The Christian Post reports that the American Civil Liberties Union is demanding that a prison end their illegal censoring of religious materials sent to detainees.
In a letter sent Thursday to the superintendent of the Rappahannock Regional Jail in Stafford, the ACLU asked for jail officials to guarantee in writing that the jail will no longer censor biblical passages from letters written to detainees and to revise the jail’s written inmate mail policy to state that letters will not be censored simply because they contain religious material.
“It is nothing short of stunning that a jail would think it okay to censor the Bible and other religious material for no reason other than its religious nature,” says David Shapiro, staff attorney with the ACLU National Prison Project. “Such censorship violates both the rights of detainees to practice religion freely and the free speech rights of those wanting to communicate with detainees.”
According to the ACLU, the letter was prompted by a complaint brought to the ACLU by Anna Williams, a devout Christian whose son was detained at Rappahannock beginning in June of 2008 until his transfer earlier this year.
Williams wanted to send her son religious material, including passages from the Bible, to support him spiritually during his confinement. But rather than deliver Williams’ letters to her son in full, jail officials reportedly removed any and all religious material, destroying the religious messages Williams sought to convey to her son.
CMR huzzahs for the ACLU on this one. But I’ve got to wonder why the same organization that’s fighting for religion to be allowed in prisons is fighting to keep religion out of schools.
Recently, the ACLU fought against granting Christian “missionaries” access to students in after-school programs. They fought against a coach leading a team prayer. They fought against a young girl mentioning religion at her graduation.
The ACLU threatened to sue to force one school district to remove “Christmas” from school calendars. The school board complied, changing “Christmas Break” to “Winter Break.”
The ACLU even fought against an elementary school allowing a man dressed as Santa Claus to visit the school and discuss the real meaning of Christmas.
So prisoners can get God but children can’t?
I wonder if the ACLU would let Santa come to the prison? Oh wait, since they’re all in prison they’re all probably on the naughty list so never mind.
July 10, 2009 at 9:02 pm
This is the second instance brought to my recent attention that the ACLU was on the right side. Keep on praying….
July 10, 2009 at 9:41 pm
The prison case involves the Free Exercise Clause. The school cases involve the Establishment Clause. They are different – some might say in tension with one another – and the ACLU thinks they're both important.
July 10, 2009 at 10:16 pm
While Anon is broadly correct, it can safely be said that the ACLU demonstrably misunderstands the Establishment Clause, both as written and in its historical context.
Ryan
July 10, 2009 at 11:15 pm
Do you think …maybe…if we allowed free expression of religion back into the SCHOOLS (which is GUARANTEED by the Constitution)…there may be fewer prisoners to begin with?
The establishment clause speaks only to the Federal government establishing a required NATIONAL religion such as England had when we broke away from Her.
Hooray for the ACLU on this one, though.
July 10, 2009 at 11:55 pm
I can see not allowing "missionaries" access to students in after-school programs that are part of the public school or rec department. I had a very bad experience with an anti-Catholic leader in a craft class when I was girl (my first exposure to Jack Chick lit). But I'd also want that to apply to anyone bringing up religion – including so-called "brights".
July 11, 2009 at 12:19 am
ACLU does pride itself on being mercurial about its choices in clients. Anyway this case involves not just free exercise, but also free speech, and privacy rights. It's important to note that the source of the religious material was not any state actor or even religious organization but the mother of an inmate.
July 12, 2009 at 4:51 am
Let's see…
Government run institution headed by a single, powerful authority.
"Inhabitants" exposed only to the ideas and influences allowed by the government.
Rights exist to the extent the government allows.
Bullying and intimidation techniques rampant among "inhabitants".
Government censorship of media and personal effects.
Which is which?
Oh yeah, one has more school buses…
July 14, 2009 at 9:08 pm
The student ACLU group at the University of Maryland helped the student pro-life group in disputes with the administration about siting of demonstrations, which were initially restricted to a few small "free-speech zones". They may not always be on the right side, but I don't think they're really schizophrenic.