this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
25 points (96.3% liked)

News

22869 readers
4196 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Question… do you realize how fascist this sounds?

You might mean well, but all you’re doing is changing who’s being discriminated against.

Not cool.

[–] secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition defines fascist as an advocate or adherent of fascism, A reactionary or dictatorial person, An adherent of fascism or similar right-wing authoritarian views.

I'm not saying right now we need to put all religious people to death, I am just tired of their lies infecting science. The idea that the delusional morons who believe their deities float on clouds and their virgins give birth are capable of objective science is preposterous. If such "miracles" exist, then the universe doesn't follow laws of math. Yes, if we are living in a simulated reality that can be hacked then such miracles could happen, but unless a religious scientist is practicing Kali, I don't want their religion polluting data with bullshit.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

No. You’re just saying we need to label religious professionals.

Because that’s a thing literal Nazis never did

[–] Barrymore@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Not advocating for the other person, but there's a big difference in what you're comparing it to. People choose their religion, and they choose their profession. If those 2 things are in direct conflict, like a religious scientist, the audience of their work should be made aware of that conflict.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Most people are born into their religion, as a matter of culture. Frequently, religion is integral to their culture, and even if they do choose to leave that religion, it likely will leave an indelible mark- good or bad-

Their purpose is to other-ize religious scientists, exactly like what the yellow star was used to do to Jews by Nazis, (and at other times and places.) I think we all know what Nazis did to those they otherized.

The rhetoric is absolutely the same kind of justification for forcing it is also the same. When non-Jewish Germans started sympathies with Jews, do you think they admitted it was to encourage discrimination and bigotry, or do you think they said things like “we know it’s difficult, but they do shoddy work and you should know that you need to keep an eye on them.”

Couching it in the rhetoric of atheist enlightenment doesn’t make it okay. It’s still bigotry, and while the OC might not realize that, meaning to or not, it’s still advancing bigotry.

[–] secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

when treated with ideals of respect and tolerance, religious people still adhere to the tenants of their religions leading to bigotry and stupidity

being tolerant of the religious is like being tolerant of a pack of rabid hyenas. I suppose it's the kind thing to do to the rabid hyenas, but it may not be the best option for those who are not rabid hyenas

the religious burned scientists at the stake. i think having skepticism towards the rational ability of religious scientists is not bigotry when religious irrationality has been shown to have broad and constant historical validity

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago

Yeah. So. To clarify, you’re okay with discriminating against people, so long as they’re the right people?

[–] secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

The yellow badge was part of a racist ideology based on eugenics pseudoscience.

This is not race or ethnicity based or part of a political movement. However, if you are a conservative Christian who believes that a virgin gave birth, that Sunday bread has supernatural properties, and listen to the Pope and religious sermons on a regular basis, then YES, IT DOES AFFECT YOUR FETAL PAIN STUDY when you clearly are trying to outlaw abortion because your religion wants that.

My wanting to know the religious bias of someone believing in illogical fairy tale bullshit is not the equivalent of Nazism, who would have put someone like me to death many times over. I don't want bullshit to taint science. It's an understandable request. The atheists of the world have been dealing with religious bullshit for so long, it's fair to want real data.

If we had the religious bias of scientists clearly known, it would be illuminating in many ways, including scientific equivalency which has become the new moral equivalency.

Right now you have "one the one hand, these 90 scientists believe we are all going to die from global warming but these 10 scientists think this is a normal trend"

I would MUCH rather have "on the one hand, these 90 scientists who believe the world is governed by math think we are all going to die from global warming, and these 10 catholic scientists who think a virgin got pregnant and gave birth without sexual fertilization and that jesus will always protect the planet think this is a normal trend"

this is not a ridiculous or fascist position and religious bullshit has infected climate science, and studying psychology, and led to justifications for racism and homophobia and OFTEN results in scientific conclusions that conveniently seem to at first line up with religion... until more and more data eventually proves it to be bullshit. This is not about discrimination. I want bullshit out of the data set.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

And, do you think, that a scientist who happens to be LGBTQ, doing a study on monkey sexuality, is able to be not biased by their worldview?

That because they seem to agree with you they’re immune from bias and are therefore totally trustworthy?

How pedantic do you want to get?

Either the science is good or it’s not. Either the study was conducted to minimize bias, the data is clean, and the conclusions come from verified evidence, or it’s not. We don’t need to know what particular flavor of human someone is- everyone is biased. Most studies are funded by private interest, and opening people up to rampant discrimination isn’t going to change that.

[–] Maeve@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

Some people can be religious and understand metaphor: some people can be atheist and understand metaphor. Some prime can be religious and interpret religion literally: as can some atheists (eg ” those people believe all the species on earth fit on a boat" when obviously, many religious don't). I'm reading statements that make good points, either way. Maybe peer review being more stringent would address a lot?

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I understand your position and I get what you are going for, but...

I submit to you Ayn Rand.

Atheists can be giant pieces of shit, too.

She used her atheism to argue for the benefit of selfishness and promoted dumbass "great men" theories of humanity. She was not Christian but ascribed to similar belief in the need for bullshit heirarchies with lazy fucking losers stealing the value created by labor sitting at the top.

Like her daddy before communism. Waaah so sad for daddy's violently fascist supporting little girl.

So I don't think it would solve as much as you think.

Humans are not rational creatures. We are rationalizing creatures and we can rationalize and justify almost anything to ourselves for any reason, religion isn't needed for it. Rand and many others are fine examples of it. She rationalized it because she was a rich kid who had her riches taken back by workers and she didn't like that.

Humans are bullshitters, removing religion won't change that.

Like does anyone think Donald Trump is seriously, actually religious? Anyone? A guy like him would exist with or without religion.

[–] eestileib@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

Many many people think Trump is a practicing Christian. Like 90% of white evangelicals.

[–] artichokecustard@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

i'm sorry that you have to live with such anger in your heart, G*D bless your poor soul 🫰🫰

and let reason one day remove your cognitive short-comings and bestow you with hate for the injustice minorities have had to suffer at the hands of the religious

[–] Lilit@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Why do religious types always drop this when they really have nothing to say? "Oh I believe in something that is so hateful and has caused many pain but why are you so angry?!!? Omg poor thing! Bless you!.".This is how I know someone isn't truly following these things with their heart. They're following it to feel superior to those who don't believe or who don't practice the way they do. I've never seen hate like religious hate.

[–] secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

they do this when they have nothing to say AND lack power

if this religious person had power and knew who I was and where I was, and there was a government of like-minded religious dullards, they would be more than willing to light the first twig

It's only "oh you poor thing" because my logic has over-whelmed their feeble religious brain like a tidal wave subsuming the shore and they are falling back on delusions of "i hope this person receives mercy.,.. because they are so EVIL!!!!!!!!!!! and the sky god knows all!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

it's meaningless blather that tells you nothing of the true destructive power of religious idiots

[–] artichokecustard@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

the funniest part to me is i grew up in a 'new age' 'way of living' ("it's not a religion, it's a state of mind","it's not a church, it's a community center") i only betrayed my family by becoming a christian maybe a decade ago. i remember making the conscious decision the summer between 4th and 5th grade that i would do everything in my power to be the best human being possible, better than anyone ever was, i prayed and i told god that i wouldn't even curse, and i remember at least feeling that i had tried so hard to achieve that, and god never even made my life better, i don't even want to linger on what could have had me so desperate and questioning at that age, but i became an out and open atheist from that point, the thing is i never stopped reading, and i never stopped questioning. Philip K Dick is one of my favourite authors, especially reading Radio Free Albemuth, and more so the actual reality of his history and what the guy went through. have you ever heard of a guy Theodore Sturgeon? i would personally recommend More Than Human and Godbody. you need to understand that the very concept and idea of such a force has been going on longer than the now western Christ, and once i chose to stop fighting humanity and to worship it instead, it made living a bit easier for me and those around me, and honestly, i absolutely hate organized religion myself, but that's what makes the JC guy so cool once you get too know the history, the founding idea is v based, have you ever seen Life of Brian? there are more entertaining ways to spend your time on the internet when we'll all die in the water wars, i'm only tedtalking here since i'm 2 4lokos in, christ has more carl jung points than star trek, but they achieve the same purpose

and, uh teehee you fell for the b8, m8, u mad bro??

[–] secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

not entirely.

i stopped reading the first paragraph when i read "becoming a christian" and knew the rest of it would be irrelevant, illogical, and pointless.

i read the last sentence of curiosity.

the correct response to the religious is to ignore everything they say and treat their words like the illogical waste of time that they are.

[–] artichokecustard@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

such an old thread, who are you pandering to? you could just message me directly if you need someone to talk to

I am not sure. I am seeing this response but since there is no quote I don't know what I wrote.