I’ve seen this before, but I’ve never been able to verify it as being real.
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.
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.
The law requires that schools hang up “In God We Trust” signs, but I don’t believe it requires them to hang up every sign that is donated to them.
Rainbow background would’ve been the cherry on top
I actually looked into this back when it was originally happening and the rules were fairly strict. It specified background color and wording but it didn’t give a language so this guy did about the best you could given the rules.
However it would be a shame if someone printed a poster with UV reactive paint that changed to something else over time while it hangs.
Selective enforcement is the name of the game. Ken Paxton won’t be using this rule to take over a school district in Bastrop.
Make poster: “In god we trust…”
Second line: “we pity fools”
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.
deleted by creator
Very interesting read. Ty for sharing.
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?
It was rejected, sorry the meme wasn’t truly what you expected.
I think it’s exactly what we expected. Hypocrisies got laid bare and pearls got clutched. I’d call it a win.
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.
Apart from this, what if you just donated several hundred posters at once? They all have to be displayed?
That’s where I thought it was going.
No. They’re not interested in playing fair or being consistent. They’ll simply warp the rules to fit their outcome and declare these posters noncomplaint. You can’t out-maneuver people who simply cheat.
The assholes on that side of things are a mixture of those who actually believe and want the US to be a religious state, and those who simply are using religion as a method of control. That second group is happy to see religious conflict because a) it distracts from real problems while they consolidate money and power, 2) they can use the fervor to further solidify their support form that religious base.
This is absolutely not new and has happened before in history .It’s just sad to see the US going done this path.
New MrBeast video
One… Hundred… BILLION POSTERS!
Black background would have been better.
Or pink.
The law specified the background color.
Legalist authorization bureaucracies will hinge the draconian punishment for failing to hang a sign on the dye used to color fabric.
Rainbow
Doesn’t that go against separation of church and state, and if this is government pushed, isn’t this a first amendment violation?
Hahaha! They don’t give a fuck
Look at the dollar bill. America has never given two shits about the separation of church and state.
In god we trust was added in the cold war because the old saying may have promoted something other than capitalism
‘E pluribus unum’ was pretty good, but I liked ‘mind your business’ too.
Fuck You. Got mine.
Is pretty on point for the current dogma.
Welcome to the fun world of ceremonial deism.
The worst part is that for the people making these policies it really isn’t religious, just a thing they can trick followers with.
Interesting. I’m going to be petty and start defacing my money.
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.
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.
I don’t want any prayer. It’s coerced religion.
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.
It’s relatively cheap for their masters, but they won’t buck the leash that got them into their position
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.
Required ceremonial deism, even worse, yuck!
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.
What I don’t understand is how the national motto can be a religious one without breaking the first amendment.
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).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aronow_v._United_States
You can blame 1956 Cold War era Congress (red scare) and Eisenhower.
How is this funny? It’s still religious doctrination. Oh I get it. Its a boomer catch phrase like “you couldn’t make this up”… Still not funny.
Its a pathetic liberal gotcha that fails to reconcile with the power of state government.
Either the sign goes up and some evangelicals vandalize it with impunity. Or the sign never goes up because school administrators don’t think the Texas AG will punish them for ignoring the law in this instance.
In this case, it doesn’t look like the flag was ever actually displayed.
Either way, evangelicals hold all the cards. Secular Liberals only manage to performatively protest in order to feel better.
Very slim chance this actually happened. There no actual photo of the flag, just a digital image that was created. Which means if it was not the creator of the flag, but a third person- they’d have a photo of the flag or in the least- not bothered recreating it in photoshop, but just describing it in enough detail. And if it was the creator that posted this- it wouldn’t be in 3rd person suggesting “someone” did this.
Additionally, In the rare chance it did happen- it wouldn’t be enforced.
What? You mean someone would just go on the Internet and lie like that?
*“Not like that!”
Is there a translation for this headline? What the hell are they saying?
What does it even mean to donate a poster?
It means this.
It’s something to do with donuts.
