World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Religion isn't the need. Social interaction and the feeling of belonging and belief are the needs. Religion can and does fill that for many.
And before you attack me, I'm atheist.
But other things can and do too, so religion isn't necessary. That's the point.
Nobody said it was. Just that it does meet some needs.
Until you somehow convince those who have those needs that religion isn't the correct way to meet those needs, you're not going to get anywhere screaming that religion isn't necessary. Those people firmly believe it is as it meets those needs for them and don't have something else to do so.
Well that's just not true, but ignoring that...
I didn't scream anything, neither did the OP that started this. They stated it calmly and plainly. Obviously religion serves a function in society, but so does slavery. I'm not trying to convince anyone to give up their long-held beliefs, I'm simply defending my interpretation of reality as objectively as I can. Just like coffee, alcohol, and black market sex rings, no one needs religion. The only reason I could think of that you would want to argue against that position is if you believed it wasn't true. But it is. 🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️
No. Let's not ignore that. If you're going to call someone a liar, own up to it. The comment that spawned this chain says verbatim
It being "religion" and "a need" would imply another, different "need". Otherwise it would have been simpler and more direct to say something like "Religion is a need".
Coming back and repeating the same shit that I just addressed from the previous comment ... Constant repetition is literally someone shoving fingers in their ears and scream "LALALALALALA". You even did it again in this post by stating "no one needs religion" when I already addressed that and even agreed with that sentiment, but wanted to specifically caveat why religion would count for "It serves a need".
Nobody said that anyone "needs" religion. Quite the contrary. The statement is "religion fills needs" to put it another way. I even clarified and made it clear that if you can find something else that fills the needs for those people that you could likely replace religion. But for some reason you keep trucking forward with your comments acting like someone said something they didn't.
What the fuck logic is this? So I must believe that Religion is a need then? I'm atheist. I stated that outright from the beginning in my first post on this thread. Fuck "God", "Yahweh", "Mohammed", or any other god that you or anyone else believes in, they're all fake. I clearly don't believe that religion is a "need".
Now I don't trust your definition of "need" or of "clearly". What other words do you define in diametric opposition to their intended meaning?
People need oxygen, breathing serves that need. People need various organic compounds for energy, eating serves that need. People want to not be afraid of the void, religion serves that want. No one needs religion and it doesn't "serve" a need, just a desire..🤷♂️ I'm sorry me simply restating my point triggers you so badly, just keep in mind that you're not going to get anywhere screaming that religion serves needs.
Serves a need. As in meets some other need. Which I've already addressed. Further I even addressed what SPECIFIC needs that it could possible be serving.
Social interaction: https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/we-are-hard-wired-to-be-social-248746
Feeling of belonging: https://www.mayoclinichealthsystem.org/hometown-health/speaking-of-health/is-having-a-sense-of-belonging-important
I'm done with you. You're either purposefully obtuse, or a troll. It's people like you who ruin actual discussion with people who could actually be educated and turned away from the fictitious man in the sky. You make up shit to address that nobody said. You ignore EVERYTHING other people post just to post your own drivel. It's fucking useless and pointless. 3 seconds of googling could have saved yourself from looking like a fool.
Edit: you even go out of your way to somehow "break" the definition of clearly when in the previous fucking sentence I literally commit what amounts to the ultimate sin in nearly every abrahamic religion all while implying I somehow care about those religions. You're special, and not in the good way.