If the USA was a Christian Nation...
I heard the following news story on NPR last week, and later found the printed text of the original story ...
********************
In Ohio, Supreme Court Considers Right to Procreate
A Man Behind on Child Support Got Orders Not to Beget
By Robert E. Pierre
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 11, 2004; Page A02
MEDINA, Ohio -- Sean Talty fathered seven children with five women and fell $40,000 behind on support payments, once going two years without making a payment. When he appeared in Common Pleas Court on felony charges for not paying child support, Talty found himself before one fed-up jurist: Judge James L. Kimbler ordered the 32-year-old Akron resident to take "reasonable efforts" not to get anyone pregnant for five years -- or go to jail.
That was two years ago, and today the Ohio Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Talty's case to decide the constitutionality of what has come to be known as "pay up or zip up."
... Medina County prosecutors have argued in court papers that the judge's order meets a three-part test established by previous court rulings: It aids rehabilitation, relates to the original crime and helps prevent more criminal activity because Talty -- also deep in debt -- will not create any new obligations.
Kimbler said the rights of people on probation and parole are routinely taken away. They can be forced to take drug tests, remain at home under house arrest or be searched without probable cause. "We interfere with fundamental rights of probationers all the time," the judge said in an interview. "This has to be seen in the context of parolee and probationer rights."
... Talty's case could set a significant precedent: What would stop the government from forcing a mother whose child would be born with spina bifida or cystic fibrosis to have an abortion? What would prohibit a judge from requiring a mother who receives welfare to get contraceptive implants? (A decade ago, a California judge did just that, but a state appeals court overturned the order.)
... A case similar to this one, however, has held up to scrutiny. In 1999, a Wisconsin man was sentenced to three years in prison and five years of probation on three separate counts of failure to pay child support. The man, David Oakley, was also ordered not to father any children during probation "unless he could prove to the court that he could support them all." The decision was upheld by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
... Laura W. Morgan, who headed the American Bar Association's committee on child support, said such cases set a bad precedent for society. She said she wishes more people tailored their family size to their budget, and she noted that Talty does not inspire sympathy. "He should have to pay," she said. "There are, however, lines that government can't cross," Morgan said. "I would hope that we are well away from the line where the government can tell you how many children you can have."
... On the day Talty was initially supposed to be sentenced, Kimbler considered putting him in jail but first had a question: Could he require Talty not to have any more children? The prosecution and defense said they did not think it was legal, so Kimbler ordered briefs from the lawyers and ended up with the language that Talty should make "reasonable efforts to avoid conception." "It was the first time I had imposed this particular condition," Kimbler said. His ruling was upheld by the 9th District Court of Appeals in Akron.
********************
Aside from the fact that this is a truly frightening precedent, and serves as a sign that we cannot be far away from government-imposed restrictions on the sizes of our families (not to mention forced contraception/abortion in the future), I found it interesting that the Judge felt free to regulate the man's use of contraceptives, but not his sexual activity.
In a Christian society, the Judge would have said, "I order you to cease and desist from committing the sin of fornication." In a Christian society, the Judge would never have allowed the man to divorce his first wife in the first place.
But because this is not a Christian society, the Judge says, in effect, "have sex, just make a reasonable effort to use contraceptives and prevent future pregnancy."
Can you imagine America as a Christian society? I'm trying to envision some of the headlines ...
"Former President Clinton Sentenced to 6 Months of Prison for Committing the Sin of Adultery"
"California Abortion Doctor Receives Death Sentence for Murdering 5,000 Innocent Babies"
"Supreme Court Bans Latest Halle Berry Movie from Theaters, Rules Immodest Images Dangerous to Nation's Youth:
Oh well. I can dream ...
********************
In Ohio, Supreme Court Considers Right to Procreate
A Man Behind on Child Support Got Orders Not to Beget
By Robert E. Pierre
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 11, 2004; Page A02
MEDINA, Ohio -- Sean Talty fathered seven children with five women and fell $40,000 behind on support payments, once going two years without making a payment. When he appeared in Common Pleas Court on felony charges for not paying child support, Talty found himself before one fed-up jurist: Judge James L. Kimbler ordered the 32-year-old Akron resident to take "reasonable efforts" not to get anyone pregnant for five years -- or go to jail.
That was two years ago, and today the Ohio Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Talty's case to decide the constitutionality of what has come to be known as "pay up or zip up."
... Medina County prosecutors have argued in court papers that the judge's order meets a three-part test established by previous court rulings: It aids rehabilitation, relates to the original crime and helps prevent more criminal activity because Talty -- also deep in debt -- will not create any new obligations.
Kimbler said the rights of people on probation and parole are routinely taken away. They can be forced to take drug tests, remain at home under house arrest or be searched without probable cause. "We interfere with fundamental rights of probationers all the time," the judge said in an interview. "This has to be seen in the context of parolee and probationer rights."
... Talty's case could set a significant precedent: What would stop the government from forcing a mother whose child would be born with spina bifida or cystic fibrosis to have an abortion? What would prohibit a judge from requiring a mother who receives welfare to get contraceptive implants? (A decade ago, a California judge did just that, but a state appeals court overturned the order.)
... A case similar to this one, however, has held up to scrutiny. In 1999, a Wisconsin man was sentenced to three years in prison and five years of probation on three separate counts of failure to pay child support. The man, David Oakley, was also ordered not to father any children during probation "unless he could prove to the court that he could support them all." The decision was upheld by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
... Laura W. Morgan, who headed the American Bar Association's committee on child support, said such cases set a bad precedent for society. She said she wishes more people tailored their family size to their budget, and she noted that Talty does not inspire sympathy. "He should have to pay," she said. "There are, however, lines that government can't cross," Morgan said. "I would hope that we are well away from the line where the government can tell you how many children you can have."
... On the day Talty was initially supposed to be sentenced, Kimbler considered putting him in jail but first had a question: Could he require Talty not to have any more children? The prosecution and defense said they did not think it was legal, so Kimbler ordered briefs from the lawyers and ended up with the language that Talty should make "reasonable efforts to avoid conception." "It was the first time I had imposed this particular condition," Kimbler said. His ruling was upheld by the 9th District Court of Appeals in Akron.
********************
Aside from the fact that this is a truly frightening precedent, and serves as a sign that we cannot be far away from government-imposed restrictions on the sizes of our families (not to mention forced contraception/abortion in the future), I found it interesting that the Judge felt free to regulate the man's use of contraceptives, but not his sexual activity.
In a Christian society, the Judge would have said, "I order you to cease and desist from committing the sin of fornication." In a Christian society, the Judge would never have allowed the man to divorce his first wife in the first place.
But because this is not a Christian society, the Judge says, in effect, "have sex, just make a reasonable effort to use contraceptives and prevent future pregnancy."
Can you imagine America as a Christian society? I'm trying to envision some of the headlines ...
"Former President Clinton Sentenced to 6 Months of Prison for Committing the Sin of Adultery"
"California Abortion Doctor Receives Death Sentence for Murdering 5,000 Innocent Babies"
"Supreme Court Bans Latest Halle Berry Movie from Theaters, Rules Immodest Images Dangerous to Nation's Youth:
Oh well. I can dream ...
<< Home