Show me the human...

[Buttercup]

Um, not the death penalty. There's jail and rehabilitation through mental health support.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I thought you'd say so I figured I'd let you say it again so everyone sees you're being levelheaded about this.

I'll add that a person who is convicted of a sex act with a child has a high chance of repeating that offense. I like sex with men and having sex with a man once would never be enough. I'm highly attracted to men and will want to repeat that experience. You can't program that out of me. I'm going to assume that someone who is sexually attracted to children can't have it programmed out either. Therefore, no matter how much this offender "wishes" they could change, children need to be protected from this person as long as he/she lives whether it be with jail time or other deterrents within the community.

 

[BSM1]

Thanks for letting us know how irrational and ridiculous your opinion is on this.

You are more than welcomed. Now feel free to defend any perverted individual that tickles your fancy, then look some damaged child in the eye and explain why.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

You are more than welcomed. Now feel free to defend any perverted individual that tickles your fancy, then look some damaged child in the eye and explain why.

Have fun kicking that strawman. Or you could actually read my posts instead of flying off at the handle. Grow up.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yeah, that's pretty much what I thought you'd say so I figured I'd let you say it again so everyone sees you're being levelheaded about this.

I'll add that a person who is convicted of a sex act with a child has a high chance of repeating that offense. I like sex with men and having sex with a man once would never be enough. I'm highly attracted to men and will want to repeat that experience. You can't program that out of me. I'm going to assume that someone who is sexually attracted to children can't have it programmed out either. Therefore, no matter how much this offender "wishes" they could change, children need to be protected from this person as long as he/she lives whether it be with jail time or other deterrents within the community.

I think it's best to let mental health care professionals handle that. It's more a matter of learning self-control techniques and changing behavior.

I mean, I'm not a psychologist or a psychiatrist, but I do know a bit about it and might enter into a career as one, perhaps with law enforcement. So the irrational slander that some are throwing at me in this thread is quite ironic and funny in a way, since I have a passion for criminal justice and think about perhaps becoming a criminal profiler or a forensic psychologist or psychiatrist. Oh, and my niece is working towards a Ph.D in clinical psychology.

 

[Buttercup]

I think it's best to let mental health care professionals handle that. It's more a matter of learning self-control techniques and changing behavior.

As long as children are protected at all times, I'm fine with therapy. But, kid safety can never be. compromised. I know too many people who were sexually abused by adults when they were kids and the mental and emotional consequences can be devastating for a lifetime.

I mean, I'm not a psychologist or a psychiatrist, but I do know a bit about it and might enter into a career as one, perhaps with law enforcement. So the irrational slander that some are throwing at me in this thread is quite ironic and funny in a way, since I have a passion for criminal justice and think about perhaps becoming a criminal profiler or a forensic psychologist or psychiatrist.

Very cool. Good luck!!

 

[BSM1]

Have fun kicking that strawman. Or you could actually read my posts instead of flying off at the handle. Grow up.

Make no mistake, IMO there is nothing worse than someone who hurts a child. A person who does so has no redeeming value, again IMO. I make no apologies concerning my position. You certainly have the right to your opinion, no matter how pin-headed it may be. But bottom line children should be protected, even at the risk of restricting and/or punishing the actions of adults with problems.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

As long as children are protected at all times, I'm fine with therapy. But, kid safety can never be. compromised. I know too many people who have been sexually abused by adults and the mental and emotional consequences can be devastating for a lifetime.

I've known/know victims of child sexual abuse and rape. I know how it goes. There's a history of that in my family, too.

Very cool. Good luck!!

Thanks!

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Make no mistake, IMO there is nothing worse than someone who hurts a child. A person who does so has no redeeming value, again IMO. I make no apologies concerning my position. You certainly have the right to your opinion, no matter how pin-headed it may be. But bottom line children should be protected, even at the risk of restricting and/or punishing the actions of adults with problems.

My opinion is based on science and reality, not knee-jerk reactions. You're not really fit to be deciding anything about this until you can come to a rational point of view on it.

 

[Wirey]

I like sex with men and having sex with a man once would never be enough. I'm highly attracted to men and will want to repeat that experience. QUOTE]

How you doin'?

 

[Buttercup]

I just have one last thing to say and then I'll shut up.

ANY form of sexual contact with a child is abuse, even if the perp is sweet as pie to kids and supposedly loves children and treats them well.

Kids are not meant for sexual experiences under any circumstances.

 

[Wirey]

My opinion is based on science and reality, not knee-jerk reactions. You're not really fit to be deciding anything about this until you can come to a rational point of view on it.

Unfortunately a rational point of view would include the idea that there is no 'cure' for a pedophile. If a drug addict or alcoholic slips up, they primarily harm themselves. Not so a pedophile. I understand you having a weaker position on this issue than most as you don't have achild, but as someone who does I can assure you that the call to arms of 'child in danger' is one of the single most impressive things in mankind's repertoire. And there's a damn fine reason for it.

A harmed child is as good as dead. The time we spend nuturing, teaching, and preparing a child for the world can be completely undone by a single act of depravity. In "To Kill a Mockingbird" there is a scene where Atticus Finch shoots a neighbour's dog who has become rabid. Someone mentions that the neigbour won't be happy that his dog was shot. This is the same. Someone who preys on children is literally no different than a rabid dog, and putting them down save both us and them the trouble of living with their disease. Is it fair to the guy? No, not really. Is it right for society? Yes, every time.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I just have one last thing to say and then I'll shut up.

ANY form of sexual contact with a child is abuse, even if the perp is sweet as pie to kids and supposedly loves children and treats them well.

Kids are not meant for sexual experiences under any circumstances.

I agree. However, I will add that children do have a sexuality of sorts, but it's pretty different from the sexuality of sexually mature people. They do "explore" and such with their own bodies and with other children. I remember when I was first exposed to sex and pornography as a very young child; it was really confusing to me and I didn't understand it although I certainly did have crushes on both males and females that were of a romantic nature.

But certainly adults shouldn't be having sexual contact with children. One of the issues is that adults sometimes project adult sexuality on children and aren't aware that it isn't the same. Adult sexuality is much more complex.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Unfortunately a rational point of view would include the idea that there is no 'cure' for a pedophile. If a drug addict or alcoholic slips up, they primarily harm themselves. Not so a pedophile. I understand you having a weaker position on this issue than most as you don't have achild, but as someone who does I can assure you that the call to arms of 'child in danger' is one of the single most impressive things in mankind's repertoire. And there's a damn fine reason for it.

No, my not having children doesn't lessen my opinion. Is the opinion of a health professional (mental or otherwise) who specializes in children lessened if they themselves are not parents? That makes no sense. You don't need to have children yourself in order to understand the issue.

A harmed child is as good as dead.

Bull! That's not only flat-out wrong, but it's extremely offensive to those who have survived and healed from childhood abuse. I'm one of those people, actually. I was physically, emotionally and mentally abused from the time I was a child until my teens. In fact, my first memory on this planet is of my drunken paternal grandfather shooting at my mom and I (I was an infant).

So don't give me that crap!

The time we spend nuturing, teaching, and preparing a child for the world can be completely undone by a single act of depravity.

Bull, again!

In "To Kill a Mockingbird" there is a scene where Atticus Finch shoots a neighbour's dog who has become rabid. Someone mentions that the neigbour won't be happy that his dog was shot. This is the same. Someone who preys on children is literally no different than a rabid dog, and putting them down save both us and them the trouble of living with their disease. Is it fair to the guy? No, not really. Is it right for society? Yes, every time.

Bull, once again! This is black and white thinking, isn't helpful and doesn't match up to reality. People can be rehabilitated and learn to manage themselves.

 

[Wirey]

Bull, once again! This is black and white thinking, isn't helpful and doesn't match up to reality. People can be rehabilitated and learn to manage themselves.

With regard to child molestation, science says they can't.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

With regard to child molestation, science says they can't.

Depends on what exactly you're talking about. Most child molestation happens within families and those types of abusers aren't considered pedophiles. With actual pedophilies, you can't change the person's attraction. However, you can change the behavior.

Not all child molesters reoffend:

"Are those who actually commit child molesting (as opposed to pedophiles who have never sexually abused) doomed to endlessly repeat this heinous offensive unless incarcerated?

Studies of recidivism clearly show that this is not the case. In an article entitled “Recidivism of Sex Offenders” published in the journal of the Center for Sex Offender Management, author Tim Bynum examined a multiplicity of studies on re-offending by convicted sex offenders. Bynum acknowledges that sex crimes are under-reported which can skew studies of recidivism. However, all studies indicate that many convicted child molesters never molest again.

Bynum cites a 1995 study as showing that child molesters had a lower rate of recidivism than rapists while a 1997 study found that over a 25-year period, child molesters had a higher recidivism rate than rapists with 52% of the former re-offending vs. 39% of the latter. Bynum points to a 1990 review of studies that found the recidivism rate for child molesters varied from 10% to 40%. As bad as any re-offense is for this horrible crime, it should be noted that no study Bynum mentions found that 100% of child molesters re-offended."

Treating Pedophiles: Reasons for Cautious Optimism

 

[Alceste]

We're all human. I don't believe in punishment or retribution. I do believe that when other humans pose a danger to us or our children they should be isolated from contact with those they are likely to harm. I'm satisfied with imprisonment (in fact, I think imprisonment should be exclusively reserved for those who are likely to harm others). If imprisonment is impossible for whatever reason, I'm completely OK with the concept of the dangerous individual being euthanized (exactly like a dangerous animal), but in law and in our culture the death penalty is a royal legal and ethical mess that is far less cost-effective and pragmatic than prison. The law should be more moral than those who are subject to it. A law that tolerates or requires killing one another for certain violations is no more moral than the fundamental ethics of the murderers we kill.

 

[Alceste]

With regard to child molestation, science says they can't.

It's important to differentiate between fantasy and activity. True, we generally can't prevent people from being attracted to children, but we can probably train most people with that particular perversion not to act upon it.

 

[BSM1]

We're all human. I don't believe in punishment or retribution. I do believe that when other humans pose a danger to us or our children they should be isolated from contact with those they are likely to harm. I'm satisfied with imprisonment (in fact, I think imprisonment should be exclusively reserved for those who are likely to harm others). If imprisonment is impossible for whatever reason, I'm completely OK with the concept of the dangerous individual being euthanized (exactly like a dangerous animal), but in law and in our culture the death penalty is a royal legal and ethical mess that is far less cost-effective and pragmatic than prison. The law should be more moral than those who are subject to it. A law that tolerates or requires killing one another for certain violations is no more moral than the fundamental ethics of the murderers we kill.

Would that be life imprisonment with no chance of parole?

 

[Bunyip]

You think this makes it okay for this person to rape and maybe kill an eight year old boy or girl?

Of course not. How on earth did you read that into my comment?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Of course not. How on earth did you read that into my comment?

He has a bad habit of doing that.