Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is sick. I am crying for that little girl. Every day, every single day she has to wonder if "it's" going to happen again today. And why can't Mommy come get her...?
Horrific.
But I actually don't see how it ties into religion at all. I'm not seeing how it ties into pastors raping or not raping children. If the assertion is that pastors aren't the "only" people who rape children, well duh (sorry).
I don't really understand the point of the post...?
Well if you can't establish relevance to R&S then it is liable to be moved someplace it fits better.
I will say that while it's true that fathers often get the raw end of the deal in custody matters and exes sometimes concoct stories to demonize them, I'm sorry but if you're a known sex offender you should not have sole custody of your daughter even absent accusations of inappropriate touching. Given that it's Oklahoma and the tone deafness of the decision, the fishing about for excuses to discredit the mother, my guess is that the judge has a strong bias, probably patriarchal and probably religion-based. But that is only a guess and the article cited doesn't address those things. It may simply be that the judge is authoritarian and angry that she denied visitation without taking it up in court first. And he may be like that apart from whatever religious convictions he has. It may be that the father is an excellent performance artist and liar and the judge is too open to give it credence. It could even be that despite what it looks like, the mother is a hideous deadbeat and easy target who is not that credible in her own right.
Whatever the excuse, though, a young girl is now in sole custody of a known sex offender, that's the bottom line.
Maybe the relevance to R&S is in the thread title ... the judicial system is messed up which disproves a point (that no one was making) that pastors are the only ones messed up in the head??
I went in to this thinking I won't make an assumptions.
First paragraph made the situation pretty clear.
That man should not have custody of that child. It sounds like the judge thinks he was wrongfully convicted, which is a valid thing to think is possible. However, we are to trust that the courts made the right decision until proven otherwise. He was convicted. If he was wrongfully convicted, then evidence should be brought forward to defend his case and he can have his criminal record removed. Until that happens, I see no reason to believe he should have custody of the child. Maybe visits with supervision, but I can't even wrap my mind around giving him custody.
This is sick. I am crying for that little girl. Every day, every single day she has to wonder if "it's" going to happen again today. And why can't Mommy come get her...?
Horrific.
But I actually don't see how it ties into religion at all. I'm not seeing how it ties into pastors raping or not raping children. If the assertion is that pastors aren't the "only" people who rape children, well duh (sorry).
I don't really understand the point of the post...?
Keeping things in perspective, I guess. Pastors or priests don't commit these crimes because they are pastors or priests. They do it because they are messed up. The churches to which these pastors or priests belong are then to be blamed as an organization for protecting the culprits. Here the law that is supposed to protect our children has gone and done the same bloody thing!
As skepticratic puts it;
Quote:
Originally Posted by skepticratic
I went in to this thinking I won't make an assumptions.
First paragraph made the situation pretty clear.
That man should not have custody of that child. It sounds like the judge thinks he was wrongfully convicted, which is a valid thing to think is possible. However, we are to trust that the courts made the right decision until proven otherwise. He was convicted. If he was wrongfully convicted, then evidence should be brought forward to defend his case and he can have his criminal record removed. Until that happens, I see no reason to believe he should have custody of the child. Maybe visits with supervision, but I can't even wrap my mind around giving him custody.
Keeping things in perspective, I guess. Pastors or priests don't commit these crimes because they are pastors or priests. They do it because they are messed up. The churches to which these pastors or priests belong are then to be blamed as an organization for protecting the culprits. Here the law that is supposed to protect our children has gone and done the same bloody thing!
As skepticratic puts it;
(Can't rep you twice)
But really, who ever said pastors rape because they're pastors? Rather the position is generally that as a protected/lauded faction ("Pastor X is a man of God, we all know he'd NEVER do such a thing!") with access to those in an inferior position, it IS possible for a pastor to rape and that some churches will protect rather than prosecute. Further, there's hypocrisy to the extreme in such "people of God" telling others how to behave and what to do, and meanwhile, raping children. Those are the factors (besides the rape itself, obviously) normally objected strongly to.
I think this poster's point is REALLY a reach. I'm not seeing how the legal system is doing the same things, for example, gathering together to "protect" this man. Indeed, originally, he was prosecuted. This is a crazy decision but I am not seeing the parallels being hinted at here...except child rape, and...forgiveness that's misplaced? Is that what the parallel is supposed to be?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
