Should all child molesters be castrated before leaving prison?

Panache said:

Yeah, it boggles the mind.

Click to expand...

Off topic, but I'll address this because it's interesting:

It's just the end result of years of influence by depraved religious cults and fascist forms of govt that have been around for years.

Their "anti-sex" ideology is just a normal part of all authoritarian cultures (ex. Communist China bans all internet pornography claiming that it is "immoral and harmful to a productive society" - sound familiar?)

The reasons this wacko view originated are:

1. Ancient cultures like the Israelites believed in "ethnic purity" and "purity of the bloodline" (they disapproved of marrying outside their race, and most marriages were arranged and done for "family honor") - so they invented laws which strictly vilified a lot sex practices in order to keep their race and families as "pure" as possible.

2. Authoritarian/fascist cultures have, throughout history, tried to regulate and control sex. This is because the more they can limit people's individual happiness, the more the people will depend on them (the state/church/Furher/People's Republic, etc)

It's all the same, it's been a common part of history, and it's never had anything to do with "morals". Ever (unless servitude to the state = "morals"). Everyone knows this, and everyone has known it since the dawn of time. The history of human society proves that. Even in countries where looking at a woman without her burka on is punishable by beheading, it doesn't change people's natural animalistic instinct to have a good ****, even if it means losing you head after. But don't try explaining that to social degenerate like Christian right, Communist Chinese, Govt. of Iran, etc. These people are brainwashed and lack the capacity for critical thought - and they've been conditioned to be this way over the years. :lol:

Tsunami said:

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.

Click to expand...

Oh no you didn't. You did not just diss my MMA.

Don't make me sic WI Crippler on you. :mrgreen:

SgtRock said:

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.

Click to expand...

Wow!
The sheer ignorance of this preposition is mind-boggling.
Besides of what has been addressed already and everything else, 15 is the legal age of consent in many nations across the world, and also in some US states.

Nope. It does not help and they will still abuse using other (bottles, razors, etc) things. How about Mandatory Killing? They all need to be put in a torture chamber til they eventally die or bleed out.

spud_meister said:

often it is not a purely sexual thing, it can be more about power and control, or something like that.

and how would you go about castrating female child molesters?

so i dont think castrating all would be a good idea, only those whose motivations are mostly sexual

Click to expand...

All of it is about power and control and the sick freaks that try to say it is a sexual urge are just saying that because the bleeding hearts will try to understand them and get em help when there is NO HELP for these monsters.
We should kill anybody that we know raped a baby/small child!

ETA: I am not talking about the 18 year old that falls in love with 14 year old Suzy down the street. I am talking about people that Rape babies and small children!

Then Kali, it isnt the current, "political witch huntery". About the issue that the debate has lead to; but the violent offense against children that started the post. Then I agree it is a dangerous, "vile act wrought with evil". Society should be harsh and, justice swift and sure. Protect the innocent among us.

Kali said:

All of it is about power and control and the sick freaks that try to say it is a sexual urge are just saying that because the bleeding hearts will try to understand them and get em help when there is NO HELP for these monsters.

Click to expand...

You are confused and oversimplifying. Pedophilia is defined as a compulsive sexual attraction to prepubescents and early pubescents.

We should kill anybody that we know raped a baby/small child!

ETA: I am not talking about the 18 year old that falls in love with 14 year old Suzy down the street. I am talking about people that Rape babies and small children!

Click to expand...

Ah, now this is a very specific kind of incident within underage sexual offenses.

Kali said:

Nope. It does not help and they will still abuse using other (bottles, razors, etc) things. How about Mandatory Killing? They all need to be put in a torture chamber til they eventally die or bleed out.

Click to expand...

I'd like to support this, but it would encourage people who abuse children outside of their families to kill their victims-- if the penalty is the same as for murder, it makes sense to kill the only witness to the crime.

Of course, I don't support torture for any reason. It's unnecessary and it corrupts the purpose of our justice system.

All of it is about power and control and the sick freaks that try to say it is a sexual urge are just saying that because the bleeding hearts will try to understand them and get em help when there is NO HELP for these monsters.

Click to expand...

How do you go from "sexual urge" to "bleeding hearts will try to understand them and get em help"?

If it isn't about sex, then why are we talking about punishments for sexual predators, rather than punishments for kidnapping/assault on children?

Sex seems to be what gets the juices flowing, and not just for the perpetrators. People get far more riled up about violence against children if sex is involved. To my mind violence against children is just as sick even if there is no sexual contact involved. More sick even than non-violent molestations.

My observation has been that the outcry over abuse seems to be far louder when it involves sex than it does when it involves violence though. I am really not sure why.

Panache said:

How do you go from "sexual urge" to "bleeding hearts will try to understand them and get em help"?

If it isn't about sex, then why are we talking about punishments for sexual predators, rather than punishments for kidnapping/assault on children?

Sex seems to be what gets the juices flowing, and not just for the perpetrators. People get far more riled up about violence against children if sex is involved. To my mind violence against children is just as sick even if there is no sexual contact involved. More sick even than non-violent molestations.

My observation has been that the outcry over abuse seems to be far louder when it involves sex than it does when it involves violence though. I am really not sure why.

Click to expand...

I think for most people it has to do with the "violation of innocence". A child whose first experience with sex was violent rape may never grow up to have a normal healthy perspective on sex. Many child abusers were themselves abused as children, according to the Big Brains.

Bad enough when it happens to a mature and experienced adult. When it is a child, it is a violation of something we tend to hold sacred: the relative innocence of childhood. In a sense, it is like someone throwing donkey crap on the Mona Lisa, but worse. Something pure and innocent has been violated in one of the more heinous ways possible.

I disagree with the theory that rape is all about power, control and violence, and that sex is not a factor. I think this is a drastic oversimplification... rapists are individuals and individuals vary in their motives. From what I've seen many women seem to make this distinction, and I think it is because women tend to associate sex with the more tender emotions, like love... and they can't imagine rape being sexually fulfilling for the rapist. Whereas, a certain percentage of men are far more intrested in just sticking something somewhere and getting their rocks off than any emotional satisfaction. Probably most rapists are motivated by a combination of sexual perversion and control/violence issues.

I have heard that castration doe not stop some of them.

SgtRock said:

If a 21 year old man has sex witha 15year old girl he should be executed.

Click to expand...

LOL WHAT? 14 is legal in several states with parental consent. :rofl A 15 year old girl having consented sex with a 21 year old guy isn't "child molestation" in any sense of the word (and even if it's a statuatory "rape" case, the most the guy should get is a couple months probation IMO).

FYI, when I say "pedophiles" I'm talking about 40 year old guys who rape 3 year old kids. Not two teenagers getting some tail. I mean if that's what you really believe then you almost creep me out as much as the pedophiles. You sound like a Taliban member or something. :shock:

SgtRock said:

Why should it be any different if its a 21 yo old woman and a 15 yo boy.

Click to expand...

Uh, because how many 13 year old boys do you think would actually complain if they got tail with a 21 year old woman? I mean talk about lucky.

Personally I think that a boy should be able to consent to sex with women as soon as he's "old enough to breed". (I think the laws should be different when it comes to gay sex or young teenage women, since when there's an older male partner involved, the chances of the younger person being taken advantage of are much higher). Seriously c'mon. When we feminize our young men to the extent that we claim they were "raped" just because they did what all young guys do - that's a serious sign of social degeneracy. No wonder so many young guys today end up being feminized ******s. :doh

There are two issues when considering age of consent legislation:
sexual maturity and personal development (and a third, the age difference between partners).
Across the world the age of consent is set somewhere between the age of sexual maturity and full adulthood (with noteable exception of the Vatican, where it's 12).

In my humble opinion, there is a world of difference between prebubescent children and sexually mature adolescents, which should be reflected in legislaton dealing with offenders.
The term pedophile, in its psychiatric meaning, concerns abusers of prepubescents, a 20 year old who has a 15 year old girlfriend is not a pedo.

Toothpicvic said:

This sounds like a good idea to me. I think that all convicted child molesters should receive mandatory castration in addition to their prison sentences. I don't know why we aren't doing this. I've heard that sometimes pedophiles get offered castration as a way to reduce their sentence, but **** that. Just castrate all of them I say.

Click to expand...

No, they should be executed before leaving prison.

I would not support this for reasons already mentioned. What constitutes "molestation" is abused these days, depending on the locality. I'm surprised that the same people who usually badmouth government control in Europe would want to endorse this kind of action in the U.S. Cutting off someone's gonads is a reproductive rights issue.

Execution is expensive due to all the appeals (which should remain in place) and innocent people have already died, thus I don't support it as a route for convicting pedophiles. The last thing we need is people being wontonly convicted of pedophilia over nothing and then being executed.

No.

My reasons are thus:

Castration is not reversible if the convicted is found to have been falsely convicted. Well, not reversible yet. Even so, if it becomes reversible, castration would then be pointless. In fact, it is pointless now, as I can easily see molestation occurring without the use of an erect penis. Not to mention female child molesters.

It isn't harsh enough, in the case of the true problem molesters here, older persons (25 and up?) who intentionally perform sexual acts on a young (as in under 10-11 years old, in general) child without the child's consent. Multiple people have stated that after that age, the gray area covers most of the area, with only the edges being black and white.

Then again, there will be exceptions/oddities. For example, what if a very sexually and physically advanced 10 to 12-year-old (and they do exist, at least the physically large bit, dunno about sexually), say 5’6”-6’ 0” and 180-250 Lbs., were to physically assault and rape a small, petite, 30-40 year-old woman?

There will always be exceptions, which is why any law which uses age as a standard will cause issues.
The trouble is, no fool-proof way to measure someone’s “adultness” exists.
I am sure that somewhere in this world, a 12 year-old boy exists who has all the basic capabilities of a fully grown adult…And at the same time, there exists a 40+ year-old child…and I don’t mean in the mentally impaired/whatever way, I mean in the child-like actions/thought processes way. Wait, is that the same thing? Ok, I don’t mean an actual physical or mental disease/defect/damage bit, I mean…Ah, screw it, you get the idea.

Basically, I would advocate that anyone who forcibly (as in, against their targets will) engages in sexual acts with another person should be given a life sentence without the possiblity of parole, in a seperate prison space exclusively for their type.

You see, as some others in this thread have pointed out, it's not the sexual act which is the issue...It is the non-consent or lack of capability TO consent of one party which is the issue.


Just my thoughts on the issue.

samsmart said:

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.

Click to expand...

Exactly... it seems pretty silly to lock up an 18 year old that has sex with a 17 year old, or to treat that 18 year old the same as a man that molests a 2 year old girl. The grey area must be addressed and changed, as it seems that most here agree.

Toothpicvic said:

This sounds like a good idea to me. I think that all convicted child molesters should receive mandatory castration in addition to their prison sentences. I don't know why we aren't doing this. I've heard that sometimes pedophiles get offered castration as a way to reduce their sentence, but **** that. Just castrate all of them I say.

Click to expand...

I didn't vote but my answer is "If I could have faith in US justice system, then by all means YES"

***** The term Child Molesation/Child Abuse covers an awful lot of territory. There have been an avalanche post mid 80's of False accusations coast to coast against hundreds of innocent people the specifics of which border on the absurd. Dozens of innocent people have been imprisoned and hundreds of others have had their lives turned upside down. The reason it isn't much worse was because of a late 80's SCOTUS ruling (Scalia written) about Facing your accuser in Court.


****** Google a Zealot ****head called Kee McFarlane and see exactly where some of this can lead to . Now obviously I have a clear defination of a serial (Male) Child Molester/Rapist and that should be fairly obvious to all but remember some hysteria will always take place and those making a Cottage industry out of exposing deviancy like NBC's Predator series are not really doing this society any good.

Zinc Route said:

***** The term Child Molesation/Child Abuse covers an awful lot of territory. There have been an avalanche post mid 80's of False accusations coast to coast against hundreds of innocent people the specifics of which border on the absurd. Dozens of innocent people have been imprisoned and hundreds of others have had their lives turned upside down. The reason it isn't much worse was because of a late 80's SCOTUS ruling (Scalia written) about Facing your accuser in Court.


****** Google a Zealot ****head called Kee McFarlane and see exactly where some of this can lead to . Now obviously I have a clear defination of a serial (Male) Child Molester/Rapist and that should be fairly obvious to all but remember some hysteria will always take place and those making a Cottage industry out of exposing deviancy like NBC's Predator series are not really doing this society any good.

Click to expand...

You sound worried and concerned about the Predator Series.:roll:

LiberalAvenger said:

You sound worried and concerned about the Predator Series.:roll:

Click to expand...

***** No - I'm past my Prime and a little too wary of Internet BS. However the outfit that provides NBC's Chris Hansen with the fodder for this amusing crap are little better than the Witch Hunters of Centuries ago. Some would just as easily go after someone Wearing a Crucifix if that was a Crime.

Toothpicvic said:

This sounds like a good idea to me. I think that all convicted child molesters should receive mandatory castration in addition to their prison sentences. I don't know why we aren't doing this. I've heard that sometimes pedophiles get offered castration as a way to reduce their sentence, but **** that. Just castrate all of them I say.

Click to expand...

How many have been accused, convicted, did or doing the time ...
Only to find out years later they never did the crime.

Do we castrate them also???

Radiate_Truth said:

How many have been accused, convicted, did or doing the time ...
Only to find out years later they never did the crime.

Do we castrate them also???

Click to expand...

Why not? You don't seem to have a problem with the fact that they've spent years in prison for a crime they didn't commit, after all.

Korimyr the Rat said:

Why not? You don't seem to have a problem with the fact that they've spent years in prison for a crime they didn't commit, after all.

Click to expand...

Where is it within your means to do anything about it ...if you could???

Radiate_Truth said:

Where is it within your means to do anything about it ...if you could???

Click to expand...

It isn't. I'm just pointing out the logical conclusion of your arguments-- if we cannot kill a convicted murderer or castrate a convicted rapist because of the possibility that they might be innocent, how can we justify putting them in prison? How can we justify any penalty?

Our system makes mistakes. It always has and it always will. But we cannot allow the fact that it makes mistakes to make us fearful of doing what is necessary. Sentencing an innocent person is a terrible injustice, but it is less of an injustice than what would occur without a functional justice system.