This is a class act in how to make use of the system through malicious compliance. If the theocrats demand a theocracy, then while we have a federal government that tries to enforce equal access, then demonstrate just how equal access will be used.

To do that, you need to be informed, engaged, willing to work, and willing to speak up with your voice. Sadly, democracy is only defended by an active and informed electorate. Politics is also a contact sport. We are served well by people stepping into the ring and putting some body blows on those in power who want to erode the foundations of secular society.

I love this idea 🐐

What we need to do is to make drag a religion so that Florida and Texas can’t ban shows.

Hartley was essentially admitting that Satanists (and Muslims and other non-Christian groups) would theoretically have access to the funds. However, if the state had a really good reason not to give it to them, there was a way to restrict the funds from going to those groups. You don’t have to be a lawyer to realize that a group being considered a “fringe” religion would never pass strict scrutiny.

N.B. “Strict scrutiny” is a standard applied by courts, not legislatures, when reviewing a law for infringements of constitutional rights. It’s the highest standard of scrutiny, and when applied almost always ends with the law being struck down.

In other words, she’s saying that a law that excludes “fringe” religions would almost certainly be struck down.