news-record.com

OPINION

Editorial: Allow sex offenders to attend church, but with fair limits

Article
Comments (8)

Friday, October 9, 2009

(Updated 3:00 am)

As a three-time loser, ex-con James David Nichols ought to benefit from going to church on Sundays.

But since his crimes involved sex offenses, the law says he can't go because the church in Chatham County has an on-premises child day-care.

The 31-year-old Sanford man, twice convicted of indecent liberties with a teen girl and second-degree rape, now wants a judge to intervene on his behalf.

However, his going to court wouldn't be necessary had the General Assembly last session approved a bill that better defines a multitude of restrictions on sex offenders released from prison. It passed the House, but languishes in a Senate committee.

Legislators, not surprisingly, hesitate when religious freedom is pitted against protecting children from potential molesters. Included in the equation is a perception that sexually deviant behavior is incurable and merits special attention.

Yet the state lists nearly two-dozen sex offenses, most of which don't involve children. Painting restrictions with such a broad brush, as Nichols contends, amounts to overkill.

Under the proposed legislation, a registered sex offender could participate in religious activities intended for adults by obtaining written permission from a church official. His whereabouts then would be monitored.

Nichols had approval to attend the service but still was arrested. Under current law, registered sex offenders can't be within 300 feet of a nursery, and since many churches have them, worship choices are limited.

Given the nature of their crimes, convicted sex offenders should expect to lose some rights. At the same time, those restrictions shouldn't be needlessly punitive.

Setting reasonable constraints that still safeguard the public makes more sense. Even for the worst sinners, church could be the road to salvation.

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Comments

View Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

lgrimestriad

October 9, 2009 - 7:57 am EDT

As a religious educator, I have a strong stake in this issue. It is important that people have their spiritual needs met. Being able to attend church could be the factor that helps someone turn their life around. There are ways for a congregation to allow a sex offender to attend worship and other church functions while still protecting children and members. The Unitarian Universalist Association has a program called Balancing Acts which outlines protections for both the offender as well as the congregation. This program has been successfully used for several years. This is not a situation of either/or.

jackhartjj

October 9, 2009 - 8:11 am EDT

Please...the guy needs to find a church without a day care center.
The law is there to protect the kids! Period!
He made the choice to mess with Gods children and then is involved in second degree rape...lets hope some liberal judge doesn't 'accomodate' his whinning. To do so leaves no protection for boy and girls from these predators!

J Peterman Reality Tour

October 9, 2009 - 8:41 am EDT

He could always join the Catholic church . . . thier down with molesting kids.

mamaboilermaker

October 9, 2009 - 8:42 am EDT

As long as the church has an appropriate nursery security system in place, there is no danger to children from a registered sex offender. In my church, anyone working with children under 18 must have a police background check and have been a member for at least 6 months. All rooms have at least 2 adults in them. The leadership maintains files of custody orders if there is an issue with a parent who might abduct a child or who has a restraining order.

Nobody touches our babies at church unless they are an approved worker or a parent. For anyone, including a parent, to pick up a preschool child, they must have the child's security number. We also have men who patrol the parking lot and watch the entrances during services. I pity the fool who tries to mess with a baby at my church! Every church should have a secure nursery; then all sinners can come hear the Word and the children will still be as safe as we can keep them in this fallen world.

flight105

October 10, 2009 - 1:34 pm EDT

Sounds like your church has the right idea! May I ask which church?

Get A Clue

October 9, 2009 - 9:41 am EDT

For perhaps the first time in his posting career, J Peterman has it right. ;-)
Except for spelling.

If sinners of all stripes were banned from houses of worship, there would be no one left in the pews or the pulpit.

x684867

October 9, 2009 - 9:54 am EDT

Has anyone stopped to consider the factual basis for these laws or their effects?

(1) According to US Department of Justice statistics, only 5% of sex offenders released in 1994 committed a new sex crime.

(2) Additional research has indicated that most sex crimes are committed by persons known to the victim, NOT BY STRANGERS.

(3) Research also indicates that most sex offenses are committed by FIRST TIME OFFENDERS and not by repeat offenders...a fact reinforced by the 5% recidivism rate.

(4) States already have registries, and now the federal government is imposing its legislation on a state matter, threatening to remove 10% of federal funds from non-compliant states. This is more about money than public safety.

(5) Do you consider your federal government MORE efficient and responsive to the public interest than the states?

(6) Do you support a national ID card system? There are more than 650,000 people registered as sex offenders today with an annual growth rate of 7%.

(7) Most are not aware of the increasing number of persons considered to be "sex offenders" or the crimes they have committed, including persons who have simply urinated on the side of the road without knowing a minor was present.

(8) The largest group of registered sex offenders are 14-year-olds who will more than likely never commit a new crime.

These laws are a bad idea.

overtaxed

October 10, 2009 - 12:04 am EDT

The 31-year-old Sanford man, twice convicted of indecent liberties with a teen girl and second-degree rape, now wants a judge to intervene on his behalf.

Did you not note the FACT this perv was TWICE convicted ? After the 2nd conviction this piece of crap should have been sentenced to at least 25 years.