498
At least they know for sure it’ll get better when they leave Lynchburg.
If a writer named the town with the comically evil school board 'Lynchburg,' people would probably think it was too obvious.
load more comments
(7 replies)
Saving the Children by not allowing them to receive money to prevent Suicide!
Compare and contrast with the Biden administration to save the children by keeping lead out of their drinking water.
Nah, Sleepy Joe is just trying to prevent kids from getting the lead they need to become Republicans when they grow up. Pretty tyrannical when you think about it! /s
Not those children!
Conservatives have always encouraged gay youth and any other kids who "aren't cool" to kill themselves.
Conservatives delight in the idea of "defective" children committing suicide. This is why conservatives have worked so hard to defund or sabotage suicide prevention efforts nationwide for the last 20 years.
#JustConservativeThings
Incidentally they also push suicide on anyone that might cost them money, veterans, the ill and injured, the working class as a whole.
Absolute ghouls.
Nah, ghouls are just scavengers. These people are stochastic murderers.
Another proud moment for Christianity
I hope the members of that school board who supported its rejection are exposed and mercilessly harassed by the internet so they never know another day of peace in their miserable lives until they finally succumb to the pressure and do the world a favor by deciding to exit it.
That town is too far under the heel of Liberty University and Lynchburg Christian Academy for them to suffer much consequence.
Be the consequence you wish to see them experience
Unfortunately, I can't point at a place on the map and say "Volcano time a-go-go baby!' and have a volcano spontaneously erupt there.
Try harder
No, you need something more precise. A volcanic eruption would harm bystanders.
I can't afford a space laser.
Have you considered a conversion to Judaism? According to at least one member of Congress that seems to help!
Drat! Capitalism strikes again
part of the conservative platform is bullying queer people into suicide. this is because american conservatives are monsters who have no place in a functioning society.
Why is there no group out there exposing these fake Christians for the heathens that they are?
rips off the mask
There's just another Christian under here!
"Nyahhh! And I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for you meddling kids!"
These are Christians. Christians can't hide behind No True Scotsman, deciding every time one of them is a despicable piece of shit that they aren't "real"
There are two potential answers to this and they both suck:
-
The "God is love" Christian majority doesn't hold the extreme nationalist/dominionist Christians accountable.
-
The extremists ARE the Christian majority.
Shit like this makes me truly believe that the GOP needs to be an illegal operation.
I really wish they would give at least a tiny bit of context to this summary. It would be nice to just know if it was purely malicious or if it was due to some sort of bureaucratic nonsense where they have some sort of strict rules in place that forces them to refuse grants of any kind or something.
Either way it would be ridiculous to refuse... But for fuck's sake at least offer a little bit of context... The summary here just reads like pure outrage porn...
Pitchforks and torches are fucking tiring to carry around all the damn time...
Edit: just read the full article and yeah that's fucked up... school board voted against the grant because of the organization it was coming from and clearly had no desire to evaluate the project on its own merits... The dissenting opinion from one member of the board is actually a really good one and would recommend anyone curious to go read it.
You know, I feel like there was a time before Trump when I could look at an outrage headline and assume the truth was more nuanced. It usually did work out that way. After some point, not only was there no nuance to it, but the truth was even worse than the headline let on.
load more comments
(4 replies)
I didn't see any dissenting opinion in the article. I really can't fathom what the could but up as a valid defense of this.
Is hope indoctrination?
“I don’t know where this started that it’s going to be indoctrination and talk about sexuality,” said Sharon Carter, one of only two school board members who voted in favor of the grant that night.
Ooohh, ok, I misunderstood what you meant. I thought you were referring to one of the troglodytes who voted to reject the funds... that they had an opinion worth reading. Got it!
No no.. this is the dissenting opinion I was referring to...
“We as a board are making it more controversial than it has to be,” said board member Anthony Andrews, who complimented the kids for doing exactly what we want our young people to do: show leadership and initiative, identify problems and find solutions. “If we vote no on this, we send the message that we don’t trust the students."
We need solid journalism. But with everyone conditioned for years now to crave outrage reporting, there's not enough demand for unbiased facts.
My hope is that this is a temporary growing pain as we wrap our heads around having the internet in our lives.
Looks like the next generation of this town is going to be voting solidly blue from now on.
Unfortunately none of them will stay in the town. They will move to blue states.
Or kill themselves. It’s really funny how easy people think it is to move to blue states. Suicide is often a much easier and more appealing option tbh.
You have a point and suicide rates are up, last year was the highest they've been since WWII https://time.com/5609124/us-suicide-rate-increase
What can I do to help these perfectly reasonable folks?
IDGAF that they are teenagers, that’s irrelevant. Anything I can do to validate, support, etc I’m willing.
this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2023
498 points (97.5% liked)
politics
19246 readers
2601 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS