It's a shame that a great, working program with huge results in prevention of recidivism is attacked to prevent funding. The majority of prisoners today are repeat substance abuse offenders, therefore, a program that brings offenders in this catagory into society, helps guide them to being dignfied, self-reliant members of our society addresses the # 1 Correctional issue in the US! We should be lauding the effort and trying to replicate it wherever we can to help men and women struggling to make it in this life with addiction tendencies!

We're getting crazy as a country. We have freedom of religon not freedom from. Faith based programs work and are often more cost effective than other programs.

This is another tactic of the devil to keep Gods people in bondage. The secular Humanism folks should not concern themselves with this. Faith based programs are effective in helping the chemically dependent return to a normal life.They soudl back off.

I don't know how you can possibly imagine freedom of religion working without protection against being forced to practice someone else's religion. Still it is a bit hypocritical for courts to order people to join the church of AA but draw the line at Prisoners of Christ et al.

As a non-religious member of a 12 step fellowship, I do understand why many believe it to be a religious program. However, in order for an addicted person to stop using, faith that SOMETHING will end a life of active addiction doesn't mean that SOMETHING is religious by nature. It is, quite simply, a way to better cope with the world we live in, than the ways we have chosen prior to getting clean.

Let's see: separation of Church and State. And there's confusion about a State contract with a religious organization? The danger is fanaticism, intolerance, power-tripping, and egoism. These are too seductive even for the well-meaning.

I see it as another sign of the times. First it was taking prayer out of school. Then, it was attacking the pledge of allegience. As time as proved, these measures have resulted in a more godless society than at any other time in our history. It also has resulted in our prisons becoming over crowded; crime and substance abuse at an all time high. Introducing people to different ideas of faith is freedom of religion - freedom for the individual to decide which is right for them - even if it means no faith at all. We need more programs that teach morality, and secular humanism is an inadequate substitute. It is time that the people hold the courts accountable for the rulings that they give out that "have the appearance of law;" however, the American people need to wake up to the idea that the Judicial Branch of government is NOT the branch to which the passing of laws is given (according to this country's founding documents), but rather the legislative branch. And "Joshua", AA is not a church. Perhaps you should attend a meeting. You might learn something.

When you begin a service with a prayer (lord grant me ...) confess your sins, and ask a higher power to help you with something, it is a church. Faith is by definition religious, regartless of what that faith is in. All religion is "quite simply, a way to better cope with the world we live in." I'm not arguing that 12 step programs don't work, or even that the Prisoners of Christ can't deliver good and effective addiction treatment, just that it is unconstitutional for the governemt to establish a sanctioned state religion by forcing people into these programs. i'm not even against the state offering the programs to people on a voluntary basis, as long as there is no forced participation or tax money support.

As far as I can see, Council for Secular Humanism is just another religion (commonly held belief system) trying to foist its beliefs on the rest of us. I say, first let them show how effective their own rehabilitational program has been in assisting persons transition from a life of addiction and prison to being a productive member of society. When they can do that, then they can talk. Otherwise, shaddup, and let the people who care about people alone to do their work. Seems to me the people of the Council for Secular Humanism are in this case representing the oppressive stance our forefathers fled from in Europe in the first place.

Overstate much Richard? There is nothing similar between the stance of the secular humanists here (don't force people into religion, which is by the way the same stance the constitution takes) and the stance of our European forefathers (beleive in my God, my way or I'll kill/imprison you). the position taken by the florida penal system is way more similar to the colonial model(if you beleive as we tell you to, you might get out of prison sooner). it doesn't matter whether the program works. forcing people into a certain set of beliefs is contrary to everything this country was built on. We are not talking about allowing the religious groups who care about people to offer help. we are talking about tax money paying for churches to preach religion to americans who are forced by prison guards to listen to it.

Lest we forget, Alcoholics Anonymous was based on teachings from the Bible and such illuminaries as Emmet Fox of Sermon on the Mount fame. Who is kidding who?

In this case the results support the programs. We know the programs are working with great results in prevention of recidivism then let it be.

I could be wrong and maybe missed something but I don't see anywhere in the article above that states that these people are MANDATED to attend these programs. So why is there an assumptions that they HAVE to attend these programs?

There is nothing in the Constitution of the United States that says there will be a "separation of church and state." This phrase was taken from a letter from Thomas Jefferson where he was expressing his own personal opinion. And the problem today, as I see it, is that collectively we have gotten away from the basic roots of our country that made us great. We have turned away from God and are now suffering the current problems that we are as a direct result of a lack of morality in this country. I may not believe the same way that you do, but I respect your right to believe however you choose to - and I expect you to give me the exact same consideration - and THAT is the contention that "humanists" refuse to address. They want me to get rid of my beliefs so that they can appease their own. What I would like to see is that each side is given the exact same consideration - equal, firm and fair.

I wonder if this means that all Florida treatment programs that incorporate the Minnasota Model or A..A.; N.A.; etc into their programming are putting their state funding future at risk.

I think that fear, fear of change and the unknown drives this type of issue to far that people are hurt from it. I see nothing wrong with inmates choosing to be a part of something greater than themselves and bettering their lives from it. Faith based programs are not forced upon anyone. We have the freedom to choose. Lets not take that away.

One of the reasons religious faith is believed to be so robust in the United States is that there has never been a state sanctioned religion in this country. Religious belief is low in most European countries due to centuries of state imposed religion. People eventually sour on religion when it is forced upon them from above. They are able witness up close the hypocrisy, greed and abuse of authority associated with government sponsored/enforced religion and eventually step away from their belief. If you want to keep the faith, then keep the separation of church and state intact.

Yes Dave, you are correct, it's not in the constitution. You have to read all the way down to the first line of the first ammendment before you come accross "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." When a government entity contracts with a minister to preach to people that is the government establishing a religion. I am a religious person myself and i agree that if we as a country were collectively more religious and moral, that the country would be better. This is, however, a failure on the part of the people and churches in America, not the government. It is not the role of the government to promote goliness and morality, nor should it be, nor would the government do a good job at it if it were. The humanists are not telling anyone that they can't practice their religion. they simply are saying that it is wrong for anyone to force (tax) someone else to pay for their religious observance. there is nothing wrong with the Lamb of God Ministries offering programs to prisoners, they are completely free to do so, that's what "the free exercise thereof" means. There is a lot wrong with the corrections department paying for these services, that's what "an establishment of religion" is.

Dear Jesus, if there is any sort of reward or punishment (perceived or actual) for being involved with a faith-based organization in a state prison, it is in violation of the constitution.

I think Joshua hit the nail on the head here. This is a case about taking someones money (taxes) to pay for something they would not pay for in their lives out of a belief that the 1st amendment allows them the freedom from being forced to purchase that something. In this case that something is a christian based recovery program. Now if Fla. can figure a way to separate the taxes out so that only those who would agree to pay for these services to exist pay for them then we could move past this. Richard Von Denver- Secular Humanists may or may not participate in recovery programs but since they don't advertise themsleves as individuals their efforts under the title of "Secular Humanists" vs. the church groups advertising themsleves under the title of "Christian Faith-based". This is just the way they work as it is the way that the faith-based groups operate.

Having read the OS article and the background on the case & viewing the comments, it appears to me that many have not even read the article or the court case and the reason the case was sent down. When we do, then perhaps a conversation about the facts on the case can be had. I look forward welcoming the Secular Humanists when they come to our prisons.

I believe the Ninth U. S. Circuit has already ruled that you can't, as a government entity, force people to attend 12 step meetings because of the Higher Power angle.