A person wrote in to columnist Randy Cohen, asking him if she should be obligated to invite a registered sex offender to a school reunion she was putting together. The reader said that she would feel badly for discluding the offender, but that she felt the other attendees had a right to the information.

Cohen responded with,"Do nothing. It’s often the best thing." Quite a pleasant response for those inactive participants of life who would rather turn a blind eye and not call a spade a spade in the fear of having to make a statement for morality. Cohen continues saying, "Some parents might be uneasy about this fellow, but to respond to that anxiety would be catering to prejudice, not forestalling danger"(Cohen 2010). Are you kidding me? Would one actually have us be of the mind that excluding a sex offender from a family event would be discrimination? I am so sick of that word and how casually it is thrown around! Sex offenders should not be discriminated against? In what sick ass world would this really take place? Oh wait. I know the answer to that question. Ours. SO called "political correctness" has been the downfall of morality on many fronts. What those are exactly,is a discussion for another time, another place, for now I'll stick to being anti-sex offender. Where do we draw the line on not speaking our minds, having moral limits, and judging our fellow brethren? If we are going to play that game of not judging others unpardonable actions, then we might as well just do away with the whole justice system because I'm sure criminals find it discriminating. Hush we should ever offend their gentle senses! Cohen back's his argument for the sex-offender further by claiming that he is not a danger to society because, "“Sex offenders were less likely than non-sex offenders to be rearrested for any offense.” The more I re-read this the further the ick seep's into my stomach. Is this guy for real? That can't a sane, logical person writing that crap. That statement is pure bullshit, and I consider that to be pure advocacy. Apparently the offender spent some time on probation for his crime against a child and Cohen says of that, "He has paid his debt to society; you ought not extract a further toll by exiling him from ordinary social interactions" (Cohen 2010). Really, he paid his debt to society? I don't feel repaid. do you? No silly probation sentence will ease my mind for that child whom he hurt, either. Does the child feel repaid? Does she say to herself, "Well at least he got a couple years probation, now it's all over, he paid for his crime against me!" Hell friggin no I say. That is an unpayable crime. This is not a sex-trade, nor is it a democracy, nor is it anything but wicked. There is no room for forgiveness, from here on out there is only room for caution. That is why we LABEL them as sex-offenders, they cannot live or work near children, and they are watched. They should be forever segregated from society. I don't think their desire is something that just goes away like a bad idea. No room for second chances when it comes to the children. And I will speak up against anyone who has a different opinion.

What should Cohen have said? He should have said "Hell no, don't invite the guy. Don't invite trouble into your home. Stand firm against those that hurt our children.He chose his path, now we are responsible to keep people like him from our ranks. They are not equal members of society, they are those who crawl among us." There are too many action groups who are allowed to many opinions. lawsuits, and frivolous behaviors. It's time to pull your pants back up and bring back morality and family values. They are almost gone people, don't let them become extinct.