• South Korea enacts chemical castration law against child sexual abuse
    414 replies, posted
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31324802]As long as this doesn't have a permanent effect I don't really see the problem.[/QUOTE] But it does. [QUOTE=lolwutdude;31324792]Are you saying we should censor a legitimate business company without their full and informed consent? Are you saying it's even wrong to lock up a human being inside a cell without their full and informed consent? Why people ever side with criminals against a procedure that can be only brought upon them by making idiotic choices when it's not even capital punishment but make it sound as if it is, I'll never understand. He made the choice of raping kids, so he'll face the punishment. He can still piss.[/QUOTE] I can't call a business that is taking advantage of the ignorance of children for monetary benefit truly legitimate. Also, a human being that steals or murders for non-necessary benefit (as in, murdering someone because he pissed you off, stealing instead of getting a job when you have a possibility of getting a job if you invested time for it, etc.), basically means you are signing a mental contract with yourself. This is different than if you have an unnatural sexual necessity which you must somehow satisfy as it's a primal instinct that you can't even do anything about.
[QUOTE=Kendra;31324813]Can you really blame a girl in her single digit years for wearing something that everyone is saying is "in/hip/cool"? She'd rather wear whatever is "in" than be left out, and this applies to most people at all ages, but some ignorant, and not yet intelligent girl is left without even the ability to make a choice. Also, if I have to choose between two evils, I'd much rather choose the one that involves not allowing the media to corrupt young minds than because of this corruption going on [corruption is a strong word, but it gets the point across], that in 20 years you are forced by someone else, unwillingly, to have your entire bodily mechanism altered because of something you most likely can't help.[/QUOTE] To a certain extent I do agree, however if a person is a repeat offender who shows no signs of stopping then I do believe temporary chemical castration is probably for the best.
[QUOTE=Kendra;31324813]Can you really blame a girl in her single digit years for wearing something that everyone is saying is "in/hip/cool"? She'd rather wear whatever is "in" than be left out, and this applies to most people at all ages, but some ignorant, and not yet intelligent girl is left without even the ability to make a choice.[/QUOTE] It doesn't matter what she wears, what she wears is NOT the reason for her being raped. And instead of castrating the rapist, put him in prison and try to find the core of his 'sickness' and cure it by therapy.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31324851]To a certain extent I do agree, however if a person is a repeat offender who shows no signs of stopping then I do believe temporary chemical castration is probably for the best.[/QUOTE] And prison/therapy is not a viable choice?
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31324851]To a certain extent I do agree, however if a person is a repeat offender who shows no signs of stopping then I do believe temporary chemical castration is probably for the best.[/QUOTE] How can he be a repeat offender? If he's raped a child he should've gone to jail in the first place.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31324851]To a certain extent I do agree, however if a person is a repeat offender who shows no signs of stopping then I do believe temporary chemical castration is probably for the best.[/QUOTE] I wonder how many people are actually repeat offenders though, and even then, it still comes down to the primordial issue with the early development; also comes down to the fact that he probably hasn't received psychological treatment while spending his prison time, which is again a thing the goverment should do, but would rather not, and then just relly on cheaper and more efficient things.
[QUOTE=Coffee;31324866]And prison is not a viable choice?[/QUOTE] Repeat offender, like when all else has failed, allowing the offender to go free without the chance of him offending again.
[QUOTE=Kendra;31324843]But it does. I can't call a business that is taking advantage of the ignorance of children for monetary benefit truly legitimate. Also, a human being that steals or murders for non-necessary benefit (as in, murdering someone because he pissed you off, stealing instead of getting a job when you have a possibility of getting a job if you invested time for it, etc.), basically means you are signing a mental contract with yourself. This is different than if you have an unnatural sexual necessity which you must somehow satisfy as it's a primal instinct that you can't even do anything about.[/QUOTE] And I can't call a government that censors a corporation because of they sell legitimate either, yet you're for it, so I guess you have little fascism inside of you as well. No it isn't, rape is still rape. That's like saying a human being is justified cause of primal instinct of anger and they have all this rage pent up that made them kill another person, then saying we shouldn't lock him up. You're justifying rapists, this is hilarious.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;31324867]How can he be a repeat offender? If he's raped a child he should've gone to jail in the first place.[/QUOTE] Rape someone >> Get out of jail >> rape more people. Actually the majority of most criminals will be repeat offenders.
[QUOTE=Kendra;31324873]I wonder how many people are actually repeat offenders though, and even then, it still comes down to the primordial issue with the early development; also comes down to the fact that he probably hasn't received psychological treatment while spending his prison time, which is again a thing the goverment should do, but would rather not, and then just relly on cheaper and more efficient things.[/QUOTE] I can't say I disagree with you to be honest, I would always advocate a decent prison sentence and psychological therapy over this.
I don't care what shit they get in their body, they shouldn't have done it.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;31324858]It doesn't matter what she wears, what she wears is NOT the reason for her being raped. And instead of castrating the rapist, put him in prison and try to find the core of his 'sickness' and cure it by therapy.[/QUOTE] My point is not that if you dress slutty as a 6 year old you will be raped, but that because of factors, SUCH AS dressing in what is basically half-lingerie as a 6 year old wearing mini-skirts and overly-exposing shirts, etc. as a 6 year old, will influence a boy of 6 years, with addition of the oversexualisation of the media (which is more targeted at adults, but children are affected regardless), and thusforth influence this 6 year old in his future years.
Because you liked picking Kendra's post apart sentence by sentence I'll do the same to yours :) [QUOTE=Collin665;31324679]Alright guys, no more multi-vitamins, prescription medicine, or any other substance that chemically alters the body (including most modern consumer items, i.e. caffeine, alcohol, cigarettes, and so on).[/QUOTE] Nice hyperbole, those drugs are hardly comparable to something that shuts off a large part of your hormone production for extended periods of time (around 10 years?). [QUOTE=Collin665;31324679] Or, you know, its because prepubescent children are... prepubsecent, they don't have tits, their body-fat percentage is lower, their hip width is relatively smaller, and we SHOULD know that we aren't supposed to be attracted to prepubescent children. [/quote] The average age of the onset of puberty has lowered a good few years over the past century, so younger children are going to be becoming more mature sexually earlier. Also, go look at some of the clothes for children in some stores, a lot of them are sexualised in a manner that is NOT appropriate for the ages the clothes are manufactured for. Whilst I'm not defending paeodophiles in any manner (in fact I completely abhor them), it is easy to see that someone who is exposed to sexualised imagery of young children may, you know, subconsciously begin to have sexual thoughts about young children? [QUOTE=Collin665;31324679]Yes, like in ancient Greece when all those kids were watching iCarly and Hannah Montana then they would grow up to molest other young boys. Sure, the over sexualized nature of today's youth is probably part of it, but it is definitely not the sole reason, nor the sole thing we can change.[/QUOTE] I agree with this, but chemically castrating sex offenders is really not the way to do it. You realise that this would not only stop them from offending again, but would stop them from enjoying ANY kind of sex life? Ie, they wouldn't be able to sleep with consenting adults. You may think this to be a fitting punishment, but you know, for most countries throwing them in jail for a long time works too, and doesn't potentially mess with their body in ways that are borderline inhumane.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31324877]Repeat offender, like when all else has failed, allowing the offender to go free without the chance of him offending again.[/QUOTE] Then obviously he's mentally ill and needs immediate medical attention.
[QUOTE=Coffee;31324906]Then obviously he's mentally ill and needs immediate medical attention.[/QUOTE] I think it's better for the offender to be castrated than to be stuck in a prison for the rest of his life. Maybe chemical castration could be used as an option for a repeat offender, allowing him to go free earlier
[QUOTE=Collin665;31324885]Rape someone >> Get out of jail >> rape more people. Actually the majority of most criminals will be repeat offenders.[/QUOTE] Then I find it strange. If someone is put in jail for rape and then is released from jail and rapes someone again, his time in jail obviously didn't do what it should have, either because he didn't recieve psychological treatment or his time simply wasn't long enough. In either case I'd blame the state/government for that.
[QUOTE=lolwutdude;31324725]It doesn't matter they're not 'helping' or 'over-sexualizing children with fashion that's been already there for decades', saying the solution to censor something is wrong when everything is dictated by free will and choice. To say this is the fault of the media is a cop-out since it's all the fault of a pedophile who can't control himself and rape a kid, cause in the end, [b]they're the ones making the choice of raping kids[/b], and we shouldn't stop considering a punishment because it might be a fault for companies that makes clothes. Hey, videogames includes murdering people, should we say they're at fault here?[/QUOTE] I'm not debating with you whether the media is to blame or not, I was clarifying to you that saying that there are reasons for actions does not mean that the actions are OK. Ie, "Bobby raped Sally because xyz" does not mean that I think Bobby can be forgiven for raping Sally. He still raped someone and should be punished accordingly. Don't jump to conclusions and assume that people condone the actions of criminals just because they understand the reasons that could lead to the actions.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31324910]I think it's better for the offender to be castrated than to be stuck in a prison for the rest of his life. Maybe chemical castration could be used as an option for a repeat offender, allowing him to go free earlier[/QUOTE] I actually think there's a country, might be Poland?, that allows you to choose chemical castration over prison. As that is giving consent to it, I am okay with this.
[QUOTE=Azur;31324904] The average age of the onset of puberty has lowered a good few years over the past century, so younger children are going to be becoming more mature sexually earlier. Also, go look at some of the clothes for children in some stores, a lot of them are sexualised in a manner that is NOT appropriate for the ages the clothes are manufactured for. Whilst I'm not defending paeodophiles in any manner (in fact I completely abhor them), it is easy to see that someone who is exposed to sexualised imagery of young children may, you know, subconsciously begin to have sexual thoughts about young children?[/QUOTE] Having sexual thoughts are different from actually committing them, everyone has them about everyone all the time, but you know, people tend to uh not enact them because they have a choice to not to do so. Cause you know, they might get punished. And this is punishment.
[QUOTE=Kendra;31324902]My point is not that if you dress slutty as a 6 year old you will be raped, but that because of factors, SUCH AS dressing in what is basically half-lingerie as a 6 year old wearing mini-skirts and overly-exposing shirts, etc. as a 6 year old, will influence a boy of 6 years, with addition of the oversexualisation of the media (which is more targeted at adults, but children are affected regardless), and thusforth influence this 6 year old in his future years.[/QUOTE] I think it's wrong that 6 year olds are dressed the way they are, which actually isn't the case, it's way overportrayed. But, if a rapist is gonna rape a 6 year old girl, I doubt it matters how she is dressed. And I'm wondering how many 6 year old boys actually find 6 year old girls sexually attractive.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;31324910]I think it's better for the offender to be castrated than to be stuck in a prison for the rest of his life. Maybe chemical castration could be used as an option for a repeat offender, allowing him to go free earlier[/QUOTE] Well I suppose that could be an option to the offender, because then it's his own choice and it's not being forced upon him.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;31324787]Can you stop with the bolded parts please???[/QUOTE] Sorry. I tend to get a tad.. heated when I see people being accused of condoning paedophillia. [img]http://www.facepunch.com/fp/ratings/heart.png[/img]
I simply pick apart Kendra's posts into easily manageable pieces so that people can see which part I am replying to. Anyway, if you guys want statistics on chemical castration efficacy then just google it a bit. Its hard to find solid statistics though. Values for sexual offender recidivism varies from 3% to 95% (both are extremes, I believe). Chemical castration efficacy varies, too, but every study I found showed it to be effective. The one I quoted earlier showed a drop from 75% to 2%, but even I find that a bit extreme.
And isn't it just as wrong for a 50 year old man to have sex with a 15 year old girl as it would be for a man of the same age to have sex with a 6 year old girl? We do find girls sexually attractive at the age of 15, most of us atleast, and we still do when we're 50. We don't rape 15 year old girls because of that, that's unethical, and for the same reason I don't think we'd rape 6 year old girls if we'd find them attractive.
[QUOTE=lolwutdude;31324930]Having sexual thoughts are different from actually committing them, everyone has them about everyone all the time, but you know, people tend to uh not enact them because they have a choice to not to do so. Cause you know, they might get punished. And this is punishment.[/QUOTE] I never said paedophiles shouldn't be punished. You're jumping to the conclusion that I condone paedophiles' actions. Chemical castration is a step too far in my eyes as to what stands as reasonable punishment.
It sounds like you people are saying that we'll all start raping 6 year old because we start finding them attractive.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;31324943]I think it's wrong that 6 year olds are dressed the way they are, which actually isn't the case, it's way overportrayed. But, if a rapist is gonna rape a 6 year old girl, I doubt it matters how she is dressed. And I'm wondering how many 6 year old boys actually find 6 year old girls sexually attractive.[/QUOTE] I read a study [about your second point] that this is happening more and more because of how much sex is used in advertisement and such. I mean, just look at any AXE or Coca-Cola advertisement, you're most likely going to find something sexual. And something like Coca-Cola is something a child will watch aswell. To a previous point, I don't understand people that think that freedom of speech should be 100% enforced when freedom of speech allows the media to literally warp and twist the mind of young children so that they may be completely altered in future years. There should be a limit to everything, even freedom of speech. Also, in retrospect, taking advantage of ignorance isn't even legitimised by freedom of speech, to be honest.
Then we should start educating people about the things that are happening, teach youngsters how to criticise, and teach their parents.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;31324973]It sounds like you people are saying that we'll all start raping 6 year old because we start finding them attractive.[/QUOTE] That's not what we're saying at all. Or at least, I'm sure as hell not saying that. I'm saying that the media and fashion industries are sexualising young children, and I believe that it is sick and wrong to do so. People who are mentally unstable in ways that may lead them to become a paedophile are bound to be influenced by this in subconcious ways which may fuel their paedophillia. This does not mean that your average joe is going to see a toddler in a tank top and instantly try to rape them.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;31324989]Then we should start educating people about the things that are happening, teach youngsters how to criticise, and teach their parents.[/QUOTE] But it is much cheaper for the goverment to inject a drug every few months/years into 10000~ child abusers or even just paedophiles than to educate over 10 million pairs of parents and 10 million children (speaking S. Korea specifically, numbers are guesses, especially abusers, but you get my point. Numbers would obviously be multiplied by tens to hundreds of times if we're talking about the entire capitalistic world.)
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.