Comment

Comment by Richard Lawrence on March 4, 2013 at 10:21am

Certainly monitoring the offenders, specifically blood tests to ensure they are taking their medications, should be included in the treatment/terms of punishment.  From the little that I have read offenders seem to be split into two groups.  One group seems to show no remorse for their actions while the other group finds their behavior as horrible as the rest of us do. The latter group seems to be afflicted with an addiction while the former appears to be a type of sociopath.  If that conjecture is ultimately proven to be true then different methods of treatment would be indicated depending on the diagnosis.  One study conducted in Germany related that after taking the drugs, some offenders stated how relieved they were to finally be rid of the compulsion to molest children and how, within certain restrictions of course, they were able to have a normal life within society. The recidivism statistics seemed to bear out what they were  saying.

Comment by Chris Breman on March 4, 2013 at 9:59am

Here in the Netherlands we had some sex-offenders who secretly stopped taking the drugs and molested children again - that is why I feel it's not a solution. And I can joke about taking a priest to the vet - who always tells me that castration is the kindest treatment for my cats - but I'll never be in favour of revengeful and cruel treatment. Crimes must be prevented and punishment should be a correction.

Comment by Richard Lawrence on March 4, 2013 at 9:44am

Based on the studies that have been done so far it appears that most offenders opt for the program.  The reason that they do this is they are  as anxious to remove this compulsion as the rest of us are.  Unless you subscribe to the belief that these people are "evil" in some metaphysical way, sinners of some sort, then modifying their behavior using chemical means is, in fact, a very good solution.  In fact, it is the most promising solution we have so far if statistics concerning recidivism mean anything. Of course, if revenge is your goal, then I would agree. It is not a very vengeful and cruel course of action.  Public castration with a hammer followed by burning would be a better way to go, right?

Comment by Chris Breman on March 4, 2013 at 8:26am

The trouble with chemical castration is that the offender has to swallow his daily dose (as far as I know), so he can stop to take the drug and molest some more children. So it's not a solution.  

Comment by Richard Lawrence on March 4, 2013 at 7:57am

At the very least, once convicted the offender should undergo chemical  castration, usually via the drug Depo Provera.  The ACLU is strongly opposed to this calling it cruel and unusual punishment. What concerns me in all of this is the monetary awards to the victims.  I don't doubt that there are priests who have molested children nor do I doubt that the Vatican and other church officials have covered up these crimes. I do feel that some of the accusations against some of the priests were motivated by the possibility of substantial monetary awards. I can only speak to the cases in the Diocese of Rockville Centre up on Long Island involving Frs. Alan Placa and Daniel Fagan (deceased) and the events that were alleged to occur at St. Pius X Preparatory Seminary in the 1970s.  I have serious concerns regarding the truth of those specific allegations. 

Comment by amer chohan on March 4, 2013 at 7:43am

Joan, whats the idea behind the name "Prision for preditory preists". I can't comprehend fully.

Comment by Chris Breman on March 4, 2013 at 2:22am

Better keep the priest on a leash too....

Comment by Joan Denoo on March 4, 2013 at 2:17am

Let me think, Chris, a cat in a carrier,  dog on a leash, and a priest wanting his reproductive organs removed. One stop does all. 

Comment by Chris Breman on March 4, 2013 at 2:00am

I always wondered why people who are so fond of celibacy, hang on to their reproductive organs. I'd vote to have those organs removed: it's only a small operation under local anaestatic - the vet could do it! 

Comment by Joan Denoo on March 4, 2013 at 1:49am

Chris Breman, Susan Stanko, and Grinning Cat, I am very happy to see you on this site.

Because a treaty signed by the U.S. with the Vatican granting diplomatic status, and thus not just immunity and legal obstruction of justice the government will not respond to crimes committed against children. Is there something private citizens can do to hold individual pedophiles accountable? The church hierarchy allegedly covered up their tracks and sent them to other congregations without proper notification of charges against them.

Thank you Tom Sarbeck for the lead to www.snapnetwork.org. I gladly add my voice to theirs. I don't want anyone innocent of these charges to be falsely prosecuted, nor do I want those who abused children to go without penalty.

 

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• Next ›
• Page