SCOTUS to Hear Religious Tolerance in Prisons Case

I have feeling things are coming to a head in the Supreme Court regarding the issue of Faith Based Prisons and Inner Change Programs.

The high court announced today that it will hear a challenge to the 2000 law, known as the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. The measure requires prisons to accommodate prisoners’ religious needs unless corrections officials can show a compelling reason not to, such as security concerns.

“This is a reasonable law that requires prisons to meet the religious needs of inmates while still respecting the security concerns of correctional institutions,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “We hope the Supreme Court upholds the law.”

Okay, I see no problem with that, but there seems to be a trend showing religious tolerance only toward Judeo-Christian and other mainstream religions.

The case comes from Ohio, where prisoners who belong to minority religions say they have been denied access to religious literature and ceremonial items. A federal appeals court struck down the law, saying it promoted religion at government expense.

So the Federal Appellate Court actually makes the right call but it goes against what Bush and company are doing in Florida where tax dollars are indeed being used to further religion.  What to do, what to do?

So now this goes before SCOTUS for resolution.  It’d be nice to see them realize this for what it is as stated in the Appellate Court ruling.  What are the odds?  How many supreme court justice posts will be replaced during this next presidential term?

6 thoughts on “SCOTUS to Hear Religious Tolerance in Prisons Case

  1. What if a cannibal wants to become Catholic?

    As long as they give up eating other inmates I don’t think the Catholic Church would have a problem with it.  As I understand it, their membership is hurting anyway.

    The bottom line is that we now have two entirely conflicting rulings coming before the supreme court in regards to the usage of tax dollars for the progression of religion.  IMHO the ruling on these cases will set the stage for future Church/State separation cases over the next four years.

  2. What do you mean by what if? Catholics are already cannibals. Haven’t you heard of the Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation?

  3. Sean, I’ve written about Michigan’s attempt to change its constitution to ban gay marriage previously and I plan to touch on it again before the election. Thanks for providing us with a link to a website urging folks to vote against it. I’ll be sure to include it in my upcoming entries.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.