Important context: This was an instance of a crowd crush caused by poor crowd control.

edit: action has now been taken against the offending comment :)

(also some of you guys in the comments here have been yoinked by mods too… just be nice? this post was not an invitation to test out your boundaries)

by opening this spoiler you acknowledge that brigading and harrassment are against the rules

link to post in question: https://lemmy.world/comment/10965360

  • cybermass@lemmy.ca
    2·
    4 months ago

    Is expressing atheist beliefs inherently anti-religious?

    Seems like a bad cope to me

      • spujb@lemmy.cafeOPEnglish
        1·
        4 months ago

        r/atheism and its consequences have been disastrous to the traditional practice of being a decent human being online

            • imPastaSyndrome@lemm.ee
              0·
              4 months ago

              Claiming that /r/atheism has any significant impact on the internet culture as a whole is just the silliest thing to claim without evidence or explanation of any sort. It doesn’t even say what he’s claiming they did to the internet’s culture just an implication that it was bad.

              Pretty empty table pounding statement

              • alyth@lemmy.world
                1·
                4 months ago

                This statement hardly merits the same level of proof as a scientific publication. The original post is an example of the obnoxious behavior you find on r/atheism.
                They feel superior to and smarter than religious people. In this extreme case, the poster expresses feeling superior to people who died in a stampede that took place at a religious event.
                Internet atheists who think they are superior to believers / Believers who think they are superior to atheists are two sides of the same coin.

    • moosetwin@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      1·
      4 months ago

      No such rules in this one

      Though neither specifically mention religion, here are the rules for c/196 and lemmy.blahaj.zone that may cover this case:

      196 rules:

      lemmy.blahaj.zone’s guidelines:

      lemmy.blahaj.zone’s TOS:

      In addition, lemmy.blahaj.zone’s TOS states that they must follow the laws of Australia, which may have legislation regarding this issue:

      Edit: replaced references from lemmy.world’s TOS, I got the instance wrong, my bad! - Also replaced non-image links with archive.org links for posterity (image links have been archived, but they have not been replaced for embedding reasons)

      initial version of the comment

      No such rules in this one

      Though neither specifically mention religion, here are the rules for c/196 and lemmy.world that may cover this case:

      196 rules:

      lemmy.world TOS:

      In addition, lemmy.world’s TOS states that they must follow the laws of the below three countries, which may have laws regarding this issue:

      • minibyte@sh.itjust.works
        0·
        4 months ago

        I read that and don’t see how it’s relevant in this case. I’m simply telling the truth. Invest your tithe into a retirement account and call it a day.

        • Feathercrown@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          4 months ago

          You cannot be telling the truth because not all gods have the same rules. Also no common gods demand castration or incapacitation.

  • MindTraveller@lemmy.caEnglish
    1·
    4 months ago

    Flying Squid told me I had psychosis because I disagreed with their views on religion. They’re an asshole.

      • tacosplease@lemmy.world
        2·
        4 months ago

        You all may have other issues with this person, but saying you’re going to show embarrassing baby pictures to boyfriends/girlfriends has been standard parenting behavior for as long as there have been photos. Nothing about that makes flying squid a pedo. Stop trying to make fetch happen.

      • MindTraveller@lemmy.caEnglish
        0·
        4 months ago

        Oh ew that’s some borderline pedo shit. “Here’s the person you’re fucking as a baby. Hahaha you’re sexually attracted to a baby. I created child pornography just to make you uncomfortable because you’re a normal, non-pedophilic person”

        • x4740N@lemm.ee
          0·
          4 months ago

          Yeah I reported it and this is the lemmy.world response I recieved back as an email

          • Roflmasterbigpimp@lemmy.world
            1·
            4 months ago

            You seem to don’t know what CSAM is.

            This was a Joke. Your parents showing your significant other embarrassing Pictures of you, is like the standard things Parents do.

  • Zagorath@aussie.zone
    1·
    4 months ago

    Damn, this post left out some really crucial context. I assumed the comment was left in response to someone martyring themselves, probably after having killed others in the name of their sky fairy. And in that context I’d have backed them 100% in what they were saying about it.

    But yeah, your reply there said it better than anyone could. The comment was completely out of place and inappropriate.

  • Tregetour@lemdro.idEnglish
    0·
    4 months ago

    If the mod team on this instance is going to be that prescriptive around how religion is mentioned, then they’re better off just blanket-banning any mention of it altogether, like on Whirlpool.

    If you’re a <insert faith>, and in the natural course of discussion people start criticizing ideas that inform <insert faith>'s beliefs and ethics, that’s not a personal attack. It’s not ‘bigotry’ on the basis that you disagree. It’s not ‘trolling’ purely because it made you upset.

    I’m going to separately post the famous Charlie Hebdo cover in this thread, the one published after Muslim extremists murdered their people over cartoons. If this instance is so straitjacketed by Australia’s ridiculous lawmaking in this area that it cannot tolerate such a post, then it’s not a forum for adults.

    • Taleya@aussie.zone
      1·
      4 months ago

      how the fuck is this an appropriate comment to make in response to someone getting yanked over explicitly saying a specific religion was “made up”.

      This is not a situation dealing with a critique of “Ideas that inform” this was straight up the statement “Your faith is made up bullshit and people died stupidly because of this made up bullshit”

      • Tregetour@lemdro.idEnglish
        0·
        4 months ago

        ‘Anti-religious comment’ accurately describes my scenario. Anyone who dislikes the hypothetical critique can simply hit the report button and it will get wiped if Rule 4 is read at face value.

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          1·
          4 months ago

          Anyone who dislikes the hypothetical critique can simply hit the report button and it will get wiped if Rule 4 is read at face value.

          Oh, so you want to throw your terrible take out there for everyone, but you don’t want to actually defend it or have people openly disagree with you?