A social media post from Waynesboro Public Schools said that police are maintaining a large presence around the school. The incident occurred just weeks after the school’s first day back following summer break.
Students have been taken to Westminster Presbyterian Church for reunification.
The sheriff's office said that the "children are safe" and asked for the public to avoid traveling to the school to ensure emergency vehicles and buses aren't blocked.
This is an example of someone in authority (not clear who) implying a religion is "safe" for kids and propagandizing that message to all the students who were taken there.
Government needs to stay the hell out of religion, and that includes teaching children that churches are safe places. They are not. Christianity teaches to hit the child with a rod to save their souls from sheol. Proverbs 23:13-14 & 20:30
I agree, but it's plainly obvious that wasn't the intent... If anything the church was simply a neutral place that was literally safe because it was far away enough from the shots being fired at the school.
It was an active shooter situation and the kids needed to be evacuated to a rendezvous point away from the school. I looked it up, that elementary school is kind of out in the middle of nowhere from the street view and the church was .4 miles away. A 10 minute walk.
Do you think that while everyone was worried about an active shooter and innocent children being murdered, some admin somewhere was like "oh this is a great time to try to indoctrinate the children!" And when that cop was making the statement that the kids are safe, that he was really hoping that it would imply it was because they were at a church and not, you know dead from gunshot wounds?
Both the evacuation as well as a statement of "the kids are safe" are not out of the ordinary given the situation. So the rendezvous point happened to be a church, what's the big deal there?
You are more upset at the false idea that this was intentional religious propaganda to teach the kids, or the target audience of the article, than you are that they were in an active shooting scenario to begin with.
No. They are safer in a non-shooting environment than they are in one where they're in danger of getting shot. I view the choice here as the difference between bad (church) and really bad (school shooting). Two bad situations, much like the saying, "jumping from the frying pan into the fire." Hope that clears it up for you.
7 Comments
T00l_shed@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 5d
Two seasons in the US, summer and school shooting
Corvidae@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 5d
This is an example of someone in authority (not clear who) implying a religion is "safe" for kids and propagandizing that message to all the students who were taken there.
KimjongTOOILL@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 5d
That's some qanon level of analysis of those statements.
There is no intent behind those statements of facts. You are just wildly projecting that narrative onto them for some reason.
Corvidae@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 5d
Government needs to stay the hell out of religion, and that includes teaching children that churches are safe places. They are not. Christianity teaches to hit the child with a rod to save their souls from sheol. Proverbs 23:13-14 & 20:30
KimjongTOOILL@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 5d
I agree, but it's plainly obvious that wasn't the intent... If anything the church was simply a neutral place that was literally safe because it was far away enough from the shots being fired at the school.
It was an active shooter situation and the kids needed to be evacuated to a rendezvous point away from the school. I looked it up, that elementary school is kind of out in the middle of nowhere from the street view and the church was .4 miles away. A 10 minute walk.
Do you think that while everyone was worried about an active shooter and innocent children being murdered, some admin somewhere was like "oh this is a great time to try to indoctrinate the children!" And when that cop was making the statement that the kids are safe, that he was really hoping that it would imply it was because they were at a church and not, you know dead from gunshot wounds?
Both the evacuation as well as a statement of "the kids are safe" are not out of the ordinary given the situation. So the rendezvous point happened to be a church, what's the big deal there?
You are more upset at the false idea that this was intentional religious propaganda to teach the kids, or the target audience of the article, than you are that they were in an active shooting scenario to begin with.
Corvidae@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 5d
No. They are safer in a non-shooting environment than they are in one where they're in danger of getting shot. I view the choice here as the difference between bad (church) and really bad (school shooting). Two bad situations, much like the saying, "jumping from the frying pan into the fire." Hope that clears it up for you.
Fishnoodle@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 5d
Read some of the sparse details available, and my bet is that a school resource officer had an accidental discharge and shot themselves