MichaelLCP Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 Why is everyone so upset over this. Don't like it? PICK JAIL! FFS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fusion Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 [quote name='judgeposer' timestamp='1317428834' post='525926'] [quote name='Fusion ' timestamp='1317350692' post='525750'] Non-violent offenders who are most likely being jailed for things like drinking and drugs could probably see a lot more benefit and "rehabilitation" from having to attend service with a religious community ever week for a year, rather than a 30 day program or a stay in county jail that costs the city and state a lot of money paid by taxpayers. Either way the savings is clear as far as taxpayers dollars are concerned. I'm not quite seeing the downside. Even in the case of separation of church and state, this alternative punishment is optional, not mandatory. [/quote] The downside is the suggestion that rehabilitation can only be had at the hand of religious influence, which we know not to be the case. [/quote] As I said, this is a point that would be solid if it were a mandatory form of rehabilitation, but it is clearly an option they are offering and I'm not seeing a semblance of suggestion by the state that religion is the only way people can be rehabilitated. As far as things go on paper, it sounds fine to me. In action, that will most likely be another story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now