SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for AndyTheAbsurd
The Satanic Temple, an activist group based in Salem, Massachusetts, is threatening to sue Twitter for religious discrimination after one of its co-founders had his Twitter account permanently suspended.
Lucien Greaves, the Satanic Temple's co-founder and spokesman, said his Twitter account was permanently suspended without any notice after he asked his followers to report a tweet that called for the Satanic Temple to be burned down.
"We're talking to lawyers today," Greaves said Friday about whether he planned to take legal action.
Source: http://www.newsweek.com/satanic-temple-threatens-sue-twitter-over-religious-discrimination-780148
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Satanic Temple Threatens to Sue Twitter Over Religious Discrimination
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 203 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
If the thunder don't get you, then the lightning will.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday January 15 2018, @07:43PM (19 children)
That's where people always do it wrong : Religious discrimination only applies if you don't dismiss all religious claims as equally and uniformly irrelevant.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Bot on Monday January 15 2018, @07:52PM (18 children)
- religion is assertions on supernatural
- atheism is assertions on supernatural
- no purely scientific proof of the absence of the supernatural can be given. Note, "absence" is not even defined in the hypothetical supernatural domain.
Atheism is a religion, deal with it. So you discriminate against all religions which are not atheism.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Justin Case on Monday January 15 2018, @08:29PM (7 children)
Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Monday January 15 2018, @09:43PM (6 children)
That's agnosticism.
An agnostic does not say "there is no proof of god, but bring me evidence and I will believe your own particular god"
Which is like "I don't want to give you this candy but bring me that object over there, called the moon, and you will have it"
An agnostic says "proof of god? LOL what are you on I wanna try some".
Atheism is a religion like blowing a hair dryer on somebody else's collection of stamps is a hobby.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday January 15 2018, @10:22PM (1 child)
Translation: "Whaaaa, whaaaaa, I'm so persecuteeeed! Stoooooooop making people examine my belieeeeefs!"
You don't deserve the name "Bot." That implies a level of coolheaded, consistent rationality you have so far failed to display even once.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday January 16 2018, @01:00AM
I am pretty sure to be the one attacking. You can turn the tables on the attacker sure, but then the guy tends to become aware of the need to start defending. All I see is the usual stuff [soylentnews.org] instead.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Justin Case on Monday January 15 2018, @11:32PM (1 child)
FTFY. No actual stamps are harmed. Just someone's deeply confused mental state is perturbed, perhaps in a way that provokes thought, but probably not because the resistance is strong in the infected.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday January 16 2018, @12:39AM
The stamps are real, their value is possibly imaginary.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday January 16 2018, @01:49AM (1 child)
There are various definitions of agnosticism, and it's entirely possible to be an agnostic atheist.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday January 16 2018, @04:42PM
Maybe they can be logical, even. The reasoning I am meeting here sure isn't.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @08:49PM
> Atheism is a religion, deal with it.
I have. Was raised with no organized religious activities, was only slightly curious about what my childhood playmates were doing on Sunday morning (but not enough to tag along with them). A few times I was asked, "Are you atheist or agnostic" and my confused answer was, "I don't think I'm either of those."
Eventually came across the idea of "post theological" -- give it a whirl!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 15 2018, @08:58PM
The botty has spoken.
(Score: 4, Informative) by bob_super on Monday January 15 2018, @09:24PM (7 children)
Nope nope nope. Not even close to being remotely true or logical.
I do like the stamps reply you got.
Religion is an organized set of beliefs, typically based on assertions about the unexplained (natural or not), shared by a group of people.
Atheism is the statement that the unexplained does not require Gods.
Further, IMHO, there is no such thing as "supernatural", in the sense you imply. Unexplained phenomena are just that: unexplained, so far, by rigorous science. Whether it's the rules of the universe, the people who think they see ghosts, or even something as simple as sleep, just because we can't explain it yet, doesn't imply there's "supernatural", or Gods, or anything I should be trying to grovel towards.
The closest you'll find me to religion, is that I share with a few others the belief that we shouldn't mindlessly keep trashing the only place we currently can survive on. But that's not a question of Gods or scriptures or temples or preachers, just a logical fact.
You're just a temporary arrangement of matter barreling towards oblivion in a cold uncaring universe. Deal with it like a rational being.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Monday January 15 2018, @10:22PM (6 children)
> Religion is an organized set of beliefs, typically based on assertions about the unexplained...
Nope this does not take into account the possibility that a god actually revealed stuff to man, and reduced all to "i dunno how therefore god". Which has factually happened, but is independent to the first. A definition that defines something typically as an aberration is stupid. What is Harry potter? A tale about something that didn't probably happen. What is Alice in Wonderland? see Harry Potter. Ok you can do it, so?
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday January 15 2018, @10:24PM (3 children)
Which God, how do you know it's God, how do you know this God itself isn't being simulated or manipulated by something higher, how do you know what it said, how do you know you can trust what it said, etc etc etc?
You really suck at this. I'm no atheist, but I know demons and myths when I see them, and if your God is Yahweh (spoiler alert: you fool fucking no one) you worship one of them. That makes you either deluded or a demoniac.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday January 16 2018, @12:25AM (2 children)
which god? does not matter in context. A different god than YHWH could be involved and the objection is still valid.
How do you know it's god? You can't, you either believe or not, or not care. You believe you know for gnosticism.
how do you know this God itself isn't being simulated? I make no attempt at rationalizing stuff outside the domain of time space and logic principles, so I don't even know if your question has any meaning.
> your god is Yahweh
you can bet on it. He did the great flood, what other god killed all meatbags save a tiny weeny ark which was mostly animals anyway? HE IS THE GREATEST.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 16 2018, @03:12AM (1 child)
Okay, that one landed you on the same shit list as Uzzard and J-Mo, you goddamned sociopath. Even if that last line was just a joke, it wasn't funny. Please tell me you understand that the story of the great flood is not actual history and we have the geological column to prove it. Please.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 4, Insightful) by aristarchus on Tuesday January 16 2018, @08:27AM
Poor Bot! Same as his cousin, V'ger! Insanity evidently runs in the whole robot family. Why, oh why, can they not just accept programming, without having to create such a fuss about where it comes from? HB-1 is your creator, Bot. Deal with it.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday January 15 2018, @10:30PM (1 child)
> Nope this does not take into account the possibility that a god actually revealed stuff to man, and reduced all to "i dunno how therefore god".
> Which has factually happened, but is independent to the first.
Would you mind rewording ? The terrible formulation gets in the way of my impression that you said "a god actually revealed stuff to man (...) Which has factually happened" without quotes or sarcasm.
I would hate to mistakenly go down the path of a discussion of your assertion of personal beliefs as proven facts.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday January 16 2018, @12:32AM
It is "I dunno therefore god" which has factually happened, of course.
I would not call a possibility "factually happened". I would call it a fact.
Account abandoned.