Why is it acceptable for our state funded prisons to employ chaplains, but not our state funded public schools?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

but our system does not acknowledge the "need" for spirituality. Our system is secular.

Right?

No. Our system ensures that you have the choice to meet whatever you deem your spiritual needs to be.

How could a prisoner meet his spiritual needs without the state providing it?

[Commander PK]

Who says you aren't allowed to read a Bible in school? That is perfectly legal. You can carry it. Read it. Form a club to study it.

So' date=' this entire thread is based on a falsehood.

A right-wing bumper sticker based on a falsehood? What are the odds?[/quote']

I will try to revise the thread title to make it more reflective of my intent.

---------- Post added February-22nd-2011 at 06:01 PM ----------

How could a prisoner meet his spiritual needs without the state providing it?

again, why does a prisoner need his "spiritual needs" to be met by the state? The state does not endorse religion. Why should the "state" show any interest in the matter?

[Bang]

Ok, for the sake of argument we are talking about the Maryland Division of Correction. A state funded institution....and St. Mary's County Public School System. Also, a state funded institution. (... and your post pretty much gets to where I'm going with this. I'm playing Devil's advocate here.) Maryland Division of Corrections has state employees who act as Chaplains in the facilities. They cater to the spiritual "needs" of the inmates. As far as I know, no such employee exists in any public school system in Maryland. Public schools have "guidance counselors."

If a bible can help a prisoner "get his life together," couldn't it also help a troubled teen overcome a troubled home life and improve his grades? What I'm saying, is that if it's right for prisoners, why is it wrong for students? Are we willing to give up our right and true "principals" so easily just to accommodate a criminal?

Sure it can.

And if a teacher in a public school handed a troubled kid a bible and suggested he read it in his free time, I'd have no problem with that at all.

But that's a far cry from "OK, children today open to David 4:16..."

If a prisoner wants to read a bible, make it available. I dont consider a prison library and a school library the same, mainly because it's patron's have no other option. I don't want the bible in a school library, but the kid is free to get one from a multitude of other sources. Prisoners don't have that same freedom.

If they forced prisoners to attend church, I'd have a problem with that. But they're free to attend chapel if they'd like (as far as I know) so it's still a personal choice.

~Bang

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

again, why does a prisoner need his "spiritual needs" to be met by the state? The state does not endorse religion. Why should the "state" show any interest in the matter?

Which is why you have priests, pastors, Imams, and Native American smoke shacks in prison. Because it isn't endorsing religion. It's providing them the means to practice their freedom of religion.

EDIT: And none of it is mandatory or compulsive so they aren't pushing or "exposing" religion to anyone who doesn't want it.

[Commander PK]

Which is why you have priests, pastors, Imams, and Native American smoke shacks in prison. Because it isn't endorsing religion. It's providing them the means to practice their freedom of religion.

EDIT: And none of it is mandatory or compulsive so they aren't pushing or "exposing" religion to anyone who doesn't want it.

so in your mind, there is a difference between a atheist prisoner's christian cellmate reading a bible aloud in the cell their share...and an atheist child in a homeroom having to be "exposed" to another child reciting the words "one nation under god" in the pledge of allegiance? Neither individual, the atheist prisoner, or the atheist student is allowed to remove themselves from the situation without consequences right? The student cannot just walk out of homeroom. The prisoner cannot just leave his cell.

How is that not being "exposed" to something you don't want?

---------- Post added February-22nd-2011 at 06:14 PM ----------

Sure it can.

And if a teacher in a public school handed a troubled kid a bible and suggested he read it in his free time, I'd have no problem with that at all.

You would not, but there are many who would. Kind of the point I'm trying to make. Acknowledging that "spirituality" could be beneficial for prisoners, you also have to acknowledge that it could be beneficial to students in public school.

[jnhay]

Nobody is forcing anyone to go to a chaplain or whatever the case may be in prison. It's an option that I think probably more than pays for itself in the end. If one chaplain can get to just 2 prisoners a year (or prevent them from going totally nuts), how much money would that save the state in the end?

And to respond to the comment above. Of course it could be beneficial to students, but how hard is it to go to Sunday school or allow parents to be parents? It's different when you talk about free children vs imprisoned adults.

so in your mind, there is a difference between a atheist prisoner's christian cellmate reading a bible aloud in the cell their share...and an atheist child in a homeroom having to be "exposed" to another child reciting the words "one nation under god" in the pledge of allegiance? Neither individual, the atheist prisoner, or the atheist student is allowed to remove themselves from the situation without consequences right? The student cannot just walk out of homeroom. The prisoner cannot just leave his cell.

How is that not being "exposed" to something you don't want?

Isn't the whole point of prison to be exposed to stuff you don't want?

[Corcaigh]

A better question is why the Senate and House spend hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on their chaplains, when the elected officials have access to whatever religious services they want. At least we don't have to borrow to fund it.

Hey Asbury ... last year the House Chaplain made $172,500 in salary alone. :-)

---------- Post added February-22nd-2011 at 06:17 PM ----------

Nobody is forcing anyone to go to a chaplain or whatever the case may be in prison. It's an option that I think probably more than pays for itself in the end. If one chaplain can get to just 2 prisoners a year (or prevent them from going totally nuts), how much money would that save the state in the end?

Prison recruitment is pretty successful for Nation of Islam and Scientology. The Christian pastors need to step up their game or should be fired for lack of performance.

[Spec138]

Why is the falsehood that Bibles aren't allowed to be read in schools still around? It's almost as if the people who use this have never gone through the public school system. Not only are you guaranteed to see a Bible-carrying student in my old HS on any given day, there was at least one Christian group that met on school grounds before class once a week or month or whatever. We also learned about the Christian reformation and in some lesser detail other religions in history class which I actually found to be pretty fun. Siddhartha by Hermann Hesse (which is a great book about Buddhism) was even required reading for my junior or senior english class.

[Bang]

so in your mind, there is a difference between a atheist prisoner's christian cellmate reading a bible aloud in the cell their share...and an atheist child in a homeroom having to be "exposed" to another child reciting the words "one nation under god" in the pledge of allegiance? Neither individual, the atheist prisoner, or the atheist student is allowed to remove themselves from the situation without consequences right? The student cannot just walk out of homeroom. The prisoner cannot just leave his cell.

How is that not being "exposed" to something you don't want?

As an adult you can make up your own mind. If your cellmate reads the Bible aloud, the adult can make up his own mind about what he's hearing, or whether or not he wants to hear it. As an adult I'm exposed to all sorts of things I disagree with (mostly on this board ). But it's up to me to decide if I agree or not. As an adult, I'm expected to have that part of my mind figured out.

A child is very different in that most of them at a young age trust anything an adult tells them.

~Bang

[jnhay]

Prison recruitment is pretty successful for Nation of Islam and Scientology. The Christian pastors need to step up their game or should be fired for lack of performance.

I'm not sure how this relates to the topic, but I think that'd be more of a problem with the religion as a whole rather than individual chaplains.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

again, why does a prisoner need his "spiritual needs" to be met by the state? The state does not endorse religion. Why should the "state" show any interest in the matter?

Because you are too ****ing stupid to understand the Establishment clause.

[Corcaigh]

I'm not sure how this relates to the topic, but I think that'd be more of a problem with the religion as a whole rather than individual chaplains.

I'm not sure I understand your point. The state is funding Christian ministry which is demonstrably under-performing other religions. Are you saying the problem is with Christianity and its effectiveness?

[Commander PK]

As an adult you can make up your own mind. If your cellmate reads the Bible aloud, the adult can make up his own mind about what he's hearing, or whether or not he wants to hear it. As an adult I'm exposed to all sorts of things I disagree with (mostly on this board ). But it's up to me to decide if I agree or not. As an adult, I'm expected to have that part of my mind figured out.

A child is very different in that most of them at a young age trust anything an adult tells them.

~Bang

so we deny them exposure in public schools as children, while also acknowledging they may "need" exposure if they end up in jail?

---------- Post added February-22nd-2011 at 06:47 PM ----------

Because you are too ****ing stupid to understand the Establishment clause.

so if a group of students decide they want to have bible study during lunch in the far left corner of the cafeteria, and an atheist parent of a non-particpant student finds out and complains about his child being "exposed" to the group? You wouldn't have a problem with this? The state has not established a "state" religion, that is being actively pressed upon the students in school...but it is also not prohibiting the "...free excersise thereof" of the students to have the group during lunch in a public school cafeteria with other students around?

[DRSmith]

Should the state pay for religous teachers? No

But compareing a prison and school is showing a serious lack of critical thought

Hey you can have sex in prison so should schools have rooms where you can have sex also

So who does the state higher to teach kids, muslims, hindus, jews, catholics, mormons,?

[Bang]

so we deny them exposure in public schools as children, while also acknowledging they may "need" exposure if they end up in jail?

No, it's up to the parents when they're school age.

If a parent wants their child to have religious exposure, they can take them to church.

Or not, as the case may be.

As far as I'm concerned, prisoners and children are not comparable in any way.

~Bang

[Commander PK]

and by the way lombardi

With your years on this website and number of posts you should be well aware that personal attacks on this website are against the rules. However, I'm going to take the high road with you.

---------- Post added February-22nd-2011 at 06:54 PM ----------

As far as I'm concerned, prisoners and children are not comparable in any way.

~Bang

only in the sense that both are participants in state funded institutions. Both involuntarily.

[DRSmith]

[/color]

only in the sense that both are participants in state funded institutions. Both involuntarily.

You volunteer to go to prison when you commit certain crimes

[Bang]

and by the way lombardi

With your years on this website and number of posts you should be well aware that personal attacks on this website are against the rules. However, I'm going to take the high road with you.

---------- Post added February-22nd-2011 at 06:54 PM ----------

only in the sense that both are participants in state funded institutions. Both involuntarily.

Children have no adult rights, so their voluntary or involuntary status doesn't exist.

Parents are free to choose public or private schools.

~Bang

[Commander PK]

Well, a case can be made that not allowing or endorsing any form of "spiritual" exposure in the public school system, while acknowledging that any such exposure may be beneficial for a troubled adult who has somehow fallen short of what we expect of them as responsible citizens is a bit hypocritical.

Why not have something like a "career" day for spirituality? Have a "spiritual exposure" day, where kids get to walk around from table to table listening to Priests, Ministers, Clerics, Rabbis, buddhists, Native Americans, and Wiccans discuss their various forms of faith, and allow the children to decide for themselves if they would like to adhere to one of them, or not at all.

[DRSmith]

Well, a case can be made that not allowing or endorsing any form of "spiritual" exposure in the public school system, while acknowledging that any such exposure may be beneficial for a troubled adult who has somehow fallen short of what we expect of them as responsible citizens is a bit hypocritical.

Why not have something like a "career" day for spirituality? Have a "spiritual exposure" day, where kids get to walk around from table to table listening to Priests, Ministers, Clerics, Rabbis, buddhists, Native Americans, and Wiccans discuss their various forms of faith, and allow the children to decide for themselves if they would like to adhere to one of them, or not at all.

You ever read the bible?

Do you know God placed with the responsibilty to teach children?

Just a hint you will find the words in Deuteronomy 6: 4-9 and Ephesians 6:4

[Bang]

Well, a case can be made that not allowing or endorsing any form of "spiritual" exposure in the public school system, while acknowledging that any such exposure may be beneficial for a troubled adult who has somehow fallen short of what we expect of them as responsible citizens is a bit hypocritical.

Why not have something like a "career" day for spirituality? Have a "spiritual exposure" day, where kids get to walk around from table to table listening to Priests, Ministers, Clerics, Rabbis, buddhists, Native Americans, and Wiccans discuss their various forms of faith, and allow the children to decide for themselves if they would like to adhere to one of them, or not at all.

Propose it in your school system. That's all I can say.

As far as it being hypocritical, until they turn 18 or legally emancipate themselves from their parents, kids haven't got any rights. They can pick it up and read it on their own, no one is stopping them.

If their parents want them exposed to it, ultimately it's their decision, troubled kid or not. They're free to take them to any church they want.

~Bang

[Commander PK]

it's a fallacious premise. in fairfax county in the 90's, we read much of the bible in 11th grade AP literature (no idea if they still do). i don't think there's any prohibition on the bible being taught as literature or in a course on religion. what's prohibited is a public institution showing allegiance or preference towards any religion.

however, having said that, i see your point that prisons might be more or less pushing christianity -- i don't know anything about that. it's worth noting that the military is full of chaplains as well. it does seem to be sort of blurring the line to say the least, but i don't think getting rid of them is possible or desirable.

maybe an argument could be made that the difference is prisons and military deal with adults, while schools deal with children, who are more susceptible to the influence of the institution. that seems kind of arbitrary, though.

Sorry I missed your post. I wouldn't say prisons are pushing one religion over another, or even that religion is being "pushed' on inmates, but "spiritual" well being is considered a part of a successful rehabilitation program.

My point, is that if the state acknowledges that there are benefits to "spirituality" by allowing inmates to be exposed, then how can they on the other hand not acknowledge that the same exposure could be beneficial to school children who are at the stage where they are becoming who they will become. Law abiding responsible citizens..or something else.

[PokerPacker]

Why are we debating the "benefits" of spirituality? its not about benefits, its about basic human right guaranteed even to criminals. To deny prisoners the ability to practice their religion would be cruel and unusual.

[Burgold]

You know that's a very interesting question. I don't think there is a very good rationale for it.

[Commander PK]

and the point of all this was just to get people thinking that is all.

I'm not of the opinion we should have prayer in schools, nor that we should can all state prison chaplains.

I'm simply acknowledging what I see to be an inconsistency in the system by comparing the two, triggered by reading a bumper sticker on someone's car.