this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2023
500 points (97.5% liked)

politics

19089 readers
3893 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The applicants made it clear the space wouldn’t be just for LGBTQ+ students. It would be for anyone who needs to “just breathe for a second,” said one of the students who confronted the adults Nov. 14.

...

The grant asks for just one thing — that they identify the sponsors, something that every grant does, one school board member reminded the room. In this case, it would be with one simple phrase anywhere in the space: “It Gets Better.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NeverNudeNo13@lemmings.world 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (11 children)

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.

[–] Motavader@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (3 children)

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.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] Motavader@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

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!

[–] NeverNudeNo13@lemmings.world 6 points 11 months ago

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."

load more comments (7 replies)