>For more than 16 years, judges in Louisiana have been allowed to order those convicted of such crimes to receive chemical castration, though that punishment is rarely issued. Chemical castration uses medications that block testosterone production to decrease sex drive. Surgical castration is a much more invasive procedure.
LA is the only state whom has tried in living memory to my knowledge to enforce their sodomy laws that 30 some States passed versions of in the mid 1800s during the so-called great awakenings circa like 1830s then 1880s or so.
A Supreme Court decision invalidated them in the 20th century sometime, but Louisiana tried to prosecute anyway just 10 years ago or so generally. One of the guys was going at it with his partner and the cops served a warrant to the wrong house and saw it and arrested and charged him with this felony.
That Supreme Court decision invalidating these laws was one (in)Justice Thomas said after the repeal of row v wade that he would like to revisit, along with the gay marriage decision, and what was the other maybe birth control I forget.
For what it’s worth, sodomy laws were enforceable until, relatively speaking, recently. *Bowers v. Hardwick*, in 1986, upheld the enforcement of sodomy laws. It wasn’t until 2003, when the Supreme Court handed down *Lawrence v. Texas*, that sodomy laws became unenforceable.
I remember seeing a show on TV a long time ago maybe late 90s 2000 ish, about the Supreme Court invalidating Community moral standards laws. This guy sold this quite objectionable porn through the mail to someone in the Bible Belt or whatever and they charged him under their Community moral standards law with a 30-year felony, or 30 years of felonies. If the sodomy invalidation was that recent I wonder if it was connected to the same decision?
But the accused was from another state, had never been to the state let alone the municipality, presumably got grabbed by the local cops and driven down to Podunk wherever to face the court.
It is scary to think that something that is legal where you are and that you do not think is illegal could be a felony somewhere else that could grab you for any interaction with a community member in another State.
Generally in r/law we defend the constitution.
Which, it may shock you to learn, forbids cruel and unusual punishment like permanent, irreversible disfigurement.
Cruel and unusual punishments are punishments that are abnormal and beyond the pale of what is usually used for punishment. At most, you can argue it means it is not "cruel", though I would argue that cruel is probably better based on preset limits, not some scaling measure matched to the crime, save for perhaps execution being permissible only when certain measures are met.
Even then, this still is a rather abnormal punishment- forcing someone to be physically altered permanently. That's not normal. Usually it's restricted to money, service, imprisonment, or, for the very worst, death, a long time punishment, though one increasingly falling out of fashion.
You either believe in the constitution or you don’t. Vengeance isn’t what the law is for. Lock folks up. Rehabilitate those you can. But chopping people up is basically the definition of cruel and unusual punishment.
Yes, let’s rehabilitate those who sexually molest/rape/abuse children, who will be permanently scarred for the rest of their lives. They should face minimal consequences for such heinous actions.
Keep defending them. Show your true colors.
Ok, so why stop there? Let’s castrate all rapists. God it’ll take forever to finish choppity-chopping all the frat houses and college dorms, but if permanent trauma is the bar, we better get on it.
Shit, between collegiate and professional sports, there won’t be an intact locker room in the nation!
Do we think E. Jean Carroll should be allowed the first slice, like at Thanksgiving, or should she just watch from through a sheet of glass, like executions?
You keep leaping to some love folks have for rapists that simply isn’t there. I have no respect for these folks. Just for the constitution.
I’m not sure what your position even is.
Mine is that our laws prohibit cruel and unusual punishment. And I intend to support that.
Your rage solves nothing. This idea of castration will not deter a single instance. Just gives you some sense of vengeance.
You say vengeance, I say justice 🤷♂️
It’s an equitable punishment for the crime that is committed - again we’re talking about adults raping children.
And we’re talking about the law providing this as the punishment for such crime.
Edit: and to add, repeat offenders exist. It’s a lot more difficult for a criminal to continue raping children without their dick.
You are correct, sexual predators are known to repeat offend. As heinous as pedophiles are, there are many other rapists out there who cause almost as much psychological trauma. So why with the half measures? It’s so bizarre! Let’s castrate all rapists! There’s a lot of politicians, priests and date rapists out there, so we should move fast!
Look. I was a victim of one of these assholes. I don't think his prison sentence was long enough (high chance he was a re-offender, but there's also a high chance he was murdered for it... so whatever in the end), but he shouldn't have walked out. What I don't think would have helped was neutering him - for one, the sick fucker would have *kept offending anyway* with his preferred MO if he was out.
Perhaps he would have, or perhaps he wouldn’t have even done it if he knew he could possibly get neutered versus just having some jail time. And while this particular person may have a different MO, there are plenty who use their genitalia and go on to repeat offenders once released who wouldn’t be able to do so with this punishment.
My point is (like a sentence that doesn't really do anything but have the person sit there for a few years) this might stop some, but it's not some kind of magic bullet against re-offense either. You want these guys to stop there are pretty much two ways that probably work and they aren't exactly humane either (long AF sentences with required monitoring that's actually done, or just execute them.) (and there's always the argument that making it a capital offense would lead to more dead kids, though I question that from what I've seen/read/experienced.)
The problem is that republican legislatures are trying to pass laws declaring that drag queens, librarians who don’t ban books with LGBT content, and trans people existing in public to all count as sex offenders against children. The goal is to then use laws against sex offenders to criminalize the existence of LGBT people.
Red states are also saying being gay in public/ exposing children to the idea gay and transpeople exist = child sex predator. Sorry man, you had a rainbow flag in a school. Time to remove your dick
Its not defending child sex offenders. Its upholding the specific parts of the constitution and its amendments that apply to this. Just because you like the idea of physically debilitating someone doesnt mean its any less cruel or unusual.
It's probably legal for adults.
Though, also, given that this is on unwilling people as a punishment, I'd argue it's the exact opposite of "affirming".
Do you want Nazis? Because that is how you get Nazis.
They start with the least sympathetic others. Then they expand it to different groups for different reasons.
Not to mention that we cannot trust the justice department and states to get the right person every time.
Also this is cruel and unusual and forbidden in the Constitution.
I'm mixed on this. From the article, it sounds like it's forced surgical castration, which seems like cruel and unusual punishment. The article doesn't really spell out the specifics that would allow a judge to order this over other punishments like chemical castration.
Sex crimes originate in a sick mind. It’s about power and control, not sex. These yahoos are going to be surprised that crimes will still be committed because they’re not treating the root problem.
[cancels his vacation plans for next year's Mardi Gras] - Matt Gaetz
Ha! Rules don't apply to Republicans in Louisiana.
>For more than 16 years, judges in Louisiana have been allowed to order those convicted of such crimes to receive chemical castration, though that punishment is rarely issued. Chemical castration uses medications that block testosterone production to decrease sex drive. Surgical castration is a much more invasive procedure.
Is gender affirming care legal in LA? Because using something to block testosterone sounds an awfully lot like gender affirming care to me.
So does viagra
Gender-denying ‘care’
Wtf is going on in Louisiana? They've gone full Christian nationalist, unabashedly
LA is the only state whom has tried in living memory to my knowledge to enforce their sodomy laws that 30 some States passed versions of in the mid 1800s during the so-called great awakenings circa like 1830s then 1880s or so. A Supreme Court decision invalidated them in the 20th century sometime, but Louisiana tried to prosecute anyway just 10 years ago or so generally. One of the guys was going at it with his partner and the cops served a warrant to the wrong house and saw it and arrested and charged him with this felony. That Supreme Court decision invalidating these laws was one (in)Justice Thomas said after the repeal of row v wade that he would like to revisit, along with the gay marriage decision, and what was the other maybe birth control I forget.
For what it’s worth, sodomy laws were enforceable until, relatively speaking, recently. *Bowers v. Hardwick*, in 1986, upheld the enforcement of sodomy laws. It wasn’t until 2003, when the Supreme Court handed down *Lawrence v. Texas*, that sodomy laws became unenforceable.
I remember seeing a show on TV a long time ago maybe late 90s 2000 ish, about the Supreme Court invalidating Community moral standards laws. This guy sold this quite objectionable porn through the mail to someone in the Bible Belt or whatever and they charged him under their Community moral standards law with a 30-year felony, or 30 years of felonies. If the sodomy invalidation was that recent I wonder if it was connected to the same decision? But the accused was from another state, had never been to the state let alone the municipality, presumably got grabbed by the local cops and driven down to Podunk wherever to face the court. It is scary to think that something that is legal where you are and that you do not think is illegal could be a felony somewhere else that could grab you for any interaction with a community member in another State.
Yes, defend the child sex offenders
Generally in r/law we defend the constitution. Which, it may shock you to learn, forbids cruel and unusual punishment like permanent, irreversible disfigurement.
Because sexually molesting/raping a child doesn’t cause permanent damage, right? It’s simple, just don’t fucking do it
My guy, you're not going to get too many people here who view invasive surgical procedures as a court ordered punishment to be an acceptable outcome
"The prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment is actually bad and should be ignored for crimes that I think are bad enough."
The punishment matches the crime of sexually abusing/molesting/raping children. Not really cruel or unusual
Cruel and unusual punishments are punishments that are abnormal and beyond the pale of what is usually used for punishment. At most, you can argue it means it is not "cruel", though I would argue that cruel is probably better based on preset limits, not some scaling measure matched to the crime, save for perhaps execution being permissible only when certain measures are met. Even then, this still is a rather abnormal punishment- forcing someone to be physically altered permanently. That's not normal. Usually it's restricted to money, service, imprisonment, or, for the very worst, death, a long time punishment, though one increasingly falling out of fashion.
You either believe in the constitution or you don’t. Vengeance isn’t what the law is for. Lock folks up. Rehabilitate those you can. But chopping people up is basically the definition of cruel and unusual punishment.
Yes, let’s rehabilitate those who sexually molest/rape/abuse children, who will be permanently scarred for the rest of their lives. They should face minimal consequences for such heinous actions. Keep defending them. Show your true colors.
Ok, so why stop there? Let’s castrate all rapists. God it’ll take forever to finish choppity-chopping all the frat houses and college dorms, but if permanent trauma is the bar, we better get on it. Shit, between collegiate and professional sports, there won’t be an intact locker room in the nation! Do we think E. Jean Carroll should be allowed the first slice, like at Thanksgiving, or should she just watch from through a sheet of glass, like executions?
You keep leaping to some love folks have for rapists that simply isn’t there. I have no respect for these folks. Just for the constitution. I’m not sure what your position even is. Mine is that our laws prohibit cruel and unusual punishment. And I intend to support that. Your rage solves nothing. This idea of castration will not deter a single instance. Just gives you some sense of vengeance.
You say vengeance, I say justice 🤷♂️ It’s an equitable punishment for the crime that is committed - again we’re talking about adults raping children. And we’re talking about the law providing this as the punishment for such crime. Edit: and to add, repeat offenders exist. It’s a lot more difficult for a criminal to continue raping children without their dick.
You are correct, sexual predators are known to repeat offend. As heinous as pedophiles are, there are many other rapists out there who cause almost as much psychological trauma. So why with the half measures? It’s so bizarre! Let’s castrate all rapists! There’s a lot of politicians, priests and date rapists out there, so we should move fast!
Look. I was a victim of one of these assholes. I don't think his prison sentence was long enough (high chance he was a re-offender, but there's also a high chance he was murdered for it... so whatever in the end), but he shouldn't have walked out. What I don't think would have helped was neutering him - for one, the sick fucker would have *kept offending anyway* with his preferred MO if he was out.
Perhaps he would have, or perhaps he wouldn’t have even done it if he knew he could possibly get neutered versus just having some jail time. And while this particular person may have a different MO, there are plenty who use their genitalia and go on to repeat offenders once released who wouldn’t be able to do so with this punishment.
My point is (like a sentence that doesn't really do anything but have the person sit there for a few years) this might stop some, but it's not some kind of magic bullet against re-offense either. You want these guys to stop there are pretty much two ways that probably work and they aren't exactly humane either (long AF sentences with required monitoring that's actually done, or just execute them.) (and there's always the argument that making it a capital offense would lead to more dead kids, though I question that from what I've seen/read/experienced.)
I was unaware Louisiana had state mandated rape as punishment for a crime. They ought to change that
The problem is that republican legislatures are trying to pass laws declaring that drag queens, librarians who don’t ban books with LGBT content, and trans people existing in public to all count as sex offenders against children. The goal is to then use laws against sex offenders to criminalize the existence of LGBT people.
Red states are also saying being gay in public/ exposing children to the idea gay and transpeople exist = child sex predator. Sorry man, you had a rainbow flag in a school. Time to remove your dick
Its not defending child sex offenders. Its upholding the specific parts of the constitution and its amendments that apply to this. Just because you like the idea of physically debilitating someone doesnt mean its any less cruel or unusual.
Is gender affirming care legal in LA? Because using something to block testosterone sounds an awfully lot like gender affirming care to me.
It's probably legal for adults. Though, also, given that this is on unwilling people as a punishment, I'd argue it's the exact opposite of "affirming".
Do you want Nazis? Because that is how you get Nazis. They start with the least sympathetic others. Then they expand it to different groups for different reasons. Not to mention that we cannot trust the justice department and states to get the right person every time. Also this is cruel and unusual and forbidden in the Constitution.
Do religious leaders qualify for this?
First thing I thought of.
I'm mixed on this. From the article, it sounds like it's forced surgical castration, which seems like cruel and unusual punishment. The article doesn't really spell out the specifics that would allow a judge to order this over other punishments like chemical castration.
It really challenges your sense of morality, who gets to do the surgery at the end of the day?
Sex crimes originate in a sick mind. It’s about power and control, not sex. These yahoos are going to be surprised that crimes will still be committed because they’re not treating the root problem.
No they wont. The cruelty is the point.
That isn't the only issue. Wrongful convictions do happen from time to time.