Poland To Castrate Pedophiles.

Poland To Castrate Pedophiles.

poligazette.com

Polish prime minister Donald Tusk wants to pass a law that would make convicted pedophiles subject of ‘chemical castration.’Chemical castration means that the convict will get a drug which will then reduce his desire to have sex....

Tusk originally came up with the plan after a 21-year old Polish woman said she had been raped by her father for years,resulting in her giving birth to two children.“I don’t believe that such individuals,such creatures,can be called human....”

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.polskieradio.pl
www.dw-world.de

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
www.bmj.com...
www.aclufl.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

I don't know how i feel about this.

Should children be protected at any cost?
Are the rights of children taking 2nd place to those of the pedophile by human right groups?

As i have no idea if chemical castration works,i don't know if this is an effective solution.

Its all about reducing sexual urges,but is that enough?
Some sex offenses are about power,violence and humiliation -not just libido.

Also,if forced,many pedophiles are likely to be angered by this and if so,then some may take that anger out on children.(as they can still sexually assault a child without having to be aroused)




poligazette.com
(visit the link for the full news article)





[edit on 28-9-2008 by jakyll]

I am torn on this issue, generally people who are exposed to child abuse and sexual abuse when they are young turn out to be violent, or messed up in other ways. I think pedophiles should be punished...perhaps this measure could be taken for repeat offenders? I think the way the law, at least in the U.S. is written is pretty stupid. If you are 18 and you are going out with a 16 year old girl, you are at risk of being put on a list. If you are 21+ going out with a 16 year old, that's COMPLETELY different and they should be punished; there needs to be a halo of some sort, I understand some states have this, but I guess that's a different issue. Anyhow, for repeat offenders...perhaps this could be a punishment? But I don't really see how this prevents them from molesting children...

reply to post by yellowcard

If you are 18 and you are going out with a 16 year old girl, you are at risk of being put on a list. If you are 21+ going out with a 16 year old, that's COMPLETELY different and they should be punished;

Here in England if you have consensual sex with a kid aged between 13-15 you can be done for statutory rape,which i've never understood because there is nothing consensual about rape.

I understand that it might make things difficult,like trying to prove if it was consensual or not,but is it acceptable to brand someone as a rapist when that just isn't the case??

Discussions of this subject are already going on here and here.

You should probably do a search next time, although I admit that doing "Ctrl + F" though all the pages can get rather tedious.

I believe the idea behind the statutory rape law is that children are to young to fully comprehend the consequences of their choices and a such cannot consent to a sexual relationship with an adult - who in most cases has a "caring role"

Chemical castration is not the solution I think, the urge will stay and I fear that they will use "foreign objects" to perform the act as said in previous posts rape is not about love, its about power.

What will they do to female Pedophiles? I don't think that is the answer, I prefer literal castration myself. But I ask again, what about the females?

Originally posted by PammyK
What will they do to female Pedophiles? I don't think that is the answer, I prefer literal castration myself. But I ask again, what about the females?

No kidding more and more females are doing this in the USA and walking right out the door with probation sentances. Im ok with castration but it needs to be for women too. No more double standards.

I did a paper about this very subject awhile back. I'm all for it. I know this is harsh, but here is how I feel about it: if you have such strong urges to touch/fondle/rape a child, and the urges become so great that you think you just have to do it, do the right thing and kill yourself before it ever gets that far.

Chemical castration is a good way to go, but a bit too humane for my liking. The children never had it so easy, I promise you that.

reply to post by jakyll


Padophilia is a vile disease/condition and i feel so strongly about it i would go as far as to say anyone convicted (beyond doubt) sholud be put to death. Male or female!

It is a bit extreme to castrate them.

It's not different that the police in Saudi Arabia cutting off a theives hand, to keep them from stealing again.

Though it is highly effective, it is often an extreme measure to take care of a problem.

Originally posted by jakyll
Here in England if you have consensual sex with a kid aged between 13-15 you can be done for statutory rape,which i've never understood because there is nothing consensual about rape.

Sorry to disagree on that point but there clearly is consent involved in a small number of rape cases, it is a very complicated area due to the way the law meets very basic human nature.

The law (and family's of victims) can and do accept that a minor gave full consent to the act of intercourse - and take that into consideration. It's not unheard of for a 'rapist' to of be handed a some what token sentence and by the time they are released the relationship is back on and the minor is no longer a minor, there was quite a wel known one some time ago, but I can't remember enough details right now.

That said I am only arguing a technicality here. Rape in any sence is wrong. But as a crime it has a massive scope of severity, level headednesses, impartiality and sensitivity is required.

[edit on 29/9/2008 by Now_Then]

reply to post by DJMessiah


Excuse me, but there is a BIG difference between a thief and a pedophile. I hope that i am misunderstanding you and you are not trying to compare the two, because there is no comparission.


How can you see the chemical castration of a pedophile as being no different than a thief getting his hand cut off ? What is being cut off of the pedophlie's body ?


I don't think it's extreme to want to protect innocent children that can't protect themselves.

There is a pre-existing thread on this topic here.

Please contribute any further questions and/or comments to the above linked thread.

Thank you.

Thread Closed.