Recently got into a stoned debate that centered around a South Park episode we were watching on TV about an association (which I, mistakenly, held was ficticious) which refers to itself as the North American Man/Boy Love Association or NAMBLA. I refused to believe that such an organization could exist (depipted in the cartoon as a hotel conference consisting of older men discussing their mutual appreciation for Sodomizing Male Children) outside of a cartoon. My friend claimed South Park was refering to a real organization, after turning to google, I found myself shocked to learn its a very real and well known organization (albeit with a constantly changing Domain Name as reflected in the IP-Only Hostname, pretty weird huh?). My factual query for GQ is as follows: What is the stayed goal(s) for this organization and why is it allowed to exist?
What I mean by the second question is, I can’t forsee government officials allowing, for instance, an organization devoted to “assasination of the president by any means necessary” being run in the public’s eye without disruption, and the very nature of the group just seems blatently illegal. So yeah, whats the SD?
Brief Addendum: Just found this recent news story (Feb. 15th 2005) which talks about an FBI-string at one of the organization’s meetings as well as a stated (which I incorrected typed as “stayed” above) objective as “advocating relationships with men and boys”.
I belive that NAMBLA doesn’t officially encourage illegal behavior, it just lobbies to have age-restriction laws for sexual behavior abolished/relaxed. As attempting to overturn laws that one feels are unjust is certainly protected by the 1st amendment, even if those laws are almost universally supported by the rest of the population, I don’t see any reason why NAMBLA would be illegal.
That said, I belive they’re largely disfunct now a days, and have a far larger presence in pop-culture (S. Park) and political/religious rhetoric then they do in actual reality.
holy sh*t, that news story is unbelievable, someone got 10 years in prison for writing a fictional private journal about hurting kids? Thats a pretty nutty decision IMHO. So is a fictional story dealing with killing the president perhaps illegal too? wow, what a country.
Indeed. In that sense, they’re no different from NORML (which advocates legalizing pot), RDU and SENSE (which advocate raising speed limits), or other groups devoted to making things legal which are currently illegal. No doubt there are some people in those groups who break the law, and some who privately tell others how to break the law more effectively, but the official line of the groups themselves is simply that the law should be changed.
Um, the same reason the KKK can exist. Advocating criminal behavior is rarely illegal, you’re using a REALLY extreme example in presidential murder plots. That’s a very specific case. You can advocate prostitution, marijuana, or even rape and murder. The only time legality comes into play is if you slander someone or give out their personal information.
It may disgust you, but it’s just another form of freedom of speech. Many unpopular/upsetting groups exist, but they’re legal. Some members of the KKK probably attack blacks, but you can’t arrest them just for advocating it. Sure, they say it’s “taking back white rights” and “advocating white supremacy,” but the Man Boy Love Association has the stance of trying to alter the age of consent. It’s a tricky issue, I don’t advocate having sex with 10 year olds but I’ve known some 14 year olds in my life who are smarter and more socially conscious than some 24 year olds. We say 14 year olds can’t consent to sex, but they can be tried as adults in some states. I mean, which is it? Is sex somehow worse than murder? How can you form the adult rationale to commit murder but not to have sex.
It really is a tricky issue. I don’t advocate child/adult sex, but if the KKK gets a website, why not them?
No, but it might get you noticed by the authorities. Threatening to kill the President is definitely an offense of its own, as opposed to just threatening any other citizen. People’s sensitivities are also an issue: think back to incidents after the Columbine shootings where a few high schoolers were suspended or otherwise got in trouble for writing stories that involved violence. People are just as sensitive about this issue.
The comparison doesn’t hold up because 14-year-olds don’t get punished for having sex with someone older (unless they use violence). It’s the older party who gets punished. Murder is worse, so in some circumstances a young murderer is punished as an adult would be.
That’s not true. Advocating something or trying to get laws changed is definitely not the same as actually planning to do something illegal. As we see here:
Do you mean the group, or the sting operation? Advocating changing consent laws is legal. If they were actually in Mexico to pick up young boys and have sex with them, that’s definitely not legal and they can be arrested for trying to do so. Most disturbing is that two of the people mentioned in that story are teachers.
Askia’s link is interesting; we’ll see how that case develops as it goes to higher courts.
This is tangential to the NAMBLA discussion, but there are exceptions to that. The Supreme Court has ruled that your right to free speech does not cover speech intended to produce “imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.”
That guy violated his probation by possessing obscene material involving little kids (the author is insignficant). Seems he was never rehabilitated and that is why his punishment was so harsh.
I think its about time one of us stands up and defends NAMBLA.
NAMBLA is only pursuing perfectly natural activities that should not be illegal. None of its members are freaks. They are perfectly normal men who simply have a pasttime in common, much like the NRA.
Please think before you criticize the North American Marlon Brando Look-Alikes.
I find this attitude absolutely abhorrent. How can you even think of comparing these bloated deviant freaks to the fine and upstanding members of the Norman Rockwell Association?
Some interesting info here, but I’m still a little confused on the legality of this group, although I can see why its in the best interests of Law Enforcement agencies to allow these groups to more easilly keep tabs on some of these individuals.
Can I start a club that promotes the legalisation of homicide and discusses human recipes and the most painful techniques to kill people?
<<The comparison doesn’t hold up because 14-year-olds don’t get punished for having sex with someone older (unless they use violence). It’s the older party who gets punished. Murder is worse, so in some circumstances a young murderer is punished as an adult would be.>>
I think it DOES hold up. The issue is the ABILITY to form the intent/consent to have sex or commit murder. The older party is punished because they “took advantage of a child who could not legally consent.” It doesn’t matter who’s charged, it’s still labelling the 14 year old as incapable of forming consent. Yet if a 14 year old kills someone, they can be charged as an adult and in some states put on death row. So we’re saying that 14 year olds can’t choose to have sex with an older person, but they can commit murder and be charged like they were an older person.
Murder IS worse. If you can form the intent to commit murder, sex is easy. That makes NO sense to me.
As for the advocating the legalization of homicide, why not? You can rally for pretty much anything, the issue is doing something illegal. I did a really quick search on human death techniques and found several message boards with topics relating to. There’s actually one on the universalpictures.com website: www.universalpictures.com/flixmixmb/htdocs/Forum1/HTML/000044.html
I assume you mean an actual ASSOCIATION for it, but searching “legalize homicide” is a little difficult because it comes up with anti-abortion websites.
You can buy things like the Anarchist’s Cookbook on Amazon.
With murder, the question is the ability to plan it. You don’t need to be able to legally consent to anything to do that. Sometimes, there’s also the issue of remorse. And lastly, a kid who has sex is not (under normal circumstances) going to be a danger to society. Somebody who commits murder might be, which is why the possibility of real jail time is sometimes made available.
In other words, could you start a club that sanctions discussion of ways to break the law more effectively? I’m not sure, but do you have evidence that NAMBLA sanctions that type of discussion?
If their meetings are limited to topics like how the law should be changed, whether kids are able to form meaningful relationships, etc. then there’s no comparison. Just like if you walked into a NORML meeting, I doubt you’d find them discussing recipes for pot brownies and the best people to buy weed from. (I’ve never been to one… maybe that is what they talk about. Seems like that’d be an invitation to get their group infiltrated and shut down, though.)
You could say that about nearly any crime. At some point you have to step back and consider what the point is of having a separate juvenile justice system at all, if kids can be tried as adults whenever someone feels the crime is naughty enough.
BTW, in California (and probably other states), two minors who have sex with each other can both be charged.