Heroes of Might and Magic Community
visiting hero! Register | Today's Posts | Games | Search! | FAQ/Rules | AvatarList | MemberList | Profile


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info mods forum | HOMM4: info CTG forum | HOMM5: info mods forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Other Side of the Monitor > Thread: Castration for hardcore sex offenders?
Thread: Castration for hardcore sex offenders? This thread is 12 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 · «PREV / NEXT»
ohforfsake
ohforfsake


Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
posted May 13, 2010 10:26 PM
Edited by ohforfsake at 22:30, 13 May 2010.

@Mvass
I'd like to seperate your post in the two parts your seperated yourself answering to them as two different subjects:
About people who does not live up to the premise of which society is build and thereby not to be part of said society. Then it's not for society to punish these people as well in my opinion, but rather to cast them out of society, as they're not part of society anymore.

About your remark on DP, government is nothing but the extended arm of the people. Government is only a legimate soruce, because sufficient amount of power (people behind) accepts it to be so. That's as much as saying if Korea took over the world and decided to kill people through some random configuration of ideas they call justice, it'd be legitimate, because they've the power to decide what's legitimate.
So I think my concern still stands, that any more powerfull civilization won't see us any different than we'd see some smaller parts of our society, i.e. a large group of people, who committed murder.

Edit: With the first part I mean, you're most welcome to create a society upon which you'll throw people out if there's sufficient amount of trouble with them (and since there's no coercion people are free to follow as well), but I think it's doing a great mistake to ever give up on anyone. It should, unless there aren't the ressources for it, be up to the criminals themselves if they want to abbandon society completely, or if they want to go through rehab. When starting on giving up on people when absolutely not needed, my guess is that such a society would quickly be only for the 'top class' a kind of 'heaven' in the way TheDeath described it, and in my opinion, something there's nothing 'good' about, because it doesn't really care about life, it only cares about those who care about it (the selfish God). [Sorry to bring a religious analogy].
____________
Living time backwards

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Corribus
Corribus

Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
posted May 13, 2010 10:37 PM
Edited by Corribus at 03:38, 14 May 2010.

@ohffs

I will admit that my questions were partly rhetorical, but I'll roll with it for the time being.

I'm not suggesting that anybody owns anybody or anything, although as it is now it certainly seems like society owns animals or, at the least, has complete authority to do whatever it wants or needs to animals in order to protect its members.  I'm suggesting that there's a inconsistency with the way society deals with threats.  

Let us presume, for the moment, that a human pedophile is a diseased individual.  This may or may not be true on a global basis, but we'll assume that your average pedophile is diseased and his actions are a function of the disease.  The implication is that, if the disease could be cured, the individual would return to "normal"*.  Now we can also take a dog.  Let us forget rabies, which is an actual disease, a terrible one in fact, and so using it could unnecessarily bias this thought experiment.  So let's take a dog with an anger issue, something that could be 'cured' with a bit of training perhaps.

Now our pedophile** kills a child.  As does our angry dog.  If it is true that the pedophile is "diseased" and has no control over his actions, we might rightly refer to the pedophile as being little more than an animal - or, better put, his capacity for future killings would be nearly equivalent to that of an angry dog, as neither are equipped to make proper moral choices.  Understanding this, society responds by taking steps to ensure that the threat to its members is eliminated.  However, the steps are unequal.  In the case of the dog, the animal is slain without question.  This is standard procedure in most jurisdictions in the US.  The execution of the dog is done humanely, of course, but society judges that the dog poses a threat to humanity and, even though society could expend resources to train the dog to perhaps not pose a future threat, the possibility of relapse is deemed too great a risk and so the dog is destroyed.

Not so with the pedophile.  Though his capacity for future episodes is equivalently high, we judge, for some reason, that the person should be put into a box - at great burden to society - and kept there for year after year until he either dies of natural causes or is released back into the community.  Society understands (knows - we have countless examples as evidence!) that there is still a risk of repeat episodes, but in the case of the pedophile, this risk is deemed acceptible for some unexplained reason.  Society spends resources to try to rehabilate (i.e., cure) the diseased individual.  In this case, the best outcome of spending those resources is a portion of a single life "saved" - and we can argue over the quality of that life (see note *).  This is all based on a rather questionable assumption that curing is even possible and that the pedophile is diseased in the first place - the alternative being of course that the pedophile is completely aware of what he's doing and there's no curing to be done at all.  In which case, all those resources are wasted!  At least in the case of the dog we knew that the person (dog) committing the crime had no capacity to make a moral judgment; in the case of the pedophile we're not even sure of that!

So you see, there's a disconnect.  

What's the difference between a pedophile and a dog with an anger problem?  Does either one provide a benefit to society?  Does eliminating either one provide a benefit to society?  What is the payoff for utilizing resources to "cure" the pedophile?  Is it not a poor investment?  It seems to me an example of society not acting efficiently, and in fact society is harming itself by keeping the pedophile alive - whether or not the pedophile is released back into the community.

* This assumption is problematic, and not only for the reason that pedophilia may not be curable.  There's the issue of reintegrating with society and the social stigma of having been a pedophile.  And the trust issue.

** on the matter of biasing our thought experiment, a pedophile is probably not the best choice.  A normal violent criminal would probably better, both for the integrity of our analogy but also because sexual crime has such a strong emotional reponse in our society.  To be consistent with the thread topic, I'll leave it as a pedophile but just keep this in mind, please.

@Az

Quote:
Don't you think you're being a bit extreme here? I mean they're not animals biologically speaking they're still human. And you know... a human life is generally considered more valuable than that of an animals. Don't get me wrong I think rapists are the most disgusting creatures that walk this planet and if they're caught they may consider themselves lucky if they don't die.

And perhaps that's the problem.  Would you consider the value of a pedophile's life to be worth more than that of a police or seeing-eye dog?  This is going to be another rhetorical question, so please don't take it the wrong way: why do we assume that all human lives are valuable?  Actually, let me reframe it: what gives a human life value?

Regarding your question:
Quote:
The question is do you want to have 1 resocialiced criminal or do you just kill them all off sacrificing the few that would actually be able to find their way back to society?

As much as I think it's poor form to answer a question with a question, in this case I can't help myself: why is a person entitled fo "find their way back to society"?  Better put: if its in society's interest to protect itself, why would/should society take the unnecessary risk of letting all these pedophiles back into the society under the hope that a few of them might some day become positive members of society?  Lacking a reasonable way of determining which pedophiles can be rehabilitated, it seems to make little sense to let them all out just because they're "human" and have some nebulous reason of entitlement to something.

Really - I'm just trying to get you guys to think about the problem in a new way.

@JJ
Quote:
1) Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think we kill deseased humans who are a danger for others. We quarantine them, but we don't kill them.

I'm asking what is the reason for this policy.

And
Quote:
2) I thought I've written that, but research is for prevention, isn't it? And healing. Why kill people, if they are deseased and can be healed? Why kill people, if by studying them we can find out what's wrong with them. If these brain defects would be obvious with babies or children, there might be a simple test to discover it, taking precautions and so on.

Yes, yes, I'm all for throwing money at diseases, but I've got two things to say about that:

First, let's throw money at diseases that we know are diseases and are likely to affect the most amount of people.   The cost of keeping the nation's pedophiles in prisons far surpasses the amount of money spent on cancer research, and yet the number of people who will get cancer far exceeds the number of people who will become pedophiles.  (OK, I actually dont' have statistics to prove that, but you get the point.)  Furthermore, you could prevent a large portion of pedophile-related deaths simply by killing the pedophiles in prison now - since a large portion of pedophiles who kill are repeat offenders - and that's a pretty cheap solution.

Second, I'm sure you'll not disagree with me that most pedophiles who are sitting in jail are not really being studied.  They're sitting in jail, eating free food, watching free TV, sleeping in free beds and wearing free clothes, merrily going about their time until some arbitrary day when they're released back into the neighborhoods where our children ride their bikes and go to school.  Pedophiles for the most part are treated as criminals and not as patients.  So really, enough with all this "let's study them to find out how to prevent future kid-killers from growing up" BS.  It's not happening.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted May 13, 2010 10:52 PM

Ohforf:
Quote:
Then it's not for society to punish these people as well in my opinion, but rather to cast them out of society, as they're not part of society anymore.
At this point they become the same as animals (from society's point of view) and are dealt with the same way dangerous animals are.

Quote:
So I think my concern still stands, that any more powerfull civilization won't see us any different than we'd see some smaller parts of our society, i.e. a large group of people, who committed murder.
But we didn't give this powerful civilisation any legitimacy, like we do to our government.

And when criminals rape/murder, they choose to abandon society by choosing to perform that action. How society deals with them is a separate question.
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Azagal
Azagal


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Smooth Snake
posted May 13, 2010 11:06 PM

@Corribus
Quote:
Better put: if its in society's interest to protect itself, why would/should society take the unnecessary risk of letting all these pedophiles back into the society under the hope that a few of them might some day become positive members of society?

I believe it is because it is just as much in societies interest to be civilized and to live up to its reputation as a state of just law. You may have a point with questioning the fundamental value of human life but you must realize that you're on extremely thin ice, no (apart from the subject being such a pain in the a$$ to argue about...)? We Humans are set apart a great deal from all other animals on this planet (atleast in theory) so naturally we are special. But it's not that biological uniqueness that gives a human life value...it's... well the fact that you're human. A society that doesn't treat humans equally can not function in any civilized manner. Of course there'll be leeches and scum that'll benefit from our morals but apparently that's the way it has to be in order to uphold higher morale standards.
You musn't argue that human life can be valued (even if it can in some ways) it leads down a very dark road...
____________
"All I can see is what's in front of me. And all I can do is keep moving forward" - The Heir Wielder of Names, Seeker of Thrones, King of Swords, Breaker of Infinities, Wheel Smashing Lord

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Azagal
Azagal


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Smooth Snake
posted May 13, 2010 11:11 PM
Edited by Azagal at 23:12, 13 May 2010.

@mvass
Quote:
Father, when individuals violate other people's rights, they give up their own.

A lesson I believe you must have learned on the cruel winter streets of mother russia while you were killing people for loafs of bread. Let me enlighten you: That's not how it works in civilized countries. A human does not forfeit his rights by violating others, why else would there be a court? If you steal something you do not surrender your right on your property lol. I doubt I need to really discuss that with you, do I? But I get it, the phrase sounds pretty dandy and wise, just too bad it's a load of **** on second glance.
____________
"All I can see is what's in front of me. And all I can do is keep moving forward" - The Heir Wielder of Names, Seeker of Thrones, King of Swords, Breaker of Infinities, Wheel Smashing Lord

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
blizzardboy
blizzardboy


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
posted May 13, 2010 11:19 PM
Edited by blizzardboy at 23:24, 13 May 2010.

I agree with Corribus in principle but not in application.

The modern idea in some countries that "human life is too precious to destroy" is rather vain, romantic, and unfounded. Give me a break, we are apes with an attitude. I personally value a cow to be of superior worth to a murderer, and since I have no ethical issue slaughtering a cow, I certainly have none in slaughtering a murderer.

But you have to ask what the impacts will be. No court is immune to error, and you don't want to kill a person for a crime they didn't commit. The legal fees of processing capital punishment are tremendous, and you can only fix that so much since you want to ensure that you don't wrongfully sentence somebody (which you can never absolutely guarantee).

Apart from that, and I admit these two reasons are more speculative, a society that conducts executions is steered towards being more bloodthirsty in general, which sucks. Second, I'm nervous with giving even government the power to take life in the domestic realm.

So yes, I think murderers and some others deserve to die, but all the same I'm against capital punishment.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Father
Father


posted May 13, 2010 11:26 PM

Well I guess nothing in the world really truly suprises me any more, and this quote is one such that normally would have but no longer does...

Quote:
There's a reason we euthanize these animals.  We don't try to rehabilitate them, or study them.  We kill them.  What is the difference between a pit bull that harms a child and a man who harms a child?


First, let me just devalue this entire argument thread (as far as I am concerned) right now. Humans are not more valuble than any other "animal". The dogs should no more be destroyed than the humans. In truth, it is really quite disturbing that we can live in a world where a vast amount of the inhabitants knee jerk reaction to unexceptable behavior is to simply kill it off. This is a frightening aspect of what some would attribute to human nature.

Corribus, there were actually a couple points I had issue with...here is another. I don't know where you get your facts about the prison system but it is a far cry from what you painted. They do not watch free tv, they do not eat free food, they do not sit around in their cells.

They are charged rent on their cell (all be it, IF they have the $ on their books) they pay for food or eat sub par "not fit for human consumption" food stuffs. They program for several hours of every day and work towards positive rehabilatative goals. They also hold down regular "prison industries" jobs and out of their pay, they repay (etiher in part or in full) their debt to society. Our prison systems are aptly named "Correctional Facilities (or Institutions)". What's more, it is actually the number of prisoners in any system that allow for officers to have their jobs and feed their families. All I am saying with that is that everything is tied together in ways we may not always think about right off the line.

Inmates have their funds allocated to pay not only for their time incarcerated, but they also pay for other damages (i.e. counseling that a victim may require).

Is the value of the human race so devoid of compassion in these last days that we will usher in the end of times with this resounding clatter? If that be the case, I would urge and hasten the end days to come. I for one would never desire to partake of something so inhuman, so debase and void of caring or compassion...despite what the other may have done. If they offend, punish them, then correct and redirect. Take as many actions along that road as are needed to help the person(s) in need. But for the love of all that keeps us as valuble of a life form as we may be (considering a vast expanse of goodness only knows how many other life forms), we start committing acts like this, we then become no better than they are.

Yet if we invest the time and effort into just TRYING, just TRYING to help them...well

To forgive is devine,
To be forgiven....

We are better than this, and I simply refuse to be a part of anything that would dare to step over a line so clearly defined between civilized and barbaric. No matter how you try to dress it, no matter what clothes you lay over it, the true nature of what you are speaking of will always be there. It is issues like these and acts like this that will brand a human soul for eternity, (or at least the rest of your life here )

Then again, I am a firm believer in both Fate and Karma (as I understand them).


____________
Once Bitten,
Twice shy,
Be careful,
This one has sharp teeth.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
JoonasTo
JoonasTo


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
posted May 13, 2010 11:31 PM

I have to point out one thing about your post corribus.

I think your definition of pedophile is off. As far as I understand pedophile means a person who's sexually only interested in kids. That itself isn't illegal and most of pedophiles are productive members of society and don't involve themselves in criminal activity. I feel it is a rather bad example comparison.

Wouldn't someone with an anger management problem be a more suitable example?

PS. This is offtopic and irrelevant but curing pedophilia is just as stupid as curing homosexuality.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Azagal
Azagal


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Smooth Snake
posted May 13, 2010 11:33 PM
Edited by Azagal at 23:36, 13 May 2010.

Quote:
Humans are not more valuble than any other "animal".

Of course they are. You don't even have to get into morals or a philosophical discussion about it, humans are more valuable than animals strictly objectively speaking. A single human is of more benefit to his group than any other individual animal is to their specific group. An individual human can become president and influence his group for the better, no other individual animal can even come close to accomplishing any feat that benefits its species as much (you don't even have to take it as far as president, make the human a teacher).

A human is a mass of potential. An animal isn't. Don't get me wrong I love animals and they deserve to be treated better but putting them on the same level as humans just isn't rational.

EDIT: Oh and ofcourse the very simple fact that humans are able to supress their instincts, animals are not.
____________
"All I can see is what's in front of me. And all I can do is keep moving forward" - The Heir Wielder of Names, Seeker of Thrones, King of Swords, Breaker of Infinities, Wheel Smashing Lord

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
blizzardboy
blizzardboy


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
posted May 13, 2010 11:44 PM
Edited by blizzardboy at 23:52, 13 May 2010.

Your argument works both ways. No animal has slaughtered countless members of their own species. The degree by which a human can impact this world has tremendous constructive and destructive potential. "Value" is such a hard-to-define term, but we do indeed have far more responsibility than any other life on Earth.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Father
Father


posted May 13, 2010 11:46 PM

We will just have to agree to disagree on that one Az and move on so that the thread stays on topic.
____________
Once Bitten,
Twice shy,
Be careful,
This one has sharp teeth.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Azagal
Azagal


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Smooth Snake
posted May 14, 2010 12:10 AM
Edited by Azagal at 00:16, 14 May 2010.

It may work both ways BB but that isn't the point since it mankind will still have the edge over any animal in that respect. It's about the ball of potential that a human is.

Well sure we can disagree Father and in the interest of the thread I agree that it might be best, but it doesn't make you any less wrong in this respect. I really don't mean to sound like a smartass but it's true. An animal and a human are not equals.

You should get it if you believe in Karma no? It's considered a sign of bad Karma to be reincarnated as a worm and the step before Nirvana is human, not Dolphin (eventhough that would be freakin awesome). And even then animals are just humans in another form ergo either human > animal or an animal deserves respect because it's not an animal but a human in different form. Either way you lose.
____________
"All I can see is what's in front of me. And all I can do is keep moving forward" - The Heir Wielder of Names, Seeker of Thrones, King of Swords, Breaker of Infinities, Wheel Smashing Lord

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted May 14, 2010 12:26 AM

Az:
Quote:
why else would there be a court?
To determine whether the person is guilty, obviously. Otherwise, there would be too much abuse in the manner of "He stole my stuff! Therefore I can steal his!" without anything to back that up.
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Azagal
Azagal


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Smooth Snake
posted May 14, 2010 12:42 AM

Even if he's guilty there's nothing to back that up. And even if found guilty you still have rights, you don't forfeit them by your actions. But I believe you got that by now.
____________
"All I can see is what's in front of me. And all I can do is keep moving forward" - The Heir Wielder of Names, Seeker of Thrones, King of Swords, Breaker of Infinities, Wheel Smashing Lord

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted May 14, 2010 12:45 AM

The justice system doesn't function that way, of course, because it also has other concerns, such as practicality and effectiveness. But the underlying fundamental principle is that one.
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Father
Father


posted May 14, 2010 12:46 AM

Az, sorry I have no comment for you past my first. When I end something, it is at an end. However, you may pick up the debate with another. Or even me if you care to start a new thread.

On to other issues, the courts are not just used to figure out guilt or innocence. Courts are also the starting square, founding plans of action to rebuild families and lives. Our world is not so black and white as maybe the counter idea sounds.

I think perhaps that too many of you have been spoiled rotten by the infection of HC. That's what you get when you come into a place like this without the proper vacines.
____________
Once Bitten,
Twice shy,
Be careful,
This one has sharp teeth.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Azagal
Azagal


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Smooth Snake
posted May 14, 2010 12:48 AM

OH YEAH?!?! Well you're...you're gay! UH-HU! Take that!
____________
"All I can see is what's in front of me. And all I can do is keep moving forward" - The Heir Wielder of Names, Seeker of Thrones, King of Swords, Breaker of Infinities, Wheel Smashing Lord

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
baklava
baklava


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
posted May 14, 2010 01:12 AM

Quote:
Bak,

Personally I don't care for the picture because I understand the backhanded slight that your trying to pay with it to everyone that disagrees with you on this particular subject. But it is clever none-the-less.

The truly clever bit is that it had nothing to do with anyone of you guys, it was actually directed at Bliz as a pun on his comment about how everyone is brainwashed and conditioned.

About all the other comments on my posts, I'd need to quote a whole lot to answer all that so I'll leave it for some other time.

Suffice to say I understand what you guys would want (well, the basics of it, at least; you mostly don't seem to know the details either), I just don't think it would a) really work, and b) be that much more ethical than the current system. In fact, there'd be a severe danger of it being even worse (see "A Clockwork Orange", though that one is a rather radical example).

Who knows though. Perhaps I'm wrong, and it could probably be turned into something that works, with a lot of tweaking and effort. It's just that I'm personally skeptical toward it. And we can all certainly conclude that the current system needs changes. We just can't agree on what those changes should be.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
blizzardboy
blizzardboy


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
posted May 14, 2010 01:44 AM
Edited by blizzardboy at 01:45, 14 May 2010.

@Bak:

Quote:

The truly clever bit is that it had nothing to do with anyone of you guys, it was actually directed at Bliz as a pun on his comment about how everyone is brainwashed and conditioned.


100% means me as well, in case you thought I was saying that I was unique.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
baklava
baklava


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
posted May 14, 2010 01:51 AM

Nah, they just brainwashed you into thinking you've been brainwashed.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This thread is 12 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 · «PREV / NEXT»
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.0962 seconds