<div> </div>
<div>Sue et. al.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Assuming this communication was sent from Latah County Law enforcement computers, personal use of work computers, whether in the public or private sector, is sometimes tolerated. But sent from a tax payer supported work computer or not, this e-mail sent to a church business list (this was not a purely personal communication) expressing religious and gender bias (the e-mail did not merely inform of job openings, but expressed a desire for "Christian men" to fill the ranks) from an employee of the Latah Sheriff Dept. raises serious issues that an apology and press release do not fully address.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Expressing preference for a specific religion and gender in a communication to recruit fellow employees demonstrates arrogance towards and disregard of the principle of non-discrimination in hiring, a principle that all tax payer supported employees of all public institutions should be thoroughly aware of and respect.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Given this employee would prefer to have "Christian men" employed by the Latah Sheriff's Dept, how well would this employee work with, for example, a Wiccan, atheist or Islamic co-worker? What about a lesbian? And in the "battle against evil," will this employee be capable of maintaining total objectivity on the job, regarding ethical issues that are problematic for their religion, given their obvious religious bias?
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I doubt it. And this doubt extends to the objectivity that any religious fundamentalist or extreme ideologue might be capable of applying on the job.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The fact this employee appeared oblivious to the ethical flaw in promoting religious and gender discrimination (though we are being led to believe this employee was not representing the department when sending this communication?) in the hiring process for a public service job clearly expresses the insular bias that is unconsciously embedded in the mentality of religious fundamentalism.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Quotes from the communication in question:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>"We currently have three open positions down in our jail," she wrote. "It<br>would be great to see them filled with Christian men. The Lieutenant of the<br>jail, Jim Loyd, is a strong Christian and so are several of the detention
<br>deputies." </div>
<div> </div>
<div>"You are issued a handgun and rifle, and you get to work for Sheriff Wayne<br>Rausch, a wonderful Christian," she continues. "Working as a cop is an<br>excellent opportunity for Christians to be at the forefront in the battle
<br>against evil."<br>--------------------</div>
<div>Ted Moffett</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div><br> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 8/24/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Sue Hovey</b> <<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:suehovey@moscow.com" target="_blank">suehovey@moscow.com</a>
> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">Roger, et al. When one is posting a message on a computer which belongs to<br>the place where you work, the message better be in compliance with hiring
<br>practice and the law. Regardless of her views, she should not be posting<br>them on a computer that does not specifically belong to her.<br><br><br>Sue<br>----- Original Message -----<br>From: "lfalen" <
<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com" target="_blank">lfalen@turbonet.com</a>><br>To: "keely emerinemix" <<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:kjajmix1@msn.com" target="_blank">
kjajmix1@msn.com</a>>; "Debbie Gray"<br><<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:graylex@yahoo.com" target="_blank"> graylex@yahoo.com</a>>; "Tom Hansen" <<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com" target="_blank">
thansen@moscow.com</a>>; "MoscowVision 2020"<br><<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com" target="_blank">vision2020@moscow.com</a>> <br>Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 11:43 AM
<br>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Religion Has No Part in Process<br><br><br>> Keely<br>> You and many other may disagree with her, but there was nothing wrong with<br>> her expressing her views. It was intended to be a private communication.
<br>> It was not an official job posting or representing the department in any<br>> way. What is suspect is the leaking of a private communication to Vera<br>> White.<br>> Roger<br>></blockquote></div>