Agreence for Seperation of Church and State

    In the blog titled, Manufacturing Texas, Daniel published a post concerning the separation of church and state. In the the post, Daniel writes about an article, "Texas a Battleground for Church and State Issues." In the article it talks about how this country was founded as a Christian Nation and how they wish to assert faith into government, schools, and town meetings. I for one agree with Daniel that this should not be the case because it is stated in the Constitution that there will be a separation of church and state. Daniel goes on to talk about politicians and how sometimes, maybe all of the time, base their policies based on their religious believes. This makes me think of the controversial matter of abortion. I think that Republicans take in their religious believes into consideration to much on this issue. They think that abortion is wrong because you are destroying a human life that is created by God, but where is the separation of church and state? If there are people out there that want to get an abortion, they should be able to because it is their own personal decision and their life. The Government should not be able to dictate some one's life based on the grounds of religion. Like what Daniel said, "if people feel so strong about living in a religious country that is founded on and whose laws are based off religion, they should think of relocating to Iran, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan which are all countries who enforce laws based off the religion of the majority. The point of the first amendment was that people are able to practice whatever belief that they would like and the state would not take sides nor persecute those that are in the minority."

A Bill for the Wrongfully Convicted

    State Rep. Harold Dutton has filed a bill that aims to prevent wrongful death sentences in cases that involve unreliable testimony from alleged accomplices or jailhouse snitches who receive a reward for implicating someone. HB 189, as he is calling it, would be a bill that would help the accused against individuals seeking awards such as, lesser prison sentences or even immunity. According to the article, Bill Would Restrict Informant Testimony in Death Cases in The Texas Tribune, "informants played a major role in more than 45 percent of overturned death sentences nationwide." The 45 percent does not mean that they were wrongly convicted, but it could account for some who were. The article states that, "under HB 189, prosecutors in death penalty cases would be unable to use testimony from informants or from alleged accomplices of the defendant if the evidence were obtained in exchange for immunity, leniency or any other special treatment. The measure would also make testimony from cellmates of the defendant inadmissible unless the conversation was recorded."
    This would be a great bill if it were passed. I have seen and heard about people spending years and even decades behind bars because of wrongful convictions and it is tremendously sad. People who are wrongfully convicted lose their lives and their reputations and may never regain stability if they do end up released from prison. Criminal informants have a really strong incentive to lie and therefore their testimony is most likely to be completely fabricated. I am not sure why a bill like this has not been already in place but according to Jeff Blackburn, the government relies on criminal testimony when they "really need to convict somebody and they really don’t have the evidence." I don't know about everybody else but I do not think that is considered justice. For those who will be charged with a crime with the death penalty attached, hope for this bill to be passed.