Re: Castration.

Ann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 00:37:00 GMT, "Cesariana Oveila Hysterectum"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> >
> >"Yin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >> What do you think about castration for sex offenses?  I heared it
> >> reduces recedivism to 3%.  Should it be used instead of prison or
> >> along with it?
> >
> >Better question might be: Do you support castration of those who file false
> >sex abuse allegations, if the sentence you propose became law?
> 
> Why would that be a *better* question?  It's simply a different one.

Almost any question is better than a question of whether men should be
castrated.  Next.


> >What compensation should the state provide to those falsely convicted? The
> >FBI found (by going back to old cases with new DNA science) that fully a
> >third of those in prison for sex abuse offenses were innocent.
> 
> And this is a different one again.  Do you have a view on the question
> asked?

Probably not.  No civilized human being _should_ have a view on such
ridiculously misandric question.

And one can hardly call it a question anyway.  It was misandric tripe
disguised as a question.  He/she/it was simply stating that men should
be castrated, and disguising the disgusting statement by asking
whether the man should be set free or imprisoned afterward.  Of course
you fell for it, but your betters didn't.