BoyWiki:Agora/24 May 2015: Difference between revisions
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Where the science might make a difference is, occasionally, in the courtroom. Public defenders will sometimes argue that, for example, the [[Butner studies]] were flawed, if the prosecutor uses those studies to back up his argument for a harsh sentence. But judges are bound by the mandatory minimums, and required to take into consideration the sentencing guidelines, that the legislature enacts, and the legislators don't necessarily care much about science. Even if they hand down a lenient sentence, the defendant remains a felon who is required to submit to sex offender registration and all that. [[User:Lysander|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander|talk]]) 21:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC) | Where the science might make a difference is, occasionally, in the courtroom. Public defenders will sometimes argue that, for example, the [[Butner studies]] were flawed, if the prosecutor uses those studies to back up his argument for a harsh sentence. But judges are bound by the mandatory minimums, and required to take into consideration the sentencing guidelines, that the legislature enacts, and the legislators don't necessarily care much about science. Even if they hand down a lenient sentence, the defendant remains a felon who is required to submit to sex offender registration and all that. [[User:Lysander|Lysander]] ([[User talk:Lysander|talk]]) 21:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC) | ||
[[Category:Agora archive]] | |||
Latest revision as of 11:52, 2 June 2015
Agora/24 May 2015
Do people even care about the evidence?
To what extent, if any, was the American public's changing attitudes toward gays influenced by what scientists were learning about homosexuality?
I wonder this, because it often seems as though people believe that the fight to change the laws concerning adult-child sex will be influenced by science. Yet we've seen, e.g. with the Rind Report, that people will often dismiss science that supports a view they don't agree with. They will even enact laws, such as those amending the sentencing guidelines, that are contrary to common sense -- for example, punishing child pornography possession more harshly than forcible rape of a child.
So I wonder, how does one change public opinion? Is it a matter of people finally having the balls to come forward and take a stand that will attract persecution? As Edith Windsor put it, "At some point, somebody came out and said 'I'm gay,' which gave a couple more people the guts to do it. As we increasingly came out, people saw that we didn't have horns. People learned that we were their kids and their cousins and their friends."[1]
Where the science might make a difference is, occasionally, in the courtroom. Public defenders will sometimes argue that, for example, the Butner studies were flawed, if the prosecutor uses those studies to back up his argument for a harsh sentence. But judges are bound by the mandatory minimums, and required to take into consideration the sentencing guidelines, that the legislature enacts, and the legislators don't necessarily care much about science. Even if they hand down a lenient sentence, the defendant remains a felon who is required to submit to sex offender registration and all that. Lysander (talk) 21:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
