this post was submitted on 31 May 2024
126 points (98.5% liked)

politics

19090 readers
3993 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 56 points 5 months ago (5 children)

I have a couple of concerns with this.

The first being if some states are going to try to use this against any kids charged with being child sex offenders, like several states have done with teenagers who have sex with each other (or have nude pictures of each other).

An additional concern is obviously conservatives trying to use this against trans people and drag queens, whom they are already trying to define as sex offenders just for existing in public.

Another concern or just question is...is this meant to be a deterrent? And is it even effective in that? For a lot of child sex offenders, a major component of the pleasure derived is from having power over the child in question. Removing their genitals wouldn't necessarily change that? It's possible it may even have them turn more to violence toward children as their outlet.

I'm just wondering on the effectiveness of this method. Is there any evidence at all or is this being done on an emotional whim?

[–] [email protected] 30 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It also has the same issue as the death penalty, where once the punishment is enacted, it can't be undone based on new evidence.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago

This is the most legally sound argument against it.

Sure it's bad to diddle kids, but it's even worse to not have diddled kids, be accused and falsely convicted, have you genitals removed, and then on appeals the court is like "yeah sry bro they fucked that up, just reverse it".

Although a lot of people think the death penalty is bad for financial or logistical reasons, but in my opinion the biggest reason against it is that there's no quick way to revive a person when a court later on says they got it wrong.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

This is a punishment that simply cannot be enacted. Any doctor that participates violates his Hippocratic oath.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm sure they'll find someone. You only need to have one in the state.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

John Oliver showed me they'll probably just call in a vet.

Maybe get some farmer with castration bands.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

Evidence? GOP crime deterrents? lol

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

Impotent rapists still penetrate. 🗡️

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

Oh SURGICALLY. Yeah that's fucked up.