3 ms·
Could you clarify your point a bit? When you (correctly) say that the books aren't under the purview of the FDA, do you imply that you would prefer if they rema
by _cs2017_ 8y ago
Could you clarify your point a bit? When you (correctly) say that the books aren't under the purview of the FDA, do you imply that you would prefer if they remained available on Amazon? If so, how would you respond to the concern that such books cause a lot of suffering to a lot of people?
- identity-haver 8y agoThe parent comment seems to believe that the FDA would have some jurisdiction over the content. It's not up to me what people read and write, or what Amazon puts on their website. Amazon has the right to choose what they sell, just as the author has the right to publish their book. In this particular case, besides Amazon's action, there could be civil suits against the author (look up Paladin Press), and even FTC actions depending on the exact claims made by the book. How would you respond to the concern that this is not the only book that people believe has caused suffering? For example, how about Aquinas, or Marx, or Hume, or Foucault, or the Anarchist Cookbook or hell, Hugh Hefner? Books don't leap off of shelves and hit people, causing them injuries. A person, subject to the law and with their pre-existing moral system, must, having read the contents of the book, perform some action to their self or others to cause suffering.