Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

DaddySatyr -> Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 2:33:53 PM)

Muslim Denied What He Claims is Religious Freedom

Please read the whole article and refrain from the knee-jerk.

I found this to be a very tough one to just choose a side on.

On one side, you've got a man who converted to a religion long before he was in a jail cell so you can't make the argument that he's just looking to stir the pot.

On the other side, you have a legitimate need for maintaining security.

I have to admit I was a bit stunned when I found out that the prison dictates that they can only speak in English. It would seem that some of these prisoners might not have been born in the US and they might not know how to speak English. I also thought it was a missed opportunity for the government to actually create some jobs by hiring translators and letting the inmates speak in Arabic, if that is their only way to communicate.

It's a tough call. Of course the prison guards have a right to be safe from inmates who may be conspiring to escape but, what gives any government the right to prevent anyone from practicing their religion (within reason, obviously, if one is incarcerated)?

It is a very tough call and I wish I was privy to the court procedings but I doubt it'll make Court TV and I'm not moving to Illinois for a few months.



Peace and comfort,



Michael



RemoteUser -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 2:56:00 PM)

Praying to a toilet normally involves alcohol and slurred promises of, "Never again..."

This guy has the capacity to carry out his religious requisites, he's angling for something beyond basic requirements. Since he's not doing it for his religion, he's doing it for himself, or to try to make an example, or point.

However you want to look at it, his rights aren't being denied. He has less than ideal circumstances, which seems pretty reasonable when you're in jail. If he wants group prayer - which is preferred but again, not mandatory - he should make an effort to work with the system, instead of trying to weasel around it. That's also pretty reasonable when you're in jail, and outside of it as well.

I don't see this as a tough call or even about security. I see it as an individual trying to push for more than what he's got. If a judge is so inclined to let him have his way, then security measures, if deemed necessary, should be implemented as a proper compromise - but that's up to the judge.



vincentML -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 3:10:22 PM)

I remember this kid. I thought at the time he was over-prosecuted in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. His is a strange story. You might get the feeling he was a victim of circumstance and not really at war with his own country. There are some serious questions about his interrogations and about the gag order that was imposed on him by the court supposedly at the request of Donald Rumsfeld. Wonder what the Don wanted to hide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Walker_Lindh#Trial



DaddySatyr -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 3:18:24 PM)

I agree that he might have been a relative of Curly (a victim of soycomstance) but, he was found guilty under our law?

That isn't my issue. He's in jail. That's a done deal but this is not a guy that "found Jesus" in a jail cell. Part of the information offered at trial by the prosecution was that he was a Muslim (OMA! He MUST be guilty!). So, it's tough to argue that he's a person who is "feining faith".

I am not even saying that he should be given carte blanche because he claims it's part of his religion. There are parts of certain religions that we don't allow by law, in this country.

He belongs to a sect that seems to strongly recommend (a strong recommendation from God to a believer is a commandment, almost) that group prayer is a necessity.

Like I said; it's a tough call. I refuse to just come down on one side or the other. I realize that affording him his rights would require extra money spent by the government to accomodate him (and others) but I am confident that there are other religions that are allowed to pray in groups in other prisons.

It's a big mess. Like I said; I'd like to be able to actually be in the courtroom for this one.



Peace and comfort,



Michael



SternSkipper -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 3:18:56 PM)

quote:

Muslim Denied What He Claims is Religious Freedom

Please read the whole article and refrain from the knee-jerk.


What a nothing issue... the guy isn't being denied much in my opinion people tend to be a little more contemplative on the toilet and groups are difficult to assemble 5 times a day in the big house.
I personally this is the article you break out when ultra low on shit to discuss.



SternSkipper -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 3:20:49 PM)

quote:

Donald Rumsfeld.


HOW DARE YOU BESMIRCH THE GREATEST REPUBLICAN WHO EVER LIVED.
My Gosh!



Rule -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 3:26:07 PM)

Muslims are not required to pray five times per day.

Muslims are required to pray no more than five times per day. So if they do not pray at all that is perfectly allright - and that indeed is what the pagan god Mohammed spoke with clearly intended.



TheHeretic -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 3:32:32 PM)

No sympathy from me.  He can pray any way he likes, after he gets out of prison. 



DaddySatyr -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 3:39:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

No sympathy from me.  He can pray any way he likes, after he gets out of prison. 


That was my first thought, Rich but I don't know.

My idea of prayer is pretty negative. I am, however, a fan of meditation, which some could consider a form of prayer.

We have a whole thread about Norwegian justice and people mention rehabilitation and being as non-punative as possible.

It's clear to me that our current system isn't working. I'm not suggesting work release or offering gunsmithing classes. I know that muslim extremism is just that; extremist. I know many followers of Islam that are not violent and are not looking to kill the western devil.

Napolean once said: "Religion is what keeps the poor from slaying (or murdering, I forget) the rich". Maybe it is an opiate of the masses? Offer them opium instead of hashish? LOL



Peace and comfort,



Michael



DesideriScuri -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 4:11:57 PM)

Here is the most important part of the entire article:

    quote:

    Muslims are required to pray five times a day, and the Hanbali school to which Lindh belongs requires group prayer if it is possible.


He can pray 5+ times per day. He is allowed to pray as a group once per day. Ergo, it is not possible to pray in a group more than once. This is a guy attempting to make life miserable for those not in prison for breaking the law.



Musicmystery -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 4:16:03 PM)

I have to agree with Rich. I don't see that this guy has much of a case, just a preference.

I can see why the ACLU is involved. The government is targeting him over paranoia of Islamic plotting during prayer and from at least the outside, probably needlessly. That would indeed be a violation of rights.

Perhaps the government has a better case than it's showing publicly. That would be one thing.

But the short take is that his rights are sufficiently being met. What's at issue is whether he's being discriminated against for his Muslim connections, and whether that concern has any real ground beyond reactionary hysteria.



stellauk -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 4:49:16 PM)

I don't see this as a tough call at all.

This is an issue of personal responsibility and dealing with consequences of one's actions and decisions. How praying in a particular way is impacted by being in prison should have been considered long ago, not now.

You have Muslim prisoners held in prisons in Islamic countries in conditions such as solitary confinement which also may not necessarily be conducive to group prayer.

The Holy Koran calls for Muslims to live simply and peacefully, yet this wasn't important when Lindh was supplying the Taliban with explosives.

You cannot expect the same freedoms in prison as you get in society.

Therefore tough titty.



subrob1967 -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 5:09:21 PM)

Fuck Lindh, they should have stoned his fucking traitorous ass.



hlen5 -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 5:23:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

................and I'm not moving to Illinois for a few months.

Peace and comfort,
Michael[/color]


(Lindh is in Indiana, not Illinois.)

He's not being forbidden to pray, he's being forbidden to congregate.



nephandi -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 7:34:16 PM)

Greetings

A simple solution to me would be to allow the group to pray together, the prayers are ritualistic and the guards should easily be able to hear when words stray from the norm if they just listen to the prayer a few times, and then they can require sermons to be held in English or with a translator present. As for as I know it is only the prayers themselves that need to be in Arabic, a sermon can be in English.

I am not surprised over this however, not long ago there was a trial in USA where several Pagan prisoners sued the Prison as the prison tried to restrict them practicing their religion and also wanted to deny them talking to a Pagan minister, this sparked a trial as several conservative Christian groups tried to prove in court that the Fonding Fathers only meant monotheistic religions when they spoke of religious freedom. There is more and more cases coming out of USA lately of right wing Christians trying to trample on the religious rights of followers of other faiths, it is a rather disturbing trend if you ask me.

I wish you well



nephandi -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 7:40:52 PM)

Greetings

quote:

No sympathy from me. He can pray any way he likes, after he gets out of prison.


Would you feel the same if he was Christian, that he should not be allowed to practice his religion in jail. Secondly do you think taking everything from a prisoner, even the basic practice of their religious faith is a good idea, first of all it would be against the law, second of all removing th ability to practice one's faith from a prisoner is likely to make them and others very, very angry which will not help security in the prison one little bit.

I wish you well



TheHeretic -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 7:59:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: nephandi

Greetings

quote:

No sympathy from me. He can pray any way he likes, after he gets out of prison.


Would you feel the same if he was Christian, that he should not be allowed to practice his religion in jail. Secondly do you think taking everything from a prisoner, even the basic practice of their religious faith is a good idea, first of all it would be against the law, second of all removing th ability to practice one's faith from a prisoner is likely to make them and others very, very angry which will not help security in the prison one little bit.

I wish you well


I would feel exactly the same way if he was a Christian, or a Jew, or a Buddist, or even a vague Deist with a fondness for Pagan sacraments, such as myself, Nephandi

And nobody is taking his religion from him.  He is being denied unlimited participation in certain rituals of his faith, for security reasons.  Religion lives inside the mind and spirit of the individual.  God, by whatever name, can still live in the heart of the prisoner in the deepest, darkest, most isolated hole.  So can evil.

Thanks, and likewise.



DaddySatyr -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 8:08:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

................and I'm not moving to Illinois for a few months.

Peace and comfort,
Michael


(Lindh is in Indiana, not Illinois.)

He's not being forbidden to pray, he's being forbidden to congregate.


Thanks. I knew it was in one of the fly-over states to the West of Pennsyltucky.



Peace and comfort,



Michael



Charles6682 -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/26/2012 8:09:58 PM)

Do the crime,do the time.Seems pretty simple.He wants religious freedom?Then don't work with people who try to suppress religous freedom



nephandi -> RE: Tough Call: Security Vs. Religion (8/27/2012 4:29:18 AM)

Greetings

quote:

I would feel exactly the same way if he was a Christian, or a Jew, or a Buddist, or even a vague Deist with a fondness for Pagan sacraments, such as myself, Nephandi

And nobody is taking his religion from him. He is being denied unlimited participation in certain rituals of his faith, for security reasons. Religion lives inside the mind and spirit of the individual. God, by whatever name, can still live in the heart of the prisoner in the deepest, darkest, most isolated hole. So can evil.


Here is the rub, we all have different views of religion. For some it is enough to believe, but for others they need to practice certain rituals to be true to their faith. I feel that if it is real security concerns then the prison should work out a way to let their prisoners practice their religion in a safer way but to flat out deny prisoners to practice their faith that I feel is wrong. Now yes in this case he can practice as he can pray his required five times a day though not under ideal circumstances, but in many other cases non Christian religions are almost completely blocked in American prisons, which is against the law, and usually the security concerns argument is used, but I feel that security concerns have become a catch phrase that can be used to justify any misuse of power.

Off course sometimes there are actual security concerns, but I do not think one should immediately accept it even if that argument is used.

I wish you well



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875