See, this is where I start to get screwed up. Because if we don’t choose to be how we are, don’t even those people deserve compassion then?
I think everybody deserves compassion, yes. Human rights apply to all humans, even those who don't respect ours. It's about how we choose to act - punishment solves nothing, the only outcome is personal gratification, and I don't think making people suffer just because it feels good is reasonable. You don't have to like these people, or even interact with them at all if you have the choice, but causing them pain isn't solving the problem.
Does it become not their fault that they are that way?
It's not their fault that they are composed in a way that makes them want to hurt other people. It
is their fault if they
choose to do so. I'm not necessarily suggesting that free will doesn't exist - part of our existence comes down to the choices that we make, and we have the capacity to make good choices, which means we are responsible when we make poor ones.
And then if someone can’t choose, and doesn’t necessarily know because they view themselves as normal or at least not evil, then doesn’t that apply to me too?
Provided you have the legal competence to do so, you should be aware of whether or not you are making decisions like "rape kids to death." Presumably this is not something you have done, so there's no relevance to wondering if you're secretly the same as a person who does. This is more within the spectrum of OCD than it is being "evil." Ultimately, how you
are isn't relevant. It's what you
do that makes you good or bad.
but I also get stuck here because why don’t they see the issue? Is there a legit disability or something that is preventing insight
For the record, most offenders understand right and wrong. The ones who don't are typically considered legally insane, but it's far more common that someone behaves sadistically with the full intention to do so. They know harming other people is wrong, they just don't care. It's a lack of insight into
other people, if anything. Namely that other people should be respected, because they are fully sentient beings who have a right to live peacefully.
Someone who commits actions like raping kids to death doesn't view that child as human. They're simply a means to gratification for the offender. Presumably you don't view kids as meat socks to jerk yourself off with, so there's really no comparison between you and a person that does.
I guess I view repaired as a completely clean slate like nothing ever happened.
Considering that we do not have the technological capacity to go back in time and erase past actions, this is kind of an irrelevant factor as well. But what we most likely
will someday be able to do, is treat conditions like pedophilia and sadism through targeted neurogenesis. If someone hurts a child because they have a neurological abnormality that wires them to be attracted to children (and that erases their empathy for their victims), and then that abnormality is
fixed, how do you suppose our society should engage with those people?
This is where conversations of punishment and compassion become important. If a person no longer poses a risk, we would be punishing them for no reason. But that doesn't mean that they shouldn't engage in a process of restorative justice. It does mean that punitive actions are relatively purposeless. As a victim, if I knew that my abuser underwent treatment that genuinely changed them, I would prefer that they dedicate the rest of their life to repairing the damage that they caused.
Sticking them in the torture box doesn't fix anything they did to me. It's just more purposeless suffering.
