I don't see how anyone who's paying attention to anything still believes in a god worth worshipping, if any god at all.
Ironically, it's probably in part due to how shit the world is you hope there is a god.
They didn't say they'd like for life be without a worship-worthy god. They said they're not sure why so many people think that there's a god worth worshipping.
By itself, their comment is really just statement of belief, not a statement of preference.
I think this is their reasoning for that position: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil
For a more detailed explanation of the reasoning: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil
There was also a comment "if any god at all." I am very familiar with theodicy questioms and euthyphro questions. And it's not a new concept that end times mentality or need for salvation in dire times actually can push some people to religion.
"If any god at all" in that context implies the person has doubt in the existence of any god. This again is not a statement of preference. One can be an atheist and happy with their beliefs or unhappy with them.
I just don't see anywhere that the person said they'd like for things to be that way. They could easily be very unhappy at a disbelief in a god for all we know.
Said another way: just because I don't believe I'll ever be a millionaire doesn't mean I'd prefer never to be one.
EDIT: I want to acknowledge that many people get strength and relief from their faiths and beliefs. And I would like to acknowledge that people's happiness and comfort in a difficult world is a very good thing.
I don't think we are in disagreement. Just misunderstanding what specifically I was responding to. Also, my account or description isn't a justification for this type of belief. But the reality is some people do become more religious in times of struggle. Not sure why I'm being downvoted for that.
I now realize I completely misread your original statement. In light of that, my previous replies don't make any sense. I actually agree with what you said, I think I just didn't comprehend it the way it was intended.
I think I've read somewhere that strife increases religiosity. I'd say it's a very defensible stance. I think it's also defensible that the religiosity sadly causes strife, too. The world would be better off if certain common religious ideas would be abandoned.
But there isn’t.
Friendly reminder that Israel weaponized sexual violence long before even Hamas was a thing, let alone Oct 7.
Everything that Hamas did on Oct 7, Israel has already done to the Palestinian people.
Friendly reminder, don't believe people posting random shit without evidence. So your own research and fact check the sources for bias.
Often times you'll find people like the above that just want you to support terrorists by attempting to invalidate human suffering with lies.
Friendly reminder, this genocide has shown the world how Israel operates.
Often times you’ll find people like the above defending genocidal colonist states by attempting to invalidate human suffering with lies.
Like for instance the above user posts nothing but pro-Israel comments. Such an inauthentic account is designed to manipulate you.
I mean Israel itself has admitted to pouring funds into having internet warriors spread propaganda and negatively target anything that challenges their narrative. A better use of time would be to continue spreading the information they're trying to suppress and spread them thin.
Rape was always a disgusting strategy of war
Absolutely.
Cool. Source? Also this is a news article about a specific event. That's why they are describing and framing the article of how Hamas did it on that day.
Cool
No. Not cool.
Source?
https://mondoweiss.net/2022/08/how-colonizers-weaponize-rape-reflections-from-the-palestinian-case/
Also this is a news article about a specific event. That's why they are describing and framing the article of how Hamas did it on that day.
Yes I get that. But realize that rape is rape. Trivializing rape of other people or asking for evidence while taking stories from your own at face value is bullshit.
If we are condemning Hamas for its atrocities in Israel then we must condemn Israel for what it has been committing for the past 75 years. Yes, 75 - there are documented cases of rape committed by Israelis against Palestinians during the Nakba.
I'm trivializing the what about ism, especially when the what about ism is incredibly vague.
But did you condemn Israel?
Exactly. Disgusting and extreme brutality on both sides but especially from the Israeli side and for generations now.
Friendly reminder your friendly reminder has no observable purpose beyond whataboutism.
But did you condemn Israel?
I'm sorry, is this supposed to make us OK with Israel bombing hospitals because a rapist might be hiding there?
Israel has been doing this shit for decades, and while this story is still horrific, it's clearly designed for the reader to justify the violence against Hamas.
Neither side is without blood on their hands, but the scope is drastically different.
I don't understand why folks think that posting articles that document one side's atrocities is implicitly advocating for or justifying the other side. That is just the scope of the article and we need accuracy to make sense of all the shit going on.
I'm sorry, is this supposed to make us OK with Israel bombing hospitals because a rapist might be hiding there?
No. Please master basic literacy. Learning about evil things Hamas has done has no relation to trying to justify things Israel has done.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The video was shot in the early hours of Oct. 8 by a woman searching for a missing friend at the site of the rave in southern Israel where, the day before, Hamas terrorists massacred hundreds of young Israelis.
Relying on video footage, photographs, GPS data from mobile phones and interviews with more than 150 people, including witnesses, medical personnel, soldiers and rape counselors, The Times identified at least seven locations where Israeli women and girls appear to have been sexually assaulted or mutilated.
And The Times interviewed several soldiers and volunteer medics who together described finding more than 30 bodies of women and girls in and around the rave site and in two kibbutzim in a similar state as Ms. Abdush’s — legs spread, clothes torn off, signs of abuse in their genital areas.
That same morning, along Route 232 but in a different location about a mile southwest of the party area, Raz Cohen — a young Israeli who had also attended the rave and had worked recently in the Democratic Republic of Congo training Congolese soldiers — said that he was hiding in a dried-up streambed.
Jamal Waraki, a volunteer medic with the nonprofit ZAKA emergency response team, said he could not get out of his head a young woman in a rawhide vest found between the main stage and the bar.
Yinon Rivlin, a member of the rave’s production team who lost two brothers in the attacks, said that after hiding from the killers, he emerged from a ditch and made his way to the parking area, east of the party, along Route 232, looking for survivors.
The original article contains 3,352 words, the summary contains 271 words. Saved 92%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/