Terry Fiedler reports: "Cory Schnurrer washed out of a boot-camp-style rehabilitation program at Willow River state prison, but things are different now. He's behind bars in Lino Lakes, immersed in Bible study. 'I totally committed to Christ,' said Schnurrer, 35, of New Ulm.
"A convicted cocaine dealer, he is among 165 other inmates taking part in an unusual, intensive Christianity program at Lino Lakes prison called the InnerChange Freedom Initiative. They spend six hours a day in religious activities, from early-morning devotions to revival meetings and Bible-based discussions of values. They live apart from other inmates and are guaranteed a job, housing and a volunteer church mentor once they get out.
"InnerChange's faith-based rehabilitation, now at six prisons nationally, is touted by some as a powerful way to turn ruined lives around. But it also is the focus of growing controversy.
"A federal judge in Iowa just ruled that a similar program there is unconstitutional because, using state funds, it coerces inmates to convert to Christianity."
And WJLA-TV reports: "A judge has ruled that a Bible-based prison program violates the First Amendment's freedom of religion clause by using state funds to promote Christianity to inmates. Prison Fellowship Ministries, which was sued in 2003 by an advocacy group, was ordered Friday to cease its program at the Newton Correctional Facility and repay the state $1.53 million.
'This calls into question the funding for so many programs,' said Barry Lynn, executive director of the Washington-based Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which filed the suit. 'Anyone who doesn't stop it is putting a giant 'sue me' sign on top of their building.'
Lynn's group accused Prison Fellowship Ministries of giving preferential treatment to inmates participating in the program. They were given special visitation rights, movie-watching privileges, access to computers and access to classes needed for early parole.
U.S. District Judge Robert Pratt called the perks 'seemingly minor benefits' that constituted unfair treatment to those not in the religious program. Despite any claims of rehabilitating inmates, the program 'impermissibly endorses religion,' Pratt wrote."
[When you are an atheist, you accept deeply that you might be mistaken about things and (1) strive to learn from your mistakes and (2) give others the chance to make mistakes and learn from them. When you are a theist, you have an invisible monster that lives in the sky on your side and (1) anything you want to do you can (2) if other people think different then they can be forced to change their mind. Which do you prefer? Which should be enfranchised in law and supported by tax dollars? Which was the intention of the authors of the Constitution of the United States of America?] [PS: Thanks to anon for spelling corrections.]
Post a Comment