When will they think of the children ?

[spoffle]

Cry me a river fallacy boy.

You wouldn't know a fallacy if it smacked you in the mouth, it's how you mentally justify the extensive usage of logical fallacies that you regularly employ.

 

[Amp34]

The line could be drawn at admitted tendencies but crossed at admitted guilt.

That said it would create a huge dilemma, person 'A' working with children admits tendencies. How could this be handled? common sense tells me this person has made an error of judgment, putting themselves around the temptation they fight is not logical. Always primary concern should be directed towards the protection of children. As part of he management process person 'A' should voluntarily resign but be given help in finding alternate employment.

A 2nd list to be checked could be created when handing background checks, admitted non offending pedophiles could be barred from applying to work with children. May seem harsh to some libertarians but primary concern always has to rest with child protection.

Seems reasonably reasonable, but then what happens when thats second list gets out and in to the hands of people like Sliver, as shown by the comment below.

True but I guarantee that at some point they will have viewed child porn and that is breaking the law. Why deny the obvious, you're arguments are weak and ill founded.

You obviously have a large amount of knowledge about how paedophiles think then I guess?

You asked for evidence that paedophiles don't have to be criminals, I provided links to articles interviewing people who are admitted paedophiles and people that work with paedophiles. You response seems to essentially be "they are all lying".

 

[Hitman_Leon]

Seems reasonably reasonable, but then what happens when thats second list gets out and in to the hands of people like Sliver, as shown by the comment below.

That list should remain confidential, being that these people would be handled by health professionals it should be treated as part of their medical records. As for rejections on job applications, nothing need be passed on to potential employers other than the person cannot work with children.

There could also be measures to prevent people trying to repeatedly get around being barred from working in that area. Criminalise serial applications, say 3 strikes and your in court for trying to work in an area you are barred from. This would encourage compliance by individuals who were serious about being treated and not offending while weeding out people trying to work the system. Also those trying to gain employment with children by using false details to get around the measures would be immediately committing a serious offence.