Two Cheers for the Bush Administration and Religious Freedom

Marvin Olasky's picture

Reasons to be sad about the Bush administration abound. But here's a happy note: Team Bush has repaired its mistake on religious freedom that I and many others complained about last month.

The problem then was the Federal Bureau of Prisons' "Standardized Chapel Library Program," which created lists averaging 150 allowable items for each of 20 religions or religious categories. By my rough count, six authors had at least five books on the authorized Protestant list: Dietrich Bonhoeffer, John Calvin, Chuck Colson, C.S. Lewis, Max Lucado and … Stormie Omartian.

The approved list included "Praying" by J.I. Packer, but if a library had Packer's "Knowing God," it would have to be purged. The list included "Fifty Reasons Why Jesus Came To Die" by John Piper, but if a library had Piper's "Desiring God," it would have to go. Chaplains had to purge many great works, but authorized books included Elisabeth Schussler Florenza's "In Memory of Her: A Feminist Theological Reconstruction of Christian Origins" and Elizabeth Johnson's "She Who Is: The Mystery of God in Feminist Theological Discourse."

Curiously, Tony Campolo and liberation theologians such as Gustavo Gutierrez made it in; Jonathan Edwards did not. Some of the specific choices seem curious, but the main concern was larger. It's reasonable for officials to remove books that urge prisoners to murder their guards, but why was the government banning "Knowing God," "Desiring God" and thousands of other books that could help prisoners?

The book ban was based in the same type of thinking that leads airport security folks to frisk gray old ladies rather than young Muslim men: fear of discrimination. Prisons have long knocked out new religious books that urge violence, but that policy takes out a disproportionate number of Muslim works, particularly because the extremist Wahhabi sect is strong in prisons and well-represented among Muslim prison chaplains.

As the outcry about its policy grew, the Bureau of Prisons backpedaled and said it would allow books not on the list to enter prison libraries -- but only if (a) a prisoner requested it, (b) the prison chaplain read the book carefully and sent a certification request to the bureau in Washington and (c) the book made it to an updated approval list. That's an exceedingly bureaucratic solution, clerics rightly responded. They couldn't write book reports on every work that a prisoner requests.

The noise finally registered among higher-ups in Washington, and late last week, the Bureau of Prisons fully reversed itself. Its announcement read, "In response to concerns expressed by members of several religious communities, the Bureau of Prisons has decided to alter its planned course of action with respect to the Chapel Library Project. The bureau will begin immediately to return to chapel libraries materials that were removed in June 2007 …"

The bureau said it would not return materials that "incite violence." That's fine; courts have long recognized prisons as a special case where some liberties obviously are lost. We can contain the bad without abandoning the good. And that leads me to a concluding note about the overall posture of conservatives toward the Bush administration.

Sure, we've all had disappointments, particularly on domestic budgetary matters, education and the wrong turns of the faith-based initiative. But the administration should be credited with the ability to respond to errors on the biggest issue, the Iraq war, and to develop a winning strategy at last. The same holds for its response to some relatively small matters such as religious books in prison libraries.

Some conservatives give the Bush presidency an F, but in Washington's difficult terrain, it probably deserves a C. We hoped for more, but we probably will miss it when it's gone.

COPYRIGHT 2007 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC

login to post comments | Marvin Olasky's blog

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by teetaw on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 9:26am.

seriously, you guys can't even things out with a decent liberal column or two? theres seriously no better articles out there?

ps: Marvin here was born a Jew, went atheist as a teenager, went communist in the 70's, and became a born again christian in 1976. how nice. Whats the next stop on the Marvin train, Scientology?

BPR's picture
Submitted by BPR on Tue, 10/09/2007 - 5:20pm.

I take it that you don't care for Christians? Because President Bush is a Christian, you don't like him. I think we need more articles like this one. If you want Liberal ones, just watch CNN.


AF A-10's picture
Submitted by AF A-10 on Wed, 10/10/2007 - 3:06pm.

But the ACLU actually represented prisoners desiring to obtain religious materials. One ACLU represented prisoner was even an LDS (Mormon). So you, BPR, are siding with the ACLU, whom conservatives have worked for years to paint as haters of religion as opposed to guardians of liberties. Strange times we live in eh?

Kevin "Hack" King


Denise Conner's picture
Submitted by Denise Conner on Wed, 10/10/2007 - 10:37pm.

"Inmates Sue over Clearing of Religious Books from Libraries"

"Prisons Purging Books on Faith from Libraries" -- I don't see the ACLU being given credit. What's your source, Hack?

"ACLU-NJ Protects Inmate's Right to Receive Religious Items in Prison" -- A case on behalf of an inmate who practices Wicca. The prison refused to recognize Wicca as a legitimate religion.

Of course, the ACLU sues for hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery for incarcerated men wishing to change their gender and for NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association). Fine organization, Atheists, Communists, And Lawyers United!

The ACLU wrote a letter to the Federal Bureau of Prisons on behalf of MTF (male-to-female) transgender prisoner, requesting that he/she be incarcerated in a women's prison or a Community Corrections Center (also known as a halfway house).

"Go HERE to an excellent site to find out what the ACLU is really like.

Trial And Error: The American Civil Liberties Union and Its Impact on Your Family by Dr. George Grant

The ACLU vs. America by Alan Sears and Craig Osten & "Evils of the ACLU" (PDF download)

"The ACLU’s 80-Year War on American Values"


AF A-10's picture
Submitted by AF A-10 on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 10:48am.

You are a wealth of knowledge and the most powerful human search engine on these boards. I found the New Mexico case from 2005-06 in about 30 seconds. You can be selective in your searches if you wish, but that does not change the case load of the ACLU (u can't have your own facts).

Kevin "Hack" King


Denise Conner's picture
Submitted by Denise Conner on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 8:27pm.

At least, you prefaced your remarks with a compliment (or was it?). I'll pass it along to the one who gave me my first computer lessons. Laughing out loud

"HONESTLY," who's the one who's "selective"?

You've used that one before: "I haven't seen anything this selective since...." BTW, I'm still waiting for your reply to several of my posts. Laughing out loud

I asked for the source of your claim that the ACLU was involved in this 2007 case ("2 New York Prisoners Sue to Get Their Banned Religious Books Back"), not "the New Mexico case from 2005-06." You can give me the source for that case also. No need to put in the links; I can cut & paste quite well! Laughing out loud

"u can't have your own facts."

I thought that I gave you too much information. Puzzled You just can't please some people. Laughing out loud

Hope you enjoy this fishing VIDEO.

I'm listening to Thomas Sowell's Black Rednecks and White Liberals to add to my "wealth of knowledge"! Eye-wink Very interesting sociological commentary.

"Books were not common even in the homes of many white Southerners who could have afforded books. That was just not part of the redneck culture." -- WHEW! Glad to know that I couldn't possibly be a redneck. Laughing out loud

"This is not about 'blaming the victim.' Nobody can be blamed for the culture he was born into. But neither should he be kept mired in that culture, in the name of 'identity' or with the pretense that all cultures are equal."


AF A-10's picture
Submitted by AF A-10 on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 8:39pm.

You know I like you; honestly. But you misread my post. I did not say the ACLU represented plaintifs in the 07 case. I said they represent christians in this same situation. The ACLU actually works for christians, muslims, mormons in similar circumstance thus casting doubt on the claim that the ACLU hates christians. Read it again, please.

Kevin "Hack" King


Denise Conner's picture
Submitted by Denise Conner on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 9:18pm.

"Misread"? Puzzled

Just how many Christians have the ACLU represented? How many lawsuits have been brought against Christians and Christian principles, traditions, and symbols? Those are the key questions.

I'll be "selective" (discriminating) and support organizations like the Thomas Moore Law Center. Smiling


Submitted by teetaw on Sat, 10/13/2007 - 12:37am.

"The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity."

But seriously, I'm actually with Denise, I wish the ACLU would just shut up so we can go back to the good old days, when women were seen but not heard. Right Denise?

Submitted by d.smith700 on Sat, 10/13/2007 - 6:05am.

I don't get a connection between Jesus and the ACLU, but I don't ever remember when we didn't "hear" women! If you act like you like them, they are sure going to let you "hear" them for the favor. That is why they were created. To temp.

BPR's picture
Submitted by BPR on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 8:42pm.

ACLU hates Christians- they are against and fight everything Christians are for. They go to court over it. Please- you know that.


AF A-10's picture
Submitted by AF A-10 on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 8:55pm.

Why has the ACLU defended street preachers' right to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ on sidewalks if they hate christians? Can you give me a coherent argument?

Kevin "Hack" King


JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 1:34pm.

I admire your persistence here but you must know that you are not going to get these true conservatives change their minds and support the Constitution. The ACLU protects civil liberties; anathema to conservatives.

Here are some quotes from Denise’s source Stop the ACLU:

“All through the confirmation process of Justice Alito, the ACLU and leftards were screaming that Alito was a racist bigot that would undermine judicial precedent.”

Did the ACLU ever actually say Alito was a racist bigot? Of course not. Here is a link to the ACLU with their reasonable and laudable reasons to oppose Alito:

ACLU Opposes Nomination of Judge Alito

Here’s another quote:

“When the islamists get control and impose sharia law, will the ACLU have the (deleted) to stand up and say “no way achmed”, or do you think it more likely that they will realize that speaking against the caliphate is a death sentence? I am betting they will shut up and become good little dhimmis.”

Utterly silly but it neatly conveys the level of intellectual discourse of the site.

In another source, The ACLU vs. America, Sears and Osten claim: “As a result of the relentless efforts of the American Civil Liberties Union and their war on America, we now live in a country where the Church has been progressively silenced…”

Here is a link to the page after page after page of cases the ACLU has brought to defend religious freedom:

ACLU Cases Defending Religious Freedom

My favorite complaint against the ACLU is the supposed attack on U.S. Sovereignty. In Denise’s sources you can find numerous examples. The common thread of course is that the U. S. must recognize international law as enacted through treaties. To conservatives this is shocking and outrageous.

And where does the ACLU find support for this shocking and outrageous assertion? From Article VI of the Constitution:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Horrors!


Submitted by thebeaver on Fri, 10/12/2007 - 6:57am.

From WSJ Opinion Journal

------------------------
“...the term “democrat” originated as an epithet and referred to ‘one who panders to the crude and mindless whims of the masses.’”

AF A-10's picture
Submitted by AF A-10 on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 8:26pm.

handled by the ACLU that don't support the view that the ACLU hates Christians in order to strengthen one's argument, and then be confounded when we bother to bring up the rest of the picture. The ACLU has defended street preacher's right to preach the gospel on public ground, and they've defended people's rights to ignore such religious messages. When you here "they hate us for our freedom," some times I think "they" are neocons.

Kevin "Hack" King


BPR's picture
Submitted by BPR on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 8:30pm.

Is this why everything a Christian believes in they are against? All they do is sit around and wait to see how they can come up with something else that is so stupid to go against Christians. You must be part of the ACLU. Because from your post I can tell you don't like Christians.


Submitted by d.smith700 on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 6:33am.

Knocking ACLU?
Bob Barr is their current protector!
I realize that those who are ignorant and dumb and lame and crippled, do not need or deserve protection from us rich baddies, but the Soopremes haven't said so, yet........

BPR's picture
Submitted by BPR on Wed, 10/10/2007 - 4:02pm.

I don't think you know what you are talking about. ACLU hates Christians. But you know what we love them and pray for them, even they have hope. Do I agree with them, of course not. Do I think prisoners should have Christian books, yes I do. Do you have any other hope to give them besides Jesus. ACLU, I don't know where you got your information, but they are so against anything that has to do with a Christian.


JeffC's picture
Submitted by JeffC on Fri, 10/12/2007 - 12:35pm.

Do y'all just make this stuff up? Here is a post from the ACLU's web site from Jeremy Gunn, Director, Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, denouncing the Bush administrations banning of Christian religious books in prisons which are not on the administration's "approved" list.

ACLU Blog

BPR, you can go here: ACLU to show your support for their work with a donation of appreciation.


BPR's picture
Submitted by BPR on Fri, 10/12/2007 - 1:28pm.

Have you checked out how many times the ACLU has gone against Christians? I didn't think so. We have nothing in common with the ACLU.


Submitted by teetaw on Wed, 10/10/2007 - 2:52pm.

If your dissatisfaction with the Bush administration's war crimes, deception of the the public, and wasting trillions of our tax dollars has been appeased because they expanded the murderers' and rapists' religious library in jail, then maybe you need someone to slap you back to your senses or perhaps you don't have any.

BPR's picture
Submitted by BPR on Wed, 10/10/2007 - 3:58pm.

I don't get what you are saying????? Did I say I was dissatified with The Bush administration? No, I support President Bush 100 percent. He is the best President that we have had. By the way, do you even believe in God- God's son Jesus? Because if you don't how do you know what you are talking about? Believe it or not I know people in prison can become Christians, because there is not one person that is without hope. Even you. What do you believe in?


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.