I think that the idea that random strangers should be restricted in their movements and activities, simply due to your suspicions and without evidence, sums up your mentality and the quality of your character perfectly.
It is the mentality of a weak, inferior mind who views every difference as a threat and that of a person who is complicit in amoral and ultimately selfish hypo-agency.
If you more ethically aim to establish punishment for crime where it has occured but also to establish no penalty where no crime has occured then you are worth talking to because you have learned the concept of justice and fairness, but you aren't.
Past displays of your behaviour have shown that. Therefore, it would be easier if you simply took your collusive and self serving hypo-agency anywhere else.
Ok NEVER did I say the above boldened quote.
I thought you didn't want to talk about this anymore?
Yet random strangers are continually restricted in their movements in our society. An example: A store with security cameras, or security, a staff only area. There they go, monitoring poor innocent people, assuming they may be criminals. How dare they! Nice kind people can't innocently just roam where they please or use the staff toilet if they need to go. Outrageous!
I think that the idea that random strangers should be restricted in their movements and activities, simply due to your suspicions and without evidence, sums up your mentality and the quality of your character perfectly.
It is the mentality of a weak, inferior mind who views every difference as a threat and that of a person who is complicit in amoral and ultimately selfish hypo-agency.
I don't, but I do have a right to defend myself. Cheer up Jimmy boy.
I was referring to Stu, who I quoted. Because me and Stu really don't like each other.
I'm exceedingly cheerful otherwise, just eternally bemused.
Really? I never would have guessed! Can we just shake hands and be friends and get back to the srs law business?
[MENTION=4956]Asarya[/MENTION] I have to strongly disagree with you on this one. I've been in situations where I've confronted people who are sexual predators and although I can (now after years of some kind of spiritual soul searching) say that maybe they don't deserve to be fried over eternal fires and slow burn for aeons and with enormous effort can feel just a tiny minute speckle of compassion for them, I would never in a million years give one the benefit of doubt and let them around my children.
I think it's all well and good in theory, but once it's personal it's much more of a bitter pill to swallow. I actual practice I'd stick sexual predators in facilities for the criminally insane and might throw way the key. I'm aware they are most often victims themselves, but the ones I know are truly repeat offenders and a real ongoing danger to people around them. Being secluded is to me the karma of their actions.
EDIT: Spiritually speaking it's also our job to set boundaries around people who would harm themselves by harming others. True grace and liberation comes from within and it does not depend on others' actions or where you are put. External events are in accordance to karma. In the material world we try to act in a way that's a reflection of "divine law". To my personal understanding having compassion (which I do lack for this particular offense) does not mean a person should be out of compassion guaranteed to have the liberties that people who have not committed such things have.They may need protection from themselves too.
Isolation, if necessary, for their own safety and of others. But the hatred is not necessary. Hatred for the sake of hatred is self indulgent and will hurt the self and prevent one from growing. I still think its possible for anyone to learn, and most mental illnesses to be managed if not healed.
I dont really know what I would do in the situation where the person was in the room with my child. I spoke to him, after about 7 years of not seeing or hearing from him at all and I could not find it in my heart to hate him. I was still angry, but the bitterness had gone. I think I would be okay to have that person there with my daughter but i dont know. i dont really know how I would feel and what i would do. But i know what I want to do and how I would want to act- with love and forgiveness. That doesnt mean I have to be negligent with my daughter and just pretend like nothing has ever happened. There are levels of trust, and trust and respect have to be earned. I dont even let one of my best friends babysit because she is so self absorbed and clumsy!
From a spiritual perspective I dont think it is our place to pass judgement. The person will recieve their own judgement and punishment by the consequences of their actions on the rest of their life and their spiritual health. It does not mean these people are doomed and not worthy of love or compassion. They are just people. I agree, setting boundaries is healthy for everybody, and is an important way to love ourselves and others. These people probably do need protection from themselves. It hard to understand how a human/soul/spirit can get to a place like that where they do such vile things. To stop these things from happening we need to find the root of the problem and address it.
I know its not a popular position and I dont expect anyone to support me but I do think that these people are worthy of love and deserving of compassion. Im sorry to everyone that has ever been abused and I think as a culture and as communities we can come together to heal these issues. These issues hurt everybody involved
All humans deserve compassion and love. I agree with you there.
As for people who assault and abuse children - most are not "cured" by the current means here in the US. Just because you go to prison doesn't mean you're actually getting rehabilitated. Paying the time for doing the crime doesn't mean shyte...
As for the registry here - it's the typical "one size fits all" rule our government pushes on us...so they include any and all who were convicted of any action remotely connect to sex. I've heard some really sad stories about persons who were convicted in small towns just so they could get rid of them or they didn't like their family. Some are completely false. Then there was the story I heard from a professor who had a private practice. She asked her client - in prison - why he was molesting(having sex) with his 7 year old sister and he replied with complete honesty - everyone in the family did it while he was growing up and that he had no idea it was wrong.
The mental illness of a person who preys upon children is insidiously woven into their mind. It is most likely as you say - abuse was done to them when they were young. Yet - from what I've seen - conventional methods to change those minds - prison and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy - do not work...and that's what the government dictates.
I think everyone deserves a chance. Actions speak louder than words as they say. But as much as I hate the idea of putting personal information out there for all to see - I feel mothers have the right to know if a convicted child abuser is living down the street from them.
[MENTION=4822]Matt3737[/MENTION] regarding date rape -- I have to disagree with you. Sure, the scenario you described does happen, but I think saying that it doesn't count purely for that is wrong. Just think about hte psychological effects on the victims of actual date rape? Victims of rape have a hard enough time feeling like it was their fault.