100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Go To Church Or Go To Jail: Alabama Rejects The Constitution | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
These arguments about defendants are completely beside the point. It is refreshing that people want to see guilty people avoid jail time. Sound just like bleeding heart liberals.
The only point here is that Judges shouldn't be violating the Constitution. That just goes in one ear and out the other. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lawsuit! And that's works for me! If they want some sort of counseling, then let them choose a shrink. There's plenty of religious and non-religious psychologists out there who work far better then a Christian church. Helps with anyone who is and isn't a Christian! so you people really think a church would hurt more than help? how sad, that you would rather see someone in jail than in church...no wonder this country is going to hell in a hand basket... Hey, if you're cool with someone pretending that church matters so they can get out of jail, ok. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lawsuit! And that's works for me! If they want some sort of counseling, then let them choose a shrink. There's plenty of religious and non-religious psychologists out there who work far better then a Christian church. Helps with anyone who is and isn't a Christian! so you people really think a church would hurt more than help? how sad, that you would rather see someone in jail than in church...no wonder this country is going to hell in a hand basket... Hey, if you're cool with someone pretending that church matters so they can get out of jail, ok. it can't hurt now can it? i don't think they are talking about felonies, so if it works, whats the big deal? if a drunk finds jesus and quits drinking, would you say it is a good thing? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
These arguments about defendants are completely beside the point. It is refreshing that people want to see guilty people avoid jail time. Sound just like bleeding heart liberals. The only point here is that Judges shouldn't be violating the Constitution. That just goes in one ear and out the other.  yup - really all that needs said
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How can you guarantee that going to church is going to help?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I dont know the details. I know I have participated in government assistance where the requirement was to work upwards of 25 hours a week somewhere (without pay) . AT those places, the supervisors submit WEEKLY time sheets and MONTLY reviews and if it isnt working or you arent doing the job, they pull you and you go back to whatever step preceeded it.
I think a year is a long time to FAKE interest in church, and I Think there would be something in place for regular reviews and assessments to curb such fraud. I also agree that prison has hardly ANY redemptive quality and that church might be a better option for MANY(particularly non violent). Along with working off any fines, fees, or paying back those they may have taken from. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Judge should never be allowed to push religion on anyone regardless.
It is against our laws to allow this to happen in our court system. Religion is not a positive influence on folks anyway it is a negative. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How can you guarantee that going to church is going to help? about the same as you guarantee that is is not... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Judge should never be allowed to push religion on anyone regardless. It is against our laws to allow this to happen in our court system. Religion is not a positive influence on folks anyway it is a negative. i take it you didn't read the article... it says it is a CHOICE... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
These arguments about defendants are completely beside the point. It is refreshing that people want to see guilty people avoid jail time. Sound just like bleeding heart liberals. The only point here is that Judges shouldn't be violating the Constitution. That just goes in one ear and out the other. i haven't seen any proof that it is against the constitution... do you have any? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
These arguments about defendants are completely beside the point. It is refreshing that people want to see guilty people avoid jail time. Sound just like bleeding heart liberals. The only point here is that Judges shouldn't be violating the Constitution. That just goes in one ear and out the other. i haven't seen any proof that it is against the constitution... do you have any? I think that's a really good question that only a constitutional law student could answer well. But the concern prolly stems from the establishment of religion being not in the purview of the government and by bringing religion into the judiciary as a choice it is establishment of religion as a state institution because it is offerred as an option within the state. I am sure there are other potential issues as well. And certainly the debate is whether it would be defacto establishment of religion as a state sponsored institution which IS a no no. Personally I feel it is. tho I have no issue with church or religion even tho I do not attend. so I'm kind of on no one's side in this....totally objective I see no reason why charitable or community service would not serve the goals of rehabilitation and personal development more adequately than church attendance which is usually a boring waste of time where I , for one, spent most of the morning staring out the window when I did attend....I'd have accomplished more elsewhere |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i haven't seen any proof that it is against the constitution... do you have any?
I'm not a Constitutional lawyer, and I'm pretty sure you aren't either. If stare decisis means anything, it seems pretty obvious that Government employees coercing a religious option is consistent with a long history of SC decisions. Of course, we have some pretty activist Conservative justices now. Who knows how that would work out? |
|
|
|
|
