Teacher told students to call pedophiles 'minor attracted persons'

submitted by meisthebigdumbTransracial BlackX Rockgender Bispecies from dailymail.co.uk

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]wylanderuk 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Yeah this is going to be an unpopular opinion, but I can see the logic behind making a distinction between having the attraction and not acting on it and having the attraction and acting on it.

What I can't see is how to do it without is how to do it without providing cover to the woodchipper fodder that act on it.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

There's good reason here for medical privacy laws for people who need to see a psychiatrist or need to get castrated. No need to publicly state the reason behind it to everyone if no crime had occurred.

But the instant you've got someone in a position of authority making statements publicly like "Don't judge people just because they want to have sex with a 5 year old" yeah you shouldn't be anywhere near education. Like you absolutely should judge people who want to have sex with a 5 year old as evil. And if you don't, that means you are also evil and will be judged accordingly.

[–]wylanderuk 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

But the instant you've got someone in a position of authority making statements publicly like "Don't judge people just because they want to have sex with a 5 year old" yeah you shouldn't be anywhere near education.

Agreed...

Like you absolutely should judge people who want to have sex with a 5 year old as evil. And if you don't, that means you are also evil and will be judged accordingly.

Thats where I somewhat disagree, they act on it? Yeah up against the wall they go, they don't? Then no.

Thier urges are abhorrent, no ifs no buts and if they act on them? They should be removed from society in a permeant manner be it locked up for life or executed. If they don't act on it or take steps like chemical castration, they may have evil urges but they have not moved into the realm of being evil.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If there are these hypothetical pedophiles that don't act on it then they are for all intents and purposes to the rest of society not pedophiles since we can't read minds. Schrodinger's pedophile?

Someone merely saying "Don't judge people for wanting to have sex with 5 year olds." Isn't and should not be "illegal" falls under free speech as distasteful as it is. But it is definitely speech that any reasonable person shouldn't tolerate as normal and I'd argue is absolutely evidence that the person in question lacks good judgement and is unfit for any position of authority. But if course they've yet to commit a crime so arrest isn't possible. But I'd watch them very closely.

This isn't much different than discussing something like murder. If the teacher said something like "Don't judge people just because they want to kill niggers." I'd have the same thing to say. You're not a murderer yet, but if you go around talking about how you want to commit genocide on people, yeah you're getting judged by me as a very strong candidate for future murderer.

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think it's perfectly fine to judge someone as long as you treat them fairly. Like if you know a person is attracted to children but never acts on it and sees a mental professional... Sure judge them but treat them fairly if they never act on it.

The teacher seemed to be taking more of a speech(-100) stance which sounded like she was condoning the activity. An English teacher probably should have the ability to construct a better sentence if she meant something else.