I asked John Curtis after the meeting how it was that, at the least meeting, a Baptist minister gave the invocation, since there is, according to Judge Chambers, no list. Curtis said he was approached by Chambers to find a minister to do the next month's regular meeting invocation. Otherwise, what would prevent, without a list, multiple people believing he or she had been picked for a given month? Instead, Chambers is acting *as* the list, choosing for himself who he believes is okay to either ask someone else or do the prayer. Sort of an informal good old boys club that discriminates against others. 

 

As I noted on July 16, 2016, apparently after Chambers realized that he would have to open up invocations to all comers, not simply the informally approved ones he happened to like, he decided it would be a good idea to go BACK to having commissioners *establish religion* from the dais. Unfortunately for him, this smacks of wanting to have his cake and eat it too, that he can discriminate against others when he wants and thumb his nose at the constitution when he wants.