Tory MP Sir David Amess murdered

Status
Not open for further replies.
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2007
Posts
5,581
Location
London
That's the same thing!



Genetic rapists...whatever next

They are not the same thing, there are some medical conditions that are hereditary, if you have it, your offspring will have it, or a 50/50 chance etc.

Being a rapist is, genetic in the sense that you need various traits to be a rapist, those traits are passed down, the chance is higher, it genetic, not hereditary.

I hope this clarifies the difference.

Edit: And also rapists need to be lacking various traits.
 
Last edited:
Permabanned
Joined
28 Nov 2003
Posts
10,695
Location
Shropshire
It's almost as if you can't rea
WHAT! THE!?

Being a rapist is hereditary now?!

I think you need to go eat some fish fingers to improve the health of your brain after that post.

It's well known that violent traits can be genetic, you don't breed progeny from a dangerous dog. Eugenics is a tried and trusted means of selectively breeding out undesirable traits. Acceptability of eugenics for removing undesirable traits in humans is still a contentious subject however.
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Mar 2010
Posts
21,725
Times article elaborating on Amess's Qatar visits/local investment plans, and then, that Qatar currently backing controversial Somali govt which is in disagreement with exiled PM, whose advisor is in accused killers family. ..
I mean Qatar human right are not all that, too ? thinking of upcoming world cup, some saudi protests at newcastle yesterday
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Dec 2003
Posts
10,984
Location
Wiltshire
The guy's right, the hormones that drive a person to rape are inherited from parents. Quite why they are inherited in the balance that results in a desire to rape as opposed to a "normal" desire to have consensual sex is another thing altogether.

I'm not buying this. There may be some underlying hormonal inheritance that's common across offenders, but behaviour (and how it's learnt and developed) is the overriding factor in someone's decision making. It's almost making excuses absolving of all responsibility for people that do bad things as it was "in their genes".
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Jun 2010
Posts
6,555
Location
Essex
I'm not buying this. There may be some underlying hormonal inheritance that's common across offenders, but behaviour (and how it's learnt and developed) is the overriding factor in someone's decision making. It's almost making excuses absolving of all responsibility for people that do bad things as it was "in their genes".
I have no skin in this game. But proclivity to certain behaviour (and in fact everything about yourself) is a product of your genes.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Posts
21,826
Location
Rollergirl
I'm not buying this. There may be some underlying hormonal inheritance that's common across offenders, but behaviour (and how it's learnt and developed) is the overriding factor in someone's decision making. It's almost making excuses absolving of all responsibility for people that do bad things as it was "in their genes".

It doesn't matter whether you find the concept palatable from a moral perspective, the fact is that we all inherit chemicals and hormones that drive our sexual desire. The process isn't formulaic therefore the son of a rapist isn't guaranteed to be a rapist himself; he could be asexual or even homosexual if he inherited more of his mother's sexual preference in terms of hormones. The fact that it's hereditary is obvious, although the previous poster's suggestion that sterilising the parents of a rapist could be some sort of solution via eugenics just demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of the process.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Oct 2004
Posts
8,849
Location
Sunny Torbaydos
Last I read, he was referred to the Governments
prevent strategy some time ago, so clearly something was done and people did report him.

But feel free to make up your own narrative in your head.

He was referred to prevent recently, but teachers in his school were concerned 5+ years ago, but said /did nothing.

And while not my narrative, I did make up my own mind about the sort of person who did it the moment I heard an mp had been murdered, at first I though another right wing loon, but then found out it was a tory that got killed, so then assumed it must be a left wing loon, but they are never violent right. Which means it could only have been a terrorism related incident which the vast majority of which all involved a certain religious following.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2007
Posts
5,581
Location
London
It doesn't matter whether you find the concept palatable from a moral perspective, the fact is that we all inherit chemicals and hormones that drive our sexual desire. The process isn't formulaic therefore the son of a rapist isn't guaranteed to be a rapist himself; he could be asexual or even homosexual if he inherited more of his mother's sexual preference in terms of hormones. The fact that it's hereditary is obvious, although the previous poster's suggestion that sterilising the parents of a rapist could be some sort of solution via eugenics just demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of the process.

How is it not a solution?

I will reply tomorrow as i need to leave now.
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Dec 2003
Posts
10,984
Location
Wiltshire
It doesn't matter whether you find the concept palatable from a moral perspective, the fact is that we all inherit chemicals and hormones that drive our sexual desire. The process isn't formulaic therefore the son of a rapist isn't guaranteed to be a rapist himself; he could be asexual or even homosexual if he inherited more of his mother's sexual preference in terms of hormones. The fact that it's hereditary is obvious, although the previous poster's suggestion that sterilising the parents of a rapist could be some sort of solution via eugenics just demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of the process.

But what I am arguing is that with a strong enough moral code and appropriate behaviour for a civilised society, humans should be able to handle those hormones. If not, then why do we treat other hormone imbalances, and ignore these if the results can be so horrific?! (rhetorical, I know why and I agree).

A child that has these "genes" brought up in a good, attentive and loving household stands a much better chance of developing behaviour and morals that control those desires. The decision then will be made consciously to commit a crime if you know right from wrong and in knowing that if caught, punished by the state. If you don't know right from wrong, and have no morals, then no decision is made, it is simply an instinctive response to hormonal desire; I see this as animalistic, and that scares me both in terms of a human being driven by instinct instead of morals, and my viewing them as "animals". They aren't animals, they have just been failed in terms of having good morals instilled, or alternatively failed and broken morals instilled through radicalisation - which begs the question, do rapists self-radicalise to justify the crime?

Just thinking about this and partaking in this discussion makes me incredibly uncomfortable I have to admit.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Posts
21,826
Location
Rollergirl
But what I am arguing is that with a strong enough moral code and appropriate behaviour for a civilised society, humans should be able to handle those hormones. If not, then why do we treat other hormone imbalances, and ignore these if the results can be so horrific?! (rhetorical, I know why and I agree).

A child that has these "genes" brought up in a good, attentive and loving household stands a much better chance of developing behaviour and morals that control those desires. The decision then will be made consciously to commit a crime if you know right from wrong and in knowing that if caught, punished by the state. If you don't know right from wrong, and have no morals, then no decision is made, it is simply an instinctive response to hormonal desire; I see this as animalistic, and that scares me both in terms of a human being driven by instinct instead of morals, and my viewing them as "animals". They aren't animals, they have just been failed in terms of having good morals instilled, or alternatively failed and broken morals instilled through radicalisation - which begs the question, do rapists self-radicalise to justify the crime?

Just thinking about this and partaking in this discussion makes me incredibly uncomfortable I have to admit.

If you re-read your post quoted above and imagine the subject being discussed is homosexuality then I think it should give you some pause for thought.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
37,804
Location
block 16, cell 12
Seems perfectly in line with the idea of punishing over 3,000,000 muslims because that guy in the news was a muslim.

Also the belief that it's not xenophobic because they're muslims (what).

No one is punishing Muslims.

I simply asked, aside from sending out notifications on how to spot and report hate crimes,

What else could the mosque/leaders do?

Maybe send out a message asking for equal treatment of of non muslim people as well as other muslims? To stop attacking them or raping them or to report any suspicious activity and be vigilant against 'extremism'

But nope.
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Dec 2003
Posts
10,984
Location
Wiltshire
If you re-read your post quoted above and imagine the subject being discussed is homosexuality then I think it should give you some pause for thought.

Why? Homosexuality doesn't do harm and isn't a crime.*

Repressing these desires will have ill effects (maybe the acts are an ultimate result of this), the same way anyone would go through emotional pain hiding it in a world that won't accept them and their desires. And in a way you have to allow instincts to go unaddressed, and just have faith that good morals will win over the desire to rape, murder or commit any other horrific crime against a fellow human. The other option presented, as alluded to by others in this thread, is to interfere with (at that moment in time) an innocent.

The conclusion being arrived at is that this cannot be stopped in a humane way (if someone wants to harm, they will find a way), so it will just happen again unless radical action is taken before the crime is committed. I don't want to agree with that notion, hence the discomfort that it's even being discussed.

*in this country, and I am aware it was in the past when society had a different set of morals it aspired to and that other countries still punish harshly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom