Looks like they’re on the verge of getting their own cells at this point.
"Bloated, self-important, delusional twat"was the original text, but it didn’t scan as well.
Yeah, I say once you’re an elected official, no one gets to call you a little girl or little boy except your parents and grandparents.
Thanks, I would have to agree finding a reasonable way to accommodate the person in this situation should be fairly simple. I know that Muslims are prohibited from drinking alcohol, I wasn’t aware there is a prohibition against serving it. However, the last sentence of my post was really more the heart of what I was curious about. Certainly it isn’t possible to accommodate every religiously based restriction in the work place. I gather from what you are saying that the key is what the law considers reasonable. Still seems like the potential to be very messy.
Also, both sides of my family are Baptist. I was always taught drinking alcohol was prohibited. In fact, I recall a huge stink arising when one of the deacons of our church began selling alcohol in his convenience store. And some years back one of my first jobs was waiting tables. My mom was very upset about the fact I had to serve drinks. But I realize there is more variability on that among different types of Baptists.
Gee, thanks for the snark but I did read the article. Yeah, the co-worker is a bigoted ass. I was curious to what extent religious beliefs would be acceptable in excusing a worker from performing their job duties, not just as it applies in this case or to adherents of Islam, but in a general way.
Baptists are a strongly “congregational” church, meaning each individual church is extremely independent. The big conventions like the SBC, ABC and a few others all have divergent positions on alcohol. The biggest “conservative, evangelical” Baptist convention, the SBC is firmly anti-alcohol. However even their position has nuance, SBC holds that the bible does not say that alcohol is forbidden or that it’s a sin to consume alcohol. But the bible lists many “dangers” of consuming alcohol. For this reason it has adopted the position that there is a “traditional avoidance of alcohol, that prevents loose morality, and that the modern church should follow this tradition.” The official position further states the local congregations should have sermons and teachings that emphasize abstinence from alcohol.
However, like Baptist churches in general, the SBC member churches are extremely independent of the SBC. However my personal experience with SBC churches is most are strongly teetotaler in their teachings and behavior, and very few would be out of line with SBC official position on alcohol.
FWIW my family that are Baptists are from the ABC, which is more of a “mainline” (meaning not evangelical/fundamentalist) Baptist convention. It doesn’t stake out much of a position on alcohol use, but does have a lot of positions on helping combat alcoholism. I never knew any ABC Baptists who were brash teetotalers. There may have been some teetotalers but it wasn’t expected, nor would the old church ladies be talking among themselves if they saw you walking out of the gas station with a six pack.
However even in the evangelical Baptist groups I’m aware of, none doctrinally (at least the national organizations) prohibit consumption of or “touching of” alcohol. Since it’s all very congregational, I imagine some evangelical Baptist churches are even far more conservative than the SBC and actively teach that it’s sin to drink, or even if they don’t go that far, stress that their members not drink ever.
You do, of course, know why you should always take two Baptists fishing with you, right?
If you only take one, he’ll drink all your beer.
And you know why Baptists don’t have sex standing up?
Someone might think they’re dancing.
And Martin, my family is firmly SBC. It is very definitely taught to be a sin. I know it isn’t doctrine but it is very strongly frowned on.
So Kim Davis’s current husband decided to wear his best overalls to meet with Huckabee.
But the piece of straw he usually keeps in his mouth was at the cleaners.
My mom lives in a retirement community that is affiliated with the Baptist Church. Right next to the dining room is a very nice bar.
He looks like he’s doing Junior Samples cosplay.
Judge Bunning fucked up; he should not have released Mrs. Davis. He set terms for her release, she has failed to meet those terms, she should not have been released.
IMO this was a serious error on Judge Bunning’s part, just like it was (and continues to be) a serious error to not arrest and prosecute Cliven Bundy.
Maybe, maybe not. I don’t think this has played out to its ultimate conclusion just yet.
The delightful Ms Maddow just had a very chucklesome little film clip of Cruz and Huckleberry at the glorious release of the martyr. Appears the Incredible Huck outFoxed Cruz…
Don’t know when it will get available on the intertubes, but Joe Bob 'luc says “Check it out”! A genuine hoot!
Oh, I know it hasn’t played out to it’s ultimate conclusion yet; that’s not at issue.
What is at issue is that Mrs. Davis has made no promises, shown no remorse, has not been humbled or cowed or otherwise seen to have changed in any way… yet the judge let her out.
If the judicial system will not keep it’s word, will not vigorously respect itself, why should any citizen?
They may be giving her rope to hang herself. She’s supposedly going to go back to work later this week. She’s said, through her lawyer, that the marriage licenses issued to same sex couples in her absence are not valid, will she try to do something about that? Also, she may try to interfere with further licences being issued. She could go back to jail for that.
I don’t know about Judge Bunning particularly, but most of the federal judges I am acquainted with are busy folks and don’t really want to deal with this shit. He’s giving her about the easiest conditional release possible and if she’ll go along, he doesn’t have to worry about this anymore. If not he can just throw her back in and keep her there until the next Kentucky legislative session.
Plus, the purpose of incarceration in civil contempt matters isn’t to punish the contemnor, but to ensure that the court’s order is respected.
As a result of the court hearing last week, the deputy clerks have been issuing licences, so the court’s order is being implemented. In that case, the judge may have decided that the message has been sent and he can now allow her release.
But, if she tries to order the deputies to stop issuing the licences, then the contempt power would likely be invoked again.
If that happens, then there is no reason to think that Davis won’t been held in jail for a longer time, at least until Kentucky can figure out what to do. If that’s the case, why spend federal dollars to a Kentucky county jail which probably doesn’t need the circus sideshow? Might as well house her in a Federal correction facility, perhaps one far away from Kentucky.
Hey, where is the duck dynasty dude anyway? Seems he’s missing out on another 15 minutes of fame.