02 February 2005
morals
Without coming over like a bad moral philosopher (to be fair, is much too late to be worried about such things), k-p pointed out to me the other day that it's often easier to justify murder than rape, even though we tend to regard the former crime as much more serious in law and so on. Just be very teacher-y about it, all those situations in which murder might not be a terrible option (self-defence, assassinating Hitler, killing the Wide-Awake Club) amount to many more than the situations in which rape might be seen to be a valid option. We could only come up with one possible scenario (sure you've already thought of it): last two surviving humans (man and woman, obv!): 'we must reproduce for the sake of the species'. 'No, piss off, I don't want to'. Even there, you'd have to give pretty massive justification for wanting to continue this largely unattractive race.
So, what's the answer? Massively more severe penalties for rape, such that punishment is at least on a par with that for murder (which varies all over the place obviously, but tends to be much harsher than for sexual crimes)?
Just a vague, mostly spurious, thought...
So, what's the answer? Massively more severe penalties for rape, such that punishment is at least on a par with that for murder (which varies all over the place obviously, but tends to be much harsher than for sexual crimes)?
Just a vague, mostly spurious, thought...
