Well then somebody should start a Twitter campaign to stop Amazon from selling the Bible.
Not serving black people and pedophilia are both morally repugnant acts that should be opposed. If we don’t then some people will get the idea that our society encourages such behavior, or at least tolerates it. Putting (non-legal) pressure on Amazon is a way for our society to voice the opinion that pedophilia is immoral and will not be tolerated. If someone is brazen enough to push pedophilia then they must know they will bring a firestorm of protests upon themselves. I see no downside to this particular example.
I do agree that it is possible for protests to go too far or to attack more innocuous ideas (Harry Potter? WFT?) For this reason I do not support legal restrictions on books and ideas. For example, I would be totally against bringing legal action against Amazon for allowing the sale of the above book. But I applaud the pressure put on Amazon in this case.
I’d personally be OK with it if the Bible went away as something commonly available.
Those are not the two actions which are being compared. What’s being compared is refusing to serve black people and selling a book.
I’d say “selling a book that promotes pedophilia”. I want society to make it well-known that pedophilia will not be tolerated.
You’re hired. Good luck on getting enough people behind you, and I’m sure the fine People at Amazon are more likely sympathetic to Christians than they are to pedophiles. Or is that some sort of oxymoron?
So far no one has answered my question. If the book became more popular as a
result of the protest (as appears to be the case), but was still pulled from Amazon, is that a victory?
If the author had been forced into distributing his book secretly, but it was still available to potential pedophiles, would that have been a victory?
If he had resorted other public methods of distributing his work, such as mailing everyone free copies, giving speeches on street corners outside schools, or setting up his own website and giving the book away on bittorrent, would that have been a victory.
You say you don’t see a downside, but I’m not even sure what you hoped to accomplish besides making it more widely known that most people don’t like child molesters.
I’m not the one who gets butthurt about what other people want to read. It’s those who want to join the mob against this easy pedophile target who should be equally upset about Amazon selling the Bible.
Again, get enough people behind the boycott and more power to them.
You have to pick your battles.
How about if we turn back the clock to the time when only the priests were allowed to read the Bible for themselves, and people like William Tyndale were burned at the stake for trying to make it available to the common people.
This…definitely this.
Yes, this book will NOT create pedophiles – nobody who isn’t already sexually attracted to children will suddenly become sexually attracted to children, no matter what kind of books they read. However, pedophile =/ child molester. You’re not a child molester until you actually commit the crime (and yes, many case of child sexual abuse involve parents or other family members who are NOT exclusive pedophiles…but that’s unrelated to this debate.)
Why stop there? I recommend you go directly to the source and file a lawsuit against the author Himself. 
Instead of the deep, dark secret that it is! :rolleyes:
The answer to all your questions above is “yes”. Sure, he might have sold a few more copies due to the publicity but future books may never see the light of day. I also believe that a collective, resounding “NO” is an important statement.
“No” to what? Nobody’s forcing you to buy it.
I think a more accurate statement of my feelings is that I wouldn’t be sorry to see religion in general fade away.
So you’re willing to give the book increased publicity and wider distribution, significantly increasing the chances that this book will fall into the hands of a pedophile who would therefore go on to rape and abuse children, all for the sake of making a statement.
That statement being, “People should not be permitted to publish statements that might encourage a pedophile to rape and abuse children.”
Well, I guess that sounds reasonab–wait, WHAT? 
In that case, the game was a bootleg. It was never legally available outside Japan.
If you say so. I’m just going by what I read on the Internet.
That is why I said: "Sure, he might have sold a few more copies due to the publicity but future books may never see the light of day."
They wouldn’t have anyway.