Should Sex Offenders Be Banned From Church?
Time looks at the case of a NC man and convicted sex offender arrested for attending services at a church with a nursery
Will today’s sex offenders be the equivalent of the first century’s tax collectors and sinners?
[Quote] The premise of the law is sound, says Laurence Tribe, a constitutional-law expert at Harvard. “If the moment you enter a church you don a cloak of immunity from the rule of law, then churches would become sanctuaries for crime,” says Tribe.What an amazingly inept statement by the expert Tribe. The idea isn’t that you can commit crimes and hide in a church—the idea is Free Exercise is denied when the very act of going to a church is a crime. The law, as represented by “TIME”, is silly. What if a sex offender rides public transportation and the bus comes within 300 feet of a daycare? This is overstepping.
I baptized a convicted sex offender this past Easter Sunday. He has been a part of our congregational life for the better part of seven years now- contact with him was established under my predecessor. When the relationship was initially formed with the church, the man was awaiting trial. He was subsequently convicted and spent 5 years in prison, where many of our faithful saints corresponded with him regularly. My personal relationship with him began when he was released on parole. Watching this man grow in the Lord has been a blessing and a great instruction in how a church deals with the situation. His conviction was such that he is currently forbidden from direct contact with minors, so our deacons do their best to assist him in meeting these demands (which he himself is very mindful of as well, as he does not wish to be sent back to prison). I have discussed the situation with his parole officer to insure that our behavior at church is such that it permits him to attend services and be as functioning a member as he can be. We have briefed the parents in our church of his status, and they also aid us in making sure their children avoid risking a violation of his parameters.
I am torn on this story. At the very least, someone like the man in this TIME story (convicted as a man in his 20s of activity with a teenage girl, if I am understanding it correctly) should not bear the same consequences and classification as say, a 50 year old taking inappropriate actions with a child of 7. The man I am dealing with in our church is probably closer to my example than he is the man in TIME. I do see the need for people in our congregation, as an act of love and concern for him as well as protecting our little ones, to take the precautions we have. That being said, it would truly be a shame if we were not able to have the relationship with him that we do as a church family-and I do mean the ENTIRE church family, even the kids who cannot have direct contact with him. I am glad that my own daughters will know from knowing who he is and the relationship their dad and mom have with him that God is capable of changing anyone- as 1 Corinthians 6 says, such [were some of you. I don’t think anyone- even my friend and brother in Christ- would argue that there be NO consequences. But any law that prevented such a one from participating in any part of congregational life is a law that I would strongly oppose.
I am torn on this story. At the very least, someone like the man in this TIME story (convicted as a man in his 20s of activity with a teenage girl, if I am understanding it correctly) should not bear the same consequences and classification as say, a 50 year old taking inappropriate actions with a child of 7. The man I am dealing with in our church is probably closer to my example than he is the man in TIME. I do see the need for people in our congregation, as an act of love and concern for him as well as protecting our little ones, to take the precautions we have. That being said, it would truly be a shame if we were not able to have the relationship with him that we do as a church family-and I do mean the ENTIRE church family, even the kids who cannot have direct contact with him. I am glad that my own daughters will know from knowing who he is and the relationship their dad and mom have with him that God is capable of changing anyone- as 1 Corinthians 6 says, such [were some of you. I don’t think anyone- even my friend and brother in Christ- would argue that there be NO consequences. But any law that prevented such a one from participating in any part of congregational life is a law that I would strongly oppose.
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
,” says Hoyle. “We feel it is a good law. When a person takes advantage of a child, I don’t worry about their constitutional rights.”
Didn’t he swear to uphold the constitution?
I can just imagine him 20 years down the road saying, “If a person claims that their religion is the only way to God, I don’t worry about their constitutional rights”.
Discussion