Not The Onion

21824 readers

1059 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

kescusay@lemmy.world

837

Christian man sues employer for forcing him to see a Pride flag on his way into work (www.lgbtqnation.com)

submitted 3 weeks ago by Infrapink@thebrainbin.org to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

286 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Department of Public Works employee Eric Batman claims that having to see a Progress Pride flag flying outside the department’s Alhambra, California, headquarters during the month of June effectively forces him to “celebrate, recognize, and solemnize conduct and actions that he views as sin” in conflict with his sincerely held Christian religious beliefs, according to a lawsuit filed in March by anti-LGBTQ+ evangelical nonprofit the Liberty Counsel.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Can I sue this guy for the disgust I feel inside me when I read about him suing for seeing a flag he doesn't like? Does this mean I can also sue every church forcing me to see a cross and forcing me to hear these fucking annoying bells every fucking hour?

Funny story, I filed a complaint about the church bells near me. I found out it's not the church ringing them, which would fall under the constitutional law freedom of religion of my country, but it is done by a foundation consisting of volunteers which does not fall under the freedom of religion law as it's not a religious organization so it is considered noise pollution.

I didn't get a reply, which is also against the law.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I would imagine that in order to be a valid noise complaint the noise needs to be unnecessary. After all construction work has to be limited between certain hours precisely because it makes noise but they're allowed to make noise within those hours because the noise is a necessary thing to put up with in order to carry out construction.

I would imagine that they would argue that the ringing of the bells is a necessary part of the ceremony. Ring them at 4:00 in the morning probably would constitute a valid noise complaint though.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

It's 2026, there is nothing necessary about church bells. Assuming they're even actual bells, and not just a midi file playing over shitty speakers

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 3 weeks ago

Try making that arguement in Texas or Alabama

[–] TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Yeah, exactly right. But these bells go 24h and also for 20min on Sunday. Normally it's allowed to make noise during the day, until 23h but not on Sunday because it's a rest day. So, ironically, they are in violation because of church service.