Comment below: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
**SNIP** > > To me, the Enlightened Sentencing Program isn't justified > because other programs are religiously slanted, but because > the ESP's been demonstrated effective regardless of the > probationer's beliefs. That's why Judge Mason considered > it in the first place, and why a growing circle of his colleagues > support it. > > It's the old argument that if you can measure results and > replicate them, it's hard to classify the program as religious. > > Some spiritually based programs can't be passed along to > non-believers. To illustrate, I'll retell a story I read in a > biography of Mother Teresa. > > Mother Teresa's Missionaries of Charity work in close > quarters with people who have highly contagious diseases. > Yet the Missionaries get sick much less than Indian > government workers who deal with the same people. > > Government managers asked Mother Teresa to teach > them her methods in order to spare the health of > government social services workers. Mother Teresa > said, "I can't teach you my methods because I don't > have any. I believe the key to our good health is this: > we see the people we aid as the suffering body of > Christ. You cannot ask your people to take that point > of view, hence, the good health we enjoy is out of > your reach." [my paraphrase, of course] > > If Farrokh were asking his students to adopt an attitude > or belief, the Enlightened Sentencing Program would > have a problem -- or, let's say, bigger problems than > it has. But he's not. > **END** My comments that Farrokh's meditation was no more religiously slanted (and even less so) than other programs ordered as part of a person's probation was more addressed to Barry's assertion that no judge should compel participation in an activity that was religious in nature (to some degree) than to yours. And, for what it's worth, the participation of probationers in these other programs (both quasi-religious, religious or secular) also have a track record of success (once again, to some degree) in helping probationers stay out of jail and prison. As you point out, the ESP doesn't ask for the probationers to adopt an attitude of belief, but other programs that do demand some portion of belief can similarly point to positive results. Probably not on as profound a level but good enough to be enshrined in the criminal justice system. The Mother Teresa and non-believers story isn't totally apt in this Christian-dominated culture. Lots and lots of folks "find Jesus" in the jails and prisons of this country, whereas I'd expect relatively few do in India. So social services that are Christian-based don't stand out in this culture while something as positive and benign as the ESP, even without any belief component, is still an oddity and subject to a level of critique far more strict. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
