December 10, 2006
WHILE THE STUPID PARY THINKS IT'S LOSING:
Religion for a Captive Audience, Paid For by Taxes (DIANA B. HENRIQUES and ANDREW LEHREN, 12/10/06, NY Times)
Since 2000, courts have cited more than a dozen programs for having unconstitutionally used taxpayer money to pay for religious activities or evangelism aimed at prisoners, recovering addicts, job seekers, teenagers and children.Nevertheless, the programs are proliferating. For example, the Corrections Corporation of America, the nation’s largest prison management company, with 65 facilities and 71,000 inmates under its control, is substantially expanding its religion-based curriculum and now has 22 institutions offering residential programs similar to the one in Iowa. And the federal Bureau of Prisons, which runs at least five multifaith programs at its facilities, is preparing to seek bids for a single-faith prison program as well.
Government agencies have been repeatedly cited by judges and government auditors for not doing enough to guard against taxpayer-financed evangelism. But some constitutional lawyers say new federal rules may bar the government from imposing any special requirements for how faith-based programs are audited.
And, typically, the only penalty imposed when constitutional violations are detected is the cancellation of future financing — with no requirement that money improperly used for religious purposes be repaid.
But in a move that some constitutional lawyers found surprising, Judge Pratt ordered the prison ministry in the Iowa case to repay more than $1.5 million in government money, saying the constitutional violations were serious and clearly foreseeable.
His decision has been appealed by the prison ministry to a federal appeals court and fiercely protested by the attorneys general of nine states and lawyers for a number of groups advocating greater government accommodation of religious groups. The ministry’s allies in court include the Bush administration, which argued that the repayment order could derail its efforts to draw more religious groups into taxpayer-financed programs.
Officials of the Iowa program said that any anti-Catholic comments made to inmates did not reflect the program’s philosophy, and are not condoned by its leadership.
Jay Hein, director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, said the Iowa decision was unfair to the ministry and reflects an “overreaching†at odds with legal developments that increasingly “show favor to religion in the public square.â€
And while he acknowledged the need for vigilance, he said he did not think the constitutional risks outweighed the benefits of inviting “faith-infused†ministries, like the one in Iowa, to provide government-financed services to “people of faith who seek to be served in this ‘full-person’ concept.â€
Over the last two decades, legislatures, government agencies and the courts have provided religious organizations with a widening range of regulatory and tax exemptions. And in the last decade religious institutions have also been granted access to public money once denied on constitutional grounds, including historic preservation grants and emergency reconstruction funds.
In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that public money could be used for religious instruction or indoctrination, but only when the intended beneficiaries made the choice themselves between religious and secular programs — as when parents decide whether to use tuition vouchers at religious schools or secular ones. The court emphasized the difference between such “indirect†financing, in which the money flows through beneficiaries who choose that program, and “direct†funding, where the government chooses the programs that receive money.
Prisoners need not choose religious rehabilitation. Posted by Orrin Judd at December 10, 2006 10:11 AM
The biggest example of taxpayer financed religion is public education, where you are taxed for the sole purpose of sending your kids to a "school" where they are indoctrinated in the religion of secular humanism.
When the ban all religious discussion in schools (other than to openly denigrate it) they are merely practicing their version of the First Commandment.
Posted by: Bruno at December 10, 2006 10:38 AMwe won that fight long ago. Our liberal town has the kids salute the flag regularly, is singing religious songs at their Christmas concert and does a whole section on the Pilgrims.
The '70s are over Bruno.
Posted by: oj at December 10, 2006 10:56 AMOJ,
As I've pointed out before, there are some good things happening here and there.
I'm less concerend with "saluting the flag" and singing songs than I am with their worldview as they walk out of HS graduation.
Maybe your brand of NH Americanism is flourishing briefly, but across the nation, the march of the 'New New Left' continues and strengthens.
State after state is going dark for conservatives/Republicans. The response is either happy-talk, or capitulation to the 'New New Left' Model.
Posted by: Bruno at December 10, 2006 11:19 AMoj. if the schools your kids attend are as you seem to think they are, they're the exception that proves Bruno's rule.
You're right that the 70's are over, but those who were mind-numbed robot young agitators then are now mind-numbed robot middle-aged teachers, professors, administrators, school board members, state and federal legislators, publishers of text books, journalists, etc.
Their work destroying our institutions is not done, but barring a real miracle, and by that I mean divine intervention, our civilization is. We had a shot, but those we thought were with us, let us down and we'll all have to face the consequences of their stupidity.
No, it isn't.
Posted by: oj at December 10, 2006 11:48 AMNo, they aren't, which is why the Right can gin up much anger against schools any more. We won already.
Posted by: oj at December 10, 2006 12:00 PMOJ,
Given your deep insights in other matters, I promise to take your "it's over" scenario into consideration.
As for your assertion that the right can't gin up much anger against schools anymore because "we've already won...."
allow to propose a different scenario.
The reason it's impossible (a rebuttable presumption) to gin up anger is that the schools are as bad as I say, but the doped white mice are already bought off "Euro-weenies" who are only to happy to acquiesce in the destruction of their culture.
The American Suburban Soccer mom (and her emasculated Husband) is already a happy convert to Eurostyle "Tranzi/Socialist/Collectivist" statism, and they aren't complaining about the schools because they support their goal. (and are taxing us into oblivion to drive the process faster.
Time will tell which of us is right. My advice for those who aren't sure would be to act as if I am correct. It's the safer course and probably closer to the truth. That way, even if OJ is correct, we will simply win faster.
Posted by: Bruno at December 10, 2006 1:10 PMyes, the goal is getting them ready enough for college so they can get a diploma. works.
Posted by: oj at December 10, 2006 2:29 PM