• carbonprop
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    5 months ago

    What in the hell is happening? It’s like the more we progress socially the more the religious zealots get to go fucking crazy.

    • djsoren19@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      46
      ·
      5 months ago

      let’s not go crazy here, this story is from Utah. Utah is basically full of religious zealots and has absolutely not progressed socially in the last two decades outside of maybe Salt Lake City.

      You gotta remember, there are two Americas. Rural America is closer to a fundamentalist country in the Middle East or Africa.

      • Sonori@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        Like most of the time when these states come up, I feel obligated to note that not only are there over half a million Democrats in Utah, but also plenty of majority Democratic districts.

    • DM_Me_Perky_Tits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      5 months ago

      Religion has had a stranglehold on society for millennia, and now that their power is slowly fading away as people turn away from it they are lashing out.

      They’re too short-sighted to see that this behavior is only going to push more people away from them and hasten their decline.

      • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        5 months ago

        Ironically the religious view that evil exists in certain types of people is something that I’ve recently adopted.

        • HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          Really? Over the last decade or so I’ve moved more towards a material conditions view, where material conditions is inclusive of neurotype - some people are naturally high anxiety, low openness, high purity sense, and high traditionalism, and that’s not something they have direct control over - and even if they did, they wouldn’t have control over the algorithm that drives them towards a given set of values for those parameters, and even if they did, they wouldn’t have control over the algorithm that decides which algorithm to use for deciding which algorithm to use for deciding those values, ad infinitum. The buck grounds out in things outside our control.

          • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            I’ve never seen this line of thinking as useful. For practical things-- the actions you take and the beliefs you express-- their effect is not connected to whether you’re a conscious, free-willed entity, or whether you’re a collection of chemical and physical processes that emulates the first option.

            It’s the same argument as “I have no free will, so it’s not my fault I’m committing this crime.” Ok, well then it’s also not my fault that I’m arresting you.

            In short, just because you can explain why a certain action is taken, that doesn’t mean that the action is justified.

            • HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              I would suggest that on the contrary, it suggests a useful point of intervention. A great deal of crime descends from poverty. If you don’t like crime, you could focus on it being about the individuals committing the crime, or you could focus on fixing the poverty. Doing the former has gotten us the highest proportion of our population in prison in the world, higher than any police state that I am aware of.

                • HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I think of myself as a consequentialist. I care about outcomes, and having an understanding of the inputs and the function gives you much better control over the outputs.

      • AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        This is fascism, the religious bit is really just peripheral. They believe in inequality based on some kind of identity.

      • Ranger@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Many religions don’t teach homo/transphoba, much of the world’s homo/transphoba comes from a particular set of religions.

    • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      5 months ago

      Ur-Fascism.

      1. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action’s sake. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of Ur-Fascism, from Goering’s alleged statement (“When I hear talk of culture I reach for my gun”) to the frequent use of such expressions as “degenerate intellectuals,” “eggheads,” “effete snobs,” “universities are a nest of reds.” The official Fascist intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligentsia for having betrayed traditional values.
      1. Besides, disagreement is a sign of diversity. Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks for consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.
      1. For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle. Thus pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. It is bad because life is permanent warfare. This, however, brings about an Armageddon complex. Since enemies have to be defeated, there must be a final battle, after which the movement will have control of the world. But such a “final solution” implies a further era of peace, a Golden Age, which contradicts the principle of permanent war. No fascist leader has ever succeeded in solving this predicament.
      1. Since both permanent war and heroism are difficult games to play, the Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters. This is the origin of machismo (which implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality). Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons — doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.
    • Misconduct@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      This always happens when society starts to see a shift. It sucks but it’s also a good thing in the long run. Just the angry dying gasps of a cult that we don’t need or want anymore.

      I mean… There was a commercial for Jesus on Hulu earlier today lmao. They’re losing it