this is from Deborah at the blog Fairfield House on wordpress.
I'll be brief. Amazon is selling a guide for pedophiles. Yes, you read that right. Amazon's statement in defense of the practice is telling:
"Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decision."
Let's parse that shall we?
It's censorship. And? That's it? So what if it is? The First Amendment to the Constitution protects American citizens against the United States government. Is Amazon now a branch of the Federal establishment or a company free to make decisions about what product it stocks. They choose to stock the work in question. I particularly note the phrase "simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable"--how very broad minded of them. How morally relative. How lawyerly. How vacant. May I ask if who exactly doesn't find it objectionable? The word "simply", as in "merely", is a touch of vile genius; violated children are such a petty issue, not up to the notice of our intellectual and moral superiors. Apparently we should stop whining about it.
It's good that they "don't support or promote hatred or criminal acts". They do however sell the instruction manuals. What could go wrong?
The statement reads as though Amazon expects us to admire them for being all brave and honest, standing up for free speech. I think their position is despicable. Freedom of speech is absolute, but it does not come with the guarantee of an audience, and certainly not a publisher and reseller. Why is Amazon choosing to participate? Is it a case of "anything goes for a dollar" or "anything to be in the news"? Simply because you can do something does not mean you ought to do it.
I will have no further business dealings with Amazon. Those with a conscience will join me. (the below is to comment on her post)