Author Topic: North American Man Boy Love Association?! (Read 692 times)

Capt. Pork · « **on:** December 08, 2003, 02:39:04 PM »

I remember hearing about NAMBLA in an episode of HBO's Mr. Show. The skit involved an ad agency creating some very questionable spots for rediculous, seemingly fictional organizations. I thought it was a joke and laughed. Turns out it's not a joke at all.

nambla website

Here's my question: Can there be a limit to free speech? I know that putting regulations on the written and spoken word is a slipperly slop. Once you start with the regulations, where do you stop? We do, however, have in this country laws against threats and slander, written or spoken, so where does the government stand on the outspoken promotion of sexual relations between grown men and underaged boys? They have a page dedicated to letter correspondance with sex offenders, for crying out loud, not to mention a printed publication.

Dago · « **Reply #1 on:** December 08, 2003, 02:49:53 PM »

Why did you look it up?

wklink · « **Reply #2 on:** December 08, 2003, 03:03:03 PM »

Should the speech rights of NAMBLA be censured? No, although I do find them disgusting.

I guess even radical, and some distasteful groups like NAMBLA, ALF, the KKK, the American Nazi Party, etc have the right to exist as long as they don't physically break any US laws. It's one thing to advocate for the right to 'make love' to boys, its another to actually do it. I suspect judging from some of their 'testimonials' from boys that they do more than just advocate but that is hard to ultimately prove in a court of law without names and addresses.

Unfortunately protecting the rights of those that sicken us is of ultimate importance because someday our opinions may be considered sickening in the eyes of a majoritiy.

Tarmac · « **Reply #3 on:** December 08, 2003, 03:03:47 PM »

Of course NAMBLA is real... it was the focus of a South Park episode, it has to be.

And no, you can't do anything about their right to speak of it. Why is this organization any different than the KKK or neo-nazi groups? All have dispicable views, but it just isn't the government's place to decide what is acceptable and what isn't.

Prosecute and/or persecute them for their actions, not for their thoughts and words.

Capt. Pork · « **Reply #4 on:** December 08, 2003, 03:03:54 PM »

I found the link in a story about Michael Jackson.

Pooh21 · « **Reply #5 on:** December 08, 2003, 03:05:31 PM »

Michael flys the niki

Capt. Pork · « **Reply #6 on:** December 08, 2003, 03:07:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by wklink
Should the speech rights of NAMBLA be censured? No, although I do find them disgusting.

I guess even radical, and some distasteful groups like NAMBLA, ALF, the KKK, the American Nazi Party, etc have the right to exist as long as they don't physically break any US laws. It's one thing to advocate for the right to 'make love' to boys, its another to actually do it. I suspect judging from some of their 'testimonials' from boys that they do more than just advocate but that is hard to ultimately prove in a court of law without names and addresses.

Unfortunately protecting the rights of those that sicken us is of ultimate importance because someday our opinions may be considered sickening in the eyes of a majoritiy.

See, Klink, that's exactly what I'm talking about... The pitfalls of trying to limit free speech within some framwork of reason are very real. However, isn't the whole goal of this group already fringing on the illegal? If so, then they should be viewed as a criminal organization, not some sort of legit subculture that speaks out for the benefits of an 'alternative' lifestyle.

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #7 on:** December 08, 2003, 03:20:02 PM »

AFAIK conspiracy to commit a crime is not protected speech. Fry'em.

Tarmac · « **Reply #8 on:** December 08, 2003, 03:20:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Capt. Pork
However, isn't the whole goal of this group already fringing on the illegal? If so, then they should be viewed as a criminal organization, not some sort of legit subculture that speaks out for the benefits of an 'alternative' lifestyle.

By that logic, many lobby groups should be viewed as criminal organizations. Corporate lobby groups are trying to get more relaxed pollution controls so they can dump more crap... which is currently illegal. Pot-legalization groups are trying to get the law changed so that they can smoke without being arrested... which is currently illegal. NAMBLA is trying to get it so they can have their way with little boys, which is also, thankfully, currently illegal. Are all these organizations conspiring to do illegal things? I wouldn't call it that. They're trying to get the law changed, so that they can do it legally.

Nothing wrong with trying change the law. But you can't break it in the meantime, or after you figure out that the public doesn't support you and you'll never get your way.

Sapphire · « **Reply #9 on:** December 08, 2003, 03:22:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by FUNKED1
AFAIK conspiracy to commit a crime is not protected speech. Fry'em.

Agreed. Besides, I thought conspiracy was even worse than the actual crime!

Capt. Pork · « **Reply #10 on:** December 08, 2003, 03:28:35 PM »

I suppose you're right tarmac... It would be very interesting to see, however, what would happen if somebody started an organization that promoted heterosexual sex between 13 and 14 year old girls and middle aged men. Equally sick, but not quite as twisted in the classic sense of the word.

Since gays have become a sympathetic minority in the last 2-3 decades, their causes carry with them an air of untouchablity, especially among the liberal public. So, now, after the initial hysteria of the polically correct 90s, people are starting to push the envelope created during the 70s and 80s. Being gay is less and less taboo, great, now lets see if we can squeeze some legal pedophilic sodomy laws into the pocket while we're at it.... Not the same for mainstream causes. Try to promote the love between a young girl and her dad's buddy Phil and you'd get crucified.

Tarmac · « **Reply #11 on:** December 08, 2003, 03:36:50 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Capt. Pork
I suppose you're right tarmac... It would be very interesting to see, however, what would happen if somebody started an organization that promoted heterosexual sex between 13 and 14 year old girls and middle aged men. Equally sick, but not quite as twisted in the classic sense of the word.

Since gays have become a sympathetic minority in the last 2-3 decades, their causes carry with them an air of untouchablity, especially among the liberal public. So, now, after the initial hysteria of the polically correct 90s, people are starting to push the envelope created during the 70s and 80s. Being gay is less and less taboo, great, now lets see if we can squeeze some legal pedophilic sodomy laws into the pocket while we're at it.... Not the same for mainstream causes. Try to promote the love between a young girl and her dad's buddy Phil and you'd get crucified.

Agreed totally. I would shake my head and question my country's sanity if NAMBLA ever got their way.

I would also shake my head and question my country's sanity if NAMBLA were ever silenced by the government for what they said, instead of what they did.

And as for Funked's post, I guess it depends on your definition of a conspiracy. In a cursory glance over the NAMBLA website and their mission statement, I noticed that not one of their goals was "to have sex with boys." Their goals are educational and legal. If educating the public is a conspiracy, then throw all the gay pride movement people in jail for conspiracy to commit sodomy. Same thing.

Curval · « **Reply #12 on:** December 08, 2003, 04:29:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Capt. Pork
I suppose you're right tarmac... It would be very interesting to see, however, what would happen if somebody started an organization that promoted heterosexual sex between 13 and 14 year old girls and middle aged men. Equally sick, but not quite as twisted in the classic sense of the word.

That is still conspiracy to commit a crime. Statutory rape.

Capt. Pork · « **Reply #13 on:** December 08, 2003, 04:35:27 PM »

I was merely pointing out the different perception with which the heterosexual varient would be viewed... The way these NAMBLA freaks do it is they don't promote methods to achieve actual sex, rather the love and affection they are seeking(the sex part goes unspoken). Legally speaking, as tarmac pointed out, they're not breaking the law as it stands... My opinion is that no matter how sick the gay pedophelic tendancies are, a heterosexual pedophile might catch even more flak in this day and age.

Do I think they should all be locked up and studied? Yes. However, as mentioned, such a precedent might start a trend that could end with perfectly normal people winding up in jail for acts and ideas that were only slightly outside the norm.

Freedom has a price. I guess this is part of it.

BGBMAW · « **Reply #14 on:** December 09, 2003, 01:48:29 AM »

first..pooh..lmfao..MJ flysNikis..lolo

second

Im down for burning the nambla memebres at the stake w/ just a crack torch

Burn Burn DIE DIE

Love
BiGB