Why is this news?

robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Why is this news?

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/apr/20/local/la-me-prisons-transgender-20110420

Why does something as insane as this make it to any news source? Why is this a topic? The only thing worse than "news" like this is when we will actually have to pay to get this person a sex change.

 

Does anyone actually agree with this kind of shit or is it just the media testing for insanity, a how far can we push it kind of thing?

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


wingless_sephiroth
atheist
wingless_sephiroth's picture
Posts: 117
Joined: 2011-04-03
User is offlineOffline
I'm somewhat taken aback

I'm somewhat taken aback that you don't see an article regarding someone with an accepted medical condition, that outside of being difficult to live with (~50% suicide rate before the age of 30), makes them the target of sexual assault to be important. And I suspect, you being an atheist don't have conspiracy theories about a "liberal scientific establishment." But, I can also simultaneously see where you're coming from in that she's a prisoner, and at least at face value her requests may seem superfluous.

This is not as simple as both sides of the argument would like to make it. The fact is, GID (Gender Identity Disorder) is an actual medical issue that most individuals will take care of in their lifetime, presuming they are free. Unless they fall into the 50% of the GID population that commits suicide before 30.

However, how much medical attention should we really offer prisoners? Did you know that prisoners are automatically shot to the top of any organ requirement list? So, if you needed a kidney and so does a prisoner, even if she or he was put on the list after you, she or he has priority over you. That's how our wonderful American prison system works.

Whether you're a criminal or not, male or female or something your own, sexual assault is one of the worst experiences an individual can go through. So, most of my sympathies probably come from that aspect, and the fact that our prisons succeed in making us spend more money on prisoners, while also simultaneously being unable to ensure our prisoners can maintain their sexual dignity.


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
wingless_sephiroth wrote:I'm

wingless_sephiroth wrote:

I'm somewhat taken aback that you don't see an article regarding someone with an accepted medical condition, that outside of being difficult to live with (~50% suicide rate before the age of 30), makes them the target of sexual assault to be important. And I suspect, you being an atheist don't have conspiracy theories about a "liberal scientific establishment." But, I can also simultaneously see where you're coming from in that she's a prisoner, and at least at face value her requests may seem superfluous.

This is not as simple as both sides of the argument would like to make it. The fact is, GID (Gender Identity Disorder) is an actual medical issue that most individuals will take care of in their lifetime, presuming they are free. Unless they fall into the 50% of the GID population that commits suicide before 30.

However, how much medical attention should we really offer prisoners? Did you know that prisoners are automatically shot to the top of any organ requirement list? So, if you needed a kidney and so does a prisoner, even if she or he was put on the list after you, she or he has priority over you. That's how our wonderful American prison system works.

Whether you're a criminal or not, male or female or something your own, sexual assault is one of the worst experiences an individual can go through. So, most of my sympathies probably come from that aspect, and the fact that our prisons succeed in making us spend more money on prisoners, while also simultaneously being unable to ensure our prisoners can maintain their sexual dignity.

He is in fukin prison, maybe he should have thought about this before he commited a crime to go to fukin prison.

How far can we take it?

"oh I'm in prison and I just don't feel like my penis is long enough, the other guys make fun of me, maybe the state will pay to get me a penis extension." What's the difference?

I couldn't give a fuk less if a prisoner "maintains their sexual dignity" THEY ARE IN PRISON!!! Anyone who takes my tax dollars to help a prisoner to "feel better about themselves" should go to PRISON and join them! They can hold their little hand and comfort them as they watch oprah on the tv.

What part of "They are a criminal" do you not get?

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


luca
atheist
Posts: 400
Joined: 2011-02-21
User is offlineOffline
What part of "They are a criminal" do you not get?

Maybe you forgot the part which is the objective of the prison: help to reintegrate a person in the society.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 Reintegration? Umm, most

 Reintegration? Umm, most of the people in that article are lifers and will never be reintegrated. In fact, the only one who is not on a mandatory life sentence is serving 40 years.

 

In any case, what makes those men so sure that they will be fine in a woman's prison anyway? As long as they are mixed in with the general population, they are likely to have some serious problems. Female prisoners are still prisoners for the same basic reason, failure to show enough self control that they can be allowed to live around other people. Once an inmate's identity becomes known (and don't kid your self about privacy in prisons), the harassment cycle will begin all over again.

 

Really, the article does make the point that at any given time, California has 30 to 50 GID inmates. Protecting them would be easy enough, just make a dedicated cell block for them and they only people they have to worry about are the other GID inmates.

 

Of course California has a huge prison system. That probably would not be quite so practical in Alaska. There however are private jails which contract with states to take on surplus population. If some corporation sees money in the deal, such a block could be made for the inmates from smaller states.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
luca wrote:Maybe you forgot

luca wrote:

Maybe you forgot the part which is the objective of the prison: help to reintegrate a person in the society.

When did it stop being a punishment and become a "therapy" program?

This occured to me after I made a post on another thread. I personally KNOW several people who went to prison. They say they don't like it but it is not enough of a deterrent to keep them from cooking more drugs. You make it HARD on people in prison and maybe they really wont want to go back!

The system we have now is ridiclous and history would testify to this I assure you and I haven't even looked up any historical statistics. I would bank my next paycheck that people back in the day did not end up back in prison system as a percentage anywhere near what they do now.

 

 

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


luca
atheist
Posts: 400
Joined: 2011-02-21
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Reintegration? Umm,

Quote:
Reintegration? Umm, most of the people in that article are lifers and will never be reintegrated.

Ok, gimme a break, I was talkin about prison in general.

Quote:
When did it stop being a punishment and become a "therapy" program?

Is it a rethorical question? Anyway you can look at Michel Foucault's history of imprisonment.

Quote:
This occured to me after I made a post on another thread. I personally KNOW several people who went to prison. They say they don't like it but it is not enough of a deterrent to keep them from cooking more drugs. You make it HARD on people in prison and maybe they really wont want to go back!

Well, maybe I don't know nobody who went to prison, but I had some other experiences. What I could say is that punishment does not make a lot of sense, to me. It could function, but, c'mon, I saw someone quoting the orange clockwork on some thread around here, do you know what that means? That that rapist tortured didn't gave a damn about punishment. I know, it's just a film, but still how moral it is to instill fear in someone to prevent him doing something nocive? What you need is to teach him how to live in a society, not fear.
I hope this doesn't sound too idealistic, I know it can't always function, or always go like this.
Behavior correction, this is what I mean. Some people you know could swear they will not make drugs anymore, but why they did it in first place? This is what matters.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 OK, then let's split the

 OK, then let's split the lifers out of the equation. One problem being that the courts would drop a shit all over the idea of differential rights based on probable release date.

 

So lifers don't get that surgery because it would be far cheaper to just put them all in one cell block. If someone is in for a fairly short sentence, well they still don't get the surgery because the tax payer should not have to pay for that. They can still go to the special cell block for protective custody if they really feel that they are in danger.

 

Past that, reintegration would be a noble goal but how many prisons have a revolving door issue today because they are not doing that? Most of them? Free elective surgery is not likely to be a huge help there.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
luca

luca wrote:
Quote:
Reintegration? Umm, most of the people in that article are lifers and will never be reintegrated.
Ok, gimme a break, I was talkin about prison in general.
Quote:
When did it stop being a punishment and become a "therapy" program?
Is it a rethorical question? Anyway you can look at Michel Foucault's history of imprisonment.
Quote:
This occured to me after I made a post on another thread. I personally KNOW several people who went to prison. They say they don't like it but it is not enough of a deterrent to keep them from cooking more drugs. You make it HARD on people in prison and maybe they really wont want to go back!
Well, maybe I don't know nobody who went to prison, but I had some other experiences. What I could say is that punishment does not make a lot of sense, to me. It could function, but, c'mon, I saw someone quoting the orange clockwork on some thread around here, do you know what that means? That that rapist tortured didn't gave a damn about punishment. I know, it's just a film, but still how moral it is to instill fear in someone to prevent him doing something nocive? What you need is to teach him how to live in a society, not fear. I hope this doesn't sound too idealistic, I know it can't always function, or always go like this. Behavior correction, this is what I mean. Some people you know could swear they will not make drugs anymore, but why they did it in first place? This is what matters.

A clockwork orange was not about fear of society imo. It was a "demonstration" of what could happen if we tried to make someone behave through force despite their own wishes and desires. In the movie society was not making him do bad things and after his prison and "cure" it was still himself. A good showing of how some people will not change, in the movie he would rather have suicided than to have to behave and work with society. He was a sociopath and would not be swayed by anything other than what he "wanted".

I don't think that movie is a good example of what I am talking about anyway.

Why did they do it? Because they fukin wanted to. Why did they want to? Lets get real deep now into some philisophical bullshit and begin to feel sorry because they had a bad childhood or a bad parent role model or whatever. Who cares, they did it now they should suffer consequences and the best rehab for people who commit crimes is a "punishment" and more punishment to look forward to on repeated offenses.

My heart just does not bleed enough for a societal fuck up who knows the chances they are taking when robbing a liquor store at gun point etc.

You make prison life rough as it used to be and there will be fewer that want to go back, this is a common sense issue. Even discussing if I should have to pay for a fukin sex change for a criminal is beyond ridiculous.

Put these guys to work like they did in the past building roads etc in chain gangs, that will put a stop to petty crap in a hurry and the amount of people in there would dwindle so fast, let alone "repeat" offenders. Therapy and "reintegration" poor criminals. /coddle.

Common sense.. where art thou oh common sense?

 

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3687
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Quote:for killing a San

Quote:
for killing a San Bernardino County woman with a shotgun in a dispute over clothes.

Why would I want to pay for this person to have a sex change, without even being convinced that it would solve their problem? I don't.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
wingless_sephiroth

wingless_sephiroth wrote:

This is not as simple as both sides of the argument would like to make it.

Ya, it is, actually.

 

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
The fact is, GID (Gender Identity Disorder) is an actual medical issue that most individuals will take care of in their lifetime, presuming they are free. Unless they fall into the 50% of the GID population that commits suicide before 30....

 

Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time.

Pretty simple logic.

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
  Did you know that prisoners are automatically shot to the top of any organ requirement list? So, if you needed a kidney and so does a prisoner, even if she or he was put on the list after you, she or he has priority over you. That's how our wonderful American prison system works.

I've never heard that before.

If that's the case, I'd like to know the rocket scientists on that committee of ethics.

Let's see...

1-  Prisoners = Deviants who are a threat and financial burden on society.

2- Law Abiding Citizen = No harm to society, and are productive member of society.

 

Which is more beneficial to society? Giving the kidney to 1 or 2?

 

Hmmmm....

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
redneF

redneF wrote:

wingless_sephiroth wrote:

This is not as simple as both sides of the argument would like to make it.

Ya, it is, actually.

 

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
The fact is, GID (Gender Identity Disorder) is an actual medical issue that most individuals will take care of in their lifetime, presuming they are free. Unless they fall into the 50% of the GID population that commits suicide before 30....

 

Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time.

Pretty simple logic.

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
  Did you know that prisoners are automatically shot to the top of any organ requirement list? So, if you needed a kidney and so does a prisoner, even if she or he was put on the list after you, she or he has priority over you. That's how our wonderful American prison system works.

I've never heard that before.

If that's the case, I'd like to know the rocket scientists on that committee of ethics.

Let's see...

1-  Prisoners = Deviants who are a threat and financial burden on society.

2- Law Abiding Citizen = No harm to society, and are productive member of society.

 

Which is more beneficial to society? Giving the kidney to 1 or 2?

 

Hmmmm....

 

Who runs PETA for criminals?

Criminals should have last dibs on anything ..let alone a sex change operation to make them "comfy".

If this is what we are coming to as a society maybe..just maybe there really is a problem. As I mentioned something like this making news is a terrible joke on every taxpayer.

What should have happened: This guy complains he is a woman trapped in a mans body but he is in prison. He tells his "prison counselor" or whomever about his "problem" and they tell him he might work on that when he gets out. End of story, not newsworthy by any means.

This should have been no more news worthy than a criminal asking to put a picture on their cell wall to masturbate too.

 

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
For some reason I just

For some reason I just reread what I just posted in a George Carlin voice.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:...something

robj101 wrote:

...something like this making news is a terrible joke on every taxpayer.

It's completely obscene.

I think it's better that this stuff makes the headlines though, and on to peoples' radar.

 

robj101 wrote:

What should have happened: This guy complains he is a woman trapped in a mans body but he is in prison. He tells his "prison counselor" or whomever about his "problem" and they tell him he might work on that when he gets out. End of story, not newsworthy by any means.

Agreed.

The fact of the matter is, that it's not any citizen's 'right' that society foot the bill for something of that personal nature, and even less so for a murderer who has taken a life, and is going to be nothing but a burden and threat to society.

Getting raped in prison is par for the course. If they don't like the accommodations and customs there, maybe they'll read the brochure next time before they visit.

As far as sympathy for this person, I have precisely 'zero'. This person is a serious offender. To me, that makes them 'less' equal for any consideration.

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
redneF wrote:robj101

redneF wrote:

robj101 wrote:

...something like this making news is a terrible joke on every taxpayer.

It's completely obscene.

I think it's better that this stuff makes the headlines though, and on to peoples' radar.

 

robj101 wrote:

What should have happened: This guy complains he is a woman trapped in a mans body but he is in prison. He tells his "prison counselor" or whomever about his "problem" and they tell him he might work on that when he gets out. End of story, not newsworthy by any means.

Agreed.

The fact of the matter is, that it's not any citizen's 'right' that society foot the bill for something of that personal nature, and even less so for a murderer who has taken a life, and is going to be nothing but a burden and threat to society.

Getting raped in prison is par for the course. If they don't like the accommodations and customs there, maybe they'll read the brochure next time before they visit.

As far as sympathy for this person, I have precisely 'zero'. This person is a serious offender. To me, that makes them 'less' equal for any consideration.

I'm glad I'm not alone in this line of thought. Maybe there is hope for sanity in the future...

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


wingless_sephiroth
atheist
wingless_sephiroth's picture
Posts: 117
Joined: 2011-04-03
User is offlineOffline
Sanity in the future? Or do

Sanity in the future? Or do you mean, "I am completely desensitized to the issue of rape, and clearly think some people deserve to be raped." Because that's what it amounts to, regardless of whatever magical holes of logic you wish to loop through. My sympathies aren't about her desire to get a sex change, they are about her and other prisoner's desire to maintain their sexual dignities and not be molested. Human rights extend to prisoners, doncha know.

I'm going to assume we all here are against the death penalty, because aside from it being against several human rights charters, in my state of California it costs around 308 million dollars per person:

http://badlawyernyc.blogspot.com/2011/06/california-taxpayers-pay-308-milliion.html

Regardless of the problems with the tax paying prison system, rape in prisons is not humorous and is not justice. No individual, even a murderer, deserves to be raped; according to many rape victims, being raped is worse than death. Rape in prisons isn't a matter of, "Fuck them, it's their fault for ending up in the prison system anyway." You know who else has that line of thinking? Islamists when they stone murderers to death. Landing in prison due to anything from pushing drugs to murder should not see the petty or even murderous criminal raped.

 


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 So if you are not doing so

 So if you are not doing so well in arguing for tax payer funded banana peelings, then you will change the topic to the death penalty?

 

Umm, whatever.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

 So if you are not doing so well in arguing for tax payer funded banana peelings, then you will change the topic to the death penalty?

 

Umm, whatever.

 

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
wingless_sephiroth

wingless_sephiroth wrote:

 Landing in prison due to anything from pushing drugs to murder should not see the petty or even murderous criminal raped.

 

Golly gee, then stay the fuck out of there. This is so freakin simple I don't know why I'm bothering to respond.

 

 

 

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
wingless_sephiroth

wingless_sephiroth wrote:

Sanity in the future? Or do you mean, "I am completely desensitized to the issue of rape, and clearly think some people deserve to be raped."

Strawman.

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
My sympathies aren't about her desire to get a sex change, they are about her and other prisoner's desire to maintain their sexual dignities and not be molested.

Then they're not too good at risk aversion, are they?

They were fully aware of the risks of going to prison, and still chose to do the crime.

Again, my sympathy for them is 'zero'.

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
Human rights extend to prisoners, doncha know.

But they're 'subhuman', doncha know?

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
I'm going to assume we all here are against the death penalty...

Why would you assume that we are all like minded on every issue or problem?

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
Regardless of the problems with the tax paying prison system, rape in prisons is not humorous...

You mean the criminals don't like being the innocent victim of crimes?

Awww, that's too bad. They should have done their homework. Prisons are full of bad people...

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
No individual, even a murderer, deserves to be raped 

They're able to call the police, should they get raped.

Same like everyone else.

What's the problem? 

Do they have problems with the 'justice' system in regards to the legal penalty for the rapist?

 

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
...in my state of California it costs around 308 million dollars per person:

Then they're doing it wrong...

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


wingless_sephiroth
atheist
wingless_sephiroth's picture
Posts: 117
Joined: 2011-04-03
User is offlineOffline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

 So if you are not doing so well in arguing for tax payer funded banana peelings, then you will change the topic to the death penalty?

 

Umm, whatever.

 

Then you didn't bother reading what I said at all in my first post. My main issue was rape from the beginning, although I'm guessing I wasn't clear:

 

Quote:
However, how much medical attention should we really offer prisoners? Did you know that prisoners are automatically shot to the top of any organ requirement list? So, if you needed a kidney and so does a prisoner, even if she or he was put on the list after you, she or he has priority over you. That's how our wonderful American prison system works.

 

Whether you're a criminal or not, male or female or something your own, sexual assault is one of the worst experiences an individual can go through. So, most of my sympathies probably come from that aspect, and the fact that our prisons succeed in making us spend more money on prisoners, while also simultaneously being unable to ensure our prisoners can maintain their sexual dignity.

 

Anywho, I don't really want to get into a long drawn out debate on this, because no one is going to change their mind, although I'll admit I strawman'd a bit. My main concern is, once again, the rape issue. If you don't mind prisoners being raped, more power to you.

 

 


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3687
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
If the subject is this

If the subject is this specific person in the article, I will say that I care that she's being raped, but only to the extent that I care that a dog in Africa is starving right now. I don't care about her nearly as much as I care about the average person, sorry. There are so many people suffering in the world right now and so many causes to fight for; why do I want to spend my money on this fucker? She killed someone with a shotgun in an argument about clothing!; how do I know she isn't going to rape someone when she gets transferred to a female prison?  

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
I'm going to assume we all here are against the death penalty, because aside from it being against several human rights charters,

I am against it in practice. In principle, I'm not sure.

I couldn't care less about human rights charters. I don't refer to an authority to determine what I feel.

Don't assume.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


luca
atheist
Posts: 400
Joined: 2011-02-21
User is offlineOffline
robj

Quote:
Lets get real deep now into some philisophical bullshit and begin to feel sorry because they had a bad childhood or a bad parent role model or whatever. Who cares, they did it now they should suffer consequences and the best rehab for people who commit crimes is a "punishment" and more punishment to look forward to on repeated offenses.

GET PHILOSOPHICAL?! Where are you from, half millennium ago? When noone knew people have a brain? If your best argument is "who cares", then wow, I loose.
I agree that people who hurt other people have to be stopped, that doesn't mean that they have to be punished for revenge.
If you don't want to use your intelligence, then at least don't insult mine.


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
luca wrote: I agree that

luca wrote:
I agree that people who hurt other people have to be stopped, that doesn't mean that they have to be punished for revenge.

You going to hold up a stop sign or something?

Who here has said anything about "revenge"? I would be talking about action/reaction learning, pretty simple. You commit a crime you are punished. You do good you get to stay out and enjoy what freedom this country offers.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 luca wrote:I agree that

 

luca wrote:
I agree that people who hurt other people have to be stopped, that doesn't mean that they have to be punished for revenge.

 

OK, so how do we keep bad people away from other people without calling it punishment? They did some bad things, now they need to be kept away from people. What would you call that other than punishment?

 

As far as the revenge thing goes, I really don't know. It is not in the historical documents that I have seen but then, who would write up revenge as a motive for locking people up? Don't get me wrong on this, the puritans used to lock people up so that they could pray and reflect on matters. Despite that stated reason, I doubt that the real motive was all that much different back then than it is today.

 

wingless_sephiroth wrote:

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:
So if you are not doing so well in arguing for tax payer funded banana peelings, then you will change the topic to the death penalty?

 

Umm, whatever.

 

Then you didn't bother reading what I said at all in my first post. My main issue was rape from the beginning, although I'm guessing I wasn't clear:

 

Anywho, I don't really want to get into a long drawn out debate on this, because no one is going to change their mind, although I'll admit I strawman'd a bit. My main concern is, once again, the rape issue. If you don't mind prisoners being raped, more power to you.

 

OK, I will stipulate that rape is a bad thing. People should not rape each other. However, it is a known fact that people in prison get raped. You don't need to be a tranny, only to be seen as weak by other prisoners.

 

If your goal in life is to not get raped, then not going to prison dramatically improves the odds.

 

That much having been said, why would anyone assume that having a sex change and a transfer to another prison would improve your lot in life?

 

Consider this question: On the outside, are male to female transsexuals generally accepted as women in female communities? The only data point that I have on that is anecdotal from having spoken personally with someone who was in that situation but the answer was no.

 

I can't, from that, speak to a general trend but as far as I can tell, there will be an outsider quality to further social relationships.

 

Now put this person into a prison situation. he/she is now surrounded by the very woman who have already shown the worst possible self control. With the potential value of being a perpetual outsider, is that a great place to be?

 

Also, who says that there is no rape in woman's prisons?

 

The idea does not seem to get press play but if you get large numbers of women with poor impulse control together and let them set up a weird internal social pecking order, then the people who are seen as the lowest on the totem pole are probably going to be physically violated. Remember that sex is something that you do with another and rape is something that you do to another. On that level, I don't see that it would be all that odd if rape occurred in woman's prisons.   

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4284
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 Beyond Saving Inc.

 Beyond Saving Inc. Presents The ALL NEW BS69 Prison Sex Change Kit

 

 

This wonderful kit comes with all your prison guard needs! Now you can carry your machete with you to perform ON THE SPOT sex change operations. Just slice, dice and step back keeping your muzzle aimed at the prisoner at all times. If the prisoner changes his mind and attacks, simply fire a rubber bullet at his head. Once a prisoner has experienced the BS69 Sex Change Kit they will never ask for another medical operation again GUARANTEED! Save your state money, provide needed sex change operations and keep your guards safe. It is a WIN! WIN! WIN! Order yours now for only $5000 plus taxes and shipping.  

 

 

Beyond Saving Inc. is not responsible for any inappropriate use of the BS69 Sex Change Kit. The BS69 has not been approved as medical equipment and Beyond Saving will not be held liable for any injury to self or prisoner. Risks include, but are not limited to, extreme bleeding, infection, bruising or death either to the person receiving or the person performing the operation. 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
 Wouldn't that be something

 

Wouldn't that be something if someone were actually straight and got a "sex change" and then had access to women in prison. Wow, weird but in these times I can see that happening.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: Beyond

Beyond Saving wrote:

 Beyond Saving Inc. Presents The ALL NEW BS69 Prison Sex Change Kit

 

 

This wonderful kit comes with all your prison guard needs! Now you can carry your machete with you to perform ON THE SPOT sex change operations. Just slice, dice and step back keeping your muzzle aimed at the prisoner at all times. If the prisoner changes his mind and attacks, simply fire a rubber bullet at his head. Once a prisoner has experienced the BS69 Sex Change Kit they will never ask for another medical operation again GUARANTEED! Save your state money, provide needed sex change operations and keep your guards safe. It is a WIN! WIN! WIN! Order yours now for only $5000 plus taxes and shipping.  

 

 

Beyond Saving Inc. is not responsible for any inappropriate use of the BS69 Sex Change Kit. The BS69 has not been approved as medical equipment and Beyond Saving will not be held liable for any injury to self or prisoner. Risks include, but are not limited to, extreme bleeding, infection, bruising or death either to the person receiving or the person performing the operation. 

I'll mail your brochure to my congressman, this could save quite a bit of cash ..and fill your pocket a bit as well.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


wingless_sephiroth
atheist
wingless_sephiroth's picture
Posts: 117
Joined: 2011-04-03
User is offlineOffline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

The idea does not seem to get press play but if you get large numbers of women with poor impulse control together and let them set up a weird internal social pecking order, then the people who are seen as the lowest on the totem pole are probably going to be physically violated. Remember that sex is something that you do with another and rape is something that you do to another. On that level, I don't see that it would be all that odd if rape occurred in woman's prisons.   

 

We're on the same page now. My concern unfortunately is probably too generic for this topic, but I felt like people were disrespecting the issue of rape, and that I don't think we should go far as to not caring if prisoners get raped just because they've landed in prison for what could be anything in an array of legal villainies. This woman in particular, whatever her gender or sexual identity is, is in a hard situation because yes, she can be raped in women's prisons too, perpetrated often by guards, but I suspect not exclusively so. Which brings me to the fact that many people get raped in prison, not just the transgendered, although wouldn't you expect it to be at least slightly disproportionate since she has breasts and presumably has been on hormones for a while?

So, a woman being concerned she is going to be raped in prison because she is already surrounded by men, who are already known to rape each other, is valid news. I guess I'm just shocked someone wouldn't consider it valid news, but forgive me if I started sounding like the Holy See of Secular Humanism for a second.


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
wingless_sephiroth

wingless_sephiroth wrote:

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

The idea does not seem to get press play but if you get large numbers of women with poor impulse control together and let them set up a weird internal social pecking order, then the people who are seen as the lowest on the totem pole are probably going to be physically violated. Remember that sex is something that you do with another and rape is something that you do to another. On that level, I don't see that it would be all that odd if rape occurred in woman's prisons.   

 

We're on the same page now. My concern unfortunately is probably too generic for this topic, but I felt like people were disrespecting the issue of rape, and that I don't think we should go far as to not caring if prisoners get raped just because they've landed in prison for what could be anything in an array of legal villainies. This woman in particular, whatever her gender or sexual identity is, is in a hard situation because yes, she can be raped in women's prisons too, perpetrated often by guards, but I suspect not exclusively so. Which brings me to the fact that many people get raped in prison, not just the transgendered, although wouldn't you expect it to be at least slightly disproportionate since she has breasts and presumably has been on hormones for a while?

So, a woman being concerned she is going to be raped in prison because she is already surrounded by men, who are already known to rape each other, is valid news. I guess I'm just shocked someone wouldn't consider it valid news, but forgive me if I started sounding like the Holy See of Secular Humanism for a second.

What you are saying is that this is indeed a woman and she could be raped so ... wtf are we supposed to do about it even if we care about a criminal?

You see my original topic was already answered by yourself.

You are why this makes news.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
wingless_sephiroth wrote:I'm

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
I'm somewhat taken aback that you don't see an article regarding someone with an accepted medical condition, that outside of being difficult to live with (~50% suicide rate before the age of 30), makes them the target of sexual assault to be important. And I suspect, you being an atheist don't have conspiracy theories about a "liberal scientific establishment." But, I can also simultaneously see where you're coming from in that she's a prisoner, and at least at face value her requests may seem superfluous.

It (gender dysphoria or Gender Identity as you call it) is no more an accepted medical condition than schizophrenia. You might argue that a person has a near-fundamental right to have this sort of operation performed on them, provided they don't display signs of mental illness and/or impulsitivity, and I might actually agree, consider what else happens to gender dysphorics in the course of their lives leading up to treatment (suicide is just the tip of the iceberg.)

To be sure, this 'treatment' is nothing more than enabling a convincing illusion of womanhood or manhood, as the case may be. It's also one that requires going under the knife quite a bit.

But then prison at one time existed to deprive criminals of 'fundamental rights', barring an extent that would violate the "cruel and unusual punishment" portion of our BoR.

Quote:
However, how much medical attention should we really offer prisoners? Did you know that prisoners are automatically shot to the top of any organ requirement list? So, if you needed a kidney and so does a prisoner, even if she or he was put on the list after you, she or he has priority over you. That's how our wonderful American prison system works.

Yes, many of our institutions have been hijacked by special interests, and this is merely another example of such. Don't act like the prison system is somehow special in this regard, because it isn't.

Quote:
while also simultaneously being unable to ensure our prisoners can maintain their sexual dignity.

That's a pretty alarming statement concerning a mere tenth or fifth of the prison population. As I've told others, rape in prison isn't nearly the pressing issue that popular culture makes it out to be.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
wingless_sephiroth wrote:I'm

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
I'm going to assume we all here are against the death penalty, because aside from it being against several human rights charters, in my state of California it costs around 308 million dollars per person:

Bahhahahahahahaha. You're funny, mang. "Oh noes! International law expressly forbids this... what shall we do?!"

As for the $308m price tag... there's another example of our institutions being hijacked, only this time instead of cozier prisons it's drawn-out, protracted repeal after repeal because "Someone's life is at steak!!!"

 

...

butterbattle wrote:

I couldn't care less about human rights charters. I don't refer to an authority to determine what I feel.

Don't assume.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
luca wrote:I saw someone

luca wrote:
I saw someone quoting the orange clockwork on some thread around here, do you know what that means? That that rapist tortured didn't gave a damn about punishment.

In the movies he certainly gave a damn about prison sentences, in the general vein of "GET ME THE HELL OUT OF HERE... PLEASE!!!"

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


wingless_sephiroth
atheist
wingless_sephiroth's picture
Posts: 117
Joined: 2011-04-03
User is offlineOffline
Okay, okay, I was a fucking

Okay, okay, I was a fucking retard to bring up the international law thing, and presume we're all pro-life internationalist hippies. I was probably high when I wrote it,  and also that's not the main point I'm trying to make. My main concern from the beginning is rape, and how we don't seem to think someone being concerned about being raped in prison is valid news, that it's the norm and that criminals should've thought of that earlier, and that they deserve what they get in the prison system.

 

Quote:
However, how much medical attention should we really offer prisoners? Did you know that prisoners are automatically shot to the top of any organ requirement list? So, if you needed a kidney and so does a prisoner, even if she or he was put on the list after you, she or he has priority over you. That's how our wonderful American prison system works.

Why does everyone keep quoting me on this as if I support it? I said this to play devil's advocate to advancing things like expensive operations, not to support it. And furthermore, why is everyone assuming I support the operation? Is my written expression really that poorly formed?

 

robj101 wrote:

What you are saying is that this is indeed a woman and she could be raped so ... wtf are we supposed to do about it even if we care about a criminal?

Forget about her; my main concern isn't her. My concern is questioning if there is no fucking way to lessen prison rape numbers, or even just for us to take rape more seriously, whether it happens to someone free or within prison? Someone afraid of and not wanting to be molested is much more than news, whether or not that person is transgendered.

 

Quote:
But then prison at one time existed to deprive criminals of 'fundamental rights', barring an extent that would violate the "cruel and unusual punishment" portion of our BoR.

And being put into a place where rape is statistically more significant, with apparently little protection, is somehow not "cruel and unusual punishment"? It's not much different than throwing you into a den of tamed lions that occasionally get out of hand and maim a percentage of the prisoner population. Maybe I'm missing something here.

 

Quote:
That's a pretty alarming statement concerning a mere tenth or fifth of the prison population. As I've told others, rape in prison isn't nearly the pressing issue that popular culture makes it out to be.

Less than a fifth of the free female population (1 out of every 6 women) in the United States experiences an attempted or completed rape. Should we not make alarming statements about that statistic?

But the whole, "If you're in prison you deserve what you get, so don't get in there in the first place," is faulty. Not everyone has equal opportunities or are placed in a good environment. Half of our prisoners are African-American; is it because of something inherently wrong with their genetics, coincidental statistics, or are African-American men and women placed in economic and cultural situations most of the population isn't?

10% of the entire African-American population is in prison. If any of you here were African-American (and may be), you would have a 10% chance to be in jail. Unless the colour of your skin determines your ability to make the right choices, it doesn't make sense to put complete blame on the individual, and lambast the entire prisoner population as sub-human. There are many other factors at work that can make what could've been an otherwise good person, do something wrong.

And people seem to be skimming over the fact that many people are in jail for relatively petty things, not for murder. Does robbing a liquor store really mean we shouldn't be sympathetic to you being raped? Does smuggling drugs really mean we shouldn't be sympathetic to you being raped?


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3687
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Eh...There are people who

Eh...

There are people who might be in the same prison for committing less severe crimes, and I would care more about them.

I do think this is news worthy. Even if some people don't care about the rape much, they should care that states might spend taxpayer money to conduct sex change operations for these criminals.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
wingless_sephiroth wrote:

wingless_sephiroth wrote:

Quote:
However, how much medical attention should we really offer prisoners? Did you know that prisoners are automatically shot to the top of any organ requirement list? So, if you needed a kidney and so does a prisoner, even if she or he was put on the list after you, she or he has priority over you. That's how our wonderful American prison system works.

Why does everyone keep quoting me on this as if I support it? I said this to play devil's advocate to advancing things like expensive operations, not to support it. And furthermore, why is everyone assuming I support the operation? Is my written expression really that poorly formed?

Probably


Quote:
And being put into a place where rape is statistically more significant, with apparently little protection, is somehow not "cruel and unusual punishment"? It's not much different than throwing you into a den of tamed lions that occasionally get out of hand and maim a percentage of the prisoner population. Maybe I'm missing something here.

Quote:
Less than a fifth of the free female population (1 out of every 6 women) in the United States experiences an attempted or completed rape. Should we not make alarming statements about that statistic?

One of the statements we probably should make is that the stated number varies from 1/3 to 1/6. Why not just skip to "I'm sorry, we have no fucking (verifiable) idea as to the prevalence or nonprevalence of rape"?

edit;Feminists would raise a shitstorm, but since when has that stopped anyone...

Quote:
But the whole, "If you're in prison you deserve what you get, so don't get in there in the first place," is faulty. Not everyone has equal opportunities or are placed in a good environment. Half of our prisoners are African-American; is it because of something inherently wrong with their genetics, coincidental statistics, or are African-American men and women placed in economic and cultural situations most of the population isn't?

Crime does heavily correlate with poverty. Not sure about "culture"; the hip hop/record company tactic of peddling an image of a macho criminal may or may not be involved. It's hard to tell.

The rest of your post doesn't deal with anything I've posted, so I'll ignore it.

 

 

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


luca
atheist
Posts: 400
Joined: 2011-02-21
User is offlineOffline
cnilcu

Quote:
You going to hold up a stop sign or something?

Quote:
OK, so how do we keep bad people away from other people without calling it punishment? They did some bad things, now they need to be kept away from people. What would you call that other than punishment?

If it does something... but I don't think so. I've not said I am against prison, because I understand prison not as punishment. In the law where I live in, prison is written to be intended for rieducating people and help them return on the society. Is it so? No, the cases are more unique that rare. Fear of prison (and imprisonment) is NOT a valid way to educate people. Even passing over the morality that this teaches, it's obvious that this pragmatic way does not function with 100% efficency.

Quote:
Who here has said anything about "revenge"?

This:
Quote:
Getting raped in prison is par for the course. If they don't like the accommodations and customs there, maybe they'll read the brochure next time before they visit.

This:
Quote:
You mean the criminals don't like being the innocent victim of crimes?
Awww, that's too bad. They should have done their homework. Prisons are full of bad people...

And this:
Quote:
Who cares, they did it now they should suffer consequences and the best rehab for people who commit crimes is a "punishment" and more punishment to look forward to on repeated offenses.

not entirely yours, sounded a little like revenge, or anyway in an excessive use of force, or not a just justice, if you wish. If I'm wrong, then pardon.

Also, hastily looking at the thread I'm not sure the word rape is used in a correct and unambiguous way.

Quote:
Beyond Saving Inc. Presents The ALL NEW BS69 Prison Sex Change Kit

Well, this goes one way only. How do you do for the other?


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
luca wrote:Quote:You going

luca wrote:
Quote:
You going to hold up a stop sign or something?
Quote:
OK, so how do we keep bad people away from other people without calling it punishment? They did some bad things, now they need to be kept away from people. What would you call that other than punishment?
If it does something... but I don't think so. I've not said I am against prison, because I understand prison not as punishment. In the law where I live in, prison is written to be intended for rieducating people and help them return on the society. Is it so? No, the cases are more unique that rare. Fear of prison (and imprisonment) is NOT a valid way to educate people. Even passing over the morality that this teaches, it's obvious that this pragmatic way does not function with 100% efficency.
Quote:
Who here has said anything about "revenge"?
This:
Quote:
Getting raped in prison is par for the course. If they don't like the accommodations and customs there, maybe they'll read the brochure next time before they visit.
This:
Quote:
You mean the criminals don't like being the innocent victim of crimes? Awww, that's too bad. They should have done their homework. Prisons are full of bad people...
And this:
Quote:
Who cares, they did it now they should suffer consequences and the best rehab for people who commit crimes is a "punishment" and more punishment to look forward to on repeated offenses.
not entirely yours, sounded a little like revenge, or anyway in an excessive use of force, or not a just justice, if you wish. If I'm wrong, then pardon. Also, hastily looking at the thread I'm not sure the word rape is used in a correct and unambiguous way.
Quote:
Beyond Saving Inc. Presents The ALL NEW BS69 Prison Sex Change Kit

Funny that. To me, all of those quoted remarks ring a general tune of apathy towards the suffering of evil people. At least Wingless pointed out (not so) tactfully that bad things, including rape, happen to nonviolent, nonmalicious offenders while in prison.

Not quite sure what started him on that rant in a thread about transsexuals in prison, but he isn't anywhere near the caliber of disruptive poster like a couple other RRSers I could name.

Quote:
Well, this goes one way only. How do you do for the other?

LOL

"Does his face express some general angst, or did getting a tattoo from a box cutter and ballpoint pen hurt like a bitch?"

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle

butterbattle wrote:

Eh...

There are people who might be in the same prison for committing less severe crimes, and I would care more about them.

I do think this is news worthy. Even if some people don't care about the rape much, they should care that states might spend taxpayer money to conduct sex change operations for these criminals.

That was the point, this has made news which makes it an issue. It should not even be an issue. Because it makes news now there is a good chance it will draw attention and the bleeding hearts will be all over it. In the next few years we will probably be paying for it because it has been made an issue.

You know being in an overcrowded prison can make people crazy, maybe we need to open more of them. I hear the food is not always that great, we should hire internationally known chefs to cook for them. It's really rough they don't get to leave and stuff maybe we should just let them stay home. Sometimes they hit one another we should supply them with boxing helmets. I hear there is a gang proble in prison maybe we should just let the gangbangers have their own clubhouses and stuff.

Really hard to type with a freakin bird bouncing from your keyboard to mouse hand. Just an FYI

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


wingless_sephiroth
atheist
wingless_sephiroth's picture
Posts: 117
Joined: 2011-04-03
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:butterbattle

robj101 wrote:

butterbattle wrote:

Eh...

There are people who might be in the same prison for committing less severe crimes, and I would care more about them.

I do think this is news worthy. Even if some people don't care about the rape much, they should care that states might spend taxpayer money to conduct sex change operations for these criminals.

That was the point, this has made news which makes it an issue. It should not even be an issue. Because it makes news now there is a good chance it will draw attention and the bleeding hearts will be all over it. In the next few years we will probably be paying for it because it has been made an issue.

You know being in an overcrowded prison can make people crazy, maybe we need to open more of them. I hear the food is not always that great, we should hire internationally known chefs to cook for them. It's really rough they don't get to leave and stuff maybe we should just let them stay home. Sometimes they hit one another we should supply them with boxing helmets. I hear there is a gang proble in prison maybe we should just let the gangbangers have their own clubhouses and stuff.

Really hard to type with a freakin bird bouncing from your keyboard to mouse hand. Just an FYI

Yes, I think our prison system is already inefficient and ridiculous, and the fact that only a few dollars are spent on a prisoner a day vs the fact that several thousand tax dollars are allocated per year shows that there is a gigantic privatised prison industry that relishes in money falling through the cracks. At least in the United States, I can't speak for other countries.

But, the point I really want to come to is that overcrowding is nothing compared to being raped. Bad food is nothing compared to rape. Not having your possessions is nothing compared to rape. Rape is one of the worst experiences a person can go through, and I don't think it should be talked about lightly or dismissed so easily.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 Well, I could have sworn

 Well, I could have sworn that we already covered this but rape is bad and people should not rape other people.

 

That having been said, if we lived in a world with no rape, we would also be living in a world with no jails.

 

Sammy Davis jr. wrote:
Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. Oh yeah! Don't do it.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


luca
atheist
Posts: 400
Joined: 2011-02-21
User is offlineOffline
my club

Quote:
You know being in an overcrowded prison can make people crazy, maybe we need to open more of them. I hear the food is not always that great, we should hire internationally known chefs to cook for them. It's really rough they don't get to leave and stuff maybe we should just let them stay home. Sometimes they hit one another we should supply them with boxing helmets. I hear there is a gang proble in prison maybe we should just let the gangbangers have their own clubhouses and stuff.

Really hard to type with a freakin bird bouncing from your keyboard to mouse hand. Just an FYI


You should come to Italy. We give prisoners even cable channel. But you have to know someone, be somebody...


Joker
atheist
Joker's picture
Posts: 180
Joined: 2010-07-23
User is offlineOffline
Except there are other

Except there are other issues to be considered too. For one thing, we seem to be trying for harsher sentencing and a greater degree of police intervention but while jails are filling faster it doesn't seem to be dealing with big problems. Not to mention that there are plenty of non violent non dangerous people in prison, IE people who just smoke pot or other non violent drug users. I don't necessarily condone drug use per se, but I also reason that a person should have a right to put what they want in their own damn body. I could also point out how ubiquitous private prisons are becoming and how many of them pay the state per prisoner, which may mean that we're seeing higher rates of incarceration because it's more lucrative.

 

I would also argue that the attitude that prisoners should always get the least of everything isn't going to help rehabilitate them and may only make them more dangerous when they get out and make the prisons themselves more dangerous.


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Joker wrote:Except there are

Joker wrote:

Except there are other issues to be considered too. For one thing, we seem to be trying for harsher sentencing and a greater degree of police intervention but while jails are filling faster it doesn't seem to be dealing with big problems. Not to mention that there are plenty of non violent non dangerous people in prison, IE people who just smoke pot or other non violent drug users. I don't necessarily condone drug use per se, but I also reason that a person should have a right to put what they want in their own damn body. I could also point out how ubiquitous private prisons are becoming and how many of them pay the state per prisoner, which may mean that we're seeing higher rates of incarceration because it's more lucrative.

 

I would also argue that the attitude that prisoners should always get the least of everything isn't going to help rehabilitate them and may only make them more dangerous when they get out and make the prisons themselves more dangerous.

So lets go the other way, give them everything and hope they just don't want to go back ..?

That's working so well.

I agree on the potsmoker reference but the law is the law untill we change it. Untill then they are in prison.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
robj101 wrote:Joker

robj101 wrote:

Joker wrote:

Except there are other issues to be considered too. For one thing, we seem to be trying for harsher sentencing and a greater degree of police intervention but while jails are filling faster it doesn't seem to be dealing with big problems. Not to mention that there are plenty of non violent non dangerous people in prison, IE people who just smoke pot or other non violent drug users. I don't necessarily condone drug use per se, but I also reason that a person should have a right to put what they want in their own damn body. I could also point out how ubiquitous private prisons are becoming and how many of them pay the state per prisoner, which may mean that we're seeing higher rates of incarceration because it's more lucrative.

 

I would also argue that the attitude that prisoners should always get the least of everything isn't going to help rehabilitate them and may only make them more dangerous when they get out and make the prisons themselves more dangerous.

So lets go the other way, give them everything and hope they just don't want to go back ..?

That's working so well.

I agree on the potsmoker reference but the law is the law untill we change it. Untill then they are in prison.

 

You know, I have wondered about that.  I am all for mary jane being legal.  But then, what about those pot smokers in prison?  Some there on "3 strikes you're out" laws - so it was supposed to be for life.  And then we make smoking it legal.  Do we let them all out?  Do tax payers compensate them for lost years like we do with people exonerated for other crimes via DNA testing?

PS - I am staunchly against 3 strike laws - they cost too much. 

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


luca
atheist
Posts: 400
Joined: 2011-02-21
User is offlineOffline
san martino

Quote:
You know, I have wondered about that. I am all for mary jane being legal. But then, what about those pot smokers in prison? Some there on "3 strikes you're out" laws - so it was supposed to be for life. And then we make smoking it legal. Do we let them all out? Do tax payers compensate them for lost years like we do with people exonerated for other crimes via DNA testing?

PS - I am staunchly against 3 strike laws - they cost too much.


This argument seems to sit between papal infallibility and Sarkozy, hehe.


robj101
atheist
robj101's picture
Posts: 2481
Joined: 2010-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Joker wrote:Except there are

Joker wrote:

Except there are other issues to be considered too. For one thing, we seem to be trying for harsher sentencing and a greater degree of police intervention but while jails are filling faster it doesn't seem to be dealing with big problems. Not to mention that there are plenty of non violent non dangerous people in prison, IE people who just smoke pot or other non violent drug users. I don't necessarily condone drug use per se, but I also reason that a person should have a right to put what they want in their own damn body. I could also point out how ubiquitous private prisons are becoming and how many of them pay the state per prisoner, which may mean that we're seeing higher rates of incarceration because it's more lucrative.

 

I would also argue that the attitude that prisoners should always get the least of everything isn't going to help rehabilitate them and may only make them more dangerous when they get out and make the prisons themselves more dangerous.

If they need to go to rehab I hear there are better places than prison. You go to prison for stepping beyond social nonconformity via breaking the laws of society, not to be "rehabilitated". I would argue the best "rehab" for someone who commits a crime is to give them a truly BAD reward for doing so, not a happy camp where we will coddle and try to make them see that they have done wrong.

I'm willing to bet most of them know very well they were breaking the law and most of those knew it while they were doing it.

If you stick your finger in a light socket and get shocked you might tend to not want to do that again. Very simple stuff just the way I like it.

If you stick your finger in a light socket and then you get someone telling you you shouldn't do that on general principles you might do it again anyway.

Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
wingless_sephiroth

wingless_sephiroth wrote:

Okay, okay, I was a fucking retard to bring up the international law thing, and presume we're all pro-life internationalist hippies.


sidenote; Seriously, what the hell gave you that impression? Yeah, we've had our fair share of proponents for pacifistic, socially democratized welfare states, one of them is a highly active moderator here, many of them have since left RRS, and many conservatives/RWs have jumped on board RRS since it's founding. We've made great strides towards a more centrist political leaning here, representing views from the entire political spectrum (save for fascism, heh.)

So whatever you've read or (I suspect) were told about us, is apparently a good bit out of touch.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


wingless_sephiroth
atheist
wingless_sephiroth's picture
Posts: 117
Joined: 2011-04-03
User is offlineOffline
Kapkao

Kapkao wrote:

wingless_sephiroth wrote:

Okay, okay, I was a fucking retard to bring up the international law thing, and presume we're all pro-life internationalist hippies.

 

sidenote; Seriously, what the hell gave you that impression? Yeah, we've had our fair share of proponents for pacifistic, socially democratized welfare states, one of them is a highly active moderator here, many of them have since left RRS, and many conservatives/RWs have jumped on board RRS since it's founding. We've made great strides towards a more centrist political leaning here, representing views from the entire political spectrum (save for fascism, heh.)

So whatever you've read or (I suspect) were told about us, is apparently a good bit out of touch.

The funny thing about that post is I am a member of the Libertarian Right myself (in another post, on the politicalcompass.org, I came up further on the Right than anyone here), although I do oppose the death penalty and support internationalism. I know I was smoking weed a lot the week I posted that. As for what you actually asked:

I posted that around the same time I started getting even more active in ex-Muslim groups.  Debate points will range from the existence of God to the morality of Islam. For the latter, the arguments we often use will centre on the fact that Islam is incompatible with almost every international law out there; international law, we argue, represents a consensus of the sane world. Supporting ideas of American isolationism and support of the death penalty would just give Muslims a (flawed) justification to their own cultural isolationism and support of the death penalty, so most ex-Muslims don't tend to support such ideas in their own realpolitik. Arguing, 'Apostates, homosexuals, and blasphemers don't deserve to die, but murderers and rapists do,' gives the Muslims much more ground than arguing ,'No one deserves to die.' With the first argument, they start coming up with superfluous arguments about how the former are as destructive to society as the latter, and although this is refutable, it takes the conversation down a time-consuming and sometimes futile lane. Additionally, without internationalism, we have to prove who gives 'humans' their 'rights' if not a consensus, and while this is also possible to do, it's again time-consuming. Explaining the writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau to someone who refuses to even understand simple Darwinism is not fun.

Rather, we point out Islam's inability to agree to a sane world's consensus, giving a list ranging from freedom of speech, religious freedom, gender equality, and the right to live despite any criminal transgression. The last is a setup for Muslims; they are bound to bring up the United States, to which we are bound to agree with them, making us seem a shit load more objective, and less likely to be called, 'Western agents pretending to be ex-Muslims,' which is one of the common accusation against us since most Muslims do not want to acknowledge that anyone would ever desire to leave Islam, it being the perfect and final religion.

And that's how we roll. Ain't it cute how apostasy decides political specifics?


5_senses_does_n...
Posts: 40
Joined: 2011-07-12
User is offlineOffline
why is this news?for the

why is this news?

for the same reason so many people have commented on this post. It pushes peoples buttons.

Its controversial , and that means buckets of money for the media.

 

Its the same reason that we had about a week of coverage on 10,000 people dying in Japan, or Haiti, and we have years of coverage on the Casey Anthony case.

 

its the same reason that Christians are up in arms about gay marriage, but not about eating shellfish, or not working on the sabbath.  all were deemed abominations in the Bible but which one is the most controversial?

the funny thing is the context of the word abomination.

It is a misleading rendition of the Hebrew word toevah, The term toevah (and its plural, toevot) occurs 103 times in the Hebrew Bible, and most of the time has the connotation of a non-Israelite cultic practice.

 

but um...anyway, that's probably why this is news.

I don't know which I doubt more.
the existence of god, or an open minded atheist.


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
wingless_sephiroth wrote:I

wingless_sephiroth wrote:
I posted that around the same time I started getting even more active in ex-Muslim groups.  Debate points will range from the existence of God to the morality of Islam. For the latter, the arguments we often use will centre on the fact that Islam is incompatible with almost every international law out there; international law, we argue, represents a consensus of the sane world. Supporting ideas of American isolationism and support of the death penalty would just give Muslims a (flawed) justification to their own cultural isolationism and support of the death penalty, so most ex-Muslims don't tend to support such ideas in their own realpolitik. Arguing, 'Apostates, homosexuals, and blasphemers don't deserve to die, but murderers and rapists do,' gives the Muslims much more ground than arguing ,'No one deserves to die.' With the first argument, they start coming up with superfluous arguments about how the former are as destructive to society as the latter, and although this is refutable, it takes the conversation down a time-consuming and sometimes futile lane. Additionally, without internationalism, we have to prove who gives 'humans' their 'rights' if not a consensus, and while this is also possible to do, it's again time-consuming. Explaining the writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau to someone who refuses to even understand simple Darwinism is not fun.

That's only relevant if you want the final authority for your rights to be someone other than yourself, or at least some political figurehead with a meager responsibility to answer to his/her constituents. I choose to rely on my country's constitution (every part of it, including all of the BoR) for inalienable rights, though I realize I'm in a shrinking minority... that lately, there are those in power who would prefer to treat the 'great writ' as a "Living document", that it's little more than a loose set of guidelines, and that it is obsolete in light of recent growing political developments... in particular, that it struggles to remain compatible with current social trends or what have you. Luckily, there is a means to alter a select portion of contents if every state feels it is called for- the amendment.

You'll find that The American Constitution, as written, more than sufficiently covers basic human rights, if applied constructively and not as mere "guidelines".

Quote:
we have to prove who gives 'humans' their 'rights' if not a consensus

No, we don't, and international law is only a consensus between nation-states, IE the political figureheads in office at the time a given law was signed, not actual people. A simple paper can lay the ground rules that determine (inalienable) human rights in a way that the UN could never hope to achieve, since the only thing the UN does effectively is capitulate in the face of danger and internal turmoil.

As for the rights of people native to predominantly muslim nations, I don't honestly care and it isn't my responsibility; it's theirs (read: Arab Spring. The freedom of so many muslims would not be possible without them rising up in the first place.) I couldn't care less if some tribesman decide to sever the penis of a known rapist (a common form of tribal justice); I won't even flinch. If someone asks for my help in releasing them from their tyrants, I might agree. Otherwise, it's none of my business, because tyrants will abuse and bully the poor fools who dared put them in power to begin with, regardless of what my nation does. It is only the ongoing quest to seek unlimited size and power in government that has led the United States to seek position as the World's Biggest Babysitter.

You'll find I have emotional investment over things I believe my politics or myself have little control.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)