Tracking you chemically? Ethical?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-01-2013, 01:02 PM
RE: Tracking you chemically? Ethical?
(27-01-2013 12:58 PM)Hamata k Wrote:  Why doe this keep coming up?


I am Hamata and I like boobs.



There. That's been dealt with.
Then you should definitely consider checking the gender beforehand is what I'm sayin'....

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderĂ²."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vera's post
27-01-2013, 02:09 PM
RE: Tracking you chemically? Ethical?
In a book by Dr Peter Breggin, Medication Madness, he really puts the boots into Big Pharma and sloppy over prescribing doctors.
Breggin is particularly concerned over all the anti depressants, ritalin for kids, along with the benzos, all of which he claims can cause suicidal and ultra aggressive tendencies in some people.

Even if he is partially correct, forced administrations might cause the very things such action would claim to prevent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-01-2013, 02:39 PM
RE: Tracking you chemically? Ethical?
This is no different than any other technology that facilitates the tracking of individuals. It's wonderful if used voluntarily by private citizens and it's despicable if used by the state.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes bbeljefe's post
27-01-2013, 04:26 PM
RE: Tracking you chemically? Ethical?
(24-01-2013 12:00 PM)kim Wrote:  You mentioned the chemical castration of convicted rapists. ... However, I would go more uh... natural than chemical castration to rather surgically remove the testicles of serial rapists and most certainly of pedophiles with no hormone treatment. ... Oh and... those men in India currently facing rape and now murder charges... yep, nuts off. Drinking Beverage
(24-01-2013 12:50 PM)Dom Wrote:  Removal of testicles does not cause impotence. It just causes infertility.

Yup. Chemical castration is far worse. Just ask my hero Alan Turing. Oh wait we can't 'cause the fucking idiot Brits sentenced him to death by estrogen for the unforgivable sin of just being fucking gay. Stupid fucking Brits.

Breathing - it's more art than science.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-01-2013, 05:08 PM
RE: Tracking you chemically? Ethical?
Castration of sex offenders is about as effective as cutting off someone's ear to rid them of prostrate cancer. Sex crimes aren't about sex and they have nothing to do with testosterone.

Rapists have unprocessed anger for women so if you castrate them and they have another opportunity to rape, they'll probably go ahead and kill the victim, perhaps without even raping her. Pedophiles have unprocessed anger from being used as sexual object when they were children and again, castration won't stop them. Pedophiles often don't include penile penetration in their attacks to begin with.


If we are truly interested in stopping the violence in our societies we have to understand that violence is not the answer. In fact, violence is exactly the reason why we have evil in the world to begin with.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-01-2013, 05:59 PM (This post was last modified: 27-01-2013 06:02 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Tracking you chemically? Ethical?
(27-01-2013 05:08 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  Pedophiles often don't include penile penetration in their attacks to begin with.

The pedophile school bus driver who dicked with Girly when I was like 8 yo was perfectly happy with just diddling with my little tiny prepubescent penis. ... Fucking weirdo. ... Told my parents. ... Fucker didn't leave no scars. ... Bizarre memories, yes. Scars, no.

Breathing - it's more art than science.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-01-2013, 11:32 PM
RE: Tracking you chemically? Ethical?
(22-01-2013 05:49 PM)aurora Wrote:  I think it's ethical for the people who are a danger to society.
Unfortunately there are too many mentally ill people on the street today mostly due to de-institutionalization.


Who then decides who is a danger to society? The government sees anonymous as a terrorist group. I see them as a group trying to make a stand for freedom. If I say that I don't trust the government (and I have every reason to not trust them), I could be labeled as such as well. There are just some areas tech should not be used.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: