home

Religious Freedom in Federal Prisons

By TChris, Section Inmates and Prisons
Posted on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 01:24:56 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Leave it to the Bureau of Prisons to find a way to unite the religious right and the civil liberties loving left. Despite protests from religious groups, Congress, and defenders of the Constitution, the BOP has refused to overturn its policy of purging religious texts from prison libraries. Only those texts deemed "appropriate" by federal bureaucrats are available for inmates to read.

Outrage over the bureau’s decision has come from both conservatives and liberals, who say it is inappropriate to limit inmates to a religious reading list determined by the government.

If the First Amendment prohibits the government from estabishing a religion, it surely prohibits the government from establishing an approved set of religious texts.

< Judicial Elves | Criticizing Move On Does Not Equal Pro-Iraq War >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Religious Freedom in Federal Prisons | 19 comments (19 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    approved (1.00 / 0) (#8)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 02:34:32 PM EST
    Churches are given a  tax exempt status.

    A government big enough to determine what religions are tax exempt is big enough to tell you what's approved.

    Scientology (none / 0) (#16)
    by Pancho on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 05:09:29 PM EST
    was given tax-exempt status after a long fight was dropped by the IRS. It is likely that they dug up some dirt on the IRS commissioner who dropped the case.

    Parent
    Another good argument (none / 0) (#18)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Sep 22, 2007 at 12:25:45 PM EST
    for enforcing the First Amendment by taxing churches, and removing the government's ability to "approve" one cult and not another.

    Do we agree that churches should be taxed to pay for the police and fire protection they receive, water supply and sewage removal, streets that allow worshipers to attend, and all other tax-paid services?

    As an atheist it sure irks me to have to pay for this stuff on their behalf.

    Parent

    I suppose we could tax them (none / 0) (#19)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Sep 22, 2007 at 12:58:23 PM EST
    Do we agree that churches should be taxed to pay for the police and fire protection they receive, water supply and sewage removal, streets that allow worshipers to attend, and all other tax-paid services?
    and other no-profits that ostensibly, anyway, benefit the community like the Red Cross and private schools and universities, but in the case of religious institutions, does not taxing them violate the principle of separaton of church and state? Or does that principle only mean that, for instance, no Christmas music should be played in gvt buildings?

    Parent
    give them credit (none / 0) (#1)
    by cpinva on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 01:34:20 PM EST
    for accomplishing the seemingly impossible. lol

    funny thing though, you'd think religious texts would be a good thing for inmates to read.

    well, there's religion and then there is RELIGION (none / 0) (#5)
    by po on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 01:50:21 PM EST
    And the Koran, the Satanic Bible probably don't qualify as respectible.  There are only a handful of approved religions, you know, usually the one that the warden and his chief subordinates practice.  Just like acceptable thought on most anything right now.  

    Parent
    Freedom of religion, (none / 0) (#2)
    by Pancho on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 01:37:59 PM EST
    does not mean freedom from religion. The government cannot establish a religion, nor should it abolish one or decide what is approved, unless it violates other laws.

    It would be interesting to see what's not on the (none / 0) (#3)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 01:41:19 PM EST
    approved list.

    Yeah.... (none / 0) (#6)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 02:14:41 PM EST
    Apparently the banned list got so long (over 10k titles), they had to replace it with an approved list.

    Parent
    Gotta say, I only read the article quickly, (none / 0) (#7)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 02:22:15 PM EST
    but it seemed to me that they aren't prohibiting specific religions per se, but, rather, radically reducing the number of books they have on the shelves for the religions. No?

    Not sure if that's accurate.

    Maybe I should do some googling...

    Parent

    On the case..... (none / 0) (#9)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 02:39:05 PM EST
    From the Boston Globe....

    A policy directed at jihadist literature has, for example, resulted in the removal of three-quarters of the Jewish books at the Otisville Prison in New York, ranging from the Zohar to the works of 12th-century Jewish scholar Moses Maimonides to Rabbi Harold Kushner's "When Bad Things Happen to Good People."

    Having trouble finding the BOP's approved list, which would tell us whick books are banned...(everything else!)

    Parent

    Found this as well (none / 0) (#10)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 02:41:41 PM EST
    The lists have not been made public by the bureau, but were made available to The Times by a critic of the bureau's project.


    Parent
    Not available to the public..... (none / 0) (#11)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 02:56:30 PM EST
    Damn that Rove!  How does he find the time?

    Parent
    you funny (none / 0) (#12)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 02:59:08 PM EST


    Parent
    It's your material.... (none / 0) (#13)
    by kdog on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 03:27:09 PM EST
    hope you don't mind:)

    Parent
    I'm gathering evidence that he's behind my (none / 0) (#15)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 04:19:52 PM EST
    Giants 0-2 start. Keep it under your hat.

    Parent
    Rather than limiting what prisoners read (none / 0) (#4)
    by po on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 01:47:13 PM EST
    how about the BOP focusing on ending gang control of federal prisons, widespread prisoner rape . . . and the needless waste of taxpayer funds incarcerating non-violent drug offenders.  Just thinking . . .

    this could be part of a program to (none / 0) (#17)
    by cpinva on Sat Sep 22, 2007 at 04:14:10 AM EST
    reduce gang influence in prisons. if you think about it, religious adherents are kind of a gang. they have entry rituals that must be observed, they have clubhouses, secret signs, gang colors for the leaders, a set of rules to be followed by all the members, etc.

    all religions think their gang is the one and only true gang.

    lest we forget, some of history's most vicious wars were fought by different religious gangs, one against the other. in fact, it continues as we speak, all over the world.

    i tell you, those religious gangs are brutal!

    Parent

    Harder to (re)build than destroy (none / 0) (#14)
    by jopark on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 04:10:13 PM EST
    This is incredibly saddening, not least because of the painstaking amount of work usually involved in developing a prison library.  I'm very interested in the fate of the removed books.  I doubt they'd be returned to the original donors (after all, once donated they become BOP property) and I fear they've been destroyed.  I expect this policy to be found unconstitutional and changed.  However, it will be a long time (years, perhaps never) before these collections can be restored to their prior states.

    Religious Freedom in Federal Prisons | 19 comments (19 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment