Dear sitetest,
This is not about voters, but about poll workers who must remain on the premises for 14 to 16 hours on election day.
You are building a strawman so it can easily be knocked down. Why don’t you address the working condition of poll workers and forget about the voters for a minute?
For example; LDS do not allow swearing inside a LDS Ward House. What if poll workers were banned for saying “Damn it?” A little too restrictive wouldn’t you say. The moment a building acts in a civil capacity, it is ruled by civil rules and not ecclisiastical ones, or else everyone who came into the building would neccessarily conduct themselves according to LDS rules of “reverance.” They would be forced to speak in subdued voices, fold their arms an maintain a decorum of reverence since these are the “rules” of being inside and LDS wardhouse.
“This is not about voters, but about poll workers who must remain on the premises for 14 to 16 hours on election day.
“You are building a strawman so it can easily be knocked down.”
Actually, the poll workers seem to have the freedom to choose not to work at polling places with this restriction in place.
It appears that the building of strawmen is your peculiar province, here.
“The moment a building acts in a civil capacity, it is ruled by civil rules and not ecclisiastical ones, or else everyone who came into the building would neccessarily conduct themselves according to LDS rules of ‘reverance.’”
In your own mind.
The use of the facility is governed by the agreement between the facility’s owners and the election authorities. If the facility’s owners propose restrictions that the election authorities find too burdensome, then the election authorities are free to reject the facility as suitable. If the election authorities insist on fewer restrictions, but the facility’s owners find that unacceptable, they can walk away.
Obviously, in the case cited by the article, there was a meeting of minds, and the restriction against caffeinated beverages stands.
sitetest