I'm no fan of organized religion but also believe that anyone else can believe whatever they want (as long as they're not hurting anyone). I'm annoyed by outreach (since I've interrogated my own belief system) but don't begrudge anyone their freedom of speech. By its very nature free speech means the potential of hearing things you find offensive.

But I digress, one's religion is one's own business and the government should never be involved, either endorsing or suppressing. That's why I find offputting the story of a judge sentencing a drunk driver--involved in a fatal crash--to church. From KOCO in Oklahoma City:

An Oklahoma teen convicted of manslaughter won't get jail time instead a judge sentenced him to go to church.

Tyler Allred was 17-years-old when prosecutors say he drove while intoxicated and killed his passenger, a 16-year-old friend.

A judge presiding over Allred's case sentenced him to attend church every Sunday for the next 10 years. In addition to church attendance Allred must graduate from high school and take drug and alcohol test for the next year.

The teen's attorney does not plan to challenge the sentence.

While the teen's attorney doesn't plan to appeal, I fully expect a group like the Madison-based Freedom From Religion foundation to get involved in this case. It's fairly light for the driver, who isn't serving hard time or paying any massive fines for his transgression. But is sitting bored in the pews during a dry sermon for 52 hours a year providing justice? I think not. 

Of course the penal system in our nation is irrevocably broken as well, as we put away criminals only to radicalize and harden them. So maybe this will work. But I still dislike the idea that a judge can mandate a person support any religion--it's a major overreach for any governmental agent.