This is news in the New York Times of all places, and adds on to some other atheists vs. the government news we’ve had lately concerning a 10 commandments monument on city property in Fargo.

The complaint was brought Tuesday in a federal court in North Dakota by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, acting on behalf of three of the state’s taxpayers. It is the most recent in a spate of legal challenges to public financing of religion-based programs.

The foundation, a group of atheists and agnostics, argues that the state’s Division of Juvenile Services and the Ward County Social Services Department should stop committing children with behavioral and emotional problems to the Dakota Boys and Girls Ranch, which, according to the ranch’s Web site, helps “children and families succeed in the name of Christ.” The ranch — actually an association that provides a variety of residential and day programs around the state — and directors of the two government agencies are named as defendants.

The complaint says that “children are disciplined for refusing to participate in the spiritual aspects” of their therapy and that objectionable behavior is deemed a “corruption in the eyes of Jesus Christ.”

“This is much more troubling than other cases,” said Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the foundation, “because it is a captive audience and a vulnerable population that is unabashedly being indoctrinated in Christianity. They are being committed by the county or the state without their consent.”

The name of the group, Freedom From Religion, is more than a little obnoxious.  The constitution guarantees the freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.  Far too many people, including these busybody atheist groups who don’t seem to have anything better to do with their time than get the vapors over even the smallest hint of religion in government, misunderstand this.  As long as, in any given issue, the government is not a) establishing a religion or favoring one over the others or b) preventing the free practice of religion by citizens there is nothing unconstitutional about religion in government.

If the state wants to contract with a religious outfit as an option for helping troubled teens that’s perfectly acceptable.

But all that aside, I do think this lawsuit may have a bit of merit.  I’m not familiar enough with with out juvenile justice system to know for sure, but I believe the Boys Ranch may be one of the only options courts/social workers have for helping troubled teens.  And if that’s true, the state needs to find a second outfit to provide secular care.  Because while religion isn’t necessarily a bad thing (even this atheist sees some benefits to spiritual teachings, even if only for the moral and ethics lessons), teens going through the juvenile justice process should have a secular alternative available.  Because like it or not, not everyone in our population is Christian, or even religious.

Perhaps there is a secular alternative to the Dakota Boy’s Ranch here in the state (or maybe the Boy’s Ranch is capable of providing a secular program), and if that’s true I doubt this lawsuit has any merit.

(via Bismarck Dems)