MaMa Don't Let Your Children

Be confiscated at birth by the Government ... though it might be a good idea ... if your partner is ... a sex offender.

Troubling issue and, yes, the ACLU weighed in and lost. What's your take on this?

Comments

[TheAlamo]

Man, this is a bad one.
I will actually side with the ACLU on this one....(I know).

But government is overstepping its bounds and acting in its usual fascist manner in this case.
IF the guy has committed a crime, then he should be in jail. If he has committed a crime and paid the dues via serving a sentence, then he is now just as free as you and I.

Lest you get me wrong here. If he was a child molestor then my take is death penalty....and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

However, in its infinite wisdom government has set this man free, having paid his dues, and therefore we no longer have any "crime" to punish either him, the mother, or the child for.

On the other hand, this woman is missing a few bricks for even being associated with this guy. But, that is not a crime, and unless a crime is committed, government NEVER has the right to interfere in the private lives of ANYONE. They set the guy free. They should now stay out of the lives of these people unless another crime is committed.

The fact is, they should have burned this guy in the first place...but they didn't...so whose fault is this? The mother? The child? or the government? You decide.

[Jay]

From what I gathered he had a history of sexual abuse with children. This was why the authorities were concerned for the child's safety.

[newswatcher]

This is a bad one. Legally, the mother should have the right to associate with whomever she wants, even though her choices may be unfortunate for the wellbeing of her children. That being said.... emotionally, I am damn glad that someone else will be raising that child because even though the molester has paid his dues, you know and I know that none ever stop being pedophiles and that many molest again. (In fact, I wonder if this was a case of pre-natal "grooming.") I also wonder what kind of crazy woman would associate with a known child molester and bring a newborn into the situation. It's a sin and a shame that we don't have a one strike law. If we did, this would not have been an issue.

I could see this case going all the way to the Supreme Court and it could set some precedents.

Of course, I am wondering if the same social services department is taking away children of mothers who are addicted to crack or meth or who associate with known drug dealers, too. Or am I being too idealistic?

[cindi in pa]

My neighbor and his wife had their two children taken away 3 years ago. The wife was an alcoholic and they had some horrible physical fights. Daves sister now has custody of the kids. His wife has been sober 2 1/2 years. No more fighting, believe me if there were, the whole street would hear it.

Four months ago they had another baby. Child services took this child away from them as well.
They are fighting the case. And in this case, I hope they win.

The case now in the news I am not sure about. I sure as hell would not want a convicted sex offender around my children,even if he served his crime. The other thing making this case a big deal is, he never acknowledged he raped the teens. All he says now is he made a mistake.

[TheAlamo]

That being said.... emotionally, I am damn glad that someone else will be raising that child because even though the molester has paid his dues, you know and I know that none ever stop being pedophiles and that many molest again. (In fact, I wonder if this was a case of pre-natal "grooming.")

Posted by: newswatcher | Oct 22, 2005 3:02:03 PM

Emotionally, I think the guy should have been exterminated...but we cannot live by your or my emotions. If we do, then something you might do gets me emotionally upset, and I want you hanged for it. Maybe you threw a rock through my windshield.
It is the fault of the government for not frying this guy in the first place...but that being said, if we go off to "get" somebody on emotions then we will end up in anarchy because everybody has emotions...and they are not all in tune.

Also, (man I hate taking this position--emotionally) we cannot prove that once a molestor always a molestor. If that were true then the crime should carry automatic life sentences or death (which, I think it should be death anyway....but it's not)

Let me be clear about two things here. I am NOT condoning what this guy did, but I am standing up for ALL of our Constitutional rights of innocent until proven guilty...regardless of the emotions involved.

Second, I am not attacking you here at all. I FEEL the same way, but we cannot judge or rule by our feelings.

All in all we should press for automatic life sentences, or death upon conviction, of child molestation...and rape as well, for that matter.

[newswatcher]

My neighbor and his wife had their two children taken away 3 years ago. The wife was an alcoholic and they had some horrible physical fights. Daves sister now has custody of the kids. His wife has been sober 2 1/2 years. No more fighting, believe me if there were, the whole street would hear it.

Four months ago they had another baby. Child services took this child away from them as well.
They are fighting the case. And in this case, I hope they win.

The case now in the news I am not sure about. I sure as hell would not want a convicted sex offender around my children,even if he served his crime. The other thing making this case a big deal is, he never acknowledged he raped the teens. All he says now is he made a mistake.

Posted by: cindi in pa | Oct 22, 2005 3:20:19 PM

I hope they get the baby back too. The mom is in recovery and certainly deserves a chance. Good on her for getting and staying sober. I would hate to think that she would be condemned for life.

I didn't know the sexual offender was violent and also never admitted what he did. He is still in denial and trying to minimize, which shows he is as sick as he was to begin with. Glad that newborn is somewhere else.

[newswatcher]

All in all we should press for automatic life sentences, or death upon conviction, of child molestation...and rape as well, for that matter.

Posted by: TheAlamo | Oct 22, 2005 3:53:54 PM

That is why we all need to work on a one strike law.

[hmmm....]

All in all we should press for automatic life sentences, or death upon conviction, of child molestation...and rape as well, for that matter.

Posted by: TheAlamo | Oct 22, 2005 3:53:54 PM

There ya go!!

[shonane]

I don't believe in mandatory minimums because all situations are different.

People assume that all people who are convicted, or plead no contest, to sex offenses are big perverts, rapists, potential murders even. This is not the case.

I met a woman last year whose younger brother was charged with a sex crime by having sex with a 15 year old girl. The guy was 18 and he had met the girl at a large party and the girl went to another high school.She told him she was a senior in high school and 18. The girl apparently looked 18 also. She pursued him and after having several outings/dates they had sex. Her mother found out and the girls family pressed charges - the girl had been sneaking out against her parents rules, but the boy did not know that she had been sneaking out. He is a now labled a sex criminal , due to her being underage, and is doing jail time.

Another case in the press recently was a guy in early twenties who had been going with a girl who was 16 and they wanted to get married. Her aunt was opposed, got the cops involved, the girls family pressed charges and he was convicted for sex with a minor. He and she still plan on getting married when after he serves his time. He loves her and she loves him according to the newpaper article where the reported interviewed both of them.

There are juveniles who are convicted of sex crimes when they are really participating in sexual exploration with other kids around their own age - has been done since beginning of time. One parent finds out, thing gets blown up, and they are labeled as a sex criminal.

Not all sex crimes would be considered by most people as sex crimes if they looked at the cases individually, even though technically they would be due to the age of one of the participants.

Then, some people who have committed sex crimes are real perverts and are dangerous.

Any across the board policy which would address all people who have been labeled as having committed a sex crime is a bad precedent.