If you highlight every other word it loses it’s significance
Also, highlighting with two different colors makes no sense at all here and makes it very difficult to read. This is the product of an unhinged mind.
In addition the entire last sentence is completely redundant…
There is only 1 sentence.my bad i see a second period now.Oh god…one period a month is enough! We don’t need a second one!
It’s honestly unreadable for me unless I try significantly harder to understand but that’s why I read the comments XD
with these colours my brain focuses on the highest contrast from the bg = white, and skips the rest 🫠
The way the words are colored in this is odd. Like why is “united daughters” orange but not “of the confederacy”. Isn’t the full thing their name?
Well it was written in all-caps to decrease readability, so to make it less readable they had to semi-randomly color code it.
+1 for the idea this is just one giant social experiment and we are the guinea pigs.
This is arguably uplifting, though also horrifying that it was allowed the first place, however it’s also from April so I don’t think it qualifies as news.
now tax the data centers Abigail.
we’re waiting.
Maybe threatened her kids and family.
Supreme Court: No, more tax exempt status for racist groups!
The founding fathers intended for this country to be racist and only for white men, we’re just following the original intent.
…god dammit. My natural instinct to that statement is to argue, but as I attempt to mentally formulate my argument, it all falls apart. How am I going to argue what you said when the founding fathers wrote “All men are created equally”, and then 5pm comes, work is over, and they all go home to their plantations with slave labor? How am I going to argue your point when they all pushed west, and claimed “manifest destiny” to kill all the native americans, and other misc non-whites? I mean my god! Hitler even used that time period as inspiration for the holocaust! We did eradicate many many different tribes of native american. Because contrary to common belief, there were no singular race called “indians” or “native americans”. It was different tribes with different cultures. Different histories. They’re erased from history now. It’s like their culture didn’t exist at all. The culture we know as being native american is from the tribes that survived. And even they almost got wiped out too.
Then I just sat in my chair, and I can’t explain the feeling I had. It was like a mixture of shame, exhaustion, and defeat. I can’t argue your point because you’re right.
I just hate that you’re right.
Perhaps. But I would argue that we have come to learn, that we prosper more when we come together. That is regardless of where you were born, what culture(s) you grew up with, the traditions you had, etc. I highly doubt that the founding fathers foresaw the U.S. becoming the world’s biggest melting pot of culture. And that’s fine. They didn’t need to know that back then. They were doing their best for the time and circumstances. They needed to form a government that could stand the test of time. It wasn’t the best for everything then and it’s certainly not the best for now. But to think that we couldn’t amend what doesn’t work well now days, versus then… Well that’s just foolish thinking.
*Christian landowning white men.
Some did feel that way, some didn’t. The ones that didn’t, got enough of their way in writing the founding documents to set the foundation for further civil rights.
Nice. Now do churches.
Wow I knew the US is a stupid place but I didn’t know you could get a tax exemption just for being super racist.
It’s basically the entire point of Scientology.
It’s basically just a giant tax break scam but some people took it too seriously and turned it into an actual pseudo religion that doesn’t really seem to believe in anything.
In Germany scientology is considered a cult and not a church. No privileges for cults including taxes.
I’d like to see the same for churches but that topic is not on the political table at the moment.
The US tried to do this, and scientologists were able to successfully do essentially a DOS attack on the IRS until they pretty much gave up.
a cult and not a church
What’s the difference?
Time
You could argue the same for every religious organization in the US.
Not every. Many have continuously existed long before the US. When establishing the US, you’ve got those major themes of separation of church and state and no taxation without representation. It naturally intersects that these actual religious organizations shouldn’t pay taxes if we don’t want the government getting into their business and vice versa. And there are plenty of those.
The tax loophole ones, on the other hand, that end up as memes–the ones with flying Santa and Super Mega Jesus™ with web 3.0 NFTs to fund the Salvation Aviation™–yeah, those are similarly ridiculed and rebuked by the real religious people. It’s not just atheists that call b.s. on those “churches”, it’s also churches.
So after the Civil War people put up statues and started groups like this to honor the dead. The cause of the war aside, if you were alive back then you would have known the people that died. They were your friends, you family, your children, you parents, etc… so groups and statues were started to honor them
You can try to say this is fucked up but we have a well respected Vietnam Memorial in Washington D.C.
Was the US right in what we did in Vietnam? No. Do you think the people that died in Vietnam were shitty and shouldn’t be remembered? Also no.
Back then people weren’t putting up statues of Stonewall Jackson because they thought “The South will rise again”, they were just honoring the memory of their dead friends. None of us think Vietnam 2.0 is on the way and this time we’ll succeed in killing them all, but we still have Vietnam memorials and ceremonies and stuff
But, time went on… and somewhere around the early 1900’s racism was still a pretty big thing and as segregation was being taken apart some people got upset and started re-igniting the love of these groups. They put up more statues of confederate soldiers, they put confederate symbols in their state flags, they started to re-join and re-support confederate groups. Not because they personally missed the people that died, but because they hated black people
Now it’s an issue of, there’s this historical thing that started with good intentions that has been muddied over the years by literal racists, what do we do? Leaving it up gives the racists something to rally around, tearing it down is “removing history”. But also, a lot of this was done out of hate way past the end of the Civil War…so we’re starting to take it all down. The statues from the 1900’s got to go, the statues from the 1800s got to go. The groups need to lose their tax-exempt status, etc…
I guess it would be like if modern day people did start to think we should go back to Vietnam and kill all the Vietnamese and then started to put up Vietnam memorials not out of memory of the young men that died but out of hate for the Vietnamese people… that memorial in DC might take on a new meaning and it might have to be removed
People don’t want to hear there’s nuance. Today, it really is just racists stuck in their ways though, and it’s really not removing history or getting rid of a support group - nobody’s personally affected by their great grear great grandfather dying in a war. Tax exempt status is a good first step, but they should be labeled as hate groups. I mean hell I think I’m technically a terrorist because I protested against Trump.
If you become important to the wealthy, you can do whatever you want. Just don’t lose that useful idiot status. Because once you’re no longer useful, leopards will eat your face.
Hooray for the absolute minimum!
I like to watermark the image so people will know I’m anonymous.
I like the rainbow text which makes my brain stop between nearly every word for some reason.
I JUST read it and I couldn’t tell you what it said
So everyone pays their taxes, right?
Except for the rich, of course.
Sounds fair
It’s going to be interesting because:
-
It could be seen as a violation of first amendment constitutional rights to freedom of speech.
-
The secessionists, whom immediately went to war with the USA until their destruction, could technically be considered terrorists and traitors and therefor their rhetoric is the advocacy of immediate harm and not lawfully protected speech.
-
None of these facts really matter once it reaches federal courts because most current judges are partisans, and if it reaches the SCOTUS then Uncle Tom has their backs.
Wait what does tax exemption have to do with free speech? I have to pay taxes but I also have free speech.
It depends on what this actually does, if it removes tax exempt status from groups that would otherwise receive it based on their beliefs and speech, then it probably violates 1A. If it’s repealing some sort of special tax exemption cutout for confederate groups, then it’s probably OK.
The problem is the targeting of specific individuals on the basis of political opinions leading to negative outcomes. If they were repealing the exemption for everyone that would be fine.
It could be seen as a violation of first amendment constitutional rights to freedom of speech.
these organizations will have more freedoms within the commonwealth, not less, by not being bound to the conditions of the tax status they no longer will qualify for.
-
No more fire insurance either, since the 2020 cool zone, probably.
https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2025/06/12/confederate-group-richmond-protest-fire-lawsuit
Well, it’s not that they hadn’t insurance, but it was too low to cover the damages. Someone saved a lot of money… or not.
I suspect nobody is willing to insure them anymore given the much higher risk.
Well done, now do the rest.
Rest of…what? Do what to the rest?
The rest of the racist groups, like the GOP, a disappointing amount of churches, police unions…
That and pretty much everything that is tax exempt.
🫡
I’ve got to ask a a question:
Did this remove a special tax exemption cutout for confederate-related groups, or did it make being confederate-related an exception that disqualifies groups that would otherwise be tax-exempt?
That’s going to be a big difference in how it shakes out in the courts - if it’s barring groups that would otherwise qualify for tax-exempt status based on their ideology, it’ll likely be found to violate free speech and equal protection, if it’s repealing a special cutout for those groups then that’s not a concern.
