It’s hard to believe some of the things we have to put up with in a free country.

The Constitution says, and the Supreme Court has upheld, that everyone has the right to legal representation, even poor people. That’s why during cop shows, when someone makes an arrest, they always say, “If you can’t afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.”

Also, the Declaration of Independence says our inalienable rights include the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Occasionally, people do things that make us believe that they don’t deserve the rights the rest of us enjoy.

Like it or not, these rights apply to everyone. When we start to make exceptions, no matter how worthy the cause, we start down the dangerous path of letting a majority of people pick and choose who has which rights.

An example of this dilemma is “Megan’s Law,” which was passed in New Jersey last fall. The law requires that residents be notified when a convicted sex offender is released from prison and moves into their neighborhood. It was passed quickly after 7-year-old Megan Kanka was murdered near her home in Hamilton Township, N.J. by a neighbor who was a convicted sex offender.

When the State Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the law in July, it ordered that hearings be held to give convicted sex offenders the chance to appeal decisions by county prosecutors, who decide how serious a risk the offender poses to the community and how widespread notification should be.

The law is back in the news now because some New Jersey lawyers are protesting a court order that guaranteed court-appointed lawyers for offenders who can’t afford one. The court recommended that the state legislature allocate money to pay the lawyers for their services. But the legislature hasn’t acted on the recommendation, and two judges handling the cases have said the court-appointed lawyers will have to work for free.

Republicans, who control the New Jersey legislature, have made an issue recently about the government making mandates without funding them.

So the lawyers don’t want to accept the cases and the legislature is dragging its feet about paying for legal representation. It seems that it has been determined that sex offenders aren’t worthy of legal representation.

I know that many people are probably of the opinion that people who molest children actually don’t deserve the right to an attorney or any other right.

There is no possible way to condone sexual abuse of anyone, especially a child. But it’s wrong to pass a law making access to a lawyer a necessity for a group of people; then deny them that access.

But I think the problem with this law lies not in the implementation of the appeals process but in the law itself. I know it was passed by a sound majority in the legislature, was found to be constitutional by the State Supreme Court and has found widespread support in New Jersey and across the nation.

But still, something about the whole premise of the law just doesn’t sit right with me.

Emotions about this issue run very high. There are people who I care deeply about who have been victims of sexual abuse. The people who abused them have never faced legal consequences for it, a fact that angers me even as I write these words.

This law is viewed as a way to protect children from convicted sex offenders. Unfortunately, for every child molester who is convicted, there are several more out there who will never get caught. Just as often as they are neighbors, child molesters are family friends, relatives, baby sitters and other trusted people.

Realistically, this law probably does very little to protect children from sexual abuse. What it does do is brand certain people for life and give parents a false sense of security.

Some convicted sex offenders may never stop committing these horrible crimes, but some do. People who have paid their debt to society should at least be given the opportunity to lead productive, peaceful lives. This law makes all the offenders open to ridicule, discrimination or even vigilantism.

I don’t find fault in anyone who voted for or supports this law. The instinct to protect one’s children is very strong.

But parents should teach their children how to protect themselves from sexual abuse and not rely on the government to do it for them. We live in an ugly, violent world, and we all have to be careful.

Though their crimes are horrible, sex offenders still have rights. We have to protect those rights, no matter how much we hate it.

Once we decide one group of people in this country don’t deserve the same rights as everyone else, we may soon see a day when everyone’s rights are put to a referendum.

---

Steven Martens is a junior in journalism mass communication from Cedar Rapids.