An unworthy "victim advocate"?

According to this news story, Connecticut's Lt. Gov., Kevin Sullivan, has called for the resignation of the state's "victim advocate", James Papillo, saying that (quoting the paper), "Papillo's opposition to a bill that would require hospitals to provide emergency contraception to rape victims violates his oath of office."

"Imagine the state victim advocate testifying against victim's rights," Sullivan said at a press conference in his Capitol office.

As it happens, Papillo is a Roman Catholic permanent deacon.  He has said he will not resign.

"I think it's a political issue in a political year," said Papillo, a lawyer who holds a doctorate in psychology. He said the victim advocate's office should be independent and not a "puppet" of any authority, not the state legal system or the legislature.

In his testimony, Papillo said his opposition to the Plan B requirement had nothing to do with religion. Instead, he said the Plan B issue simply obscured the real needs of victims, including the need for more money for counseling and more court-appointed victim advocates.

But in an interview Tuesday he said the state must balance the religious rights of the hospitals against the needs of rape victims.

Connecticut's Governor Rell remarked that Papillo "now understands that he went far beyond the bounds of victim advocacy," Rell said. "Mr. Papillo knows he must not cross the line again between his personal beliefs and the interests of those for whom he advocates."  Sullivan added, "This is an individual with a very personal agenda, and he's taken a position that is adverse to victims."  Indeed, according to Sullivan, Papillo's statement to the public health committee that his office has never received a complaint from a rape victim who was denied access to emergency contraception was like (quoting the paper) "the argument of racists during the civil rights struggles of the 1960s."

"I think back to African Americans [when those opposed to integration] said, `Well, they didn't want to eat at [white] lunch counters anyway,"' Sullivan said.

Well, there is a lot here.  Is it relevant, and is it troubling or objectionable, that Papillo is a deacon?  Does his religious vocation convert his views about the wisdom of the proposed contraceptive mandate into a "personal belief" or "personal agenda"?  Is a "victim advocate" required to endorse Gov. Rell's or Lt. Gov. Sullivan's understanding of what is, in fact, in the interest of victims?  Is a "victim advocate" required, by virtue of his or her position, to prefer automatically a proposal framed as pro-victim to the religious freedom of citizens of the state he or she serves?