Good morning, anti-censorship intellectuals! Remember that story from January about Abunga Books, the online bookstore whose sole unique feature is that it claims to "empower decency" by enabling prudes to vote to censor their offerings? Now it has made ABC News. It's amazing how much press this thing has received — I'm beginning to suspect there is some marketing genius behind the store who knows how to whip up a media frenzy.
They've got a couple of quotes from me and from the founder of Abunga, Lee Martin.
"Anything that irritates the right, they want off," Myers told ABCNEWS.com "They can have a limited selection of books and select whatever political perspective they want. But [Abunga] is cloaking itself in democracy, and instead of being open-minded, they are being narrow-minded. It's hypocrisy."
Boy, I got that one exactly right. You should read how Martin defends himself against that charge.
In response, Myers' readers mass e-mailed the company and logged on to Abunga.com to ban a number of religious books themselves, including the Bible.
"What they didn't realize is that we control inventory from our members, and it's pretty easy to see the difference of customers who are blocking 'The Golden Compass' and the Bible," Martin said.
Martin insists his company has no agenda. "If you look at the books, we have a complete rainbow range of books, and we give to non-Christian ministries."
(By the way, you'll have a hard time finding a non-Christian ministry in their list of charities. They've got a few good secular groups in there, like regional hospitals and the March of Dimes, but it's mostly a collection of openly evangelical organizations. I guess if you do stuff that actually works, like giving medicine, that counts as "non-Christian" to these guys.)
So they don't have an agenda, and they're just letting their customers control the inventory, but they can tell the difference between the 'good' customers who want to block The Golden Compass, and the wicked, nasty bad customers who want to block the Bible. We are all equal, except some of us are more equal than others.
Like I said, Abunga can have whatever bias they want, and they clearly want to be a right wing Christian bookstore. I don't mind that at all, although they certainly wouldn't be getting my business. My objection is that they want to pretend that they're taking the high road and calling their bias "democracy," when it clearly is not, and it is definitely not a noble enterprise — these are guys with yet another scheme to pander to right-wing ignorance and make money from it.
Of course, that's my disagreement with their practices. The ABC News article takes a different approach that might be more effective in alienating their prospective clientele, by listing a selection of naughty books that are still easily available at Abunga. They've got a censorship filter, but it's a mighty leaky one.
- Log in to post comments
Right. The irony is that what they hope to accomplish is virtually impossible anyway. They'll never block every "objectionable" book - they'll only make some subset of books they personally find objectionable unavailable to those of similar but unidentical mind who may feel otherwise. What's the use of that?
Well, I suppose it feeds the myopic, self-righteous attitudes that are the foundation for the whole enterprise in the first place, and fools the participants into believing they're making the world a better place. Feh.
You're just working off a different definition of "democracy" than they are. From the xian perspective, your vote only counts if you are one of the "chosen." Heathens don't get to vote.
I'm sure there is a word for an economic system where a centralized authority tightly manages economic options while ostensibly allowing all individual economic actors to express choice and ownership in the availability of those options. I can't think of it right now, but maybe one of your readers from Moscow or Beijing could enlighten us.
Urban promiscuity? Strippers? French erotic memoirs? Pedophilia? Henry Miller? D.H. Lawrence?
Apparently, the good folk over there just can't be bothered with uncomfortable details, just the broad brush strategy: pander loudly to Wingnuts on the Right(TM).
And I bet that strategy includes Dawkins.
One question: Don't you have to read a book before judging it obscene?
Another question: Don't you have to obtain a book before you read it?
Still one more: Isn't buying a book one way to obtain it?
So: How are these customer busybodies so frickin' knowledgeable about what should be blocked and what shouldn't?
And: Is there a Master Censor locked away somewhere in a dark basement, jeopardizing his immortal soul by polluting it with all manner of jaded filth as a substitutionary sacrifice for the tender sensibilities of the morally pure?
One Last Question: How can I get a job like that?
"What they didn't realize is that we control inventory from our members, and it's pretty easy to see the difference of customers who are blocking 'The Golden Compass' and the Bible," Martin said.
Yeah it's pretty easy to see the difference of customers who are blocking The Golden Compass and the Bible. The customers who are blocking The Golden Compass are the customers who are blocking The Golden Compass, and the customers who are blocking the Bible are the customers who are blocking the Bible. Easy!!
I'm a mischievous type so I signed up for a membership and have decided to spend 5 minutes a day blocking all books with a faintly Christian message.
If enough of us do that they might find out that their little niche isn't worth pursuing.
Why on Earth should they worry about the details? Pandering loudly to the Wingnuts on the Right can be a very successful business strategy.
Seriously, I dont think they care that the censorship is not wholly effective. They want to create a warm and fuzzy place that their target audience will find comfortable to buy books.
Fortunately, for all the censoring fools like this out there, there are people like my mother, who may find a book personally objectionable or unappealing, but literally says "To each their own". Really, she said it last night, referring to books of the type they're banning at Abunga. And she's a creationist! My reading was never censored (or really even examined -- my brothers and I all read too much for my parents to ever even attempt to figure out if any given book was 'appropriate'), leading me to my current satisfyingly godless life.
Assuming that they're saying that they won't ban the Bible regardless of how many people object, then they really are just hypocrits. Their own website states:
It does not say, "when one gets enough blocks, and if we agree with that majority decision, then we will pull it from the database". In my books (pardon the pun), that's filed under, "Bare-faced lying".
A few points:
1. Kudos to ABC News for drawing its own Nazi comparison.
2. I love that they keep bringing up The Golden Compass. Who wants to argue that "Lee" has actually read it? I think not. I wish ABC would've asked him what he found so offensive about the book.
3. More kudos to ABC for pointing out how many "offensive" books had not been banned. I really wish they'd point out that the only way to know if the book is actually offensive is if you read it.
Oh, they just know.
I wrote something on an earlier thread - I think it must have been one of the Golden Compass movie threads - about a 12-year-old girl with whom I'd had a conversation about the film. Her mother had forbidden her to see it, for reasons which demonstrated that her mother knew very little about the book. (For example: the childen in the book had their own "demons". Gah! Such ignorance!) Another reason was simply that author Philip Pullman is an atheist. I assured the girl that the book was a thing of beauty, and that she could read whatever she wanted when she grew up. She then enthusiastically proclaimed, "I want to be an atheist when I grow up!" It warmed my heart.
Everyone go there and search for "Ken Ham" and block his books.
You mean creationists read books?
As in the plural? As in more that just one?
Get outta here.
Hey look at that. You got a small internet start-up featured on a national news-source. You sure showed those bastards.
I think abunga isn't very nice. It panders to authoritarianism. But there are other bookshops online. Plus the were only behaving like meatspace bookshops do. If their customers don't like something, to the point where it will hurt their business, they remove it.
The charge of hypocrisy doesn't even stand. I couldn't see anywhere that they claimed there was a democratic vote to block books, just that if their community of customers clearly wanted it they would block stuff. So they are right that there is a valid difference between the people blocking HDM and those blocking the bible. The former aren't buying anything.
Although I would never buy anything from there, I don't see the problem. They are creating an environment of their own, one where there isn't any "danger" of accidentally buying a book that doesn't meet biblical purity requirements, fine. The Amish don't want to use electricity and follow their other bazaar guidelines, go for it. They aren't imposing their stupidity on others. I can still get whatever I want on Amazon. There is a "Christian" book store up the road from me, I don't see any problem with that. I don't shop there, I drive across town to the Barnes and Nobels but I don't have any issue with them.
What I am curious about is if they are having trouble with lude and lascivious books jumping out at them at other online sellers. Not once in the many times I have been to Amazon have I been bombarded by porn. Never have I been accidentally exposed to even partial nudity. Am I doing something wrong? Is there a nudity button I have accidentally filtered out?
Are they accidentally going to search for Henry Miller books, not knowing about their nature and be shocked when they get them home and read about acts they aren't allowed by god to perform?
Do they have a list of the books they have banned? I might have to use that as a preferred reading list.
MyaR @7,
well, fair to play to your mother. I think she's dead wrong to be a creationist, of course. But she has a liberal streak that is very rare in that, umm, baramin. Most creationists not only believe nonsense, they also insist that everybody else believe it too. (In fact there's a particularly insidious form of creationist that, as I suspect, does not believe the nonsense, but still wants the general public to believe it.)
That doesn't mean I haven't logged on to the site to mess with their filters. If they are going to create a system so easy to mess with, they have to expect it.
Cardinal Shrew said:
BUZZ! Wrong. Unless the Amish have stopped reproducing.
I am curious if we'll see a similar uproar from the religious right about the movie The City of Ember, based on a book by Jeanne DuPrau. Its a great, quick read, and I don't want to give anything away, but suffice it to say that it's about a group of people who have lived on an ideology that's been carried down through many generations, and when some pretty major cracks start to show in those outdated ideas, all heck breaks loose.
To me, it's a much more subtle and graceful message about seeking reality than the Dark Materials books, and I highly recommend it.
(For those of you that are fans of Pratchett, I would akin the theme of this book to the Bromeliad, especially Truckers.)
@Armchair dissident: O I didn't see that. Well I guess technically they ARE being dishonest then. Still that shows more that they didn't think through what they were offering at the start than anything else. It's still unreasonable to expect them to treat non-customers the same as customers.
Kyle W.
Well yes, they are imposing their ridiculous lifestyle on their offspring. Are you saying they shouldn't be allowed to raise their children as they see fit? Don't get me wrong I agree that it is nearly child abuse but I also don't think state imposed restrictions on how they raise their children would be a good idea.
Cardinal,
I'm also not advocating state interference. I don't think anyone here is implying that the government should shut down the Abunga website. What I am implying is that it is harmful, just as raising your children in an Amish household is harmful. I don't think there's anything that should keep us from calling a spade as it is.
Armchair Dissident said:
It can also be found under subsection "they owe me a new irony meter" I can tell you that much!
Matt Heath said:
How do they know that the nice customer logging on to block "The Golden Compass" is going to go on to buy anything? Besides that's not really the point, the point is they offer a book blocking service that is available to everyone who starts an account. There's nothing in there that says "unless ofcourse you are the wrong sort of person", particularly when they claim in their interview by ABC not have a political agenda (whilst at the same time the CEO describes himself as being "viscerally angry" about the spread of pornography - can they please at least pretend to keep their story straight?).
Your "votes" only count if you "vote" the way The Organization wants you to "vote." In effect, there is no such thing as a "vote."
I'm just hoping that I'm talking about a bookstore here, and not the future Theocracratic States of 'Merica.
Kyle W.
Gotcha. Maybe the Amish analogy wasn't the best.
I am standing by my opinion that if they want to create an environment where they don't accidentally bump into anything they might find objectionable it is no more harmful than if they created a brick and mortar version of the same thing. I am not shopping there but there are lots of places I am not shopping.
If they tried to impose those restrictions on other sites I would stand beside anyone who was fighting them.
I also wonder why these people worry so much? I could read the bible all day long and not worry about my beliefs wavering. Are they afraid they aren't strong enough to resist the temptation of a book with sex in it? Are they worried if the read the Golden Compass their faith will be broken? If their faith is that weak, they should reexamine it and if it isn't, what are they worried about?
Also if they are going to filter the votes, how is it a vote? Shouldn't it be considered more of a suggestions box?
I knew this was just a marketing gimmick. At the end of the day they would just reset the inventory and offered books to their usual collection of fundie and right wing favorites.
There are a large number of businesses preying on gullible, uneducated Xians.
And yes, there is no such thing as bad PR. Martin is undoubtedly delighted with the attention and free advertising. The Expelled movie clowns are pursuing the same strategy.
Wow, ABC news throwing the N word right there in the title about a Christian store! Don't know if it's a cheap shot (probably is) but it's hilarious nonetheless. That and Paulos's column makes me have a little hope in a little part of the online mainstream media at least.
It's pathetic pandering, and we do well to criticize it.
OTOH, they're just being up-front with their pandering, and so perhaps are more just in their pandering than are the ones who quietly pull books that the prudes don't like.
Almost certainly, the loss of so many independent booksellers, replaced by large sellers and the mass marketing of books by those merely interested in making the most money is of bigger concern. Which doesn't mean that making a marketing strategy of deliberately pandering to small minds doesn't deserve ridicule, of course.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
I'll be the last person to buy anything from Abunga. Their description of the book-blocking feature for account holders is dishonest, with a wink to their fundie clientele. But it's not censorship. It's not communism. It's not Germany in 1938.
Abunga is a startup in a highly competitive and saturated marketplace. They are pursuing a niche in that market with a gimmick that they think will add value to their customer experience. It's fucktarded, but it's not censorship.
My local movie theater is not planning to show Expelled! at all. I am glad that is the case. Some are not as glad. But it's not censorship.
So... are they blocking other such "heretical" and nonchristian things such as the books about other religions, like the Koran? Greek mythology? Egyptology? all those things talk about other gods... wouldn't the very presence of them shake the fragile beliefs of their readers? Surely they'd ban anything that speaks of Buddha? probably Shakespeare too, as it discusses unsavory topics...
guess not...
Honestly, if I could find a way to pander to the right in a way that made them give me money and didn't hurt anyone else, I'd be sorely tempted to do it. It's that second clause that keeps me out of televangelism. That and the fact that I don't have the hair for it.
Or the stomach.
(.)(.)
But we already have state-imposed restrictions. Name a state that doesn't have its own version of a DSS or DYS. The state defines what constitutes abuse and neglect, and the definitions are dependent on contemporary societal standards, and therefore subject to change. There's potential for abuse in the formulation of the definitions. This is what worries those who constantly point to the danger lurking behind those Dawkinsian charges of religion being a form of child abuse. Anyway, what's to stop the state from deciding that depriving a child of the benefits of electrical appliances constitutes child abuse?
Uhhh, hhhuh-huh. You said..."bung."
I don't really care for what Abunga is doing, but I did go to their website to check it out. They do have listings for (I don't know if they would actually ship them if you ordered them) Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens. They also show listings for Al Franken.
One disturbing feature is the tab for "Report non-family products". You can type in a category, name, etc, & the database will pull up all listings. You can then click on a "select all" button and then click an icon to "Block Books".
I don't know if this feature does more than block the books from your personal future searches, or blocks the books for all viewers, but potentially, someone could block all books with "evolution" in the title, as an example.
I don't see anything illegal about this, but it disturbs me none-the-less. There are those who will be closed minded, and this bookseller just panders to them. Better get Bradbury's Farenheit 451 before it's blocked, and start getting your kids to memorize the classics. "Daddy - I want to be a fireman when I grow up!"
I don't think anyone has suggested it is illegal -- just narrow-minded and hypocritical.
She then enthusiastically proclaimed, "I want to be an atheist when I grow up!" It warmed my heart.
That makes me giggle with happiness.
"Although I would never buy anything from there, I don't see the problem. "
I do. And them being featured on ABC flags up the problem (although ABC seems to have treated them somewhat critically). It's bigotry.
"What they didn't realize is that we control inventory from our members, and it's pretty easy to see the difference of customers who are blocking 'The Golden Compass' and the Bible,"
In other words, it's pretty easy to see the difference between Christians and atheists. And the atheists are not allowed. Not because it's a specifically Christian book store, in fact, I'd be happier if that was the case. They can set up their little treehouse, fine. But they're acting as ostensibly nonsectarian moral arbiters, and declaring from on high that atheism is Bad. It falls short of our community standards. And now they're on national TV essentially saying so. And I say, fuck them.
And while I don't feel like checking their site today, I remember last time this came up, Golden Compass was banned, but the other two books in the trilogy, which actually contain the anti-religious themes that are largely absent from Compass, were still available, as well as boxed sets of the whole trilogy. So the Bungians are obviously stupid sheep, and thus should be mocked.
"How do they know that the nice customer logging on to block "The Golden Compass" is going to go on to buy anything?"
And if it was all about whether the customer was an actual paying customer, then why do they let anyone log on and make an account and block things?
No, they're not. This argument comes up in the UK quite a bit over state funding for "faith schools": aren't religious parents entitled to bring up their kids as they see fit.
They're not, and it's disingenuous at best to suggest that they are (and, of course, this argument has precisely nothing to do with whether the state should pay for those schools, but I digress).
As Kseniya has stated, there's no shortage of work for child support agencies precisely because some parents have believed that they really are entitled to raise their children precisely as they see fit to the detriment of the development or health of the child.
I want to be an atheist when I grow up!
I know she's just a youngling, but isn't this sentence redundant?
I think that this could work out just fine!
Let these people keep shielding themselves from science, thought and the modern world. I imagine that this will work against them in their ability to function in modern society. People see the Amish as "quaint" and would never see them as being influential to modern politics, or decision making. The more detached they become the better in my opinion.
Also, 40+ comments and we haven't yet had a mental midget come here to ask "What's wrong with a company standing up for what is right and defending family values?"
Or have I just jinxed us?
Also, 40+ comments and we haven't yet had a mental midget come here to ask "What's wrong with a company standing up for what is right and defending family values?"
Or have I just jinxed us?
What's wrong with a company standing up for what is right and defending family values? (:
Actually, I don't see anything wrong with what they're doing, since it works against them being in business long-term. Given that:
(1) they don't seem to have mastered the logistics / implementation of the book-banning thing very well,
(2) they are in a declining industry which operates on razor-thin margins (Amazon et. al. make their money on volume) and
(3) they're chasing away potential customers,
I don't expect to see this outfit still around in two years' time.
I didn't mean to imply anyone thought we should be raising everyones kids or even just the Amish kids. I also think most of us can agree that we shouldn't allow abusive parents to continue to abuse their children. The scale of what defines abuse is a slope that is both slippery and steep but having seen what can happen to children I think as a society we should attempt to protect those born into situations no one would wish on a child. Where exactly that line is I would never claim to know but we have all have heard of situations where we individually feel the parents are unfit.
This threadjack started as a flawed analogy of a subculture where people with a shared set of values decided surround themselves with those that shared their values as much as possible without inflicting it on others. It was also precoffee and not well thought out. I am neither defending or attacking the Amish. Nor am I defending or attacking child welfare services, they have a job I could never do.
I just wanted to say i didn't believe a bookstore that only sells material they think their market will approve of is a bad thing. I just don't share those particular values. I would however shop in a bookstore that only sold books that discussed the flaws of religion, if such a store existed.
I think this cuts right to the heart of the matter:
-- George Orwell.
Does anyone else find it funny that the logo for this bookstore is a sign meaning "no books allowed?"
NO it's not. Just because it's not YOUR choice, doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the lifestyle (of which you probably know close to nothing about).
I know all kinds of "off the grid" hippie types. But because they're funny clothes come from the 1960's instead of the 1760's, they're "cool" while the Amish are, apparently, abusers.
So, you're not calling a spade a spade. You're just exercising your bigotry at people who are different than you because they're easy,different and they have no voice.
I find the name so silly-- "Abunga." What on earth is an "abunga"? It sounds like the made-up dialog of primitive natives in a bad old movie or a Bugs Bunny cartoon, or the lyrics of "Mad Dogs and Englishmen," or that someone forgot the "cow" part of the word.
someone should start a CowAbunga, with offerings for the bovine family unit and options to vote out any catalogs on steaks and shishkabobs...
Jesus. Picking on the Amish. All of you, boot to the head!
Any Amish out there want to weigh in on this?
Lets put it this way. What do you get when you add a) people that think only **their** version of reality is right, b) gun culture, c) the presumption, held by most of these people, as evidenced by how many tend to still support Iraq (and not just loosely as something to finish, but as "successful"), d) a desire to actively "make the world better, like we think it should be!", and e) some sort of limited ludditism, where by they don't believe in technologies, ideas, books or anything else that doesn't fall into that category? Well, in the ME they are called Saudi terrorists. Don't remember the name of the group, but they believe only in *their* literature, in technology *they* find acceptable, ideas *they* are willing to accept and they are quite certain its their goal to remake the world in their image. Thankfully, for the most part they have only acted as cannon fodder for other terrorists, for the most part.
Point being. When you cater to this kind of thinking, you **create** groups of people, who, once they recognize that they can't manipulate the rest of the world into thinking like them, are all too prone to starting to think, "OK, then how can we **force** the rest of the world to think like us?" The number like that in the US is vanishingly small, so far, at this point, and so paranoid and fearful of the world around them that they close themselves off in camps and cut themselves off from things like Abunga. That is the good news. The bad news is, things like this pander to the kind of thinking that generates such lunatics, and if the local nuts concludes that there is some place "safe" in the real world to show themselves, you might find yourself standing next to them in line at the grocery store, wondering what the odd bulge is under their trench coat. This might happen even sooner, if we get someone even more sympathetic to their insanity elected to the presidency at some point.
That Christians tend not to be as openly violent, and more specifically *aggressively* mass population violent, doesn't mean there are not those among the radicals that can be, would be, and, given the number of anti-government wacko encampments we do have, are. What happens if the government is suddenly not their enemy, but instead their friend, do to shared ideological madness? Not a pretty picture.
There were a couple things that jumped out at me from that ABC article. The frist was this quote from Martin:
It seems that he doesn't like public education. I'm guessing his kids are home schooled.
The other was this one:
Really? Surfers took their vocabulary from a comic book, and not the other way around? (And btw, TMNT was a comic before it was ever a TV show.) I know it's just a small thing, and pretty much unrelated to the story, but why even throw it in there if you're not going to do a little fact checking?
Where does the state have a compelling interest in restricting the rights of parents to riase their children as they see fit? There are community standards that are pretty easy for people to agree on, let's just dump them in the catagory of "child abuse" and leave them be, but there have been lawsuits closer to the edge. A relevant issue is the question: "Should Christian Scientist parents be allowed to prevent their children from recieving medical care?" I'm not up on the current state of the law, but I think they're allowed to refuse medical treatment for their children, and it's not legally considered abuse, even if the child dies as a result.
Are they afraid they aren't strong enough to resist the temptation of a book with sex in it?
I guess this might explain why so many Fundies appear never to have read the Bible ...
I guess this might explain why so many Fundies appear never to have read the Bible ...
I don't get this either. If I hadn't heard beforehand that the author was an evil atheist (and to be honest, I probably wouldn't have read the series if I hadn't), I would have thought it was a Christian book. It sounds straight out of the Book of Revelations: the Messiah (the girl, I forget her name) overthrows the false church, the Antichrist (the angel "god"), and the Beast (the Regent); and by falling in love (which lots of other people do, but it doesn't save the world; I didn't get that part) allows the Holy Spirit (Dust) to return, preventing the end of the universe. Not exactly Christian, but much more so than anything I picked up from C.S. Lewis. Then again, I read Narnia before the Bible, so I may have missed it.
When P-Zed appears in the national networks
You know it's a hell of a ride.
But when will you learn that you can't cow Abunga--
They censor with God on their side!
You rock, Cuttlefish!
God forbid we "force" education on anyone. *eyeroll*
I've love to watch these imbeciles moan and cry if public education suddenly disappeared from the American landscape. My hunch is that they'd prefer not to live in the dark ages. (Although, I admit, there is more than enough good cause to wonder.)
Now THAT was funny!
Cardinal, I responded to your original "Amish" comment only to elaborate on what you started there. It never, even for a moment, occurred to me that you were advocating anything with regard to Amish children, or that you were denigrating their lifestyle.
--Then it works the same way radio music requests do. The DJ records all request calls off air, waits until a caller requests a song already on his playlist then plays that call on air as if he really is taking requests live.
or that you were denigrating their lifestyle.
I am. You know what bothers me about them? Their lack of commitment to their own religion and culture. Seriously, stop pussyfooting around: if you're going to be Am then be Am, and stop half-assing it by being Am-ish.
That's rich, coming from a guy who can't fully commit to being brown.
o_O
That is comedy gold (as is Kseniya's followup)!
I think the goal here should be to get ALL of their books banned. Just vote for everything in their current top 10, and when all those get banned, move on to their new current top 10... Just keep repeating that until every single book they're trying to sell get banned.
I admit to having a soft spot in my heart for the Left Behind books, though.
I gotta say, I love the storm of controversy around this. Seems to get folks from both sides all ruffled up. I love even more that science blog fans swarmed the site and worked the whole thing to their benefit. You just have to take this stuff with a sense of humor and have fun with it. Otherwise it'll drive you crazy.
Moses said:
You're missing my point about the Amish. I (personally) believe that raising your children "off the grid" is harmful to them, because they will lack the necessary social skills should they choose, later of course, to not live the Amish lifestyle. My point was not to rail against the Amish, I could say the same thing about the way many of us raise our children -- but notice I advocated against state interference because I believe it's... well, interfering. That's not the government's job. I can express my opinion that I think its harmful, but that's about all I can do, lest I turn to fascism. Abunga, however, actually asks for my opinion on which books should be banned. Since I favor "none," I believe that is a valid opinion to voice -- since they're democratic and what-not.
Additionally, you're incorrect in assuming (a) that I know nothing about the Amish and (b) that I would find the off-the-grid hippie types any more acceptable. As I said, depriving your children of the opportunity to engage society is making a choice for them that will not just affect their childhoods, but the rest of their lives. It's easy to remain Amish, or a communal hippie, if you've never ventured outside your community or interacted with anyone that has a different viewpoint. Speaking of different viewpoints:
Do you think its acceptable to socially cripple your children? And why do you characterize my criticism of another group as "bigotry" rooted in some type of superficial difference between myself and them? The difference is between my view and their view of acceptable ways to raise kids.
Put bluntly: I don't like abunga AND I don't like the way the Amish raise their kids. But only one group asked for my opinion on anything.
I find the name so silly-- "Abunga." What on earth is an "abunga"?
Interestingly, when looking up the name at Meriam Webster, the list of suggested words includes "obeying," "abnegate," "abrogate," "Ebola," and "Ebonics." So, "Abunga," apparently, is obediance, the act of denying and treating something as nonexistent, a hemorrhagic fever, and a variant of the English language.
I'm curious, though, as to why the creationists think they need such a censorship feature in their bookstores. Do they think that, without it, they might accidentally buy The God Delusion? It can't be that they're trying to keep the "objectionable" books from everyone else in the country-- does it not occur to them that those who would like to read it might just go to Amazon.com?
Now, wait.. The other possibility is that the owners of the site aren't really on the fundies' side-- Abunga's just set up as a red herring, a place to which they can complain and see results, so they'll stop bugging the real bookstores. If I owned a small bookstore in a conservative town, I'd appreciate it. :)
That's rich, coming from a guy who can't fully commit to being brown.
Don't you make me come over there, young lady!
Here's a few they may read straight from Abunga:
The Bible as Good Reading
Silent Conversations: Reading the Bible in Good Company
God's Good Gifts: A Scrapbooking Bible Study for Women's Groups
Now That's a Good Question: How to Lead Quality Bible Discussions
And God Said, "It's Good!": Amuzing and Thougt-Provoking Parallels Bewtween the Bible and Football
Doing Business by the Good Book: 52 Lessons on Success Straight from the Bible
Just on the Amish child abuse thing. They do have rumspringa so I suppose their kids do have some choice.
I' try to get them to ban 'Left Behind'
Left Behind sounds likes it has to do with bums (american - butt). Which made me wonder whether Andy Griffiths' kids book "The Day My Bum Went Psycho" is on Abunga. It is. As "The Day My Butt Went Psycho". It's BUTT on Amazon too. At least the Amazon review says it has been "translated from the Australian", but(t) what's the deal translating from English into American? Strewth. Anyway bum is a way better word than butt.
I suppose the only time I get confused with the whole American bum thing is when they talk about bums panhandling...
"I want to be an atheist when I grow up!" It warmed my heart.
LOL
and probably stopped her mother's.
:p
Well, her mother wasn't within earshot, so...
Lyle, it might be intriguing, from a performance-art standpoint, if the Left Behind books were eventually the only books in the entire catalog not to be banned.
I don't really see the big deal, aren't the people who shop there not going to buy those books anyway?
Yes but they have to make a big song and dance out of it to show what good christians they are. It's the same reason they raise their arms and jig when praying. They're saying look at me, look at me I'm praying aren't I good.
I don't really see the big deal, aren't the people who shop there not going to buy those books anyway?
it's the business model that's the problem.
not likely to happen, but what if this took off, like Walmart?
could you imagine shopping at a place like this if it replaced Amazon (bad enough)?
the very principle of the thing is based on the Tyranny of the Majority.
if you don't know what that means, suggest reading John Stuart Mill:
http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/jsmill.htm
Wow cheats
wow cheat happened everyday. Many players become the victim of
wow cheat, do you know how did this happen? What kind of form do wow cheats been?
Cheats for WOW can come in a variety of different forms. While WOW does not actual have cheat codes, some players
use bugs in the game code to their advantage. This is commonly referred to as an exploit (as in exploiting an error
made by the games programmers.) While exploits work for a period of time, they are eventually discovered by Blizzard
and fixed in a future patch.
Mod or Mods is another form of wow cheating in WOW. This is
done by modifying some aspect of the game. For example changing the screen colors to make night time game play more
visible would be considered a mod. You are giving yourself an advantage over other players who have not modified
their display in any shape or form. Read more about WOW mods.
Walkthroughs and other types of guides are also considered by many to be a WOW cheat.
Bots are yet another way about the wow cheat. They are external
software that run while you are playing the game, they are often used to automate some type of in game task to
benefit your character in some way. They are also known as Wallhacks, aimbots or simply wow bots.
Besides that, some wow cheats happened because they trade with some game website. I always buy wow gold and power
leveling service from www.farmer100.com. I think they are reliable and their customer is sweet. TaultUnleashed is a
nice forum too, They offer thousands of unauthorized wow cheats on a site that is updated daily. But it is a paid
members forum. So be careful wow cheat and enjoy your wow game.