Letters to the Editor
blunderdog
Published Letters: 509 Editor's Choice: 10
-
@AKA Smith
[Read the article: Pedophile blogger unfairly targeted?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Not to focus on this specific case.
What is your general take on the idea of human redemption, or personal change and rehabilitation for past crimes?
I favor locking up child molesters, rapists, abusers, etc. I don't think they should serve time based on the "severity" of their offense, but rather whether they there's a likelihood they'll commit another crime.
Is it possible, in your view, for people to overcome things like pedophilia an go on to live adjusted and productive lives?
I believe it's possible, and I'm not much in favor of "free and clear" rehabilitated ex-cons having their pasts advertised to their neighborhoods. I don't think they should be expected to pay forever for their crimes if they'll never recur. Yeah, it's a bit idealistic, but personally, I'm a pretty wary guy, and I don't really hold the expectation that my neighbors aren't ever going to harm me.
So I'm willing to take 'em as they come. And I'd hope they'd be able to see me as I am, rather than as I was X years ago.
(Disclaimer: I confess I have no dark secret or horrible crime in my past I wish I could escape. Just bankruptcy.)
-
@ Laurel962
[Read the article: How can I comfort my boyfriend about losing his hair?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here](way too late to be read, I guess, but what the hell)
'WHY AREN'T women doing exactly the same selection of males that they INSTINCTIVELY KNOW are more virile, more successful, more high earning, more fertile, better fathers, etc. based on the logical deduction that "HAIR GOOD, BALD BAD"?
Because women are doing exactly the same selection of males that they INSTINCTIVELY KNOW are better providers, protectors, and child-rearers based on the logical deduction that "wealth good, poverty bad."
The evo-psychs aren't silent. Seems like you just might not like the answer. It's just as insulting either way.
-
@ AKA Smith
[Read the article: Pedophile blogger unfairly targeted?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sorry for keeping you up half the night. I appreciate the response.
To clarify something: I didn't ask if a pedophile could be "cured"--and I think it's both a mistake and an injustice to assert that whatever is different about them is something to be "cured." All kinds of people's personal characteristics (good, bad, and indifferent) are, at root, NOT diseases to be cured.
How can you "cure" how someone feels about things? You might be able to change their _behavior_, but if you're going to use the ATTRACTION to children as the defining characteristic of a "pedophile," you've created your own logical Gordian knot.
You appear to hold the firmly convicted belief that "persons who are sexually attracted to children" are diseased, incurable, and prone to molest children.
Given all that, why not just cut to the point and assert that they should all be either a) put to death on conviction, or b) imprisoned for life without parole? That really is the only reasonable way to handle criminals who we already know are beyond rehabilitation AND likely to repeat their crimes.
Am I wrong in concluding that that's something you'd like to see?
One of the big hangups is whether the person's "attraction" or "behavior" are why we need to worry about them. I'm firmly convinced that people are entitled to do whatever the hell they want in the privacy of their own MINDS.
I don't blame you for your perspective. It's a subject that must be very near to the heart with the sexy daughter and all.