Taboo Topics (Heavily moderated)

Post by **Merlin** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:22 pm

"+1" is getting stupid.

Miss Starseed · Post by **Miss Starseed** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:23 pm

Karilyn wrote:Plasma's argument for several pages now is that child rapists absolutely will not under any circumstance drug and rape another child as long as you slap them on the hand, and explain to them that it is against the law.

Ah, I see.

I do not really understand why this "middle ground" cannot exist, unless of course we're thinking of different middle grounds.

Does a child rapist who does not understand the damage they cause with their crimes deserve death, or do they deserve to spend the rest of the days in an environment where they can't harm anyone (as in, in an asylum)? Or, on a slim chance, they can come to understand the extent of the damage they caused, do they deserve the chance to reintegrate into society?

That is the middle ground I was refering to. If a child rapist is aware of what they have done to their victims, the scars they will have left for the rest of their life, they deserve no chances. If there was a sentence with no chance of parol, it is what I would want them to get, so they could spend the rest of their days being abused by their fellow inmates. A quick death is of too much mercy.

DoNotDelete · Post by **DoNotDelete** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:23 pm

I generally don't think the death penalty is a good idea.

I don't believe politicians, government officials, police officers or high court judges are really so incorruptible that they won't put an innocent man/woman to death as a scapegoat, for political means, or to cover up something very sinister indeed (i.e. killing somebody because they know too much about what really goes on).

If somebody is caught in the act, with the blood on their hands... I don't know. It's so hard to be sure that somebody did something if you weren't there.

Karilyn · Post by **Karilyn** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:24 pm

Ame no Akai wrote:And on the other side, we have you claiming that child rapists will rape again regardless of time done in prison, or anything for that matter.

No. My argument is that if there is such a thing as a soul, that a person who rapes a child has absolutely burned and scattered the ashes of their soul. They have zero chance of redemption on Earth, or in the afterlife.

You cannot rape a child if you still have a soul. You can NOT. You are a demon, a monster, an inhuman beast. It is an utterly irredeemable crime.

There is no excuse. There is no justification. It is no accident.

Post by **Merlin** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:25 pm

Karilyn, you're almost saying that we should imprison everybody because everybody has the potential for horrid behavior.

Miss Starseed · Post by **Miss Starseed** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:28 pm

I see Karilyn's point, although I don't entirely agree.

She is not arguing they should be put to death because they might do it again. She is arguing they should be put to death because they did it at all in the first place.

It is, after all, a disgusting crime. One so widely considered such that even other criminals will do what they can to punish those that would rape a child.

Post by **Merlin** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:29 pm

We should just eliminate all kids so child rapists have nothing to rape. Let them fight the wars.

DoNotDelete · Post by **DoNotDelete** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:31 pm

Karilyn wrote:No. My argument is that if there is such a thing as a soul, that a person who rapes a child has absolutely burned and scattered the ashes of their soul. They have zero chance of redemption on Earth, or in the afterlife.

You cannot rape a child if you still have a soul. You can NOT. You are a demon, a monster, an inhuman beast. It is an utterly irredeemable crime.

Um.

I'm not defending the bad stuff you're talking about, but...

When did religion come into this?

I don't think you can really pull religious stuff into this argument and have people take your opinion seriously.

I'd try to keep arguments in the field of the need to defend young people who can't defend themselves, as well as the need to punish people who abuse a position of trust, power and/or influence...

Those things can be argued without the need for religious stuff.

Xeraphem · Post by **Xeraphem** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:32 pm

Miss StarSeed wrote:I see Karilyn's point, although I don't entirely agree.

She is not arguing they should be put to death because they might do it again. She is arguing they should be put to death because they did it at all in the first place.

It is, after all, a disgusting crime. One so widely considered such that even other criminals will do what they can to punish those that would rape a child.

Most of the child molesters in state prisons don't live two days before finding a shank in their guts. :/

Of course, there's always the flip side of all this: What do you think a woman would get for molesting a small boy? The same treatment that a man molesting a girl would?

Karilyn · Post by **Karilyn** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:33 pm

Miss StarSeed wrote:She is not arguing they should be put to death because they might do it again. She is arguing they should be put to death because they did it at all in the first place.

Yep.

I consider it on a level comparable to something like a sadist serial killer who would tie up a person, and dismember them piece by piece while the victim screams in pain, and the killer is smiling and enjoying it the whole time.

The level of sadism that a person must possess in their heart to rape someone; hold them down and violate them, while they scream and beg to be left alone... And that gives the rapist pleasure... not only makes them pop flyin', but arouses them?

Irredeemable.

Miss Starseed · Post by **Miss Starseed** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:34 pm

Xeraphem wrote:Of course, there's always the flip side of all this: What do you think a woman would get for molesting a small boy? The same treatment that a man molesting a girl would?

Maybe, in some areas she might, but for many years it was actually accepted that "relationships with an older woman" were good for a young boy - turned him into a man, and all that junk. It's only starting to become accepted that it doesn't really matter which gender is involved, it's still wrong.

Xeraphem · Post by **Xeraphem** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:38 pm

Miss StarSeed wrote:
Xeraphem wrote:Of course, there's always the flip side of all this: What do you think a woman would get for molesting a small boy? The same treatment that a man molesting a girl would?
Maybe, in some areas she might, but for many years it was actually accepted that "relationships with an older woman" were good for a young boy - turned him into a man, and all that junk. It's only starting to become accepted that it doesn't really matter which gender is involved, it's still wrong.

A valid point, but still, it again goes to the point of a person in power pushing their will over a charge. Many of the reports of female school teachers doing such things wind up spending a couple of months in prison, then get probation, followed by the revocation of a teaching license. In a sense, a slap on the wrist as opposed to the male counterpart.

Miss Starseed · Post by **Miss Starseed** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:41 pm

I think it's wrong regardless of... pretty much anything. Gender, setting, attitudes, etc.

Post by **Merlin** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:45 pm

Let's kill all children. If you take the prey away from the predator, the predator dies out.

DoNotDelete · Post by **DoNotDelete** » Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:46 pm

I'm kinda appalled by all the teenagers I see walking around the supermarkets that are either pregnant or already have at least one kid of their own.

daisies kids ruin their lives too daisies fast these days.

Seems like chastity and contraception died at the turn of the century.

I'm such a Victorian throwback.