# data[].attributes.body
They should view everyone as equal and not say anything bias online. This is because they are the people keeping us safe and if they post something mean about a group of people then they would cause that group to feel unsafe. The people would feel unsafe because they might think that they wouldn’t be safe anymore.

# data[].attributes.body
I think it depends on the magnitude of the situation, because each act of misconduct will have a corresponding and appropriate consequence. I think firing someone for a social media post is a bit extreme, because this can prevent them from finding other employment since they will have bad things on the resume.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that if someone is a public servant and they post something disrespectful about a group of people, I think they should be fired from their job. As a public servant, their duty is to help people when they need it, but more importantly, to make everyone feel safe. If their comments make a group of people feel inferior and unsafe, they should definitely be severely punished for their actions

# data[].attributes.body
I think that it should matter because public workers could have underlying bias and prejudices that put a certain population in risk/at a disadvantage.

# data[].attributes.body
I think it matters of what strangers post on social media because even if it doesn’t effect me, it can badly effect other people or people close to me. People need to be more considerate about what they post and what they should say, even on a social media platform.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that no matter who the offensive post is directed to, we should all take action because there is someone in the world that doesn’t feel safe. The person should be fired because if they are a public servant and can’t create a safe place for others, it directly impacts the other person physically and mentally

# data[].attributes.body
Yes. Saying something in private is different from saying it in public. He knew what he was doing when he attacked an ENTIRE community. So, he should face the consequences.

-Saniya

# data[].attributes.body
I think people should be fired for posting rude and offensive comments because of its effects. If the person has a social media account, they should understand how many people can view their post, and the effects of that. A rude comment or post could also stop others from reaching out to them because of how uncomfortable it made them feel. If the person is not corrected for this mistake, it would continue. For all these reasons, I feel that the person should be fired.

# data[].attributes.body
You should be fired if you post something offensive or something the makes other uncomfortable, especially if you are a public worker. As a public servant you try to make the public feel safe and if you don’t do that by posting a rude comment then you should get fired.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that if they post offensive things towards people, they should be fired, because they are making people feel unsafe.

# data[].attributes.body
It definitely matters if someone posts something and it is a negative comment about a group of people. People need to feel safe when calling the police or the fire department. I think it depends on the heaviness or lightness of the post.

# data[].attributes.body
Public servant professions include police officers, judges and firefighters, as well as jobs that keep the government operating such as accounting, finance, information technology and logistics management.

# data[].attributes.body
Public servant professions include police officers, judges and firefighters, as well as jobs that keep the government operating such as accounting, finance, information technology and logistics management.

Should how they view strangers and talk about them on social media matter?

# data[].attributes.body
More children have started to download social media. They don’t realize what the risk is when doing this because of how young and gullible they are, so it’s easy to be taken advantage of.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that since our generation is more online and judged based on our social media, we need to be careful of what we post. On the other hand this could be a good thing because it will help people know who you are safely, without giving away too much information.

# data[].attributes.body
People should be aware of what they are posting because it can have a certain effect when an employer looks at your social media account.

# data[].attributes.body
There’s a whole other platform with which people make assumptions about you based off what you post, not just your future employers but also your classmates. Now with social media blooming, I feel that people are having false narratives written about them because of the pictures they post. I think adults heavily warn against the use of social media but it extremely hard to control and there is only so much you can do as an external third party.

# data[].attributes.body
I think the generation now should be more careful of what they are posting, since even if your delete it, it never really goes away. Also because more schools are looking at your social media.

# data[].attributes.body
Being on social media sometimes provides a lot more negative effects that I don’t always consider. A photo is there forever, even if you delete it, so it is extremely hard to permanently delete yourself from all social media. Also, if you are tagged in another person’s photo, it may become extremely hard to get that photo deleted. This may have been taught earlier, but I feel that it should have been emphasized more.

# data[].attributes.body
It’s definitely important to hide parts of your life that employers may dislike in social media. You should always be mindful of what you post, comment, or follow.

# data[].attributes.body
Since our employers can see what we post it is harder to hide and not show who you really are.

# data[].attributes.body
I don’t really have any social media, but adults did tell me to be careful of what I should say if I was allowed to have a social media platform. Social media is kind of weird because there can be so many more people that are interested in what you do that you don’t know in real life, but you have to be careful with what you say if you attract a large following as those people can look up to you.

# data[].attributes.body
I feel like I’m being more scrutinized than other generations just because there’s so much someone can learn off the internet about you so it makes me feel like I need to be even more careful than before.

# data[].attributes.body
It feels nice to be able to look back at past photos/memories, but the possibility of being tracked and judged for photos you took a long time ago is a little unnerving. My parents definitely taught me to be aware of the people I interact with online, and my schools did hold units on cyber security/digital citizenship.

# data[].attributes.body
Your post that you post than delete never really goes away. It’s somewhere in the web. Be mindful what you are posting because while the internet can be good it is full of terrible things.

# data[].attributes.headline
What you post impacts you and your friends. You have been online since birth. How does it feel to be judged for your choices unlike previous generations who didn't document their lives. Did adults teach you online responsibility?

# data[].attributes.subject
What you post impacts you and your friends. You have been online since birth. How does it feel to be judged for your choices unlike previous generations who didn't document their lives. Did adults teach you online responsibility?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Employers looking at social media accounts when you apply for a job

# data[].attributes.body
I think that this law is very necessary even if I do not personally need it. This law will help many people, and because of that, I think that it is very important.

# data[].attributes.body
I think this law is necessary. I don’t benefit from it, but other people would greatly benefit from it, so it’s definitely necessary.

# data[].attributes.body
I think this law is necessary to protect others from discrimination, even if it doesn’t apply to everyone.

# data[].attributes.body
I think this law is necessary because it would benefit many people who classify as a marginalized person and make them feel more comfortable in different environments.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that this act is important and should be supported because although it doesn’t support me, it supports other people.

# data[].attributes.body
Even if I’m not apart of these communities, people need to treat others with respect and like real humans, regardless of their ethnicity, religion, sexuality, etc. -Amy

# data[].attributes.body
This law is very necessary because we want equality and liberty for everyone. It’s literally in the pledge of allegiance “with liberty and justice for all”. It’s also quite necessary to have more protection against different religions.

# data[].attributes.body
In my opinion, the Equality Act is necessary because it prevents people with certain backgrounds from unfair treatment and actions. Although I wouldn’t personally benefit from the bill, it’s important to support the ones who need it.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that it is very important to support acts that you don’t personally need because others do.  People don’t chose to be part of the  LQBTQ community but they are, it is part of there identity. You should support these people because they are human and all humans don’t have to be the same.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that this law is necessary even if I don’t need it because it could affect the people around me.

# data[].attributes.body
I think this law is necessary even though I may not need it because it really affects people who do need it. There lives would be completely different if they faced discrimination.

# data[].attributes.body
I think it is necessary even though you don’t need it.There are other people that need it.

# data[].attributes.body
The Equality Act would expand protections for religious Americans by updating the public spaces where the Civil Rights Act applies. Under current federal law, it is perfectly legal to discriminate against someone in a retail store or a taxicab, for example, for being visibly Christian (or Muslim or Hindu — or anything else). The Equality Act would ensure that Americans' religious freedom is protected in those places, preserve all of the religious liberty provisions of our current civil rights laws and protect LGBTQ Americans from discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations.

Question is:
Is this  law necessary even if you do not personally need it?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For years the religious right has trumpeted a lie: that its opposition to LGBTQ nondiscrimination protections has to do with, or is even required by, religion. It has even, on occasion, distorted the meaning of religious freedom to make this argument.

But as its opposition to the Equality Act, which passed the House on Thursday, shows, the idea that LGBTQ nondiscrimination protections undermine protections for religious Americans is an egregious mistruth.

The Equality Act would expand protections for religious Americans by updating the public spaces where the Civil Rights Act applies. Under current federal law, it is perfectly legal to discriminate against someone in a retail store or a taxicab, for example, for being visibly Christian (or Muslim or Hindu - or anything else). The Equality Act would ensure that Americans' religious freedom is protected in those places, preserve all of the religious liberty provisions of our current civil rights laws and protect LGBTQ Americans from discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations.

That truth was not an obstacle to the legislation's opponents. "The Equality Act would discriminate against people of faith," a group of Catholic bishops warned; Franklin Graham warned that it was " very dangerous." Similar exhortations have been made against the bill in past years: Televangelist Pat Robertson told his audience in 2019, "If you want to bring the judgment of God on this nation, you just keep this stuff up," and radio host Eric Metaxas that year called the legislation "madness."

The religious right's loud, often bigoted opposition to the Equality Act obscures the fact that most Americans who self-identify as religious support this legislation.

As the weakness of the religious right's arguments has become more and more visible, and as more and more Americans who identify as religious reject the edicts to discriminate, its fearmongering about the dignity of LGBTQ people has shifted, both over the past decades and more recently. These days, it focuses on scaring Americans about transgender people, from their participation in youth sports to the standards of medical care for transgender youth, about which it spouts vicious fictions. All of its fearmongering is based on falsehoods or stereotypes, like those that have been proven incorrect in states that already have nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ youths playing sports.

But facts have never stopped Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., before. She captured the essence of opposition to Equality Act on the House floor Wednesday in a speech scorning all transgender Americans and laced with religious rhetoric. She then proceeded to do the opposite of "love your neighbor" by singling out and attacking the transgender daughter of Rep. Marie Newman, D-Ill., in tweets and then with a sign outside her own Capitol Hill office, about which she also tweeted.

Still, it is not just the lies the religious right tells about transgender youth or religious freedom that should rankle other Americans of faith: Its loud, often bigoted opposition to the Equality Act obscures the fact that most Americans who self-identify as religious support this legislation.

The vast majority of Americans - 83 percent - favor laws that would protect gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people against discrimination in jobs, public accommodations and housing. That includes majorities of every major religious group in the country, according to the Public Religion Research Institute. Even 59 percent of white evangelical Protestants - the largest and most reliably conservative bloc of religious voters - support the type of protections in the Equality Act.

As the weakness of the religious right's arguments has become more and more visible, its fearmongering about the dignity of LGBTQ people has shifted.

Americans of all religious backgrounds also reject the distorted "religious freedom" framing of the religious right's opposition to the Equality Act, as outlined Wednesday by Greene. When given a choice between these two statements -"Everyone is free to follow their religious beliefs and practices in their personal lives, provided they do not cause harm to others," and "Everyone is free to follow their religious beliefs and practices in every part of their lives, including performing their jobs, even if that means excluding certain groups of people" - 89 percent of Americans, as well as majorities of all major religious groups, chose the former.

All of this is among the reasons that over 100 faith-based organizations have endorsed the Equality Act, including Catholic, evangelical Protestant, mainline Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Unitarian Universalist and Hindu groups. And faith groups that recognize the dignity of LGBTQ people have a faithful ally in the White House: President Joe Biden - one of the most overtly religious presidents since Jimmy Carter - has made the Equality Act a priority for his administration.

Despite not representing the majority of Americans of faith on this issue, the religious right will do all it can in the coming weeks to derail the Equality Act by purporting to represent those very Americans. It is certainly its prerogative to advocate against civil rights, but Americans deserve to know that faith communities and people of faith largely support this historic legislation.

And most religious Americans understand that the response to LGBTQ discrimination most in keeping with the highest callings of the tenets of their various traditions is to enact laws that protect everyone.

Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, delivered a powerful witness on the House floor Thursday when he said, "God created every person in this room," referring to his LGBTQ colleagues. "Are you saying that God made a mistake? This is not about God. It's about men who choose to discriminate against other people because they have the power to do so."

He then cast his vote with the majority of his colleagues, representing the majority of Americans, in favor of this historic civil rights legislation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | Here's why conservatives wanted the Equality Act debate to focus on trans kids

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For years the religious right has trumpeted a lie: that its opposition to LGBTQ nondiscrimination protections has to do with, or is even required by, religion. It has even, on occasion, distorted the meaning of religious freedom to make this argument.