"Poland castration law takes effect"

iptba

If society is going down this route, I think there needs to be good protection for people (nearly always men) charged with rape, etc. (i.e. with regard how trials are conducted) and also reasonably severe penalties for false accusations.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/europe/10269055.stm

Poland castration law takes effect

Page last updated at 16:49 GMT, Tuesday, 8 June 2010 17:49 UK

A Polish law that can force some rapists and paedophiles to undergo chemical castration has come into effect.

The legislation, passed by Polish MPs last September, applies to men who rape children or immediate family members.

The procedure has been tried elsewhere, but usually on a voluntary basis.
Prime Minister Donald Tusk proposed the measures after a series of high-profile paedophilia cases last year.

Under the law, prisoners would be forced on their release to take drugs to reduce their sex drive, but courts are required to consider the opinions of psychiatrists before ordering it.

According to Polish politicians, the country now has the toughest legislation towards paedophiles in Europe.

Giselle

According to Wikipedia, it would appear to be reversible, even desireable in the case (for example) of paedophiles..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_castration

When used by men, these drugs can reduce sex drive, compulsive sexual fantasies, and capacity for sexual arousal. Life-threatening side effects are rare,

However, it just feels barbaric. And its not without side effects.

but some users show increases in body fat and reduced bone density, which increase long-term risk of cardiovascular disease and osteoporosis. They may also experience other "feminising" effects such as gynecomastia[5][6], reduced body hair,[7] and loss of muscle mass

It is, given the risk of false accusation, much more palateable than the death penalty - the most irreversible sentence of all.

The Polish law is enforceable in limited circumstances, but I have serious issues with a persons physical integrity being violated.

Snowie

Giselle wrote: »

However, it just feels barbaric. And its not without side effects.

I see where your coming from. But sexual abuse be it rape or pedophiles are just as barbaric. I personally beleave that type of behavour, is barbric, Knowing some one who was sexually abused as a child.

It cause them so much pain through out life. Takes awy part of their life.
I think rape and pedofiles get of far to lightly. They diserve that kinda, thing should happen.

I think they deserve it tho for people wrongly accused tho that would be/is a huge concern because it does happen...

Mrmoe

I think this is a good idea but it will have to be controlled properly and probably used as a final resort. Rapists and child abusers get far too lenient sentences in my view. Will it work though? Is there any evidence that by using this chemical treatment that reoffending will be reduced?

Giselle

Snow-Monkey wrote: »

I see where your coming from. But sexual abuse be it rape or pedophiles are just as barbaric. I personally beleave that type of behavour, is barbric, Knowing some one who was sexually abused as a child.

It cause them so much pain through out life. Takes awy part of their life.
I think rape and pedofiles get of far to lightly. They diserve that kinda, thing should happen.

I think they deserve it tho for people wrongly accused tho that would be/is a huge concern because it does happen...

All crimes carry a risk of wrongful conviction, and I'm against this like I'm against the death penalty for that reason, and because I don't think the state should be killing/castrating people. Certainly not on 'my' behalf.

amacachi

If they're always going to be a danger they should never be let out of prison, simples.

The Corinthian

glenjamin wrote: »

They should just cut it off. Dirty bastards.

I weep for the gene pool... I assume that were you falsely accused and convicted of such a crime, you would happily sacrifice your balls to your convictions? After all, you can look forward to your name likely being cleared in the future.

As to the Polish 'castration' law itself, my understanding is that it is:

• Applicable only in cases involving repeat offenders.
• Not actually castration, but chemical suppression of sexuality - reversible if necessary, albeit with severe side effects.

As such, I do not think this is a bad idea as the chances of the innocent being subjected to permanent damage is extremely unlikely and the benefits could be significant.

Of course, this does not address female sexual offenders, but that is another debate.

enda1

glenjamin wrote: »

They should just cut it off. Dirty bastards.

And here I was thinking we were in "The Gentleman's Club"...

After Hours comments aside, the establishment of laws such as this just goes to show how socially and societally retarded Poland is. They are achieving massive economic growth at the moment, helped no end by their inclusion in the EU and the opening of their labour market - fuelled by their high levels of education.

But you can't buy class or decency.

Emme

enda1 wrote: »

And here I was thinking we were in "The Gentleman's Club"...

After Hours comments aside, the establishment of laws such as this just goes to show how socially and societally retarded Poland is. They are achieving massive economic growth at the moment, helped no end by their inclusion in the EU and the opening of their labour market - fuelled by their high levels of education.

But you can't buy class or decency.

Aren't we Irish lucky that we had industrial schools and the like to beat class and decency into us? :rolleyes:

Who are we to call the Poles socially and societally retarded when we spent the boom years drunk/drugged out of our heads and got carried away buying houses for 10 times what they were worth. Any Poles I knew in this country worked their backsides off.

Fair play to the Poles for being tough on sex offenders, it's better than covering it up and sweeping it under the carpet for decades like they do in some *cough* countries!

Greyfox

enda1 wrote: »

And here I was thinking we were in "The Gentleman's Club"... goes to show how socially and societally retarded Poland is.
But you can't buy class or decency.

Speak for youself, loads of people like me think it's a brilliant idea and I'm delighted with it, fair play to Poland for going tough of rapists, Ireland in comparison should be ashamed with how lenient it is with rapists. I'd absolutely love to see this law in Ireland

The Corinthian

enda1 wrote: »

But you can't buy class or decency.

I actually pointed out a number of reasons why such a law is not actually a bad idea; you might rebut those arguments or those made by others in favour of this law (although most, I'll admit were knee-jerk cliches), rather than responding in such a trite manner.

Emme wrote: »

Who are we to call the Poles socially and societally retarded when we spent the boom years drunk/drugged out of our heads and got carried away buying houses for 10 times what they were worth. Any Poles I knew in this country worked their backsides off.

The Poles are not terribly different to us though. They often "worked their backsides off" so that they could buy houses back in Poland, leading to a similar (although nowhere near as disastrous) price inflation. However, unlike the Irish, many Poles decided to get their morgages from banks in Switzerland, to take advantage of the much lower interest rates.

This naturally was great for them until the Zloty devalued against the Swiss Franc by about a third and then their pain began.

Fair play to the Poles for being tough on sex offenders, it's better than covering it up and sweeping it under the carpet for decades like they do in some *cough* countries!

The Roman Catholic Church in Poland has not gone unscathed where it comes to the clerical abuse scandals though and not only were these kept quiet there for many years, but given that the Church still maintains a considerable level of political influence, comparable to Ireland prior to the nineties, it is not unreasonable to assume that there is more to come in the future, while Ireland is ahead in 'cleaning house'.

All this is not to specifically put down Poland, but it is just as important to recognize faults of another country as it is to defend it.

The_Kew_Tour

I would be behind this in all countries but like few of you have said they want be 1000% sure that those found guilty are guilty, otherwise it could backfire.

But would make these sick people think twice thats for sure

The Corinthian

adrian280582 wrote: »

I would be behind this in all countries but like few of you have said they want be 1000% sure that those found guilty are guilty, otherwise it could backfire.

My understanding is that it is reversible - castration is a very misleading term.

But would make these sick people think twice thats for sure

I think most studies have shown that it is largely compulsive behavior, especially in the case of child abuse, so thinking twice or even punishment does not come into it.

The whole purpose of this is to dampen or eliminate this compulsion so that it does not reoccur, not as a deterrent. I remember reading an article on how former offenders had actually welcomed this drastic form of treatment.

El Siglo

My opinions on paedophiles are like that of an SS camp officer on Jews.;) Paedophiles never change and they're absolutely useless to society. They can't work because nobody wants to employ a paedophile, they're conditions are psychological disorders so they're rarely treated properly and in any case most of them don't think they've done wrong as it didn't feel wrong. And most of the time they show no remorse. Personally, I'd be for castration and longer prison sentences, and if the state decides to do more them then fair play. I'd rank a nematode higher than a paedophile.

iptba

El Siglo wrote: »

My opinions on paedophiles are like that of an SS camp officer on Jews.;) Paedophiles never change and they're absolutely useless to society. They can't work because nobody wants to employ a paedophile, they're conditions are psychological disorders so they're rarely treated properly and in any case most of them don't think they've done wrong as it didn't feel wrong. And most of the time they show no remorse. Personally, I'd be for castration and longer prison sentences, and if the state decides to do more them then fair play. I'd rank a nematode higher than a paedophile.

The law also covers people convicted of rape.

Emme

El Siglo wrote: »

My opinions on paedophiles are like that of an SS camp officer on Jews.;)

Ironic comparison seeing as so many Polish and Jewish people perished in Nazi concentration camps.

El Siglo wrote: »

Paedophiles never change and they're absolutely useless to society. They can't work because nobody wants to employ a paedophile, they're conditions are psychological disorders so they're rarely treated properly and in any case most of them don't think they've done wrong as it didn't feel wrong. And most of the time they show no remorse.

What has that to do with any particular ethnic group apart from the Poles who are enforcing this law? Paedophiles come from all backgrounds and walks of life.

El Siglo wrote: »

Personally, I'd be for castration and longer prison sentences, and if the state decides to do more them then fair play. I'd rank a nematode higher than a paedophile.

I agree with you there.

Galvasean

Anyone else think it's a bit like the treatment used in A Clockwork Orange? I mean, this way they arent really learning their lesson, just being made incapable of reoffending. I'm sure it would be very effective, but ethical? I'm not so sure. A bit like chopping off someone's hands to stop them from stealing again.

Ms.Odgeynist

Snow-Monkey wrote: »

I see where your coming from. But sexual abuse be it rape or pedophiles are just as barbaric. I personally beleave that type of behavour, is barbric, Knowing some one who was sexually abused as a child.

It cause them so much pain through out life. Takes awy part of their life.
I think rape and pedofiles get of far to lightly. They diserve that kinda, thing should happen.

I think they deserve it tho for people wrongly accused tho that would be/is a huge concern because it does happen...

What about two thugs who kick a guy half to death on the street. Cut off their legs? Maybe inject them with a drug that paralyses them from the waist down?

This is insane

juleserino

Ms.Odgeynist wrote: »

What about two thugs who kick a guy half to death on the street. Cut off their legs? Maybe inject them with a drug that paralyses them from the waist down?

This is insane

Not insane. Tis an attempt to address an abhorrent category of crime and tackle the almost unbelievable rates of recidivism.

I note the law is designed to deal with repeat offenders.

How many chances do you feel these animals deserve?

El Siglo

Emme wrote: »

Ironic comparison seeing as so many Polish and Jewish people perished in Nazi concentration camps.

It's ironic that you don't get what means. I was merely gauging my distaste for paedophiles as much as Nazis hated Jews, I hate paedophiles on the same level.

What has that to do with any particular ethnic group apart from the Poles who are enforcing this law? Paedophiles come from all backgrounds and walks of life.

What the fuck are you talking about ethnic groups about? I was talking about how paedophiles don't see the wrong in their actions, they don't apologise, they're not remorseful, this isn't a generalisation of paedophiles it's a given and if they do show remorse, it's hollow and insincere. Also you didn't read what I said properly, paedophiles are useless to society, what possible benefit can they offer? Nothing.

I agree with you there.

Grand.

El Siglo

Galvasean wrote: »

Anyone else think it's a bit like the treatment used in A Clockwork Orange? I mean, this way they arent really learning their lesson, just being made incapable of reoffending. I'm sure it would be very effective, but ethical? I'm not so sure. A bit like chopping off someone's hands to stop them from stealing again.

Well it's better than throwing them in prison for a few years only to have them coming out even more fucked up.

Ryan!

Ms.Odgeynist wrote: »

What about two thugs who kick a guy half to death on the street. Cut off their legs? Maybe inject them with a drug that paralyses them from the waist down?

This is insane

Are you really comparing rape and/or child abuse to assault?

Galvasean

El Siglo wrote: »

Well it's better than throwing them in prison for a few years only to have them coming out even more fucked up.

I'll be the first to agree that the excuses for sentencing against such criminals is laughable (well it woul be were it not so serious) there is something about altering human beings' physiology as a form of punishment that creeps meout.

El Siglo

Galvasean wrote: »

I'll be the first to agree that the excuses for sentencing against such criminals is laughable (well it woul be were it not so serious) there is something about altering human beings' physiology as a form of punishment that creeps meout.

Well we're already altering their mental state which is nearly or equally as bad, depending on how much importance you place on somebody's mental state, does it really matter if the state alters their physiology? Also, considering the damage, in physical terms that a paedophile inflicts on a victim (victims contracting STDs etc...), I think it might be fair to say that the punishment fits the crime.

juleserino

Galvasean wrote: »

Anyone else think it's a bit like the treatment used in A Clockwork Orange? I mean, this way they arent really learning their lesson, just being made incapable of reoffending. I'm sure it would be very effective, but ethical? I'm not so sure. A bit like chopping off someone's hands to stop them from stealing again.

Thats some hairy ****in concept your peddling there fella...ethical considerations for rapists and paedophiles:mad: Yes Galvasean, lets all hold hands and consider the plight of recidivist sexual predators

Have you any similar, ethical like considerations for the future victims of these recidivists?

Galvasean

juleserino wrote: »

Thats some hairy ****in concept your peddling there fella...ethical considerations for rapists and paedophiles:mad: Yes Galvasean, lets all hold hands and consider the plight of recidivist sexual predators

Have you any similar, ethical like considerations for the future victims of these recidivists?

How you got all that from what I said I will never know...

juleserino

Galvasean wrote: »

How you got all that from what I said I will never know...

I dunno, just got to thinking that if someone re-offends in Poland they consciously run the risk of losing the right to their physical integrity. Their choice. The victim was given no choice about what was taken from them. Their physical integrity was simply taken, by the perpetrator, by choice.

Don't really understand why society should bear the risk of a sexual predator re-offending on the basis of an ethical consideration and/or a concern for their wellbeing.

Can't see that they deserve any such consideration.

amacachi

Galvasean wrote: »

How you got all that from what I said I will never know...

Don't bother, seriously.

Jarndyce

Galvasean wrote: »

Anyone else think it's a bit like the treatment used in A Clockwork Orange? I mean, this way they arent really learning their lesson, just being made incapable of reoffending. I'm sure it would be very effective, but ethical? I'm not so sure. A bit like chopping off someone's hands to stop them from stealing again.

You presume that they are capable of 'learning their lesson'. In addition, I would be in favour of chopping off hands to prevent future theft.

opinion guy

I have one question

Is there any proof that chemically castrating a paedophile or a rapist prevents them from reoccurring ?

Jarndyce

opinion guy wrote: »

I have one question

Is there any proof that chemically castrating a paedophile or a rapist prevents them from reoccurring ?

It's pretty self-evident, don't you think?

opinion guy

Jarndyce wrote: »

It's pretty self-evident, don't you think?

Absolutely not.

Jarndyce

opinion guy wrote: »

Absolutely not.

Rape involves penetration by the penis. If chemicals render the penis permanently flaccid (for so long as the chemicals are administered) then it is a physical impossibility, is it not? Thus, rape cannot reoccur. I fail to see the ambiguity.

opinion guy

Jarndyce wrote: »

Rape involves penetration by the penis. If chemicals render the penis permanently flaccid (for so long as the chemicals are administered) then it is a physical impossibility, is it not? Thus, rape cannot reoccur. I fail to see the ambiguity.

1. There are different forms of rape or sexual assault. Penetration by the penis is just one form
2. The chemicals DO NOT render the penis permanenty flacid. Where did you ever get this from ?

Jarndyce

opinion guy wrote: »

1. There are different forms of rape or sexual assault. Penetration by the penis is just one form.

I am well-aware of that. I didn't deem it necessary to mention each form.

opinion guy wrote: »

2. The chemicals DO NOT render the penis permanenty flacid. Where did you ever get this from ?

"Chemical castration prevents erections but cannot prevent strong desires. In addition, there are many other ways to assault someone. Given this, some argue chemical castration might even lead to an increase in such crimes,”. Psychiatrist Selçuk Candansayar, a professor at Gazi University.

opinion guy

Jarndyce wrote: »

I am well-aware of that. I didn't deem it necessary to mention each form.

Neither did I. Nevertheless your statement was wrong. Or at best incomplete. The point is this 'treament' will not prevent other forms of abuse/assault/rape.

"Chemical castration prevents erections but cannot prevent strong desires. In addition, there are many other ways to assault someone. Given this, some argue chemical castration might even lead to an increase in such crimes,”. Psychiatrist Selçuk Candansayar, a professor at Gazi University.[/QUOTE]

Well thats the opposite of what wikipedia says it does. Nevertheless this guy says it might even lead to an increase in such crimes. Errrr quote fail much ?????

Quite apart from that its reversible. Whats to stop someone this has been done to from going and reversing it all on his own ?

juleserino

amacachi wrote: »

Don't bother, seriously.

Sorry about that. Forgot I was posting in Ireland, land of the apathetic sound bite. You just keep clockin up those posts paddy, seriously.

amacachi

juleserino wrote: »

Sorry about that. Forgot I was posting in Ireland, land of the apathetic sound bite. You just keep clockin up those posts paddy, seriously.

Paddy? Ouch! Put your claws away.

Only thing I'm apathetic about is trying to explain my viewpoint to people whose minds are obviously completely closed to opinions or ideas other than their own, something which from your Daily Mail-esque posts seems to be the case with you.

Agent Smith

BBC NEWS wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/europe/10269055.stm



The legislation, passed by Polish MPs last September, applies to men who rape children or immediate family members.

Whats wrong with hanging? Serriously?

Morphie

Snow-Monkey wrote: »

I see where your coming from. But sexual abuse be it rape or pedophiles are just as barbaric. I personally beleave that type of behavour, is barbric, Knowing some one who was sexually abused as a child.
.

That's only a solid argument IF we could guarantee 100% that there were no false charges.

The fact that we can't guarantee that, show how silly a law like this really is. Much like the death penalty, if a government is willing to risk the future of innocent people who get cause in the law, then that is indeed a barbaric thought.

How would you feel if you were an innocent guy and was forced to do this? I don't think victims have right over potential innocent victims in the future.

The Corinthian wrote: »

I weep for the gene pool... I assume that were you falsely accused and convicted of such a crime, you would happily sacrifice your balls to your convictions? After all, you can look forward to your name likely being cleared in the future.

As to the Polish 'castration' law itself, my understanding is that it is:

• Applicable only in cases involving repeat offenders.
• Not actually castration, but chemical suppression of sexuality - reversible if necessary, albeit with severe side effects.

As such, I do not think this is a bad idea as the chances of the innocent being subjected to permanent damage is extremely unlikely and the benefits could be significant.

Of course, this does not address female sexual offenders, but that is another debate.

I should have read this before I posted.

You say it's reversible? How is it that they do that?

Permanent damage is unlikely. Still, a likelihood? I guess that person could just live bitterly for the rest of his days, whilst swimming the money he got when he sued.

The Corinthian

Morphie wrote: »

You say it's reversible? How is it that they do that?

I'm surprised that few, if any, have bothered to even read the Wiki article on the subject.

Permanent damage is unlikely. Still, a likelihood? I guess that person could just live bitterly for the rest of his days, whilst swimming the money he got when he sued.

No law is perfect and sometimes the innocent suffer. It is unfortunately part of the trade off between the good of society against the good of the individual that we make.

When this involves incarceration, they are released and compensated and while this may not give them back all that they lost, it is better than those who suffer a permanent measures, such as capital punishment, from which the unjustly convicted may never be saved.

In this regard, and from my understanding, chemical castration is more akin to incarceration than capital punishment, in that it is not final and irreversible. As such, while mistakes will still occur, they can be reversed and I would think that the resulting benefits overall outweigh the negatives.

amacachi

The Corinthian wrote: »

I'm surprised that few, if any, have bothered to even read the Wiki article on the subject.

No law is perfect and sometimes the innocent suffer. It is unfortunately part of the trade off between the good of society against the good of the individual that we make.

When this involves incarceration, they are released and compensated and while this may not give them back all that they lost, it is better than those who suffer a permanent measures, such as capital punishment, from which the unjustly convicted may never be saved.

In this regard, and from my understanding, chemical castration is more akin to incarceration than capital punishment, in that it is not final and irreversible. As such, while mistakes will still occur, they can be reversed and I would think that the resulting benefits overall outweigh the negatives.

Can be revered, but some of the effects would be hard to overturn. For me as well the fact that it relies on someone showing up every 3 months is another thing I don't like, how long more would it take for their sex drive to come back?
There's also the aspect of state interference with a person's body, which I'm against, as well as the fact that someone convicted of a crime may be given a choice in what their sentence is.

The Corinthian

amacachi wrote: »

There's also the aspect of state interference with a person's body

Incarceration is state interference with a person's body too - just less clinical.

someone convicted of a crime may be given a choice in what their sentence is.

To a degree all criminals have a choice in their sentience, it most commonly comes with their plea.

Don't get me wrong, you make valid points, but as I said law and justice comes down to an imperfect compromise between the interests of society and of the individual and you have to pick a point of compromise somewhere. And in this, the Polish law does not, on the face of it, strike me as a ill considered.

metrovelvet

amacachi wrote: »

Can be revered, but some of the effects would be hard to overturn. For me as well the fact that it relies on someone showing up every 3 months is another thing I don't like, how long more would it take for their sex drive to come back?
There's also the aspect of state interference with a person's body, which I'm against, as well as the fact that someone convicted of a crime may be given a choice in what their sentence is.

The state intereferes with the body from the moment we start school.

While I sort of agree with you, while we have things like court mandated c sections and bedrest for pregnant women, who are not criminals, and birthcontrol for women charged with child abuse/neglect, it will make chemical castration for criminals look not so bad.

r3nu4l

juleserino wrote: »

Sorry about that. Forgot I was posting in Ireland, land of the apathetic sound bite. You just keep clockin up those posts paddy, seriously.

Use that phrase in this forum in that context again and you'll lose your posting rights.

If you can't be civil don't post. Nothing apathetic about that.

juleserino

amacachi wrote: »

Paddy? Ouch! Put your claws away.

Only thing I'm apathetic about is trying to explain my viewpoint to people whose minds are obviously completely closed to opinions or ideas other than their own, something which from your Daily Mail-esque posts seems to be the case with you.

You confuse your apathy with a predisposition to condescension, seriously.

Sorry about the "Paddy" thing darling, all that time spent reading the Daily Mail has robbed me of my vocabulary, just couldn't think of the correct nomenclature. Lost another bloody point for that one. r3nu4l was really upset. Might have to smoke a turd in purgatory for that one.

Pissin on about ones ethical concerns with regard the chemical castration of sexual predators in Poland appears somewhat disingenuous in light of current events here in Ireland.

Ethical consideration, Irish style.

1. Four pedophile brothers in one small Irish town, two of whom were recently rewarded for their crimes with a release from custody, this of course due to a loop hole in the Mental Health Act.

2. A vice-principal at a secondary school who had 289 images and six video files of child pornography on his computer jailed for three months.

Any ethical concerns there folks?

Paedophiles should just up stakes from where ever they are in the world and make a new home in sunny Ireland. They sure as hell wont emigrate to Poland. They don't reward sexual predators in Poland. Not so many bleeding heart types residing there.

And Yes amacachi, I am completely and utterly closed minded to the notion of concerning myself ethically or otherwise with the welfare of sexual predators that by their own choice REPEATEDLY make it their business to inflict their psychopathology on other members of society.

r3nu4l

juleserino has been banned for two weeks from the forum for his condescending posts. Please don't respond to his trolling, thank you.

Morphie

The Corinthian wrote: »

I'm surprised that few, if any, have bothered to even read the Wiki article on the subject.

No law is perfect and sometimes the innocent suffer. It is unfortunately part of the trade off between the good of society against the good of the individual that we make.

When this involves incarceration, they are released and compensated and while this may not give them back all that they lost, it is better than those who suffer a permanent measures, such as capital punishment, from which the unjustly convicted may never be saved.

In this regard, and from my understanding, chemical castration is more akin to incarceration than capital punishment, in that it is not final and irreversible. As such, while mistakes will still occur, they can be reversed and I would think that the resulting benefits overall outweigh the negatives.

I'm more of a "why read a whole page when my question can be answered with a few words". Unless I'm interested enough in the subject. Yeah, ignorance, lame of me.

Saying that no law is perfect is hardly a way of justifying it. The courtroom is a sham, and it will be until we figure out a more just way of going about it. Of course this also is a pointless stand point, since, well, we can't do nothing can we?

It's a bit off when the best we can do is say "well, that's just how it is, it's not perfect".

I'll agree, going by what you have said, that the benefits do outweigh the negative.

HavingCrack

Is there actually any method of curing paedofiles/rapists of their compulsions completely and utterly so they would never prevent a threat again? I don't mean castration (which would only apply to men anyway)but actual shutting down of sexual desire. I presume it would be as impossible as to turn a homosexual person straight or vice versa (no offence intended at all-just given as an example as this was often attempted in the past). I'd be realyl interested to know is it actually possible however.

The Corinthian

Morphie wrote: »

I'm more of a "why read a whole page when my question can be answered with a few words". Unless I'm interested enough in the subject. Yeah, ignorance, lame of me.

Don't worry - in a modern liberal democracy, you are not required to have any clue on the matters that you vote on

Saying that no law is perfect is hardly a way of justifying it.

If that were the case we would not be able to enact any law. But we do, even though we know that no law is perfect.

HavingCrack wrote: »

Is there actually any method of curing paedofiles/rapists of their compulsions completely and utterly so they would never prevent a threat again?

It's a contentious issue as this area of psychology is very politicized. Pedophilia is presently considered and abnormal sexual orientation or paraphilia (which if you know your Greek, means the same thing). Homosexuality used to be considered a paraphilia too, but politically the situation has changed and so too has the definition.

Either way, regardless of whether a sexual orientation is the product of nurture, nature or both, it is very difficult to reverse, and while one may suppress it, I don't think there is any 'cure' - 1984 would have been a very boring book if there were.

I'd also (pedantically) note that you can't really lump pedophiles and rapists together - it's a bit like apples and oranges.

amacachi

The Corinthian wrote: »

Don't worry - in a modern liberal democracy, you are not required to have any clue on the matters that you vote on

Makes ya question sometimes if it's worth keeping yourself informed. :P

I'd also (pedantically) note that you can't really lump pedophiles and rapists together - it's a bit like apples and oranges.

Yes ya can, it's how political campaigns work. :P