• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sex offender to be ordained 8:56

F107HyperSabr

DP Veteran
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
2,617
Reaction score
375
Location
Connecticut
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Sex offender to be ordained
[ame=http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2009/09/07/nr.sex.offender.cnn]Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com[/ame]

I cannot believ this !! This so called pastor will "ordain" a piece of human crap pedophile pervert as a minister. The piece of human crap is named Mark Hourigan and he served time starting in 1998 for dodomy of an 11 year old boy.

have we not learned anything from the case of that girl who was held for 18 years. The piece of human crap named Mark Hourigan say that he has gone through sex affender training and can control himself through counciling by others.

Mark Hourigan should not be a minister he should be castrated and then killed.
 
I cannot believ this !! This so called pastor will "ordain" a piece of human crap pedophile pervert as a minister. The piece of human crap is named Mark Hourigan and he served time starting in 1998 for dodomy of an 11 year old boy.


"dodomy"...?
 
Yeah! And he should be quartered and poked and drowned and we should raise Jeffrey Dahmer from the dead and feed Hourigan to him and kill Jeffrey Dahmer again too! :mad:
 
Sex offender to be ordained
Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

I cannot believ this !! This so called pastor will "ordain" a piece of human crap pedophile pervert as a minister. The piece of human crap is named Mark Hourigan and he served time starting in 1998 for dodomy of an 11 year old boy.

have we not learned anything from the case of that girl who was held for 18 years. The piece of human crap named Mark Hourigan say that he has gone through sex affender training and can control himself through counciling by others.

Mark Hourigan should not be a minister he should be castrated and then killed.

Emotional hyperbole aside, it does seem like he got off very light. How in the world did he only serve 4 years 8 months for sexually abusing an 11-year-old? Someone I went to high school with is currently serving 10 years for possession of child pornography, and obviously this is a much worse crime than that.

I agree that the church should welcome him as a member (how else would he ever reintegrate into society?), but they are taking an enormous risk by ordaining him. Aside from the obvious physical danger to the children of the church, if he re-offends, it will forever ruin the pastor's and church's credibility with its members. I have no idea what they could possibly be thinking.
 
Last edited:
As much as I detest pedophiles, I could not help but think that Christ came to earth, not to save the self righteous, but sinners.
 
Emotional hyperbole aside, it does seem like he got off very light. How in the world did he only serve 4 years 8 months for sexually abusing an 11-year-old? Someone I went to high school with is currently serving 10 years for possession of child pornography, and obviously this is a much worse crime than that.



It does seem rather arbitrary.
On the other hand, ten years for possession of child porn seems excessive to me (I'm sure I'll get roasted for saying that, but Jesus Christ :roll:).
 
Perhaps the sodomy wasn't forcible.

Whoa!!

Any time sodomy is committed on a child, that can be considered as forcible, since children do not have the ability to understand rape.
 
Just a minute here. Since I'm not in the mood to get into another little brouhaha about this, I'm not referring to coercion. I'm referring to physical force. If the sodomy was not physically forcible, that may have accounted for a reduced sentence.
 
Whoa!!

Any time sodomy is committed on a child, that can be considered as forcible, since children do not have the ability to understand rape.

With a child that age, it is safe to assume that the sodomy was coercive, if not physically forcible.
It strains credulity to imagine that the child- a child, not an adolescent- wanted to be sodomized by this individual and had the capacity to understand the ramifications of that.
 
Just a minute here. Since I'm not in the mood to get into another little brouhaha about this, I'm not referring to coercion. I'm referring to physical force. If the sodomy was not physically forcible, that may have accounted for a reduced sentence.

I don't think the law makes such a distinction, Agnapostate.
Nor do I think it should.
That would encourage a "blame the victim" mentality.
"Oh, since you didn't fight back and have to be beaten unconscious, the perpetrator has committed a lesser crime and should receive a lighter sentence, accordingly."
You see the problem with that?
It makes child rape victims feel that they sort of deserved to be raped.
In truth, child molesters typically use verbal threats and mental/emotional coercion to subdue their victims. Physical force is rarely necessary. Children are not very strong.
Sentencing molesters according to whether they used physical force would not be right. It would send the message to children that they weren't "really" raped unless they fought and struggled, and in truth there is no point in it- an adult can overpower a child regardless- and it might get some child victims needlessly killed.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the law makes such a distinction, Agnapostate.

I'm quite sure there's a distinction made, with there likely being additional assault and perhaps battery charges in addition to mere abuse charges in some jurisdictions in the case of some forcible or violent interaction as opposed to some coercive but nonviolent interaction.
 
I'm quite sure there's a distinction made, with there likely being additional assault and perhaps battery charges in addition to mere abuse charges in some jurisdictions in the case of some forcible or violent interaction as opposed to some coercive but nonviolent interaction.

I edited and expounded on my idea; see my above post.
 
I was making what I believed to be a factual statement, not an ethical claim. I was commenting on how I believed these issues were prosecuted, not how they ought to be. :shrug:

I don't believe it is factual, is what i'm saying.
I know the courts no longer discriminate against adult rape victims who ask their attackers to wear condoms. That was an issue for awhile, and now it's been resolved.
Attempting to protect oneself from HIV infection /= tacit consent to sex.
A child attempting to protect himself from beating, maiming, or murder /= tacit consent to sex.
 
I find the churches actions brave, especially in a time when politicians love to bring up child molestation in order to make the public act like a bunch of slavering idiots. However, his sentence seems to be far to light considering his crime. In my opinion, he should still be prison, but I don't have a problem with him becoming a minister if he is out. He is being kept away from children, and it is better for society for him to be a minster than a homeless vagrant. Social pressure keeps people from committing crimes, and casting them out from society doesn't make children any safer.
 
Nothing new about pedophiles in the Church:(
 
As much as I detest pedophiles, I could not help but think that Christ came to earth, not to save the self righteous, but sinners.


Still, I would think in a religion your sin can be forgiven but not forgotten, especially with such hienous acts.

There are a lot of things he could do in a church besides being a leader.
 
There are a lot of things he could do in a church besides being a leader.
Organist, or maybe an excorcist with an unusual way of expelling demons:)
 
Nero used to use that same twisting of a wonderful metaphor, how far your
understanding has advanced in two thousand years. :doh

Actually, I share the name of the Apostate Emperor instead, which I always thought a delightful irony given the importation of Latin names to America by Spanish Catholics, many of whom desired above all else to forcibly convert the indigenous masses. :2wave:
 
As much as I detest pedophiles, I could not help but think that Christ came to earth, not to save the self righteous, but sinners.

I agree with you 100% Dan and I have no problem with him being in the church but leading a church is something entirely different . As humans we have no idea if this person is fully recovered or not. When a person in the secular world commits such a crime it is bad. When a Christian commits such a crime it goes up in neon lights and is advertised on the side of the Good Year blimp. As Christians we need to be aware of and prepared to meet the needs of others but the the needs of the Church as the body of Christ needs to be considered before all things. And the church surely does not need to put itself at risk for another scandal such as this could cause.

Moe
 
Back
Top Bottom