Are there any? Does anybody know one or even heard of one?
Elaborate please. I know a Unitarian who used to be a District Attorney, now he’s prosecuting attorney for the division of regulation and licensing in my state.
Still waiting for clarification, so I may understand just what’s going on in the OP’s mind.
Qadgop the Unitarian Universalist
What needs clarification? Frannie’s post is crystal clear, and your response indicates that you understood it perfectly. Looks like there is (or was) a grand total of perhaps ONE Unitarian prosecutor out there. Let’s try something: Anybody out there know any Unitarian criminal defense attorneys? Of course, there aren’t a whole lot of Unitarians out there to begin with, but I have a hunch my question brings a five-fold response within 24 hours.
Personally, I want to hear about the masterminds of the Unitarian criminal underworld.
There is no such thing as the Unitarian Universalist Mafia.
Now, if you know what’s good for you, you’ll never bring it up again, okay? Here … have some coffee.
I’m not aware of any type of database that lists prosecuters by their religious affiliation.
What difference would it make if a prosecuter was a Unitarian, anyway?
I rather doubt Frannie was looking for anything as scientific as a data base, finkboy. Sounds to me like she was looking for the anecdotal.
I also doubt that she thinks it “makes any difference” what any prosecutor’s religion is in terms of such things as performance, commitment, shoe size, or batting average. Rather, I surmise that it suddenly dawned on me that although she might know some prosecutors and she might know some unitarians, she didn’t know any who are both. Curiosity getting the better of the little kitten, she thought she’d pose the question to the universe.
Of course, I can’t speak for Frannie herself, and if I’m way off here she can correct me.
Chief Justice William Howard Taft was a Unitarian. William Jennings Bryan tried to use it as a campaign issue against him in 1908 with very little success.
It worth noting that while the Unitarian Church of the mid-to-lat 19th century bears some resemblance to the modern Unitarian Universalist church, it was pretty different. It was much more avowedly Christian, for one thing.
So when did the Unitarians get The Ten Suggestions? 
Well, Elliot Richardson was Unitarian, and he was Attorney General, which is sort of a prosecutor.
William Howard Taft, as was mentioned, was a Unitarian, and he also was at one point, an Assistant Proscutor in Ohio.
Phillip J. Elliot, who is Unitarian, used to be prosecutor for the City of Daytona.
Those are what I’ve found from a really quick search of Google. I’m sure there are more, but I don’t know of anywhere where proscutors are listed by religious affiliation.
Well, it is when the job is done right. But there are, of course, notable exceptions. See, e.g., Richardson, E.; Reno, J.; Clark, R.; Mitchell, J.
This is really off subject…but as a Hindu the ONLY church setting I feel comfortable in is a Unitarian Universalist Church.
Okay, end of hijaack.
I’m going to have to ask for a cite. Are you claiming that Elliot Richardson, Janet Reno, Ramsey Clark, and John Mitchell, in their combined tenure as Attorneys General, never engaged in prosecutions?
Rmat, do you or do you not have a factual question. As far as I can tell, the answer to the one you asked is “yes.”
Start in with the political shit in this forum and you will be a former member of this message board. I’m not in the mood.
First of all, I didn’t pose a question; Frannie did. My posts are all reasonable and civil responses to observations others have made.
Do you really think I’ve said or done anything to warrant the abusive tone you’ve employed? Is it your “mood” that determines who gets to participate in this board? With all due respect, I would expect a little more civility and courtesy (not to mention a far better display of fairmindedness) from a “moderator.”
Maybe it has to do with the UU attitude towards the death penalty. Frannie, do you want to come back and clarify?
Doh!
No. Not even a little bit. When I made my original mistake and thought you were the OP, I thought that the original question combined with the remark about the relative performance of those prosecutors who were Unitarians meant that you were trolling and I wanted to stamp it out.
Possessed with actual, correct information about the identity of the OP, your remark clearly was either a) a wisecrack, something very much encouraged in GQ or b) an invitation to debate, which would earn at most a reminder from me that a separate thread in GD would be the right place for that.
So I apologize for my remarks, completely and unreservedly. This must be why TubaDiva warned me of the evils of MWM (Moderating While Migraining). Further, I apologize to the OP, since the mistake affected her, too.
Sorry about that.
There really isn’t anything to clarify. It’s a terribly long story, so suffice to say that I was just curious. By this explanation, I hope I haven’t incurred the wrath of our tyrannical moderator. I mean… gosh; threatening Rmat like that is sooooooo silly! Isn’t it? I mean… am I way off here? Anyway, just forget it… I’ve really lost interest.