The real ultimative Chad

The real ultimative Chad


I did not believe you at first because his name was Chad so I looked it up so you are absolutely correct.


The kind of power that comes from learning of a problem and doing something to fix it is true Chad energy.


This guy should replace Giga Chad


He is the one Chad to rule them all


So, we some sort of Suicide Chad?






The source of the Great Fountain of Chad, through which all Chadness hath flown


As a Chad, I am very happy with this outcome. Urban dictionary isn't so nice.


You should read what is under Mitch lol. I’m destined to be roasted for my name.


Nearly every name has at least some really positive and some really negative shit on there, presumably written by people that either love or hate someone with that name.


I’m Lucky. Everything about Xavier is positive


Uh, there's an Xavier in one of the classes I relief teach in, and uh... he's young, but he has the potential for international notoriety. Enjoy the anonymity of the name Xavier while it lasts....




Found Elon Musks kid


Not many know the pain, just Karens


He’s the OG Chad


Father Chad


The Chadfather


we have the same thought. so I did search him too


The only Chad I'd ever really trust.


Thank you for saving me a google search


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritans_(charity) If people want more information


Unfortunately, In 2004, Varah announced that he had become disillusioned with Samaritans. He said, "It's no longer what I founded. I founded an organisation to offer help to suicidal or equally desperate people. The last elected chairman re-branded the organisation. It was no longer to be an emergency service, it was to be emotional support"


Which seems to be suicide prevention before they're suicidal.


Which is also very noble and neccesary measures. Just giving context.


Sadly samaritans is absolutely useless and is pure trash now


That hasn’t been my experience.


And that's good, but from mine and people I know's experience, it did nothing. Even made it worse in some instances


It's almost like councillors need training or something


That’s sad to hear. I have heard the opposite and know from people who have worked for them that the training is rigorous so as to make sure people are equipped to help. Hopefully that means it’s got better recently.


Man I subscribe to r/holup and reading the title and the beginning of the text I was sure that was the sub it belonged to. Happily surprised in the way it turned out. Reddit has ruined me.


If you follow r/holup you know none of the content on that sub is a holup


Happens to most subs that go mainstream :/


Happens to em all. r/watchholupdie


Nothing hurts as bad as having seen /r/ShittyReactionGifs turn into a /r/ReactionGifs clone. Big difference is that the mods of SRG have a fully hostile attitude towards quality control on the subreddit, like they all wanted it to fail from the beginning. I'm not one to shit talk mods for power trips and incidental absences, but the SRG mods are a special breed of stinkbugs.


It used to really good once and I literally saw it get worse as weeks went by. It was like watching a disease erode a man away.


that's what you call compassion


If only they chose people like this to be saints and represent catholicism, why does it always have to be some ironic supervillain like [Mother Theresa](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Mother_Teresa). Edit: oh yeah I remembered why >In 2017, investigative journalist Gianluigi Nuzzi, in a book titled Original Sin, published accounting documents from the controversial Vatican Bank – officially known as the Institute for the Works of Religion – which revealed that the funds which were held in Mother Teresa's name on behalf of her charity had made her the Bank's biggest client, and they amounted to billions. Had she made substantial withdrawals, the Bank would have risked default. Edit 2: wrong religion, where am I?


Father Chad was an Anglican priest, therefore not eligible for Catholic sainthood


Jesus dyck, so this girl knew about STDs but not about her own period? Fuckd up


It occurred to me that she might be the victim of abuse and/or sexual assault assault, hence the feelings of shame and belief she contracted an STD.


That was exactly my thought, as well. What a tragedy, although amazing work by Father Chad up there.


That lines up with the sex “education” we received in 90s Mississippi. If driver’s education was taught like sex education, you’d get a picture of an engine and then 8 months of graphic accident footage.


Ngl, my driving school was a lot of graphic accident videos I don't think showing kids STDs in health class is bad really, but it should be used to promote safe and protected sex, not abstinence


Where did you learn how to drive if you don't mind asking?


I know I got my license from a packet of cornflakes, like a normal person.


Might be more of a matter of when. Scaring the shit out of children with gore was an educational fad for a while. I think it faded out starting in the 90s.


We did what they call the party program where you go to the morgue and the doctors tell you about horrific car crashes (mostly caused by drinking and driving) and the. Show you some mangled dead bodies. If you are lucky there are none that day and then you just got pictures.


Yo, driver's ed ca.2004 was full of gory videos and madd interviews, but reading other people's stories I'm starting to believe there are some sadistic motherfuckers in charge. It's not just inadequate education! Btw, I strongly believe americans should adopt the european driving school method.


I took driver’s ed in 2013, and we had a day where a state trooper came in and gave a 2-hour presentation filled with gory pictures and videos from accidents. I had a terrible panic attack afterwards and was on edge for weeks. I still have a ton of random anxiety about accidents even though I’m pretty calm behind the wheel.


For me, the anxiety came from realizing that IIHS crash safety tests are performed at 35 mph, and that I am going 75 mph on the highway. [This](https://www.cnet.com/a/img/FkkAhlvG_K3ytdrPGBq587dUf3g=/940x528/2016/05/24/6c03e5ba-9838-4a4f-bb1a-7f353d02de5a/challenger-iihs-crash.jpg) is the damage caused by hitting a barrier at 35 mph. I am going twice that, with 4 times the energy.


75 mph is 120.7 km/h


Oh yeah, that part is terrifying too


Bet you drive pretty safely now and always remember your seatbelt though lol


Don't think it ever faded out. Went to driver's ed circa a couple years ago, and they showed loads of "scary" informational videos. First hand accounts of car crash sole survivors, most of whom were disfigured. A lot of driver's guilty of vehicular manslaughter confessing their sins to the camera. Fun stuff. It may or may not have been the same ones you're referring to, as the quality, style, and speak aged it at least 15 years if not more.


My high school parked cars with their accident body counts from drunk driving accidents on the quad every year for Drunk Driving Awareness Week. This was in the late 90s. I couldn't even begin to imagine being someone involved in, or the family of someone involved in one of those accidents, only to drive by and see the mangled car.


??? You're high school put the cars involved in fatal accidents on display in the parking lot!?!?


Y’all are acting like this is something outdated. Any time someone works with dangerous shit they are usually shown accidents that can happen from negligence or circumstance.


Oh yeah, I worked for a preserved steam railway for a while - just in the office but had to do a trackside safety induction. One problem places like that have is there's a lot of survivorship bias - "We never had to do all this safety shit back in the old days and we were fine! Can't even climb a ladder now without filling in a risk assessment form! Snowflake PC culture gone mad at q " So they spend some time absolutely hammering home about how easy it is to die doing simple stuff like changing a light bulb.


Ohio, dude loved to make up all kinds of insane stories too, he told us about his cop friend who went to the scene of an accident where a gas tanker flipped over and had these teenagers car pinned underneath the tanker, and it was leaking gas, and while he was trying to get them out, the car caught fire, so the cop pulled out his gun and fucking shot the teens so they wouldn't burn to death. That shit cost like $400 too


The DMV in my area has a TV showing accident videos


I mean, that's pretty much drivers ed, too. Red Asphalt?




I mean, it was pretty shocking for us, too


Lol still better than Florida’s. On my drivers ed test I got a picture of a stop sign without the word “stop” on it, with a question asking if it meant yield, pedestrian crossing, or stop. No wonder florida drivers are so bad (and STDs are rampant). Don’t ever live in florida. It’s not worth it.


It's a trick question, it means stop only if a police officer is nearby, otherwise it has no function.


You don’t have to stop if there’s a white border around the edges!


That’s.. exactly how drivers training is taught


I never had any gory videos and definitely nothing on the engine. I was disappointed, I like gory videos.


That's what drivers education was like in the 90/00s, and my sister told me it's still like that recently.


That lines up with what I learned in late 2010s Mississippi. Still gets pictures of STDs. I had a girl who didn't know what sex was in my class.


STDs got (hopefully past tense? I took my courses in sex ed 20 years ago) talked about a lot more than periods, but only in a boogeyman sense: "If you're a bad kid and have sex before you get married, you'll get an STD and maybe even die! Think how ashamed your parents will be at your funeral." Puberty as a whole for both boys and girls was brushed off with the "changes" speech; I know several guys who thought the appearance of pubic hair was due to masturbating at the time.


It's better now, but I don't really think by much. They do talk about different ways to prevent STDs and they talk about periods and stuff, but they spend maybe too much time talking about abstinence (At least when I took it 3 years ago). Like, yeah, that's the best way to prevent STDs, as it's 100% effective, but you're talking to a bunch of teenagers. The only ones who are going to stay abstinent are asexuals and incels.


And people with standards? You're making it sound like teenagers having sex is the norm. It certainly is for a few of them but the split for sex having and non sex having teenagers is 50/50. Sure some of them are asexual and some of them have problems with talking to the opposite sex but it's a bit weird to assume that those are the only groups of people that don't have sex as teenagers.


You need the education still. The reason they would stay abstinent as teens doesn't mean they will forever or that STDs existing is why they don't have sex. But they will likely have sex in like their 20's, thing is, then you are already out of general education. So you can't teach anyone. It is better to know stuff that to not tell because "some have standards"


True fair enough


Uhh, you sound like a parent with teens in denial honestly. 50/50 is laughable. You did go to high school right? The **average** age of losing virginity in the US is 17.


God you must love sounding pretentious. I'm 18 and a senior in high school. The CDC literally collects data on this and you could easily look it up. The percentage of teens sexually active in high school has been decreasing since the 80s/90s actually, and depending on the study more or less 50% of teenagers have sex in high school. Some studies report way less actually so I assume that it depends on the region. I don't think you understand statistics and averages either. The average age of losing virginity being 17, which is the tail end of high school, proves my point more than yours. Say you have a population sample of 200 kids, 100 of which have sex during high school (presumably during freshman, sophomore, and most of junior year i.e under 17) and the other 100 lose their virginity in college, in their early twenties. This would still average out to 17, or around that. I'm not saying it's not important to educate teens on safe sex if half of them are engaging in it but it's weird how people seem to think that high school is this raging non stop orgy. To think that you must either base your views on TV and other media, or you must have hung out with the kids that did have sex in high and confirmation biased yourself into believing that everyone was like that. Both are pretty bad indicators of critical thinking skills. It's also weird to assume that the kids that don't have sex are literally incapable of having sexual attraction (asexuals) or have something wrong with them (incels). Honestly kinda weird that people talk like this because it almost seems like they're pushing for kids to have sex in high school. Edit: Damn lol I only just now considered the fact that you might have actually gone to school in the 80s/90s, when the rates were much higher


2013 high school our sex ed was never have sex and doing so will give you an STD or pregnancy and condoms will also get you an STD. So idk what I learned but I did use condoms despite that.


They just use scare tactics to tell you sex bad and not actually teach about biology and especially not how women's bodies work if they even teach about men's bodies at all


The sex education at my school in Scotland back in the 1970s covered STDs but not periods. I guess they thought us boys in the mixed classes couldn't handle it. The school my wife taught at in the 1980s had some mixed and some separate classes for sex ed so gender specific subjects could be taught.


That's what happens when your sex education is primarily about scaring and shaming women.


Because that's what heros do


Samaritans…they’re still going today, great organisation.


And that's kids The Chad society came to existence. Be Like Chad.


yeah be like Chad


Be like Chad


A real christian ✝️


How can you tell if someone is a real Christian?


Maybe people who try to follow Christ’s example instead of cherry picking Bible verses to justify being an asshole


It's not even that. There are outdated social modes reference in the Bible, often to do with honour systems and women's roles, but there is a fundamentalist culture separate and concurrent with pure religious dogma. Hating homosexuals and abortions and weed is such a culture and is not real religion. It's an unfortunate byproduct, a political regime long attached to it. The Bible either never backs up their stances at all or certain passages are insidiously perverted to support their foregone conclusions.


You're honestly pretending the Bible isn't chock full of vile sentiments and stories.


It's not. I had to sit through it countless times having 13 years of institutionalised Catholic education. The politics of Catholicism can be vile but the allegories and proverbs in the Bible are not.


To be fair, they don't really go out of their way to point out the messy bits of the bible in catholic education. I guess it varies, but lots of people never hear about a lot of stuff in the bible even after decades of attending church and associated institutions.


I dunno, seemed pretty rude to turn Lott's wife into a pillar of salt and not a more interesting spice or maybe even an herb.


Do you have any idea how much salt was worth in the past? Its even said that the wall of china was paid by a salt tax.


Am I supposed to be glad that a lady got turned into an expensive salt? Seems more wasteful than anything, he couldn't even look at her, much less go get some salt.


Salt is the best seasoning though, what are you chatting bruv


How about a god who is so insanely petty and childish that he would direct a man to kill his own son just to prove how much he loved god and then at the last instant say “nah just kidding. I just wanted to see if you’d do it.” The god of the Bible is a spoiled child with a magnifying glass at the absolute best and a complete murderous fucking psychopath at the worst.


"You can keep your son, what I really want are some foreskins, get on it." -God, 1998


>Salt is the best seasoning though, what are you chatting bruv This is an agressively British sentence. Not white as agressive as the Brits historically were about spices, but it's getting there.


And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation. And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him. And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp. And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses.


Naw, fam. The Bible explicitly calls for all kinds of injustice, and permits and allows *slavery*. Even the beating and killing of said humans-as-property. The Bible is full of vile garbage.


Thats only the old Testament, which Jesus says no longer needs to be followed. I'm not a Christian, but I have read the Bible once. Its better to treat the okd testanent as christian and Jewish history, and follow Jesus's teachings in the new testament.


When does Jesus say not to follow the Old Testament?


Ah yes here goes the cherry picking.


> Thats only the old Testament That’s still the Bible. And it’s not like the god of the Old Testament retired and handed over the position to some new guy. The guy who gave instructions on how to manage your slaves is the same guy that sent Jesus.


No, the new testament is also stupid. You're also wrong because one of the first quotes on Jesus fucking Christ is that he's 'not here to change the old testament rules, those still stand' aaaand then proceeds to change rules from the old testament


So god *was* a homicidal rape apologist, but *now* he’s turned over a new leaf and we all need to be stupid and believe that?


No... even in the times of the Old Testament, Moses delivered a whole people from slavery. It was presented entirely as wrong.


Not "a people", but "the chosen people". Moses was perfectly fine leaving all the other slaves in Egypt.


Ooh, come on.. there's so many examples! Num. 31:18 – God orders his warriors to kill every living thing in a captured city, except the virgin girls, who are to be raped and turned into sex slaves. (According to verse 35, there were 32,000 virgin girls thus taken.) Deut. 21:11-12 – If a warrior likes the look of a female war captive, he can take her to be one of his “wives.” Deut. 22:28-29 – A man who rapes a virgin may take her for a wife if he pays her father 50 shekels of silver. (Yet a bride found not to be a virgin must be killed. – Deut. 22) Judges 5:30 – The spoils of war include “a damsel or two” for every man.


Ah so when God asks Abraham to murder his beloved son in a test of faith, that was just a lovely little story. Yeah if you ignore the entire old testament and most of the new testament, it's really a wonderful collection of bullshit.


As someone who was brainwashed into thinking the bible is normal and a basis of anything other than nonsense, brainwashed for 13 years, your opinion is incredibly biased and you should consider that




Are YOU not the one cherry picking? **Leviticus 18:22** > "Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin." **Leviticus 20:13** > "If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense." **Timothy 1:8-10** > "Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine ... " ...countless more


Are YOU not? There are myriad iterations of the Bible for sundry theological positions and denominations. The single one you refer to is explicit, yet that isn't widely so. The original in ancient Hebrew is convoluted and nebulous, and it is a mix of ideology and translation that gives rise to different 'cherrypicked' meaning. Some don't censure homosexuality at all but sodomy. Some censure romantic attachment to men but not sexual. Some attach meaning only to opposition to adultery and bestiality and not men entirely. Still, most Christians do not act so dogmatic about the Bible. Few actually read it and know it. Most theologians and seminarians I know are progressive and productive in their approach to its message. Creationists, American evangelicals and fundamentalists are a minority. They propound a political ideology, not a wholly and inherently religious one. The Bible is but a vague weapon, not a policy.


What about eating pork? That is outright banned and Christians have no problem eating bacon like it’s holy or something… also what about love your neighbor as thyself?


True Christians should never eat pork and should always love thy neighbor. Do to otherwise is to contradict to the holy texts. What is there to discuss here?


They arent homophobic and genuinely care about people


And they don’t try to shove it down your throat and put on a show.




So what religion are people who are homophobic?


Great question. I'd like to see this answered.


Jesus have a pretty good test: >15 ¶ Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. >16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? >17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. >18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. >19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. >20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. -Matthew Chapter 7 This example here seems like good fruits to me.


Is this the verse where Jesus asks God to smite a fig tree because it wasn't producing fruit and he wanted figs?


The instance you are talking about is in Matthew 21. It's a different part of the story, but it's related. In my view, the context of Matthew 21 makes the curse a symbolic act where Jesus pronounced the hypocrisy of Jewish religious leaders at the time. They said they hoped for the arrival of the Messiah, and they did all the correct religious motions(appearing like a fig tree); yet when Jesus came and performed all the signs of God's Kingdom, they refused to admit that Jesus was the Messiah or follow his teachings(not producing any fruits). The two stories are related in that one can't claim to be a follower of Jesus if one does not live accordingly, that is loving God and loving one's neighbours.


I took that story at surface level, I'll be honest. Probably didn't help that I was told he was drunk at the time too. Thanks for the context.


He did curse a fig tree...


The perception of good and not so good is subjective to change based on where you're standing. It helps to move beyond ideas of good and not so good for a deeper, non-judgmental understanding or acceptance of something.


I can see where you're coming from. The Bible does tend to be very black and white on the morality scale. But at the same time I think we can all agree here that this man was a man of compassion, who did a very good thing. And even if he was imperfect in other ways, his heart was in the right place in this instance. Good and bad may be subjective based on perception, but I think we as individuals can make judgement calls for ourselves, and if we really care about doing right by ourselves, our fellow humans, and if you're so inclined, to God, then we can say something was beneficial as a whole, or it was harmful as a whole. I think if standing by a sidewalk we saw someone push an old lady to the ground we would instinctively make the call that was harmful. And on the other hand if the old lady slipped and fell and someone offered to help her up, that was a kind and helpful person. Part of the problem is when we get into the weeds on politics. Most politics are gray, and we build up extremes on two sides, then turn it into a sport where each side wins or loses, and there's no middle ground. And this is where good and bad are terrible judgement calls, because the truth lies somewhere in between the two sides, but both are too concerned about winning to acknowledge that fact. Removing the politics, removing the sides, and getting a bit more down to the basics and asking the question, does this help people, or does it harm them, is probably the best barometer we can use. And yeah, not everyone is doing to agree even on that definition. But if we are honest with ourselves, and are committed to being fair to all people, we can reach an agreement on those definitions. I actually really like [this video by Vsauce about the future of reasoning](https://youtu.be/_ArVh3Cj9rw), and one of the big points made is that we can do the most good for humanity by making decisions as a group. That may sound ridiculous in the current political climate, but the key to making something that actually works is by enabling participation by all groups to ensure proper representation in the decision making process. That in and of itself is a feat that we could work on for a hundred years and still not achieve it fully. But it's a goal worth striving for. And if we can achieve it our definitions of harm or helpfulness will get better over time.


And also Jesus: Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. These are the fruits of the spirit


You can’t, since they don’t advertise it


Shouldn't we take people's word about what they believe?


No, that's just a no true Scotsman in action. You can be a raging asshole and still be a definition perfect Christian since it's a religion and all religions are defined by what god or gods they believe in. Many priests are definitely Christians and also rapists and abusers. Doesn't make them not Christians.


They like to say they’re not real Christians so they don’t have to adress their actions. Classic Christian evasion tactics.




Almost the exact opposite. It's nice to pretend Christianity was ever about following Christ's example but that's just historically false.


At first, this made me chad. But by the end, I was chad I read it.


The real Chad's are the ones who didn't know were Chad's at all.


Do you want the Chad news, or the Chad news?




r/liminalspace r/egg_irl


"Priest teaches sex education" is not something people tend to praise now'days


These comments are a fucking train wreck, holy shit


What religion was meant to do


This is the type of Christianity we should be promoting.


Man this basically shows how women's anatomy is demonized. This poor girl had her period and she had no idea, in some societies it's still a taboo. I hate this world smh.


Unfortunately the Catholic Church has since lobbied against funding for suicide hotlines since they support LGBT people equally


But they're still on board for comprehensive sex education, right? There's no way they could be against that.


They actively went to Africa to discourage people from wearing condoms during the AIDS crisis and still do


Lol.. the grotesque things they have done related to sex education is a long long long list


Yeah but is the use of the devil's contraception *really* worth saving millions of lives?


All I know is god works in mysterious ways \*oooh spooky noises\*


Someone who grew up in a devotely-Catholic family, here: You took the words right out of my keyboard.


Notice how the outcome of this priests efforts was a suicide hotline where young vulnerable people can call and not a rational science based education course. Which one do you think is more likely to indoctrinate people and help them "find god" as a reason to live?


Not that it really changes your comment (will have to read up on that), but Chad Varah was Anglican, not Catholic


That’s Anglican Church, not the catholic one


These are the real Christians. Plague to humanity


Christians are not a monolith. You wouldn't happen to make other superficial valuations now would you?


Someone has said that this man was a "real Christian". This is my counterpoint. This man was such an exception from what Christianity does that we made a post about it saying "Wow, look at what this priest did" when as a group Christians withhold support and resources from some of the most marginalized groups. That is what a 'real' Christian does because they are apart of a larger organization that does these actions. Religion as a whole is incredible destructive and holds back society from progress... in aggregate.


yeah, we all love an ubermensch. btw, you are making your whole point on the view of a random redditor. what is the ratio of "real christians" to christians? moral atheists to amoral atheist? are you thinking or feeling?


15 years later our lord made up his mind and decided the birth control pill was bad


Why didnt this young woman receive sex education? Christian morals.


These are the people that *should* become priests


He’d be disappointed with the hotlines today


He actually became disillusioned with the organisation he founded. \>"Later in life, Chad Varah became disillusioned with the Samaritans organisation. He announced in 2004 that, "It's no longer what I founded. I founded an organisation to offer help to suicidal or equally desperate people. The last elected chairman re-branded the organisation. It was no longer to be an emergency service. It was to be an emotional support".


Virgin Mary vs Chad priest


I’m so conditioned to reading about priests molesting kids I was waiting for him to be the villain. Great to see some good news out of organized religion for a change.








They actually named a whole country in Africa after him, that's crazy


Oh look. A priest being what a priest should be.


STD? Why did she believe she had an STD? Unless.... Someone should contact child protective services.


She may not have actually had sex. Some believe that you can get pregnant from a toilet seat. And if she grew up in a religious home that demonized sex, who knows what she was told.


I'd never had sex and when I was 10 or so and started getting that pre-growth-spurt weight gain I thought I was pregnant, just because I had no idea what being pregnant was besides what I'd seen in TV and movies. Please yall, talk to your kids about sex.


Up until the age of 18 ... I made multiple attempts to cut off my ... ahem ... special lady part because I thought I was deformed. Thankfully I was unsuccessful. I had absolutely no idea about female anatomy downstairs.


Probably saved more lives through this than any Saint.


Had me in first half with the priest and little girl words. Then I read whole thing and it was wholesome.


Same shit happens to boys… not the period ordeal but I think you know what I’m talking about.


I see a lot of people talking about the Catholic Church in this thread, but it's worth noting that Chad Varah was *not* a priest in the Catholic Church; he was a priest in the Church of England, which has a *very* different approach to certain things (like sex ed). Probably doesn't hurt that the Church of England ordains women and allows its priests to marry and have families. Varah himself had five kids.


American suicide hotline leaves you on hold.


Omg. Omg. Omg. Omg. I am at a loss for words or anything actually... That poor poor girl.


Ah yes, another picture of a random person with text on it.


They should make the suicide hotline helpful in honor of his memory.


There’s exactly nothing amazing about this… this should have been day one shit for a church committed to service. This is less than bare minimum


A priest and sex education don't really go together especially for kids


Suicide hotlines are worthless


Suicide hotline suck btw


r/atheism dislikes this.


Nahh he seems like a cool dude


Haha Ultimative


You know what I would love if when there is an event or fact put out to the world, it came with supportive documentation/citations.


Do you mean that the reddit power user: my_memes_will_cure_u isnt enough of a source?


Or... Like the user beneath you in the comments, you could spend the time it took to comment this, and just [searched... ](https://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/10/world/europe/10iht-obit.1.8276521.html) *Edit: above you, now*