Prison Ministries and Evangelicals

The Des Moines Register has an article today about how a prison ministries program at the Newton Correctional Facility had it's $310,000 a year funding cut by the legislature. This is the program that came under fire in the past few years by critics claiming that the program is unconstitutional--the whole "separation of church and state" issue.

The program is voluntary, and has 132 participating inmates. Program officials are trying to work with prison officials to find a way to privately fund the program, but I doubt that will please the critics. Rev. Barry Lynn, from Americans United For Separation of Church and State was quoted in the article, "Private funding, though, does not address some of the issues the judge found unconstitutional, including the preferential treatment of prisoners in the program, the delegation of authority to a religious group, the exclusive use of certain prison property by this program."

Never mind that successful programs that help people turn their lives around makes a belief in God as one of the primary steps. You would think that the state would have an interest in programs that keep inmates from coming back for another stay. It was a voluntary program, and prison officials weren't forcing inmates to join.

There is another important part of this article. It was a quote from Iowa House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who said he has had concerns that InnerChange is anti-Catholic and a "right-wing Christian conversion program" that promotes the idea of wives being subservient to their husbands. Two paragraphs later, the paper says McCarthy is open to private funding, which I'll give him credit for. But the above quote is irresponsible, and he should be called to account for it.

Before this post end, one point. The fallacy of the argument from the "separation of church and state" crowd is that the Constitution says no such thing. The Establishment Clause says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." This means no national "Church of America" and no forcing people to practice a certain religion or denomination. The founders didn't want to practice religion like in England, where you joined the official church, or else you could be punished. The famous "wall" we hear so much about came from a letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Church, not the constitution. It wasn't until 1947, and the Supreme Court Decision in Everson v. Board of Education that this "wall" became a part of the Establishment Clause.

--------------------------------
Stay Awake
Pay Attention
Always Vote