Monday, February 04, 2008
Sex offender registries are the new Holocaust
Gamelot has diverted our discussion about the nature of legislation and morality as discussed here and has ventured into what can only be described as incredible territory.
That's what I was bringing into question.
Well, you haven't even interacted with my main arguments on the topic, so I'll move on just as you have and wait for you to deal with what I've said.
How often do we do that? How can we be sure we're not doing that now? I, for one, am absolutely convinced that we are.
I don't see how this is even applicable to our day, since we don't live in a theocracy.
Now, on sex offenders...
I just found that out about the sex offender laws, and I think it's kind of weird that public urination = sex offender registration.
At the same time, the sex offender search websites will often display the crime, and so you can tell whether the guy committed aggravated sodomy or urinated publicly.
On a side note, I don't have the least sympathy for that person. Don't get drunk in public. Not that freaking hard.
A man who is drunk and urinates in an alley is treated the same as a man who rapes 5-year-olds, as far as the sex offender laws are concerned.
No they don't.
At least some of the search websites list their crimes.
And the public urinators aren't published as harshly as pædophiles.
housing is impossible for sex offenders to obtain
In fact, I'm house-hunting, and we saw one that we really liked.
Oops, a sex offender (agg sodomy and indecent exposure with a child) lives 2 doors down.
If not for that registry, who knows what could have happened to my beloved 13 month old daughter?
Christ offers people a second chance. His followers do not.
This is the kind of wild-eyed generalisation that would do the worst of our national politicians proud.
Provide evidence that these laws you decry are driven by "Christ's followers". If you can't, you should withdraw your assertion.
How is alerting others to a potentially dangerous person by putting them on a list equivalent to not giving them a 2nd chance? Seems like you could say that if these guys were executed. But in this case, they're just limited in their options until they can prove themselves non-dangerous. Big deal - that happens all the time.
If people don't know the law and do such a disgusting thing as urinate publicly, what is your argument for giving them a 2nd chance? What would that look like? Just ignoring it?
Is ignorance of the law an excuse? Can I murder someone and then attempt to credibly claim I didn't know it was wrong? Why or why not?
I'm tempted to draw a parallel to the Holocaust
Dude, you don't want to do that.
Just stop and think, for a second how horrible that event truly was. I think that most people these days have lost their horror of it b/c all they know they've experienced thru a textbook or a movie.
I've experienced no more than that but I've cultivated the sense of horror in my heart so as never to lose the revulsion, the awfulness. To even MENTION it in the same breath is to do a ludicrous disservice and insult to the memories of those murdered. Don't go there.
The point remains, though, that the similarities are there.
The differences in degree AND in quality are so vast as to make the comparison absurd.
What did those murdered in the Holocaust DO? Nothing.
What do these 'sex offenders' DO? Something. And they get on a registry that usually describes the crime. The victims of the Holocaust were murdered along with their whole families. Get off it.