“You propose executing people for suffering under a morbid temptation?
A pedophile is someone who suffers from the paraphilia (the psychological term) or besetting temptation (the moral term) of sexually desiring prepubescent children. Some know it is wrong and struggle mightily and in some cases successfully against the temptation. Some, like Sandusky, give in.
I trust you really mean pedophiles who act on their paraphilia and abuse children should be executed.”
Please tell me you’re joking, your forgot the /sarc tag, something, anything other than what you just wrote. We all make mistakes and post stupid things sometimes. But defending pedophiles ? I mean, really ?
By “pedophiles should be executed” I mean anyone who has ever molested a child.
As far as child pornography is concerned, IMHO all those who manufacture, distribute, and view child pornography should also be executed. If that sounds harsh, those who watch it are participating after the fact in the rape of children. And although I have no statistics, I suspect that most of those who view child pornography also actively molest children, sooner or later.
Pedophilia needs to be elminated, and the only way to eliminate it is to eliminate those who practice it. And as far as promoting it, like the NAMBLA organization, such promotion is NOT protected by the Bill of Rights and all such organizations or promotions should be illegal. Anyone who has ever promoted pedophilia should have their life under a microscope and if they have ever molested a child or manufactured, distributed or owned child pornography, they should be executed.
I hope my POV is clear.
Just because someone is attracted to molesting children is not cause to execute them. But they should know that if they try to act out their morbid desire, they will be executed. And none of this 20-30 years on death row, either.
I’m not defending anyone. Just demanding moral clarity. The definition of “pedophile” is based on a desire, which I characterized as a morbid temptation (hardly a phrase one would use in defense of the desire).
Those who yield to temptations to engage in actions which harm others should be punished (and very harshly in the case of sexual predators who prey upon children), but for the actions, not for the temptation. Those who resist temptation, whether of a morbid and unusual sort like pedophilia, or of more ordinary sorts, ought not be condemned for being subject to temptation, but aided in resisting temptation — in traditional Christian societies those struggling against pedophilia might be urged to retreat to a monastery where they would have no contact with children. Perhaps pedophiles requesting to be castrated to drive off the temptation before they harm children should have their requests honored, rather than turned aside.
Leave thoughtcrime to the left. Even as applied to thoughts which are loathsome to us.