An admitted pedophile in Ohio is actually trying to make the argument in court that having sex with children is protected under the free exercise clause because it's part of the doctrine of the religion he invented.
A man accused of sexually assaulting nine boys with physical or mental disabilities told a judge that having sex with children is a sacred ritual protected by civil rights laws.
Phillip Distasio, who said he is the leader of a church called Arcadian Fields Ministries, represented himself at his pretrial hearing Wednesday. He is charged with 74 counts including rape, pandering obscenity to minors and corrupting another with drugs.
"I'm a pedophile. I've been a pedophile for 20 years," he said in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court Wednesday. "The only reason I'm charged with rape is that no one believes a child can consent to sex. The role of my ministry is to get these cases out of the courtrooms."
Uh, yeah. Good luck with that one, pal. All but one of his victims were under 13 years old. 7 of them were autistic, all were handicapped in some way. His public defender, to his credit, refused to make the freedom of religion argument so the man is now representing himself. There is no possible punishment harsh enough for someone like this.
- Log in to post comments
I expect the freedom-loving folks at STACLU to step up and help defend this innocent believer. Any minute now.
Hmmmm.
How about a religion that practises human sacrifice -- specifically pedophiles?
I bet such a religion would end up with more members..... Let me rephrase that. I bet such a religion would have more disciples.
This is such a stupid argument. One could then just make up a religion that did what you wanted. I know, I'm starting a religion that says all members of other religions must be stoned to death. Do you think that will fly?
Ohh, I hate to tell you this, but that one's taken.
Oh My God!! Its NAMBLA!!! and here I thought that was just a South Park joke. I'm stunned.
L. Ron Hubbard, please pick up a white courtesy phone.
Hey, this guy is only practicing the "Ken Hovind stupid religious reason for violating the law" legal defence...........
How does one make the argument for breaking a law to obey one's religion? Obviously it can't (and shouldn't) happen in this case, but it does happen in others. So how do the courts draw the lines? Native American tribes are allowed to use peyote, for example.
The first website a google search for these wackos turned up said, "Arcadian Fields is a ministry of the Universal Life Church. The goal of the ministry is to provide free food and shelter for artists and musicians in order to promote education and health through interactive entertainment."
Since this pervert is apparently AF's FOUNDER, I can guess what kind of "interactive entertainment" he had in mind. Even more twisted details of "Brother Patheticus" can be found here.
The ULC has zero qualifications for ministers. they will literally ordain anybody. Many who do so are Pagans (as he allegedly claims to be), and would NEVER consider this guy's behavior acceptable.
In part of the article the Herald didn't print: "Not all pedophilia is bad, and sex with boys can be healthy,"
Distasio said. "It's an argument I'm willing to make, but my attorney is not."
No shit. That's because he's sane.
It seems like there are a LOT of these creatures popping up lately -- this has to be at least the sixth story I've read on child molesters in the last two weeks. As a step-brother to two people who are developmentally-disabled & someone who worked with them for several years, I can't really put into words how disgusted people like this make me. But I can summarize it this way: Child sexual abusers are among the VERY few criminals I have no problems executing.
Me either, but for capital cases, you need a really high standard of proof. The director of our local children's museum stands accused of child pornography; he just had pictures of his son's birthday party developed at the wrong place and was reported by an overzealous clerk. He's now out of a job and a social pariah.
If the thing you are accused of is bad enough, evidence of your innocence is conflated with lack of concern over the crime. Of course that doesn't relate to that Arcadian guy; he admitted what he is.
Matthew wrote:
There is a famous case called Employment Division v. Smith, which ruled that the free exercise clause did not protect the right to use peyote in Native American religious ceremonies. After that decision came down, Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which says that a generally applicable law may not place a "substantial burden" on the free exercise of religion unless the government can show that the prohibition furthers a compelling government interest and is the least restrictive means of doing so. Congress essentially demanded that the courts apply the highest level of scrutiny when considering the constitutionality of a law that places a substantial burden on religious liberty. That's why the courts have since then carved out exemptions from generally applicable laws (in such cases, the law is not typically struck down, there is just a religious exception to it given).
Can I play this game? My ambitions are far more modest, I swear. Basically, God told me that I'm allowed to use the car pool lane. Actually, he told me I was going to hell if I don't use the car pool lane at every possible opportunity. Is it my fault if nobody else (especially CHP for some reason) has enough faith to see this?
I know you don't mean that, but it's concerning to hear nonetheless. I know sexual molestation of a child is the crime that gets people's hackles up more than anything else, but it's an irrational anger-- not because molesting a (mentally deficient, especially) child shouldn't be a crime, but because there are plenty of worse things a person can do....and plenty of punishments which would not be deserved for this.
Religious terrorists are just following their religious doctrines too.
I suppose I could imagine some punishments that I would balk at, but of all the punishments allowed under law, there's none I have a problem with. I have absolutely no problem with the death penalty in such a case, since we have no doubt that he is truly guilty (since he admits to it, and is proud of it, and defends it). I would have no moral problem with putting him to death. I'd even be willing to push the button myself.
Wow. For me to support such a thing, the person would at the very least have to have killed someone. The spectrum between molesting someone and killing them.....well, it's far too great (and I suspect, for that matter, that this guy is actually insane).
I think molesting handicapped kids is every bit as morally reprehensible as killing someone. And he admits it, and is proud of it. Whether he's insane or not has no bearing on it for me.
I don't disagree that sexually molesting handicapped children is just as reprehensible as killing someone... but saying that there is no punishment that would not be too severe is a failure of imagination.
The rape of a child (sorry but molesting is rape - I call it such)is in fact, the theft of that person's childhood. It is the gutting of their innocence. It is the tearing down of their phsycy. Those who commit such rapes should be locked away forever.
A guy I knew in highschool courageously came to me (when we were in highschool) and admitted he was sexually attracted to children. I talked to our schools teen crisis intervention teacher, who was also his health teacher, and got him a pass to see the school therapist that didn't have his name on it. He subsequently got the help he needed and now has a family. Point being that with courage and a desire to change, child rape is an illness that can be beat. I therefore have zero sympathy for perpatraters of that crime.
And while I can imagine worse crimes, they all involve genocide or mass destruction. But for civil crimes I can think of none worse than the rape of a child. While I am not a supporter of the death penalty that is because I do not believe in executing anyone who is not guilty with 100% certainty. In this sick F***s case - light him up.
Well, I am glad to see that the "religious" right has once again shown a remarkable ability to be narrow-minded and short-sighted. Apparently, the blame for this freak is solely and completely on, you guessed it, "liberals."
This is from our friend Kevin McCullough at WorldNUTDaily.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51382
In my new book ''MuscleHead Revolution: Overturning Liberalism with Commonsense Thinking,'' I point out how painfully obvious it has become to us all that the clear-headed absolutes of right and wrong and good and evil were thrown out with the modern-feminist bathwater of the 1960s. But few of us ever thought it would get to the point that we are now seeing - pedophiles claiming constitutional civil rights protections for their desire to engage in homosexual pedophilia.
So where does Distasio get the boldness to make such ludicrous claims?
How about modern liberalism, academia, and the Clinton administration?
And how right he is. What the "left" really wants is children raped - we think it is a great thing. After all, as McCullough goes on to explain:
Since modern liberalism's true goal is the actual eradication of God, moral values, and the ideas of absolute right vs. wrong, it should surprise no one that not a single leftist politician in America has denounced Distasio.
Apparently if you don't denounce every loon on the planet, you are explicitly endorsing them.
Wonder if Mr. McCullough has yet to denounce Guy Adams, of Alan Keyes' group "Renew America," for recently stating that the next big trend in the gay community is "sex with infants." Because if he hasn't, he must believe the same thing, right?
Is molesting a child worse, better, or equivalent to beating them to within an inch of the life? What about emotional abuse that takes place over years?
Sexual abuse is horrendous, but this "you've destroyed all innocence" rhetoric is going too far. There are worse things that can be done to a child.
There was a group of prisoners who made up a version of Christianity with a novel re-imagining of the Eucharist: every Friday they had to have an excellent steak (to order) and sherry. Incidentally, this is not the first time that paedophiles have tried this.