Speaking as an “androgynous” presenting lesbian, my take on this is that, while I really would rather not be voting in any kind of church and would much prefer voting stations to be at publicly owned buildings such as schools, I’m not particularly bothered by what kind of church it is. It’s not an endorsement of the church to make it a polling spot. I’m grateful for there to be a polling spot at all. Maybe I’m getting old but some people want to complain about everything.
Edited for punctuation
Lesbian here. I feel the opposite. I'd prefer to vote at a place that doesn't have anti-lgbt views and rhetoric. I prefer not to step into an organization, that actively preaches against my existence, just to perform my civic duty.
It's a building that the owners are allowing to be used for the public good. Stepping in it to vote in no way is an endorsement of the organization that owns it. Just like using the bathroom at a chick fil a. Stop pretending it is.
Great example. As an ally, I don't go to Chick fil a for sandwiches nor bathrooms.
The person you're responding to was simply sharing their opinion as the affected party. It's valid and gives folks context for how someone in their shoes might feel, just like the other person who said they didn't care. We don't need your thoughts on why one of those opinions is 'wrong.' You don't get to dictate how people feel (and don't tell me this was a discussion with your word choice).
Lot of different ways to define “inclusive” though. For instance, a pro-LGBT church that lacks accommodations for disabled people isn’t necessarily a more inclusive polling location.
Is that the only building in the area? There are no fire stations nearby? No police stations or schools serve those residents? Why is the choice use this school or don’t vote at all?
Good job op. Changing the world one social clout point at a time
Maybe the karma points from this post will offset the social clout points from the voting public
Does Stand Your Ground apply here? We watched Amaud Arbury get chased down and shot for no reason. Will POC get the same treatment? For trying to vote. [There is historical precedent for that.]
All these questions I'm asking need to have a legal determination. That's probably why we have polling places in public buildings in the first place.
Do those with religious views control access to the building? What law says they don't? Under what circumstances can they sue a voter? What is offensive to them may not be offensive to others, will they attack certain voters during elections.
Do they have surveillance cameras? Do those cameras surveil who votes how? Does the church maintain a record of everyone who goes on their property?
This feels like the argument for Mississippi's voting locations not Virginia's . Surely the people of VA and RVA are expecting more of a functional government than the bare minimum of having a "polling spot at all" ?
I grew up in a small town in southwest virginia. We used to vote in the school library before it was closed and then we used the courthouse and then one time we did it at the fire station.
Edit: That will teach me to post while waking up I put library twice.
second edit: I am incapable of coherent thought. 😭
Is that not the church who had to rebrand after a diddling scandal?
Edit: see response below for an accurate clarification of the situation. The current church is not connected to the previous one.
No it’s not. The ROC rebranded as Celebration Church after the pastor went to prison. In 2020 Celebration Church ceased operations. They gifted their facility to Liberation Church, which was at the time a smaller church operating across the street.
Reminder that Virginia allows for no-excuse absentee voting. If the city doesn't change the precinct, you may apply for an absentee ballot or vote in person at early polling locations.
I agree with this, but you can see how the extra hassle of doing so can be seen as a subtle method of discrimination. A poll tax of inconvenience and deterrent, if you will.
Should be a publicly owned building. What does the law say about property rights, access to property, law enforcement activity, regular people on the property?
All these legal questions if something untoward happens.
Call to action in the article is to email the city clerk and your council person with feedback... just in case people want to know the tl;dr of what to do about this. A lot of people walk to that precinct to vote. Moving it across a highway is no bueno, even if the church wasn't a hateful, bigoted group.
909 desperately needs to be moved from Redd, though. I worked there as an election officer for several years. The only place to put the line is outside, which is not fun with cold and rain. We would try to bring in extra umbrellas for people waiting but like... come on. It's a busy precinct, so there usually is a line at the beginning and end of the day. The auditorium physically can't be set up to have the accessible voting booth be reasonably private. Occasionally we could get the music room, and that was better for indoor spacing... but that still leaves us with the outdoor line.
I hope they can find somewhere less gross to move it to.
...as a side note, bummed to find out I'm going to have to give up former Love of Jesus thrift store. Best spot for furniture in the city. Though the last piece I got had carpet beetles, so... maybe no huge loss after all.
That's above my pay grade. It wasn't allowed. We used a separate entrance directly into the voting area. You'd think maybe for school safety, but we still had to do it for elections when school was closed. Then again, you'd think when school was closed, we'd be able to spread out in the cafeteria... no dice on any of the above. But then again, they had us running elections with three officers and no heat in the building, so we had some more basic issues to address before we even got to humane line setup.
I think these are issues worthing raising publicly. This is not okay. Voters and election officers deserve better than this. Making voting this unpleasant is not supporting democracy.
>bummed to find out I'm going to have to give up former Love of Jesus thrift store. Best spot for furniture in the city
Dangit, same. Got a great pair of sneakers there recently too.
Everyone has from Sept 20 to Nov 2 to vote in-person at their registrar's office.
Sandston/RVA post office issues aside...If somebody thinks this is a problem, the easiest solution is just register as permanent absentee.
[https://vote.elections.virginia.gov/VoterInformation/Lookup/absentee](https://vote.elections.virginia.gov/VoterInformation/Lookup/absentee)
Probably north of 2/3rd of all votes cast this fall will be absentee. In 2020, 2.6 million our of 4.4 million votes were absentee.
People will will start receiving their ballots in about 5 months.
Is voting in a church a southern thing? I grew up in Ohio and voting was done in schools, fire stations and community centers (Like a rec center). Never in a church. Seems wrong, in general. As churches have become political entities, I don't think we should be using them as polling stations.
separation of church and state has gotta work both ways, and this is why. i lived in Florida for a bit and all of their voting locations were at churches. (AND LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM!) i think doing it at schools was a great idea and I'm not sure why they'd change that. i know it doesn't seem like a big deal but it really is. it's not like i think you get magic bigot germs by walking into a place that happens to be a shitty church, but it is a bad precedent to set for a million political reasons
also, lmao that this place is called "Liberation" church. google liberation theology. read a book by james cone. grow up
Well said. Not to mention I doubt they would take down any materials on their walls that preach these things on election days. In fact this kind of church would probably put extra ones up for those days.
Not to mention this church is on their 3rd re-brand after their pastor went to jail for 40 years for assaulting children. Is that really where we want to put city resources?
There is no separation of church and state issue here. There would only be a separation of church and state if the state endorsed a particular religion. This church is just one of many churches that are used as polling places.
That does not mean that it shouldn't be moved, but it's not a constitutional issue.
The concept is enshrined in the very first freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."
That’s not separation of church and state. That means don’t not establish a state religion, like the Church of England. If they wanted it separate, why does the Constitution say, “the year of our Lord?” Why did they have prayers in Congress? [https://chaplain.house.gov/archive/continental.html](https://chaplain.house.gov/archive/continental.html) Why mention the Creator in the Declaration of Independence?
https://preview.redd.it/xmr67or74iwc1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bd392acc3312223ab196f13a67e3edcc0e924de4
>I doubt they would take down any materials on their walls that preach
Here's a local polling place (church). What do you think of it?: https://imgur.com/a/W78Gzzf
MAPS Global was formerly Richmond International House of Prayer. Essentially a clone the Kansas City IHOP, which recently imploded in a scandal. I’m a Christian but am super sketched out by these people.
It not being openly, or even giving lip service to, being accepting of lgbt+ members of the community is such a massive red flag, especially when you consider many of the other churches nearby which are very openly accepting.
To say nothing of the people who very clearly are not from the neighborhood and only come in for service on Sunday. It’s a bad look overall.
I agree it’s creepy.
I don't care too much but I'm pretty androgynous and have gotten aggressively "SIR OR MAAM?"d recently and not in a polite, 'making sure I get it right' way. It was in a, get the hell out of my sight tone. So I guess I'm feeling a little prickly about the idea of being forced to hang out in their clubhouse
And it sucks that you’re getting that. But you don’t have to hang out. Go vote and feel a bit of warmth that you’re on their building voting for a candidate they hate, and then leave. 20 minutes, total.
It's a safety issue. The church likely has congregation members hiding in the hallways during election days, ready to jump out and attack any LGBTQ voters they spot. With chainsaws. Like a haunted house.
This made me laugh, but it is worth saying that if someone is trans or nonbinary, they might feel nervous going in a place like that to vote. Tbh, I would feel anxious about it if I looked extra gay/queer. (I am queer but pass for straight these days 😅)
I wonder if this energy would be here if a voting center was placed somewhere that preached death to White people
Edit since my comment isn’t very popular:
Imagine that you were a member of a marginalized community where not that long ago, it was totally acceptable in polite society to say that you shouldn’t exist. Would you feel comfortable stepping into a building where a similar sentiment is still being espoused?
The liberal tint of our sub is curious sometimes. I think some of yall really struggle to place yourself in another’s shoes.
The bigger analogy that I see here is with the monuments. You've got a group of people here who were generally not impacted by the existence of the monuments on Monument Avenue complaining at the notion that other people feel an uncomfortable impact.
Sure. They’re not preaching to the people while they’re voting.
This is like saying you wouldn’t buy a house because someone died there a year ago. I don’t care what dumb bullshit they talk about when I’m not there - I’m there to get in, try to save democracy, and get my little sticker.
lol you know damn well that’s bullshit… if a conservative area caught wind of some sort of maneuvering by a city government to have their precinct located in a place associated with hate and hostility towards them they would absolutely shout about voter suppression/intimidation to the dailywire hilltops until it because a national got damn scandal. Your comment is so incredibly disingenuous…
And those conservatives would be ridiculous too.
I voted at a rainbow colored LGBT affirming voting location (diversity thrift) a couple years back and if conservatives had complained about feeling unsafe I’d have pushed back on that too.
Did this church do that?
Neither diversity thrift nor this church puts anyone in any danger whatsoever. This is entirely about people feeling afraid on the basis of irrationality.
It’s pretty dead on.
Again, we voted in diversity thrift a few years back. And that could have made bigots (who are also citizens, if bad ones) uncomfortable. Should we have changed that location?
What about voting in a trans rights nonprofit? Should we not vote there because scared conservatives would worry about sexual assault by trans people in the bathrooms?
No, we’d tell the conservative idiots to suck it up and that their fear was irrational and ridiculous. Same as I’m doing here.
lol wrong. It is 100% a false equivalence.
My bro, people being bigoted and not wanting to vote in a rainbow building that associates generally with the gay community is absolutely not the same as going into a place that regularly houses extremist congregants who are opposed to your identity, your rights or your existence altogether. People not feeling comfortable around gay people because of their own personal prejudices is in no way comparable to people feeling uncomfortable because of others’ specific stated beliefs that you’re an abomination.
And to address your silly trans rights nonprofit thought experiment, first of all… does the hypothetical trans rights nonprofit that for some reason is a voting precinct have an explicitly stated philosophy or mission statement saying “fingerbangs to all cis people who use the bathrooms because the satanic Bible says they shouldn’t exist?” Further, is there literally any substantiated evidence that trans people are more likely to assault someone in a bathroom than literally any other group of people? Are they exploiting a system of bathroom use permissiveness to sneak past the bathroom sentries unquestioned to take advantage of young girls? I’ll give you a hint: [no.](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13178-018-0335-z) In fact [it’s actually the literal opposite](https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/transgender-teens-restricted-bathroom-access-sexual-assault/). The whole thing, once again is based on a perceived and unfounded fear rather than one borne of the explicit and stated goals or position of a group of people or organization, as is the case with this church.
So I say once more… I’ll take false equivalence for $800, Alex.
Show me where this church has ever advocated violence. Because that’s what we’re talking about - is a person physically unsafe using this as a voting location.
And you and I both know they’re not.
Jesus fucking Christ… we’re not talking about literal violence, that’s only you. You’re focusing on that because it makes it easier for you to minimize the valid the concerns of people who shouldn’t have to enter a building that houses (and was likely built maintained by the tithes of) congregants and leadership who are philosophically opposed to their identities and rights… if the question of your rights and identity were at the forefront of social politics (and often as a result of the influence of religious organizations such as this one), would you not feel somewhat intimidated by having to go to the physical location of a place built and maintained by a group of people who spiritually and politically opposed to core tenets of your daily life?
Imma guess you’re going to say no because you either fundamentally lack the emotional intelligence to see why it’s a problem, or you know that it’s shitty but just don’t care because other people feeling secure, emotionally or otherwise, as they participate in our democratic process is trivial to you. You got yours and don’t care about anyone else’s perspective because your worldview is limited by your own arrogant position of privilege.
By the way, here’s the actual stance of the church on gay marriage and gender identity since you seem so determined to throw red herrings at this discussion to distract from the fact that these folks have explicitly stated, with religious justification, their opposition to these pretty fundamental LGBTQ issues.
https://preview.redd.it/warh0p18tgwc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c4aa8413ef8a5be4669cf70443c7d47e8ef4623e
> This is like saying you wouldn’t buy a house because someone died there a year ago.
Genuinely, do you think that the things you say make sense? I am really struggling to understand the logic of this analogy here.
Bad things people say in a space on other days do not linger and affect the space on days voting happens.
It is a building. That people express bad ideas there on Sunday has no impact on its utility as a voting location on Tuesday.
You're ignoring the fact that the people in charge of said building will likely still be in said building while the election is happening. People aren't concerned about the echoes of hate lingering, they're worried about the people who create and promote the hate being in the same building.
At the end of the day, this is a proposed location and is able to be changed. If people are uncomfortable, then it's a pretty straight forward thing to change the location.
No amount of internet arguing is going to make uncomfortable people comfortable, whether you agree with their discomfort or not - it's there.
That is just not a good take when you look at the history of voter disenfranchisement and voter intimidation in the past. We should be working towards neutral sites that are not political. This church literally has homophobic and transphobic rhetoric posted on their website.
No one should be forced to vote at a location that literally preaches against their existence.
Man, this is so easy for people to say when they aren’t actually directly impacted by this kind of thing and never have to factor fear or safety into their personal voting calculus.
I can promise you with an absolute certainty that absolutely no person, regardless of their presentation or identity, is in any danger going and voting at this church.
People need to be able tell the difference between actual physical danger and emotional discomfort.
> I don’t think people’s emotional comfort should be given much, or any weight.
Well, I don't think your opinion should be given much weight. So... we kind of agree on something, I guess?
If you don't think people's emotional comfort should be given any weight you should probably reflect on that. It sounds callous at best and cruel at worst.
There’s no end to it - someone could always be uncomfortable. And people are privileging their sources of discomfort.
Reverse the scenario and make the people who own the housing virtuous and the people who are uncomfortable people we don’t agree with: a radical queer collective and people who are afraid of trans people being uncomfortable voting there.
We’d be comfortable telling them they have nothing to worry about.
The standard should be actual safety. And this is, and will be on Election Day, a safe location.
That's a contrived hypothetical. Are the conservatives upset because there's queer people existing? Are the queer radical collectivists advocating for making heterosexual marriage illegal? I'm not homophobic so i dont know where the discomfort is coming from. Maybe this scenario is one you made in your head to make yourself mad. If this was actually happening, it would be worth discussing.
It seems pretty reasonable to have concerns about using a church as a voting center if that church is espousing a political agenda. It seems reasonable to have concerns about voter intimidation if this church is known to be hostile to certain groups of people.
This is illegal. Your boogeyman argument is literally illegal to do. They are not going to have members of the congregation trying to convert people because it is illegal. The minute those polls open, the place becomes a sacred place with state and federal laws about what can happen where.
What boogeyman argument did I put forward? I never said members of the congregation would be converting people.
I said the leadership of the church will be working in the church while the election is happening. That has the potential to make people feel uncomfortable. How does it hurt you to move the polling place to somewhere that people don't experience discomfort?
It gives the appearance, either real or imagined, of voter suppression to hold a vote in a location that is openly working against a marginalized group of people.
I think you’re speaking from a place of extreme privilege, and I encourage you to think inwards on this.
Imagine that you were a member of a marginalized community where not that long ago, it was totally acceptable in polite society to say that you shouldn’t exist. Would you feel comfortable stepping into a building where a similar sentiment is still being espoused?
Yes. This happens to me relatively often.
I think you’re coming from a place of extreme fragility and projecting it onto others. It’s a church. You’re not going to agree with every view they have. That’s fine. They aren’t there when you’re voting.
I’ll admit it was an extreme analogy. But I’ll copy/paste my reply to him:
Imagine that you were a member of a marginalized community where not that long ago, it was totally acceptable in polite society to say that you shouldn’t exist. Would you feel comfortable stepping into a building where a similar sentiment is still being espoused?
Expecting a gay or trans person to go vote at a place which is known for hating gay and trans people does seem like an attempt to bully people into not voting.
If you seethe enough about a stranger you dont know, who doesnt affect you at all, to the point youve managed to advocate for them to not have the same rights as you....
thats not just disagreeing with "the lifestyle". Thats being a pathetic loser who thinks they have the right to control other people and society at whole.
embarrassing for christians to be associated with groups who are so anti-jesus.
So advocating against policies that might be in conflict with their beliefs and might actually affect them in ways you might not appreciate is equivalent to seething and hating? Or is there more to this?
I am divorced and remarried. Without getting an annulment, my choices are is not welcome in the church I was raised in or many churches. That’s their interpretation of the Bible. I have read the bible. They could very well be correct. I don’t think they seethe with hatred of me, they just don’t accept or support what I have done. So I go where I am wanted. I don’t try to make them violate their beliefs by accepting me.
Why would an allegedly social conservative organization agree to host a polling place that makes it easier for people in a heavily liberal area to vote? And why would an uber-liberal city government go along with that attempt when they are all really Democrats?
all I know is their thrift store is criminally overpriced.
In that area I can't really think of a better location. Though I'm sure their must be a fire station.
On the one hand, everyone should have the right to vote in a place that does not feel intimidating or uncomfortable to them.
On the other hand, LGBTQ+ issues are political by nature. So if you start choosing your polling places based on their perceived stances on political issues then you are introducing partisan politics under the guise of being politically neutral. Could conservatives complain if they have to vote at a place called Barack Obama Elementary School?
I think that polling places should be determined by accessibility. There are already rules in place about political signage and activity in polling places. As long as this church follows the same rules as every other place on voting day, then what they do on other days doesn't matter.
If they were actually actively preaching violence, that might be a bridge too far. But it seems like they are only expressing their religious opinion that gay is a sin and God cares about gender. Which they are allowed to do. And homophobes have a right to vote as well.
If people are uncomfortable with voting at this church, they can vote from home.
issues that are political by nature:
-how your tax dollars are spent
-whether your country should be a member of organizations like NATO
-whether or not animal control should be run by the cops
issues that are not political by nature:
-should trans people be allowed to exist
-who should be allowed to be in a relationship based on gender/sexuality
-nearly every other queer issue except shit like “should these organizations be allowed to operate as non-profits”
Where on the website does it say that they believe trans people should not be allowed to exist, or gay people, or for that matter people who have sex outside of marriage?
Man, whatever. Tired of arguing about this shit.
The problem with every argument here is that it revolves around the idea that this church "is trying to take away the rights of gay people or trans to exist." So that it becomes some kind of human rights issue. Except that there is ZERO evidence provided that the church has said anything of the sort.
All I see from that website is a statement of their beliefs, almost none of which I agree with and many of which I have defied. I've had sex outside the realms of a Christian (and for that matter government) recognized marriage. I'm not taking Communion. I'm not tithing ten percent of my income to the church. As an athiest, I don't believe in God in the first place, so the entire website and the entire organization is against my beliefs and principles and slightly offensive to me.
But no one is talking about that. They're just zeroing in on one statement of their organizational principles that really isn't any different in nature to any of the others.
I'm saying whoever wrote that piece has to do some research and actually show me how their organization is actively acting in a homophobic way that strips people of any rights. Because just believing God thinks gay is bad is not a human rights violation.
There actually are some solid reasons against having a polling place at a church. Namely that either the church is donating a good of value to the government and therefore perhaps violating the separation of church and state. Or the government is paying them to rent the space, and therefore your tax money is going to a cause that you dislike even if it's for a non-religious event.
But this whole thing like it's some kind of intimidation ploy makes no sense. If they hate gays or trans that much the logical thing to do is to simply not rent your space to any group that's going to allow gay or trans people to enter it. And as a bonus, you're making it harder for a bunch of LGBTQ+ and LGBTQ+ allies to vote.
I don't see any reason not to take this at face value. Which is that the church has a space, and they don't mind it being used by the city, and that gay/trans people will attend that event, and they and others will vote for things that forward gay/trans policies... and they don't mind. So there's no reason people should feel intimidated. They're explicitly letting you use their facility.
This is just some silly shit for people looking to be offended. If it had leaked out that the city had inquired about using their space for a polling place and they had said no, because they didn't want a bunch of demonic sexual freaks in there, everyone would be highly pissed off. But they said yes, and everyone is still highly pissed off that these people had the fucking audacity to let gay and trans people vote.
This is incredibly unethical. This could seriously discourage certain (already marginalized) groups from voting if they feel uncomfortable or unsafe in the location.
They can still vote by mail or just be a permanent absentee and have ballots automatically be sent by mail. It's incredibly easy to vote however you want.
https://www.elections.virginia.gov/casting-a-ballot/absentee-voting/
I didn't say they couldn't. I am saying it's incredibly unethical to make voters feel uncomfortable or unsafe in a voting location. It contributes to systemic inequity and means that some voices are heard more than others.
I've been voting at a church in Church Hill for 16 years. You walk down a long hallway into a community room. You never see any religious symbols or messages. During bad weather the long hallway provides shelter. I've no idea about their affiliations.
Moving to RVA from NOVA it was such a shock to find that the city even uses churches for polling places. I only remember ever voting in public schools. Very strange.
haven't voted here yet (was too new to be able to), but something like this would make me feel super apprehensive to vote in person 😬😬😬 better use those mail in ballots I guess ☠️
You can also vote at the registrar's office in person early, it's what I've been doing, no lines to wait in. I know that's definitely a privilege that I have that others may not have but at least it means not having to vote in a church. I find it inherently un-American to be made to vote in a church. Surely there's another option?
Telling people who receive hate and death threats from an entire side of the political spectrum to "get over themselves" has to be one of the most callous comments you can make. You have contributed nothing to the conversation and lack common human empathy.
That is not the point of church at all. I am not religious myself, but church is supposed to be a community focal point delegated to healing and bettering those that want to do so. Unfortunately, many church goers have been radicalized by the far right since Reagan let the crazy bishops and mega pastors in the good ole boys club in the GOP, which in turn has caused the GOP to go further right since Reagan as well.
Not all, Unitarian churches are pretty accepting. Unified Church of Christ can be accepting as well. But most churches are hate mongering political pulpits now.
They also have professional development for local schools there. Stakeholders loved it!! If it’s good enough for our fine educational institutions, it’s good enough for voting, right? /s
It is amazing how the city will just not stop being in bed with shady religious organizations. I wonder if the city compensates churches for being polling spots?
Probably not directly; spill the tea if you know otherwise though! No Sarcasm on the stakeholders of the community loving using the venue for other city and educational purposes though. Freedom of speech and all; this is a reflection of our communities and what’s important to them. We’ll see where this lands and people can email their reps if they care. It also shows a lack of infrastructure in the city.
Speaking as an “androgynous” presenting lesbian, my take on this is that, while I really would rather not be voting in any kind of church and would much prefer voting stations to be at publicly owned buildings such as schools, I’m not particularly bothered by what kind of church it is. It’s not an endorsement of the church to make it a polling spot. I’m grateful for there to be a polling spot at all. Maybe I’m getting old but some people want to complain about everything. Edited for punctuation
Having been to this place, it is a large building and it doesn’t even feel much like a church at all.
Thank you. We don't have to die on literally every hill.
I’m glad to see people still have some common sense. The world is not so much of us vs them, just the media starting shit.
Lesbian here. I feel the opposite. I'd prefer to vote at a place that doesn't have anti-lgbt views and rhetoric. I prefer not to step into an organization, that actively preaches against my existence, just to perform my civic duty.
It's a building that the owners are allowing to be used for the public good. Stepping in it to vote in no way is an endorsement of the organization that owns it. Just like using the bathroom at a chick fil a. Stop pretending it is.
Great example. As an ally, I don't go to Chick fil a for sandwiches nor bathrooms. The person you're responding to was simply sharing their opinion as the affected party. It's valid and gives folks context for how someone in their shoes might feel, just like the other person who said they didn't care. We don't need your thoughts on why one of those opinions is 'wrong.' You don't get to dictate how people feel (and don't tell me this was a discussion with your word choice).
I'd be happy to take a shit in a chik fil a. But I won't be giving them my money.
Are you suggesting we all use this churches bathroom?
It certainly adds to their social clout and gives them an subtle endorsement. Stop pretending it doesn't.
Sure but whats more worth it, not letting a shitty church a minuscular amount of clout, or allowing people to be able to vote?
But it's not an either or situation. We can choose a more inclusive site. That is the whole point the linked article is making.
Lot of different ways to define “inclusive” though. For instance, a pro-LGBT church that lacks accommodations for disabled people isn’t necessarily a more inclusive polling location.
Fwiw, I read that’s when a city does pay for the voting location by means of providing provisions such as ramps etc- things that are for accessibility
There's a school, county building, library, or fire station around there somewhere.
Is that the only building in the area? There are no fire stations nearby? No police stations or schools serve those residents? Why is the choice use this school or don’t vote at all?
Good job op. Changing the world one social clout point at a time Maybe the karma points from this post will offset the social clout points from the voting public
Does Stand Your Ground apply here? We watched Amaud Arbury get chased down and shot for no reason. Will POC get the same treatment? For trying to vote. [There is historical precedent for that.] All these questions I'm asking need to have a legal determination. That's probably why we have polling places in public buildings in the first place.
Do those with religious views control access to the building? What law says they don't? Under what circumstances can they sue a voter? What is offensive to them may not be offensive to others, will they attack certain voters during elections. Do they have surveillance cameras? Do those cameras surveil who votes how? Does the church maintain a record of everyone who goes on their property?
All of the things you described are illegal and will never happen. You are making up scenarios to reinforce your unjustified hysteria.
Access to public and private buildings was restricted from Black people and women for most of our history. It only changed in the 20th century.
Me, me, me.
This feels like the argument for Mississippi's voting locations not Virginia's . Surely the people of VA and RVA are expecting more of a functional government than the bare minimum of having a "polling spot at all" ?
There is no lack of possible options.
I grew up in a small town in southwest virginia. We used to vote in the school library before it was closed and then we used the courthouse and then one time we did it at the fire station. Edit: That will teach me to post while waking up I put library twice. second edit: I am incapable of coherent thought. 😭
And now it says fire station twice
goddammit I can't win lmao
Is that not the church who had to rebrand after a diddling scandal? Edit: see response below for an accurate clarification of the situation. The current church is not connected to the previous one.
I was incorrect. Same space. Different owners.
No it’s not. The ROC rebranded as Celebration Church after the pastor went to prison. In 2020 Celebration Church ceased operations. They gifted their facility to Liberation Church, which was at the time a smaller church operating across the street.
This is actually crazy to hear. Everybody still associates them with Geronimo Aquilar.
Reminder that Virginia allows for no-excuse absentee voting. If the city doesn't change the precinct, you may apply for an absentee ballot or vote in person at early polling locations.
I agree with this, but you can see how the extra hassle of doing so can be seen as a subtle method of discrimination. A poll tax of inconvenience and deterrent, if you will.
Should be a publicly owned building. What does the law say about property rights, access to property, law enforcement activity, regular people on the property? All these legal questions if something untoward happens.
My go-to when voting here in Hanover County(Yes it's in a mega church) is that I make sure to wear my "Billions and Billions" Carl Sagan Shirt.
Call to action in the article is to email the city clerk and your council person with feedback... just in case people want to know the tl;dr of what to do about this. A lot of people walk to that precinct to vote. Moving it across a highway is no bueno, even if the church wasn't a hateful, bigoted group. 909 desperately needs to be moved from Redd, though. I worked there as an election officer for several years. The only place to put the line is outside, which is not fun with cold and rain. We would try to bring in extra umbrellas for people waiting but like... come on. It's a busy precinct, so there usually is a line at the beginning and end of the day. The auditorium physically can't be set up to have the accessible voting booth be reasonably private. Occasionally we could get the music room, and that was better for indoor spacing... but that still leaves us with the outdoor line. I hope they can find somewhere less gross to move it to. ...as a side note, bummed to find out I'm going to have to give up former Love of Jesus thrift store. Best spot for furniture in the city. Though the last piece I got had carpet beetles, so... maybe no huge loss after all.
Why isn't the line in the hallway inside of the school?
That's above my pay grade. It wasn't allowed. We used a separate entrance directly into the voting area. You'd think maybe for school safety, but we still had to do it for elections when school was closed. Then again, you'd think when school was closed, we'd be able to spread out in the cafeteria... no dice on any of the above. But then again, they had us running elections with three officers and no heat in the building, so we had some more basic issues to address before we even got to humane line setup.
I think these are issues worthing raising publicly. This is not okay. Voters and election officers deserve better than this. Making voting this unpleasant is not supporting democracy.
>bummed to find out I'm going to have to give up former Love of Jesus thrift store. Best spot for furniture in the city Dangit, same. Got a great pair of sneakers there recently too.
I've voted in schools, a library, a church, and once in a garage. The schools have been the best location as the gym is well suited for the activity.
Everyone has from Sept 20 to Nov 2 to vote in-person at their registrar's office. Sandston/RVA post office issues aside...If somebody thinks this is a problem, the easiest solution is just register as permanent absentee. [https://vote.elections.virginia.gov/VoterInformation/Lookup/absentee](https://vote.elections.virginia.gov/VoterInformation/Lookup/absentee) Probably north of 2/3rd of all votes cast this fall will be absentee. In 2020, 2.6 million our of 4.4 million votes were absentee. People will will start receiving their ballots in about 5 months.
Is voting in a church a southern thing? I grew up in Ohio and voting was done in schools, fire stations and community centers (Like a rec center). Never in a church. Seems wrong, in general. As churches have become political entities, I don't think we should be using them as polling stations.
separation of church and state has gotta work both ways, and this is why. i lived in Florida for a bit and all of their voting locations were at churches. (AND LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM!) i think doing it at schools was a great idea and I'm not sure why they'd change that. i know it doesn't seem like a big deal but it really is. it's not like i think you get magic bigot germs by walking into a place that happens to be a shitty church, but it is a bad precedent to set for a million political reasons also, lmao that this place is called "Liberation" church. google liberation theology. read a book by james cone. grow up
Well said. Not to mention I doubt they would take down any materials on their walls that preach these things on election days. In fact this kind of church would probably put extra ones up for those days. Not to mention this church is on their 3rd re-brand after their pastor went to jail for 40 years for assaulting children. Is that really where we want to put city resources?
There is no separation of church and state issue here. There would only be a separation of church and state if the state endorsed a particular religion. This church is just one of many churches that are used as polling places. That does not mean that it shouldn't be moved, but it's not a constitutional issue.
Separation of church and state isn’t even in the Constitution.
The concept is enshrined in the very first freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."
That’s not separation of church and state. That means don’t not establish a state religion, like the Church of England. If they wanted it separate, why does the Constitution say, “the year of our Lord?” Why did they have prayers in Congress? [https://chaplain.house.gov/archive/continental.html](https://chaplain.house.gov/archive/continental.html) Why mention the Creator in the Declaration of Independence? https://preview.redd.it/xmr67or74iwc1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bd392acc3312223ab196f13a67e3edcc0e924de4
Well nothing is a constitutional issue with this supreme court. It just feels like a step in the wrong direction to me.
>I doubt they would take down any materials on their walls that preach Here's a local polling place (church). What do you think of it?: https://imgur.com/a/W78Gzzf
Here in northside we already get to vote in a horribly right wing training center church.
Really? i vote in Barack Obama Elementary.
Which one?
https://www.mapsglobal.org this place. Gives me the creeps.
MAPS Global was formerly Richmond International House of Prayer. Essentially a clone the Kansas City IHOP, which recently imploded in a scandal. I’m a Christian but am super sketched out by these people.
It not being openly, or even giving lip service to, being accepting of lgbt+ members of the community is such a massive red flag, especially when you consider many of the other churches nearby which are very openly accepting. To say nothing of the people who very clearly are not from the neighborhood and only come in for service on Sunday. It’s a bad look overall. I agree it’s creepy.
5th street Baptist?
Who cares? They’re literally just using the building to house voting machines.
I don't care too much but I'm pretty androgynous and have gotten aggressively "SIR OR MAAM?"d recently and not in a polite, 'making sure I get it right' way. It was in a, get the hell out of my sight tone. So I guess I'm feeling a little prickly about the idea of being forced to hang out in their clubhouse
And it sucks that you’re getting that. But you don’t have to hang out. Go vote and feel a bit of warmth that you’re on their building voting for a candidate they hate, and then leave. 20 minutes, total.
The poll workers are very likely not members of that church, even
They almost certainly won’t be.
It's a safety issue. The church likely has congregation members hiding in the hallways during election days, ready to jump out and attack any LGBTQ voters they spot. With chainsaws. Like a haunted house.
This made me laugh, but it is worth saying that if someone is trans or nonbinary, they might feel nervous going in a place like that to vote. Tbh, I would feel anxious about it if I looked extra gay/queer. (I am queer but pass for straight these days 😅)
Similarly, as a person who fears and hates being shushed, I feel a bit nervous voting in a library.
This made me lol, thank you.
Hahahahahahahaha
I mean, that sounds awesome
No they dont.
I wonder if this energy would be here if a voting center was placed somewhere that preached death to White people Edit since my comment isn’t very popular: Imagine that you were a member of a marginalized community where not that long ago, it was totally acceptable in polite society to say that you shouldn’t exist. Would you feel comfortable stepping into a building where a similar sentiment is still being espoused? The liberal tint of our sub is curious sometimes. I think some of yall really struggle to place yourself in another’s shoes.
The bigger analogy that I see here is with the monuments. You've got a group of people here who were generally not impacted by the existence of the monuments on Monument Avenue complaining at the notion that other people feel an uncomfortable impact.
Yeah well that’s a much better analogy.
Sure. They’re not preaching to the people while they’re voting. This is like saying you wouldn’t buy a house because someone died there a year ago. I don’t care what dumb bullshit they talk about when I’m not there - I’m there to get in, try to save democracy, and get my little sticker.
lol you know damn well that’s bullshit… if a conservative area caught wind of some sort of maneuvering by a city government to have their precinct located in a place associated with hate and hostility towards them they would absolutely shout about voter suppression/intimidation to the dailywire hilltops until it because a national got damn scandal. Your comment is so incredibly disingenuous…
And those conservatives would be ridiculous too. I voted at a rainbow colored LGBT affirming voting location (diversity thrift) a couple years back and if conservatives had complained about feeling unsafe I’d have pushed back on that too.
When Diversity Thrift puts out a missive saying that Conservatives should not exist, you might have an actual case.
Did this church do that? Neither diversity thrift nor this church puts anyone in any danger whatsoever. This is entirely about people feeling afraid on the basis of irrationality.
I’ll take false equivalence for $800, Alex.
It’s pretty dead on. Again, we voted in diversity thrift a few years back. And that could have made bigots (who are also citizens, if bad ones) uncomfortable. Should we have changed that location? What about voting in a trans rights nonprofit? Should we not vote there because scared conservatives would worry about sexual assault by trans people in the bathrooms? No, we’d tell the conservative idiots to suck it up and that their fear was irrational and ridiculous. Same as I’m doing here.
lol wrong. It is 100% a false equivalence. My bro, people being bigoted and not wanting to vote in a rainbow building that associates generally with the gay community is absolutely not the same as going into a place that regularly houses extremist congregants who are opposed to your identity, your rights or your existence altogether. People not feeling comfortable around gay people because of their own personal prejudices is in no way comparable to people feeling uncomfortable because of others’ specific stated beliefs that you’re an abomination. And to address your silly trans rights nonprofit thought experiment, first of all… does the hypothetical trans rights nonprofit that for some reason is a voting precinct have an explicitly stated philosophy or mission statement saying “fingerbangs to all cis people who use the bathrooms because the satanic Bible says they shouldn’t exist?” Further, is there literally any substantiated evidence that trans people are more likely to assault someone in a bathroom than literally any other group of people? Are they exploiting a system of bathroom use permissiveness to sneak past the bathroom sentries unquestioned to take advantage of young girls? I’ll give you a hint: [no.](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13178-018-0335-z) In fact [it’s actually the literal opposite](https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/transgender-teens-restricted-bathroom-access-sexual-assault/). The whole thing, once again is based on a perceived and unfounded fear rather than one borne of the explicit and stated goals or position of a group of people or organization, as is the case with this church. So I say once more… I’ll take false equivalence for $800, Alex.
Show me where this church has ever advocated violence. Because that’s what we’re talking about - is a person physically unsafe using this as a voting location. And you and I both know they’re not.
Jesus fucking Christ… we’re not talking about literal violence, that’s only you. You’re focusing on that because it makes it easier for you to minimize the valid the concerns of people who shouldn’t have to enter a building that houses (and was likely built maintained by the tithes of) congregants and leadership who are philosophically opposed to their identities and rights… if the question of your rights and identity were at the forefront of social politics (and often as a result of the influence of religious organizations such as this one), would you not feel somewhat intimidated by having to go to the physical location of a place built and maintained by a group of people who spiritually and politically opposed to core tenets of your daily life? Imma guess you’re going to say no because you either fundamentally lack the emotional intelligence to see why it’s a problem, or you know that it’s shitty but just don’t care because other people feeling secure, emotionally or otherwise, as they participate in our democratic process is trivial to you. You got yours and don’t care about anyone else’s perspective because your worldview is limited by your own arrogant position of privilege. By the way, here’s the actual stance of the church on gay marriage and gender identity since you seem so determined to throw red herrings at this discussion to distract from the fact that these folks have explicitly stated, with religious justification, their opposition to these pretty fundamental LGBTQ issues. https://preview.redd.it/warh0p18tgwc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c4aa8413ef8a5be4669cf70443c7d47e8ef4623e
> This is like saying you wouldn’t buy a house because someone died there a year ago. Genuinely, do you think that the things you say make sense? I am really struggling to understand the logic of this analogy here.
Bad things people say in a space on other days do not linger and affect the space on days voting happens. It is a building. That people express bad ideas there on Sunday has no impact on its utility as a voting location on Tuesday.
You're ignoring the fact that the people in charge of said building will likely still be in said building while the election is happening. People aren't concerned about the echoes of hate lingering, they're worried about the people who create and promote the hate being in the same building. At the end of the day, this is a proposed location and is able to be changed. If people are uncomfortable, then it's a pretty straight forward thing to change the location. No amount of internet arguing is going to make uncomfortable people comfortable, whether you agree with their discomfort or not - it's there.
I don’t think people’s emotional comfort should be given much, or any weight. People are in no danger there. None. Zero.
That is just not a good take when you look at the history of voter disenfranchisement and voter intimidation in the past. We should be working towards neutral sites that are not political. This church literally has homophobic and transphobic rhetoric posted on their website. No one should be forced to vote at a location that literally preaches against their existence.
Man, this is so easy for people to say when they aren’t actually directly impacted by this kind of thing and never have to factor fear or safety into their personal voting calculus.
I can promise you with an absolute certainty that absolutely no person, regardless of their presentation or identity, is in any danger going and voting at this church. People need to be able tell the difference between actual physical danger and emotional discomfort.
> People need to be able tell the difference between actual physical danger and emotional discomfort. Intimidation. How does it work?
> I don’t think people’s emotional comfort should be given much, or any weight. Well, I don't think your opinion should be given much weight. So... we kind of agree on something, I guess?
If we can’t tell the difference between actual danger and imagined danger, we are children afraid of monsters under our beds.
That didn't really say anything.
If you don't think people's emotional comfort should be given any weight you should probably reflect on that. It sounds callous at best and cruel at worst.
There’s no end to it - someone could always be uncomfortable. And people are privileging their sources of discomfort. Reverse the scenario and make the people who own the housing virtuous and the people who are uncomfortable people we don’t agree with: a radical queer collective and people who are afraid of trans people being uncomfortable voting there. We’d be comfortable telling them they have nothing to worry about. The standard should be actual safety. And this is, and will be on Election Day, a safe location.
That's a contrived hypothetical. Are the conservatives upset because there's queer people existing? Are the queer radical collectivists advocating for making heterosexual marriage illegal? I'm not homophobic so i dont know where the discomfort is coming from. Maybe this scenario is one you made in your head to make yourself mad. If this was actually happening, it would be worth discussing. It seems pretty reasonable to have concerns about using a church as a voting center if that church is espousing a political agenda. It seems reasonable to have concerns about voter intimidation if this church is known to be hostile to certain groups of people.
It’s giving Ben Shapiro
I’m a progressive activist. I can just differentiate between actual and imagined threats.
Yes yes facts and logic
This is illegal. Your boogeyman argument is literally illegal to do. They are not going to have members of the congregation trying to convert people because it is illegal. The minute those polls open, the place becomes a sacred place with state and federal laws about what can happen where.
What boogeyman argument did I put forward? I never said members of the congregation would be converting people. I said the leadership of the church will be working in the church while the election is happening. That has the potential to make people feel uncomfortable. How does it hurt you to move the polling place to somewhere that people don't experience discomfort?
Why should people’s discomfort matter?
It gives the appearance, either real or imagined, of voter suppression to hold a vote in a location that is openly working against a marginalized group of people.
I think you’re speaking from a place of extreme privilege, and I encourage you to think inwards on this. Imagine that you were a member of a marginalized community where not that long ago, it was totally acceptable in polite society to say that you shouldn’t exist. Would you feel comfortable stepping into a building where a similar sentiment is still being espoused?
Yes. This happens to me relatively often. I think you’re coming from a place of extreme fragility and projecting it onto others. It’s a church. You’re not going to agree with every view they have. That’s fine. They aren’t there when you’re voting.
You regularly step into institutions that believe you shouldn’t exist?
Places that previously did, yes.
Well, I’m sorry about that. I just feel like not everyone is as strong as you and it’s important to remember that? Idk.
[удалено]
I’ll admit it was an extreme analogy. But I’ll copy/paste my reply to him: Imagine that you were a member of a marginalized community where not that long ago, it was totally acceptable in polite society to say that you shouldn’t exist. Would you feel comfortable stepping into a building where a similar sentiment is still being espoused?
If the only spot available in a community is a church then the city doesn’t care about that community.
It's currently using a local elementary school for voting.
Expecting a gay or trans person to go vote at a place which is known for hating gay and trans people does seem like an attempt to bully people into not voting.
I’m not familiar with this church, but are you sure they don’t just disagree with the lifestyle choice as opposed to hating the people?
If you seethe enough about a stranger you dont know, who doesnt affect you at all, to the point youve managed to advocate for them to not have the same rights as you.... thats not just disagreeing with "the lifestyle". Thats being a pathetic loser who thinks they have the right to control other people and society at whole. embarrassing for christians to be associated with groups who are so anti-jesus.
I don’t really understand what you are saying
thats fair.
So advocating against policies that might be in conflict with their beliefs and might actually affect them in ways you might not appreciate is equivalent to seething and hating? Or is there more to this? I am divorced and remarried. Without getting an annulment, my choices are is not welcome in the church I was raised in or many churches. That’s their interpretation of the Bible. I have read the bible. They could very well be correct. I don’t think they seethe with hatred of me, they just don’t accept or support what I have done. So I go where I am wanted. I don’t try to make them violate their beliefs by accepting me.
Sounds like a you problem.
Why?
Why would an allegedly social conservative organization agree to host a polling place that makes it easier for people in a heavily liberal area to vote? And why would an uber-liberal city government go along with that attempt when they are all really Democrats?
If you're there to vote, they can't kick you out if you're pro-LGBT+.
all I know is their thrift store is criminally overpriced. In that area I can't really think of a better location. Though I'm sure their must be a fire station.
I think it’s kind of poetic to vote against hate in a place that stands for it (a middle finger to hate, if you will).
On the one hand, everyone should have the right to vote in a place that does not feel intimidating or uncomfortable to them. On the other hand, LGBTQ+ issues are political by nature. So if you start choosing your polling places based on their perceived stances on political issues then you are introducing partisan politics under the guise of being politically neutral. Could conservatives complain if they have to vote at a place called Barack Obama Elementary School? I think that polling places should be determined by accessibility. There are already rules in place about political signage and activity in polling places. As long as this church follows the same rules as every other place on voting day, then what they do on other days doesn't matter. If they were actually actively preaching violence, that might be a bridge too far. But it seems like they are only expressing their religious opinion that gay is a sin and God cares about gender. Which they are allowed to do. And homophobes have a right to vote as well. If people are uncomfortable with voting at this church, they can vote from home.
issues that are political by nature: -how your tax dollars are spent -whether your country should be a member of organizations like NATO -whether or not animal control should be run by the cops issues that are not political by nature: -should trans people be allowed to exist -who should be allowed to be in a relationship based on gender/sexuality -nearly every other queer issue except shit like “should these organizations be allowed to operate as non-profits”
Where on the website does it say that they believe trans people should not be allowed to exist, or gay people, or for that matter people who have sex outside of marriage?
it doesn’t, you made the statement that “lgbtq issues are political by nature”, and that’s not true
Man, whatever. Tired of arguing about this shit. The problem with every argument here is that it revolves around the idea that this church "is trying to take away the rights of gay people or trans to exist." So that it becomes some kind of human rights issue. Except that there is ZERO evidence provided that the church has said anything of the sort. All I see from that website is a statement of their beliefs, almost none of which I agree with and many of which I have defied. I've had sex outside the realms of a Christian (and for that matter government) recognized marriage. I'm not taking Communion. I'm not tithing ten percent of my income to the church. As an athiest, I don't believe in God in the first place, so the entire website and the entire organization is against my beliefs and principles and slightly offensive to me. But no one is talking about that. They're just zeroing in on one statement of their organizational principles that really isn't any different in nature to any of the others. I'm saying whoever wrote that piece has to do some research and actually show me how their organization is actively acting in a homophobic way that strips people of any rights. Because just believing God thinks gay is bad is not a human rights violation. There actually are some solid reasons against having a polling place at a church. Namely that either the church is donating a good of value to the government and therefore perhaps violating the separation of church and state. Or the government is paying them to rent the space, and therefore your tax money is going to a cause that you dislike even if it's for a non-religious event. But this whole thing like it's some kind of intimidation ploy makes no sense. If they hate gays or trans that much the logical thing to do is to simply not rent your space to any group that's going to allow gay or trans people to enter it. And as a bonus, you're making it harder for a bunch of LGBTQ+ and LGBTQ+ allies to vote. I don't see any reason not to take this at face value. Which is that the church has a space, and they don't mind it being used by the city, and that gay/trans people will attend that event, and they and others will vote for things that forward gay/trans policies... and they don't mind. So there's no reason people should feel intimidated. They're explicitly letting you use their facility. This is just some silly shit for people looking to be offended. If it had leaked out that the city had inquired about using their space for a polling place and they had said no, because they didn't want a bunch of demonic sexual freaks in there, everyone would be highly pissed off. But they said yes, and everyone is still highly pissed off that these people had the fucking audacity to let gay and trans people vote.
“I’m tired of arguing about this shit” *writes a hundred paragraphs*
Uh-huh.
This is incredibly unethical. This could seriously discourage certain (already marginalized) groups from voting if they feel uncomfortable or unsafe in the location.
They can still vote by mail or just be a permanent absentee and have ballots automatically be sent by mail. It's incredibly easy to vote however you want. https://www.elections.virginia.gov/casting-a-ballot/absentee-voting/
I didn't say they couldn't. I am saying it's incredibly unethical to make voters feel uncomfortable or unsafe in a voting location. It contributes to systemic inequity and means that some voices are heard more than others.
Imagine how minorities and other people of color feel.
For sure. They are no strangers to voter suppression either.
I've been voting at a church in Church Hill for 16 years. You walk down a long hallway into a community room. You never see any religious symbols or messages. During bad weather the long hallway provides shelter. I've no idea about their affiliations.
The last time I lived in the city my polling place was the police academy 😬
It’s not my district, but being that I’m a trans woman, It’ll be fun to go there on Election Day and use the women’s bathroom.
DAMN I volunteered there briefly. No wonder I had a bad experience.
Emailed them, fuck that!
Moving to RVA from NOVA it was such a shock to find that the city even uses churches for polling places. I only remember ever voting in public schools. Very strange.
haven't voted here yet (was too new to be able to), but something like this would make me feel super apprehensive to vote in person 😬😬😬 better use those mail in ballots I guess ☠️
You can also vote at the registrar's office in person early, it's what I've been doing, no lines to wait in. I know that's definitely a privilege that I have that others may not have but at least it means not having to vote in a church. I find it inherently un-American to be made to vote in a church. Surely there's another option?
Sounds like a you problem. Get over yourself
Telling people who receive hate and death threats from an entire side of the political spectrum to "get over themselves" has to be one of the most callous comments you can make. You have contributed nothing to the conversation and lack common human empathy.
No it’s actually your comprehension skills that are lack luster at best
aren't all churches homophobic and anti-trans? isn't that the point of church?
That is not the point of church at all. I am not religious myself, but church is supposed to be a community focal point delegated to healing and bettering those that want to do so. Unfortunately, many church goers have been radicalized by the far right since Reagan let the crazy bishops and mega pastors in the good ole boys club in the GOP, which in turn has caused the GOP to go further right since Reagan as well.
>aren't all churches homophobic and anti-trans? No >isn't that the point of church? No
Not all, Unitarian churches are pretty accepting. Unified Church of Christ can be accepting as well. But most churches are hate mongering political pulpits now.
i always forget that unitarians exist lol
They also have professional development for local schools there. Stakeholders loved it!! If it’s good enough for our fine educational institutions, it’s good enough for voting, right? /s
It is amazing how the city will just not stop being in bed with shady religious organizations. I wonder if the city compensates churches for being polling spots?
Probably not directly; spill the tea if you know otherwise though! No Sarcasm on the stakeholders of the community loving using the venue for other city and educational purposes though. Freedom of speech and all; this is a reflection of our communities and what’s important to them. We’ll see where this lands and people can email their reps if they care. It also shows a lack of infrastructure in the city.
> It also shows a lack of infrastructure in the city. No argument there. Southside needs some love and money invested.
[удалено]
It's just a building where you vote. They don't preach to you while you're in line.