Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested

Doc Thompson’s 24-hour radio marathon, ‘#24forok,’ continues until 9 am ET — Listen Live!

Crime

Teen Sentenced to 10 Years of Church Attendance After DUI Manslaughter Conviction

Nov. 16, 2012 10:38am Billy Hallowell

An Oklahoma teenager In Muskogee, Oklahoma, who pleaded guilty in the tragic death of another teen has been given an interesting sentence: 10 years of church attendance in exchange for not heading to prison. The defendant, Tyler Alred, 17, is not fighting a judge’s mandate, as his lawyer deems the decision both fair and appropriate.

“My client goes to church every Sunday,” attorney Donn Baker told Tulsa World. “That isn’t going to be a problem for him. We certainly want the probation for him.”

Alred, who was convicted of DUI manslaughter, crashed into a tree last year, an incident that led to the tragic death of his passenger and friend. Tulsa World has more:

The defendant, Tyler Alred, 17, was behind the wheel of a Chevrolet pickup about 4 a.m. Dec. 3 when he crashed into a tree on a county road east of Muskogee. His friend and passenger John Luke Dum, 16, of Muskogee died at the scene.

Alred, a high school and welding school student, admitted to Oklahoma Highway Patrol troopers that he had been drinking, records show.

Although not legally drunk – he was given two breath tests, which, at 0.06 and 0.07, fell below the legal 0.08 blood-alcohol threshold for legal drunkenness – he was underage and, as a result, considered to be driving under the influence of alcohol.

Tyler Alred Convicted of DUI Manslaughter, Sentenced to Church Attendance

Tyler Alred (Photo Credit: Tulsa World)

In August, Alred pleaded guilty to manslaughter as a youthful offender and Muskogee County District Judge Mike Norman implemented the intriguing church-based penalty. The district attorney’s office will monitor the teen’s attendance to be sure that he complies.

Some experts have contended that mandating church attendance creates a separation of church and state issue. In addition to going to church, Alred will need to wear an ankle bracelet to monitor his alcohol intake, speak at events about the negative results of drinking and driving, finish high school and go for counseling. Additionally, he will undergo drug tests.

(H/T: Tulsa World)

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (156)

holy ghostbuster
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:16pm
The story is a tragedy for those killed and junior should be punished to the maximum extent of the law. However, I am getting tired of these god-complex judges who think they can impose any sentence they wish. Every violation has a statutory penalty associated with it and does not allow judges to make **** up as they go along. Like it or not, the defendant still has a 1st Amendment right to freedom of or from religion. The judge is clearly over stepping his authority. How can anyone say that the judge is not “establishing” a state religion, when he is imposing religion as a sentence on the kid. Also, if the kid already goes to church every Sunday, then what is the punishment? Strange on so many levels. I suppose for some, like myself, going to church would be a punishment. It’s ironic when you think about it…Your punishment for the crime is to attend church. Wow.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- antann
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:54pm
  Teenage drinking is a huge problem in this country. The punishment fits the crime. He must educate others about what his stupidity cause. Every time he has to tell others of the consequences of killing a friend I’m sure the weight of his irresponsibility will hit him. He will be monitored to make sure he doesn’t live in a way that will harm others.
  
  The order to continue to go to church was the judge’s mercy not part of the punishment. The young man already goes, but his guilt could easily cause him to pull away from others isolating himself. Since he is already a believer he will have to confront his need for forgiveness. He will have to confront his need to make restitution and eventually forgive himself. He will have a place to learn to live with his very real guilt.
  
  Report this comment
- wvernon1981
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:56pm
  Why should he be punished with the maximum allowable sentence?
  
  Report this comment
- RabidPatriot
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 3:38pm
  If he was smart, he would go online and get a clergy certificate and start his own church. Have his friends join. What a dumb sentence.
  
  Report this comment
- longbow719
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 3:58pm
  I think I would almost rather go to jail than that!
  
  Report this comment
- lilyq
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 5:52pm
  It is freedom of religion, not from. Of.
  
  Report this comment
- Marine25
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 7:39pm
  @lilyq
  It is neither. It is the freedom from having the government keep out of religion. Out of the PUBLIC square, and in this case, it should be kept out of the court room.
  Jefferson agrees, by the way: “[N]o man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.”
  
  Report this comment
- Bumpintheroad
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 7:57pm
  and how about the liberal judge who said the guy in bear muhamed suit deserved to get beat up? Bet you don’t have a problem with that one.
  
  Report this comment
- tootsie roll
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 8:51pm
  GIVE THE BOY A CHANCE.
  Jesus asked let you without sin throw the first stone.
  
  Report this comment
- sonseeker
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 9:22pm
  Kind of a buffoon aren’t you? If you actually read the Constitution you would see that the Federal government (congress) is to make no laws regarding religions. The states can do what they want.
  
  Report this comment
- bumpkin
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 10:22pm
  Oh, Holy…! Puleeze! Get over it! This is a kid who was NOT legally drunk, and a harsher sentence would not be appropriate nor bring his BFF back. The kid took the life of his BFF, which i am sure is absolute torture. The sentence does not decree that he BELIEVE or ACT upon anything he sees or hears at said Church. The judge did NOT decree that the kid follow any particular religious practices, nor to even repeat anything he learned or heard there at said Church. Its likely he can even go to a different church every Sunday if he wants to. All he has to do is Walk in, Sit Down and then Leave after the service is completed. In fact, he will be much less busy than if he’d been sentenced to community service. Stop whining, Nobody is trying to make you acknowledge GOD. He doesn’t even have to wear a burqa! C’MON! I expect that separation of Church and State is not exactly in the Constitution, nor in our Declaration. Indeed, it’s the perfect place for this young man to learn the value of life, and to learn the fact that one’s personal values are EXACTLY the thing that controls our very behaviors and attitudes in life. I am absolutely certain that church will not hurt this boy, so you can calm your fit now. If you’re howling to the moon about having to go into a building and sit down for a spell, – a building, I might add, that is likely one of the very most safe places for the kid, I cant imagine how you’d howl if we had a POTUS who overstepped our Constituti
  
  Report this comment
- OhImSoEnlightenedBlahBlahBlah
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:52pm
  Hey Marine25, it most definitely IS “OF” and not from. Please cite your source of those words by Jefferson.
  
  Report this comment
- child of God
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 12:36am
  This is one time I agree with you….going to church should not be used as a punishment. It should be a personal choice.
  
  Report this comment
- SoNick
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 8:25am
  lilyq,
  I’m so sick and tired of this empty reply “it’s freedom of not freedom from”. What a stupid, empty comment. Are you implying that it is mandatory to have a religion? Then you do not understand the First Amendment.
  
  Report this comment
- conserve
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 10:24am
  The judge did not specify what church just to church. That is how it is Not establishing a religion. If you had at least two working brain cells it would be clear to you. Also if the kid did not wish to go to church he could go to prison. Lots of options.
  
  Report this comment
- wdcraftr
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 11:19am
  The Judge did not impose mandatory church as you say, as the only punishment. He can still accept the punishment of the Law and go to jail. His freedom is not imposed upon.
  
  Report this comment
- VanceUppercut
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 11:44am
  @holy ghostbuster
  
  There’s also the problem of judged forcing people to go to AA, where they have to acknowledge a “higher power”. I hope someday soon someone will really fight back on this. Unfortunately it almost always is connected to a drunk driving offense, and it’s hard for a drunk driver to get sympathy from anyone.
  
  Report this comment
- IdahoBlaze
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 4:16pm
  @Marine
  Normally I don’t mess with marines…if you are/were in the service, thank you for your service to our great Nation. Now, I have to take issue with your quote.
  
  1. Your quote is from the Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom. You can see the full text here: http://www.heritage.org/initiatives/first-principles/primary-sources/virginia-act-establishing-religious-freedom. It is about “the efforts of the new republican government in Virginia to disestablish the Anglican Church as the official state religion and aggressively protect freedom of religion.”
  
  2. The Constitution (which you swore to uphold and defend) definitely states OF religion. Even the above statement written by Jefferson himself states “Freedom OF Religion.” That gives us (i.e. We The People) the Right to go to church, not go to church, and/or go to any church we want to. It’s that simple.
  
  In this criminal case…this young man needs help getting back on the ‘straight n narrow’. Since he ALREADY goes to church, maybe, JUST MAYBE, making sure he goes on a regular basis and hopefully gets counseling from his Pastor(s) and make friends who can help support him on his journey to move through his grief, and start his life over again, will be a GOOD THING. Either way, the judgment is done, we should hope (and pray, if you choose) that this young man can do something positive with his life. I think the public speaking is a great start, as well.
  
  Report this comment
- jumpinjakeflash
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 5:54pm
  HG, I see your point, if this were his only punishment. But it is only a fraction of the teen’s punishment, and probably was not arranged in the order given in the article (the article connotes that church attendance was primary). I think, also, that if said teen were not already attending church, the judge would not have mentioned this in his judgement. Although I am one who is pro-religion, I also would have had a problem with mandating church attendance. But in this case, along with the other punishments, I think it was fitting.
  
  If the teen had been legally drunk, I think the judge would have come down on the young man harder and given him jail time. But the amount of alcohol he had in his system was a trace amount and probably had little effect on his driving (the law reflects what experts agree is the point of impairment regarding alcohol).
  
  Report this comment
- Marine25
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 9:07pm
  @Idaho
  Thanks for the reply. Yes, the preposition is ‘of’ and not from. Yet the clause is not referring to freedom of or freedom from, but ‘establishment of’. The key word choice here is not the selection of prepositions, but the exclusion of articles, namely the exclusion of the article ‘a’ preceding the word religion. The establishment clause, by referring to the establishment of religion and not the establishment of a religion carves a far wider freedom than many conservatives like Buckley or Friedman (real conservatives that both recognized this very point) would like. The SC spoke clearly on this matter in Lemon v. Kurtzman, declaring that a government action was not establishment if:
  1.the statute (or practice) has a secular purpose;
  2.its principal or primary effect neither advances nor inhibits religion; and
  3.it does not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.
  I appreciate your thoughtful response. Yes, I am a Marine, and a former Special Agent of the Diplomatic Security Service. I am a professor now. On this site I have been demoted to RINO and socialist, traitor and troll. The reactionaries and tea-partiers have driven me from the party. I come here occasionally to try and deduce what has hijacked conservatism, and to see if there is anyone left with whom to have reasoned exchanges. Thanks for that.
  
  Report this comment
- pymgip
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 9:45pm
  It was not punishment; it was forgiveness requested by the dead boys parents. Why are their so many atheists on this web site demanding long jail time for this kid. He belongs in AA, not jail or church.
  
  Report this comment
- Oldphoto678
  Posted on November 18, 2012 at 9:16am
  If I were him I’d join a mosque.
  
  Report this comment
- MichiganFreedom
  Posted on November 19, 2012 at 3:41am
  It was a deal the kid freely, and gladly, I’m sure, accepted. Who the hell are you to say it’s inappropriate? You “liberal” jackasses who decide that if it’s not for you it’s nor for anyone make me sick!
  
  Report this comment
- Thinkingman777
  Posted on November 20, 2012 at 2:27pm
  Does that include the judge in Colordo that let a convicted murderer go free because he learned the jury, during their deliberations, had discussed what the Bible says about capital punishment? Atheists and secularists seem to think that our U.S. Constitution actually says there must be a “wall of separation between Church and State.” The First Amendment was not written to keep the church and any Christian influence out of public life. It was written to prevent government from imposing its will on those who care to practice their faith publicly or otherwise.
  
  Report this comment
- Goldstardad1
  Posted on November 21, 2012 at 7:07am
  @sonseeker.
  If our rights are inherit and unalienable , then even the states can not take them away. They did not give them to us. Something to think about.
  
  Report this comment
BigBadBud
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 1:52pm
Now THAT’S thinking outside the box judge. Good Call, he’ll learn much more positive things in church then he ever could in prison. Oh course the ACLU whine bags will be out in force about this, but I think it’ll turn out for the best.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- SacredHonor1776
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:46pm
  What if the church of his choice is a liberal ‘social justice’ church?
  
  Report this comment
- WhiteFang
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 4:13pm
  I hope and pray that this young man can choose the right faith/church to follow.
  
  There are thousands of conflicting ideas and teachings out there that will only confuse, and lead to worshipping God in falsehood instead of with accurate knowledge. – John 17:3
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 8:32pm
  Yup, he’ll learn in church that all people are born worthy of an eternal torture and that by only accepting a human sacrifice can they hope to avoid said torture.
  
  Are those the “good” things you speak of that he’ll learn?
  
  Report this comment
- WhiteFang
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 9:27pm
  ModerationIsBest,
  
  You think you are so very clever, don’t you?
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 10:11pm
  @WHITEFANG
  
  Sorry friend but I didn’t see you refute anything I said.
  
  If that’s your viewpoint of the human race, that’s fine but please don’t call it “moral” or “good” to teach others that as well.
  
  I tend to hope the best of people.
  
  I don’t think anyone is born evil, or worthy of an eternal torture. I don’t think anybody is going to get punished FOREVER for disagreeing with me or my viewpoints on life.
  
  Even if I accept your premise of being born worthy of an eternal torture, I then wouldn’t consider it “moral” or “just” to have someone else die in my place.
  
  The only moral action would be to fight against the sacrifice of a human and say, “no, I don’t want this. Stop this madness.”
  
  Report this comment
- WhiteFang
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 12:09am
  ModerationIsBest,
  
  I’m sorry but I have no idea what you are talking about. Did you actually read my original comment? Your reply has nothing to do with what I said. Are you just wanting to argue, or what?
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 1:10am
  Your original commit was too vague to understand.
  
  Report this comment
- The_Knower
  Posted on November 18, 2012 at 12:21am
  I agree with Moderation, WhiteFang. Your statements are too vague to work with outside the confines of refuting your previous statements over again in the hopes of you replying with something more… I don’t know, understandable? Just talk with people more. You’ll get this “conversation” thing down in no time.
  
  Report this comment
- Old Truckers
  Posted on November 18, 2012 at 9:31am
  Moderation and Knower,
  
  You guys are saying you don’t understand what whitefang is saying?
  
  I do not understand why you do not understand his message. He said he hopes the boy chooses a true faith, not a false, misleading one. Then he encourages reading John 17:3 which seems clear enough to this old trucker.
  
  Report this comment
- L.B.Stephens
  Posted on November 18, 2012 at 10:08am
  old truckers,
  
  Before I signed up to comment on the Blaze, I always considered WhiteFang’s comments to be accurate and thought provoking. I always learn something from his post’s. Those who criticise him are (maybe) too use to reading comic books and can not understand matters or ideas that require analysis or thought. To choose the “right” faith is to be taken very seriously, otherwise the boy would be wasting his time worshipping God in a wrong way.
  
  I clearly understood what whitefang said.
  
  Report this comment
- WhiteFang
  Posted on November 18, 2012 at 10:22am
  The_Knower,
  
  Thank you, I will try to do better, and I do appreciate your critique.
  I am aware of my tendency to be short in my statements and not explaining my thoughts fully. I will try to improve.
  
  Report this comment
G.E.R
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 1:34pm
This is a horrible and tragic story, the kind that destroys lives, made even worse by the blatant violation of church/state separation and an interjection of a religious agenda into a scenario which demands real-world solutions.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- SquidVetOhio
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:04pm
  What real world solution would that be, a 12 step program? The church/state separation only exists in the minds of liberals because it can’t be found in the Constitution and you guys know it. It was invented by a God-hating bigot Supreme Court Justice. Plus, the defendant isn’t objecting to his sentence. That must really torque you off eh?
  
  Report this comment
- U4eeeahhh
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:30pm
  Squid Vet, A prohibition against murder and a minimum wage are also two things not mentioned in the constitution or bill of rights. So what. The Separation of Church and State is a doctrine we all have come to understand and most accept and it is also interpreted to include a freedom from religion too.
  
  Report this comment
- rickc34
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:42pm
  I guess the God hating liberals would rather this kid go to jail. The kid is not complaining and has agreed to his sentence. It would probably do him more good than getting raped in prison by some God hating sodomite.
  
  Report this comment
- SacredHonor1776
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:48pm
  What if he is going to a liberal church?
  
  Report this comment
- antann
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 3:04pm
  SACREDHONOR1776, if he goes to a liberal church then he still learns about forgiveness. They will substitute social justice for salvation, and he will be directed toward doing community service.
  
  The liberal church will let him know if his girlfriend gets pregnant that the unborn baby doesn’t carry the same weight as his dead friend so abortion is on the table as a solution. No need to worry about punishment with unwanted pregnancies.
  
  Report this comment
- SacredHonor1776
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 4:30pm
  What ever happened to Juvenile Hall, or military school?
  
  Report this comment
- SacredHonor1776
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 5:00pm
  Actually I’m somewhat torn on this. On one hand, ya I think the kid was too young to be thrown into an adult prison. Juvenile law is very different than laws for adults. Also it matters, “If “he was showing remorse for what he did, and it was his first offense..If this was his second time, however, throw the book at him….
  
  On the other hand, there is a questional issue on equal justice under the law. What if this kid had been an athiest, or under some other religion? Obviously the judge could not order someone of another religion or non-religion to ‘attend church’. Is there an equal punishment that could be offered to someone who does not go to church, so that each person is offered similar and equal fair punishment? Law must avoid ‘special treatment’ given to one part of society, while denying it to other parts of society…
  
  Is such a ‘punishment’ even binding, or is more of a joke (a wink and a nod by the judge to the kid, that he needs to change his life around)? It would require parents to enforce it, but that really could only occur until he turns eighteen. Is he or his parents being monitored to see if he is keeping up with his punishment? What happens if they fail to abide by it? Does this fall into collective punishment territory?
  
  Perhaps community service, would be an option. But that kind of punishment should be enforced on any child in equal measure, from any religion or non belief…
  
  Report this comment
- SacredHonor1776
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 5:07pm
  I guess there also used to be the whole “attend driving school’, ‘attend AA meetings’, and/or councelor ‘alternative’ punishments issued for this kind of thing in the past…
  
  Report this comment
dont_drive_slow_in_the_left_lane_obliviot
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 1:08pm
betchya a case of coors his only regret is the crimp in his lifestyle. he’ll just zone out at church and play with this smartphone like everybody else. unlikely he will learn anything except don’t get caught next time.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- wvernon1981
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:58pm
  Aren’t you arrogantly presumptuous?
  
  Report this comment
- Eastinfection
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 7:24am
  If i were him i’d start going to the “Church of Beer”…. saving souls 12ozs at a time!
  
  http://thechurchofbeer.com/
  
  Report this comment
Truth4SureNuff
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 1:02pm
If the judge had sentenced him to prison, he would have been abused by less than humans.
Judge you did the right thing.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- holy ghostbuster
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:17pm
  Now he gets to be abused by the clergy. Hope it wasn’t a Catholic church.
  
  Report this comment
- The Jewish Avenger
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 11:18am
  Actually Universialist Church is proven to be filled with pedophiiles… pedorats or whatever we call homosexual boy rapists these days.
  
  4% of all priests have been ACCUSED. And if you think that the accusations are proof enough…
  
  What does that say about Michael Jackson?
  
  .. what too racist?
  
  Personally. I liked him when he was black.
  He wasnt old enough to make stupid choices yet.
  
  (Converted to Islam because he was upset that the JW criticized his Thriller album.)
  .
  
  Report this comment
- Keatonc333
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 2:21pm
  sentencing a murdered to church is the right thing?
  
  Report this comment
- Oldphoto678
  Posted on November 18, 2012 at 9:21am
  If he was black he would be in prison.
  
  Report this comment
702TruthSeeker
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:58pm
see, just another reason to ban cars!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- antann
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 3:14pm
  Cars don’t kill. Fuel kills! Ban the fuel that propels them! Time for Agenda 21 bicycles.
  
  Report this comment
Midwest Blonde
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:55pm
If this kid goes to jail, he will most likely learn more bad (criminal) behavior and will likely come out worse. Church seems like a good choice, along with monitoring. He will have to live with the death of his friend (due to a stupid choice) for the rest of his life. That’s punishment.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 8:35pm
  Instead of sentencing him to jail, or to church, the judge should sentence him to read a different book once a week.
  
  Look into science, philosophy, religion, fiction, non fiction.
  
  That’s the way you help a child.
  
  Report this comment
Clownzilla
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:47pm
I think the kid would rather go to church than go to jail. Those against this sentence need to be in the shoes of this kid.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Individualism
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:44pm
stupid drunk, hope big bubba encourages you to never do that stupid crap again. i am sick of dodging these idiots on the road. It should be considered murder if hit and attempted murder if nobody hit. I like driving at night, its very safe and peaceful normally, but sometimes these idiots can take the peace away from doing so.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Fearless Flyers
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:07pm
I’ve seen these type of sentences before. It’s likely the suggestion of Church Attendance was made on the part of the Defence Lawyer during the Sentencing Hearing. These type of sentences are generally limited to Juvinile Courts where creative alternatives are seen as a way to allow juviniles to avoid the criminal influence of jail.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- toiletclogga
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:29pm
  I don’t believe the “sentence” was meant to be a punishment. His church is likely a source of support for him, and it benefits him as he is likely in a living hell right now. His friend is dead, and he caused it. In all liklihood, his pastor was probably instrumental in this agreement, and he is probably a good kid who did something very regretable. Go I, but for the grace of God!
  
  Report this comment
- everydaywoman
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 1:04pm
  toiletclogga:
  
  Agreed. As a Christian myself, I don’t believe in forcing anyone to attend church but in this case – where the boy agreed to it – I don’t see the problem. I do, however, pray (as I’m sure you do) that this kid subjects himself more to the grace and mercy of God and God’s forgiveness than to guilt and the judgment and condemnation of others (as well as himself). I pray he and both families will find the healing they all so desperately need.
  
  Report this comment
- toiletclogga
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 1:30pm
  Perfectly stated Everydaywoman!
  
  Report this comment
- holy ghostbuster
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:20pm
  They used to sentence delinquents to the military. Since the military has raised its standards and no longer accepts criminals, they’re now sentencing them to church, which obviously has lower standards.
  
  Report this comment
- conserve
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 10:40am
  HOLY GHOSTBUSTER
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:20pm
  They used to sentence delinquents to the military. Since the military has raised its standards and no longer accepts criminals, they’re now sentencing them to church, which obviously has lower standards
  
  yes they do the church would even accept some one as low as you.
  
  Report this comment
schroeder123
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:06pm
Good.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
PIGSWILLNEVERFLY
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:00pm
If all children were taught the meaning of the gospel Romans from beginning to end and re read it every month it would serve to eliminate many practical moral problems that are plaguing individuals relating to society. Romans reaches inside the individual and teaches communion with the Holy Spirit the “gift” and guarantee of life eternal.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- DeavonReye
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:46pm
  And yet, how many christian teens ARE abusing alcohol and driving? Having “pre-marital sex”? The same kids who HAVE read the book of Romans. What book you read makes little difference. A person must take it upon themselves to change their behavior. The problem is, . . . many things [such as drinking and sex] ARE fun, and people will be people, getting caught up in it . . . either because they have a group of friends there, or someone they’re really attracted to. Things get out of hand. That is the result of brain chemicals doing their thing.
  
  When I stop doing potentially destructive activities [a rare occurance at that], I do so for my own benefit. Not out of fear of celestial punishment. I stop because it is the right thing to do.
  
  Report this comment
- SquidVetOhio
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:18pm
  @DEAVONRYE
  
  Some. But, substantially less than those kids that have not read Romans. I guarantee you that. If you can find a teenager who has actually read the entire book of Romans, I’d be fairly confident they probably don’t have a drinking problem.
  
  P.S. Christians don’t claim to be sinless. Just the opposite. We only claim to be forgiven and try to live our life by trying not to willfully sin as best we can out of our love for God.
  
  It’s atheists who claim sinlessness as they don’t believe in sin in the first place.
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:59pm
  And I hope that the majority continue to keep from destructive behaviors. I have seen, first hand, those who are very good christians, but “sinned” because they wanted whatever to happen.
  
  I don’t call them “sin”. I call them something like “counter-productive”. But whatever you wish to call it, . . . it is up to the person to exhibit self control. It isn’t an easy thing to do, for sure, but it will make for a healthier society.
  
  Report this comment
truthbased
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:58am
everyone is complaining about what church it is. I don’t care as all long as he is not restricted to one church and can change to another church

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Chromo200
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:55am
Oh the atheists will be filling briefs.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
justangry
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:44am
Would anyone be pissed if attended a Muslim church for 10 years?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- hillbillyinny
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:53am
  @ JUSTANGRY
  
  Muslims don’t have churches–they have Mosques.
  
  And your comments here on The BLAZE show that you wouldn’t last long as a Muslim, you would quickly be convinced to Martyr yourself. You wouldn’t make it ten years but you’d have a really warm place to think about your actions for all of eternity. . .
  
  Report this comment
- fdraiden
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:54am
  Huh?
  
  Report this comment
- justangry
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:00pm
  I don’t care what they call it. And who’d want to last in a theocracy anyway?
  
  Report this comment
- jefftavolieri
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:22pm
  Don’t try to use logic on a fundamentalist christian…
  
  Report this comment
- SquidVetOhio
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:05pm
  “No, in fact I would be pleased.”
  
  - Jesus Christ
  
  Report this comment
- SquidVetOhio
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:07pm
  “Don’t try to use logic on a fundamentalist christian…”
  
  Or try to find anything redeemable from atheists.
  
  Report this comment
- justangry
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 3:41pm
  Atheism doesn’t make someone a bad person anymore than being a Christians makes one a good person.
  
  Report this comment
DeavonReye
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:37am
I’m torn between finding it funny that a judge would sentence him to “10 years of church” as punishment for his crime [punishment being the key word], . . . and appall at the slap in the face of justice. One of the most absurd “rulings” from a justice who should step down from the bench.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:51am
  I’d have to agree. Freedom of conscious shall not be violated. The kid may attend church now, but what if he decides he doesn’t believe 4 years down the road? At that point, he’d be being forced to attend a church he didn’t subscribe to, by mandate of the state.
  
  And I’d like to also observe that it’s mentioned that he already attends church every Sunday. That didn’t stop him from drunk driving and killing innocent people. How will more of the same act as a societal prophylactic and prevent him from doing the same in the future?
  
  Report this comment
- fdraiden
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:52am
  I dont suppose you’ve heard the biblical phrase “he who is without sin cast the first stone”? I dont suppose you’ve ever drank and drove? I have many times but never got caught. As another saying goes,”but for the grace of God go I”.
  
  Report this comment
- The_Pointy_End
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:06pm
  I see your point…..I thought about it a bit, but don’t agree. Good kids do stupid things, I know I did as a kid. I didn’t kill anyone but some of the stupid things I/we did could have turned out differently. This kid unintentionally killed his friend. This is going to be a lot of guilt to carry for the rest of his life. Who better than the church to teach this kid forgiveness, and how not to repeat mistakes. I also noticed the judge also sentenced this kid to complete high school with safe guards to make sure he does not repeat his alcohol use. This judge saw a good kid that made a bad choice. This judge is more interested in turning the kid’s life and soul around rather than sending it further down the road of destruction. One teen’s life is already gone, what does it accomplish (other than revenge) to take away another life by sentencing the teen to life in jail. This teen did not murder, nor is he a danger, he made a mistake that cost his friend his life, and this will haunt him for the rest of his life. I think that is punishment enough.
  
  Report this comment
- INTHEBROTHERHOOD
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:53pm
  at devon……sir this is the first post youve written that i dont fuly agree with you on. the blood/alcohol leval was below legal limit. church is the least of his sentence, the lectures, drug testing, ankle bracelet, probation etc is the real sentence. He already attends church. the judge was proper in his decision. he pleaded guilty. he was not tried as an adult.
  
  Report this comment
- INTHEBROTHERHOOD
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:59pm
  at ghost…..he was not drunk driving…..by legal definition..he was underage….and should he not attend, he would serve his suspended prison sentence in prison, not be mandated to another church violation of probation
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 1:10pm
  I see your point. It is true that he was within the legal limit. One thing is certain. IF his level of intoxication was the cause of the accident, his true punishment will be living with the loss of his friend. Perhaps that, alone, will cause him to act correctly in the future. It would with me.
  
  Report this comment
TeresaJ
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:34am
Finally our government is starting to make sense.

The boy wasn’t forced; he agreed to this sentence in echange for not going to prison. Prison is useless for changing anyone’s life. This boy is 17 and just starting out. This kind of conviction will give him the best possible chance to turn his life around.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Remember_Benghazi
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:31am
This is truly the most hilarious sentence in US history. If it meant skipping out on doing hard time, you could get me to worship the sun. At the same time I’d be praising the idiot that deemed this justice. Enjoy your freedom, kid. You deserve it. Kick back with your iphone in that congregation and enjoy the crazy.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Wool-Free Vision
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:28am
Someone should remind this judge that in Muskogee white lightnin’s still the biggest thrill of all.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
FreeUsAll
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:17am
Forcing a person to act virtuous does not instill virtue. Further, it’s immoral to use force against anyone, even if you are forcing them to act morally. He should be responsible for his actions, but I am not sure that this is the way to go about it.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- SquidVetOhio
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 2:12pm
  “Further, it’s immoral to use force against anyone, even if you are forcing them to act morally.”
  
  Then why do we have laws, pray tell? Isn’t that exactly what laws are for? Forcing people to act morally under penalty of violence and/or imprisonment? Why is it against the law to rape, murder, steal, etc? BECAUSE IT IS IMMORAL. Good grief…..
  
  Report this comment
The_Cabrito_Goat
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:16am
You can chain him to the pews, but I still wouldn’t trust this boy until he’s met his punishment.

Manslaughter is a wanton disregard for human life. I don’t think I can worship right next to a person like that. But, alas, Jesus said to embrace the sinner..

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- wvernon1981
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:42am
  He had two beers and drove. Tell me you haven’t done that.
  
  Report this comment
watashbuddyfriend
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:13am
Now, the Judge’s decision/ruling did not go far enough! The Judge should have applied punishment to his Parents, and his peers, because they were the reason the 17-yo went astray!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 12:14pm
  Fortunately, this country traditionally hasn’t practiced the concept of collective guilt. The communists, on the other hand, were notorious for punishing the children and grandparents of those children, because the father/son owned a business. Just think, you just endorsed that model.
  
  Report this comment
hauschild
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 10:55am
Instead of 10 years of church where 75% of the clergy are progressives, why not a solid year of intense Constitutional study? Will do a helluva lot more for the benefit of this country than church.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- watashbuddyfriend
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 11:10am
  @hauschild
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 10:55am
  
  “Instead of 10 years of church where 75% of the clergy are progressives, why not a solid year of intense Constitutional study? Will do a helluva lot more for the benefit of this country than church.”
  
  Amen, and I say Amen! And, I am out of the Southern Baptist ranks!
  
  Report this comment
Small World
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 10:44am
Oh no what about separation of church & state ??? Where’s the ACLU????

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Cavallo
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 10:54am
  I believe the judicial system has a lot more leeway. Hence why laws are being passed to prevent Judges from using foreign or religious law to make decisions.
  
  Report this comment
sizzlinsexybeckster
Posted on November 16, 2012 at 10:41am
And where is this person going to church at? With Obama’s old pastor? Or how about the new Golden Dawn Nazi “church”??? This is really a lame judicial decision.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- toiletclogga
  Posted on November 16, 2012 at 10:56am
  How about accepting he’s going to church where he is being fed the word of God. The poor kid must be going through hell accepting that his actions led to his friend’s death. I’d rather have a good kid get sentenced to this type of punishment before being sent to prison. If you look into this matter further, you’ll probably see that he’s never been in trouble. This is true rehabilitation. He’s already had enough punishment.
  
  Report this comment
- VanceUppercut
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 11:45am
  @toiletclogga
  
  This “poor kid” just killed someone, and now he is going to get out of jail just by going to church and and pretending to give a crap.
  
  Report this comment
- ardypenn
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 4:53pm
  How hard is it to look up churches in Muskogee? :-P
  
  Report this comment
- toiletclogga
  Posted on November 17, 2012 at 5:14pm
  @Vanceuppercut–He didn’t kill anyone. His actions lead to the death of his friend. Vehicular manslaughter is much different than murder. Have some compassion you *****!
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.