My sister’s public school just agreed – after a threat of litigation – to stop having prayers (that mention Jesus explicitly – as in "In Jesus’ name we pray) at graduation ceremonies. In this case, it was a kindergarten and a second grade ceremony. An atheist complained, did not get a reasonable response, and went to some humanist group for help. Humanist group sent a letter saying “you can’t do that - so assure us you will stop” and the school agreed. So why were they praying at graduation ceremonies? Because a) they assumed that everyone was Christian b) if not, so what - they aren’t complaining. c) this is God’s country. Plenty in town are outraged against this attack against Christianity.
Things stop only when people complain and sometimes if they complain WITH BACKING. Otherwise, Jesus.
Salzman would instantly win an appeal. This judge, however, cannot be sued. The judge enjoys immunity from all suits while on the bench, which makes sense if you think about it.
Well different AA groups tend to have different styles, so your mileage may vary.
Anyway, I had a roommate who felt that way, and he’s dead now from booze and pills.
But “higher power” is more palatable than telling people the rest of the world is sick of their infantial petulant defiance towards every fucking thing, and that in the end, that’s what’s going to kill them.
Scalia would agree agree with the judge, taking a strict textualist interpretation that, although the Constitution prohibits a religious test for elected office, it does not forbid a religious test for child custody.
IMHO playing along would be sending the worst message to my kids ever, and I wouldn’t do it.
My civil rights are far more important than a counselor or court’s desire to force their religious beliefs on me. And cowtowing to their illegal actions only encourages further illegal and unacceptable behavior.
It’s best for everyone that the judge gets kicked off the bench for being an constitution-breaking idiot.
Based on the details of her needing to use public library space while dodging the law, it doesn’t sound like she has the money to kickback to anyone. But it wouldn’t be too surprising to find out the judge and councilor have some type of relationship prior to this set up (Family, Church, Neighbors,…)
I’m sorry you went through that, not everyone who ends up with DUI and court mandated AA goes down that path. I know at least two who are fully functioning members of society with no substance abuse issues at all anymore.
I think you have to play the cards you are dealt. Given the circumstances a little collusion might have restored her access to her children in a relative short time, which in the end should be her paramount concern, not making a statement of freedom to “The World”.
Even when both counselor or judge are removed, she could still be considered as hostile to counseling, who knows what or who else might come next. I am not american, nor I live there, but I know that legal proceedings might take months or years to be solved.
Think of the children. What would they prefer? A quick resolution or long frustrating wait?
People in AA are pretty clear that the higher power does not have to be religious in nature. Mainly it’s for support, positive peer pressure to stay sober, and constantly acknowledging that someone who has crossed over into addiction to alcohol is highly unlikely to have success in trying to drink moderately.
