How about this Separation of Church and State?

[ladiesbballcoach]

http://www.ministrytodaymag.com/index.php/ministry-news/65-news-main/18673-churches-welcome-sex-offenders-but-states-less-forgiving

 

Should churches be forced to welcome convicted sex offenders because of their Constitutional right to religious freedom? That's one of the questions being debated now in North Carolina and Georgia after two separate cases have challenged the states' sex-offender laws.

 

In North Carolina, state legislators passed a law in December prohibiting convicted sex offenders from coming within 300 feet of any day care or site used primarily to look after minors. This was news to 31-year-old James Nichols, who was convicted three times of sexual crimes in the past but was trying to restore his life by going to church. After worshipping at Moncure Baptist Church in Moncure, N.C., one Sunday, Nichols was arrested in his home because the church has a child-care facility.

 

In a similar case in Georgia, the Southern Center for Human Rights (SCHR) is fighting on behalf of sex offenders throughout the state who want to volunteer in churches. "Over 16,000 are subject to prosecution if they volunteer at churches, even though none of the activities in which they participate involves unsupervised contact with minors,” says SCHR attorney Sarah Geraghty. "The prohibition against volunteering at a church is substantially overbroad, vague and intrusive of core rights to free exercise of religion."

 

Georgia's laws currently bar sex offenders from living or working within 1,000 feet of places where minors typically congregate (e.g., churches, schools, child-care centers). Yet for church leaders and members, the lines of forgiveness and welcoming a convict into their congregation aren't so clearly marked.

[True blue (and gold)]

The first sentence doesn't seem to go with the rest of the article. Is the the issue more about forcing churches to accept sex offenders or churches being unable to open their door to sex offenders?

[ladiesbballcoach]

The first sentence doesn't seem to go with the rest of the article. Is the the issue more about forcing churches to accept sex offenders or churches being unable to open their door to sex offenders?

 

I think you have two things going on here.

 

By law, churches are not allowed to open their door to sex offenders without the sex offenders running the risk of being arrested if they are offering child care facilities, I would assume during services.

 

You have that point in the debate but then you have the other point of each of us have religious freedom in this country. Does that mean churches HAVE to accept a child sex offender in their midst if they wanted to worship at that church?

[UKMustangFan]

I have no problem with these laws. In fact, I support them.

[Hatz]

I think you have two things going on here.

 

By law, churches are not allowed to open their door to sex offenders without the sex offenders running the risk of being arrested if they are offering child care facilities, I would assume during services.

 

You have that point in the debate but then you have the other point of each of us have religious freedom in this country. Does that mean churches HAVE to accept a child sex offender in their midst if they wanted to worship at that church?

 

If that is the case, then no convicted offender would ever be allowed to worship again because he/she would probably be too close to a nursery/child care area.

[titletownclown]

If the law is written such that a child sex offender must stay a certain distance away from children, then that law should apply EVERYWHERE as far as I am concerned. I don't see this as a separation issue at all. In fact, it's just the opposite. In many states the laws are written in such a manner that it doesn't matter WHERE the children are located, the distance from them must be maintained. I personally would have more objection with a law that has exceptions for churches.

 

Further, the theory that you must go to church to worship God is ludicrous. God should be worshipped constantly by anyone who is truly a Christian. Thus, to say you would be denying a child molester the right to worship because he can't enter a church where children are located is simply not true (imo).

[ladiesbballcoach]

If that is the case, then no convicted offender would ever be allowed to worship again because he/she would probably be too close to a nursery/child care area.

 

It is not that they are a convicted offender but that they are a convicted sex offender and the rules on them does not allow them 1000 feet from child care facilities. So, yes a convicted sex offender would never be allowed to worship in a church services that we think of now.

[ladiesbballcoach]

If the law is written such that a child sex offender must stay a certain distance away from children, then that law should apply EVERYWHERE as far as I am concerned. I don't see this as a separation issue at all. In fact, it's just the opposite. In many states the laws are written in such a manner that it doesn't matter WHERE the children are located, the distance from them must be maintained. I personally would have more objection with a law that has exceptions for churches.

 

Further, the theory that you must go to church to worship God is ludicrous. God should be worshipped constantly by anyone who is truly a Christian. Thus, to say you would be denying a child molester the right to worship because he can't enter a church where children are located is simply not true (imo).

 

But worship service is a PART of worshipping. And this country was built on religious freedom and it is being denied this person.

 

AND in the most ironic part of this whole thing, a religious freedom of Christianity that says all can be forgiven if they ask for forgiveness in Jesus' name.

 

Yet, the state would be telling them that they cannot go to a church and worship with other Christians.

[titletownclown]

But worship service is a PART of worshipping. And this country was built on religious freedom and it is being denied this person.

 

AND in the most ironic part of this whole thing, a religious freedom of Christianity that says all can be forgiven if they ask for forgiveness in Jesus' name.

 

Yet, the state would be telling them that they cannot go to a church and worship with other Christians.

 

I still side with the law as written to protect children. I understand your perspective entirely. I also agree with the Christian forgiveness doctrine(we need more of that), but the Christian forgiveness angle has no relevance in relation to the laws as enacted by the state (separation as previously discussed).

 

Personally speaking, I think the offender should be forgiven by Christians in accordance with Biblical directives. But, he doesn't need to be in church to be forgiven. Yes, worship service is a part of worship, but nowhere (that I'm aware of) is it written that the worship has to be done in a specific location deemed by man to be a "church". Church can take place in your living room or den with family, friends, strangers, or all by yourself.

[ladiesbballcoach]

I still side with the law as written to protect children. I understand your perspective entirely. I also agree with the Christian forgiveness doctrine(we need more of that), but the Christian forgiveness angle has no relevance in relation to the laws as enacted by the state (separation as previously discussed).

 

Personally speaking, I think the offender should be forgiven by Christians in accordance with Biblical directives. But, he doesn't need to be in church to be forgiven. Yes, worship service is a part of worship, but nowhere (that I'm aware of) is it written that the worship has to be done in a specific location deemed by man to be a "church". Church can take place in your living room or den with family, friends, strangers, or all by yourself.

 

So, you are okay with the state saying who can and cannot attend a Sunday morning worship service at church?

 

I thought this country was moving to separation of church and state but here the state is intruding mightily into the church setting.

[titletownclown]

So, you are okay with the state saying who can and cannot attend a Sunday morning worship service at church?

 

I thought this country was moving to separation of church and state but here the state is intruding mightily into the church setting.

 

I am for the protection of children. The law says the violator can't be around children. If children are in church then the law just so happens to still apply. I don't see a violation of the church/state issue at all. But again, that's my opinion.

 

In this case, the state isn't saying he can't attend church. It's saying he can't be around children.

 

Hypothetical question:

 

A bomb threat is called in to police saying a bomb has been planted in a church filled with worshippers. The bomb squad enters the church and orders everybody out at once. Have they violated those peoples' right to worship or are they protecting the innocent?

[ADopted ADmiral]

IMO this guy can have all of the Freedom of Religion He wants,as long as it's a Adult only Church!:thumb:

[HT721]

They should be watched closely, but any man should always have the right to worship God and try and find the peace that comes with salvation.

[ladiesbballcoach]

I am for the protection of children. The law says the violator can't be around children. If children are in church then the law just so happens to still apply. I don't see a violation of the church/state issue at all. But again, that's my opinion.

 

In this case, the state isn't saying he can't attend church. It's saying he can't be around children.

 

Hypothetical question:

 

A bomb threat is called in to police saying a bomb has been planted in a church filled with worshippers. The bomb squad enters the church and orders everybody out at once. Have they violated those peoples' right to worship or are they protecting the innocent?

 

Your assumption is that a person with their faith in Jesus Christ cannot change. Your scenario has an immediate threat. It is arguable whether a person in a worship service that is over a football field away with the proper guidance is any threat to a child.

 

Ironically, Ky Supreme Court, if I recall correctly has just ruled that it is okay for child sex offenders to live within 1000 feet of schools if they were living there before the law went into effect.

[ladiesbballcoach]

They should be watched closely, but any man should always have the right to worship God and try and find the peace that comes with salvation.

 

I liked the scenario in the article where each person was mentored with a Christian man that sat with him during the worship services and monitored him.