• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Alabama approves chemical castration

Dick Tornado

Well-known member
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
669
Reaction score
293
Location
Phoenix Arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
The point of chemical castration is that it does not merely hurt one's ability to perform sex, but one's actual libido/sex drive.

I think it is perfectly appropriate to destroy the sex-drive of convicted sexual predators of all stripes, whether they rape adults or children, in order to lessen the harm they have on society. And I would also argue that the ACLU's point is inane. The implied right to privacy does not include the right to retain the ability to rape children. And even if by some warped and over-broad reading of the case law it did, that right can be curtailed through the due process of law upon criminal conviction, just as practically any of our rights can be.
Your argument is that an offender will only ever have sex if it involves children.

I run the block watch in my neighborhood and we have a sex offender who lives one street down who has to register, and the community is informed.

He attends our meetings with his wife and they have 3 kids.

He was peeing in the tree line of a highway and got ticketed for urinating in public.

He plead guilty and expected to pay a fine at his sentencing.

The sentencing judge who was different than the judge he plead guilty to pushed his crime to a sex offence since children could have seen him.

In the state he was tried in exposing oneself to a child is a Class 3 sex crime or the highest level, equal to raping a child or another person.

I have personally seen his court paperwork and can confirm that he started with urinating in public and it escalated from there.

He can't change his offender classification, he wasn't allowed to rescind his guilty plea and he even has a personal letter from the state trooper stating that he was more than 20 yards off the roadway with his back towards traffic.

His children were born after his trial, he runs a successful business, is a great guy and a good neighbor.

Under the Alabama guidelines he would be castrated as a class 3 offender.

You might say that he would be an exception, but the law would still apply.
 

Dick Tornado

Well-known member
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
669
Reaction score
293
Location
Phoenix Arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
We (Australia) do not have a Bill of Rights. We have a written Constitution...the laws that govern the country, but not specifically a Bill of Rights. Even if we did, similar to America, I would still advocate for the castration, or better yet, the execution of child rapists. It is not fair and it is not just that children and women who are raped receive a life sentence, but the rapist is free to walk around a few years later, free to do it to some child or woman again. Why is it that the rights of criminals are protected but the rights of victims are not?
In Australia rape is considered assault.

What is the punishment for assault in Australia?

Common assault offences are dealt with by the Magistrates' Court. The maximum penalty for this offence is generally 18 months imprisonment and a fine of $18,000.

However, where the offence occurs in circumstances of aggravation, the maximum penalty rises to 3 years imprisonment and a fine of $36,000

Life in prison?
 

Masterhawk

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2016
Messages
1,693
Reaction score
371
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Why is it that the rights of criminals are protected but the rights of victims are not?
You can't really say that the right of criminals is being protected when they have to register as a sex offender
 

Jason Warfield

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2019
Messages
1,072
Reaction score
572
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
So, there are about 7 or states that have no mininum age requirement (seriously, and some don't even have the usual must have parental consent if under 14). FYI, both red and blue states. So if legally married minors show up, what happens?
 

Nilhus

New member
Joined
Jul 7, 2019
Messages
35
Reaction score
8
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
So its cruel and unusual to allow a predator the choice to opt out of some years of prison in exchange for eliminating his pedo sex drive?
Pretty much everything is cruel and unusual when it comes to so called "sex offenses" in the US(and a few other countries). Starting with what's defined as being a "sex offense" and the associated crazily high sentences, and ending with various human rights abuses like "sex offender registries", "chemical castration" etc.

Sure, the entire US pseudo-judicial system is a cruel and unusual totalitarian mess! But there's something particularly heinous about the system when it comes to alleged "sex crimes" (real or not, it doesn't even matter although most are fake complaints or deeds that shouldn't be crimes), it appears that the system is designed to be even more abominable than the worst "offenders"

There should be absolutely no difference between other crimes and "sex crimes" in any judicial aspects(early release, registration, etc. ) - actually such categorizations should not exist at all!
 

Alex Winston

New member
Joined
Feb 3, 2020
Messages
29
Reaction score
10
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Alabama approves

but do the citizens of Alabama approve?
 

gulfman

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2017
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1,297
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I assume the rapists don't
 

JMaximus

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2017
Messages
2,002
Reaction score
586
Location
Upper Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Alabama approves chemical castration for some sex offenders

The use of chemical castration is internationally controversial, and critics say forced chemical castration violates human rights.


Alabama State Capitol.



A handful of states permit either voluntary surgical castration, or voluntary chemical castration (Depo Provera) as a condition of early prison release/parole respectively.

The efficacy of chemical castration is questionable, and recidivism is not unknown.

Critics charge that chemical castration violates sex offenders' constitutional rights. The ACLU contends that chemical castration violates an offender's implied right to privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment, rights of due process and equal protection, and the Eighth Amendment's ban of cruel and unusual punishment.

Related: Alabama governor signs chemical castration bill into law
So they could decide to remain in prison instead, yes?
 

bomberfox

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2019
Messages
9,755
Reaction score
2,213
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Jeebus we have an intense love of punishing people in this country.
 

Jason Warfield

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2019
Messages
1,072
Reaction score
572
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Interestingly, what if the chemically castrated male then decides to identify as a female?
 

FreedomFromAll

Post Political parties
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
15,710
Reaction score
4,271
Location
New Mexico USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
So basically the State of Alabama is using tax dollars for birth control.
 
Top Bottom