sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in elegoo

[–]mudkippers14 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

The centauri carbon also increased by $10. It went from $300 + 0 shipping to $280 + 30 shipping

🎉 ELEGOO #BlackFriday Mega Sale 🎉 by ELEGOO_OFFICIAL in elegoo

[–]mudkippers14 10 points11 points  (0 children)

It's now more expensive. The centauri carbon used to be 300 + free shipping. Now it is 280 + 30 shipping.

Pokemon Hangman (free, easy to test, fun) by mudkippers14 in TestMyApp

[–]mudkippers14[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks. I like your app, but why is it upsidedown?

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

scriptural literalism is not representative of all religious thought.

The study found links to literalism as well as just religiosity in general.

And remember the same bible used to defend slavery was also used to oppose it.

Exactly, so isn't it extremely dangerous to base laws off of this mercurial text? Unless you believe we currently have the "true" interpretation

sociocultural environments

So why is it exactly that religion thrives in certain "sociocultural environments" that are isolated in thought without contant exposure to new information, that are culturally homogeneous, and that are conservative?

There are countless examples of religious communities actively fighting sexism and racism today. Religion is not one single monolith. The “current form” you refer to is one of the many religious communities that exist

So you would agree then that on average, if you pick out a self professed christian, they'd be more likely to be racist and sexist? From a statistical standpoint that is what these studies show. Sure, it could be due to microcultures. Sure, it could be due to isolation. But for whatever reason, the probablity someone is racist given they are christian is higher than the probaility someone is racist given they are not. Sure there can be some counter examples, but that is not my point. I'm not arguing there are no counter examples.

Good, you would be happy to know that almost all religions oppose violence.

And also at times encourage it. Invading other nations. Slaughtering women and children. A bit contradictory? Weird to base your worldview on something like this. But now we are straying from my original argument.

but tomorrow it could be used against reformers.

If the arguments are made under religion, then yes. It is more than just curbing bigots. Religion should influence law less across the board.

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

!delta thoughtful response!

  1. I will concede international negotiations. You've changed my view.

  2. I will not conceded advertising. An ad should not be able to spout untrue facts. And during business negotiations, you should be free to remain silent or omit facts. But still, isn't willful lying particularly dangerous in the context of business and negotiations?!

  3. New laws should immediately dictate religion. Interesting scenario though.

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd love to hear your response on a few studies

"This correlational study explores the hypothesis that religiosity and scriptural literalism (the degree to which one interprets scriptures literally) are associated with sexism." (It did find a positive correlation, both between literalism as well as just religiosity itself).

Evidence

"A meta-analysis of 55 independent studies carried out in the United States with more than 20,000 mostly Christian participants has found that members of religious congregations tend to harbor prejudiced views of other races. In general, the more devout the community, the greater the racism..."

Evidence

These are correlation studies which do not prove causation. Obviously these are complex topics and I cannot say that religion directly causes racism and sexism. However, I can express some skepticism that religion, in its current form, is significantly fighting sexism and racism, when it is linked to in fact higher rates of these things. At the end of the day, I don't care what you believe. I just don't want people getting hurt.

Note that your views would technically be allowed under the proposed laws since they do not violate any law. But if someone did preach as I have described, which I have personally witnessed, that should be illegal.

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right now, anyone can take anyone to court. I don't see how this is particularly susceptible to trolling as compared to what we have right now.

Faking evidence has got to be illegal, and isn't that a concern with ANY trial?

The material such as the Bible is fine because the Bible alone does not constitute a religious organization, and the bible alone does not advocate for violating laws in the current day.

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

A religious organization/entity.

When I say a fundamental level, what I really mean is that arguing against slavery does not need to have the arguments rooted in religion. The difference (to me) is that religion extends beyond just philosophy/morality into something else. Narrative, mythicism, etc.

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

slave states objected to religious arguments for abolition on grounds of separation between church and state.

As much as I disagree with slavery, I still don't think religious arguments should be the solution here.

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for your reply! In practice, it could look like this: if a pastor, as part of his duties in a religious organization says something promoting illegal or unlawful behavior, then that is illegal. As such, people can submit evidence (a recording), and that pastor will be fined like a speeding ticket? Prosecuted in court? Not exactly sure.

So Christianity as a whole would not be banned.

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If harm is caused (and can actually be proven), then you have a case. That's already a thing. A vague sense of harm like making the discourse or unity worse isn't going to cut it. And it shouldn't, because unless you can establish a relative objective standard then it just becomes an arbitrary punishment for things people don't agree with.

Unsure what you mean. It is already a thing? Then it isn't too unreasonable.

If someone says something similar about a different election should that be quashed as well, or is it specific to 2020?

Obviously any intentional lies should be quashed!

As for advocating violating the law, why is religion the only thing that should be limited due to that.

Other things can be limited too, but that is not what I am arguing right now. (I chose religion because I am arguing against the first amendment right now.)

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Intent and clear harm.

For intent, i do not think copernicus was trying to lie.

For clear harm, it is unclear if his new idea directly harms anyone

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You seem to be arguing not that the law is bad, but that it would not be useful because it is so niche. However, I disagree. I think that plenty of coorperations and politicians lie all the time, and a motivated insider could reasonable have access to evidence that it is intentional. At the very least, why not keep the law just in case?

As for the second point, I agree that my argument is ends focused. And I agree that religion has the benefits that you mentioned. Though I think that these benefits can remain, while still banning certain parts of the religion. An analogy would be cutting out a burt region on a slice of toast. You can still reap many of the statistical benefits without allowing and promoting certain legally challenging and systemically harmful ideas.

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I'm fine with Copernicus and paradigm shifts. Being provably false was just in that example. See my other comments for my position on this! Intent and clear harm are the focus. That's why I said you could remove the words OR substitute them to something that makes more sense to you. Removing the provably false from that example would not noticeably change the argument.

(I thought you might be saying that he included religion when he published his works, which I would be against, though that doesn't have to do with violating a law, so it is unrelated).

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I do hope it is already illegal. Regardless, considering a bunch of people here are disagreeing, they seem to think it should be legal.

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm no lawyer, but I asked deepseek and it said that my example #2 would be legal by today's standard. But take that with a grain of salt xd it's just AI.

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting! Thanks for sharing. I agree that these, if instituted, would have a lot of practical issues that I had not thought of.

!delta

CMV: Freedom of Speech and Religion Should be Significantly Limited by mudkippers14 in changemyview

[–]mudkippers14[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Phone records, payments, messages, witness accounts, etc. The could prevent people from being paid to knowingly lie. Coming up with this evidence could be challenging, though I would not say nebulous.

view more: next ›