Why does society tolerate monsters?

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

03-08-2010, 07:44 PM
GGT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flixy

With things like alcohol and tobacco and drugs you could argue that using those substances also results in higher health care costs, and is indirect taxation for that.

I'm not aware of any definitive proof that marijuana means higher care costs. In fact, it's been linked to effective medical therapies to treat chronic pain or glaucoma.

Booze can have some negative health affects, but small doses and certain types (red wines) can be beneficial.

Even certain exercises can be good for the heart but hell on the joints (requiring plenty of expensive sports medicine therapy or joint replacements). Increasing longevity also has higher costs, healthy or not.....
03-08-2010, 07:52 PM
GGT

oops, sorry, never mind this thread drift.....the discussion went from pedophilia (society's monsters) to social engineering and taxation. There were a couple of comments I didn't want to go unnoticed or unchallenged.

:(
03-08-2010, 08:58 PM
ImAnOgre

Quote:

Originally Posted by GGT

oops, sorry, never mind this thread drift.....the discussion went from pedophilia (society's monsters) to social engineering and taxation. There were a couple of comments I didn't want to go unnoticed or unchallenged.

:(

I blame you wholeheartedly for the thread drift GGT.
03-08-2010, 10:01 PM
Khendraja'aro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flixy

With things like alcohol and tobacco and drugs you could argue that using those substances also results in higher health care costs, and is indirect taxation for that.

Sola dosis facit venerum.
03-08-2010, 10:06 PM
GGT

Quote:

Originally Posted by ImAnOgre

I blame you wholeheartedly for the thread drift GGT.

Then answer my questions, Mr Libertarian ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro

Sola dosis facit venerum.

What is that, Greek or Latin? Sun does facilitate truth?
03-08-2010, 11:37 PM
Flixy

Quote:

Originally Posted by GGT

Then answer my questions, Mr Libertarian ;)

What is that, Greek or Latin? Sun does facilitate truth?

Only the dose determines the poison.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GGT

I'm not aware of any definitive proof that marijuana means higher care costs. In fact, it's been linked to effective medical therapies to treat chronic pain or glaucoma.

Booze can have some negative health affects, but small doses and certain types (red wines) can be beneficial.

Even certain exercises can be good for the heart but hell on the joints (requiring plenty of expensive sports medicine therapy or joint replacements). Increasing longevity also has higher costs, healthy or not.....

In moderation, sure, to very specific conditions, but it can easily lead to memory damage and other health effects. And I can see plenty of other reasons to want to discourage its use. You are right though, the taxing for healthcare costs argument is pretty stupid considering the vast amount of other ways to ruin your own body, which are left alone.
03-09-2010, 12:04 AM
Hazir

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nessus

I'm not convinced Lewk's separation of church and state spiel is dishonest. Islam is inherently a political religion insofar as I know, but is Christianity? Someone refresh my memory. I know a Christian should do his best to spread the word and try to convert people, but are they also commanded to infiltrate 'politics', inasmuch as the Jews of Jesus' era understood politics?

What I do know is that Jesus explicitly left room for a separation of state and church. The interpretation of what his words meant has been changing over the centuries. Europe has seen times where the powerstruggle between papacy and royalty was intense to say the least. It's for a reason that we've seen several emperors pulling their crowns out of the Pope at their coronations.

Islam has no solid ideas about this separation, but the debate rages.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nessus

A lot of the mentally ill in the US are living on the street, actually; I think it was in Reagan's time but I might misremember, that a lot of facilities, in particular the more open, out-patient ones, got closed down and their inmates shoved to the street, homeless and destitute. A great many of those are also Vietnam war veterans, a grateful nation sends its thanks.

They do have loads of prisons. Many are over-crowded, too.

It's a bit more complicated than that; a lot of those people were institutionalized without their consent. It was established that if they were not endangering anybody (themselves or others) keeping them against their will was a violation of their human rights. It wasn't just a heartless administration throwing these people out into the streets.
03-09-2010, 12:09 AM
GGT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flixy

Only the dose determines the poison.

Ah, if the dose is the sole vermin, then taxing all of it is silly! ;)
03-09-2010, 12:49 AM
']['ear

Quote:

Originally Posted by ImAnOgre

So I’m not a serious conservative? Lewk doesn’t speak for us all my friend. I consider myself very conservative when it comes to fiscal responsibilities. I just don’t like paying for laziness, or people who choose to make bad choices.

Not even close. You're very liberal on social issues, and you're right of center on fiscal ones, but not far right.
03-09-2010, 05:59 AM
Lewkowski

Jesus very clearly did not come to take out the Roman Empire. Many of his followers thought and hoped that is what would happen.

The bible is not specific on how to go about running a country NT onwards. As such Christians are free to take their best shot at what they do know. What history has taught us is that imperfect man creates terrible theocratic government. Perverting the glory of God and his holy church into such perversions as the Inquisition.

At the point of the sword a conversion was not made by the apostles so I see little reason to believe that God wants Christians to go out and perform forced conversions. And considering the *greatest* commandment is to love God with all that you have, not doing that would (in my mind) imply a far more critical sin then theft, murder, rape or anything else that man can do to man. If I believed that we should allow moral law to reign then I would be forced to support the forced "conversion" of non-believers.

I'm still waiting for all of you child molester enablers to tell me how many kids per 10,000 convicted child molesters are you OK With being raped or killed.
03-09-2010, 06:46 AM
Being

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Jesus very clearly did not come to take out the Roman Empire. Many of his followers thought and hoped that is what would happen.

The bible is not specific on how to go about running a country NT onwards. As such Christians are free to take their best shot at what they do know. What history has taught us is that imperfect man creates terrible theocratic government. Perverting the glory of God and his holy church into such perversions as the Inquisition.

At the point of the sword a conversion was not made by the apostles so I see little reason to believe that God wants Christians to go out and perform forced conversions. And considering the *greatest* commandment is to love God with all that you have, not doing that would (in my mind) imply a far more critical sin then theft, murder, rape or anything else that man can do to man. If I believed that we should allow moral law to reign then I would be forced to support the forced "conversion" of non-believers.

I'm still waiting for all of you child molester enablers to tell me how many kids per 10,000 convicted child molesters are you OK With being raped or killed.

Than :picard:
03-09-2010, 07:49 AM
Ziggy Stardust

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

I'm still waiting for all of you child molester enablers

The one thing I like about you, not resorting to namecalling, just died in my arms tonight.

It must have been something you said.
03-09-2010, 05:47 PM
Nessus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust

The one thing I like about you, not resorting to namecalling, just died in my arms tonight.

It must have been something you said.

I can't remember, has he said how many innocent people killed by the state for every 100 executions he'd be willing to live with? Maybe there could be some kind of currency exchange between molested kiddy-winks and executed children wrongly convicted for trying to steal bread?
03-09-2010, 06:01 PM
ar81

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

I'm still waiting for all of you child molester enablers to tell me how many kids per 10,000 convicted child molesters are you OK With being raped or killed.

You may kill all the child molesters you want to kill. I won't stop you.
I feel sorry about dolphins being murdered.
But I do not feel sorry about cockroaches and child molesters.

How about creating a stadium where child molesters kill each other using gladius swords?
03-09-2010, 07:23 PM
']['ear

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nessus

I can't remember, has he said how many innocent people killed by the state for every 100 executions he'd be willing to live with? Maybe there could be some kind of currency exchange between molested kiddy-winks and executed children wrongly convicted for trying to steal bread?

How dare you bring Occam's razor to a hammer fight? :mad:

Lewk, I know it's crap like this that makes you avoid posting your "political spectrum" test results. We'd get to see how authoritarian you really are. What, don't think that having the government throw any kind of offender into jail for life is authoritarian? How about execution as authoritarianism? Yeah, you hate government having power over individuals.... :rolleyes:
03-10-2010, 04:55 AM
Lewkowski

Quote:

Lewk, I know it's crap like this that makes you avoid posting your "political spectrum" test results. We'd get to see how authoritarian you really are. What, don't think that having the government throw any kind of offender into jail for life is authoritarian?

Talking about Child Molesters here. What do you think a fitting punishment should be. Not just in terms of "justice" but in terms of keeping children safe from them?
03-10-2010, 05:42 PM
']['ear

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust

The one thing I like about you, not resorting to namecalling, just died in my arms tonight.

It must have been something you said.

Channeling Loki. Husseists.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Talking about Child Molesters here.

I understand. Why didn't you post your position in the political spectrum thread?

Quote:

What do you think a fitting punishment should be. Not just in terms of "justice" but in terms of keeping children safe from them?

About the same as rape, since that is what it is. Dread has strenuously tried to show that the recidivism rate for pedophilia is not higher than for other crimes. I originally disagreed with him on this, but I think he proved me wrong.

A large part of your outrage seems to be based on the fact that he molested THEN killed this poor child. but the fact is that all we had to go by was molestation and its recorded recidivism rate. Now, I can't claim whether he got released earlier than he should have based on his prior crime (my belief is rape-based sentencing, and I don't know whether that was applied here). I DO think that parole boards, and much of the criminal justice system, show a real paucity of applied science when practicing. But I think neither of us know whether the release of this guy was reasonable.

And no, I don't think you lock somebody away for LwoP for pedophilia, or rape. Nor do I think you do so for armed robbery, even though a fraction of released armed robbers will eventually murder somebody.
03-11-2010, 05:26 AM
Lewkowski

Quote:

About the same as rape, since that is what it is. Dread has strenuously tried to show that the recidivism rate for pedophilia is not higher than for other crimes. I originally disagreed with him on this, but I think he proved me wrong.

It doesn't matter if the recidivism rate is .01. I'm not arguing (like others do) that child molesters are "wired" that way and that they can't be cured. I really don't give a flip. If someone hurts a child in that manner any non zero chance is too great. Society has a job to protect people from criminals. That job is all the more important when protecting societies most fragile and vulnerable.

Quote:

A large part of your outrage seems to be based on the fact that he molested THEN killed this poor child. but the fact is that all we had to go by was molestation and its recorded recidivism rate. Now, I can't claim whether he got released earlier than he should have based on his prior crime (my belief is rape-based sentencing, and I don't know whether that was applied here). I DO think that parole boards, and much of the criminal justice system, show a real paucity of applied science when practicing. But I think neither of us know whether the release of this guy was reasonable.

This guy wasn't suited for parole and should have been in prison longer.

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/TheL...0002541&page=2

Quote:

Gardner, a registered sex offender, pleaded guilty in 2000 to charges of committing lewd and lascivious acts on 13-year-old girl in his parents' home. He served five years of a six-year sentence and was on parole until 2008.

Court psychiatrist, Dr. Matthew Carroll, who evaluated Gardner, pushed for the maximum sentence, as many as 30 years, and said Gardner "would be a continued danger to underage girls in the community."

Dr. Alex Kalish, a colleague, said Carroll was angry that his recommendations were ignored a decade ago.

"Dr. Carroll told the court that [Gardner] showed no insight and expressed no responsibility and that he is a danger. You can't make a stronger statement than that," said Kalish. "The guy is a violent and a predator who shows no remorse.

"There was no effort to consider his report. Apparently the D.A. did what was expedient to get a conviction. It is frustrating that no one considered the psychiatric input. Why ask for it, if you don't consider it," Kalish said.

So lets boil down to specifics. What should be the punishment for rape? For child molestation? For child rape? Give me the number of years you think that's OK.

I don't understand the perverse desire to let those who prey on the innocent of society do it again.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page