Republican pol refuses to resign for knowingly hiring child sex offender

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBT33B64EE.html

N.H. Politician Facing Calls to Resign Over Arrest of Aide on Abuse Charges

CONCORD, N.H. (AP) - A member of the powerful state Executive Council is facing calls to resign for hiring a campaign aide he knew was a convicted child sex offender, but he said Tuesday he has no intention of stepping down.

"I don't plan to resign. There's too much work yet to be done," Raymond Burton told The Associated Press in a phone interview.

The aide, Mark Seidensticker, 45, was arrested last month and accused of inappropriate contact with teenage boys. Based on that arrest, Burton said he no longer will employ Seidensticker, who is being held on $50,000 bail at the Merrimack County jail. snip

U.S. Sens. John Sununu and Judd Gregg and both of the state's congressmen have urged Burton, to resign. All four are Republicans, as is Burton. Gov. John Lynch, a Democrat, also called Monday for Burton to step down.

Sununu said court records and campaign reports "make clear that ... Burton continued to employ Mark Seidensticker in a public capacity despite knowledge of his convictions."

More Republican family values I guess?

he still needs to work.

So long as his job does not put him in direct contact with young boys, then it's better he work as a campaign aide than a camp counsellor.

Now this guy will disappear to Shady Lake.

and THEIR OPPOSITE set of rules they have established for the rest of US.

I don't want to get into another soul searching discussion about child molestation-- and I've discussed my own involvement with childhood sexual molestation elsewhere so I won't do it again here-- but what are we supposed to do with convicted sexual criminals who've served their time and been released? Yes, I know the statistics about sexual crime recidivism, and as a biologist, I think I understand some of the reasons for that failure rate. But the fact remains that we need to make consistent decisions about how we deal with the future of "former child molesters" and other criminals who've been punished and released. Should we brand them as monsters for life by default, deny them access to the same opportunities for a decent life that other people enjoy, and even use them as tools to excoriate the hapless folks who do employ them? That seems inherently wrong to me. The OP suggests that that is exactly what should be done.

The OP disturbs me on several levels, and that is just one of them. The final comment implies that Burton deliberately chose a former child molester because he somehow likes that, or something similar, i.e. child molestation is within his republican value system. That's wrong too. I think the republican philosphy is the value system of pigs, but it's piglike enough on its own merits without our having to make inferences like the one in the OP, which I suspect even the most hardened among us knows in untrue.

That Burton would hire a known sex offender if he himself were one as well.
This attention was bad enough. I imagine that if Burton were a sex offender, he would go to great lengths to hide it.

As for the question of whether to brand someone for life...
Well, even though that shouldn't happen, we know that these are working on biological triggers. Sexual attraction is a real problem when minors become the subject.

Other than that, I must agree that, however improbable it may seem, nearly ALL the instances of perversion, debauchery, corruption, and hypocrisy I have heard of in the last 5 years are perpetrated by Republicans.

Maybe that too is a 'biological trigger'.