> > My question is more fundamental -- do you *really* think > > it's a good idea to present meditation as something that > > people are SENTENCED TO? > > > > I mean really...think this through... > > As part of a parole or equivalent agreement? Sure, as long > as it is voluntary and there is a compliance component of > some kind. If the sentence is mandatory, then its silly. > You can't prove that someone is meditating anyway, unless > you hook them up to machines constantly.
Would you consider making it mandatory if there *was* a simple way to prove whether they were meditating or not, and thus force compliance?
