NationStates Jolt Archive

As most of the US Americans on here know, Shasta Groene (8) was found in the company of a convicted child rapist, Joseph Edward Duncan III. She and her brother, Dillon (9), were missing when neighbors found their mother, brother, and mother's boyfriend bound and beaten to death almost 2 months ago. Dillon is believed to be dead. Remains found are being DNA tested to verify that they are Dillon.

http://www.comcast.net/news/national/index.jsp?cat=DOMESTIC&fn=/2005/07/06/172372.html

We now have another fine example of how our courts are turning these animals loose to prey on us and our children.

Duncan had served 14 years of a 20 year sentence for raping a boy at gun point and then setting him on fire. He soon was charged with molesting a 5 year old and released on $15,000 bond. He jumped bail and disappeared. It is believed that soon afterwards he killed the kids' family merely to get the 2 kids for his own sick pleasure.

Another recent victim to a known, dangerous, registered sex offender is Jessica Lunsford. Her killer stole into her home and took her out of her bedroom in the middle of the night. He then spent several days molesting her before he buried her alive before fleeing to another state. This creep had 24 prior arrests, including child molestation. Yet he was walking around stalking a defenseless child.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/18/national/main681537.shtml

Some people demand "civil rights" for these monsters, but when they harm a child, deny a child's civil rights, shouldn't they by default forfeit their own civil rights? I think that we should set up colonies especially for these misfits, lock them in, and throw the key away. Your ideas?

I thought this post had something to do with animals?

I thought this post had something to do with animals?


It does. The animals that think our kids are here for them to slaughter and molest.

It does. The animals that think our kids are here for them to slaughter and molest.

Ah so the question becomes when is a human not human anymore?

Really, we need much stricter punishment for certain things. Our duty is to protect the people from madmen. An innocent man being judged guilty can be covered up. But such insanity as this causes people to fear for their safety and damages more lives than any wrongful charge of guilt.

I say sentence them for some serious number of years of hard labor. If they survive, let them go. And tell everyone in the neighborhood they move into about them. If they do it again, torture them to death. These people don't deserve rights, and they don't deserve mercy.

It does. The animals that think our kids are here for them to slaughter and molest.
Wait. Time out. Despite all the background information about that Duncan guy, has it been proven that he did anything besides kidnap Shasta? As far as I know, he's only going to trial for kidnapping...

So...the question is...despite the fact that there are some moral conflicts here, her mother (and her mother's boyfriend) and her older brother were murdered, and not necessarily by this guy...isn't it possible that this guy had been legitimately healed (by serving prison time) and was honestly trying to take care of this child as she had no guardians that he knew of?

I mean, after all, from the video and first-hand accounts I've heard, she wasn't exactly trying to escape from him...

Wait. Time out. Despite all the background information about that Duncan guy, has it been proven that he did anything besides kidnap Shasta? As far as I know, he's only going to trial for kidnapping...

So...the question is...despite the fact that there are some moral conflicts here, her mother (and her mother's boyfriend) and her older brother were murdered, and not necessarily by this guy...isn't it possible that this guy had been legitimately healed (by serving prison time) and was honestly trying to take care of this child as she had no guardians that he knew of?

I mean, after all, from the video and first-hand accounts I've heard, she wasn't exactly trying to escape from him...

Shasta was eight. All he had to say was 'If you try to run, or if you try to tell anyone, you will never see your parents again'. Moreover, I doubt it would be difficult to convince an eight year old that something she had no prior knowledge of in any form was right and acceptable.

He deserves a fair trial, sure, but any halfway smart sex offender who gives half of a damn about at least TRYING to reform would have taken her to the police immediately upon ascertaining she had no guardians. Why would he not have... unless he knew the state of her guardians, or he did indeed intend to abuse her?

I say that we simply keep them away from others. Prison, or if one must, the death penalty for them. But bloodymindedness, revenge, and torture are never a solution. Justice is not about revenge.

Shasta was eight. All he had to say was 'If you try to run, or if you try to tell anyone, you will never see your parents again'. Moreover, I doubt it would be difficult to convince an eight year old that something she had no prior knowledge of in any form was right and acceptable.

He deserves a fair trial, sure, but any halfway smart sex offender who gives half of a damn about at least TRYING to reform would have taken her to the police immediately upon ascertaining she had no guardians. Why would he not have... unless he knew the state of her guardians, or he did indeed intend to abuse her?
First, I did not speculate that he had sound mental health. In fact, I'm very convinced that he has extremely poor mental health.

However, are you saying that there is no way possible that he could have legitimately been simply caring for the child who had no parents?

Also...if the child was so easily convinced by Duncan that running was a bad idea, then I chalk that one up to bad parenting...

Ah so the question becomes when is a human not human anymore?

Well consider the fact that prisons have to seperate them from the general population or else they get killed by one of the inmates.

I say that we simply keep them away from others. Prison, or if one must, the death penalty for them. But bloodymindedness, revenge, and torture are never a solution. Justice is not about revenge.

Justice is revenge.

Revenge or renumeration (Whether to the victims or society as a whole.).

Wait. Time out. Despite all the background information about that Duncan guy, has it been proven that he did anything besides kidnap Shasta? As far as I know, he's only going to trial for kidnapping...

So...the question is...despite the fact that there are some moral conflicts here, her mother (and her mother's boyfriend) and her older brother were murdered, and not necessarily by this guy...isn't it possible that this guy had been legitimately healed (by serving prison time) and was honestly trying to take care of this child as she had no guardians that he knew of?

I mean, after all, from the video and first-hand accounts I've heard, she wasn't exactly trying to escape from him...

They have learned from interviews with little Shasta that Duncan tied up the family, loaded the kids in a pickup, and then molested both of them, moving from campground to campground. Initial reports seem to indicate that Duncan disappeared soon after Duncan kidnapped them.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,161663,00.html

Since when does prison "heal" anything? People who have spent any time aorund kids know that it is easy to intimidate them.

Also...if the child was so easily convinced by Duncan that running was a bad idea, then I chalk that one up to bad parenting...


Bad parenting? Reports are that their mother was far from the ideal, but how do you teach a child to not be afraid of a much larger person who threatens them or the people they love with harm. Hell, how do you teach an adult that?

First, I did not speculate that he had sound mental health. In fact, I'm very convinced that he has extremely poor mental health.

However, are you saying that there is no way possible that he could have legitimately been simply caring for the child who had no parents?

Also...if the child was so easily convinced by Duncan that running was a bad idea, then I chalk that one up to bad parenting...

Nothing to do with parenting. Anyone who spends fifteen minutes thinking about how a child thinks realizes that you can control them easily through threatening to withold things that are most important to them, among other knids of threats (People will hate you, you'll be alone, I'll kill you, etc. etc.) (This holds true for ALL humans, it's just that adults are generally more cynical about the threateners ability to act on their threats.).

And it is possible, but I cannot find myself believing that course of action occurred. If it has, then I would offer my condolences to the convicted's misfortune. Except, well, you know. Child molester and all.

Well consider the fact that prisons have to seperate them from the general population or else they get killed by one of the inmates.

Well I was more refering to the one posters classification of these people as animals but I'll bite. That is removing them from society but is it really them losing their humanity? What does being human really mean....you know what this is getting to sound too much like a rant from the matrix.

"Shasta and Dylan were repeatedly molested," Kootenai County Sheriff's Sgt. Brad Maskell wrote in a terse, handwritten affidavit released Tuesday. "Shasta saw Mr. Duncan molest Dylan."

The girl told Maskell she had never seen Duncan before.

She was awakened at her home and watched as her mother Brenda Groene, 13-year-old brother Slade and Mark McKenzie, her mother's boyfriend, were tied up, the document said. She and Dylan were also bound and placed in the pickup truck. The children were later transferred to a stolen red Jeep and taken to the first of three campsites, she said.

How can you defend this? Duncan, Coey, and others like them are not human. They are animals. It is natural instinct in humans to protect and care for children. It is not uncommon for a complete stranger to put themselves in harm's way to protect a child. The beasts that do this do not have a shred of humanity and should not be treated as human.

Well I was more refering to the one posters classification of these people as animals but I'll bite. That is removing them from society but is it really them losing their humanity? What does being human really mean....you know what this is getting to sound too much like a rant from the matrix.

In case you didn't know, humans are a species of animal. These are animals gone savage. Why do we have to respect the rights of "people" who trample our rights, especially those who deny kids their rights?

How can you defend this? Duncan, Coey, and others like them are not human. They are animals. It is natural instinct in humans to protect and care for children. It is not uncommon for a complete stranger to put themselves in harm's way to protect a child. The beasts that do this do not have a shred of humanity and should not be treated as human.

Ah so if a person doesnt show regard for another person's life they are animals?

Ah so if a person doesnt show regard for another person's life they are animals?

Yes.

Ah so if a person doesnt show regard for another person's life they are animals?

If their actions are bestial and savage then they are not embued with human nature but animalistic tendencies. It would be more accurate to say they are sub-animal. Even in the animal kingdom most species nurture their young.

Yes.

So everyone who was a soldier in a war and killed for their country is now an animal?

If their actions are bestial and savage then they are not embued with human nature but animalistic tendencies. It would be more accurate to say they are sub-animal. Even in the animal kingdom most species nurture their young.

Ah so you go and refine your previous answer. Well they say war is hell and people do horrible things in wars. Not only that but in society itself. We ignore people, talk behind others backs, and do all maners of things to people mentally that are just as bad if not worse then physical tourtue. And about the animal kingdom thing there are animals who eat their young, kill their young, and kill their spouses.

Stop insulting my dog, dammit. He never did anything like this. It's assumed that many non-human animals have not only nurturing and conserving feelings, but consciousness, theory of mind, and the very things we often consider separating the "humans" from the "animals."

On another note, prisons are not nice places for child molesters. Prisoners hear the news. To be honest, there's nothing good, honest criminals hate worse than sharing a room with some pervert, and the pervert is usually found hanging from a bedsheet shortly thereafter.

Even in the animal kingdom most species nurture their young.
Except for the entire phyla Mollusca, Porifera, Cnidaria, Ctenophora, Echinodermata, Annelida, Nemertea, Nematoda, Playhelmithes, and most of Arthropoda and Chordata.

So everyone who was a soldier in a war and killed for their country is now an animal?



Ah so you go and refine your previous answer. Well they say war is hell and people do horrible things in wars. Not only that but in society itself. We ignore people, talk behind others backs, and do all maners of things to people mentally that are just as bad if not worse then physical tourtue. And about the animal kingdom thing there are animals who eat their young, kill their young, and kill their spouses.


You are micro-examining this discussion to hijack it to another anti-war rant, aren't you. Sorry, but it's like comparing hand grenades to pineapples. To compare social misbehaviour to the physical and mental destruction of a child is ludicrous. Just because there are a few species that destroy their own kind, does this excuse this behaviour in humans?

I was hoping for a discussion of rational ideas on how to best handle these perverts and protect our children and ourselves. You just seem to want to make wild comparisons for the sake of argument. That is not productive and a bore.

So everyone who was a soldier in a war and killed for their country is now an animal?


That is not killing for no reason, or for personal pleasure. That is killing to survive. Plus, many soldiers feel guilty about it. That makes them human. Stop mincing words.

As most of the US Americans on here know, Shasta Groene (8) was found in the company of a convicted child rapist, Joseph Edward Duncan III. She and her brother, Dillon (9), were missing when neighbors found their mother, brother, and mother's boyfriend bound and beaten to death almost 2 months ago. Dillon is believed to be dead. Remains found are being DNA tested to verify that they are Dillon.

http://www.comcast.net/news/national/index.jsp?cat=DOMESTIC&fn=/2005/07/06/172372.html

We now have another fine example of how our courts are turning these animals loose to prey on us and our children.

Duncan had served 14 years of a 20 year sentence for raping a boy at gun point and then setting him on fire. He soon was charged with molesting a 5 year old and released on $15,000 bond. He jumped bail and disappeared. It is believed that soon afterwards he killed the kids' family merely to get the 2 kids for his own sick pleasure.

Another recent victim to a known, dangerous, registered sex offender is Jessica Lunsford. Her killer stole into her home and took her out of her bedroom in the middle of the night. He then spent several days molesting her before he buried her alive before fleeing to another state. This creep had 24 prior arrests, including child molestation. Yet he was walking around stalking a defenseless child.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/18/national/main681537.shtml

Some people demand "civil rights" for these monsters, but when they harm a child, deny a child's civil rights, shouldn't they by default forfeit their own civil rights? I think that we should set up colonies especially for these misfits, lock them in, and throw the key away. Your ideas?

thats what happens when you get so many people protesting the death penalty

thats what happens when you get so many people protesting the death penalty
Whoa...
Somebody with the same name as I!

How profoundly odd.

You are micro-examining this discussion to hijack it to another anti-war rant, aren't you.
Not really. I am using it as an example but I never condemned wars.

Sorry, but it's like comparing hand grenades to pineapples. To compare social misbehaviour to the physical and mental destruction of a child is ludicrous. Just because there are a few species that destroy their own kind, does this excuse this behaviour in humans?
I never said it excused this behavior. What I am trying to challenge here is the sort of us versus them view that you have set up. The calling these people animals makes it easier for us to look away and say give them the chair without examining them and without giving them the same treatment as the rest of us. It makes it easier to look at these people and say their animals because you dont have to look at them and say this is humanity in all its glory. This is what we do we kill, we maim, we bleed, we cry, and we die.

I was hoping for a discussion of rational ideas on how to best handle these perverts and protect our children and ourselves. You just seem to want to make wild comparisons for the sake of argument. That is not productive and a bore.
Aww but playing devils advocate is always so fun.

Except for the entire phyla Mollusca, Porifera, Cnidaria, Ctenophora, Echinodermata, Annelida, Nemertea, Nematoda, Playhelmithes, and most of Arthropoda and Chordata.

Sponges, jellyfish, mollusks, spiders, etc. Except for eating and breeding, they have very few other higher functions. Try comparing to other mammals.

Sponges, jellyfish, mollusks, spiders, etc. Except for eating and breeding, they have very few other higher functions. Try comparing to other mammals.
Spiders take care of their young. That's why I didn't include them. Plus, you said most animals. I proved you wrong by showing that care for the young only occurs in 2 phyla.

BTW, lions kill lion cubs all the time. There's an example of one mammal's consideration for its young.

Not really. I am using it as an example but I never condemned wars.


I never said it excused this behavior. What I am trying to challenge here is the sort of us versus them view that you have set up. The calling these people animals makes it easier for us to look away and say give them the chair without examining them and without giving them the same treatment as the rest of us. It makes it easier to look at these people and say their animals because you dont have to look at them and say this is humanity in all its glory. This is what we do we kill, we maim, we bleed, we cry, and we die.


Aww but playing devils advocate is always so fun.

I have not nor never would advocate killing them, or anyone. I think that there has to be away to get them off the streets and out of our communities permanently.

We also love, nurture, provide, share, and die in peace. Those are qualities of humanity in its glory. Would you still want to play devil's advocate if one of these "people" moved in near your family?

I have not nor never would advocate killing them, or anyone. I think that there has to be away to get them off the streets and out of our communities permanently.

I agree that these people need to be removed from society to be rehabilitated or to make sure that they are not a threat to others. But we cant just lock them up and throw away the key. We need to adress the root of the problem as well as the actual problem.

We also love, nurture, provide, share, and die in peace. Those are qualities of humanity in its glory. Would you still want to play devil's advocate if one of these "people" moved in near your family?

I have already lived next to one of these people. I'm still here. They deserve the same rights and liberties as you and I do. Once we decide they dont get the right to live whats to stop others from comming around and saying we dont deserve the right to live?

Spiders take care of their young. That's why I didn't include them. Plus, you said most animals. I proved you wrong by showing that care for the young only occurs in 2 phyla.

BTW, lions kill lion cubs all the time. There's an example of one mammals consideration for its young.

Male lions kill cubs to reduce future pride competition. OK, higher thought processes are not present in "most" animals. But, with few exceptions, in the higher orders, instinct provides a natural inclination to protect the species as seen in pride, pack, herd.

I agree that these people need to be removed from society to be rehabilitated or to make sure that they are not a threat to others. But we cant just lock them up and throw away the key. We need to adress the root of the problem as well as the actual problem.



I have already lived next to one of these people. I'm still here. They deserve the same rights and liberties as you and I do. Once we decide they dont get the right to live whats to stop others from comming around and saying we dont deserve the right to live?

Rehabilitated in what way? Their inborn tendency is towards children. If you can rehabilitate them, then when will they start coming around and trying to rehabilitate others who do not prefer heterosexual same species sex?

I interpret the thread started as not saying these people are equivalent to animals so much as they are subhuman.

don't forget that the guy who molested Jessica Lunsford had 3 other people in the same trailer while he was molesting her and the state of Florida refuses to prosecute them and the St. Petersburg Times has also been covering for them. They were in the trailer when the abuse occurred. They let it happen. They were accomplices but they are getting off free.

Rehabilitated in what way? Their inborn tendency is towards children. If you can rehabilitate them, then when will they start coming around and trying to rehabilitate others who do not prefer heterosexual same species sex?

I tend to believe that sexual prefernce for male and female is a genetic trait. However I dont think the age that one likes is nessecarily dependent on genes. Your last part of this is kind of confusing me could you maybe clarify this.

I say sentence them for some serious number of years of hard labor. If they survive, let them go. And tell everyone in the neighborhood they move into about them. If they do it again, torture them to death. These people don't deserve rights, and they don't deserve mercy.
Yet you would give rights to a terrorist bent on genocide?

As our laws our now, we are placing the rights of criminals over the rights of honest citizens. Until we have a method to control or redirect their anti-social proclivities we must put them where they can't hurt others.

As our laws our now, we are placing the rights of criminals over the rights of honest citizens. Until we have a method to control or redirect their anti-social proclivities we must put them where they can't hurt others.

How are we placing the rights of the criminals over the rights of honest citizens?

don't forget that the guy who molested Jessica Lunsford had 3 other people in the same trailer while he was molesting her and the state of Florida refuses to prosecute them and the St. Petersburg Times has also been covering for them. They were in the trailer when the abuse occurred. They let it happen. They were accomplices but they are getting off free.

It's looking like the police continued to question him after he requested a lawyer. Based on this, his confession can be denied as evidence. It looks like the police are going to have to let those 3 escape justice in exchange for their testimony in court to prosecute this guy.

Rehabilitated in what way? Their inborn tendency is towards children. If you can rehabilitate them, then when will they start coming around and trying to rehabilitate others who do not prefer heterosexual same species sex?
Rehabilitation is possible but we don't have the technology yet. As I stated in a thread that was closed on the other forums before the move to jolt, pedophilia and homosexuality are caused by a biochemical misfiring of neurons in the brain caused by a very traumatic experience in child hood.
For example, many children who are molested will often grow up to be child molestor's themselves. The most we can do today, with our primitive technology is try to break the cycle. People who are abused as children also have greater risk, than the general population, of growing up to be either child molestors or child abusers or as in the case of Shasta's molestor, both.
This form of brain damage can also be caused by doing drugs for a very long amount of time. As some drug addicts are known to be sexually attracted to children.
The cure lies in the brain.

It's looking like the police continued to question him after he requested a lawyer. Based on this, his confession can be denied as evidence. It looks like the police are going to have to let those 3 escape justice in exchange for their testimony in court to prosecute this guy.
Yeah, the prosecution are real morons in this case.

Let me first start by saying that as a victim of sexual abuse as a child, I'm disgusted that so many people feel that a pedophile's rights and freedoms are equally or more important than those of a child. There's a reason that a convicted armed robber is not allowed to purchase a firearm... If you give him a gun, guess what, he'll commit another robbery nine times out of ten.

Most states now classify sex-offenders as either Class-1, Class-2 or Class-3 based on the severity of their offense and their previous record. A good example of a Class-1 sex offender is the 18 year old in highschool that gets caught having sex with his 17 year old girlfriend by her dad. He can, and may be charged with statutory rape, indecent liberties with a minor, or any other charges off a long list (varying from state to state). Technically at that point, he's a registered sex offender, but not somebody, I think, that you need to worry about kidnapping, molesting and murdering your 10 year old children. Class-3 however means that this person has a repeat history of sexual offenses, at least one pertaining to a minor below the age of 16. These are the people who SHOULD be handled in a different way. Personally, I feel that these people should all be put to death. You can give me this "He's not evil, he's sick.", "It's not his fault, something from his past caused this." etc. but the fact of the matter is, when a dog gets rabies and it goes mad... it's put down. Same goes for any other type of animal. For the sake of the general public, animals considered a possible danger are euthanized for the protection of the greater good.

This particular guy was a repeat offender. He'd been convicted and sentenced, serving 14 of his 20 years. He was registered in his home state of Washington as a sex offender. Last year he was arrested in, I believe Wisconsin, where he was not registered with the state police. Wisconsin has a stupid law that states that the court cannot detain someone without bail, and that bail must be set at "a reasonable ammount". This is the kind of law that serves almost no purpose other than to help criminals elude the law. Anyways, in Idaho, where the children were kidnapped, he also was not registered with the state police. This shows that the problem isn't something that's going to be easily fixed since it's source comes from many places all across the board. The fact that his last known address in Washington was last updated almost a year ago is just the begining of the laxity of our justice system.

In short, fry the bastard.

*came here expecting a thread calling for a giant eagle hunt and is dissapointed*

Rehabilitation is possible but we don't have the technology yet. As I stated in a thread that was closed on the other forums before the move to jolt, pedophilia and homosexuality are caused by a biochemical misfiring of neurons in the brain caused by a very traumatic experience in child hood.
For example, many children who are molested will often grow up to be child molestor's themselves. The most we can do today, with our primitive technology is try to break the cycle. People who are abused as children also have greater risk, than the general population, of growing up to be either child molestors or child abusers or as in the case of Shasta's molestor, both.
This form of brain damage can also be caused by doing drugs for a very long amount of time. As some drug addicts are known to be sexually attracted to children.
The cure lies in the brain.
I might add, that unfortunately, due to the bad aura of the subject of pedophilia, very little is know about the pedophile brain as to date, none have been studied. If the state would allow us to take and study the brain of a dead pedophile, we could learn much about how they function mentally and find clues about what went wrong to make them the way they are. But it seems to be illegal to dissect the brains of pedophiles for some reason. Or at least no one seems willing to fund such a study.

Let me first start by saying that as a victim of sexual abuse as a child, I'm disgusted that so many people feel that a pedophile's rights and freedoms are equally or more important than those of a child. There's a reason that a convicted armed robber is not allowed to purchase a firearm... If you give him a gun, guess what, he'll commit another robbery nine times out of ten.

Most states now classify sex-offenders as either Class-1, Class-2 or Class-3 based on the severity of their offense and their previous record. A good example of a Class-1 sex offender is the 18 year old in highschool that gets caught having sex with his 17 year old girlfriend by her dad. He can, and may be charged with statutory rape, indecent liberties with a minor, or any other charges off a long list (varying from state to state). Technically at that point, he's a registered sex offender, but not somebody, I think, that you need to worry about kidnapping, molesting and murdering your 10 year old children. Class-3 however means that this person has a repeat history of sexual offenses, at least one pertaining to a minor below the age of 16. These are the people who SHOULD be handled in a different way. Personally, I feel that these people should all be put to death. You can give me this "He's not evil, he's sick.", "It's not his fault, something from his past caused this." etc. but the fact of the matter is, when a dog gets rabies and it goes mad... it's put down. Same goes for any other type of animal. For the sake of the general public, animals considered a possible danger are euthanized for the protection of the greater good.

This particular guy was a repeat offender. He'd been convicted and sentenced, serving 14 of his 20 years. He was registered in his home state of Washington as a sex offender. Last year he was arrested in, I believe Wisconsin, where he was not registered with the state police. Wisconsin has a stupid law that states that the court cannot detain someone without bail, and that bail must be set at "a reasonable ammount". This is the kind of law that serves almost no purpose other than to help criminals elude the law. Anyways, in Idaho, where the children were kidnapped, he also was not registered with the state police. This shows that the problem isn't something that's going to be easily fixed since it's source comes from many places all across the board. The fact that his last known address in Washington was last updated almost a year ago is just the begining of the laxity of our justice system.

In short, fry the bastard.

I would agree. Even though he can't be executed for child molesting, it seems they are saying he was the one that killed the parents. So that ought to be enough for them to fry him. He committed multiple murders. If he still gets out of the death penalty, something must be wrong with the system.

pedophilia and homosexuality are caused by a biochemical misfiring of neurons in the brain caused by a very traumatic experience in child hood.


This is quite simply one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. This goes on the list with the "if you're molested, you'll end up being a molester" bullsh*t.

I would agree. Even though he can't be executed for child molesting, it seems they are saying he was the one that killed the parents. So that ought to be enough for them to fry him. He committed multiple murders. If he still gets out of the death penalty, something must be wrong with the system.

Actually, the good news is that he's being charged with two counts of kidnapping, and as per Idaho law, since the kidnappings were committed with the intention of progressing to abuse, rape, murder or sexual crimes against a minor 16 or under, he qualifies for the death penalty.

This is quite simply one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. This goes on the list with the "if you're molested, you'll end up being a molester" bullsh*t.

ah and with no proof to the contrary we are suposed to believe what your saying. If your going to do that add some sort of factual proof to dispute it instead of calling it bullsh*t.

This is quite simply one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. This goes on the list with the "if you're molested, you'll end up being a molester" bullsh*t.
Well, I did state that most children who are molested tend to grow up to be molestors themselves. The key being most, but not all.
I wonder if the state of Idaho would be willing to give this guy's brain over to science for dissection and study. Then we can find out how these people's brains function physiologically and start working toward some type of cure.
Heck, we should be putting these people through mandatory MRI's.

O.K.

Example 1.
From the age of four until the age of six I was molested by my father. I am now 23 years old and am neither a homosexual, nor a pedophile.

Example 2.
I know many homosexuals and there are plenty of them who had none of your aforementioned traumatic childhood experiences. If these pedophilia/ homosexuality causing misfires are triggered by abuse of some sort, I'd like to know where the rest of the gay folks come from.

Well, I did state that most children who are molested tend to grow up to be molestors themselves. The key being most, but not all.
I wonder if the state of Idaho would be willing to give this guy's brain over to science for dissection and study. Then we can find out how these people's brains function physiologically and start working toward some type of cure.
Heck, we should be putting these people through mandatory MRI's.

If you were to say "some children who are molested grow up to be molestors" that would be one thing. But to even say most do shows a gross lack of knowledge on your part on a subject that should be understood a bit better. I can only assume that you have never contacted any type of victims' rights/ victims' support groups, nor spoken with very many victims of childhood sexual abuse.

O.K.

Example 1.
From the age of four until the age of six I was molested by my father. I am now 23 years old and am neither a homosexual, nor a pedophile.
While I am glad you are not a pedophile and I am sorry for the trauma you experienced your going to have to give more proof then yourself. If I said a african american kid treated me horribly because I was white when I was a kid would I be legitimatly able to classify all african americans as people who hate whites? Add a link with some proof and it will give your arguements a little more weight then saying I know so because such and such happened to me.

Example 2.
I know many homosexuals and there are plenty of them who had none of your aforementioned traumatic childhood experiences. If these pedophilia/ homosexuality causing misfires are triggered by abuse of some sort, I'd like to know where the rest of the gay folks come from.
Once again actual links to pages are better then saying I have experienced x or I know these sort of people.

O.K.

Example 1.
From the age of four until the age of six I was molested by my father. I am now 23 years old and am neither a homosexual, nor a pedophile.

Example 2.
I know many homosexuals and there are plenty of them who had none of your aforementioned traumatic childhood experiences. If these pedophilia/ homosexuality causing misfires are triggered by abuse of some sort, I'd like to know where the rest of the gay folks come from.
Ah, your rant is about homosexuality and not pedophilia.
The natural tendency of man would be toward woman who is in the range of 17 to 24. This for reproductive reasons. Reproduction being the reason that evolution invented sex in the first place. Therefore anything not resulting in reproduction is not natural. Hence homosexuality and sex with girls under say, 12, or even little boys for that matter, is unnatural because it won't result in reproduction. Though it is to be said that evolution has led modern man away from having sex purely for reproductive reasons.
But even those cases, the woman still has a chance, though it gets smaller with time, of getting pregnant, even after 30.

In addition, I would like to point out the fact that four out of every five instances of childhood sexual abuse go unreported, which in and of itself makes any study trying to set a percentage of victims-turned-molestors.

Well, I did state that most children who are molested tend to grow up to be molestors themselves. The key being most, but not all.
I wonder if the state of Idaho would be willing to give this guy's brain over to science for dissection and study. Then we can find out how these people's brains function physiologically and start working toward some type of cure.
Heck, we should be putting these people through mandatory MRI's.

So all those kids the Catholic Church molested are out there molesting?

Damn didn't know we had so many out there.

Instead of executing the molesters, just cut their genitals off. Then they wouldn't really be able to molest anyone. (Plus, it would be a suitable punishment to add to prison time) Armed robbers are not allowed to own guns, so repeated child molesters should not be able to keep their...well, you know.

There have been a great many well-documented cases of homosexual activities existing in nature by wild animals, ranging from monkeys and other primates to birds and insects. The fact that you try to present a biochemical cause/effect link connecting homosexuality/pedophilia/being molested doesn't really impress.

Alas, I have more to do this evening, so I must bid you goodnight. It was nice chatting with everyone.

There have been a great many well-documented cases of homosexual activities existing in nature by wild animals, ranging from monkeys and other primates to birds and insects. The fact that you try to present a biochemical cause/effect link connecting homosexuality/pedophilia/being molested doesn't really impress.
actually there has been no such documentation of homosexual acts in the wild. That is one the myths perpetuated by the militant gay rights organizations.

There have been a great many well-documented cases of homosexual activities existing in nature by wild animals, ranging from monkeys and other primates to birds and insects. The fact that you try to present a biochemical cause/effect link connecting homosexuality/pedophilia/being molested doesn't really impress.

Whits been told that before. He ignores it.

He is also an arch-catholic so keep that in mind too.....

actually there has been no such documentation of homosexual acts in the wild. That is one the myths perpetuated by the militant gay rights organizations.

Well as one who is a student of primatology I can say that is wrong.

It has been observed most famously in the Bonobo and even instances with the chimpanzee. Amoung others as well.....

How can you defend this? Duncan, Coey, and others like them are not human. They are animals. It is natural instinct in humans to protect and care for children. It is not uncommon for a complete stranger to put themselves in harm's way to protect a child. The beasts that do this do not have a shred of humanity and should not be treated as human.

amen and amen.

why he was not in jail for life for raping at gunpoint and setting as boy on fire!

this is just plain sickening,i fear they let these scum of the earth out because they dont profit on there incarceration.they have to seperate them from general population as they should.
when i was in jail,they had them seperate because they would have died in a day with the regular population.

if he is indeed guilty after a fair trial....and it is his what?3rd offence of destroying someones life...destroy him with extreme prejudice....very sadisticly.

i am against the death penalty in almost all cases,i'd say 99.9% of the time.
but in the case of repeat child rapists..they cant be rehabbed so whats the point.

at the least they should never be released on society,they have the highest repeat offender status of any crimminal,in fact,i don't consider them crimminals,i think they are miswired humans that are insane and evil. :sniper: :mp5: :headbang:

I could get a general idea of his political/ theological leanings from his linking together of homosexuality and pedophilia. The fact that he thinks both are caused by the same source shows he see's homosexuality being as much a perversion as molesting children makes me want to crack jokes about catholic priests and little boys, but I'm too nice a guy for that.

Anyways, have a wonderful evening, all.

actually there has been no such documentation of homosexual acts in the wild. That is one the myths perpetuated by the militant gay rights organizations.*Has image of gay men prancing around in army fatigues threatening to rearrange the furniture of extreme christians*

Whits been told that before. He ignores it.

He is also an arch-catholic so keep that in mind too.....
That's because such studies don't exist.

I could get a general idea of his political/ theological leanings from his linking together of homosexuality and pedophilia. The fact that he thinks both are caused by the same source shows he see's homosexuality being as much a perversion as molesting children makes me want to crack jokes about catholic priests and little boys, but I'm too nice a guy for that.

Anyways, have a wonderful evening, all.Well, actually the priests who engaged in child molestation were homosexuals as evidenced by their preference for little boys over little girls. BTW, I'm not Catholic but my parents and older siblings are.

That's because such studies don't exist.
There is documented, video proof that male emperor penguins will perform fellation on eachother in exchange for trinkets to give their female mates for nesting. If that's not homosexual activity, I don't know what is.

I guess techinally it's bisexual activity, not homosexual, but it illustrates the point. Really this time though, I need to go. Happy posting.

That's because such studies don't exist.

Sure whitt sure

Try a google of nonhuman primates and homosexual

There is documented, video proof that male emperor penguins will perform fellation on eachother in exchange for trinkets to give their female mates for nesting. If that's not homosexual activity, I don't know what is.
Now you are posting stuff from out your rear. Stick with the logical arguments with stuff that actually does exist.

Wait. Time out. Despite all the background information about that Duncan guy, has it been proven that he did anything besides kidnap Shasta? As far as I know, he's only going to trial for kidnapping...

So...the question is...despite the fact that there are some moral conflicts here, her mother (and her mother's boyfriend) and her older brother were murdered, and not necessarily by this guy...isn't it possible that this guy had been legitimately healed (by serving prison time) and was honestly trying to take care of this child as she had no guardians that he knew of?

I mean, after all, from the video and first-hand accounts I've heard, she wasn't exactly trying to escape from him...
YOU DO NOT HEAL PEDO PHILES. it is a sickness, one from there is no redemption, once they made the choice to prey on children they went down a path that even if they could return, they have no redeeming value as a human being. i know that sounds harsh but there it is :mad:

As most of the US Americans on here know, Shasta Groene (8) was found in the company of a convicted child rapist, Joseph Edward Duncan III. She and her brother, Dillon (9), were missing when neighbors found their mother, brother, and mother's boyfriend bound and beaten to death almost 2 months ago. Dillon is believed to be dead. Remains found are being DNA tested to verify that they are Dillon.

http://www.comcast.net/news/national/index.jsp?cat=DOMESTIC&fn=/2005/07/06/172372.html

We now have another fine example of how our courts are turning these animals loose to prey on us and our children.

Duncan had served 14 years of a 20 year sentence for raping a boy at gun point and then setting him on fire. He soon was charged with molesting a 5 year old and released on $15,000 bond. He jumped bail and disappeared. It is believed that soon afterwards he killed the kids' family merely to get the 2 kids for his own sick pleasure.

Another recent victim to a known, dangerous, registered sex offender is Jessica Lunsford. Her killer stole into her home and took her out of her bedroom in the middle of the night. He then spent several days molesting her before he buried her alive before fleeing to another state. This creep had 24 prior arrests, including child molestation. Yet he was walking around stalking a defenseless child.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/18/national/main681537.shtml

Some people demand "civil rights" for these monsters, but when they harm a child, deny a child's civil rights, shouldn't they by default forfeit their own civil rights? I think that we should set up colonies especially for these misfits, lock them in, and throw the key away. Your ideas?

I may be mistaken on this point, as I only scanned most of the responses, but it seemed to me that this post took its usual turn of veering in precisely the wrong direction: look at how stupid the bleeding hearts are for their interest in "civil liberties".

The real question that should be asked is why in the hell many of these monsters are getting out. The reason isn't because bleeding heart lawyers are springing them from the clink and dropping them off at the local playground. It's usually because prisons are stuffed to the brink, and because the laws currently on the books hold that some prisoners have to serve mandatory minimum sentences, while others, like murderers, rapists, and pedophiles, get out in order to ensure that those people serve their term. Who are these dangerous criminals who are serving these mandatory
terms in prison? Usually, they are low-level drug offenders, that's who. Yes, ladies and gents, because of our tough-on-crime policies against drugs, murderers and rapists get early parole so that there is enough room to ensure that some guy who got caught again with an ounce of pot can serve his 25 year mandatory sentence.

So if you want people like these pedophiles to go back into the joint like they are supposed to be, you might want to listen to those kids at the local college campus who want you to sign petitions for drug decriminalization.

Now you are posting stuff from out your rear. Stick with the logical arguments with stuff that actually does exist.

Aww Whitt just because you are getting hit with facts, you don't need to get nasty.

You might look at the wisconson primate center as well.

Dr. Frans de Waal has written some things as well.

But hey don't let facts obscure your mission.

Yuck.

Another thread where people try to show they are more bloodthirsty and totalitarian due to a couple of anamolous horror stories.

Jettison the Constitution, the lessons learned from centuries of common law, and all notions of justice, liberty, and civil rights because of a few bogeymen.

Of course, if I suggest any number of ways we could spend money to save the lives of many more children from dying of hunger or disease or any other nasty ways to die, I'm a bleeding-heart liberal idiot.

Even if we don't worry about "rights" and "equal protection under the law" or "due process," we cannot as a practical matter lock up forever everyone that ever does anything "bad."

We can and must try to determine sentences that are fair and effective.

We can and must respect the rights of the guilty to protect the rights of the innocent.

We can and must try to rehabilitate those that are guilty.

Human beings are animals. Because some act like savage animals, must we all?

Aww Whitt just because you are getting hit with facts, you don't need to get nasty.

You might look at the wisconson primate center as well.

Dr. Frans de Waal has written some things as well.

But hey don't let facts obscure your mission.
He's talking about penguins, not primates and that is where I called him out. Most of what the gay rights activists call homosexuality is not sex but grooming.
Grooming is common in the animal kingdom but is a far cry from sex. Just because a male bonobo is cleaning to the fur of another male bonobo does not mean they are engaged in a homosexual act.

don't forget that the guy who molested Jessica Lunsford had 3 other people in the same trailer while he was molesting her and the state of Florida refuses to prosecute them and the St. Petersburg Times has also been covering for them. They were in the trailer when the abuse occurred. They let it happen. They were accomplices but they are getting off free.

The State of Florida and the St. Petersburg Times are conspiring to cover-up the aiding and abetting of the molestation of Jessica Lunsford?

Color me skeptical. Very skeptical.

Yuck.

Another thread where people try to show they are more bloodthirsty and totalitarian due to a couple of anamolous horror stories.

Jettison the Constitution, the lessons learned from centuries of common law, and all notions of justice, liberty, and civil rights because of a few bogeymen.

Of course, if I suggest any number of ways we could spend money to save the lives of many more children from dying of hunger or disease or any other nasty ways to die, I'm a bleeding-heart liberal idiot.

Even if we don't worry about "rights" and "equal protection under the law" or "due process," we cannot as a practical matter lock up forever everyone that ever does anything "bad."

We can and must try to determine sentences that are fair and effective.

We can and must respect the rights of the guilty to protect the rights of the innocent.

We can and must try to rehabilitate those that are guilty.

Human beings are animals. Because some act like savage animals, must we all?
Actually I agree with you. The problem is these guys get out before they've paid their dues to society.

The State of Florida and the St. Petersburg Times are conspiring to cover-up the aiding and abetting of the molestation of Jessica Lunsford?

Color me skeptical. Very skeptical.
Mr. OReilly has been opining on this matter for the last couple of months when it was revealed that state of Florida was refusing to prosecute. Though, I must say I don't understand where the St. Petersburg Times comes in. Something about them attacking OReilly for wanting the 3 accomplices put on trial.
Did they not commit a crime for which they should be tried?

Grooming is common in the animal kingdom but is a far cry from sex. Just because a male bonobo is cleaning to the fur of another male bonobo does not mean they are engaged in a homosexual act.

Whittier try keep this thought. TBF is a student of primatology.

I read stuff that would put most people to sleep.

I think I know what grooming is. Do you even know why it is done? Cleaning is only part of it.

If you are going to talk about the Bonobo, at least read up on them. Grooming can't be argued a homosexual act. But what about rubbing each other genitals? How about stroking the genitals?

Big difference.

Instead of executing the molesters, just cut their genitals off. Then they wouldn't really be able to molest anyone. (Plus, it would be a suitable punishment to add to prison time) Armed robbers are not allowed to own guns, so repeated child molesters should not be able to keep their...well, you know.

It's not about sex, it's about power. If you do that, they will torment the kids in other ways.

Better that they never see light from anywhere but a controlled facility.

Whittier try keep this thought. TBF is a student of primatology.

I read stuff that would put most people to sleep.

I think I know what grooming is. Do you even know why it is done? Cleaning is only part of it.

If you are going to talk about the Bonobo, at least read up on them. Grooming can't be argued a homosexual act. But what about rubbing each other genitals? How about stroking the genitals?

Big difference.
Interesting. You seem to be trying to make a case that nonhuman animals are capable of logical thought. Which of course they are not. Only humans have free thought capability while the rest of the animal world only has instinct. Are you sure you are not talking about gay humans?

Actually I agree with you. The problem is these guys get out before they've paid their dues to society.

:rolleyes:

Do you think parole boards tend to just open the gates and see how many will try to run out?

How do you determine when one has paid his/her dues to society?

I love how, despite the fact sentences have gotten increasingly harsh, the solution is always "lock 'em up longer." (If not the ubiquitous inanity, "fry 'em).

You are one of those that always brags about how much of the country is and had been controlled by conservatives for so long. Do you think all those judges and wardens and parole boards are communists? Are they all pro-child molester?

You'll almost never read a story in the paper about someone that goes to prison and never offends again -- because it isn't a story!!!

It's not about sex, it's about power. If you do that, they will torment the kids in other ways.

Better that they never see light from anywhere but a controlled facility.
Yes, power does seem to be a major factor. Cause, another group that has a greater than average likelyhood of becoming molestors are those who are rejected as children. Actually I would have to say some. As no study as to the causes of pedophilia have been attempted to the stigma surrounding the subject.
But the only way to confirm this is if we had a pedo. brain to slice open and dissect.

Well, I did state that most children who are molested tend to grow up to be molestors themselves. The key being most, but not all.
I wonder if the state of Idaho would be willing to give this guy's brain over to science for dissection and study. Then we can find out how these people's brains function physiologically and start working toward some type of cure.
Heck, we should be putting these people through mandatory MRI's.


1. Extremely insulting to victims of child abuse. Not nice.

2. Why do have the sneaking suspicion who don't have the slightest bit of reliable scientific proof of this assertion?

3. I'm rather certain you have it backwards. Most of those who molest were molested themselves. Not that most of those molested become molesters. Rather enormous difference. And one for which you should apologize.

Ah, your rant is about homosexuality and not pedophilia.
The natural tendency of man would be toward woman who is in the range of 17 to 24. This for reproductive reasons. Reproduction being the reason that evolution invented sex in the first place. Therefore anything not resulting in reproduction is not natural... Though it is to be said that evolution has led modern man away from having sex purely for reproductive reasons.

There's nothing particularly unnatural about homosexuality. Unusual, perhaps (maybe uncommon would be a better term), but hardly unnatural. Homosexual behaviour occurs in pretty much all mammal species, and for social animals such as ourselves, sex is about a lot more than simple reproduction. Besides, reproducing one's-self isn't the only way to pass on one's genes... this is where altruism comes from.

As for child molesters... well, yes, repeat offenders bear watching. What truly boggles my mind are those who are convicted, and beg to be castrated so that they won't re-offend, and the state refuses. Seems like a humane, straightforward, and effective remedy to me.

And whoever said justice is revenge, I hope you never, ever end up in the legal or political professions. oO;

:rolleyes:

Do you think parole boards tend to just open the gates and see how many will try to run out?

How do you determine when one has paid his/her dues to society?

I love how, despite the fact sentences have gotten increasingly harsh, the solution is always "lock 'em up longer." (If not the ubiquitous inanity, "fry 'em).

You are one of those that always brags about how much of the country is and had been controlled by conservatives for so long. Do you think all those judges and wardens and parole boards are communists? Are they all pro-child molester?

You'll almost never read a story in the paper about someone that goes to prison and never offends again -- because it isn't a story!!!

Well, actually the reason recividivism (spelling), is high, is because the focus is on punishment. There is not much effort put into rehabilitation or preparing the prisoners for transition from prison life to free life. If more of the prison systems' resources were spent on rehabbing and transition preparedness, I think prisoners would be less likely to committ further crimes.
There need to be more job training and more transition counselors. For some reason, the idea of them having to report to parole officer makes it sound like they are still doing time. What does a parole officer do besides making sure the guy checks in like he supposed to? He doesn't stop anyone from breaking the law.

But the only way to confirm this is if we had a pedo. brain to slice open and dissect.

Your obsession with dissecting human brains is beginning to be worrisome.

Mr. OReilly has been opining on this matter for the last couple of months when it was revealed that state of Florida was refusing to prosecute. Though, I must say I don't understand where the St. Petersburg Times comes in. Something about them attacking OReilly for wanting the 3 accomplices put on trial.
Did they not commit a crime for which they should be tried?

You do realize that your citing "Mr. O'Reilly" makes me even more skeptical.

Mr. O'Reilly rarely knows what the hell he is talking about. It appears particularly clear he is being asinine here.

Since when did Bill O'Reilly know anything about prosecuting criminals? Is it based on all his years of experience doing it?

And since when is disagreeing with Bill O'Reilly about the best way to prosecute a case the same as covering up a crime?

Well, actually the priests who engaged in child molestation were homosexuals as evidenced by their preference for little boys over little girls. BTW, I'm not Catholic but my parents and older siblings are.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_chil.htm
"The Reality of Pedophilia
We get often caught in a semantic conflict when discussing the sexual abuse and molestation of children. Depending upon our exact definitions of terms, it can be shown:

1. that homosexual abuse of children is widespread, and
2. that abuse of boys by gays is rare, and
3. that the abuse of girls by lesbians is rarer still.

If we define the phrase "homosexual abuse of children" in the first statement to mean adults molesting and abusing children of the same sex, then this statement is true: Child sexual abuse is widespread. It is perpetrated by males in the vast majority of cases. And a substantial minority of their victims are boys. Data relating to men abusing boys is hungrily pounced upon by opponents to equal rights for homosexuals, who often use it against both gays and lesbians in civil rights battles. But it is not homosexuals, as the term is generally understood, who are responsible for the abuse. It is rather pedophiles who are attracted to children, and have decided to abuse them.

However, if we define the phrase "abuse of boys by gays", and "abuse of girls by lesbians" to mean adult persons with a homosexual orientation abusing children of the same sex, then these statements 2 and 3 above are also true. Gays and lesbians rarely abuse children.

The fact behind these conflicting statements is that most pedophiles are not homosexuals! Or to put it another way, most homosexual molestation is not done by homosexuals."

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

http://www.malesurvivor.org/myths.htm
"Myth #2 - Most sexual abuse of boys is perpetrated by homosexual males.

Pedophiles who molest boys are not expressing a homosexual orientation any more than pedophiles who molest girls are practicing heterosexual behaviors. While many child molesters have gender and/or age preferences, of those who seek out boys, the vast majority are not homosexual. They are pedophiles.

Myth #5 - Boys abused by males are or will become homosexual.

While there are different theories about how the sexual orientation develops, experts in the human sexuality field do not believe that premature sexual experiences play a significant role in late adolescent or adult sexual orientation. It is unlikely that someone can make another person a homosexual or heterosexual. Sexual orientation is a complex issue and there is no single answer or theory that explains why someone identifies himself as homosexual, heterosexual or bi-sexual. Whether perpetrated by older males or females, boys' or girls' premature sexual experiences are damaging in many ways, including confusion about one's sexual identity and orientation.

Many boys who have been abused by males erroneously believe that something about them sexually attracts males, and that this may mean they are homosexual or effeminate. Again, not true. Pedophiles who are attracted to boys will admit that the lack of body hair and adult sexual features turns them on. The pedophile's inability to develop and maintain a healthy adult sexual relationship is the problem - not the physical features of a sexually immature boy.

Myth #6 - The "Vampire Syndrome"Ñthat is, boys who are sexually abused, like the victims of Count Dracula, go on to "bite" or sexually abuse others.

This myth is especially dangerous because it can create a terrible stigma for the child, that he is destined to become an offender. Boys might be treated as potential perpetrators rather than victims who need help. While it is true that most perpetrators have histories of sexual abuse, it is NOT true that most victims go on to become perpetrators. Research by Jane Gilgun, Judith Becker and John Hunter found a primary difference between perpetrators who were sexually abused and sexually abused males who never perpetrated: non-perpetrators told about the abuse, and were believed and supported by significant people in their lives. Again, the majority of victims do not go on to become adolescent or adult perpetrators; and those who do perpetrate in adolescence usually don't perpetrate as adults if they get help when they are young."

You need a reality check. Please research the subject before claiming to know the facts.

1. Extremely insulting to victims of child abuse. Not nice.

2. Why do have the sneaking suspicion who don't have the slightest bit of reliable scientific proof of this assertion?

3. I'm rather certain you have it backwards. Most of those who molest were molested themselves. Not that most of those molested become molesters. Rather enormous difference. And one for which you should apologize.
1. Maybe. But it was necessary to make the hypothesis, which as I've stated earlier, is untested.

2. The reason there is no scientific proof is because there haven't been any scientific investigations into the cause of pedophilia. Such that my hypothesis' and others (whether similar or counter) are speculation because there is no data that has been collected on the subject. This is due to the taboo surrounding the subject. If society was willing to put money into such research we find out what the cause of the brain damage called pedophilia is and possibly come up with a cure. Surely you would agree with the need to find out what makes these kind of people tick.

3. Not backwards, I think you mean mixed up. The difference being that you vaguely said that "those who molest were molested themselves" while I was more specific with "most of those who were molested become molestors". The former is observable, but the latter is something that needs to be tested. And indeed can be tested actually. But has such a test been done? No. So it is an assertion, though an unproven assertion.

Your obsession with dissecting human brains is beginning to be worrisome.
Why would that be?

Yet you would give rights to a terrorist bent on genocide?

What the hell are you talking about? If Bush weren't in the country right now, I'd be the most pro-war, pro-US person in England. The only thing I've ever said against Gitmo is that there should be more effort on the part of the US to show the truth - that is that these people are the worst of the worst, constantly abusive, violent, threatening; and still receive the best care and medical treatment of their lives, still are given Korans, prayer beads, etc., are directed towards Mecca, and called to prayed five times a day - and that perhaps it would be prudent to move these people through courts, not because they deserve it, but because it might shut up the whiny pissants who care more about ideologically deranged murderers than about their innocent victims. So please, exactly how do you figure I want to give terrorists more rights? Did you get that from some other thread?

And whoever said justice is revenge, I hope you never, ever end up in the legal or political professions. oO;

That was me. And I defend my statement thus; Justice, by definition, has nothing to do with protecting society or about rehabilitating criminals. Justice requires fairness - and what else is fair but repayment, whether to gratify a person by seeing their assailant punished, or by renumerating society in what is considered to be an acceptable manner? Sorry, but rehabilitation is not what prisons are designed for, same goes for paying fines, etc. etc.. Justice is just. Justness is eye-for-an-eye.

How much longer will we delude ourselves into believing the status of "human" and thus basic human rights are subjective, and ultimatly negated by our personal beliefs and opinions of the individual in question? How much longer, Lord?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_chil.htm
"The Reality of Pedophilia
We get often caught in a semantic conflict when discussing the sexual abuse and molestation of children. Depending upon our exact definitions of terms, it can be shown:

1. that homosexual abuse of children is widespread, and
2. that abuse of boys by gays is rare, and
3. that the abuse of girls by lesbians is rarer still.

If we define the phrase "homosexual abuse of children" in the first statement to mean adults molesting and abusing children of the same sex, then this statement is true: Child sexual abuse is widespread. It is perpetrated by males in the vast majority of cases. And a substantial minority of their victims are boys. Data relating to men abusing boys is hungrily pounced upon by opponents to equal rights for homosexuals, who often use it against both gays and lesbians in civil rights battles. But it is not homosexuals, as the term is generally understood, who are responsible for the abuse. It is rather pedophiles who are attracted to children, and have decided to abuse them.

However, if we define the phrase "abuse of boys by gays", and "abuse of girls by lesbians" to mean adult persons with a homosexual orientation abusing children of the same sex, then these statements 2 and 3 above are also true. Gays and lesbians rarely abuse children.

The fact behind these conflicting statements is that most pedophiles are not homosexuals! Or to put it another way, most homosexual molestation is not done by homosexuals."

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

http://www.malesurvivor.org/myths.htm
"Myth #2 - Most sexual abuse of boys is perpetrated by homosexual males.

Pedophiles who molest boys are not expressing a homosexual orientation any more than pedophiles who molest girls are practicing heterosexual behaviors. While many child molesters have gender and/or age preferences, of those who seek out boys, the vast majority are not homosexual. They are pedophiles.

Myth #5 - Boys abused by males are or will become homosexual.

While there are different theories about how the sexual orientation develops, experts in the human sexuality field do not believe that premature sexual experiences play a significant role in late adolescent or adult sexual orientation. It is unlikely that someone can make another person a homosexual or heterosexual. Sexual orientation is a complex issue and there is no single answer or theory that explains why someone identifies himself as homosexual, heterosexual or bi-sexual. Whether perpetrated by older males or females, boys' or girls' premature sexual experiences are damaging in many ways, including confusion about one's sexual identity and orientation.

Many boys who have been abused by males erroneously believe that something about them sexually attracts males, and that this may mean they are homosexual or effeminate. Again, not true. Pedophiles who are attracted to boys will admit that the lack of body hair and adult sexual features turns them on. The pedophile's inability to develop and maintain a healthy adult sexual relationship is the problem - not the physical features of a sexually immature boy.

Myth #6 - The "Vampire Syndrome"Ñthat is, boys who are sexually abused, like the victims of Count Dracula, go on to "bite" or sexually abuse others.

This myth is especially dangerous because it can create a terrible stigma for the child, that he is destined to become an offender. Boys might be treated as potential perpetrators rather than victims who need help. While it is true that most perpetrators have histories of sexual abuse, it is NOT true that most victims go on to become perpetrators. Research by Jane Gilgun, Judith Becker and John Hunter found a primary difference between perpetrators who were sexually abused and sexually abused males who never perpetrated: non-perpetrators told about the abuse, and were believed and supported by significant people in their lives. Again, the majority of victims do not go on to become adolescent or adult perpetrators; and those who do perpetrate in adolescence usually don't perpetrate as adults if they get help when they are young."

You need a reality check. Please research the subject before claiming to know the facts.

There is no research to support your latter claim. It is clear that that child molestors were themselves molested as children. It does not mean that all but it does mean that some molested children will indeed grow up to be molestors.

What the hell are you talking about? If Bush weren't in the country right now, I'd be the most pro-war, pro-US person in England. The only thing I've ever said against Gitmo is that there should be more effort on the part of the US to show the truth - that is that these people are the worst of the worst, constantly abusive, violent, threatening; and still receive the best care and medical treatment of their lives, still are given Korans, prayer beads, etc., are directed towards Mecca, and called to prayed five times a day - and that perhaps it would be prudent to move these people through courts, not because they deserve it, but because it might shut up the whiny pissants who care more about ideologically deranged murderers than about their innocent victims. So please, exactly how do you figure I want to give terrorists more rights? Did you get that from some other thread?



That was me. And I defend my statement thus; Justice, by definition, has nothing to do with protecting society or about rehabilitating criminals. Justice requires fairness - and what else is fair but repayment, whether to gratify a person by seeing their assailant punished, or by renumerating society in what is considered to be an acceptable manner? Sorry, but rehabilitation is not what prisons are designed for, same goes for paying fines, etc. etc.. Justice is just. Justness is eye-for-an-eye.

I don't agree with your definition of justice. My comment was a question of whether you would.

How much longer will we delude ourselves into believing the status of "human" and thus basic human rights are subjective, and ultimatly negated by our personal beliefs and opinions of the individual in question? How much longer, Lord?
who said that?

There is no research to support your latter claim. It is clear that that child molestors were themselves molested as children. It does not mean that all but it does mean that some molested children will indeed grow up to be molestors.

But you claimed that most victims became perpetrators.
I opposed that.

For example, many children who are molested will often grow up to be child molestor's themselves. The most we can do today, with our primitive technology is try to break the cycle. People who are abused as children also have greater risk, than the general population, of growing up to be either child molestors or child abusers or as in the case of Shasta's molestor, both.

What latter claim?

And I expect an apology for all of us who has been sexually molested as children. To claim that most of us commit the same atrocities that were dealt to us is highly insulting.

There is no research to support your latter claim. It is clear that that child molestors were themselves molested as children. It does not mean that all but it does mean that some molested children will indeed grow up to be molestors.

And some people who were not molested will grow up to be child molesters. Your line of reasoning is, in the face of a total lack of evidence, fallacious and insulting to anyone who has suffered at the hands of one of those wretched... subhumans. Edit: And indeed, it's bordering on libel. You're making accusations that I have a higher liklihood of becoming a molester because I have been a victim of it. Nevermind offensive, there are laws to prevent a person's reputation being tarnished in that manner.

I don't agree with your definition of justice. My comment was a question of whether you would.

That's fine, but the thread isn't about that. And rule #7 mate, don't take the piss. You phrased the question as such; "Yet you would give rights to a terrorist bent on genocide?". The construction of the sentence, structured as a statement rather than a query, quite plainly made it an accusatory statement. If you misread something or confused me with someone else or whatever, that's cool. I don't like you, but everyone makes mistakes and I won't rip you up for that.

Why would that be?


..................

who said that?

The original poster, on the first page, in the first post, and in the thread title itself. I wasn't responding to anything you may or may not have said, to the best of my knowledge.

Interesting. You seem to be trying to make a case that nonhuman animals are capable of logical thought. Which of course they are not. Only humans have free thought capability while the rest of the animal world only has instinct. Are you sure you are not talking about gay humans?

Ok I will follow you if you want to skirt the issue.

Ok what do you define as logical thought?

You understand that chimpanzes are self aware, problem solve, use tools, use rudimentary politics, lie, adopt, and even make war.

As to my genital comments such actions have been observed by different people.

Simple solution
Automatic Death penalty for anyone over 21 caught in sexual act with a child under 12 beyond all doubt and 13-15 twice beyond all doubt .
I say 13-15 and twice because an person I know, really, truly did not know she was 14 when he was 18.
I say twice and beyond all doubt because people have had untrue child molestation cases leveled at them.

Simple solution
Automatic Death penalty for anyone over 21 caught in sexual act with a child under 12 beyond all doubt and 13-15 twice beyond all doubt .
I say 13-15 and twice because an person I know, really, truly did not know she was 14 when he was 18.
I say twice and beyond all doubt because people have had untrue child molestation cases leveled at them.
Hmmmm.. Interesting.You might have Something there especially the part about false accusations

There is no research to support your latter claim. It is clear that that child molestors were themselves molested as children. It does not mean that all but it does mean that some molested children will indeed grow up to be molestors.

So, you are saying that while not all molested children grow up to be molesters themselves, all those people who do molest children were molested themselves when children?

Do you have anything to back up that claim?

So, you are saying that while not all molested children grow up to be molesters themselves, all those people who do molest children were molested themselves when children?

Do you have anything to back up that claim?

I can't imagine why I'm defending this guy, but he is correct. Studies of convicted child-molesters have shown that a high percentage of them were sexually abused as children. This does NOT mean that a high percentage of people who were sexually abused as children grow up to be abusers.

I guess I've always thought the best way to stop these sick people is to neuter them. That way, unless it's simply a mental addiction, there's very little chance that they will continue to rape or molest. Hell, dogs hardly ever hump legs if they're neutered. And in my opinion, sexual criminals are worse than dogs, because at least people like dogs. So why do we continue to allow these sick f***s to walk around with the ability to continue their grotesque obsessions? I say neuter 'em all!

I guess I've always thought the best way to stop these sick people is to neuter them. That way, unless it's simply a mental addiction, there's very little chance that they will continue to rape or molest. Hell, dogs hardly ever hump legs if they're neutered. And in my opinion, sexual criminals are worse than dogs, because at least people like dogs. So why do we continue to allow these sick f***s to walk around with the ability to continue their grotesque obsessions? I say neuter 'em all!
That won't eliminate their sex drives. As for dogs, we had ours neutered and it still went around humping people's legs.

And some people who were not molested will grow up to be child molesters. Your line of reasoning is, in the face of a total lack of evidence, fallacious and insulting to anyone who has suffered at the hands of one of those wretched... subhumans. Edit: And indeed, it's bordering on libel. You're making accusations that I have a higher liklihood of becoming a molester because I have been a victim of it. Nevermind offensive, there are laws to prevent a person's reputation being tarnished in that manner.



That's fine, but the thread isn't about that. And rule #7 mate, don't take the piss. You phrased the question as such; "Yet you would give rights to a terrorist bent on genocide?". The construction of the sentence, structured as a statement rather than a query, quite plainly made it an accusatory statement. If you misread something or confused me with someone else or whatever, that's cool. I don't like you, but everyone makes mistakes and I won't rip you up for that.

you cannot libel a group. Only individuals can be libeled and they have to be mentioned specifically in your comments.
You are not libeled if one says, "Most molested children grow up to be Pedophiles." Because groups don't have rights. Only individuals do.

Further, what studies have been done have proven clearly that all pedophiles were themselves molested as children.

Further, what studies have been done have proven clearly that all pedophiles were themselves molested as children.

I think we would all do well to learn from Whittier's example. Mind you, not a good example. He seems to think that denying facts that have been proven through scientific study, and making speculative and unfounded claims on a subject with which he is obviously only passingly familiar will prove his point.

Now, the problem with "neutering" the offenders would be that this is a psychological thing with them usually. Four out of five cases of child molestation do not involve contact of the abuser's genitals. More often, the case is the abuser touching the genitals of the child or the abuser using an object on the child, thus, the neutering would be pointless. Also, Whittier's belief that there will be some type of physically visible defect to be seen withing the brains of child abusers makes no sense at all. Opening a schizophrenic's brain will not help explain why he's schizophrenic and opening a gay man's brain won't help explain why he's gay. We're not talking about mental retardation here, we're talking about perversion.

It does. The animals that think our kids are here for them to slaughter and molest.
Humans are animals

you cannot libel a group. Only individuals can be libeled and they have to be mentioned specifically in your comments.
You are not libeled if one says, "Most molested children grow up to be Pedophiles." Because groups don't have rights. Only individuals do.

Further, what studies have been done have proven clearly that all pedophiles were themselves molested as children.
Correct hence my not wanting to have kids (the whole priest thing in my past)

Not saying any urges are there but I don’t want to tempt fate

I think we would all do well to learn from Whittier's example. Mind you, not a good example. He seems to think that denying facts that have been proven through scientific study, and making speculative and unfounded claims on a subject with which he is obviously only passingly familiar will prove his point.

Now, the problem with "neutering" the offenders would be that this is a psychological thing with them usually. Four out of five cases of child molestation do not involve contact of the abuser's genitals. More often, the case is the abuser touching the genitals of the child or the abuser using an object on the child, thus, the neutering would be pointless. Also, Whittier's belief that there will be some type of physically visible defect to be seen withing the brains of child abusers makes no sense at all. Opening a schizophrenic's brain will not help explain why he's schizophrenic and opening a gay man's brain won't help explain why he's gay. We're not talking about mental retardation here, we're talking about perversion.

Where did he state a physical defect anywhere?

As for the child molesters themselfs molested
Goldstein-Harte Study 1973

57 percent in that study (molesters that were themselfs molested)

As far as I caught ... while old is an alright study

I think we would all do well to learn from Whittier's example. Mind you, not a good example. He seems to think that denying facts that have been proven through scientific study, and making speculative and unfounded claims on a subject with which he is obviously only passingly familiar will prove his point.

Now, the problem with "neutering" the offenders would be that this is a psychological thing with them usually. Four out of five cases of child molestation do not involve contact of the abuser's genitals. More often, the case is the abuser touching the genitals of the child or the abuser using an object on the child, thus, the neutering would be pointless. Also, Whittier's belief that there will be some type of physically visible defect to be seen withing the brains of child abusers makes no sense at all. Opening a schizophrenic's brain will not help explain why he's schizophrenic and opening a gay man's brain won't help explain why he's gay. We're not talking about mental retardation here, we're talking about perversion.

There are zero scientific studies that prove any of your points. So don't even go there. I at least admit that there are no studies to support my hypothesis. You on the hand are pulling stuff out your rear.
THERE ARE NO STUDIES TO PROVE EITHER OF US RIGHT OR WRONG. Because no such studies have been conducted. And if someone tried to do them, someone like you would very likely sue to stop the study, alleging that said study constituted "libel".

How exactly do you know how much familiarity I have with this. You seem to be implying you know more about my own history than I do. Indeed, as they say in Shakespeare, "I thinketh that thou protestest too much."


Physical defect? Again you are so void of countering the proposal I have set forth, that you are pulling stuff out of your rear and clearly twisting what I said. And this is the first time, anyone has twisted my words even that much.

There are other people on this forums that have been victims. Yet you claim to the sole authority on such matters and that everyone else should defer to you. I don't know you. Why should I defer to you? When I can defer to my older sisters and indeed one of my neices?
I think the experiences of three outweight the experience of the one, does it not?

As for the child molesters themselfs molested
Goldstein-Harte Study 1973

57 percent in that study (molesters that were themselfs molested)

As far as I caught ... while old is an alright study
at least you present something. So the study says the majority. There need to be more update and more thorough studies though.

at least you present something. So the study says the majority. There need to be more update and more thorough studies though.
Defiantly … Its just a hard topic to search for lol and at work don’t have the time for digging through things with buzzwords like child molestation lol

There is documented, video proof that male emperor penguins will perform fellation on eachother in exchange for trinkets to give their female mates for nesting. If that's not homosexual activity, I don't know what is.


You have a link?

I think we would all do well to learn from Whittier's example. Mind you, not a good example. He seems to think that denying facts that have been proven through scientific study, and making speculative and unfounded claims on a subject with which he is obviously only passingly familiar will prove his point.

Now, the problem with "neutering" the offenders would be that this is a psychological thing with them usually. Four out of five cases of child molestation do not involve contact of the abuser's genitals. More often, the case is the abuser touching the genitals of the child or the abuser using an object on the child, thus, the neutering would be pointless. Also, Whittier's belief that there will be some type of physically visible defect to be seen withing the brains of child abusers makes no sense at all. Opening a schizophrenic's brain will not help explain why he's schizophrenic and opening a gay man's brain won't help explain why he's gay. We're not talking about mental retardation here, we're talking about perversion.

If there are facts, post a link to one of those studies. Until you post evidence, anything you state here is just heresay.

I agree that these people need to be removed from society to be rehabilitated or to make sure that they are not a threat to others. But we cant just lock them up and throw away the key. We need to adress the root of the problem as well as the actual problem.



I have already lived next to one of these people. I'm still here. They deserve the same rights and liberties as you and I do. Once we decide they dont get the right to live whats to stop others from comming around and saying we dont deserve the right to live?

I don't believe they deserve the same rights as the rest of society. Once you molest a child, you don't deserve the same rights.

I'll take the safety and well being of our children over the rights of sexual predators every time. Call me narrow minded, but you won't change the way I think about people who psychologically destroy or even kill children so they can have an orgasm. You can call those people sick, you can say they need help, etc. To me, they're trash.

If you can address the problem without giving them access to children, I'll listen to your proposal. Because the current system clearly doesn't work.

Aww Whitt just because you are getting hit with facts, you don't need to get nasty.

You might look at the wisconson primate center as well.

Dr. Frans de Waal has written some things as well.

But hey don't let facts obscure your mission.

Do you have a link to any of these facts?

you cannot libel a group. Only individuals can be libeled and they have to be mentioned specifically in your comments.
You are not libeled if one says, "Most molested children grow up to be Pedophiles." Because groups don't have rights. Only individuals do.

Further, what studies have been done have proven clearly that all pedophiles were themselves molested as children.

I am part of the group and plainly, by implicating that this group has a higher chance of being a paedophile, you are implicating the same of me as an individual. Or hey, I can just find a couple dozen other people who were abused as children and we'll see what ALL of us have to say, but I'm pretty confident you're full of shit here.

All? All? lolz. Last time it was only most, or even some I believe. Now it is all paedophiles? Please, do go ahead and link me to something which supports even one of your outrageous claims.

you cannot libel a group. Only individuals can be libeled and they have to be mentioned specifically in your comments.
You are not libeled if one says, "Most molested children grow up to be Pedophiles." Because groups don't have rights. Only individuals do.

Further, what studies have been done have proven clearly that all pedophiles were themselves molested as children.

Without bothering to look it up, I am not sure you are correct that you cannot libel a group. I think you can.

Regardless, you can libel an individual by making defamatory comments about a group to which he/she belongs.

Moreover, whether or not your comments are technically libel:
(1) they were -- as you have somewhat admitted -- untrue
(2) highly insulting to victims of child abuse.

I highly recommend you consider an apology.

All this talk of child molestors not having rights and recommending cruel and unusual punishment is really disturbing.

One does not seek justice by imposing injustice or denying rights.

Seeking to deny the humanity of some of us diminishes us all.

Some things to think about:

"Our government... teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy." ~Justice Louis D. Brandeis

"By a divine paradox, wherever there is one slave there are two. So in the wonderful reciprocities of being, we can never reach the higher levels until all our fellows ascend with us." ~Edwin Markham

"I have always found that mercy bears richer fruits than strict justice." ~ Abraham Lincoln

"Give to every human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~Robert Ingersoll

"No man is above the law and no man below it." ~Theodore Roosevelt

"You can only protect your liberties in this world by protecting the other man's freedom. You can only be free if I am free." ~Clarence Darrow

"Of equality - As if it harm'd me, giving others the same chances and rights as myself - As if it were not indispensable to my own rights that others possess the same." ~Walt Whitman

"We ought always to deal justly, not only with those who are just to us, but likewise to those who endeavor to injure us; and this, for fear lest by rendering them evil for evil, we should fall into the same vice." ~ Hierocles

"If the equality of individuals and the dignity of man be myths, they are myths to which the republic is committed." ~Howard Mumford Jones

"As one reads history, not in the expurgated editions written for schoolboys and passmen, but in the original authorities of each time, one is absolutely sickened, not by the crimes that the wicked have committed, but by the punishments that the good have inflicted; and a community is infinitely more brutalised by the habitual employment of punishment than it is by the occasional occurrence of crime." ~Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man Under Socialism

"I am the inferior of any man whose rights I trample underfoot." ~Horace Greeley

All this talk of child molestors not having rights and recommending cruel and unusual punishment is really disturbing.

One does not seek justice by imposing injustice or denying rights.

Seeking to deny the humanity of some of us diminishes us all.

Some things to think about:

"Our government... teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy." ~Justice Louis D. Brandeis

"By a divine paradox, wherever there is one slave there are two. So in the wonderful reciprocities of being, we can never reach the higher levels until all our fellows ascend with us." ~Edwin Markham

"I have always found that mercy bears richer fruits than strict justice." ~ Abraham Lincoln

"Give to every human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~Robert Ingersoll

"No man is above the law and no man below it." ~Theodore Roosevelt

"You can only protect your liberties in this world by protecting the other man's freedom. You can only be free if I am free." ~Clarence Darrow

"Of equality - As if it harm'd me, giving others the same chances and rights as myself - As if it were not indispensable to my own rights that others possess the same." ~Walt Whitman

"We ought always to deal justly, not only with those who are just to us, but likewise to those who endeavor to injure us; and this, for fear lest by rendering them evil for evil, we should fall into the same vice." ~ Hierocles

"If the equality of individuals and the dignity of man be myths, they are myths to which the republic is committed." ~Howard Mumford Jones

"As one reads history, not in the expurgated editions written for schoolboys and passmen, but in the original authorities of each time, one is absolutely sickened, not by the crimes that the wicked have committed, but by the punishments that the good have inflicted; and a community is infinitely more brutalised by the habitual employment of punishment than it is by the occasional occurrence of crime." ~Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man Under Socialism

"I am the inferior of any man whose rights I trample underfoot." ~Horace Greeley


Your points on the freedoms of men are noble, but my own opinion is that an individual should be accountable for his actions and those actions should cost that person some if not all of his freedoms. I'm not willing to pay the price in children to give a second chance to a person that has clearly demonstrated that he's willing to take a child's life to have an orgasm.

Your points on the freedoms of men are noble, but my own opinion is that an individual should be accountable for his actions and those actions should cost that person some if not all of his freedoms. I'm not willing to pay the price in children to give a second chance to a person that has clearly demonstrated that he's willing to take a child's life to have an orgasm.
Molestation is not always about the orgasm … you use it for its emotional connotation but appeal to emotion is not a very good factual debate tactic

Molestation is not always about the orgasm … you use it for its emotional connotation but appeal to emotion is not a very good factual debate tactic

Whether for the orgasm or some other form of release, you aren't going to convince me that a child's life was worth spending for that person's second chance.

Whether for the orgasm or some other form of release, you aren't going to convince me that a child's life was worth spending for that person's second chance.
I did not say that but I was trying to correct the emotional appeal

Your points on the freedoms of men are noble, but my own opinion is that an individual should be accountable for his actions and those actions should cost that person some if not all of his freedoms. I'm not willing to pay the price in children to give a second chance to a person that has clearly demonstrated that he's willing to take a child's life to have an orgasm.

Big difference between losing "some" rights and "all" rights.

I firmly believe that anyone that commits any form of child molestation should be punished.

They should be fairly sentenced for their crime -- although the length of any sentence must vary by the individual crime, any child molestor should serve a stiff sentence.

You have added in the factor of murder. One that rapes and murders a child is definitely guilty of a whole other degree of crime. I'm not a big fan of the death penalty, but it may be appropriate -- depending on all the circumstances. Life imprisonment certainly should be considered.

But not all cases are the same. We have an entire justice system -- flawed though it may be -- that is supposed to treat everyone -- victims and defendants individually.

Sweeping generalizations such as those common in this thread do nothing to protect children and endanger the rights we all hold dear.

Dylan's body has been positively identified.

Some people here have said that this guy should never have been released after what he did to the 14 year old boy, but these people arent realizing that he was 16 himself at the time. How many people havent had a boyfriend or girlfriend 2 years older or younger? Thats rather normal. It wasnt a case of child abuse at the time, it was a case of rape. The real tragedy is that the system treated him as an adult rather than the child he was and gave him adult time in an adult prison. Many people think back on their adolescence, those years of 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 as their great years. People reffer to themselves as belonging to that generation when they were 16-20. People often reffer to their late high school and college years as "back in my days". Well, this guys days were spent in prison. One has to wonder, if he had been treated for his psychological problems instead of just being shoved into an adult prison if Dylan and the other 3 members of the family would still be alive..

I did not say that but I was trying to correct the emotional appeal

I understand. But I don't think someone looking at my argument would be swayed by such semantics as what the molester was trying to achieve with the child when that child ends up either dead or a basket case for years even with therapy. Many molesters do try to achieve orgasm. That some of them don't doesn't change my argument or it's effectiveness IMHO because of the revulsion that most people inherently regard crimes against children with.

Big difference between losing "some" rights and "all" rights.

Agreed. But if a molester kills the child, I am a proponent of taking the offender's life, liberty and property as a punitive measure.

If the child lives, that's a tough one. Because most of these kids being killed now are by molesters that didn't kill the child the first time around and were released after a short prison term. I'm not advocating killing every child molester (only the ones that kill). But all child molesters ought to serve a minimum sentence - say 10-15 years.

Do you have a link to any of these facts?

I do not have links to those particular studies. (I am not the original poster of those points.)

But here are a rather haphazard collection of links re homosexuality and other "alternative" sexualities in animals:
On the Originality of Species (http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2004/mayjun/features/roughgarden.html)
Homosexual Activity Among Animals Stirs Debate (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html)
The FABULOUS kingdom of GAY animals (http://www.salon.com/it/feature/1999/03/cov_15featurea.html)
Gender scientists explore a revolution in evolution (http://www.stanford.edu/dept/news/report/news/2003/february19/aaassocialselection219.html)
JAMA: Biological Exuberance -- Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity (http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/283/16/2170)
"Homosexuality/Bisexuality in the Animal Kingdom" (http://www.qrd.org/qrd/origins/1993/gay.animals-refs-12.31.93)
Gay animals come out of the closet (http://www.swissinfo.org/sen/swissinfo.html?siteSect=511&sid=1841425)
They're in love. They're gay. They're penguins... And they're not alone. (http://www.jrn.columbia.edu/studentwork/cns/2002-06-10/591.asp)
Why members of some species prefer their own sex (http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/sn_arc97/1_4_97/bob1.htm)
A Brief Survey of Homosexual Behaviors In Animals (http://www.bidstrup.com/sodomy.htm)
Animals exhibit "gay" behavior (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002340835_gaycritter19m.html)

EDIT: I addressed this point because the question was raised. Homosexuality has nothing whatsoever to do with pedophilia. And homosexuality has no more (and statistically less) to do with child molestation than heterosexuality. I reject utterly any attempt to link the subjects.

I do not have links to those particular studies. (I am not the original poster of those points.)

But here are a rather haphazard collection of links re homosexuality and other "alternative" sexualities in animals:
On the Originality of Species (http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2004/mayjun/features/roughgarden.html)
Homosexual Activity Among Animals Stirs Debate (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html)
The FABULOUS kingdom of GAY animals (http://www.salon.com/it/feature/1999/03/cov_15featurea.html)
Gender scientists explore a revolution in evolution (http://www.stanford.edu/dept/news/report/news/2003/february19/aaassocialselection219.html)
JAMA: Biological Exuberance -- Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity (http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/283/16/2170)
"Homosexuality/Bisexuality in the Animal Kingdom" (http://www.qrd.org/qrd/origins/1993/gay.animals-refs-12.31.93)
Gay animals come out of the closet (http://www.swissinfo.org/sen/swissinfo.html?siteSect=511&sid=1841425)
They're in love. They're gay. They're penguins... And they're not alone. (http://www.jrn.columbia.edu/studentwork/cns/2002-06-10/591.asp)
Why members of some species prefer their own sex (http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/sn_arc97/1_4_97/bob1.htm)
A Brief Survey of Homosexual Behaviors In Animals (http://www.bidstrup.com/sodomy.htm)
Animals exhibit "gay" behavior (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002340835_gaycritter19m.html)

EDIT: I addressed this point because the question was raised. Homosexuality has nothing whatsoever to do with pedophilia. And homosexuality has no more (and statistically less) to do with child molestation than heterosexuality. I reject utterly any attempt to link the subjects.

No, I'm not trying to link homosexuality with pedophilia.

I just wanted some links that lent some credence to a few of the arguments I've heard here, and I thank you for providing them.

I am part of the group and plainly, by implicating that this group has a higher chance of being a paedophile, you are implicating the same of me as an individual. Or hey, I can just find a couple dozen other people who were abused as children and we'll see what ALL of us have to say, but I'm pretty confident you're full of shit here.

All? All? lolz. Last time it was only most, or even some I believe. Now it is all paedophiles? Please, do go ahead and link me to something which supports even one of your outrageous claims.
You are the one who is full of shit.


And Mr. Cat Tribe, I shall apologize to no one since I have done nothing to apologize for.

Do you have a link to any of these facts?

:)

Sorry I didn't post links as I know he would never read them. ;)

Much of my stuff is paper form.

Just google homosexuality and bonobo and you can find stuff for and against the claim.

For example:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1589/is_n735/ai_20164884#continue

If you like this kind of stuff, de Waal is a published author both paper and books. "Chimpanzee politics" is a fascinating read.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0801863368/ref=pd_sxp_elt_l1/104-4804677-4511152

He also published Bonobo: The forgotten Ape.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0520205359/ref=pd_sxp_f/104-4804677-4511152?v=glance&s=books

The primate center I see has locked down some things. Too many fanatics pro and con animal reasearch infected the chat list when the list was only supposed to be talking about field research, shots, problems with countries etc.

They still have some general information:

http://www.primate.wisc.edu/

:)

Sorry I didn't post links as I know he would never read them. ;)

Much of my stuff is paper form.

Just google homosexuality and bonobo and you can find stuff for and against the claim.

For example:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1589/is_n735/ai_20164884#continue

If you like this kind of stuff, de Waal is a published author both paper and books. "Chimpanzee politics" is a fascinating read.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0801863368/ref=pd_sxp_elt_l1/104-4804677-4511152

He also published Bonobo: The forgotten Ape.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0520205359/ref=pd_sxp_f/104-4804677-4511152?v=glance&s=books

The primate center I see has locked down some things. Too many fanatics pro and con animal reasearch infected the chat list when the list was only supposed to be talking about field research, shots, problems with countries etc.

They still have some general information:

http://www.primate.wisc.edu/

Cat-Tribe posted them for me too - but thank you. This helps.

I do not have links to those particular studies. (I am not the original poster of those points.)

But here are a rather haphazard collection of links re homosexuality and other "alternative" sexualities in animals:
On the Originality of Species (http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2004/mayjun/features/roughgarden.html)
Homosexual Activity Among Animals Stirs Debate (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html)
The FABULOUS kingdom of GAY animals (http://www.salon.com/it/feature/1999/03/cov_15featurea.html)
Gender scientists explore a revolution in evolution (http://www.stanford.edu/dept/news/report/news/2003/february19/aaassocialselection219.html)
JAMA: Biological Exuberance -- Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity (http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/283/16/2170)
"Homosexuality/Bisexuality in the Animal Kingdom" (http://www.qrd.org/qrd/origins/1993/gay.animals-refs-12.31.93)
Gay animals come out of the closet (http://www.swissinfo.org/sen/swissinfo.html?siteSect=511&sid=1841425)
They're in love. They're gay. They're penguins... And they're not alone. (http://www.jrn.columbia.edu/studentwork/cns/2002-06-10/591.asp)
Why members of some species prefer their own sex (http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/sn_arc97/1_4_97/bob1.htm)
A Brief Survey of Homosexual Behaviors In Animals (http://www.bidstrup.com/sodomy.htm)
Animals exhibit "gay" behavior (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002340835_gaycritter19m.html)


Thanks Cat for doing my work. :p


EDIT: I addressed this point because the question was raised. Homosexuality has nothing whatsoever to do with pedophilia. And homosexuality has no more (and statistically less) to do with child molestation than heterosexuality. I reject utterly any attempt to link the subjects.

My gay men I know tend to view children as little vermin. :D