midwest.social

phoenixz, (edited ) to maliciouscompliance in Pretty funny indeed (Crossposter note: thought it would fit here very well)

Doesn’t that go against separation of church and state, and if this is government pushed, isn’t this a first amendment violation?

clockwork_octopus,

Hahaha! They don’t give a fuck

Muffi,

Look at the dollar bill. America has never given two shits about the separation of church and state.

HikingVet,

In god we trust was added in the cold war because the old saying may have promoted something other than capitalism

metallic_z3r0,

‘E pluribus unum’ was pretty good, but I liked ‘mind your business’ too.

Patches,

Fuck You. Got mine.

Is pretty on point for the current dogma.

grue,

No, it was added during the cold war because the commies were seen as godless heathens and the religious assholes in charge seized the opportunity to push their brainwashing on us using “do the opposite of the commies” as an excuse. There was never any legitimate concern about “e pluribus unum.”

It’s the same story as why they reflexively oppose almost anything proposed by a Democrat today.

HikingVet,

Which is a more detailed version of what I said.

Majawat,

The way it was worded basically said that it had to be the national motto, thereby not making it a religious text to bypass the concerns you mentioned.

Rev3rze,

What I don’t understand is how the national motto can be a religious one without breaking the first amendment.

Majawat,

It hasn’t reached the Supreme Court for a decision, but lower courts have basically said that it’s not establing a religion because it’s used in a secular and patriotic fashion. (My interpretation of my understanding of the ruling).

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aronow_v._United_States

You can blame 1956 Cold War era Congress (red scare) and Eisenhower.

FlyingSquid,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Welcome to the fun world of ceremonial deism.

JackbyDev,

Required ceremonial deism, even worse, yuck!

DarthBueller,

Fucking hate this. There is a local public meeting that starts with a prayer to the Evangelical God in Jesus’s name that I’m forced to attend because of my job. I hate being essentially compelled to participate in prayer. The SCOTUS precedent supporting this is 100000000% Christian bias.

Patches,

The SCOTUS precedent

Don’t worry they don’t believe in Precedent anymore. You just need to grease their wheels. I hear it’s cheaper than you think.

flerp,

It’s relatively cheap for their masters, but they won’t buck the leash that got them into their position

grue,

And you can’t disrupt the meeting by interrupting the prayer until they kick you out, because then presumably your employer would fire you, I assume? 'Cause if not, you should definitely ruin their motherfucking christofascist bullshit.

AngryCommieKender,

You could counter with a Baha’i prayer. They are still an Abrahamic religion, and they have literally hundreds of prayers for practically every topic.

DarthBueller,

I don’t want any prayer. It’s coerced religion.

HikingVet,

I would start invoicing people for your time until you get a legal cease and desist. Then sue them, just because they accepted responsibility.

Make it cost them money.

DAMunzy,

Interesting. I’m going to be petty and start defacing my money.

hglman,

The worst part is that for the people making these policies it really isn’t religious, just a thing they can trick followers with.

Techmaster, to maliciouscompliance in Pretty funny indeed (Crossposter note: thought it would fit here very well)

Donate thousands of them to a single school

TheButtonJustSpins,

I think they made the rule that just the first one has to be displayed.

CookieJarObserver,
@CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works avatar

Then just change the background color

AngryCommieKender,

They specified the background color in the rules. The guy went about as far as you can go within the rules as written

CookieJarObserver,
@CookieJarObserver@sh.itjust.works avatar

Did it just say blue or this specific blue?

And then you could color the text :)

Noodle07,

We now have AI to create thousands of different ones

Double_A, to maliciouscompliance in Pretty funny indeed (Crossposter note: thought it would fit here very well)
@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

What does it even mean to donate a poster?

Viking_Hippie,
OrdinaryAlien,

It’s something to do with donuts.

Viking_Hippie,

And a dude named Nate. He mostly does kittens hanging in there, but he’s actually very versatile when allowed to spread his proverbial wings!

imgonnatrythis, to maliciouscompliance in Pretty funny indeed (Crossposter note: thought it would fit here very well)

Is there a translation for this headline? What the hell are they saying?

Trekman10, to maliciouscompliance in Pretty funny indeed (Crossposter note: thought it would fit here very well)
@Trekman10@sh.itjust.works avatar

I’ve always thought that the upholding of these laws should instead result in quotes and “imagery” from Islam directly…or any non-Christian religion, really.

MxM111, to maliciouscompliance in Pretty funny indeed (Crossposter note: thought it would fit here very well)
@MxM111@kbin.social avatar

Black background would have been better.

HikingVet,

Rainbow

AngryCommieKender,

The law specified the background color.

UnderpantsWeevil,
@UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

Legalist authorization bureaucracies will hinge the draconian punishment for failing to hang a sign on the dye used to color fabric.

supert,

Or pink.

Xylight, to maliciouscompliance in Pretty funny indeed (Crossposter note: thought it would fit here very well)
@Xylight@lemmy.xylight.dev avatar
Little8Lost,

oops, i extra checked but it seems like two idiots had the same idea at the same time

Xylight,
@Xylight@lemmy.xylight.dev avatar

np

Anti_Weeb_Penguin, to maliciouscompliance in Pretty funny indeed (Crossposter note: thought it would fit here very well)

Southern US moment

Candybar121,

(another) Texas moment

Kuvwert, to maliciouscompliance in Pretty funny indeed (Crossposter note: thought it would fit here very well)

I’ve seen this before, but I’ve never been able to verify it as being real.

TheRaven,
@TheRaven@lemmy.ca avatar
wjrii,
@wjrii@kbin.social avatar

It was a legitimate protest of a stupid law that uses a legacy of inconsistent thought and limited perception to do an end run around the first amendment, but the text of the law requires a poster per building, so if they have enough in English, there would be no "need" to accept or post them. Now, if a principal or administrator had some balls, I certainly don't see why they couldn't use one of these or to flank the posters they do post with lots of context or more diverse ideas.

UnderpantsWeevil,
@UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

Now, if a principal or administrator had some balls

You don’t become a public school middle manager in Texas by showing balls. You’d get weeded out before you even got through the substitute program for teaching gym class.

SpeedLimit55, to maliciouscompliance in Pretty funny indeed (Crossposter note: thought it would fit here very well)
dragonflyteaparty,

And there’s tons of other schools who may not reject it. What exactly are you trying to say here with the single word “rejected” and a link?

SpeedLimit55,

It was rejected, sorry the meme wasn’t truly what you expected.

Staccato,

The way you present your message, it implies the effort was rejected statewide. That could be misleading some folks.

It was actually rejected by Carroll ISD, which is the school district covering the disproportionately white and wealthy suburb of Southlake, TX.

There are 1,021 more ISDs in Texas to go.

barttier, to maliciouscompliance in Pretty funny indeed (Crossposter note: thought it would fit here very well)
@barttier@feddit.de avatar

Make poster: “In god we trust…”

Second line: “we pity fools”

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • localhost
  • All magazines
  • Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #