Personal tools

Argument: Castration puts rights of victims over sex offenders

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

Hynek Blasko, the father of Jakub Simanek, a 9-year old boy raped and killed in 2009 in the Czech Republic expressed indignation that human rights groups were putting the rights of criminals ahead of those of victims: "My personal tragedy is that my son is in heaven and he is never coming back, and all I have left of him is 1.5 kilograms of ashes. No one wants to touch the rights of the pedophiles, but what about the rights of a 9-year-old boy with his life ahead of him?"[1]

"Chemical castration. Real solution needs involvement of entire society." The Korea Times. June 3rd, 2010: "Opponents cite possibilities of human rights abuses of offenders. This is basically a sound concern, but should give way to the far more severe and realistic sufferings of victims and their families. The focus should be on how to maximize its benefits and minimize adverse effects."

Leader of an Israeli pro castration of sex offenders website, Tnu Ligdol Besheket, said in January of 2011: "The argument is always that pedophiles need quiet and a chance to rehabilitate after they are released from prison, but we believe that it is the children that need quiet and should be protected, not the men."[2]

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits