lisarea

Sunday's Denver Post had their whole "Perspective" section dedicated to this this weekend. Usually, they seem to do the point-counterpoint thing when they have multiple articles on the same topic, but not this time.

They had two main articles, here:

Let Ministries Help with Inmate Rehab

Ministries Offer Survival

and a couple of incoherent 'testimonials.' (You can get to those from the right navigation bar.)

It's as though this Shekinah organization bought advertising space on the front page of the Editorial section.

Here's the Shekinah Ministries website. I like the article about how people in nursing homes are lonely and depressed, and therefore ripe for the picking.

I've already written a letter, but the Denver Post's letters email address is bouncing.

Maybe someone else would like to give it a shot, too.

dangin

Love to see major newspapers ignoring the constitution. Thanks for the post.

Stephen Maturin

From the first article:

Charles Colson rehabing felons? Christ. 'Scuse me while I hose the horseshit from my poor computer. Will the Nixon administration never die?

Having navigated the preceding ocean of drivel, we finally get to the crux of the matter: "The real problem is that the state isn't giving my group any money." And please don't expect any explanation of how "non-funding" = "imped[ing]". It just does. Trust us.

A worthwhile goal, one for which they should have no trouble soliciting oodles of private donations. But:

When you're in need, you should solicit the help of the Lord, who giveth freely and upbraideth not. To make sure God has time to meet your financial needs, we won't bother him with ours. Instead, we'll go to the state general assembly.

We know that what we're asking is flagrantly unlawful, but what the hey? If the law stands in the way of doing the Lord's work (and lining our pockets with public booty in the process), then the law must go.

I'm almost always up for a rousing game of "spot the informal fallacies and unstated assumptions," but this one's way too big a job.

lisarea

That was my biggest problem with this--trying to figure out what to address and what to leave out.

There are just so MANY problems with it, it's daunting to try to address it in letter length.

My primary argument, though, hinged on the fact that I would like to have more unrepentant felons running around, and their trying to take them off the streets is a violation of my right to pursuit of happiness. I then pointed out that crime is cool, and said some stuff about the 'Tupac-olypse.'

Stephen Maturin

I was going to suggest something along the lines of questioning how many of these people are designated "felons" based on conduct that shouldn't be considered criminal in the first place, but your stuff is infinitely better.

atheist_in_foxhole

How, exactly, is a book (the Bible) filled with murder, torture, slavery, rape, and death supposed to rehabilitate criminals?

lisarea

Well, in my letter, I tried to focus on the more superficial, obvious issues without getting into broader topics such as the fact that, OH, MAYBE when you start seeing such huge numbers of people in prison, it's time to rethink the laws that are putting them there. (For example, if the government had declared a WAR against the American people or another such outlandish, speculative sort of thing.)

Basically, though, they have a couple of prison programs in which evangelical Christian groups spoon feed prisoners sanitized versions of the Bible, and along with that, they provide them with support services both in prison and out, including job training and assistance, help locating housing, counseling, etc. And somehow, we are to conclude that it is the Biblical basis of these programs that is having a positive effect. So much so, in light of the sparse and unexamined data presented, that it's worth tossing aside the First Amendment without a second thought.

Even so, it doesn't surprise me in the least that a largely poor, subliterate prison population might just be swayed by the Biblical concept of a system of spectral rewards and punishments. It's an incredibly simplistic worldview, it appeals to fear and greed, and it's probably easier overall to go along with it than not.

I'm just surprised not only that the Post didn't seem to be able to locate a single, non-trivial argument in favor of the most fundamental principles upon which our system of government was based; but that nobody seems to have considered that opening up that can of worms would necessarily open up the doors for similar groups of Muslims, Moonies, Hindus, Scientologists, etc. Even those who won't consider the most obvious logical arguments are usually scared by that. If nothing else, it tends to bring their real motives out in the open.

lpetrich

Also, isn't it interesting how funding-hungry these fundies often are?

Why don't they simply pray to that god of theirs to rain money down from On High? Just like manna on the wandering Israelites in the Sinai.

theyeti

lisarea, the best thing to point out is simply that these "faith based" prison programs have not been demonstrated to be effective. There is as of yet no evidence to show that their recidivism rate is any better than the general population, and they ignore important aspects like education and job training. Moreover, these programs often used coercive methods to attract inmates: basically giving those in the program special priviledges that others don't get. It's really nothing more than a sleezy method to win converts at tax-payer expense by taking advantage of people who are in a desparate situation.

Here's a good article in Church State about the Chuck Colson program:

theyeti

lisarea

You rock, my dear.

I initially spent a little time trying to find real data on recidivism rates with faith-based programs, and was disappointed in the sparsity of the data available. This is great.

The thing is, this topic was one of those ones that had so many freaking things wrong with it, I felt like I had to pick some point at which to simply accept their assumptions and take it from there. The argument is truly turtles all the way down.

I took it from the point of assuming that these programs did appear to work, and then asked what elements of the programs were effective, and even assuming that religion was a factor, would it be worthwhile not only to push aside the separation clause, but to necessarily make these programs unavailable for inmates who chose not to convert.

They just emailed me and said they're considering publishing my letter, so I'm not allowed to write another one. (Although I'm tempted to just pick a name out of the phone book and sign it. Not really, but boy, would that be funny.)