Of COURSE you can't agree with me, you turd!

Let's examine your logic:

Jaxian wants to consider the welfare of the criminal.
Therefore, Jaxian considers the rights of the criminal to be more important than the rights of innocent civilians.

Do I need to point out the error in this logic? It is obvious, right? That I have concern for the criminal says nothing of my concern for the victim. The welfare of the victim absolutely superceeds the welfare of the criminal. But this doesn't justify us in delivering cruel and unncessary punishment.

You mean it sounded like I was ending an essay or something? Sorry, I tend to end my posts like that sometimes.

I disagree that "Justice" should be the primary responsibility of the courts. "Justice", in my opinion, is the politically-correct way of saying "revenge". I mean, what is Justice? Justice is when a criminal hurts a victim, so in return, we punish the criminal for the sake of the victim. That's revenge.

Instead, I think the primary responsibility of the courts should be assuring that a reasonable punishment is delivered for each crime, in order to prevent crime and protect people from criminals. Delivering exceptionally cruel punishment, such as castration, is not a reasonable punishment.

First Jaxian, no need to apologize. I found your words stylin' !
But I must go on record to also say I find them wrong!

Justice exacted in a court of law is exactly what the courts were purposed to do...heck, you've surely seen the depiction of the court system in the Lady Justice!

I truly believe that the courts are to mete out sentences thaat are fair, punitive AND corrective in nature. That there is much to be said for restorative justice. In many kinds of criminal activities, restoration is possible.

I am not in any post here adding my approval of castration. Though the OP did initiate such a consideration, any post I contributed did not condone that practice as right or viable.

However for you to conclude that castration is unusally cruel, you might have a very hard time convincing someone that it is so, if that someone is a mother who has spent years after the fact of sexual abuse, trying to pick up the fractured hearts and lives of her children. Fractured and overwhelmed by the frenzied actions of a man that worked a most cruel and unnecessary act upon the trusting innocence of a child!


OD

The mother you speak of seeks revenge. Cruelty does not justify cruelty, and a criminal's crimes do not justify us in delivering whatever punishment we feel like.

I do not question that sexual abuse interferes with the mental state of the victim. But it seems to me that jail time fractures the criminal's life a lot more than rape fractures the victim's life. Considering that, prison seems like a strong, fair punishment. To take the extra step of permanently removing body parts from the criminal is an unnecessarily cruel act, which goes above and beyond the suffering of the victim, and which goes above and beyond reasonable punishment.

I may have a tough time convincing the mother of this. But then again, I may have a tough time convincing her that the criminal should not be tortured and executed. The mother is bound to be angry, but anger shouldn't cloud our better judgement.

Castration of a sexual predator is NOT cruel and unusual punishment, nor is it torture! Men can live without their testicles.

What would likely have happened if this repeat sex offender had undergone castration after his FIRST offense? Well, likely there would have been no 2nd or 3rd offense, and an 11-year old boy would still be living!

What will it take to get through to some people?!?!?!

American Chronicle: OUTRAGE! Repeat Sex Offender Kills 11 Year Old Boy

Jaxian! This: "I do not question that sexual abuse interferes with the mental state of the victim. But it seems to me that jail time fractures the criminal's life a lot more than rape fractures the victim's life."
It is seems to me!!! And have you ever been either a perp incarcerated or a victim of a crime of sexual abuse?
It seems to you???
Oh my goodness Jaxian. First you rewrite the purpose of the courts and try to construe the word "justice" as a dirty word! Now you say that a villain suffers more than a victim if they are incarcerated?
I hope you can see from the amount of time I have been a member here, that I really do not get ruffled easily, but I am gonna just tell you, You have ruffled me with that!
I am going to have to say this to you: What bubble are you living in???
A mother has every right to be angry, as does the victim. Anger is even an essential part of the healing process.
Anger is not clouding the judgment of someone who seeks justice. But maudlin sentiments have surely clouded the judgment of anyone who puts the focus of his sympathies with the perp! Without a measure of justice, there is no chance for reform. And one victim is exponentially added to by the criminal's conclusion that he got away with it!
You have no idea how lives are wrecked in the wake of sexual abuse, apparently.

Oh and while I find it necessary to point out your incredulous statements, what dear Jaxian the heck is this: "But it seems to me that jail time fractures the criminal's life a lot more than rape fractures the victim's life. Considering that, prison seems like a strong, fair punishment"...are you marking a distinction between jail and prison and saying that jail is worse than prison? How absurd is that!!!

Forgiveness is something that benefits the victim. When a victim can forgive the victim is made better to a certain degree. And forgiveness is a personal responsibility. The courts are not established to be a voice for the spirit of the individual but an arm to strengthen the community and hand down right mandates to punish and correct those who offend the safety and well being of others.

Jaxian, again, what bubble are you living in?

OD

I read somewhere that you don't need testicles to get an erection, so if a lot of the base problems are psychological, that may not be effective.

I have been neither, though I know both.

You don't agree? But why not? Sexual abuse does not alter the victim's life in any fashion. What I mean is, the victim is still physically able to go to school, to go to work, to speak to others, and to engage in any freedom he or she desires. The entirety of the damage caused by sexual abuse is mental.

Now I don't mean to downplay the horrible mental disorders that can result after sexual abuse. They are certainly bad. However, I don't feel that they mess up a life as much as, say, twenty years of jail time.

I did not mean to upset you. Most people are outraged the moment I say that child molesters should not be executed, but I don't know how to state my position in a fashion which is not upsetting.

However, I don't fully understand why you are upset. Are you upset that I do not wish a criminal to have body parts cut off? Or are you upset that I believe jail time is worse than being sexually abused? Why should you be upset at this?

Of course people have the right to be angry, and they should be. But any form of anger clouds judgement.

I am not sure what you are saying here. I did not say the criminal should not be punished; I only said the criminal should not be castrated.

I was saying that our current punishment is already strong enough, is more likely than castration to protect the populace, and is not unnecessarily cruel.

I feel I have a good idea of how lives are changed by sexual abuse. But if I am wrong, perhaps you can explain to me what I do not understand? Or perhaps you could provide a link explaining it? Just saying that I don't understand will not help me understand.

Huh? No, I was not making any distinction between "jail" and "prison". I meant them as the same thing.

I was saying that our current punishment for sexual offenders is already strong enough, and it does not need to be increased through castration or any other cruel fashion.

This is exactly correct. The courts do not exist to execute revenge on criminals: they exist to strengthen the community and punish criminals in order to protect the safety and wellbeing of others.

And I'm having trouble understanding where we disagree. You disagree with castrating sex offenders, right?

So I think we're just having an argument about which is worse: being sexually abused, or twenty years of jail time. Is that correct?

Though I don't know from experience, I'm sure that's probably true...

But, for the sake of argument, let's say that castration works 80% of the time.

Isn't 80% effectiveness a heckuva a lot better then what we got going on now? I mean, enough of this crap already! Anyway you cut it (no pun intended) a guy that will rape somebody DESERVES to have his testicles removed.

The ONLY people who don't take this seriously are those who have not either been victims themselves, nor have immediate family members who were victims.

This is no laughing matter.

I can assure you, as a husband and father, if somebody sexually assaulted either my wife or daughter, they danged well better be hoping the police get to him before I do.

There are some things that are simply unacceptable, and we need to quit making excuses for the people who do them.

Sorry for the bluntness, but I do believe that's the most stupid thing I've ever read!

Unbelievable! Unbelievable!