Somehow I don't feel entirely comfortable with it, for said human rights reasons. Of course, having a child molested makes me even a lot more uncomfortable, so maybe it's a lesser of two evils situation?
Mr Tusk's refusal "to call such individuals – such creatures – human beings" doesn't sound too good either. It's a little more complicated than that and reminds me of calling Hitler a monster, instead of looking at what humans are capable of doing. As hard as it is, people have to stop thinking about such situations from the vigilante point of view of parents, keep a sober and clear head and think it through.
It's mostly this, that sounds a bit off:
"Supporters are reminding those against the move that the effects of chemical castration are not permanent, nor are they a guarantee that a paedophile will not re-offend."
What's the point then? It may lower the risk, okay, but doesn't eliminate it. If this law gets through, one will have to see how it goes in the next few years. Maybe it checks out successfully.
This is the first time I read about the British model, where offenders have to agree to get treated. That I can get behind entirely.
Mr Tusk's refusal "to call such individuals – such creatures – human beings" doesn't sound too good either. It's a little more complicated than that and reminds me of calling Hitler a monster, instead of looking at what humans are capable of doing. As hard as it is, people have to stop thinking about such situations from the vigilante point of view of parents, keep a sober and clear head and think it through.
It's mostly this, that sounds a bit off:
"Supporters are reminding those against the move that the effects of chemical castration are not permanent, nor are they a guarantee that a paedophile will not re-offend."
What's the point then? It may lower the risk, okay, but doesn't eliminate it. If this law gets through, one will have to see how it goes in the next few years. Maybe it checks out successfully.
This is the first time I read about the British model, where offenders have to agree to get treated. That I can get behind entirely.
*MySmiley*
You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.
You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling.
Castration of paedophiles
21/04/2010 11:44:03 AM
- 840 Views
Hmm
21/04/2010 12:04:45 PM
- 401 Views
More or less agree
21/04/2010 05:20:43 PM
- 464 Views
The chemicals they use in The Netherlands, for example, decrease the sex drive.
21/04/2010 05:26:58 PM
- 336 Views
Calling it "castration" makes it sound a million times worse than it actually is.
21/04/2010 12:44:30 PM
- 429 Views
One quick response: Alan Turing
21/04/2010 03:43:33 PM
- 457 Views
Are they really using the same chemicals as in 1952?
21/04/2010 04:40:30 PM
- 388 Views
You'll have problems finding medicines that don't have any risks associated with them... *NM*
21/04/2010 05:26:11 PM
- 149 Views
If they won't let us just shot them then cutting thier balls off will have to do
21/04/2010 03:24:22 PM
- 464 Views
Yeah... no. *NM*
21/04/2010 04:06:57 PM
- 152 Views
Why are you against this? *NM*
21/04/2010 06:54:20 PM
- 140 Views
First, because I don't knee-jerk to BURN IN HELL FOREVERRRRR whenever I see "pedophile"
21/04/2010 07:28:34 PM
- 375 Views
Although I'm not a psychologist
21/04/2010 11:29:04 PM
- 336 Views
No...just kill them *NM*
22/04/2010 04:44:47 AM
- 154 Views
I'm with you Mook.
22/04/2010 05:08:46 AM
- 372 Views
Well, that's kind of the point, right?
22/04/2010 06:50:11 AM
- 375 Views
I also agree.
22/04/2010 01:15:50 PM
- 339 Views
It will keep them from hurting more children *NM*
22/04/2010 01:53:23 PM
- 129 Views
there are many ways to accomplish that.
22/04/2010 03:10:02 PM
- 422 Views
you can make any argument sound absurd if that is goal
22/04/2010 05:07:56 PM
- 354 Views
You misunderstood my logic.
22/04/2010 05:11:30 PM
- 387 Views