• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should all child molesters be castrated before leaving prison?

Good idea?

  • Yes

    Votes: 27 40.3%
  • No

    Votes: 40 59.7%

  • Total voters
    67
Not if you follow the line of the conversation.

The problem is that removing guns from convicted felons doesn't stop them from committing violent crimes, and removing penises from rapists doesn't stop them from sexual crime.

If the motivation is there, they will find the means.
 
The problem is that removing guns from convicted felons doesn't stop them from committing violent crimes, and removing penises from rapists doesn't stop them from sexual crime.

If the motivation is there, they will find the means.

Okay, but unlike you, misterman hasn't offered any alternative.
 
Yeah, here's the thing. You can purchase a new gun. You can't purchase a new penis.

True, according to the penal code. :mrgreen:

So, are you suggesting that we let people who commit armed crimes keep their guns after serving their sentence?

No, but I'd let them keep their trigger fingers.
 
As a parent, that's good advice. But the topic was prison terms for child molesters, not time out for not cleaning up your room.

It is a perfect logical analogy that doesn't have anything to do with parenting or prisons, but rather with the resulting consequence of a person's action that breaks a rule or law. You seriously don't understand this?
 
It is a perfect logical analogy that doesn't have anything to do with parenting or prisons, but rather with the resulting consequence of a person's action that breaks a rule or law. You seriously don't understand this?

Yes, as an analogy. I was just surprised you brought up parenting.
 
So you think that if 15 year old boy succeeds in seducing a 21 year old girl, that the girl needs to be executed?

If a 21 year old man has sex witha 15year old girl he should be executed. Why should it be any different if its a 21 yo old woman and a 15 yo boy.
 
If a 21 year old man has sex witha 15year old girl he should be executed. Why should it be any different if its a 21 yo old woman and a 15 yo boy.

Because it wasn't all that long ago that teenage boys were expected and even encouraged to have sex at that age while teenage girls who had sex with an older man were seen as having been seduced and coerced. Really, the equality has only come out after the recent scandals of women teachers caught having sex with the teenage boys in their classes.
 
It's funny when people fall all over themselves trying to be tough.
 
If a 21 year old man has sex witha 15year old girl he should be executed. Why should it be any different if its a 21 yo old woman and a 15 yo boy.

Seriously? Even if the 15 year old is the initiator? This isn't a case of some innocent child having their life ruined by a monster, this is a case of someone who is barely an adult herself getting a bit drunk at a cast party and making a dumb decision that ultimately didn't hurt anyone.

What if the 15 year old slips something into her drink to "get her in the mood?" Should she still be executed?
 
Okay, it was just kind of sudden. It didn't look like an analogy at first.

Gotchya now... didn't know why you brought that up. :2razz:
 
Seriously? Even if the 15 year old is the initiator? This isn't a case of some innocent child having their life ruined by a monster, this is a case of someone who is barely an adult herself getting a bit drunk at a cast party and making a dumb decision that ultimately didn't hurt anyone.

What if the 15 year old slips something into her drink to "get her in the mood?" Should she still be executed?

If we initiate executions, which I am for for some pervert that kidnaps, locks up and sexually molests some 5 year old, then we need to rewrite laws. I would never dream of including in that same catagory a 15 year old having consentual sex with even a 40 year old. It is not in the same ballpark, hell, it aint even the same game to quote Jules...
 
If we initiate executions, which I am for for some pervert that kidnaps, locks up and sexually molests some 5 year old, then we need to rewrite laws. I would never dream of including in that same catagory a 15 year old having consentual sex with even a 40 year old. It is not in the same ballpark, hell, it aint even the same game to quote Jules...

You know, you bring up an excellent point. The cases of some of these people who kidnap kids, stuff them in dungeons, rape them, and kill them have caused a public outcry for stricter laws against sex offenders. However, there is a lot of gray area when it comes to laws against sexual conduct, as has been discussed in this thread. Which makes me want to want to know that instead of making sex offenses have stricter punishments, why not have kidnapping and acts of violence have harsher penalties instead? Doing so would protect those teenagers who are in a relationship with each other and choose to have sex with each other while also going after violent offenders.
 
Last edited:
You know, you bring up an excellent point. The cases of some of these people who kidnap kids, stuff them in dungeons, rape them, and kill them have caused a public outcry for stricter laws against sex offenders. However, there is a lot of gray area when it comes to laws against sexual conduct, as has been discussed in this thread. Which makes me want to want to know that instead of making sex offenses have stricter punishments, why not have kidnapping and acts of violence have harsher penalties instead?


The first thing we need to do is recognize that a 13-15yo is capable of being a voluntary partner in sex. They don't recognize all the implications and their consent may be ill-informed, but we're talking about minors who are past puberty here... like it or not they are not quite "children" per se anymore, they are capable of reproduction and possess a desire for sex.

As the father of a 14yo, I hate to admit that, but it is a fact.

I'm not saying it should be "okay" for a 21yo to have sex with a 15yo. I'm just saying that if the 15yo "consented" then we are not REMOTELY in the same class of situation as the perv who manipulates and 11yo into sex, let alone any kind of forcible rape.

21+15... wrong? Yes, I'd say so. Life without parole, chemical castration, execution? Oh hail no. I'm not sure I'd even call it a felony as long as the 15yo was sober.

The actual predators are something else entirely... make the distinction, change the definitions, whatever... then quit giving the actual predators who prey on actual children NO second chances.
 
The first thing we need to do is recognize that a 13-15yo is capable of being a voluntary partner in sex. They don't recognize all the implications and their consent may be ill-informed, but we're talking about minors who are past puberty here... like it or not they are not quite "children" per se anymore, they are capable of reproduction and possess a desire for sex.

As the father of a 14yo, I hate to admit that, but it is a fact.

I'm not saying it should be "okay" for a 21yo to have sex with a 15yo. I'm just saying that if the 15yo "consented" then we are not REMOTELY in the same class of situation as the perv who manipulates and 11yo into sex, let alone any kind of forcible rape.

21+15... wrong? Yes, I'd say so. Life without parole, chemical castration, execution? Oh hail no. I'm not sure I'd even call it a felony as long as the 15yo was sober.

The actual predators are something else entirely... make the distinction, change the definitions, whatever... then quit giving the actual predators who prey on actual children NO second chances.

Right. I just wanted to point out that most of the sex offender laws are based around sex but not violence or kidnapping. I don't know about you folks, but I would be more concerned about someone who was guilty of kidnapping moving into my neighborhood than a 20-year-old who had sex with a 15-year-old thirty years ago.
 
The first thing we need to do is recognize that a 13-15yo is capable of being a voluntary partner in sex. They don't recognize all the implications and their consent may be ill-informed, but we're talking about minors who are past puberty here... like it or not they are not quite "children" per se anymore, they are capable of reproduction and possess a desire for sex.

As the father of a 14yo, I hate to admit that, but it is a fact.

I'm not saying it should be "okay" for a 21yo to have sex with a 15yo. I'm just saying that if the 15yo "consented" then we are not REMOTELY in the same class of situation as the perv who manipulates and 11yo into sex, let alone any kind of forcible rape.

21+15... wrong? Yes, I'd say so. Life without parole, chemical castration, execution? Oh hail no. I'm not sure I'd even call it a felony as long as the 15yo was sober.

The actual predators are something else entirely... make the distinction, change the definitions, whatever... then quit giving the actual predators who prey on actual children NO second chances.

Aside from the double negative in the last line, I agree entirely. ;)
 
Aside from the double negative in the last line, I agree entirely. ;)

Yeah, well I'm a Southerner, what do you expect. :mrgreen:

We ain't got no proper English down here.
 
Last edited:
You know, you bring up an excellent point. The cases of some of these people who kidnap kids, stuff them in dungeons, rape them, and kill them have caused a public outcry for stricter laws against sex offenders. However, there is a lot of gray area when it comes to laws against sexual conduct, as has been discussed in this thread. Which makes me want to want to know that instead of making sex offenses have stricter punishments, why not have kidnapping and acts of violence have harsher penalties instead? Doing so would protect those teenagers who are in a relationship with each other and choose to have sex with each other while also going after violent offenders.
For some reason our society has decided sex is worse than violence. Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction resulted in millions of complaints and fines, but the same network can show MMA fights live, and news broadcasts regularly show videos of people being assaulted. Depictions of sex involving minors are illegal, but depictions of violence against minors are on television every night. Molesting a child gets you a long prison sentence and a lifetime on the sex offender registry, but assaulting a child gets you much less time. Chris Brown beat his girlfriend and is already back on the radio, Tiger Woods does nothing illegal and is vilified in the media for weeks.
 
For some reason our society has decided sex is worse than violence. Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction resulted in millions of complaints and fines, but the same network can show MMA fights live, and news broadcasts regularly show videos of people being assaulted. Depictions of sex involving minors are illegal, but depictions of violence against minors are on television every night. Molesting a child gets you a long prison sentence and a lifetime on the sex offender registry, but assaulting a child gets you much less time. Chris Brown beat his girlfriend and is already back on the radio, Tiger Woods does nothing illegal and is vilified in the media for weeks.

Yeah, it boggles the mind.
 
Back
Top Bottom