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

News

22839 readers
3622 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
(page 2) 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] morphballganon@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (5 children)

The very idea of sexuality being divisible into distinct types is a uniquely human construct.

Animals don't think "I'm gonna go find another dude to have gay sex with," they just get the urge and act on it with whoever looks good nearby.

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

Animals don't think "I'm gonna go find another dude to have gay sex with," they just get the urge and act on it with whoever looks good nearby.

Several animal species are famously monogamous, penguns for example.

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

Penguins (emperors at least) must work together for the eggs to survive.

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

That doesn't explain why the same couples keep coming back to each other season after season.

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

In the case of emperors, they don't. They find a new partner each season.

I haven't looked into other subspecies.

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

Oh my mistake there then. Rockhoppers are one species that are monogamous for life.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] threeduck@aussie.zone 0 points 2 months ago (3 children)

The issue with finding homosexual behaviour in animals is that it's never exclusive. Homosexual animals tend to be bisexual at best, and can often be chalked up to erroneous mating.

A lot of these studies are used to validate human homosexuality and harm the "it's unnatural!" argument touted by conservatives. However using a Call to Nature is fallacious, and could be used to validate all number of animal behaviour.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] doingthestuff@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I mean that's cool and all but that's not really a debunking of biblical creation or sexual order if you take it at what it says and not what traditional religion tells you it says. There wasn't supposed to be death, so animals shouldn't have eaten each other. It also describes something like an asexual heaven. So even if homosexuality isn't in the eternal perfection, everything now is imperfect so it's just like everything else.

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

Where does the Bible describe an asexual heaven? Do you mean because Revelation says the only people who get to go to heaven are a small number of men?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (12 children)

People who publish scientific articles should be forced to declare their religious views at the top of the article so that if anything is listed other than "none" then it can just be automatically discarded unless it's replicated by a non-religious scientist. Religion just ruins everything, like running a computer with Windows.

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

I don't consider myself as religious, but this is just such a bad take.

I too dislike religion, but judging people based on their beliefs and discrediting their views because of it is exactly the problem.

[–] secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (5 children)

I disagree. For hundreds of years, illogical religious beliefs have biased science. People should have a right to know if scientists have religious beliefs so they can be weary of their agendas affecting the results. Many religious beliefs are obviously illogical and make no sense and if a scientist believes them, it does illuminate the likelihood of the accuracy of their results.

For many years "scientists" said homosexuality was caused by "mental illness" and then suddenly they decided it's not. There were entire scientific programs devoted to racist beliefs that were psuedoscientific and often impacted by religious views justifying racism. Of course religion biases science and is a problem in having unbiased research!

I don't think we should outlaw religious people from practicing science, but their views should at least be known so people can scrutinize their work more closely.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (19 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.

load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 months ago (3 children)

You have an ideological viewpoint that says that all people with a certain identity are wrong. And you present yourself as moral.

You sound like a fundamentalist, to me.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] MindTraveller@lemmy.ca -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

The only people with no religion are solipsists. Believing in consensus reality is a religious view. What's it like being a solipsist?

[–] Nelots@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] MindTraveller@lemmy.ca -1 points 2 months ago (5 children)

If you have a scientific argument for realism, I'd love to hear it, and so would every scientist ever, because it's never been proven.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›