this post was submitted on 18 May 2024
208 points (98.1% liked)


18191 readers
5396 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!


  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:


World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

A bill sponsored by GOP State Rep. Dodie Horton would shove Christianity in students' faces

Worth checking out the posters that an activist has prepared at the bottom of the article.

all 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] halcyoncmdr 62 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Any bets on how long it takes the Satanic Temple to have the Seven Tenets be included as well?

I. One should strive to act with compassion and empathy toward all creatures in accordance with reason.
II. The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions.
III. One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.
IV. The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo one's own.
V. Beliefs should conform to one's best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one's beliefs.
VI. People are fallible. If one makes a mistake, one should do one's best to rectify it and resolve any harm that might have been caused.
VII. Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice should always prevail over the written or spoken word.

[–] Veraxus 20 points 2 months ago (2 children)

They’ll just get some corrupt judge to wave their hands and rule “not like that”.

[–] Serinus 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Did you know that in the past even judges appointed by Republicans weren't blatantly corrupt?

[–] rdyoung 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

There was a time when judges appointed by one side of the aisle would tend to lean towards the other side because of the aforementioned lack of blatant corruption and ideological based appointments.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

Count on it.

[–] Burn_The_Right 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Each one of these tenets is polar opposite to the values of a conservative. No wonder they hate TST.

[–] ours 10 points 2 months ago

The whole point of TST is to shed light on conservative hypocrisy.

[–] disguy_ovahea 38 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Stone v. Graham set precedent against this practice in 1980. This may just be another attempt to bring it up to our newly conservative SCOTUS to be overturned.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer 11 points 2 months ago

Hopeful that the courts will immediately invalidate this. They seem to have put in even less effort to make this secular than they did in 1980. Still, SCOTUS likes to invent facts and events where they don't exist.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago

They may want to sort out their little golden calf issue before their imaginary friend in the sky starts striking them down with lightning.

GOP Trump gold statue at CPAC.

[–] Burn_The_Right 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The only good commandment is a dead commandment.

...goddamned autocorrect...

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

I guess they went Baphomet too

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

It wouldn't be so bad if they planned to start following them as well.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Does anybody else think it’s peculiar that when there’s a post here that’s critical of the right, or points out their cruelty or criminality…

the bOtH siDeS kids are always absent from any discussion on it?

I wonder why that is.

[–] jmanes 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I see more posts preemptively bringing up bothsidesism than bothsidesism itself.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

We see what we want to see I guess.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Both sides arguments are only ever used to deflect from something awful R did, or lessen the value of something good D did.

The moment you see the both sides argument come out you can know immediately that the person is purposefully or obliviously pushing a conservative agenda.

I think this is the point you are implying, but I just wanted to say it explicitly.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's horseshoe theory in action.

It's pretty clear who those folks want as POTUS in 2025

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Oh I’ve no doubt about their intentions. The problem is that if you actually say it, your comments get removed and you face potential bans…

But they can accuse people of supporting genocide all day.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Seven tenets too, right?

[–] Treczoks 2 points 2 months ago

In the version of the Sinners Bible or Wicked Bible from 1631? Would fit the GOP family agenda.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

The "ten commandments" differ both by religion and sect - Christianity doesn't have 1 definition of them across it, and even if it did, Judaism would disagree. Even without equivalents from other religions, like Satanism's 7 Tenets, this would be incredibly ripe for disputes.