(no subject)

[phyloxena]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/business/10faith.html?pagewanted=print

Try it! Confused issues for anyone who cares. Tax-funded prosylitism in state prisons. Just beautiful.

Comments

[skept1cal.livejournal.com]

What's so confusing? Direct funding of religious indoctrination is clearly a violation of the Establishment clause (as opposed to some form of indirect funding, or funding of a religious organization doing performing secular function).

[phyloxena.livejournal.com]

While the author of the journal there we met has clear and sound party affilation, I do not. Evangelical indoctrination is something more to the right, while saving prisoners for beter future is to the left, while using the tax funds extensively to the left again, but how about atheist's rights? All typos and vocabulary abuse are mine.

[skept1cal.livejournal.com]

Right, left, right, left... I'm getting dizzy!!! :)))
No doubt, NYT oftentimes looks with their one eye (we all know which one) closed. That said, there's no need to look at this as right/left issue. Everyone agrees that prisoner rehabilitation is in society's best interests and some think that religious teachings are the most effective way to go and they may have some good evidence of that.
On the other hand, if some religions (or atheists) get discriminated, it is impermissible. Hence, the controversy.