Poll of the Day > Texas schools must display the 10 commandments

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.texastribune.org/2023/04/20/texas-senate-passes-ten-commandments-bill/

https://youtu.be/AG26IoRBuWQ

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/6/9/5/AACBR1AAEZ6H.jpg

https://youtu.be/oZA2mBntrHk

I'm hoping the Satanic Temple sues to get goat statues in schools.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/7/3/4/AAQwHjAAEZ6u.jpg

They're just begging to be sued.

Texas puts the fun in fundamentalism

Texas' favorite commandment, Thou Shall Not Kill

Clench281 posted...

Texas puts the fun in fundamentalism

And the mental in fundamentalism.

Bahahahaha.

I remember when that crap was in my schools too. Back then I never knew why it disappeared or why people needed notes every day to not go. I used to just skip it by hiding under the stairs for a minute then hang out.

JOExHIGASHI posted...

They're just begging to be sued.

They are, but presumably no state court is going to rule against the state, meaning the only recourse is to appeal it up to the Supreme Court. Given this Supreme Court's track record, I fully expect they won't see a problem with it.

In the interest of religious freedom, I also want them to display the Pillars of Islam, the star of David, maybe a statue of Baphomet.

acid_snake141 posted...

In the interest of religious freedom, I also want them to display the Pillars of Islam, the star of David, maybe a statue of Baphomet.

Let's go through the top 5000 religions and put them all up.

I should have the right to introduce my daughter to the concepts of adultery and coveting one's spouse, Litzler said. It shouldnt be one of the first things she learns to read in her kindergarten classroom.

Jfc

faramir77 posted...

I should have the right to introduce my daughter to the concepts of adultery and coveting one's spouse, Litzler said. It shouldnt be one of the first things she learns to read in her kindergarten classroom.

Jfc

It's kind of hilarious how closely that mirrors the "I don't want homosexuality mentioned in schools" hysteria.

I wonder if they're paying the schools to display those commandments.

I dont see an issue a display doesnt hurt anyone they can easily ignore it if they so choose

I don't have a problem with schools having Christian symbols in them even though I'm not a Christian but the state mandating it is fucked up

All my meanest, nastiest clients are from Texas. So clearly they take the Bible to heart

Muscles posted...

I don't have a problem with schools having Christian symbols in them even though I'm not a Christian but the state mandating it is fucked up

and that's where they are going to lose the lawsuit, can't promote one religion over the others

Red states are in the a race to the bottom. And they're going to try to force this crap on everyone else.

Lordkill posted...

and that's where they are going to lose the lawsuit, can't promote one religion over the others

If the constitution is legitimately enforced, that is.

Don't forget the pentacle, a Buddhist statue, and depictions of any given pantheon.

adjl posted...

If the constitution is legitimately enforced, that is.

This. Red states are passing all kinds of shit that is blatantly unconstitutional, because their activist judges on the supreme court will uphold them. Sometime this decade we are going to see a supreme court case so disastrous, it will be our generation's Dred Scott decision and tear the country in half. It's inevitable at this point.

Only Commandments 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 are really worth displaying tbh

Thou shall not steal!

*umm, didnt' you plagiarize that from the Code of Hamurabi?*

-kills gawker-

Also.. thou shall not kill

NinjaGhosts posted...

I dont see an issue a display doesnt hurt anyone they can easily ignore it if they so choose

so they should be able to put up displays supporting gay people too, right?

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/696/

In Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980), the Supreme Court ruled that a Kentucky law that required the posting of the Ten Commandments on the wall of every public school classroom in the state violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment because the purpose of the display was essentially religious.

can't believe texas would go against the constitution

The people who voted for that bill surely all claim to be strong proponents of the constitution. It always confounds me when the conservatives all attempt to claim it's liberals who are opposed to the constitution when they are constantly passing just blatantly and overtly unconstitutional bills.

The constitution is more than the second amendment.

papercup posted...

Red states are passing all kinds of shit that is blatantly unconstitutional, because their activist judges on the supreme court will uphold them. Sometime this decade we are going to see a supreme court case so disastrous, it will be our generation's Dred Scott decision and tear the country in half. It's inevitable at this point.

I wonder if I can predict the case you're referring to. Below are some of my guesses.

• It becomes legal for children to purchase, possess and carry firearms so that "they can be protected in case of a school shootout".
• Homosexuality becomes a crime again, but a loophole allows gays and lesbians to exist if they become transgender.
• Public schools now include mandatory Christian studies and baptism, and confirmation is required to graduate from high school.
• Land owners are now required to pay taxes to a Christian Church of their choice.
• Extramarital sex is now a crime, but a loophole allows rape victims to marry their rapists to avoid prosecution.
• All hate crime laws are now abolished.
• Marital rape is no longer a crime again, and domestic violence becomes justified in cases where the wives refuse to obey their husbands.

BlackScythe0 posted...

It always confounds me when the conservatives all attempt to claim it's liberals who are opposed to the constitution when they are constantly passing just blatantly and overtly unconstitutional bills.

Every. Accusation. Is. A. Confession.

Zareth posted...

Every. Accusation. Is. A. Confession.

If you work in any form of customer service, you encounter these people, so you know of their existence. Very good at accusing people of the very rude things they themselves are doing. Probably learned it from their parents.

Accrovideogames posted...

Homosexuality becomes a crime again, but a loophole allows gays and lesbians to exist if they become transgender.

That seems unlikely. Across the board, they hate trans people more than homosexuals. It's more likely that homosexuality becomes a crime, then trans people just get shot on sight.

IIRC, Texas just made it illegal for men to wear make-up

LinkPizza posted...

IIRC, Texas just made it illegal for men to wear make-up

So... no more film industry in Texas? Or stage performances featuring anyone but women?

adjl posted...

So... no more film industry in Texas? Or stage performances featuring anyone but women?

or... News anchors?

welle we all need more god in our lives

adjl posted...

So... no more film industry in Texas? Or stage performances featuring anyone but women?

Lokarin posted...

or... News anchors?

Basically, they hate something so much that they end up making laws without thinking about how it affects a vast majority of other stuff, as well In this case, they hate drag (Nad trans people, and gay/metro men), so they say men cant wear makeup. Which then means people that are in positions like the ones mentioned cant wear it, either The best part is that its not only people in drag, trans people, and gay/metro men that wear makeup. But to them, it doesnt make sense that normal men would wear any. So, they just banned it. Its just a literally shit show I would hope things get better, but who knows

adjl posted...

That seems unlikely. Across the board, they hate trans people more than homosexuals. It's more likely that homosexuality becomes a crime, then trans people just get shot on sight.

Loopholes are always accidental by definition. Besides, I took inspiration from a Canadian news article reporting that some gender-affirming therapy centers actually used to be gay conversion therapy centers. They had to adapt once gay conversion therapy was banned. The reasoning behind it is that if gays become women and lesbians become men, they are no longer homosexuals. In other words, a loophole allows them to basically continue converting people to heterosexuality. I wish I could post a link to the article, but I unfortunately can't find it anymore.

I also like to think that it may also be a form of eugenics. Gender-affirming surgery renders patients sterile, which means they're removing homosexuals from the gene pool. This is at least what I came up with while trying to understand why religious zealots would do that.

Accrovideogames posted...

Loopholes are always accidental by definition.

They are, but given the current discourse I'd expect gender dysphoria to become illegal before homosexuality.

potdnewb posted...

welle we all need more god in our lives

you've got to be a troll at this point

Accrovideogames posted...

Loopholes are always accidental by definition. Besides, I took inspiration from a Canadian news article reporting that some gender-affirming therapy centers actually used to be gay conversion therapy centers. They had to adapt once gay conversion therapy was banned. The reasoning behind it is that if gays become women and lesbians become men, they are no longer homosexuals. In other words, a loophole allows them to basically continue converting people to heterosexuality. I wish I could post a link to the article, but I unfortunately can't find it anymore.

I also like to think that it may also be a form of eugenics. Gender-affirming surgery renders patients sterile, which means they're removing homosexuals from the gene pool. This is at least what I came up with while trying to understand why religious zealots would do that.

So, you think theyll force people to become transgender? Because Im not sure thats work. That might start a war Plus, with how much they hate trans people, Im not sure theyd want to go down that road That said, what about bi people?

Accrovideogames posted...

Loopholes are always accidental by definition. Besides, I took inspiration from a Canadian news article reporting that some gender-affirming therapy centers actually used to be gay conversion therapy centers. They had to adapt once gay conversion therapy was banned. The reasoning behind it is that if gays become women and lesbians become men, they are no longer homosexuals. In other words, a loophole allows them to basically continue converting people to heterosexuality. I wish I could post a link to the article, but I unfortunately can't find it anymore.

I also like to think that it may also be a form of eugenics. Gender-affirming surgery renders patients sterile, which means they're removing homosexuals from the gene pool. This is at least what I came up with while trying to understand why religious zealots would do that.

Where did you read that? Some garbage site like Rebel News?

adjl posted...

That seems unlikely. Across the board, they hate trans people more than homosexuals. It's more likely that homosexuality becomes a crime, then trans people just get shot on sight.

Clarence "Billionaire Trips" Thomas has already said the Supreme Court should reconsider Obergefell v Hodges (gay marriage), Lawrence v Texas (gay sex), and Griswold v Connecticut (contraceptives). Some GOP members are even wanting to go after Brown v Board of Education (school segregation) and Loving v Virginia (mixed race marriage).

ReturnOfFa posted...

you've got to be a troll at this point

rude

potdnewb posted...

rude

I'd say it's more realistic than rude to suggest that we don't need more God in our lives.

ReturnOfFa posted...

I'd say it's more realistic than rude to suggest that we don't need more God in our lives.

there would be less violence with more god

potdnewb posted...

there would be less violence with more god

History proves otherwise

captpackrat posted...

Clarence "Billionaire Trips" Thomas has already said the Supreme Court should reconsider Obergefell v Hodges (gay marriage), Lawrence v Texas (gay sex), and Griswold v Connecticut (contraceptives). Some GOP members are even wanting to go after Brown v Board of Education (school segregation) and Loving v Virginia (mixed race marriage).

Oh, I don't believe for a second that homosexuality is safe. Just that trans people are even more immediately in the crosshairs.

captpackrat posted...

Clarence "Billionaire Trips" Thomas has already said the Supreme Court should reconsider Obergefell v Hodges (gay marriage), Lawrence v Texas (gay sex), and Griswold v Connecticut (contraceptives). Some GOP members are even wanting to go after Brown v Board of Education (school segregation) and Loving v Virginia (mixed race marriage).

Then, theyll probably try to bring back slavery And then, war And maybe that will be better than whats going on now

potdnewb posted...

there would be less violence with more god

God was very violent And so was his whole time period