Update: All the News That's Fit to Print?

About a year ago I reported on a story that received little media coverage. The little it did receive from The New York Times was an outright lie. Today InnerChange Freedom Initiative reported good news as judges overturned a previous ruling against it.

Back on December 12, 2006, Prison Fellowship, a Faith Based organization that provides programs for inmates in prison reported that it was ordered to repay the state of Iowa $1.5 million it received in funding for its InnerChange Freedom Initiative (IFI) programs. The ruling came after a left-wing group sued the organization. As Prison Fellowship reports:

"Barry Lynn and Americans United for Separation of Church and State sued IFI in Iowa, claiming it was unconstitutional. In June 2006, a federal judge agreed and ordered the program shut down—and for Prison Fellowship, which launched IFI, to repay the state of Iowa $1.5 million."

Today Prison Fellowship reported the appeals court upheld the faith-based program. As Prison Fellowship reports:

"The three-judge panel, including former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, overturned major portions of Judge Pratt’s ruling."

Yesterday's ruling as stated above, overturned "major portions" of Judge Pratt's ruling. Basically the Appeal Court ruled that:

1. The IFI program may continue to operate as a privately funded faith-based program, which all of our programs are.

2. IFI and Prison Fellowship do not have to repay the $1.5 million to the state of Iowa. This was extraordinarily important, not only for Prison Fellowship, but also for the principle and other faith-based programs.

3. The court ruled that Judge Pratt’s allowing of so-called “expert testimony” disparaging evangelical Christians was “not only unnecessary but also offensive.”

4. The ruling gives IFI and other faith-based organizations additional guidance as we move forward in working with governments to address one of the most pervasive social problems facing our country: crime and the high recidivism rate of prisoners.

So what does this all mean? It means that the IFI programs will be allowed to continue. This, I believe, is the most important with respect to the needs of inmates and their families. This is a program that is offered to inmates who sign up for it voluntarily. No one is coerced into signing up for it. A study conducted by secular University of Pennsylvania showed the initiative actually helps to reduce recidivism Prison Fellowship reported. So what does this mean to you and I out here in society? Does this have anything to do with us? Should it matter to us as a society whether inmates re-offend or not? Does it matter to you when a sex offender is released into your community to live? If so why? Does it matter to you whether an offender gets rehabilitated or not? Is it good for society if inmates can be rehabilitated and be reintegrated into society to be productive members instead of remaining locked up at tax payers expense? These are some of the questions we need to bear in mind when we look at what works for inmates and what doesn't. From personal experience, from studies like the one done by the University of Pennsylvania and from IFI's reports of success in reducing recidivism should we as members of society not be more interested and eager to use whatever works in order to rehabilitate inmates? Even if that rehabilitation is faith based?