As I first reported here, the City of Issaquah was to vote on an ordinance restricting where convicted sex offenders could live within the city limits, in an effort to keep them as far as possible away from children.
Well, the ordinance passed, and went into effect on September 1st, but as reported here, this ordinace is being challenged in court by - you guessed it - those "defenders of the oppressed (including convicted sex offenders)", the ACLU.
They are challenging this on the grounds that this ordinance is "unconstitutional" in that it violates the rights of the sex offenders to live wherever they please, stating that it is "cruel and unusual punishment" to make them live where there aren't any children around that they can prey upon.
What about the rights of children to not be victims of sexual predation? What about the rights of the parents of those children, to have their children not live in fear of being sexually assaulted? What about that, ACLU?
The ACLU supposedly defends those who are not able to defend themselves, right? Well, doesn't that include children, who are among the least able to defend themselves?
The ACLU is one of the most morally reprehensible organizations inflicting this planet, insinuating their morally bankrupt agenda into nearly every facet of civilized society, and they need to be confronted, and hopefully stopped, every time they attempt to do something like this.
Note to the judge(s) who will be hearing this case - consider very carefully which way you decide the outcome of this lawsuit, by taking into consideration the very real vulnerability of the children this ordinance strives to protect, versus the so-called "rights" of convicted sexual predators to live in close proximity to children that they could prey upon.
No comments:
Post a Comment