691
submitted 2 years ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] fukurthumz420@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

well, one path is based on reason and logic. the other is based on fairy tales. which path is more likely to produce the best result?

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

Anti - vaxxers are based on fairy tales but claim to be based on reason and logic. Religion is not the problem, education is.

[-] fukurthumz420@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

well good luck legislating effective education within the context of a christian nation.

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

Man you give up quick when the effective solution isn't attacking religion. Makes me suspect that your actual motivation may not be ending bigotry, but rather furthering your own bigotry. (Shocking, I know)

[-] fukurthumz420@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

didn't give up. i just don't think you were arguing in good faith. what reason do you have to defend religion?

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago

If someone argued that the way to stop bigotry was to make sure everyone was vaccinated I'd argue against that too, because it's irrelevant to what is happening and won't fix it.

[-] fukurthumz420@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

it’s irrelevant to what is happening and won’t fix it

incorrect.

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

Well according to this study: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-secular-life/201807/religion-secularism-and-xenophobia

23% of the population doesn't need religion to be bigots, so eliminating all religion still leaves 1 in 4 people in America a bigot.

[-] fukurthumz420@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

which is far smaller than people with religious affiliations. there's also the holistic factor, by which a secular population is more likely to implement education to reduce bigotry. it's the best option altogether if you want to produce a more humane society.

you just don't want to accept it as a better path than religion. you're arguing in bad faith. i fucking hate people that argue in bad faith. you're just sticking on a stupid point for no reason other than to have someone pay attention to you. you're fucking pathetic. quit replying.

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

which is far smaller than people with religious affiliations.

Yup, 23% is 13% smaller than Protestants, so if you want to get rid of Protestants you'll get rid of 13% instead of the full 39% if we deal with the actual fucking cause. 23% is 9% smaller than Catholics, so if you want to get rid of Catholicism you'll get rid of the 9% that are bigots instead of the full 32%. Evangelicals are the only one more than double the baseline, so you could focus on Evangelicals and deal with the 29% of them that are bigots, or we could find a solution that accounts for Secular bigots as well and deal with all 52%. Why are you arguing for less effective methods? What even is your plan to get rid of all religion and leaving only 1 in 4 people as bigots?

You just don't want to accept anything other than getting rid of religion, regardless of how ineffective the idea is. You're arguing in bad faith, and getting upset that when pushed your bad faith becomes obvious and you look like a fool. You're sticking on a stupid point for no reason other than your own hatred and bigotry. you’re fucking pathetic. Quit trying to push your bad faith arguments and you'll stop showing yourself to be a fool.

this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2024
691 points (98.2% liked)

News

35714 readers
677 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


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


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


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. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


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 2 years ago
MODERATORS