Book that tells you where is it legal to have sex with children

''Why would someone look for a book on ages of consent if they were going to rape someone? Surely it is consensual (according to the countries laws)?''

That's an interesting point of view. Consent is presumed in the absence of laws which prohibit. Does that mean that prior to rape in marriage being made illegal, all women who were raped by their husbands weren't' actually raped?

Look, calling for censorship and banning things is not just stupid, it's lazy. Encouraging your mates to go beserk on Twitter about a nasty but unimportant little book self-published by a nasty but unimportant little individual (which no one would have heard of without this sort of OMG Share This On Your Status flapping might make everyone feel a bit smug, but it doesn't actually achieve very much. It would be a far better use of the energy that can be mobilised by having a big scream of 'Ban This Sort Of Thing' over the internet to start a campaign against low ages of consent. Concerted pressure on specific countries to change specific laws regarded by the rest of the world as harmful and wrong has been known to have some positive effect, whereas censorship invariably has unwanted negative effects on freedom, human rights and women's rights.

No, it doesn't, SGB. But if someone wishes to do those things and a book helps to enable them to do so, then that's pretty bad, isn't it?
If the primary purpose of the book is to enable paedophiles to rape children, then what is the point of protecting this book?
It's very obvious that no sort of speech will automatically and infallibly result in physical action, but still where the likelihood of serious harm being incited or enabled by speech is high enough and isn't outweighed by benefits of that 'speech', it isn't automatically protected. Which is how it should be - at least WRT to this book, IMO.

This, along with the fact that Amazon openly sold a paedophile guide, is why I will never purchase from them again.

But why search for age of consent if you are going to rape them, that could be done without the expense of travelling.

That sounds grim but it's true.

A book may advocate criminal activities but being aware of how to/where to do things that are illegal in your home country doesn't mean you're actually going to go and do them just because you read about them in a book.

Yes, LastMango. The page has been removed, but the Google cache of it shows it has one, one-star review saying that "this book simply consists of a list of ages of consent for pretty much every country of the world. This information appears to be taken straight from the 'Age of Consent' page from Wikipedia, so quite why anyone would want to pay nearly £3 for a list that is available for free is beyond me."

*not automatically be...

The point, Schroedingers, is that sex with a child where the child was not under the age of consent would automatically not be statutory rape.

It looks like its been pulled, neither the address in the OP or the link in frothy's blog go to the book, just a ''The Web address you entered is not a functioning page on our site.''

So the book is exactly the same as the Wikipedia page you linked to, ecclesvet? And contains same info, worded exactly the same, as links?
Are you sure about this?

I really don't agree with the book and think it is disgusting but need to ask if I am missing something?

Why would someone look for a book on ages of consent if they were going to rape someone? Surely it is consensual (according to the countries laws)?

Wikipedia has the exact same information as this book. One review of it before it was taken down suggested that it was literally cut-and-pasted from Wikipedia. Is Wikipedia enabling paedophile sex tourists? The only difference between the two is £3 and a creepy blurb.

I don't think that anyone on this thread thinks that legal texts on any area of law should be banned (and there are some really interesting books on law and sex in historical and international contexts out at the moment), but the purpose of this book is clearly to enable paedophile sex tourists to rape children.
Mostly we're familiar with liberal free speech values - all fine when they apply to 'self regarding activites' (which is what liberal free speech vlaues are based on). But raping children isn't really a self-regarding activity, is it?
I can see how your argument makes sense in that it protects speech that some people find offensive - OK, fine, well and good, why should anyone have a right not to be offended?
But that's different from speech that incites harmful behaviour - and traditionally this sort of speech isn't protected by (English) law or by liberal values. It seems quite clear that this book aims to enable rape of children. Therefore it's not just offensive, it's harmful. Not worth protecting legally or morally as 'free speech'.

Well, believing in the importance of free speech means accepting that there will be speech - and books- in existence that you don't like. That some countries have different ages of consent is a fact, and banning a book that states this fact will not, in itself, change the laws of those countries that have a low age of consent. However, setting a precedent that books which contain facts about the laws of different countries should be banned is a stupid and dangerous thing to do.

Has it been removed? The link doesn't work.

ecclesvet that book was very clearly directed at men who want to rape children - so anticipating how that information would be used would be fairly easy.

The book just gives (gave, it's been removed) information about age of consent by country. It's one of those crappy self-publish-your-ebook things. You can find the same info here without the creepy packaging. Should books be banned for truthful information, if we speculate that bad people might use that information?

And whoever said the UK has no free speech legislation is completely wrong.

Really, SGB? How could the book that this thread is about possibly have any value at all, though? How could it be anything but dangerous? And how does any 'free speech' value justify or vindicate this book?

You can also buy books on Amazon that tell you how to make bombs and get away with murder. Doesn't mean you have to go and do it. Taking extreme examples and using them to advocate censorship is always a bad idea.

...have to say...

EatsBrainsAndLeaves
"There isnt a global definition of a "child". This book outlines countries where there is no age of consent and so it is legal to have sex with toddlers. The book isn't about promoting sex with say 14 or 15 year olds, but with children of all ages. "

Seeing as you appear to have read the book, what precisely does it have to day about having sex with toddlers?

I have shared on FB link to blog hth.

Unbelievable a book like this is being open,y sold commercially on a large online retailer.

I had to read the OP three times.