A journalist and advocate who rose from homelessness and addiction to serve as a spokesperson for Philadelphia’s most vulnerable was shot and killed at his home early Monday, police said.

Josh Kruger, 39, was shot seven times at about 1:30 a.m. and collapsed in the street after seeking help, police said. He was pronounced dead at a hospital a short time later. Police believe the door to his Point Breeze home was unlocked or the shooter knew how to get in, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported. No arrests have been made and no weapons have been recovered, they said.

Authorities haven’t spoken publicly about the circumstances surrounding the killing.

  • Nahvi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    77
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have done and will continue to call out racial and homophobic bigotry as quickly as I do religious bigotry.

    Unfortunately, as shameful as it is, one of those forms of prejudice is supported by most of the active population here.

      • Nahvi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        37
        ·
        1 year ago

        It is unfortunate that you think so, there is a lot of wisdom in the various world religions.

        We may be beyond the need for religion, but I doubt even that.

          • Nahvi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            19
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nice quote, though I think it would be better applied to this whole post.

            The few bits of wisdom here are so surrounded by shit that most people would need a hose and sieve to find them.

          • Nahvi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You can be a wise, moral and ethical person without religion

            I fully agree.

            Edit: That in no way discounts the idea that there is a lot of wisdom in religion. Even if some of it is outdated.

            That is not really what I was referring to Edit: when I said I doubt we are beyond the need for religion. There is a (debated) theory that religion was important in moving from tribalism towards modern civilization. Specifically, the belief that a god or gods would punish your neighbor if he was doing evil behind your back may have been a necessary concept in our development. Even in modern times, the idea that our fellow citizens may be doing evil without recourse is a serious consideration. It may be adding to our current societal stresses.

            Of course, that could be all horse shit, but I am leaned slightly towards that opinion at present.

          • kmaismith@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            As an atheist (i do not believe in an intelligent creator, or othewise deity), the more time i invest in being moral and wise the more friends i make with pastors. Most people cannot tell from the surface that i am not religious, the more i ask myself if i am religious or not the more meaningless that question starts appearing.

            I don’t identify with any particular religion, but it would be challenging to prove i’m not religious despite the fact that i do not believe in any god.

            • Nahvi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I can appreciate that train of thought.

              A lot of agnostic and atheistic people have spent a lot of time considering their own moral and ethical values; I know I have. While my own version started with an ethics class I took while at a bible school, I still needed to spend plenty of time once I left that life considering what morals and ethical values I thought were relevant.

              I wouldn’t be at all surprised to find that an unbiased observer thought I was religious until they got to know me better.

        • SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It is unfortunate that you think so, there is a lot of wisdom in the various world religions.

          What wisdom is in world religions that couldn’t be found elsewhere without all the murdery baggage?

    • prole@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Religious bigotry” LOL

      The only people who practice anything that could be called that are religious people themselves. Everyone else just wants to be left the fuck alone.

        • prole@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Calling out your hateful ideology for what it is, is not bigotry. You seem to not understand that word either. Nothing I said was bigoted.

          • Nahvi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            You seem to not understand that word either. Nothing I said was bigoted.

            What? I didn’t call anything you said bigotry. Just adjusted the term I used based on your previous statement.

            Calling out your hateful ideology for what it is, is not bigotry.

            I am not sure what this means unless you think I am religious. I am not.

        • xanu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The paradox is literally what’s happening with you in this thread, genius. the Christian church has been out of bounds for centuries, and now that people are finally responding appropriately, you kick and scream saying “not like that! you can only respond appropriately if you follow all the rules laid out by the people who oppress you! you need to tolerate our intolerance because our imaginary friend says we need to hate you to stop the end of the world”

          There were “good” people who identify as Nazis. should we let that ideology thrive because a minority of its population put flowers on the graves their compatriots created?

          I get that you just want to hold hands and sing kumbaya, but I have trouble holding the hands that are covered with the blood of my brothers, sisters, and allies.

          • Nahvi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            The “paradox of tolerance” is people justifying attacking people. This myth does nothing but ensure there’s no way back for people who have drifted out of bounds - it’s a recipe for radicalizing people.

            The vast majority of Christians have spent your entire life moving more towards the middle. Yet, all you see is the ground that hasn’t been covered yet. When you push them (not me) back and pretend that they should be judged by the actions of their ancestors instead of their own actions, you make it that much more challenging to have them stay in-bounds, or move back in if they have gone astray.

            When you compare the Christian Religion that two-thirds of the US shares, to the secular Nazi Ideology, and claim they have blood on their hands, you push them towards radicalization.

            When people that support your stance go out-of-bounds themselves, and aren’t called on it they make it that much harder to show the way back in-bounds to the opposition that have strayed.

            • xanu@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The vast majority of Christians have spent your entire life moving more towards the middle.

              Huh, dang I guess you’re right. I mean, it certainly would be pretty wild for you to say that if the majority of Christians that I’ve personally met and the ones controlling my government had been organizing and campaigning to take away the rights of the LGBTQ+ community, women, and any racial minority since before my parents ever met. It’d be downright dishonest of you if, instead of moving more towards the middle, christians have spent the last 40 years sprinting to the far right as fast as they possibly could, to the point where a comparison to the Nazis doesn’t seem so far-fetched. Do you honestly think the women’s rights, LGBTQ+ acceptance, or the civil rights movement was championed by the Christian majority and they weren’t the primary opposition to those ideas?

              It’d also be insane if the “secular Nazi ideology” was actually heavily Christian and the Catholic Church spent centuries laying the groundwork for Jewish Genocide, helped the Nazis seize power, and continued to protect them long after their atrocities were well known. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany

              I guess if you are part of the oppressors, they’re probably quite nice to you. Sorry if my words are what push you to finally be honest with yourself about what you believe. Didn’t mean to radicalize you

              • Nahvi@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Huh, dang I guess you’re right.

                You probably should have just stopped that first paragraph right there.

                There was no reason to make crazy ass claims that only a fart-for-brains would believe, then spend the time smacking them down. If you really don’t think the opinion of the average Christian has changed towards LGBT folks, then you haven’t been paying attention. Please feel free to check any numbers anywhere and see that roughly half of US Christians are fine with homosexuality now. Compared to 30, 40, 50, 100 years ago, this is a huge shift.

                It’d also be insane if the “secular Nazi ideology” was actually heavily Christian

                If you wanted to claim that a lot of Christians joined the Nazis, that is one thing, but the ideology itself is incompatible with Christianity.

                From the same wikipedia article that you linked:

                Nazi ideology could not accept an autonomous establishment whose legitimacy did not spring from the government. It desired the subordination of the church to the state.[38] Although the broader membership of the Nazi Party after 1933 came to include many Catholics and Protestants, aggressive anti-Church radicals like Joseph Goebbels, Alfred Rosenberg, Martin Bormann, and Heinrich Himmler saw the Kirchenkampf campaign against the Churches as a priority concern, and anti-Church and anticlerical sentiments were strong among grassroots party activists.[39]

                Hitler’s Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels, saw an “insoluble opposition” between the Christian and Nazi world views.[39] The Führer angered the churches by appointing Alfred Rosenberg as official Nazi ideologist in 1934.[40] Heinrich Himmler saw the main task of his SS organization to be that of acting as the vanguard in overcoming Christianity and restoring a “Germanic” way of living.[41] Hitler’s chosen deputy, Martin Bormann, advised Nazi officials in 1941 that “National Socialism and Christianity are irreconcilable.”[40]

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany#Nazi_attitudes_towards_Christianity

                • xanu@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It is true that the Nazi regime was hostile to the Christian church - because they recognized the power the church held and knew they needed to be the one and only source of truth. Nazism needed to be above god (that’s the “fundamentally incompatible” part of your argument, since the church argues nothing is above god), but never sought to eradicate the belief in Him. When 95% of the regime identifies as Christian, and uses Christian ideology to suppress and genocide members of every other religion, that is a fundamentally Christian ideology, even if they fought for power directly with the Vatican. With many Nazi leaders wanting to treat Nazism itself like a religion - complete with divine rule - I’d even go so far as to argue that Nazism is a particularly embarrassing Christian sect.

                  Some Nazis, such as Hans Kerrl, who served as Hitler’s Minister for Church Affairs, advocated “Positive Christianity”, a uniquely Nazi form of Christianity which rejected Christianity’s Jewish origins and the Old Testament, and portrayed “true” Christianity as a fight against Jews, with Jesus depicted as an Aryan.[14]

                  Look Ma, I can cherry pick wikipedia too!

                  Under the Gleichschaltung (Nazification) process, Hitler attempted to create a unified Protestant Reich Church from Germany’s 28 existing Protestant churches. The plan failed, and was resisted by the Confessing Church. Persecution of the Catholic Church in Germany followed the Nazi takeover. Hitler moved quickly to eliminate political Catholicism. Amid harassment of the Church, the Reich concordat treaty with the Vatican was signed in 1933, and promised to respect Church autonomy. Hitler routinely disregarded the Concordat, closing all Catholic institutions whose functions were not strictly religious.

                  Seems like Hitler had more of an issue with the political power of the church instead of their beliefs and even tried making his own Protestant sect.

                  But you seem to enjoy taking Nazis at their word (surely they wouldn’t lie, would they?) so sure, they were totally a secular organization that definitely treated Jewish people nicely. They were even socialist!

                  roughly half of US Christians are fine with homosexuality now.

                  And yet, when you ask about trans identity, they’ll show what they really believe. given the chance, even those who are “fine with it” would rather see us eradicated to please their special guy than for us to live peacefully by their side. Since I know how the Nazi comparison tickles you so much: if you asked the 1930s German population what they thought of Jewish people, more than “roughly half” would’ve said they were “fine” with them.

                  The shift in Christian attitudes towards the LGBTQ+ community is the direct result of opposition to the church - which was considered to be “out of bounds” and “pushing Christians to be radicalized” at the time. The church changed their stance because they seek power and control over any principles they pretend to have. The shift happened in spite of religion, not because of it. I see you didn’t even try to respond to how Christians were the main opposition to any and every single push for civil rights. If we sat back and placated them like you believe we should, only white landowning men would be able to vote or have rights.

                  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_opposition

                  If Christians are so progressive, why is it always Christian groups that oppose progress? wait, I can answer this one for you: “Those groups don’t represent ‘real’ Christianity”. Surely there’s nothing fundamental to the religion that makes oppression intrinsic.

                  • Nahvi@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Seems like Hitler had more of an issue with the political power of the church instead of their beliefs and even tried making his own Protestant sect.

                    I fully concede this point. I had only read the bit about Nazis being secular recently while looking up something and clearly did not do enough supporting research before repeating it.

                    The shift happened in spite of religion, not because of it.

                    No objection here.

                    I see you didn’t even try to respond to how Christians were the main opposition to any and every single push for civil rights.

                    You seem to be stuck on this idea that I think Christians are the real progressives or something. I have not in any way said or tried to imply any such thing. Just that the majority have been moving toward the middle nearly your entire lifetime.

                    If we sat back and placated them like you believe we should

                    You should definitely stick to things I actually said, not easy to win stances that I do not hold.

                    I have made it pretty clear from the beginning that we should stand up to bigoted hateful speech regardless where it comes from. Since you seem to have missed it: That includes Christians, but it also includes LGBT members, and anyone in-between or outside of them.

                    Pretending that a third of the world all believes the same thing because of certain groups among them is a problem. Treating them all like shit, for something other members of their faith believe, is a reflection on the person treating another human like shit not on their target.

                    And yet, when you ask about trans identity, they’ll show what they really believe.

                    Trans identity is a complex issue. One that affects more than just trans people. Surely it will shift in some way over time, though I would not want to even try to guess in what direction at this point. People go nucking futs when it comes to their kids, and in my opinion the Trans community lost some PR ground when it came out that schools were intentionally hiding students who were transitioning gender identities from their parents. Edit in Italics

                    If you want to make progress on trans issues, I would suggest that the LGBT community take a transitional stance and then move again in the future, rather than losing their minds because they cannot force the whole population to share their views all at once.

                    This is a tried and true tactic when it comes to gay rights. When Clinton passed, “Don’t ask, don’t tell” it was a highly controversial pro-gay stance. If he had tried to push the military to where we are today there is no telling how the US would have reacted, but it would not have been good.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is a difference between attacking someone who chooses a disgusting belief system and bigotry. Any adult who remains a Christian knows exactly what the religion with the highest kill count stands for. They decide to ignore that because they get the warm fuzzies once a week for an hour.

      Now go restore Roe v. Wade or you are useless to me.

      • Nahvi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        There is a difference between attacking someone who chooses a disgusting belief system and bigotry.

        Bigotry is thinking, what I believe is right and everyone who believes differently is wrong.

        To point at all varieties of Christianity and say, “you are bad,” is being bigoted.

        Now go restore Roe v. Wade or you are useless to me.

        If you want someone useful here are some people that agree with you and will help you fight, assuming you can manage to not call their belief system disgusting to their faces:

        Rev. Angela Williams, a Presbyterian pastor and the lead organizer of SACReD: Spiritual Alliance of Communities for Reproductive Dignity, told Healthline that faith leaders and religious groups that support abortion rights have been preparing for this moment for a long time.

        https://www.healthline.com/health-news/meet-the-religious-groups-fighting-to-save-abortion-access

        Members of the Episcopal Church (79%) and the United Church of Christ (72%) are especially likely to support legal abortion, while most members of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and the mainline Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (65%) also take this position.

        https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2018/01/22/american-religious-groups-vary-widely-in-their-views-of-abortion/

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Bigotry is thinking, what I believe is right and everyone who believes differently is wrong.

          No. That is just being human.

          To point at all varieties of Christianity and say, “you are bad,” is being bigoted.

          Ok? It isnt some weird charm argument winner. You can call me any nasty thing you want and that won’t raise from the dead a single Iraqi or stop a single 14 year old girl having to induce an at home abortion because her uncle raped her.

          If you want someone useful here are some people that agree with you and will help you fight, assuming you can manage to not call their belief system disgusting to their faces:

          Not good enough. I want to hear a Christian shaman to say that anyone who opposes their religion on the rest of us is no longer a Christian. Disown or own. I like hot beverages and cold ones but not lukewarm ones.

          • Nahvi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            No. That is just being human.

            No. That is just being arrogant. You can be human and acknowledge that your stance is an opinion and that there are other just as valid opinions. Yours just fits you better.

            You can call me any nasty thing you want

            To the best of my memory, I haven’t called you anything. I was pointing out OC’s bigoted statement.

            I want to hear a Christian shaman to say that anyone who opposes their religion on the rest of us is no longer a Christian.

            Ever heard of a Schism? Virtually every denomination in America thinks the others aren’t doing it right. Half of them won’t acknowledge each other as real Christians.

            In fact, there are major schisms forming right now over LGBT issues. Methodists have been constantly in the news regarding their LGBT schism for the last year or two.

            https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2023-07-06/one-in-five-united-methodist-congregations-in-the-us-have-left-the-denomination-over-lgbtq-conflicts

            Another article points out :

            But the United Methodist Church is also the latest of several mainline Protestant denominations in America to begin fracturing, just as Episcopal, Lutheran and Presbyterian denominations lost significant minorities of churches and members this century amid debates over sexuality and theology.

            https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2022-10-10/united-methodists-are-breaking-up-in-a-slow-motion-schism

            • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Talk is cheap. Excommunicate Christians who vote religion into government and spend every single tithe on restoring Roe v. Wade.

              Or you can call me a bigot again for not respecting your skydaddy and Jesus. Just so you are aware: Jesus never even existed.

              • Nahvi@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Jesus never even existed.

                Please do a little research before making such ridiculous statements. You do not have to believe in a god to believe a man named Jesus existed. There is likely more evidence for the existence of a man named Jesus than there is for the existence of your own great-great-grandmother.

                Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed. The contrary perspective, that Jesus was mythical, is regarded as a fringe theory.

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

                Excommunicate Christians who vote religion into government and spend every single tithe on restoring Roe v. Wade.

                If this is where you set the bar for treating Christians like anyone should treat another human then there really isn’t anywhere to go in this conversation.

                Not that it really matters but I am not a Christian. I am just someone that believes all humans should be treated with a bit of respect until they prove they are not worthy of it by their own personal words and actions.

                • SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I am just someone that believes all humans should be treated with a bit of respect until they prove they are not worthy of it by their own personal words and actions.

                  That’s what afraid_of_zombies has been saying all this time.

                  • Nahvi@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    That’s what afraid_of_zombies has been saying all this time.

                    Then they have a funny way of expressing it. It sounds a lot more like they were defending a bigoted statement by saying someone can’t be bigoted against people from religions they find disgusting.

                    There is a difference between attacking someone who chooses a disgusting belief system and bigotry.

                    https://lemmy.world/comment/4026429

                    Edit: added people from

                • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Please do a little research before making such ridiculous statements. You do not have to believe in a god to believe a man named Jesus existed. There is likely more evidence for the existence of a man named Jesus than there is for the existence of your own great-great-grandmother.

                  Zero. Zero. Zero. Contemporary evidence the man existed. All we have is hearsay by known liars decades later. As for my great-great grandmother I have seen her Elis Island file and my grandmother had a photo of her from turn of last century. In case you are curious one of my great great grandfather was a dean at an certain major university.

                  I am sure if I made an effort I could also get her marriage certificate and census record.

                  Yet your Jesus left nothing behind, pretty sus.

                  Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed.

                  Ding ding ding argument from authority! Gotcha. Basic logical fallacy. Ding ding ding ding. Guess they don’t teach basic logic and research methods in your weekly pretend time.

                  Not that it really matters but I am not a Christian.

                  What type of sky-daddyism do you follow? Let me know so I can point out how wrong it is. Is it cliche agnostic but not really or mall yoga Hinduism or Buddha was a pot smoker?

    • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you keep advocating in this fashion you are going to start feeling very backed up against a wall very quickly. When people are routinely hurt by an institution the unambiguous defense of the people within institution as a whole claiming a similar victimhood plays on a part of human nature. What people want of you is to accept that the numbers of people claiming Christiandom to then go on to harm someone means that as someone who claims to be Christian that you should be the first voice to start criticizing your own.

      Instead because you cannot separate yourself from your Christian label or other people’s frustration and pain caused by other people who do so under the flag of being “Proud Christians” your advocacy appears shallow and self serving. You and all the good Christians you defend become literary “the good man who does nothing” If facing people in your audience who have experienced trauma at the hands of your group what they want to see is that you accept that people like you harmed them and that you are different than them by being able to recognize their pain and shelve your agenda and listen unambiguously. What they are asking is for you to show you care about them and are strong enough to weather and differentiate the criticism they aren’t directing at you.

      It’s a similar effect to how a lot of systemic issues around racism get held up on the feelings of the people in institutions about being implied to be racist. Oftentimes the issues never get dealt with because the conversation has to stop become all about the feelings of the person and how they aren’t a bad person. While they may not intend it that person’s feelings become the obstacle that throws up the roadblocks on people who are fighting desperately to have less roadblocks. Once this happens often enough people start to figure that that person’s feelings DO make them a bad person because regardless of their personal merits they are still in the way and having to sway every individual roadblock by taking them offside and coddling them telling them, it’s okay we know YOU aren’t a bad person becomes way too much. Thus people start getting more frustrated with the people who demand this treatment and take up their energy and they start getting more strident.

      When you place yourself in that spot it’s easy to see people’s frustration as hate but it is different. They want you to be better.

      • Nahvi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I appreciate the well-thought out and verbose response. Have an upvote!

        Now to the meat of it. I am not a Christian, I am someone who is tired of some bigots getting a pass and some bigots getting their whole instances defederated. Since there is clearly a disinterest in heavy-handed moderation to get rid of the one-sided bigotry then the best recourse is open discussion.

        I have no doubt that the people here who are heavily prejudiced against religion have their reasons, but that does not mean that their words are good or acceptable in an open forum. When people express their ideas in socially unacceptable ways they should be called out and down-voted, but currently they they are mostly receiving positive responses. This is wrong. It is a mark against the communities and instances they are posting those statements in.

        It does not matter why someone feels justified for spewing hate, they should be called-out or at least shunned. If you want to help someone work through their hate, that is great. I just want to stop being embarrassed by it. Despite being a great concept, I literally cannot recommend Lemmy to anyone because the top comment is so often some trash about how “all conservatives are fascists” or a gay activist died “it must be a Christian.”

        • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Lemmy is kind of unapologetically leftist and there is a lot of dissatisfaction by a number of groups that all coelece around the use of religion or “traditional values” a euphemism for Christian, more specifically the Pauline chapters, norms that reject LGBTQIA identities and a flattening of the rights of women to be autonomous. When you look at the “bigotry” you’ll find “Christianity” does not always often mean the same thing when people use it from poster to poster. In many ways it closer to a shorthand for the Evengelical movements which are growing more like consolidated political parties. If someone claims to be Christian the belief in Christ itself is not always the cause for the vitriol (not saying the angry atheists do not prowl). Rather it is how they weild it against other communities.

          Moderation is never truly neutral. To some extent all places are tailored to be safer to someone. Leftist spaces are often tailored to be more sympathetic with people to whom conservative values trend on the whole to be hostile towards. Importantanly however it is important to look at how that frustration is being utilized. On the whole people here’s main gripe is an overreach of control at the expense of safety and health of other people. The desired outcome is not a banishment from society but a ceasefire.

          • Nahvi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Once again, thank you for the well-reasoned comment.

            I have to say, much of this sounds very similar to something I might have said while trying to convince someone that there is some nuance to the Christian Right. The rest of if though is still worth thinking over some more for sure. Especially the bit about how this space is a bit tailored towards leftist view points. Maybe I am expecting too much in a place where people should be able to throw an off the cuff “goddam repubtards” without being called on it.

            Still, I think some of the comments really do push that boundary; including OC’s immediate accusation of some generic Christian being the murder.

            • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              My experience mostly comes from moderating queer friendly communities with a low amount of anonymity. If you have a community with a high instance of trauma surrounding being cast out of your family, abused directly or placed in the abusive situation of conversion therapy then let someone use that space to proselytize Christianity positivly it tends to make that place unsafe because you can actually cause flashbacks in the standing community and eventually in the interest of protecting the right of one person to say whatever they the rest of the community stops being able to speak freely without having to explain themselves and have to tiptoe around the one person who makes any instance of them venting their reasonble frustrations with their situation about how "not every Christian… ". People sometimes need places to let off steam.

              Often people in threatened minorities need protected spaces where they don’t need to follow the rules that are more universally applied where they don’t feel they have to appease the sensibilities that are enforced on them the minute they step outside. Very few spaces are actually welcome to everyone and the ones that use an anything goes moderation policy usually find themselves hosting some damn near criminal elements who drive off others and rot the place.

              Since conservative spaces tend to be somewhat hegemonic people from those spaces often hold feelings that if they are not welcome to say whatever they want anywhere they choose that any request to modify their behaviour with respect to the needs of others in the space is intolerable oppression. Every space has to chose on a sliding scale how much they are willing to put up with if one participant starts causing everyone to enjoy the space less though the decision in my experience is often a matter of long debate per individual about how willing to learn and accept that the value lies with the more vulnerable audience who have fewer venues to not have to deal with being spammed with rhetoric that paints them as deviant, dangerous, mentally ill or inferior.

              Halfway spaces in our forums are made available for people who cannot be trusted to play by the stricter ruleset of conscientious behaviour where one can expect to be more rough and tumble but a lot of the time that becomes a space to debunk a lot of the bullshit and places the burden on our queer membership to be educators as oftentimes people who can’t be trusted use the dedicated spaces to whine and complain about how they should have the all access pass and when they inferred everyone in the space was a pedophile they didn’t actually know what they were doing so it wasn’t like they were trying to hurt everyone etc etc etc…

              • Nahvi@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Much of it seems to be a matter of what we think Lemmy and the communities are for.

                In my mind, c/News and c/Politics should be group spaces where people of all stripes can express view points in well-reasoned, civil, ways. I have no problem with little corners of the federation that cater to the hurt and angry, my issue is when it spills out into the more public spaces. I will readily acknowledge some of that opinion comes from a stance that does not seem all that popular on Lemmy.

                When I first heard about the fediverse, I was excited that the echo chambers would be broken open. I thought everyone could have their radical little corners, but that there would be open communities that we could all meet in and discuss issues in a reasonable way.

                When I joined an instance with a “democratic” experiment going on, I quickly realized that my view that it was awesome to federate with everyone was a relative minority; many people there thought it was more awesome to be able to defederate from those whose opinions they never wanted to see. Fortunately, their community found something of a middle ground, but it was still quite the disappointment to me.

        • tygerprints@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s true that bigotry can work both ways, but you have to admit the right has given us a lot of reason to feel bigoted towards them, especially in light of incidents like this where progressive and smart people are being killed for being better humans than other humans. Christianity has one main tenet - love they neighbor as thyself. There is no other principle to Christianity, only this one. And yet right wingers seem to think they don’t have to obey it but can still call themselves “christians,” which is a complete lie and slap in the face to god and everyone on earth.

    • oxjox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just be sure you’ve taken a moment to understand who you’re speaking with and what you’re speaking with them about. Because in this case, any issue of bigotry has absolutely nothing to do with this drug related domestic dispute murder.

      Commenters here are arguing with each other over something that has nothing to do with this case. So, it’s not that you care about the victim, you care about virtue signaling.

      FWIW, the victim regularly attended an Episcopalian church. So, I’m not so sure he’d be cool with people using religion as a cudgel beneath his obituary.

      • Nahvi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        this drug related domestic dispute murder.

        Is that what it is looking like now? The article was significantly sparse on details.

          • Nahvi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Thank you for the link. The article from that comment was far superior.

            I am sorry to hear that Josh lost his life like that. Seems like Philly lost a good guy.

            Hopefully it wasn’t actually the domestic option. It is a hard thought to think that someone he helped out by letting them live there would come back to kill him.

            Also, I am glad to hear that his friends are looking into rehoming his rescued cat friend.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well hey maybe religious people should stop consistently hurting other humans and society in general because they think their imaginary friend would be down with it.

      • Nahvi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        It sounds an awful like you are saying, “Well yeah, we are bigots, but we are bigots because they deserve it!”

        Am I misunderstanding you?

        • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, you are misunderstanding me.

          I’m saying that religion has a richly documented history of intolerance and repression, up to and including the present day. I am simultaneously saying that I am intolerant of intolerance.

          I feel like you should read up on this if you’re still struggling to wrap your head around the nuance of what pretty much everyone else in this comment tree besides yourself is expressing.

          • Nahvi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Thank you for the clarification.

            I have read that multiple times. I just think it is a shite theory.

            I eventually need to put it in my own words, but /u/theneverfox@pawb.social’s post is pretty good for now: (emphasis added)

            There’s no paradox in tolerance. Tolerance means you accept everyone existing within the societal contract - period. Doesn’t matter if they’re Republican, a racist, or anything else

            Behavior out of bounds should be fought appropriately. If someone uses words to express racism, call them a disgusting asshole. If a bunch of neonazis organize for an act of violence, confront it with violence. Respond appropriately.

            Conversely, if a racist can be around people of other races without acting racist, accept them in the group to reinforce their rehabilitation. If someone with braindead opinions bites their tongue and keeps it to themselves, tolerate them.

            There’s no paradox - there’s acceptable behavior and unacceptable behavior. If anyone, displays only acceptable behavior, you tolerate them - full stop. If anyone goes out of bounds, you respond appropriately to correct the behavior - full stop.

            The “paradox of tolerance” is people justifying attacking people. This myth does nothing but ensure there’s no way back for people who have drifted out of bounds - it’s a recipe for radicalizing people.

            I’m genuinely convinced the “paradox of tolerance” is a psyops designed to fracture society by breeding extremists… If there’s no tolerance when they behave and no way back, what do you think is going to happen? Either their beliefs that they’re under attack get constantly reinforced and they get further pushed out of bounds, or we kill them all before they destroy our society

            There has to be a way back, or the only way forward is ideological purges

            https://lemmy.world/comment/3754441