NationStates Jolt Archive

A judge in Detroit sentenced a man convicted of a minor drug offense to a Pentecostal Christian drug treatment center. There the man's Catholic prayer book and rosary beads were confiscated and he was told that Catholicism was witchcraft. They told him if he didn't convert he'd go to prison. He complained to the judge that the center was violating his religious rights, so the judge put him in a prison boot camp facility.

What ever happened to freedom of religion? This judge basically told the convict he had to submit to conversion or be punished.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051207/LIFESTYLE04/512070347/1003/METRO

What ever happened to freedom of religion? This judge basically told the convict he had to submit to conversion or be punished. I am lost for words. I can't believe this is real!

that's crap. I wonder why judges are allowed to get away with that stuff. I know there must be some non-religious treatment programs that could be helpful. I would sue the state if I were him, and then the judge personally.

that's crap. I wonder why judges are allowed to get away with that stuff. I know there must be some non-religious treatment programs that could be helpful. I would sue the state if I were him, and then the judge personally.
I think he is sueing with the help of the ACLU.

I think he is sueing with the help of the ACLU.
good deal, I hope they win.

(not that I always like the aclu, because they defend nambla and such, but I am glad they are around for stuff like this)

that's crap. I wonder why judges are allowed to get away with that stuff. I know there must be some non-religious treatment programs that could be helpful. I would sue the state if I were him, and then the judge personally.

Now now don't be oppressing the judges relious beliefs you anti-religion communist biggot hypocrite liberal! :p

Good thing that pesky "anti-christian" document called the Constitution is around.

The ACLU will be tossing it in a few peoples faces when they get wind of this....

-edit-

Oppps just saw commies post about the aclu.....

Here's another thing I don't get:
Hanas, 23, said in the suit he was told that in order to complete the program and avoid prison, he would have to be "saved" in the Pentecostal church.
Now explain something to me--if you're a true believer, what do you think you've accomplished by coercing someone into becoming saved into your faith? Do you think that you've fooled God into believing that you've brought another one to him? Do you think there's a big tote board with the numbers of saved people but that God doesn't notice that you're padding your stats?

Let me get this straight...
The judge, a supposed Christian, was obstructing the guy's rights because, in effect, he was a Christian (albeit the wrong sort).

Dear dear. What has religion come to?

Let me get this straight...
The judge, a supposed Christian, was obstructing the guy's rights because, in effect, he was a Christian (albeit the wrong sort).

Dear dear. What has religion come to?

There a batches of Christians that think Catholics aren't Christians......

Dear dear. What has religion come to?

"And the meek shall inherit the earth" is suffixed by (though this was removed by the larger churches) "but the assholes are the current owners."

Now now don't be oppressing the judges relious beliefs you anti-religion communist biggot hypocrite liberal! :p

:p ROFL, that's the first time someone has called me names on here :D and you were kidding:(

geez what's a girl got to do to get flamed properly around here?!


*please don't flame me properly, I will cry, and then report you to the mods, as I am overly sensitive and have no sense of humor whatsoever. ;)

The Catholic Church should do the world a favor and bring a suit, too. For a few years now, the religious right has been claiming some kind of united "Christian" front and cheering every time some Catholic bishop says you'll go to hell if you vote Democrat, but all the while reserving the word "Christian" for themselves. This case gives a glimpse of their true colors. "Witchcraft," eh? Reject your church or go to prison, eh? Maybe it's time for the Pope to get more picky about who the Church associates with.

The moral of the story: The enemy of your enemy is your friend -- unless he's also your enemy.

A judge in Detroit sentenced a man convicted of a minor drug offense to a Pentecostal Christian drug treatment center. There the man's Catholic prayer book and rosary beads were confiscated and he was told that Catholicism was witchcraft. They told him if he didn't convert he'd go to prison. He complained to the judge that the center was violating his religious rights, so the judge put him in a prison boot camp facility.

What ever happened to freedom of religion? This judge basically told the convict he had to submit to conversion or be punished.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051207/LIFESTYLE04/512070347/1003/METRO

Actually, the case is in Flint, Michigan and I've been following it since it was first reported.

The defendant has a history of failing to complete inpatient programs.

The defendant himself suggested THIS program and the judge only adopted it as an order.

The defendant knew it was a faith based program. So did the defendants mother.

Approximately halfway through the program the defendant bailed out again. He did not merely complain to the judge.

The judge put the defendent in jail because of his pattern of bailing, not for any religious issue.

Is it a complicated political/social issue? It sure is. But, I wish the papers would print the whole story, not just the sensational parts.

Wow I never thought of it as witchcraft before but it makes sense... if you use incantations (Prayer) and power objects (Rosary) in hopes of having some spirit being to cause changes in our physical world, then that sounds a lot like witchcraft to me too.

:p

That sucks for the dude though, this reminds me of the AA and a Higher Power thread.

For what it's worth, here's a story from the local newspaper that makes more of an attempt to give both sides.

http://www.mlive.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-33/1133972425124440.xml?fljournal?NEF&coll=5

Is it a complicated political/social issue? It sure is. But, I wish the papers would print the whole story, not just the sensational parts.

The news industry would self-destruct if they did that. ;)

There a batches of Christians that think Catholics aren't Christians...... Well, Catholicism must be a pagan religion. I mean, everyone knows pagans have wild orgies, how do you think the Catholics manage to attract such a large membership? [/hicksville]

For what it's worth, here's a story from the local newspaper that makes more of an attempt to give both sides.

http://www.mlive.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-33/1133972425124440.xml?fljournal?NEF&coll=5
Thanks. I found that one on my own, but had to go through some pretty hefty googling to do so. This was the bit that really stood out to me: Ransom said Hanas did have options, starting with his decision to participate in Drug Court rather than being sentenced in the criminal justice system. He said that after Hanas decided to drop out of Inner City, Hanas told him he did not want to go to a religious program. However, the only free programs available were faith-based, and Hanas could not afford to pay, Ransom recalled. No Catholic program was available at the time, the judge said.

"The practical side to this is, who takes care of people? It turns out to be your Salvation Army" and other religious groups, Ransom said in a telephone interview.

Ransom acknowledged that to he best of his recollection he sentenced Hanas to jail in part because there was no program that could accommodate him that he would agree to attend. Another factor was that Hanas had committed some violation of the program, he said. Looks like some sloppy reporting from the Detroit News.

"And the meek shall inherit the earth" is suffixed by (though this was removed by the larger churches) "but the assholes are the current owners."

The meek shall inherit the Earth...once we've stripped it of anything valuable."

Thanks. I found that one on my own, but had to go through some pretty hefty googling to do so. This was the bit that really stood out to me:Looks like some sloppy reporting from the Detroit News.

I had the feeling from the first article that the defendant had entered voluntarily into an agreement in order to avoid jail - and that he had known in advance that it would be religious - and not his own religion.

Actually, the case is in Flint, Michigan and I've been following it since it was first reported.

The defendant has a history of failing to complete inpatient programs.

The defendant himself suggested THIS program and the judge only adopted it as an order.

The defendant knew it was a faith based program. So did the defendants mother.

Approximately halfway through the program the defendant bailed out again. He did not merely complain to the judge.

The judge put the defendent in jail because of his pattern of bailing, not for any religious issue.

Is it a complicated political/social issue? It sure is. But, I wish the papers would print the whole story, not just the sensational parts.
Well, it seems that the judge was probably right to send the guy to jail, but what about this program? It will be up to a court to decide if the guy is telling the truth about how he was treated, but if he is, then the program clearly stepped over the line. According to the rules of faith-based programs, they are supposed to be delivering services as advertised, not opportunistically evangelizing, and they are not supposed to refuse services to people of other religions. It is one thing to promote one's own faith, it is quite another to denigrate another religion and try to force or intimidate people into converting. At the very least, if guilty, this group should lose their public funding for this program. And I still say the Catholics should sue -- that program, not the state.

I had the feeling from the first article that the defendant had entered voluntarily into an agreement in order to avoid jail - and that he had known in advance that it would be religious - and not his own religion.
That wouldn't excuse the program staffers from denigrating the defendant's religion or trying to coerce him into converting. That would be a violation of faith-based program rules, which prohibit discrimination. The program can be Pentacostal, but, having accepted a Catholic participant, they're not allowed to then try and force him to give up being a Catholic. It's possible that the defendant is lying about how he was treated, but if he is telling the truth, then there is no excuse for the program.

...It is one thing to promote one's own faith, it is quite another to denigrate another religion and try to force or intimidate people into converting. At the very least, if guilty, this group should lose their public funding for this program. And I still say the Catholics should sue -- that program, not the state.

from the mlive link:

"The Rev. Dwight Rottiers, who runs Inner City in Flint, strongly disputed Hanas' version of events and said Hanas was not forced to enter the program or to convert.

"He chose our ministry and he was talked to before he entered the doors," Rottiers said, adding that even Hanas' mother was made aware of how the program works. "Did I make him convert? No. I can't make anyone convert, I just preach the word."

That wouldn't excuse the program staffers from denigrating the defendant's religion or trying to coerce him into converting. That would be a violation of faith-based program rules, which prohibit discrimination. The program can be Pentacostal, but, having accepted a Catholic participant, they're not allowed to then try and force him to give up being a Catholic. It's possible that the defendant is lying about how he was treated, but if he is telling the truth, then there is no excuse for the program.
I find it hard to believe a convict.

He has no witnesses to corroborate his allegation.

Since he doesn't have money for alternative treatment, and won't participate in a religious-based rehab, maybe he'll be happier just doing his time in prison.

I think he is sueing with the help of the ACLU.
This makes no sense! I thought that the ACLU was against Christians... but now... just one... Christian vs. Christian... ACLU... *turns on Rush Limbaugh, waits to die.*

I find it hard to believe a convict.

He has no witnesses to corroborate his allegation.

Since he doesn't have money for alternative treatment, and won't participate in a religious-based rehab, maybe he'll be happier just doing his time in prison.I think the mLive link said that he finished his time and is currently on probation through 2007.

I think the mLive link said that he finished his time and is currently on probation through 2007.
Then the whole thing is moot as far as I'm concerned. He's on probation.

I'm sorry, but I can't buy his story about forced conversion. Without witnesses, that's all it is.

Lousy judge.

These are the pitfalls of 'faith based government.'

Actually, the case is in Flint, Michigan and I've been following it since it was first reported.

The defendant has a history of failing to complete inpatient programs.

The defendant himself suggested THIS program and the judge only adopted it as an order.

The defendant knew it was a faith based program. So did the defendants mother.

Approximately halfway through the program the defendant bailed out again. He did not merely complain to the judge.

The judge put the defendent in jail because of his pattern of bailing, not for any religious issue.

Is it a complicated political/social issue? It sure is. But, I wish the papers would print the whole story, not just the sensational parts.

Um. Even looking at the article you cited rather than the original article (or other articles I find on the web), these "facts" you allege are -- at most -- in dispute.

I find it hard to believe a convict.

He has no witnesses to corroborate his allegation.

Since he doesn't have money for alternative treatment, and won't participate in a religious-based rehab, maybe he'll be happier just doing his time in prison.

Um. Much of the convict's story is corroborated by the statements of the judge and of the program he was put into. Of course, some facts are in dispute, but many key ones are not.

(not that I always like the aclu, because they defend nambla and such, but I am glad they are around for stuff like this)
And what exactly is wrong with defending [the right to free speech for the organisation abreviated as] NAMBLA. Free speech is for everyone, as much as i would like to see some people shut up, i know that their hatefull bile or constant annoyance is the price everyone has to pay. I bet you 10:1 that the ACLU would never touch a case of pedophilia, but still be there to defend the right to talk about it from the angle the NAMBLA has.

-fumes- I hate idiocy -_- -hires sniper-:sniper:



:rolleyes:

A judge in Detroit sentenced a man convicted of a minor drug offense to a Pentecostal Christian drug treatment center. There the man's Catholic prayer book and rosary beads were confiscated and he was told that Catholicism was witchcraft. They told him if he didn't convert he'd go to prison. He complained to the judge that the center was violating his religious rights, so the judge put him in a prison boot camp facility.

What ever happened to freedom of religion? This judge basically told the convict he had to submit to conversion or be punished.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051207/LIFESTYLE04/512070347/1003/METRO

Long live Jesusland! Err, America!

And what exactly is wrong with defending [the right to free speech for the organisation abreviated as] NAMBLA. Free speech is for everyone, as much as i would like to see some people shut up, i know that their hatefull bile or constant annoyance is the price everyone has to pay. I bet you 10:1 that the ACLU would never touch a case of pedophilia, but still be there to defend the right to talk about it from the angle the NAMBLA has.
I think there is freedom of speech and then there are people who advocate things that are illegal for obvious reasons.

I think there is freedom of speech and then there are people who advocate things that are illegal for obvious reasons.
This is were you are wrong. The NAMBLA seeks a change of laws. It does not advocate illegal activities. As much as it is allowed to rally for the legalisation of drugs it is also legal to ask for a lowering or complete deletion of the age of consent.
Moral issues or distaste have no place in this, i certainly dont agree with them, but what they do is perfectly fine with the first amendment.

This is were you are wrong. The NAMBLA seeks a change of laws. It does not advocate illegal activities. As much as it is allowed to rally for the legalisation of drugs it is also legal to ask for a lowering or complete deletion of the age of consent.
Moral issues or distaste have no place in this, i certainly dont agree with them, but what they do is perfectly fine with the first amendment.
I suppose I do let my personal feelings dictate what I think about them.

How about this for an attitude?

I don't agree with what they say, or what they believe but they deserve the right to make me vomit because we all live in America.

Well, i dont, but i agree. ;)

Actually, the case is in Flint, Michigan and I've been following it since it was first reported.

The defendant has a history of failing to complete inpatient programs.

The defendant himself suggested THIS program and the judge only adopted it as an order.

The defendant knew it was a faith based program. So did the defendants mother.

Approximately halfway through the program the defendant bailed out again. He did not merely complain to the judge.

The judge put the defendent in jail because of his pattern of bailing, not for any religious issue.

Is it a complicated political/social issue? It sure is. But, I wish the papers would print the whole story, not just the sensational parts.


Have to say, but if this information is true... The man's case is in major jeopardy...

Land of the Free, LOL. :rolleyes:

I Love the European Union. :D

from the mlive link:

"The Rev. Dwight Rottiers, who runs Inner City in Flint, strongly disputed Hanas' version of events and said Hanas was not forced to enter the program or to convert.

"He chose our ministry and he was talked to before he entered the doors," Rottiers said, adding that even Hanas' mother was made aware of how the program works. "Did I make him convert? No. I can't make anyone convert, I just preach the word."
Neither the convict nor the minister is an objective source. Obviously, the minister is not going to say, "Of course we tried to coerce him into converting; everyone knows the Pope worships Satan." I'm sure he sincerely believes that nothing he did was coercive. That doesn't necessarily make it so. Lots of people are unaware, or in denial, about whether their actions are right or not. If the suit goes ahead, then the matter will be hashed out in court, with witnesses. If it's just he said/he said (convict vs. minister) then the suit will probably not go ahead.

I find it hard to believe a convict.

He has no witnesses to corroborate his allegation.

Since he doesn't have money for alternative treatment, and won't participate in a religious-based rehab, maybe he'll be happier just doing his time in prison.
We don't know for certain whether he has corroboration or not. If the suit goes forward this should come out.

In the meantime, I think this story raises the issue of faith-based programs and whether they are a good idea and whether there is enough regulation of them or how they should be regulated.

I'm more ready to believe that a convicted criminal may be lying about his treatment, but I will not simply dismiss a complaint because it comes from a convict. I don't believe that getting convicted of a crime means you should lose ALL your civil rights. Complaints deserve to be investigated. From this story, it seems there really is no case against the judge, but there may be against the program, and that deserves attention -- either to prove it or to clear the program of any doubt.

I think he is sueing with the help of the ACLU.

Its part of the war on christmas...