Oprah hates pedophiles
As a follow up to the earlier discussion here at the BT, I thought you might be interested in the Oprah episode that aired today. It is Oprah’s opinion that child molesters cannot be rehabilitated and that convicted pedophiles should be given a mandatory life sentence on the first conviction. See her pedophile page here.
One expert on the show said there are about 100,000 sex offenders on the streets of America that are not in compliance with their paroles. Apparently Florida just passed a new law requiring a minimum 25 years sentence without parole and a permanent tracking device for life after parole.
Jesus said that such people will wish they had been drowned in the sea before committing such crimes when justice comes due. Do you agree with Oprah that our society ought to help such monsters wish they were never born before the day of judgment? Oprah is promising to give a $100,000 reward to anyone that provides information leading to the capture of a certain number of fugitive pedophiles. What do you think of her latest crusade?
I think it really depends upon the case. But I do think that GPS transmitters that are carefully monitored makes a lot of sense.
Comment by Clark Goble — October 4, 2005 @ 6:17 pm
I agree with Clark.
I only glanced at a couple of the pedaphiles listed on Oprah’s page and we’re talking really bad offenders. I know Washington State has different level designations for sex offenders, based on likelihood to reoffend.
Comment by Susan M — October 4, 2005 @ 7:11 pm
Her show was based, at least in part, on a case in Northern Idaho, near us here in Spokane. It was healine news for several weeks. The killing of the mother and boyfriend, the missing two children and then the capture of the monster at a Dennys with the little girl. Later it was discovered he had killed her brother as well.
After following this story in the local news I would have to say that I agree with Oprah on this one.
If we kept all first time offenders behind bars forever, it wouldn’t bother me. When you weigh the few who can be (if they really can be) rehibilitated, against those who can’t and the damage they do when they are released…society should demand to keep them locked up.
It’s bad enough the crimes that can be committed against adults, but to do the terrible things to innocent little children, Christ’s judgement can’t come fast enough.
Comment by Don — October 4, 2005 @ 7:33 pm
I’m with y’all. I guess the hard thing will be to determine who should go to jail for life and who should go for a shorter time (and how long that shorter time should be). These abuse cases come in endless gradations it seems… I too like the tracking idea though. It seems to me that anyone convicted of child molesting should give up that particular form of privacy for life.
Comment by Geoff J — October 4, 2005 @ 7:44 pm
There are various reasons to be cautious about this. Pedophilia is probably not curable. On the other hand, many states define a child as a 14-year-old or 16-year-old. Sex with a 16-year-old is probably a bad idea and reflects problems with boundary drawing. But, it’s not the same thing as actual pedophilia.
Comment by tasty goldfish — October 4, 2005 @ 8:02 pm
Don, that case was horrible. It was big news in Seattle as well. Nightmarish.
Comment by J. Stapley — October 4, 2005 @ 9:22 pm
I’m in favor of life-sentences, and life tracking. I think some states already have them for crimes against children under 14 (I’m thinking Nevada maybe?) I am also, I think open to the idea of chemical castration, it’s reversable in case someone is ever found innocent later, and it goes to the root of the problem.
It hasn’t been easy for me to come to a spot where I could admit that. My knee jerk liberal reaction is to have compassion, even for those so twisted. But I just can’t err on the side of compassion in these sorts of cases, the cost is too heavy.
Comment by fMhLisa — October 4, 2005 @ 11:05 pm
While there is statuatory rape, with most states it is considered different from pedophilia and it’s not hard to tell from the convictions what they were convicted of.
Castration has nothing to do with the problem, which is often either in terms of brain structure or else power/love issues due to their own abuse. Thinking it is an issue of testosterone or thinking that castration would stop things in the least is mistaken. Likewise castration would almost certainly be considered cruel and unusual and be unconstitutional.
Comment by Clark Goble — October 5, 2005 @ 12:52 am
This subject certainly is a moving target through various sites and threads in the ‘nacle! II finally remembered some comments by Pres. Hinckley, towards the end of his talk in the priesthood session of 4/2004 GenCon, about the Church’s purpose and position regarding child-abuse victims, offenders, and records. just posted on another thread, but I’ll include it here because I believe it’s useful to this discussion.
——
Now I wish to mention another form of abuse that has been much publicized in the media. It is the sordid and evil abuse of children by adults, usually men. Such abuse is not new. There is evidence to indicate that it goes back through the ages. It is a most despicable and tragic and terrible thing. I regret to say that there has been some very limited expression of this monstrous evil among us. It is something that cannot be countenanced or tolerated. The Lord Himself said, “But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea†(Matt. 18:6).
That is very strong language from the Prince of Peace, the Son of God.
I quote from our Church Handbook of Instructions: “The Church’s position is that abuse cannot be tolerated in any form. Those who abuse . . . are subject to Church discipline. They should not be given Church callings and may not have a temple recommend. Even if a person who abused a child sexually or physically receives Church discipline and is later restored to full fellowship or readmitted by baptism, leaders should not call the person to any position working with children or youth unless the First Presidency authorizes removal of the annotation of the person’s membership record.
“In instances of abuse, the first responsibility of the Church is to help those who have been abused and to protect those who may be vulnerable to future abuse†(Book 1: Stake Presidencies and Bishoprics [1998], 157–58).
For a long period now we have worked on this problem. We have urged bishops, stake presidents, and others to reach out to victims, to comfort them, to strengthen them, to let them know that what happened was wrong, that the experience was not their fault, and that it need never happen again.
We have issued publications, established a telephone line where Church officers may receive counsel in handling cases, and offered professional help through LDS Family Services.
These acts are often criminal in their nature. They are punishable under the law. Professional counselors, including lawyers and social workers, are available on this help line to advise bishops and stake presidents concerning their obligations in these circumstances. Those in other nations should call their respective Area Presidents.
Now the work of the Church is a work of salvation. I want to emphasize that. It is a work of saving souls. We desire to help both the victim and the offender. Our hearts reach out to the victim, and we must act to assist him or her. Our hearts reach out to the offender, but we cannot tolerate the sin of which he may be guilty. Where there has been offense, there is a penalty. The process of the civil law will work its way. And the ecclesiastical process will work its way, often resulting in excommunication. This is both a delicate and a serious matter.
Nevertheless, we recognize, and must always recognize, that when the penalty has been paid and the demands of justice have been met, there will be a helpful and kindly hand reaching out to assist. There may be continuing restrictions, but there will also be kindness.
(Link to full text)
—–
It seems that if this is the Church’s position, it would be well for the Church’s members to make it theirs. (Matt 25:45)
Comment by manaen — October 7, 2005 @ 7:49 pm
Wow! Oprah’s bounty worked. See Here.
Comment by Geoff J — October 7, 2005 @ 7:52 pm
As in all judicial categories, justice is not equally applied. If it were, then Bernard Cardinal Law would have several consecutive life sentences for knowingly harboring, employing and concealing pedophile priests and installing them in positions where unsupervised contact with children was guaranteed. Why don’t we have marked car license plates and personal identifications (e.g., like the organ donor hologram on a driver’s license) as requirements for these people to be invited back into society after rigorous and documented rehabilitation? The national registry system is flawed becuase it is silent. I was recently in a rural town (Ayer MA) where all of the downtown retailers had posted alerts about a local Level 3 sex offender in their shop and restaurant windows. My reaction was: good for the community for trying to protect itself. Having said this, the only assurance to children is incarceration, since nothing I have said addresses the ultimate innocent victim within the broader society. But cases like the infamous Fells Acre Daycare case and more recent fraudelent claims against teachers gives me caution about a universal and mandatory, throw away the key approach. We don’t have a perfect judicial system that could be applied in this way. And for people who have been falsely accused, who do they see to rebuild their lives, put their famlies back together and fortify their drained bank accounts? Good for Oprah; more famous people should put their celebrity to such good use instead of painful self-absorption.
Comment by L.B. — October 11, 2005 @ 5:57 pm