If Mr. Zinnanti truly believed in free speech, he wouldn't be doing his part to silence Jack. You can be opposed to pedophilia and hebephilia while still supporting free speech. If groups like PJ and AZ are any indication, there are PLENTY of Americans who believe that free speech shouldn't be constitutionally supported if they disagree enough with what is being said. Claiming that free speech may be "dangerous" to children is one way politicians and lawyers use emotion and fear-mongering to support censorship.

I understand why you want to listen to the opinions of the other side, but you need to take into consideration EVERY motivation the opposing side may have in formulating that opinion. Whenever they use the excuse or motivation "protecting the children," you know they are trying to manipulate the emotions of the public, because they know that a fearful public will agree to virtually any attack on their civil liberties in order to protect kids.

I agree that Jack is not thinking straight right now. I don't think he ever even seriously considered the topic of MAA rights. He's not an activist. If he was, I'm sure he would be accepting your offer and fighting this. Then again, few if any activists would have put their neck in the wringer like Jack did.

Another thing I think you need to consider...hatred of MAA's is more than sufficient to turn the general public into a realm of fascists. Hatred and fear are always the enemies of rationality, freedom, peace, and democracy. So I wouldn't be so quick to defend Mr. Zinnanti, because he seems to support the stereotypical notions of what an MAA is rather than the truth.