6-25-2012 Oregon:
An Oregon church is challenging a requirement by its insurance company that it disclose the identity of sex offenders to other congregants, allow offenders to attend only one predetermined service and assign them an escort.
Pastor Chad McComas of Set Free Christian Fellowship in Medford said his church disclosed that known sex offenders were among the 100 members. Church Mutual insurance company on May 1 responded with a letter outlining requirements to continue an insurance policy.
Besides announcing disclosing the names of sex offenders, limiting them to one service and providing escorts, the church is required to keep sex offenders out of child or youth programs.
McComas told the Mail Tribune that the rules will have a chilling effect on disclosure.
The rules lump an 18-year-old convicted of abuse for sex with his 17-year-old girlfriend with more serious abusers. The rules will encourage abusers to go underground, he said.
"Where does that line go? They're throwing everyone in the same boat," McComas said.
Church Mutual insures more than 100,000 religious organizations and has covered nearly 5,000 sex-related claims since 1984, said Patrick Moreland, vice president of marketing for Church Mutual.
The rules were developed by attorneys and are designed to protect the organization from the "legal hot water" of sexual misconduct and molestation claims, he said. They also protect potential victims, Moreland said.
"Our No. 1 goal is to protect our churches and our children," Moreland said.
McComas said he doesn't want his church to have the reputation as "the sex-offender church" but the issue is about principle and what's possible.
"We deal with a lot of members who have addiction backgrounds. That's part of who we serve. But that's not all of who we serve," McComas said. "We know who our members are. We are being careful and diligent. But how often are we going to have to tell the congregation that someone is a sex offender? The congregation changes all the time."
The Rev. Pam Shepherd of the First Congregational United Church of Christ in Ashland said churches must keep children and youth safe. Her church is insured and performs background checks on all Bible school teachers, youth ministers and others who deal with minors. No one in their congregation has disclosed any sex crimes. Shepherd said, however, she has never seen a letter like the one McComas received.
"There are no known sex offenders coming to our church," Shepherd said. "But if all sex offenders glowed orange, people might be surprised to see who they are sitting next to."
Convicted sex offender Dave Schmidt, 66, said he attends Set Free services to worship, not to seek out additional victims.
If he's driven out of Set Free by insurance company policies, he said, he will simply go to new churches, one week at time if necessary. ..Source.. by The Daily Astorian
June 25, 2012
Church protests insurance rules for sex offenders
September 17, 2010
NH court: sex offender can't attend church
Hummm, I'm not so sure their decision is correct.9-17-2010 New Hampshire:
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) ” The New Hampshire Supreme Court has denied a sex offender's request that he be allowed to go to church with a chaperone.
Jonathan Perfetto of Manchester was convicted in 2002 of possessing child pornography. Though a condition of his release is that he have no contact with children, he had asked to attend Jehovah's Witnesses services chaperoned by a church elder.
The state Supreme Court on Friday agreed with a lower court ruling denying that request. It said the probation condition does not violate Perfetto's constitutional rights to religious freedom and that Perfetto can still practice his religion in other ways.
Perfetto also served time when he was 17 for molesting a young male relative and again when he was older for assaulting adult women. ..Source.. by NewsOK
July 5, 2010
Churches grapple with whether to welcome convicted sex offenders
7-5-2010 National:
"All are welcome" is a common phrase on many a church sign and Web site. But what happens when a convicted sex offender is at the door?
Church officials and legal advocates are grappling with how -- and whether -- people who have been convicted of sex crimes should be included in U.S. congregations, especially when children are present:
-- Last month, a lawyer argued in the New Hampshire Supreme Court for a convicted sex offender who wants to attend a Jehovah's Witnesses congregation with a chaperone.
"What we argued is that the right to worship is a fundamental right and the state can only burden it if it has compelling interest to do so, and then only in a way that is narrowly constructed," said Barbara Keshen, a New Hampshire Civil Liberties Union attorney for Jonathan Perfetto, who pleaded guilty in 2002 to 61 counts of possessing child pornography.
-- On Monday, the Seventh-day Adventist Church added language to its manual saying that sexual abuse perpetrators can be restored to members only if they do not have unsupervised contact with children and are not "in a position that would encourage vulnerable individuals to trust them implicitly." Garrett Caldwell, a spokesman for the denomination, said the new wording in the global guidelines tries to strike a balance between protecting congregants and supporting the religious freedom of abusers in "a manifestation of God's grace."
-- On Thursday, a law took effect in Georgia that permits convicted sex offenders to volunteer in churches if they are isolated from children. Permitted activities include singing in the choir and taking part in Bible studies and bake sales.
The Rev. Madison Shockley, pastor of Pilgrim United Church of Christ in Carlsbad, Calif., which publicly grappled with whether to accept a convicted sex offender three years ago, said he hears from churches several times a month seeking advice on how to handle such situations.
"The key lesson for churches is this: The policy, however it winds up, must be a consensus of the congregation," Shockley said. "I talked to so many pastors who decided they're going to make the decision because they know what's theologically and spiritually right -- and that's absolutely the wrong thing to do."
Shockley's church will soon commission a minister to address the prevention of child sex abuse; the church also distributes a 20-page policy on protecting children and dealing with sex offenders. He declined to say how the church handled its admission of a known abuser in 2007, citing the congregation's limited-disclosure policy.
Beyond the thorny legal questions, theologians also find that there are often no easy answers to the quandary of protecting children and providing worship to saints and sinners alike.
"My own theology of forgiveness is not that it's a blanket statement -- 'You are forgiven; go and sin no more,' " said the Rev. Joretta Marshall, professor of pastoral theology at Texas Christian University's Brite Divinity School. "Part of what we have to do is create accountability structures, because damage has been done."
Sometimes, legal and religious experts say, crimes are so severe that convicted offenders must lose their right to worship.
New Hampshire Assistant Attorney General Nicholas Cort argued in court documents that Perfetto should not be permitted to change the conditions of his probation to attend a Manchester congregation, because "restricting the defendant's access to minors was an appropriate means of advancing the goals of probation -- rehabilitation and public safety." Barbara Dorris, outreach director of Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, said it may be possible for convicted offenders to attend services if "proper safeguards are in place" but that offenders "forfeit many rights when you commit this kind of a felony." In other cases, the wording of laws has made it difficult for offenders who want to worship to be able to attend church legally.
In North Carolina, lawyer Glenn Gerding is representing James Nichols, a convicted sex offender who is contesting a state statute that made it illegal for him to be within 300 feet of a church's nursery. He was arrested in a church parking lot after a service.
"Technically, a person could go to an empty church and violate the statute if that church has a nursery," said Gerding, whose client was convicted in 2003 of attempted second-degree rape and released from prison in 2008.
In Georgia, the Atlanta-based Southern Center for Human Rights successfully argued for the removal of a legal provision that would have prevented registered sex offenders from volunteering at church functions, said Sara Totonchi, executive director of the center.
Experts say churches need to abide by state laws and be prepared to handle the possible presence of sex offenders, which could mean ministering to them outside the church building.
Steve Vann, co-founder of Keeping Kids Safe Ministries in Ashland City, Tenn., said that children's safety must be paramount but that giving convicted abusers social support could help reduce additional offenses.
"We talk about covenant partners," he said, using his ministry's phrase for chaperones. "They're not just there to watch what the person does. They're there to assist the person in spiritual growth."
Andrew J. Schmutzer, a professor at Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, is editing a book titled "The Long Journey Home," which includes essays from theologians and ethicists about how churches can both address sexual abuse and predators.
"The churches are on the cusp of trying to figure out what they can do," he said, " without scaring the public and without breach of confidentiality." ..Source.. by Adelle M. Banks
June 25, 2010
High court weighs sex offenders’ rights
6-25-2010 New Hampshire:
Man wants to attend church where children are present
CONCORD — The state Supreme Court took up a case Wednesday that could determine how and where sex offenders worship after they’re released from prison.
The justices’ questions were many, but they boiled down to how to balance an offender’s fundamental right to practice religion with the state’s duty to protect the public.
At the center of the case is 36-year-old Jonathan Perfetto of Manchester, who served about seven years in prison after pleading guilty to possessing 61 items of child pornography.
Since shortly after his 2008 release, when he briefly lived in a Concord parking garage, Perfetto has wanted to worship with a Manchester congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses. But he says he can’t, because his supervised release prohibits him from having contact with anyone under 17.
If he has such contact or reoffends or uses the internet, he could go back to prison to serve up to 28 years of his remaining suspended sentence.
Perfetto, initially representing himself, thought he had a solution a year ago when he asked the Hillsborough County Superior Court to let him attend church meetings under the close watch of a church elder. Perfetto said he hoped a chaperone would satisfy concerns of prosecutors.
The Hillsborough County Attorney’s Office objected, saying the church is a family-oriented congregation that requires members to attend frequent meetings.
“The likelihood that (Perfetto) will be supervised every minute, of every meeting, every week is not high,” wrote Assistant County Attorney Maureen O’Neil.
Four days later, Judge Larry Smukler denied Perfetto’s request without a hearing.
Perfetto’s appeal went before the state Supreme Court Wednesday, with legal representation by Barbara Keshen, staff attorney for the N.H. Civil Liberties Union.
Keshen didn’t disagree that Perfetto’s activities could be restricted while he’s on supervised release. The problem, she said, is that Smukler decided the matter without hearing from Perfetto or delving into the facts of his particular situation.
That sort of analysis is required, Keshen said, when the state wants to restrict a fundamental right that is protected in the U.S. and state constitutions.
“Here there probably can be limitations on Mr. Perfetto’s right to worship, but they have to be narrowly tailored,” she said.
She added, “The court needed a lot more facts than it had when it decided this case. What is his risk to offend now? What is the ratio of children to adults in the congregation? Are (children) always supervised in the sanctuary?”
Justice Carol Ann Conboy noted the state’s arguments that Perfetto could worship at home or through a Bible study with other elders from the church. “I’m struggling, frankly, with your contention that this is a restriction on his right to practice his religion,” Conboy said.
Chief Justice John Broderick asked how Keshen would handle a client who wasn’t allowed to use the internet but claimed he could under his right to free speech. Would a chaperone satisfy the state’s concerns and protect the public’s safety?
Keshen said she couldn’t say without more specifics about such a case.
“I would support the balancing (of interests) that would be involved,” she said.
Conboy asked, “Is it reasonable that someone convicted of (61 counts) of child pornography be prohibited from unsupervised contact with kids?”
Yes, Keshen said, “but then the question is how do you craft something that balances his fundamental rights to worship and public safety?”
The justices were equally curious about the state’s position.
Conboy and Justice James Duggan wanted to know why Smukler didn’t learn the details of Perfetto’s situation before denying his request to attend church with a chaperone.
Chief Justice John Broderick asked what should be done if children attend every service at the church. How, Broderick asked, can the state balance Perfetto’s right to worship and the public’s right to safety?
Nick Cort, who handled the appeal for the state Attorney General’s Office, said the test is reasonableness. Cort said the state is not obligated to set the least restrictive conditions possible when it comes to fundamental rights.
“There is a reasonable relationship between these restrictions and the goals of the corrections system,” he said. ..Source.. Annmarie Timmins, Concord Monitor
October 29, 2009
NC- UPDATE: Law challenged after sex offender arrested for going to church
10-29-2009 North Carolina:
Pittsboro, N.C. — Lawyers for a registered sex offender appeared in court Thursday to challenge the constitutionality of a law under which he was charged for going to church.
James Nichols, 31, was arrested on March 28 after he attended services at Moncure Baptist Church. He was charged under a nearly year-old state law that bans sex offenders from coming within 300 feet of any place intended for the use, care or supervision of children.
Moncure Baptist has a nursery and regularly scheduled programs for children.
In a two-hour hearing in Superior Court in Pittsboro Thursday, Nichols' lawyers argued that the law is too broad, doesn't exempt churches and violates constitutional rights to religious freedom and to assembly.
."He engages in free speech, he walks down the aisle, he sings with people, and he reads the Bible," defense attorney Glenn Gerding said. "So this is not just a case about the free exercise of religion; it is also a case about assembling together with people who want to assemble together."
Nichols has been convicted twice of indecent liberties with a teen girl and most recently of attempted second-degree rape in 2003. He spent a total of 6 years and 2 months in prison on those charges.
Nichols said that he found God in prison, and when he was released last September, Moncure Baptist welcomed him with open arms.
Prosecutor Kayley Taber said Nichols and another sex offender, Frank DeMaio, were arrested after the Chatham County Sheriff's Office received a complaint.
"This was not an investigation targeted at local churches," Taber said.
DeMaio has joined Nichols in challenging the law.
Judge Allen Baddour did not make a decision on the issue Thursday but set another hearing for Nov. 12.
If Baddour declares the law unconstitutional, the case could go all the way up to the state Supreme Court.
Thirty-six states establish zones where sex offenders cannot live or visit. Some states provide exceptions for churches, but many do not. ..Source.. by Bryan Mims
October 25, 2009
NC- Can Sex Offenders be Barred from Church?
10-25-2009 North Carolina:
As widely reported, including in this Time magazine story, sex offenders who are barred by state law from going near children have begun to invoke their free exercises rights when such state laws are used to keep them from attending religious services in houses of worhsip that also supervise children. The Time article focuses on a North Carolina case, but the problem is broader. Unfortunately, the article does not go into the real legal issues in any depth. I'll take a shot at clarifying.
There is pretty clearly no federal free exercise problem here. Back in the day, the formal doctrine from SCOTUS said that whenever the govt substantially burdened somebody's ability to practice his or her religion, the law or policy doing the burdening had to be subject to strict scrutiny: The govt had to prove that the law or policy was narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest. Under Sherbert v. Verner, the strict scrutiny test applied not only to laws that specifically targeted religion as such but also to religion-neutral laws that happened to impose incidental (but nonetheless substantial) burdens on particular people.
In Employment Div. v. Smith, the Supreme Court changed its approach. Under Smith, a law of general applicability--i.e., a law that does not single out religion or any particular religion for special burdens--can be validly applied in circumstances in which it limits the ability of someone to practice his religion; free exercise, as interpreted by the SCOTUS, simply does not require religious exemptions. Technically, the Court distinguished rather than overruled the old cases, characterizing them as requiring exemptions only where there was already in place an administrative scheme for granting other sorts of exemptions or where the claimant's free exercise claim was coupled with some other constitutional claim, and thus posed a "hybrid" right. A small number of lower court cases take the hybrid category seriously, but I do not.
It was pretty obviously made up in Smith so that the Court could pretend it wasn't overruling prior precedent. There's no principled basis for the hybrid category and the particular outcome it was used to justify, Wisconsin v. Yoder, involved a hybrid of free exercise and the unenumerated right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children. Yet Justice Scalia, the author of the Smith majority, does not even believe in that unenumerated right, so it is hard to see why he would think it adds anything--except as a way of disingenuously distinguishing rather than overruling Yoder. Thus, the best reading of Smith is that it does not require exemptions from laws that do not specifically target religion.
The North Carolina sex offender law, like those of other states, does not single out churches. It applies equally to bar registered sex offenders from other places children congregate, such as day-care centers, public parks, or schools that have adult education classes at the same times that they have programs for children. Thus, under Smith, there is no federal free exercise problem.
For the remainder of this discussion: by Mike Dorf
October 9, 2009
NC- EDITORIAL: ACLU Fights For Churches To Accept Sex-Offenders
10-9-2009 North Carolina:
A registered sex-offender who was arrested after attending a Baptist Church in North Carolina is challenging a law that would give him the right to go to Church without restrictions.
Twice convicted James Nichols, 31, says he is now a Christian after ‘finding God’ while spending a month and a half in jail for indecent liberties with a teen girl and attempted second-degree rape, according to the Associated Press.
Police say Nichols was arrested at his home after he attended the services because the Baptist Church he chose to worship at has a nursery. Under state laws, sex offenders are banned from coming withing 300 feet of any place used to care for children.
Georgia, which passed legislation that prevents sex-offenders from living or working in places near schools, bus stops, places where children congregate and child care facilities, has been sued by the Southern Center for Human Rights behalf of Georgia’s 16,000-plus registered sex-offenders because the law there prevents offenders from volunteering in places of worship that has child care. The lawsuit, Whitaker v. Perdue, is pending in federal court.
“Criminalizing the practice of religion for everyone on the registry will do more harm than good,” said Sara Totonchi, policy director for the Southern Center for Human Rights. “With these laws, states are driving people on the registry from their faith community and depriving them of the rehabilitative influence of the church.”
Nichols agrees and is getting some help fighting his case from an organization that may come to no surprise to many, the ACLU.
Lawmakers like state Sen. David Hoyle (D) who sponsored the bill in North Carolina says people like Nichols should have thought about the repercussions before they committed the crime.
“I’m not denying him the right to go to church. He denied himself that,” said Hoyle. “If they are a convicted pedophile, they have given up a lot of their rights.”
Joseph Green, pastor of the Baptist Church that Nichols attended just prior to his arrest, let him know that he is welcome but added he’s also careful to protect the congregation from harm and those criminals who want to exploit the Church.
“I told him as long as he’s honest with me, then we’re willing to embrace him and help him focus and get his life back on track,” said Green. But, “The Bible talks about wolves coming in in sheep’s clothing, so I’ve got to be watchful over everyone coming into my church.”
Church members tended to agree with their pastor. “God turned my life around,” said Baptist church member, Shawn Cox. “I’m not saying that you bring the guy in and put him over the youth program or the youth ministry as soon as he walks in the door. But there’s no way he can overcome these things without help and support.” ..Source.. by Christian Law Journal
September 28, 2009
CA- The churches won't be threatened
9-28-2009 California:
The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
"Or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ." Either San Bernardino City Councilwoman Wendy McCammack has forgotten these words or has chosen to ignore them, when she initiated the passing of an ultimatum to the First Church of the Nazarene, telling them, in essence, who they can and cannot minister to. Her statement, "If they think it is unconstitutional let them sue us, I'm not afraid of a lawsuit," is to me the epitome of arrogance.
The fact that Ms. McCammack and City Attorney James F. Penman think they have the right or even the authority to issue such an ultimatum to a church is unconscionable. Especially when the church in question has done nothing to warrant such action.
The chief of police, the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department and Child Protection Services all gave the church their approval that at no time is any child in danger on the church grounds with the presence of the individual who is registered as a sex offender, and the church itself has had 90 years of experience providing service to the community with ministries and outreach programs geared primarily to children. Currently, with he charter school that is renting space from the church and the community center that is housed on the church grounds, the church is and has complied with all the safety regulations required by the San Bernardino Unified School District and with the San Bernardino park district.
The "fear campaign" started by Mr. Penman and Ms. McCammack has resulted in the present mood of our city which has fostered discussions about getting rid of churches because we provided services to individuals such as the sex offender, the poor, the homeless, the marginalized and the disenfranchised. Could you imagine a city without churches?
Ms. McCammack states that the city has a responsibility to protect the participants of Operation Phoenix programs. Did she or Mr. Penman think about the protection of the families in the charter school whom they scared by passing out fliers with the man's picture on them when they arrived at school? Or when Mr. Penman attended a parent-teacher meeting that school held to address the concerns about the information on the flier and Mr. Penman summarily threatened them? Whom were they protecting then? How about the members of the Nazarene Church who will have to deal with the fallout from Ms. McCammack and Mr. Penman's actions? Are they not participants of the city?
Did they bother to get their facts straight before they launched this fear campaign? Did they bother to let the people know that the offense happened when the gentlemen in question was 19 and now he's 40, and since then has not had a similar conviction?
Did they bother to let the people know that he has not lived in the community for over a month and that he never worked on the church staff, but as an independent contractor doing work on the weekends and never was a threat to any of the children? Did they bother to let the people know that this man did not try to hide his past but notified the pastor of his conviction the moment he began working and attending the church?
Someone once said "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones." Listen, we all live in glass houses, we all have things in our past that we would not want to be judged for today, and the message of the church and the gospel we preach is that you don't have to live in your past, that if you genuinely want to change your life for the better that you have a savior who is Christ the Lord who died for the forgiveness of your sins and for the redemption of your soul.
Jesus says if you will come to me I will in no wise cast you out. Now, if God says we all are redeemable who I am to say one among us is not?
In effect, that is exactly what Ms. McCammack and Mr. Penman would say with this ultimatum. That the city has the right to determine, based on a partnership with a church, who is redeemable and who is not.
If this is the price that a church will have to pay for wanting to work with the city to help it become a more safe and peaceable place to live, as a pastor who has served this city for the past 18 years in partnership, I say the price is too high and I will not stand by and be threatened with ultimatums about who I can and cannot minister to, and I'm sure my parishioners - their constituents - will be glad to hear that the posture of their city attorney and 7th Ward councilwoman is one of antagonism and not cooperation.
I'm also sure Mr. Penman and Ms. McCammack would say to me that this is not directed at any church but the First Church of the Nazarene. But I say to threaten one of us is to threaten all of us. We as churches in this community cannot let this precedent be set, for surely this will create more problems for us in the future. Therefore, I will be contacting the churches in the city that we have come to work with about plans to address the City Council regarding this issue very soon!
..Source.. by Pastor Joshua Beckley is senior pastor of Ecclesia Christian Fellowship in San Bernardino.
August 25, 2009
MO- Imperial church billboards ask, "What's forgivable?"
8-25-2009 Missouri:
KSDK -- Jefferson Hills Christian Church in Imperial is asking a series of serious questions on billboards along Interstate 55 south of St. Louis. Those billboards ask whether God or people should forgive a certain list of offenses, such as: sex offenders, suicide, cheating on your boyfriend, and little white lies.
"We've noticed that people everywhere, no matter your faith or church background, have internal lists of things they think are forgivable or not forgivable," said Steve Benke, lead pastor at Jefferson Hills Church. "Are there certain things you can do that are unforgivable, and have heaven or hell issues at stake?"
The billboards went up Monday. Benke hopes they are thought-provoking.
"As Christians, we believe there is no unforgivable sin," said Benke. "Jesus Christ is our perfect savior, and that means there's not a single sin a person can't turn to God with and find forgiveness."
The campaign marks the church's second foray into provocative marketing and advertising. The first billboard campaign took place early last year, featuring messages supposedly from Satan. One message read, "Boycott Jefferson Hills Church," while another said, "I hate Jefferson Hills Church."
Regarding that effort, Benke said, "We saw a 14 percent increase in our attendance for nine months during that campaign."
The "forgivable" billboards stimulated conversation among drivers along I-55.
One driver, Keith Murphy, was asked if sex offenders and people who commit suicide are forgivable.
"It all depends on the situation and what happened, how it all went down," he said.
Another commuter, Erica Downs, said three out of four of the sins in the new billboard campaign are forgivable. Which one is not?
"The sex offenders," she said. So what does Downs think about the campaign?
"I guess it's a good one," she said. "I guess that's what the Bible says, that you're supposed to forgive everyone, but I don't think human nature really goes along with that all the time."
Benke said it's important people understand what's contained in Christian scripture.
"And then, quite frankly, the church gets that message wrong, as well," he said. "But the Bible teaches there is no sin that isn't forgivable in Jesus."
Benke hopes his church's thought-provoking billboards mark the beginning, not the end, of a conversation about forgiveness.
"We love the idea of inviting St. Louis to join in conversations about faith topics," Benke said.
To see the billboards visit www.whatsforgivable.com; for more information about Jefferson Hills Church, visit their website at www.jhchurch.org. ..Source.. by Alex Fees
May 12, 2009
NC- Church among activities off limits to sex offenders
5-12-2009 North Carolina:
RALEIGH – If they want to repent their sins, sex offenders in Buncombe County and elsewhere had better do it at home.
Some church services are among the activities that are off limits because of tough restrictions on registered sex offenders' movements, passed all but unanimously last year by state lawmakers who invoked a young girl's tragic murder.
This week, though, the General Assembly will likely start to rethink a ban that keeps sex offenders from going within 300 feet of a place “intended primarily for the use, care or supervision of minors.”
Questions have come up about whether this rule applies to a church with a nursery, a hospital with a pediatrics unit, a store like Wal-Mart with a toy aisle or an eatery like McDonald's with a play area, Rep. Rick Glazier said.
“I think there's increasingly an argument that a lot of what we did is unconstitutional,” said Glazier, a Fayetteville Democrat.
The process of undoing it could start as soon as today. Glazier, along with Rep. Bruce Goforth, an Asheville Democrat, and others, have introduced a bill proposing a number of changes in sex-offender laws. Most of them will be put on hold for now, Glazier said, but they will try to move ahead with changes in the 300-foot rule.
Legislators will try to meet a deadline of Thursday for a vote in the House, making a committee vote today likely.
Arrested for churchgoing
The American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina has received two reports of men being arrested for going to church, said Sarah Preston, a lobbyist for the group.
Another man complained he couldn't go to the library, Preston said. Unemployed, he wanted to use the library for job hunting, but it had a children's section.
More than 270 sex offenders live in Buncombe County, where sheriff's Lt. Ross Dillingham said 10-12 churches have called the sheriff's office about the law.
Sex offenders cannot attend North Asheville Baptist Church services when they're held at North Buncombe High School, Dillingham said. They're banned from school property.
The law is tough for sheriffs to interpret because there have been no court rulings in the state, Transylvania County Sheriff David Mahoney said. In Georgia this year, a federal judge blocked a similar state law.
“I suppose that if we were to receive a complaint … I think we would have to just really go by the letter of the law,” Mahoney said. “If that means it's at McDonald's, then so be it.”
Unintended consequence
Goforth, among the most vocal advocates in the legislature for sex-offender restrictions, said the far-reaching ban was an unintended consequence.
“We want them in church to try to turn their lives toward Christ,” Goforth said, so “they would no longer prey on society.”
Known as Jessica's Law, a set of restrictions that took effect in December was named in honor of a 9-year-old who was kidnapped, raped and buried alive by a registered sex offender in 2005 after moving to Florida from Gaston County.
The law was sponsored by Rep. Julia Howard, a Mocksville Republican who is now among the legislators pushing for a change. The law's other main backers were also Republicans, including then-Rep. Charles Thomas of Arden.
It set a number of restrictions that are not being considered for rollback, notably a mandate of at least 25 years in prison and lifetime electronic monitoring for raping a child.
Grier Weeks, director of the National Association to Protect Children, said the debate highlights the fact that such laws are ineffective because they can't be enforced.
The most serious offenders should be in prison or on probation, where they can be monitored, Weeks said.
“If somebody is sexually dangerous to children, you absolutely want to keep them from going where children congregate,” he said, “but the only effective way to do that is to have teeth in it.”
Other sex offender bills
Even as they rethink some restrictions on sex offenders, legislators are moving to add more. Bills moving through the legislature would:
• Require school employees convicted of taking indecent liberties with a student to register as a sex offender. Introduced by Rep. Bruce Goforth, D-Buncombe.
• Keep registered sex offenders off juries.
• Keep offenders from driving buses with children on them.
• Keep them from being EMS personnel. Authored by Rep. Carolyn Justus, R-Henderson, the bill passed the House unanimously last week. ..News Source.. by Jordan Schrader
November 12, 2008
GA- Sex offenders, as well as victims, need love of church to rehabilitate
11-12-2008 Georgia:
As a Christian, I believe firmly in the power of redemption. My life and my faith are enriched through service to my church community, particularly in reaching out to the marginalized and the oppressed.
I was deeply concerned to read a recent Atlanta-Journal Constitution editorial about a Georgia law that has barred people on the sex offender registry from participating in their church communities (“Sex offender statute becomes tormentor: Family’s ordeal shows how Ga. law goes way too far,” @issue, Oct. 31). I believe this law — which is being challenged today in U.S. District Court in Atlanta — runs counter to the church’s mission of sharing God’s love and his message of redemption.
I have seen how meaningful participation as a member of a faith community can be a powerful rehabilitative force in the lives of those seeking redemption for past sins. But Georgia’s law severely limits this opportunity for rehabilitation while simultaneously preventing me from ministering to all members of my faith community.
Over 10 years ago, one of our church members was convicted of a sexual offense and now has to register for the rest of his life as a sex offender in Georgia. When he started attending our church, he brought his registration requirements and prior conviction to the attention of our church board.
Our church’s leadership has since been able to monitor this member and his involvement within the church. Together, we have ensured that he complies with his registration requirements. He never volunteers with children, nor is he ever in the presence of children unless other adults are present.
For the last four years, this church member has served in a variety of volunteer capacities, from reading scripture aloud during service, to setting up and taking down sound equipment as needed, to helping prepare meals for the homeless. As a result of the actions of the Georgia General Assembly, he recently had to stop participating in all of these activities.
Earlier this year, the legislature passed a law that prohibits sex offenders from working or volunteering at a church. This law makes it a crime for a person on the sex offender registry to sing in adult choir, help the pastor prepare the elements, participate in Bible study or prepare food for church functions. The consequence of violating the law is 10 to 30 years in prison. Rather than risk such a sentence, our church member has stopped participating in church activities.
As a Christian and a father, I am very concerned about sexual abuse in our community. I do not, however, think that a law that pushes people away from the church is a good solution to this grave problem.
Like many churches, our church has mechanisms to address the issue of sexual abuse within our community. I cannot overstate the importance of the church being responsive to the feelings and needs of existing and potential victims and survivors of sexual assault. At the same time, in order to be a truly welcoming Christian community, the church must embrace every person, even those who have been convicted of sexual assault.
In Acts, we are taught to believe that “God shows no partiality.” We are a community because of our one Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, in whom we are also one body. “We were all baptized into one body — Jews or Greeks, slaves or free,” we learn in Corinthians. “The eye cannot say to the hand, ‘I have no need of you.’ “
In line with this passage, we believe that we must refrain from casting stones, and instead are called to live out Christ’s command in the Gospel of John to love one another.
I believe that the church lives out our community by offering that same love that God offered to us. We are taught to welcome the stranger and, as Matthew writes, “the least of these.” If they can’t come to church and be welcomed, where can they go?
The church must be a place of safety and healing for all. We must implement safety measures for the children of the church and community. We must offer pastoral care, counseling and healing to those who have suffered sexual assault. And we must help to rehabilitate people who have committed crimes.
As a people of faith and conscience, it is imperative that we bear witness to injustice, doing what we can to promote righteous solutions in our church communities and in the state as a whole. This current law is not the answer. Let us find the right one together. ..News Source.. by Charles Ohrenschall who is a member of the Board of Directors (Vestry) of The Church of Jesus Our Shepherd in Norcross.
June 25, 2008
GA- Law bans sex offenders' church work, say critics
If the court rules that the state may not bar registrants from volunteering, on religious grounds, how will that square with church policies that bar registrants from volunteering?
6-25-2008 Georgia:
A Georgia law banning sex offenders from volunteer work at churches should be struck down because it "criminalizes fundamental religious activities," a court motion filed Tuesday says.
The motion is the latest legal assault on the controversial state sex-offender registry law, one of the toughest in the nation. A new provision says no registered sex offender shall be employed by or volunteer at a church.
This makes it a crime for sex offenders to sing in adult choirs, prepare for revivals or cook meals in a church kitchen, said the motion, which seeks a court order halting enforcement of the provision before it becomes law July 1. It was filed in U.S. District Court in Atlanta as part of ongoing litigation that seeks to declare the law unconstitutional.
Sarah Geraghty, a lawyer with the Southern Center for Human Rights, said punishing registered sex offenders for volunteer work at a place of worship will do more harm than good.
"Certain people on the sex-offender registry should not work with children in a church setting or elsewhere," said Geraghty, one of the lawyers who filed the court motion. "With this law, the state of Georgia is driving people on the registry from the faith communities and depriving them of the rehabilitative influence of the church."
The goal of the state's sex-offender registry law is to keep sex offenders away from areas where children congregate and let the public know where the offenders reside. Its punishments are severe: any offender caught working at or volunteering at a church can be sentenced to 10 to 30 years in prison.
Sen. President pro tem Eric Johnson (R-Savannah) said Tuesday that nothing in the law prohibits someone from attending a place of worship. "They just can't be Sunday school teachers or volunteer for a vacation Bible school," he said. "It prevents them, as it should, from being around children."
The motion stretches the intent of the law as a way to topple it, Johnson said. "I think somebody's trying to use religion to accomplish their own agenda."
Lori Collins, a 47-year-old mother of two from Henry County, is on the registry because she was convicted of statutory rape six years ago in Screven County for having sex with a 15-year-old boy. In prison, Collins completed the Department of Corrections' faith and character program and served as assistant to the chaplain.
Since her release, Collins has become a licensed pastor, is a regular churchgoer at Mount Paran Church of God and is active in prison ministries.
As of July 1, she said Tuesday, she will no longer be able to do this volunteer work or help with administrative functions at two small evangelical ministries.
"If we're practicing our faith and doing this work, we're doing the work God called us to do," Collins said. "The state is hindering what the Bible clearly speaks about. I just want them to take another look at this."
Collins said she would never volunteer for any activity involving children.
In a sworn affidavit attached to Tuesday's motion, Floyd Rose, pastor emeritus at the The Church at Pine Hill in Valdosta, expressed surprise that none of the more than 15,000 registered sex offenders will be able to volunteer at church.
A problem is that the ban is applied to all offenders, even if they were convicted of consensual sex as teenagers and pose no danger to children, he said Tuesday.
"The church is in the business of redemption," Rose said. "We must not throw a blanket over all sinners. Those accused of being sex offenders are individuals and should be treated as such."
The motion is part of ongoing litigation filed in 2006 after the Legislature enacted restrictions where sex offenders could live and work. U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper initially issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting law enforcement from barring registered offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school bus stop. That order has since been lifted, but the bus stop restriction is not being enforced while the litigation makes its way through court.
Last year, the Georgia Supreme Court struck down part of the law prohibiting registered offenders from living within 1,000 feet of places where children congregate.
This past session, the Legislature revised the law primarily to address the state Supreme Court's ruling.
House Non-Civil Judiciary Chairman David Ralston (R-Blue Ridge) said the restriction against volunteering at a church or other places children congregate was added at the recommendation of local sheriffs.
It was made part of the law so people who cannot work in schools, churches or day care centers cannot get around that prohibition by saying they were merely volunteering at those places, Ralson said.
"This was adopted at the suggestion by law enforcement to keep people from subverting the purpose of the law," Ralston said. ..News Source.. by BILL RANKIN
June 8, 2008
IN- Flourishing ministries
Laws related to sex offenders, which have made them so hated that churches no longer want them in their congregations, clearly violate the U.S. Constitution.
6-8-2008 Indiana:
Multifaith summit strives to help congregations refocus, reach potential
Susan Weber is talking about how people talk about their churches.
In her audience, at Grand Wayne Center in downtown Fort Wayne, are about 200 people representing their churches.
“If you point your congregation to positive language and images, which way will they go? In a positive direction,” says Weber, a Roman Catholic layperson who is an expert in church dynamics.
“If you point towards negative language and images, which way will they go? Out the door.
“What we focus on,” she continues, “becomes our reality.”
Weber’s point was a main message of “Flourishing Congregations: Moving from Dreams to Reality,” a one-day multidenominational conference sponsored by a new member of the area’s religious community.
The Fort Wayne office of the Indianapolis-based Center for Congregations hosted the event in late April as one of its first forays into the Fort Wayne region. The office was established in 2006.
The center’s mission is helping churches advance into a future they design for themselves, says Brian Witwer, a retired United Methodist pastor and the center’s director.
Affiliated with the interfaith Alban Institute in Herndon, Va., and funded with grants from the Lilly Endowment, the non-profit center doesn’t just talk a good game. It’s putting money behind it.
Following the conference, attendees were invited to apply for a $10,000 matching grant to use the center’s approach in strengthening their own congregational life.
Five applications for the grant are under way, Witwer says, and congregations later may have the opportunity to apply for additional money to accomplish a specific project they’ve chosen.
Projects being envisioned so far, Witwer says, include starting a day-care center at a church on Fort Wayne’s southeast side and sponsoring an initiative in Angola to combat racism.
One Fort Wayne congregation would like to help the city’s Burmese immigrant population access services for children and youth. A congregation in Decatur wants to revitalize after a pastoral change.
At the conference, participants learned techniques such as asset identification, or naming the things they have historically done well, and appreciative inquiry, which employs questions to learn about people’s perceptions of their church, including its problems.
During one exercise, people were asked to describe what their church would look like when “flourishing.” They weren’t given a definition of the word but were told it was whatever they imagined.
Connie Bush of Dupree Memorial Church of God in Christ, Fort Wayne, said she envisioned her small church at 1231 Hayden St. as a place where young people would find a home, as she did as a young person.
“The people were so friendly. It was like a family church because the congregation seemed at one accord, with a lot of elderly people who were rooted and grounded in the church and younger people who were encouraged,” said Bush, wife of the church’s pastor, Lester Bush.
At another table, Gail Zdilla, 29, of Our Saviour Lutheran Church in West Lafayette, and Ruthann Vandenbosch, 37, of Northeast Christian Church in Fort Wayne, were joking that two women who work in youth ministry in far-flung areas of a large state had providentially found each other in a large room full of people.
Vandenbosch imagined her church starting mission trips for adults as a way to “flourish.”
When she accompanied a group of college-age young people from her church on a mission trip to Mexico, she said, she saw the whole church engaged in supporting them financially and in prayer. And, she said, she saw the trip’s participants become more committed Christians.
“It pushes them so far out of their comfort zone that they come back as different people,” she remarked.
Vandenbosch began trading ideas with Zdilla about how to connect college students with local congregations. Zdilla’s church is about a block from Purdue University and has an outreach to the campus.
“With us being so close to IPFW, I just so much want to see kids plugged into a local church,” Vandenbosch said. “My dream is to be a church home for kids away from home.”
Witwer, who led Aldersgate United Methodist Church in Fort Wayne for 22 years, says about 50 congregations attended the conference. The center plans other events similar to ones that have been held in the Indianapolis area.
One popular offering, he says, has been one on sacred spaces, which helps congregations find structures to fit their mission.
“Lots of times churches build buildings because it’s a fashionable thing to do,” Witwer says. “Family life centers were big a few years ago, and now they (churches) have them and don’t use them and are kind of stuck with them. We see a lot of them that are underused, and one of the things we have done is help churches repurpose them.”
Other programs have been on congregational dynamics and computers and specialty software for churches.
The center, Witwer says, can serve as a resource for any area church with an issue or problem – there are no membership requirements, he says. While the center charges for conferences, other consultations are free.
A pastor or other leader can call the center, and staff members will direct him or her to whatever’s needed, he says – whether it’s someone who restores stained-glass windows or someone who knows how to deal with a member who is a convicted sex offender.
Center services are not offered exclusively to Christian churches, Witwer says. Buddhist, Muslim and Jewish congregations are welcome. “We don’t want to leave anybody out,” he says.
Witwer says Fort Wayne-area congregations are remarkably vital and diverse.
“Some are growing and some are struggling. I don’t think, taken as a whole, they are in survival mode. I think most are in the growing mode or the interested and wanting-to-grow mode,” he says.
“One of the things we’ve learned is that every faith community is unique. Another thing we’ve learned is that large churches and small churches deal with the same kinds of issues. They’re just focused differently. It doesn’t matter if they’re financial or missional or leadership issues – everybody has the same issues.”
And everybody can learn to do something better, says Bush.
“We’re always open for new and better ideas,” she says. “We want to lead our church in the right way.” ..News Source.. by Rosa Salter RodriguezThe Journal Gazette
