The Logic of the ACLU

[ThatRobGuy]

Prisoners' Rights - Recent Court Cases, Issues and Articles | American Civil Liberties Union

The ACLU is pushing for federal prisons to stop the use of solitary confinement, allowing criminals with life sentences to get out of prison once they're elderly, make sure that the punishments they receive don't conflict with their religious beliefs among many other things that they're pushing for to make prison less unpleasent for criminals.

Am I missing the whole point of prison?

Isn't it supposed to be a punishment?

If we're going to make it nice for them, I have some other ideas.

Instead of the weights out in the yard, we should use tax money to build an indoor, air conditioned, gym since making them bench press out in the heat would infringe on their rights.

Since the usual sleeping accomodations might infringe on the rights of those who are claustrophobic, we'll revamp it so everyone has their own private room with their own TV set and since it'd be cruel to make someone eat a particular food they don't like the taste of (and in some cases infringe on their religious beliefs), we can create an entire menu where they can order what they like and have it brought to their private cell (since they might be tired and overworking is also cruel as the ACLU has informed us). I also think that we need to build an pool and remodel the outside so it doesn't look so drab, we can't embarass the people staying there since according to the ACLU people have right to not be mocked or made to look singled out when they're serving their sentence.

It will cost about $14million per prison (on top of the $300 per night for each inmate) and when the the whole project is done, each of the prisons will look like this.

Now, our criminals can live in dignity and peace without fear of judgment, punishment, or being made to feel uncomfortable.

 

[Jade Margery]

It depends on your philosophy of justice really, and why you think prisons exist.

Some people think prisons exist as a punishment, and should be made as miserable as possible.

Others think prisons serve to protect the people outside from the people who are put inside, so letting them out when they are too old and feeble to hurt anyone makes sense.

Others think prisons should be a place of rehabilitation; many of the people in them are themselves victims of circumstance wherein their actions can be traced to the environment they grew up in and the education they received (or lack of it), and by remedying those things even violent offenders can become productive, peaceful members of society. In this regard it makes sense not to use punishments that actually promote anti-social behavior, and there's nothing less social than solitary confinement.


Now, I'm not going to get into which of these philosophies I personally support. At the moment our (America's) justice system seems to be a mix of the three. But all three views have merit and I'll say this; I don't think your post is a credit to you, since you have tainted what could be an interesting and informed discussion by caricaturing opposing views to ridiculous extremes.

 

[The Nihilist]

Prisoners' Rights - Recent Court Cases, Issues and Articles | American Civil Liberties Union

The ACLU is pushing for federal prisons to stop the use of solitary confinement, allowing criminals with life sentences to get out of prison once they're elderly, make sure that the punishments they receive don't conflict with their religious beliefs among many other things that they're pushing for to make prison less unpleasent for criminals.

Am I missing the whole point of prison?

Isn't it supposed to be a punishment?

If we're going to make it nice for them, I have some other ideas.

Instead of the weights out in the yard, we should use tax money to build an indoor, air conditioned, gym since making them bench press out in the heat would infringe on their rights.

Since the usual sleeping accomodations might infringe on the rights of those who are claustrophobic, we'll revamp it so everyone has their own private room with their own TV set and since it'd be cruel to make someone eat a particular food they don't like the taste of (and in some cases infringe on their religious beliefs), we can create an entire menu where they can order what they like and have it brought to their private cell (since they might be tired and overworking is also cruel as the ACLU has informed us). I also think that we need to build an pool and remodel the outside so it doesn't look so drab, we can't embarass the people staying there since according to the ACLU people have right to not be mocked or made to look singled out when they're serving their sentence.

It will cost about $14million per prison (on top of the $300 per night for each inmate) and when the the whole project is done, each of the prisons will look like this.

Now, our criminals can live in dignity and peace without fear of judgment, punishment, or being made to feel uncomfortable.

The prison system in the United States is ridiculous. It's unnecessarily cruel, prisons are overcrowded, and even for criminals, the conditions are inhuman. This is all thanks to the drug war, which is grade a stupid, and the for-profit prison industry, which makes big tobacco look like jesus christ. Prison should be about separating those who are dangerous from the rest of us and reforming those who aren't. There's no need to torture or dehumanize either group, and there are plenty of reasons not to.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

While I agree that the drug war is rediculous and that several people are put in prison who shouldn't be due to it, ACLU was targeting federal, maximum security prisons. People who get caught smoking pot don't end up in those, they end up in county jail for a few days (if it's their 3rd or 4th offense), most times, they just get a fine and probation.

I don't think your post is a credit to you, since you have tainted what could be an interesting and informed discussion by caricaturing opposing views to ridiculous extremes.

Yes, their was a little bit of satire in my post, but it's not as rediculous of an exteme as you think. The ACLU is the same organization that goes on the record as stating that Indian and Muslim prisoners should still be allowed to wear their traditional head dress and have alloted prayer breaks (which the rest of the inmates do not get). They also tried to sue the US military for making Native Americans who enlist in the military shave their head during boot camp (which every single other soldier has to do). So while my caricature may have been comically extreme, so are some of the ACLU's actual views.

When looking at the ACLU's actions, it's not hard to see that they unfairly favor all religions over Christianity and often target them for things that they would normally try to get protection for if it were any other religion. Now, I'm not a Christian, I don't personally believe in it, but I think the ACLU should be consistent with their stance on religious rights and rights of inmates vs. normal citizens.

If a school allows Christian prayer or children to bring their King James bibles to school, the ACLU knocks down their door and claims that "they're infringing on the rights of the secular community, there are atheist parents who don't want their children exposed to that" by trying to "force Christianity on everyone else". However, if anyone ever suggested that a Muslim child wasn't allowed to bring the Quaran to school, the ACLU would be saying that the school was infringing on their right to practice their own religion. In college we had a rep from the ACLU give a lecture in our Social Dynamics class, and it was clear to see after 10 minutes that they were trying to label Christianity as something oppresive, outdated, silly, not politically correct, but spoke of Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, and Taoism as some kind of historical tradition that needs to be understood, tolerated, and respected.

I don't know how anyone could look at the ACLU's cases, and think that they're consistent with the groups they try to support. I don't doubt that they've done some good here and there, but it's almost as if they try to side with the most counter-culture groups they can find just for shock value.

 

[The Paul]

http://www.aclu.org/prisoners-rights
Am I missing the whole point of prison?

Isn't it supposed to be a punishment?

That depends.

Do you want prisons to give you a sense of vengeance against criminals, or to be part of a system that protects you from criminals?

 

[fenix144]

education-rehabilitation.

tis all I got to say.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

That depends.

Do you want prisons to give you a sense of vengeance against criminals, or to be part of a system that protects you from criminals?

Not necessarily vengeance, but yes it should be a punishment. If it weren't, they'd have no problem commiting the same crime when they get out to go right back.

 

[The Nihilist]

Yes, their was a little bit of satire in my post, but it's not as rediculous of an exteme as you think. The ACLU is the same organization that goes on the record as stating that Indian and Muslim prisoners should still be allowed to wear their traditional head dress and have alloted prayer breaks (which the rest of the inmates do not get). They also tried to sue the US military for making Native Americans who enlist in the military shave their head during boot camp (which every single other soldier has to do). So while my caricature may have been comically extreme, so are some of the ACLU's actual views.

If inmates are allowed to practice christianity in prison, then they should be allowed to practice islam or whatever else. That christianity doesn't require headdress or prayer at 5 times/ day is immaterial.

When looking at the ACLU's actions, it's not hard to see that they unfairly favor all religions over Christianity and often target them for things that they would normally try to get protection for if it were any other religion. Now, I'm not a Christian, I don't personally believe in it, but I think the ACLU should be consistent with their stance on religious rights and rights of inmates vs. normal citizens.

If a school allows Christian prayer or children to bring their King James bibles to school, the ACLU knocks down their door and claims that "they're infringing on the rights of the secular community, there are atheist parents who don't want their children exposed to that" by trying to "force Christianity on everyone else". However, if anyone ever suggested that a Muslim child wasn't allowed to bring the Quaran to school, the ACLU would be saying that the school was infringing on their right to practice their own religion. In college we had a rep from the ACLU give a lecture in our Social Dynamics class, and it was clear to see after 10 minutes that they were trying to label Christianity as something oppresive, outdated, silly, not politically correct, but spoke of Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, and Taoism as some kind of historical tradition that needs to be understood, tolerated, and respected.

Carrying a holy book is a constitutionally protected right, and I don't believe the ACLU has ever argued that you couldn't carry a bible into a school.

I don't know how anyone could look at the ACLU's cases, and think that they're consistent with the groups they try to support. I don't doubt that they've done some good here and there, but it's almost as if they try to side with the most counter-culture groups they can find just for shock value.

The ACLU protects our civil rights, christian and nonchristian alike. Here's 2 sites that provides a list of cases where the ACLU has argued for the rights of christians:The ACLU Fights for Christians
http://www.aclu.org/aclu-defense-religious-practice-and-expression
Now go learn something and stop watching foxnews.

 

[AtheistVet]

Not necessarily vengeance, but yes it should be a punishment. If it weren't, they'd have no problem commiting the same crime when they get out to go right back.

Don't most of them do that anyway? Obviously it's not working.

 

[The Nihilist]

Not necessarily vengeance, but yes it should be a punishment. If it weren't, they'd have no problem commiting the same crime when they get out to go right back.

You don't believe that reforming a prisoner is important?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

The ACLU protects our civil rights, christian and nonchristian alike. Here's 2 sites that provides a list of cases where the ACLU has argued for the rights of christians:The ACLU Fights for Christians
ACLU Defends Religious Practice and Expression - Cases, Laws, Events | American Civil Liberties Union
Now go learn something and stop watching foxnews.

Wow, nice cheap shot. First off, not every opinion that's further right of your own automatically the result of "fox news" type broadcasting.

Do you have any unbiased websites that coincide with this view point of them helping Christians equally? I know they're going to say that on their website to keep a good public image, but their actions don't seem to follow that line of thought.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

You don't believe that reforming a prisoner is important?

Yes, I do, but there needs to be consequences for your actions.

 

[The Nihilist]

Wow, nice cheap shot. First off, not every opinion that's further right of your own automatically the result of "fox news" type broadcasting.

No, and I don't think it is. What I do think is that you're an ignorance that is specifically peddled by foxnews.

Do you have any unbiased websites that coincide with this view point of them helping Christians equally? I know they're going to say that on their website to keep a good public image, but their actions don't seem to follow that line of thought.

For me to accept your out-of-hand dismissal of the ACLU's sites, I would have to accept your premise that they are dishonest and have an anti-christian agenda. Do you have any sources indicating that the ACLU doesn't help christians, or can you point to any cases in which the ACLU has opposed a christian's constitutionally guaranteed rights?

 

[The Nihilist]

Yes, I do, but there needs to be consequences for your actions.

The loss of freedom through confinement is a consequence.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Don't most of them do that anyway? Obviously it's not working.

That shows that the punishment isn't severe enough if they weren't afraid to go back

 

[The Nihilist]

That shows that the punishment isn't severe enough if they weren't afraid to go back

Or not:
New Study: With Prison, Try a Little Tenderness - WhoWhatWhy | WhoWhatWhy

Here's the study:
http://faculty.som.yale.edu/keithchen/papers/Final_ALER07.pdf

 

[AtheistVet]

That shows that the punishment isn't severe enough if they weren't afraid to go back

Wow.

Then how do you explain this?

NICIC.gov: Gentle Justice: Analysis of Open Prison Systems in Finland: A Way to the Future?

Finland instituted an incredibly humane prison system and recidivism rates plummeted. Meanwhile our hardcore prison system that focuses more on punishment than rehabilitation just spits out criminals more hardened then when they went in.

 

[Paradoxum]

I don't think prison should be nice, I think prisoners should have work to improve the country if they can't be reformed. I also don't prison shouldn't be s**t hole that turns humans into animals.

 

[The Paul]

Not necessarily vengeance, but yes it should be a punishment. If it weren't, they'd have no problem commiting the same crime when they get out to go right back.

Well, as long as punishment is priority over public safety then yes, the purpose of prisons is to punish criminals.

ACLU probably disagrees with you over what should take precedence, though.

 

[OllieFranz]

The first prison to be called a "penitentiary" was in Philadephia, home of the Quakers. In terms of prison reform, they were to the left of the ACLU. Their Penitentiary was envisioned as a place where they had the peace and quiet to meditate on their lives, come to repentance.

The layout of the cell block was based on medieval monasteries, a small space with a single bed and bare walls. In effect, every prisoner was placed into solitary confinement from the moment he arrived at the gates, until he served his time -- or died. We know now that extended enforced isolation can be a form of torture, and there are limits beyond which solitary becomes "cruel and unusual."