»
»

U.S. Supreme Court Refuses To Hear Sex Offender Visitation Case, ACLU Disappointed

If you are a pedophile, the ACLU is looking out for you. The argument is old hat for the ACLU, who believe not only that pedophiles and sex offenders should have the right to live next to playgrounds and elementary schools, but that they even have the right to instruct their perverted buddies on how to rape little boys. These positions are quite disturbing to most Americans, especially those of us with children. It is even scarier when there are loony judges out there that actually rule in favor of these twisted views. Luckily, the Supreme Court shot the ACLU down this time.

The American Civil Liberties Union-Indiana, suing initially on behalf of a female inmate, had filed a class-action lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the policy.

The Indiana Department of Correction imposed the policy in 2001, stating that inmates with a record of sex offenses involving children “shall not be permitted to receive visits from minors.” The agency amended the rule a year later to allow some visits under certain conditions, including one that the intended visitor had not been a victim of the offender.

The DOC justified the restrictions by arguing that sex offenders are at high risk of repeating the crime and often know their victims.

According to court records, visitations occur in areas with 25 to 30 tables and as many as 100 people often supervised by a single guard. The agency knew of past incidents when children were sexually abused in visiting areas.

DOC Commissioner J. David Donahue said the policy was aimed at protecting the public, and it will remain in effect.

“The Supreme Court’s review supports the policy,” Donahue said.

The ICLU argued the policy violated prisoners’ constitutional right to maintain family relationships and that it was cruel and unusual punishment.

“We’re very disappointed,” Ken Falk, legal director of the ACLU-Indiana, said Tuesday.

Before long, they will be supporting things like this in America.

Cut the age of consent to 12, and eventually get rid of it altogether, on the grounds that restricting sexual relations with kids “just makes children curious.”
Allow private possession of child pornography.
Allow daytime pornography broadcasts.
Provide sex education for toddlers.
Make adolescents aged 16 and up eligible to be prostitutes and appear in porno films.
Legalize sex with animals.
Legalize going naked in public.
Legalize all drugs.
Provide taxpayer-financed “free” train rides.

Don’t doubt it, they already support the legalization of child porn distribution, and possession. They also already support legalizing all drugs. Dan Rhiel thinks Peta may be on board with it too.

Post to Twitter Post to Plurk Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to Ping.fm Post to Reddit Post to StumbleUpon

Email This Email This

Posted by Jay on May 30, 2006 8:26 pm

» Filed Under ACLU, Child Exploitation, News

Trackback URL:

Links

Comments

3 Responses to “U.S. Supreme Court Refuses To Hear Sex Offender Visitation Case, ACLU Disappointed”

  1. hoosierev on May 31st, 2006 8:24 am

    This post hits very close to home. My brother messed up and had sex with an underage neighbor and served his time in Indiana. I visited him many times. There was always ample supervision and the thought he might try something with his own children is preposterous. Does it happen? Occasionally I am sure. But the policy is a classic case of overreacting. The solution is to beef up security, not deny inmates the opportunity to see their own kids once in awhile.

    I am normally against the ACLU, I have this blog on my blogroll. But this time they were right.

  2. Jay on May 31st, 2006 8:28 am

    The agency amended the rule a year later to allow some visits under certain conditions, including one that the intended visitor had not been a victim of the offender.

  3. technomagi on May 31st, 2006 5:36 pm

    I have an idea that I believe could stop the ACLU or at least slow them down. Stop them legally. This is my theory. I believe that anyone who favors as many evil things as this organization is led by people who cannot stand under personal scrutiny. I believe that if professional investigators started digging into the personal lives of the ACLU’s officers, leaders and key members that they would probably find a lot of dirt. The idea is simple. Form an organization dedicated to investigating these individuals and when evidence of criminal activity is discovered turn it over to the proper authorities and of course to the newspapers. If enough of these people get busted for child pornography or whatever their poison is then the whole organization will be discredited and demoralized.

»
»