Associate
- Joined
- 31 Dec 2004
- Posts
- 1,384
- Location
- Essex, UK
sounds like he is being picked on for not having fully explained his reasoning for people with half a brain cell... or the media.
Cardinal: Paedophiles aren't criminals
- Thread starter estebanrey
- Start date
Then that is a problem with how society treats people and how the justice system treats people. You don't rectify societal wrongs by stigmatising people as criminals if they haven't done a criminal act.
Pretty much agree.
Indeed.
Not all people who have killed someone are classed as being murderers either, there are plenty of examples where abnormality of mind, diminished mental faculty, and psychological disorders have meant that a murder charge is inappropiate and they come under the Mental Health Act rather than the Criminal Justice Act. (Perverted Sexual Desires that create irresistible impulses due to childhood experiences has in the past been sufficent to raise a defence of diminished responsibility, and that doesn't imply that the person was insane, only has a diminished capacity due to an arrested or abnormal social and mental development..abnormality of mind)
The Cardinal is not saying anything that many psychiatrists, doctors and lawyers have been saying before him, and something that many justice systems consider to some degree already.
However, they all put it a bit more tactfully, eloquently and would have maybe kept stum if they had of belonged to an institution with such a horrible record on mass child abuse.
So the social worker, doctor, child psychiatrist, psychologist who all worked for the Social Services should have kept quiet because of the inherent and mass abuse of children in the care system?
I would rather they spoke out and got these people the help they need as to tackle and avoid the problems that have ravaged such institutions and also to allow those people with such problems to feel they can get help before they commit an offence....keeping quiet helps no-one.
Would you?
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
Quite.
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,768
- Location
- Auckland
There are at least three separate but interesting strands going on within this thread.
Strange for GD!
Strange for GD!
The Social Care system does not hide the abuses committed in there they also don't buy people off they also don't promote to the very top the very people who have tried to bury the allegations and buy people off. A very big difference.
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Possessing child porn is a criminal offence even if the person has never physically touched a child. The only reason we don't arrest people for simply thinking about it is because it's impossible to read minds.
So you have never thought about hitting someone and yet not done it. Because following that logic through we should be charging you with assault.
That isn't actually true. There are numerous examples of where people at the top and in intermediary positions have both hidden and committed the abuses, in some homes it has been so prevalent that almost all the children within that home were at one time abused in some way with the abusers being protected by the very system they helped create, often for decades. (The North Wales Child Abuse Scandal was only one such example)
I agree that the Catholic Church has been party to such as well, but it is not exclusive to the Catholic Church, it has and continues to happen in social care and other institutions across the world as well, and it should never stop people within those institutions speaking out. Institutional abuse is not exclusive to the Church, and we should stop thinking that it is and actually support those who are attempting to address all the issues positively and openly regardless of which institution they belong to.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
No, even if we could, we still wouldn't.
Else everyone at some stage would be minority reported arrested for murder, or hate crimes, or assult or similar at some stage of their adolescence.
He made a point.
It might not have been fully reported, but either way, paedos need either treated or removed from society, or to fully control their urges. For every paedo this control process either their own or external will be different.
You can't package up paedophilia and claim is it just a crime like murder or robbery, it is a state of mind, like heterosexuality or homosexuality. It is also currently illegal within the UK, and most parts of the world. This was not always the case, as post pubescent marriages occurred here until not that long ago, but still well under any age of 18, which seems not be the limitation as decreed by the law, even if our age of sexual conscent is 16, for purposes of picture or video it is 18. Some thing I never quite undrstood. Neither do I understand he complete ignorance by our judical system of underage sex, even with consent. Why have a law if we do not enforce it, and make zero attempt to enforce it, instead we call it misguided and provid benfits and other incentives for those involved. Anyway different thing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,468
Indeed the murderous raping centre that was a kids home on the island of Jersey was a similar example. The level of involvement there seemed to be complete.
Actually, we do.
Drawings of non-existent "under-age" children* in sexual situations are illegal.
*They don't have to be human children. They can be aliens, or anthropomorphised animals, etc.
How do you age a character in a drawing? Apparently you show it to a focus group and they decide whether it is under 18 or not...
You couldn't make this up, but it's true.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 14,081
- Location
- Between Realities
Anyone who has child porn can be arrested for it. Not just pedophiles. That's because that sort of disgusting imagery is illegal.
As horrible as it is to say it, Being a pedophile isnt illegal, its a horrible sickness of the mind. One that will unfortunately lead some pedophiles to act on their urges.
My question is, what about those people out there who are strong willed enough to keep what is in their head, in their head. The ones who have base urges out side the norm. rape fetish, animal fetish and god forbid child porn.
Should these people be strung up for urges?
I'm really find this debate in somewhat bad taste now
*shudders*
You are not to my understanding describing a thought crime, as I would consider a thought crime to have to take place entirely within the mind.
What you describe is the creation/possession of tangible images that are prohibited under law. Whether the prohibition is justified is another matter altogether, if the intent is to sexually objectify children then maybe so, if not then perhaps the law is over zealous.