this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2026
10 points (100.0% liked)

Murdered by Words

2597 readers
1 users here now

Responses that completely destroy the original argument in a way that leaves little to no room for reply - a targeted, well-placed response to another person, organization, or group of people.

The following things are not grounds for murder:

Rules:

  1. Be civil and remember the human. No name calling or insults. Swearing in general is fine, but not to insult someone else.
  2. Discussion is encouraged but arguments are not. Don’t be aggressive and don’t argue for arguments sake.
  3. No bigotry of any kind.
  4. Censor the person info of anyone not in the public eye.
  5. If you break the rules you’ll get one warning before you’re banned.
  6. Enjoy the community in the light hearted way it’s intended.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Was religion ever intended to fill a different role?

[–] GardenGeek@europe.pub 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It was/is a ruleset made by humans for humans to ensure cooperation within huge groups. Bit outdated nowadays but the concept is continued in form of laws, human rights, social norms etc.

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 month ago

It's also commonly used to create a strong sense of "us"/"them", inferiority to the unquestionable elite, superiority and self righteousness over non-believers, and a great way to force your underlings to do your bidding disguised as words from "God", whoever that might be.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Look at basically every none-abrahamic faith

Especially those religions without gods per se, but rather concepts and ideas

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

I'll admit I've dismissed them all as mumbo-jumbo but please correct me if I'm wrong - not eating cows (hinduism?) despite being a suitable source for protein seems pretty limiting. Living in celibacy with an odd haircut (Buddhism) is downright weird to me. Sihks seem alright, although those turbans (the name escapes me) seem oppressively heavy. Do you have any other religion in mind that isn't a tool for oppression?

Edit: Sikhs are warriors with swords as part of their uniform. Doesn't get much more oppressive than war. Scientology extracts wealth from the members to keep the leaders happy. I don't know of any "concepts and ideas" religions. Please feel free to enlighten me.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

I wanna see your bad faith uncharitable takes on Humanism and FSM, these are hilarious to see how you'll twist anything even slightly religious to look evil

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

FSM is a joke, made for a dude to be able to wear a colander on their passport.

Humanism as a religion - where do we draw the line on "is a religion"? Is coffee a religion? Is Marxism a religion? Is the color purple a religion?

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Damn that's the good stuff, I'll have to share this thread with my friend, this is hilarious

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I find it quite humorous how you try to defend religion by bringing up the truly defining beliefs with up to a staggering 500 practitioners worldwide to support your point. Arguing that "there is nothing to believe in" is a religion sure is something else.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

I mean you called Satanism a religion, so by the same definition, so is Humanism, and so is Marxism

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 weeks ago

I did? You're the one that brought it up, and unlike the other fringe ones I've at least met 20+ people that consider themselves satanists.

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

Hindu eat beef? It's not against the religion to eat it.

That's a misconception, they just make sure they die with dignity and lived as happy a life as possible.

Which some sects argue it's impossible if they're not living a wild life in nature, and argue one shouldn't eat them ever (as there's basically no such thing as wild cow anymore.) But there's no ban, it's just seen as immoral.

Sikh having a warrior thing is funnily enough fuck all to do with war. It's a holdover from ancient times that's just stuck around as part of it.

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And nazism didn't start any wars these last 10 years so it's all good? Geez, I've selldom seen cherry-picking this obvious.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It literally did? Israel Palestine

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 weeks ago

That's zionism. Don't be silly.

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And those that don't eat beef out of religious conviction that it's not moral are not hindu, or is their religion not true?

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They're just a different subsection of the same faith

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 weeks ago

So they are hindu and doesn't eat beef, just as I said? Wew.