[citation][nom]malekith2k5[/nom]It isn't. However, murderers, molesters and rapists aren't people -- they are worse than animals. Therefore, they have no rites and we as a society should feel free to cull them as we see fit. Humanity is the only dumb animal that willingly allows bad members of its community to remain within it and try to 'fix' them. Does anyone think an ape/lion/dolphin/anything that had tried to kill another member of the group would be allowed to stay? Nature kills off or drives away these 'bad apples'...humanity pays for their comfort and allows them to breed. Awesome.[/citation]
I disagree. People ARE people. Just because their behaviors and sexual desires don't meet societal standards does not make them not people. Child rape is prevalent around the world. On the contrary, it is a minority human thing to do or humans would not do it. However, it is not a "normal" thing to do. In ancient cultures PARENTS would SHOW their children what sex was.
Many perspectives are also environmental. Not only can our past experiences affect our behaviors, but bacteria/viruses and parasites can change who we are as well.
Research toxoplasmosis, rabies, "behavior altering diseases". Many diseases can affect how we think and act and what we feel...and many are virtually undetectable without procedural testing.
We should look for solutions to people's issues, this is a mental health problem like so many things. You can't just label people as "different" and then kill them for it because they don't live according to the rules you desire them to. There is usually an underlying cause to "unnatural" behavior. Homosexuals and mentally retarded people were at one time seen with the same disdain.
A true humanist would seek to change these perverts through therapy, and an ego-maniacal tyrant would kill those who believe differently.
What if vegetarians took your stance and believed you were a murderer for eating meat? Many feel that if you support the killing of innocent cows by eating them that you should be put to death yourself. Personally, I think they have mental issues as well, but society is fine with their belief as long as they don't act upon it.
By law, an ACT is NOT required for prosecution though. Intent to harm/distribute/etc is usually hard to prove but can be enough to convict. However, without established proof of these things one cannot be indicted. So what then of the person who views child porn but doesn't go anywhere near children or who has no interest in selling the porn? Is that as bad of a crime as the one who took the photo? What if they report what they find but choose to still keep a copy of the photo?
Don't rate me down, I'm just trying to argue opposing viewpoints and cause readers to ask moral questions. Consider that perverts sometimes have their own children that they would never consider taking pictures of. Consider that they might be outstanding citizens in every other regard. I ask you to consider too that they realize they have a problem but have nowhere to go to get help. Addiction is addiction. You may as well desire to burn coffee drinkers, people who have to have music on 24-7, and smokers at the stake along with porn addicts.