http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/paul-bernardo-book-disappears-1.3319838
The general public opinion seems to be unanimous in their view that Paul Bernardo, a high-profile convicted child killer/rapist serving a life sentence (with no chance in hell of parole), must not be allowed to publish his novel. They believe that as a convicted felon with no chance of parole who has done really awful, awful things, he has no right to free speech. I can't stand reactionary liberals who like to say they are for freedom of speech. But then they turn around and want to take away that freedom from people they don't like (as well as take away our guns, take away our large sodas, etc). Just because you support Paul Bernardo's right to freedom of expression, doesn't mean you actually agree with what he did. Or whatever views he may be expressing in his novel.
I believe that Amazon had a right to take his eBook down if they feel that it's bad for business (meanwhile they let Holocaust Denial literature and David Duke work on their website. Why is that ok but Paul Bernardo's work is not ok?) But these freedom-hating "liberals" want to ban Paul Bernardo from having freedom of expression at all. That's the issue here.
Greeting from /leftypol/. I'm a social democrat on fiscal policy and a civil libertarian on social policy. A left-libertarian I guess. Why do I feel the need to point out that I'm a social libertarian? I'm tired of SJWs hijacking mainstream liberalism and wanting to rule things with an authoritarian iron fist. SJWs who hate our freedom (free speech, gun rights, etc.) are #NotMyComrades.