Indiana judge dismisses suit targeting new sex offender law

11-11-15 Indiana:

INDIANAPOLIS (AP) — An Indiana judge has dismissed a lawsuit that argued a new state law wrongfully barred two registered sex offenders from attending church services because their churches have schools on their grounds.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana and the state's attorneys sought the dismissal after the state determined the law does not in fact bar the two men from attending their respective churches.

An Elkhart County judge dismissed the suit Oct. 22 and ordered the two sides to pay their own costs and attorneys' fees.

The ACLU of Indiana argued that the law that took effect in effect in July and bans many sex offenders from going onto school property at any time also barred the men from attending their churches because they have schools on their grounds. ..Source.. by The News Dispatch

---

ACLU: RFRA must let sex offenders worship at churches with schools

7-2-2015:

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed Wednesday what appears to be the first lawsuit that invokes the state's new new Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Their clients? Registered sex offenders who believe their religious freedom is being denied by another new law that bans them from attending any church located on the same property as a school.

"This is a prime example as a place where people's religious rights are being burdened, and therefore under RFRA the state has to justify that," said ACLU of Indiana legal director Ken Falk. "It makes no sense to ban people on a Sunday if there are kids there on a Thursday."

For example, that would be the case with church preschools or parochial schools with adjacent churches.

Serious sex offenders include sexually violent predators and those convicted of crimes such as child molestation, possession of child pornography or sexual misconduct with a minor.

The lawsuit was filed in Elkhart Superior Court, on behalf of two unnamed sex offenders, against the prosecutors and sheriffs of Allen and Elkhart counties. When reached by The Indianapolis Star, the sheriff's departments declined to comment.

Indiana's new religious freedom law, which went into effect Wednesday, says if the government imposes an undue burden on the religious rights of individuals, businesses or religious organizations, it must prove a compelling interest and that it is using the least restrictive means possible.

"I think this is exactly the kind of case RFRA was about," said Indiana University law professor David Orentlicher. "You've got this sex offender law that's designed to protect children. It wasn't passed with the intent to interfere with religious practice, but it turns out there are a fair number of schools on church grounds. These people now can't go to pray without running afoul of the law."

Some in Indiana — including the ACLU — opposed the state RFRA, arguing that the law would allow discrimination against lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender individuals. That led to a "fix" to the law to clarify that an RFRA defense could not be used to trump local and state civil rights laws.

But with the heated debate over how RFRA would apply in wedding services for same-sex couples, "what got lost was there are a lot of good reasons for these statutes," Orentlicher said.

"That's what this case should remind us — that RFRAs can be misused, but we don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater," he added.

Falk of the ACLU said the lawsuit uses RFRA "as it was originally contemplated" to protect religious freedoms.

"We're not going to pretend it doesn't exist now," Falk said. "It does exist. The legislature said it wants to protect religious liberties, and that's exactly what we're trying to do."

Still, state Senate President Pro Tempore David Long, a Fort Wayne Republican, criticized the ACLU for the lawsuit.

"The ACLU used to be a staunch supporter of religious liberty," he said in a statement. "Now they've reduced themselves to making a mockery of it. On top of this, they also support endangering our children while championing the rights of sex offenders. It's a sad day for the ACLU."

State Rep. Christina Hale, D-Indianapolis, co-sponsored the law prohibiting sex offenders from school grounds and reacted to the ACLU lawsuit by slamming the religious freedom law: "Clearly nobody had thought through what all the negative ramifications might be for people."

"I think that we have to keep in mind that Indiana is one of the very worst states in the nation when it comes to protecting our children from sexual violence," she added, citing national health statistics and recidivism rates. "We're second only to Wyoming. And we have to do whatever it takes to protect our kids. ... Any time we can keep a sexual predator away from a child, that's a small victory."

But Orentlicher made the point that the case may not be so simple. For sex offenders who have served their time, religion may be instrumental to their rehabilitation, he said: "If your goal is to protect kids, with these people, you want to maximize their chances for rehabilitation."

As an example, the lawsuit notes that one of the unnamed plaintiffs had his parole officer approve the church he chose after being released from jail. The lawsuit says he is now "deeply spiritually involved" with the church — one that doubles as a preschool and is adjacent to a religious school.

In addition, the ACLU argues for sex offenders to have access to the worship services when schools aren't in session. And the lawsuit says it's "not rational" that serious sex offenders can still go to church services where children are present if there's no school attached.

Orentlicher said other states, such as Missouri, have carved out religious exemptions to allow sex offenders to attend church when school is not in session.

"They're just saying, 'Let us pray when the kids aren't there,' " Orentlicher said. by Stephanie Wang

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

8 in 10 chuch members say sex offenders should attend church

8-26-2010 National:

CAROL STREAM, ILLINOIS (BNO NEWS) — Nearly 80 percent of church members believe that sex offenders belong in church under appropriate supervision, according to a survey conducted by Christianity Today International (CTI) to explore the attitudes and beliefs of pastors, church staff, lay leaders and other active Christians regarding whether to allow sex offenders to participate in faith communities.

The survey was conducted online between April 9 and May 3 and was filled out by 2,864 people, of which one-third are pastors, one-fifth are non-pastoral leaders, and 43 percent are lay leaders, members or attendees.

The results show that eight in ten church members think that convicted sex offenders belong in a church as attenders, under continuous supervision, and subject to appropriate limitations. In contract, about five percent say they belong as attenders with no limitations and no supervisions required.

And while nine percent said sex offenders should be embraced without qualifications, only three percent of respondents said they think known offenders should be completely excluded from church.

The majority of respondents are influenced by the seriousness of the sex offender’s crime in their decision to allow an offender to integrate into the faith community. For 52 percent of the respondents, standards for participation are determined in part by the seriousness of the sex offense committed.

Nearly everyone – 99 percent – agreed that someone needs to be notified when the presence of a registered sex offender becomes known. However, many respondents feel that finding out about the presence of a registered sex offender in the church is a bigger problem for their church than it is to them personally.

But despite the fairly positive response regarding the attendance of sex offenders, almost half of the respondents said they would be opposed if a sex offender expressed a desire to serve in a ministry at church.

And when it comes to child victims of sex offenders, nearly two-thirds of respondents say that people who were sexually abused as children are at a greater risk of becoming abusers as adults.

For this reason, about 56 percent believes it should be standard policy to question all adults about their history of possible past abuse before they are allowed to serve in a ministry at church. On the other hand, only 23 percent think questioning all adults about possible past abuse is an invasion of privacy.

Among other results of the survey, more than half of respondents advocate church leaders to take action when they become aware that someone in church might be at a higher risk of committing a sex crime. 81 percent of this group believes church leaders should talk to the individual, while 65 percent believes counseling at church should be offered, or otherwise provide a referral for professional counseling.

Asked what church leaders should do when they become aware that someone in church is an offender, 82 percent said they should pray about it. Additionally, 57 percent believes church leaders should draft a conditional attendance agreement and talk to the offender’s probation officer. ..Source.. by BNO News

Open publication - Free publishing - More survey

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

With open arms and open eyes, churches minister to sex offenders

8-1-2010 National:

Within days of attending a Sunday service at the United Methodist Church of the Resurrection, a Johnson County man received an unexpected e-mail.

Security officials at the Leawood megachurch wanted to see him immediately. They told him this summer that some rules needed to be set if he wished to come back to worship.

He must go straight to the sanctuary before service and leave immediately after it ended — no dawdling. There would be no direct contact with church staff.

Only a single-stool restroom on the church campus could be used.

And under no circumstances could he enter the children’s wing of the church.

The man is a registered sex offender, convicted seven years ago of possessing child pornography. He’s also one of a special class of worshippers whom most churches across the country want to welcome — but very carefully.

“While we’re a very inclusive church family, at the same time, we feel we have a responsibility to have a safe environment for our members and visitors,” said Peter Metz, communications director for the Church of the Resurrection. “It’s a practical solution, much better than denying them access to the church.”

Sex offenders across the country face laws and regulations that keep them from living near schools, parks, bus stops and pools. Some neighborhoods created association rules banning offenders from residing there.

Now churches are in the mix, trying to welcome parishioners while draping a protective cloak over the children and others in the next pew.

The Seventh-day Adventist Church added wording to its manual last month that sex offenders can restore their memberships but never hold a post involving unsupervised contact with children.

Earlier this summer, a Georgia law took effect allowing sex offenders to volunteer in church only if they’re not around children.

In New Hampshire, a man has sued for the right to attend a Jehovah’s Witnesses church with a chaperone. Jonathan Perfetto, who served about eight years in prison for 61 counts of child pornography, has been welcomed by the congregation. A church elder volunteered to chaperone.

But being around anyone under the age of 18 is a violation of his probation, and a judge denied his request. Attorney Barbara Keshen of the New Hampshire Civil Liberties Union argued his case last month before the state Supreme Court.

“On the one hand, every citizen has the freedom to exercise their religion,” Keshen said. “On the other hand, churches want to make sure no member of their congregation is in danger.”

Sara Totonchi, executive director of the Southern Center for Human Rights, said: “I think churches are struggling to find that middle ground.”

•••

By nature, and God’s word, churches welcome all people. Hate the sin, love the sinner, the belief goes.

But many churches say open arms have to come with open eyes. In the past several years, churches have done everything from requiring limited access agreements to prohibiting some from coming inside the church at all.

“We believe they have spiritual needs that could help them on their path to recovery. We want to be part of their rehabilitation,” said Jim Bradford at the Assemblies of God national headquarters in Springfield, Mo. “But we have to be proactive. The stakes are too high.”

His church leadership recommends that its 12,000 churches adopt some restrictions but doesn’t mandate them. In the past, Bradford was lead pastor at Central Assembly of God in Springfield, where several sex offenders had attended.

First, Bradford said, he and other leaders would find out what the circumstances of the offense were. Then they would tailor the restrictions.

Sometimes, offenders would get offended, but the church stood firm. In one case, a man was told not to come back because leaders felt he wouldn’t obey the restrictions.

“By ministering to them, it’s not necessarily saying, ‘We trust you,’ ” Bradford said. “It does say that ‘within Christ, we have hope for you.’

“We don’t want to close the door. … Jesus wouldn’t.”

Janet Taylor, a minister at Kansas City’s Unity Temple on the Plaza, agrees. Her church makes sure children and other members are safe by monitoring security cameras set up throughout the church.

Anyone working with children goes through a background check. But the front door is open for offenders wanting to turn their lives around.

“From my perspective, it’s important to have someone attend church if they were in that situation,” Taylor said. “Even though they acted inappropriately in the past, we would still strive to see the Christ-like essence within them.”

Churches are most cautious with volunteers. Some routinely check sex offender registries.

At Lenexa Christian, church leaders make sure volunteers working with young people have no convictions of a sexual nature. If they do, that doesn’t preclude them from being involved in other areas of the church.

“We’re trying to reach out to them in love, also,” said pastor Kirk Ruchotzke, who oversees Christian education at the church. “Just because there’s something in their background doesn’t mean God can’t use them in some type of ministry.”

•••

For the last several years, the Johnson County man attended a weekly group for adults sponsored by the Church of the Resurrection.

Some members knew his status. He wasn’t hiding.

That’s why he expressed surprise at the e-mail and the requirement to sign the agreement to be allowed to return. He felt his rights were violated, but he has declined to discuss the episode further.

Metz, a church spokesman, said the man remained under the radar until recently.

“Our safety and security folks were not aware of him,” Metz said. “Every offender we become aware of, we ask them to sign our agreement.”

Restrictions are a good security tool for churches — as long as they’re accompanied by support, said Steve Vann, who helps run Keeping Kids Safe Ministries, based in Tennessee.

The group helps churches make proactive decisions regarding sex offenders in their congregations. What worries Vann are the churches that don’t address the issue at all.

“When you ignore it, abandon or shut off these people, it makes it more likely for them to reoffend,” Vann said.

As a prison minister in central Kansas for 20 years, Lynn McBride has offered his services to criminals and offenders for years. To him, the importance of religion in rehabilitation is clear. He offered the example of one sex offender who remade his life once out of prison. He is now remarried, has a good job and is active in his church.

“He turned to God in prison,” McBride said. “He’s just a wonderful young man. He’s doing great.”

Through another offender, McBride knows what can happen when the support and counseling isn’t there.

The prison minister didn’t meet one inmate until he was imprisoned after a second offense. Between prison terms, the child molester went to a church, volunteered in the nursery and abused a child there. The man is no longer behind bars and, through ministry and support, appears to be obeying the law.

“There are good stories. There are tragedies,” McBride said. “It’s important for them to be able to call someone, to have a church, a pastor who understands.

“That’s the bottom line. They need counseling. They need people there for them.” ..Source.. by LAURA BAUER, The Kansas City Star

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

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

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...