Sunday, June 02, 2013

Dr. Ross Condemns His Church

The keepers of the Op-Ed section of the Lexington Herald-Leader seem to be obsessed lately with deviant sexual behavior. The latest offering (01 June) is by James Robert Ross, described by himself as a marriage-and-family therapist, and as a “professional credentialed by the Commonwealth of Kentucky to assess and treat sex offenders.” In the column, Ross berated his church leaders for not welcoming sex offenders into the church and attempted to argue how wrong they were.

A couple weeks ago, columnist Roger Guffey’s offering had to do with the absolutely vital necessity of celebrating the genius of homosexuals, his main exemplar of that strain being none other than Plato himself. Guffey didn’t mention the fact that Plato, in his own writings, identified himself, also, as a cultured, sophisticated pedophile/pederast. Actually, bestiality might have been an even better qualifier of the great man as…well, GREAT! Hitler was also homosexual, with the genius for wasting 11 million people, so there’s much to celebrate…something like 3,000 per day gassed and incinerated, starved or otherwise tortuously discouraged from living 1935-45.

Ross didn’t identify his church but in an unrelated matter pointed a long finger of sex-connected accusation at an evangelical church, one of the largest in the country, as if that might vindicate his position. It was just mean-spirited but, after all, he has a PhD in theology—case closed.

There’s no intention here to play down the need of a convicted/released child molester for a strong spiritual grounding but the church does not guarantee that. Ross would do well to deal with his client in Christian ministry one-on-one, just as Jesus did. Expecting his church to see things his way is from a practical standpoint a reach too far. The parents in that church have a common-sense approach and understand that the law even mandates where a registered offender may and may not live or travel.

The initial problem leading to incarceration is bad enough but the rate of recidivism is instructive. In a Wall Street Journal article of 24 January 2008, mention is made of a recidivism rate of 52% as suggested in a widely published report by Dr. Dennis Doren, evaluation director at Sand Ridge Secure Treatment Center in Mauston, Wisconsin.

In a Canadian study in the 1990s, the rate was set at 42% in a study of offenders released 1958-74, with 10% of the repeat crimes occurring 10-31 years after release. From this long-term study in a relatively homogeneous population, unlike this country’s, it can be seen that child molestation capability may be a latent threat for decades.

Ross wrote that he had never heard of a child being abused in a church by a registered offender. Of course not! How many registered offenders go to church, in the first place? Weird! Ross said the church’s decision was based on either ignorance or irrational fear or both. This is the kind of arrogance expected in the warm-fuzzy politically-correct craze of today, in which all is relative and nothing is either right or wrong, with the hoi polloi too dumb to understand their betters, like Ross.

Ross made it clear that an offender attending church would be accompanied by “another responsible adult.” That just about says it all. That’s like saying that a released shoplifter or murderer couldn’t attend church unless chaperoned by a policeman. Such is not the case, of course, and points up the need to take extensive measures to protect the most vulnerable—the children—in church and everywhere else.

Finally, Ross brings out the big gun, to wit, WHAT WOULD JESUS DO. After all, sinners are to be welcomed in church, according to Christ. But as a clinician—psychologist, therapist, counselor, whatever—Ross deals with sick people. Would someone with smallpox be expected in church? Should children be exposed to someone sick (or evil) enough to violate a child? Most folks probably think not—maybe about 99.99% of them.

In any case, Jesus was not the wimp the PC crowd prefers. He made a whip and used it on the backs of people violating the Temple and drove them out, not in. Later, shortly before he was crucified, he told his disciples to arm themselves. When he referenced Sodom in condemning other wicked cities, he minced no words. Christ was a hardliner.

So…does the whole thing boil down to a disgruntled church-member not getting his way? Who knows…but plain common sense/decency dictates that Ross’s church deserved better than his condemnation of it.

And so it goes.
Jim Clark

No comments: