Editor:

I just finished reading Mary Billiter's piece titled "Objectifying women and children" (Opinion/Nov. 7). It appears that she has resurrected an old argument. But, it is full of baloney. The Supreme Court ruled long ago that magazines like Playboy are not pornographic and secondly, characterizing sex offenders as a "cesspool of predators" is just over the top. In fact, the vast majority of sex offenders are not characterized as predators at all. These days the category of "registered sex offender" has been so broadened that it includes everything from misdemeanor streaking to teens "sexting" each other. Furthermore, the actual numbers of registered sex offenders that have crimes where they preyed upon children under 14 years of age is very small. Most sex offenders are nonviolent and don't deserve the abuse and stigmatization that America society heaps upon them. And finally, Ms. Billiter states that the authorities "ruled out all 161 registered sex offenders" who lived in an area of having committed a particular crime. If sex offenders are so dangerous one would think that such a density of sex offenders would almost guarantee rampant sex crimes committed on a daily basis. Statistics show that the majority of sex offenders never re-offend.

Mary Billiter's op-ed piece merely enflames an already overhyped issue. Sex offenders are easy targets of abuse from hysterical news media types looking to capitalize on the ever-popular topics of sex or deviations thereof. Sex (and nudity) is a dirty subject that few will discuss objectively.

MARTIN COLLER, Jackson