Go straight to church, do not pass go,

[Gob]

SALT LAKE CITY — A district judge in Oklahoma has generated new controversy by sentencing a teenager to 10 years of church attendance, even though the judge admits it's not constitutional.

Religion News Services reports Judge Mike Norman gave Tyler Alred, 17, a 10-year deferred sentence for DUI manslaughter. Alred was driving a pickup truck that crashed and killed a passenger in December 2011.

In deferring the sentence, the judge not only ordered Alred to a decade of church attendance, but also required him to finish high school and welding school.

Alred's attorney and the victim's family agreed to the terms of the sentence.

The ACLU in Oklahoma calls the church requirement a "clear violation of the First Amendment."

Judge Norman, who has recommended church as part of sentencing in some past cases, admits the church attendance part of the sentence won't hold up legally but doubts either side in the case will appeal.

He says the sentence was the right thing to do.

The ACLU is considering its options, but according to RNS an individual or organization must have legal standing to challenge the constitutionality of the church attendance requirement.

[dales]

A stint working in the county morgue would be more appropriate for his DUI conviction.

[rubato]

A year assisting with post-mortems on people killed in accidents?

Good idea.

yrs,
rubato

[Jarlaxle]

The judge should be disbarred.

Tyler Alred should spend the rest of his life in a cell.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Tyler Alred should spend the rest of his life in a cell.

I don't disagree with that (even though being the alcoholic I am I have driven drunk more times than I can count).

I just wonder why the ACLU needs to get involved if both sides agree to the sentence? If the defendent protested the sentence then I might see them consider getting involved as it is a question of church vs state. But when both sides agree, ACLU should not even bother.

Going to the meetings every night I hear plenty of horror stories and how people got off easy and plenty of stories where people are never going to drive again (even not causing death or harm nor physical damage). This kid got off easy. The ACLU shold butt out and let him do his sentence.

[Sue U]

I just wonder why the ACLU needs to get involved if both sides agree to the sentence? If the defendent protested the sentence then I might see them consider getting involved as it is a question of church vs state. But when both sides agree, ACLU should not even bother.

Just because the defendant agreed to the sentence doesn't make it a legitimate exercise of judicial power. In the first place, there is a statute that sets out the range of penalties for vehicular manslaughter, and a judge has no authority to go beyond the legislative mandate of the statute to fashion his own idea of an "appropriate" sentence. Second, it is clearly a violation of both the Estabishment and Free Exercise clauses of the First Amendment for a judge to even suggest, let alone order, church attendance in sentencing. Moreover, because it clearly can't be enforced, it invites disregard for the law.

[Long Run]

Norman sentenced Tyler Alred, 17, Tuesday after he pleaded guilty to first-degree manslaughter in August for killing friend and passenger John Luke Dum in a car crash.

Dum died on impact in December after Alred crashed his Chevrolet pickup truck, ejecting Dum. Alred was 16 at the time of the crash and had been drinking prior to the deadly accident.

Oklahoma Highway Patrol issued a Breathalyzer at the time, and although Alred was under the state’s legal alcohol limit, he had been drinking underage.

The judge could have sent Alred to jail but, instead, taking into account his clean criminal and school records, sentenced him to wear a drug and alcohol bracelet, participate in counseling groups and attend a church of his choosing – weekly. He must also graduate from high school.

To avoid jail time, Norman gave Alred a maximum 10-year deferred sentence.

* * *

In the courtroom this week, an emotional scene between the victim’s family and Alred played out after statements from Dum’s mother, father and two sisters were read during the sentencing. Dum’s father and Alred stood up in court, turned toward each other and embraced one another.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2 ... -10-years/

With these other facts, it is more reasonable that there is a no-prison sentence result. Different states give judges different leeway in sentencing. That said, this goes beyond other creative sentences (such as the suggested working in a morgue) in that it effectively mandates that the defendant go to church -- the alternative being prison. Hard to see how that would not be a violation of church/state separation.

[rubato]

The judge should sentence him to take a university-level course in Newtonian physics, and re-take it until he gets a passing grade on the final.

1. It would torture him worse than religion, he would actually have to use his brain rather than parrot slogans.

2. He might come to understand why KE = 1/2MVexp2 is such an important equation for drivers. (the velocity term is squared)

3. He might learn that in the physical world physical actions have physical consequences rather than some useless superstitious babbling.

yrs,
rubato

[dales]

Newtonian physics?

As opposed to his religious faith in "superstitious babbling".

[rubato]

As opposed. Yes.
_____________________________

"It is not by prayer and humility that you cause things to go as you wish, but by acquiring
a knowledge of natural laws. The power you acquire in this way is much greater and more
reliable than that formerly supposed to be acquired by prayer, because you never could tell
whether your prayer would be favorably heard in Heaven. The power of prayer, moreover,
had recognized limits; it would have been impious to ask too much. But the power of
science has no known limits. We were told that faith could remove mountains, but no one
believed it; we are now told that the atomic bomb can remove mountains, and everyone
believes it. "

Russell

______________________________

yrs,
rubato

[dales]

Who gives a flying fig about Russell when the subject at hand is Newton's religious faith?

[Lord Jim]

Newton was very devout, and wrote more extensively on theological matters than he did on physics....

He even learned Hebrew and experimented with "bible code" analysis....

Of course to be aware of these facts, one would have to know something about history....

[rubato]

Who gives a flying fig about Russell when the subject at hand is Newton's religious faith?

Newton's religious writing has been dismissed by time as worthless junk as has his (even more extensive) work in alchemy.

The advantage of science is that we throw out the garbage on a regular basis and don't waste time revisiting useless crap. No matter who wrote it.

yrs,
rubato

[dales]

The advantage of science is that we throw out the garbage on a regular basis and don't waste time revisiting useless crap. No matter who wrote it.

yrs,
rubato

Like Newtonian physics.

[rubato]

The advantage of science is that we throw out the garbage on a regular basis and don't waste time revisiting useless crap. No matter who wrote it.

yrs,
rubato

Like Newtonian physics.

Are you drunk?



yrs,
rubato

[Jarlaxle]

Who gives a flying fig about Russell when the subject at hand is Newton's religious faith?

Newton's religious writing has been dismissed by time as worthless junk as has his (even more extensive) work in alchemy.

The advantage of science is that we throw out the garbage on a regular basis and don't waste time revisiting useless crap. No matter who wrote it.

yrs,
rubato

So...you must not be much is a scientist, then,. Rube...because you SPECIALIZE in worthless crap!

[dales]

The advantage of science is that we throw out the garbage on a regular basis and don't waste time revisiting useless crap. No matter who wrote it.

yrs,
rubato

Like Newtonian physics.

Are you drunk?



yrs,
rubato

Why do you ask?

Quantum physics, anyone?

[rubato]

Why do you ask?

Quantum physics, anyone?

Quantum mechanics did not disprove Newtonian mechanics, replace it or make it less useful. It merely defined the range of physical phenomenon within which Newtonian physics operates accurately. For objects of appreciable size traveling less than a large fraction of the speed of light Newton physics works very well and is taught in every decent university in the world.

His alchemy and theology are abandoned as valueless. His mechanics and calculus are still useful.


yrs,
rubato