There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Philadelphia journalist who advocated for homeless and LGBTQ+ communities shot and killed at home

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.

stevedidWHAT ,
@stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world avatar

Some of those who work forces,

Are the same who burn crosses.

phoneymouse ,

Is there any info linking police to the shooting?

stevedidWHAT ,
@stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world avatar

Hello again old friend

Not to my knowledge but it was still an idea worth posing given the polices history against the homeless population nation wide and would be an easy answer as to why there’s not been any breaks in the case.

Although I didn’t pose what I said as fact, I can’t help what people will assume of groups they’re already familiar with.

crypticthree ,

It is the city that bombed it’s own people

oxjox ,
@oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

Dude. The words you’re typing are grossly irrelevant to the story you’re commenting on. ___

stevedidWHAT ,
@stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world avatar

Care to explain further or are we just throwing pebbles

Jelly_mcPB ,

It looks like you used a catchphrase to grab worthless internet popularity points. We have no evidence, and it very well could have been the cops, or a junkie, or Santa. You’re on a public forum, it’s not stone throwing to point out nonsense.

clanginator ,

They made a quip that referenced a popular anti-establishment song which criticizes police for acts of hate towards minorities.

This person, who was defending minorities, was shot and killed in their home, in the city whose police dept. dropped an actual bomb on minorities less than 40 years ago.

Police have also been known to enter people’s houses and perform execution-style killings like this in the US.

How is it irrelevant?

SCB ,

Because a cop didn’t kill him

oxjox ,
@oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

That’s called a conspiracy theory.

You have taken a handful of unrelated things and applied them to an entirely unrelated story. With this formula, you could conclude anything you wished to conclude and get people to believe you because people don’t give a shit about facts any more.

I would advise people, all people in general, to read some words about the thing they think they know something about, before they go about committing on such things and spreading misleading and false statements.

clanginator , (edited )

I mean yeah it is a bit conspiratorial. Doesn’t mean it’s irrelevant. They’re not making accusations, they’re just floating the idea without attempting to present it as a serious accusation. I think that’s generally how that comment was perceived, except for you.

The comments on a post about the killing of someone who defended two groups historically oppressed by police (homeless ppl and queer ppl) in a city whose police force is particularly known for such hate… yeah, there’s gonna be some people being conspiratorial.

Doesn’t mean it’s an illogical suggestion to make, or one that can’t be discussed.

Also:

I would advise people, all people in general, to read some words about the thing they think they know something about, before they go about committing on such things and spreading misleading and false statements.

Enough with the bloviating. Reaaally thought you were crushin with that bit, huh? Yikes.

You literally just can’t accept someone making a quip about police violence, that’s all that’s happening here. Nobodies “spreading misleading blahblah”, okay? Ur just being dense.

oxjox ,
@oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

Holy shit. You people are so incredibly out of touch with reality. It scares me.

Just because a story has some words that you associate with other entirely unrelated events does not mean you can reject the facts of the story to make your narrative fit. I genuinely do not understand this drive that people have to change reality to make them feel better.

Fuck - you think that because the city bombed a house forty years ago that police are raiding the homes of journalists and murdering them?? If that sounds like reality to you - PLEASE get off the internet.

I just wish people would stop with this bullshit. This world is crumbling because of the false narratives being floated to the top of internet chatter. Meanwhile, the everyday real stories happening to real people are being diluted and downplayed. People ARE dying. Police ARE murdering people. The evidence and reporting IS out there but it’s being ignored.

In the time people have spent commenting in this chat, you could have read the news and obtained something more than a headline about this event. Unless of course you don’t believe journalists and prefer your own narrative. I just wish people would fucking use the internet to read about things more than having to comment on headlines without knowing anything at all.

How fucking difficult is it to care enough to comment on a headline but not take three minutes to read the story? Why the fuck do people care about internet karma so much that conspiracies and jokes are more highly ranked than getting the facts straight about the murder of an innocent person?

clanginator ,

deleted_by_author

    •
    oxjox ,
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    I can not fucking believe you’re still going to “the police murdered him” after reading this article. You are choosing to reject the reality presented to you to fit a narrative that has nothing at all to do with this case. You’re horrible.

    clanginator ,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    oxjox ,
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    What facts are being rejected when making a quip about how it might’ve been police who killed him?

    WHAT FACTS?? Okay. Now I know you’re just trolling. Fuck off.

    oxjox ,
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    I would like you to explain how you typed those words in relation to this story.
    This case involves what the police had indicated was likely a domestic dispute, in the victim’s home, possibly involving drugs.
    You’re talking about uh, the police murdering the homeless? Seriously. How could you possibly make that connection?
    I don’t know what you mean by “breaks in this case” when this was posted only 24 hours after the incident. Within 36 hours, the police had identified a suspect.

    stevedidWHAT ,
    @stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world avatar

    With my fingers.

    oxjox ,
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    Gotcha. That makes sense that you let your fingers do the thinking for you. Anyone with half a brain would have a hard time putting down your words.

    American_Communist22 ,
    @American_Communist22@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    oh shut up you fuckhead

    oxjox ,
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    I’m the fuckhead and the guy blaming the cops for murder when there’s ample evidence pointing to a domestic drug related dispute and absolutely zero indication of any police involvement is totally fine?

    Meanwhile, no one wanted to talk about the cop getting all charges dismissed for murdering Eddie Irizarry. They just wanted to talk about the kids stealing shit from the Apple Store.

    This is the problem. No one cares about facts. Just their feelings. Even when they have absolutely no clue what it is they’re talking about.
    Lying is cool now as long as it fits your narrative, right? Can’t allow people to live in the real world anymore because then you might find yourself misaligned with your political ideology.

    stevedidWHAT ,
    @stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world avatar

    I never did that, just pointed out a popular fact.

    One bad apple ruins the bunch when it comes to those who’ve been trusted with power

    stevedidWHAT ,
    @stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world avatar

    Nah, just you fam.

    guckfoogle ,

    Work forces??

    bitwolf ,

    Influential people. It’s a Rage Against the Machine quote if you need the context.

    postmateDumbass ,

    Police forces. Task forces… Etc.

    psmgx ,

    We don’t know the cops did this.

    No shortage of right-wing reactionaries, who aren’t cops, shooting people.

    that said, the Philly PD don’t have the best reputation, e.g. blatantly trying to frame Mumia, etc.

    BigBananaDealer ,
    @BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee avatar

    when i first read this, i thought it was the journalist advocating for homless and lgbtq+ to be shot and killed

    tjsauce ,

    Same, it took me a second

    oxjox , (edited )
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    These comments are out of control. To be fair though, this AP article is garbage.

    The likelihood of this having anything to do with the victim being a queer journalist in Philadelphia is practically zero. Here’s some excerpts from the local paper.

    Detectives believe Kruger’s death may have been the result of a domestic dispute or may have been drug-related, according to three law enforcement sources with knowledge of the case. The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation, said police investigators recovered troubling text messages between Kruger and a former partner. Investigators also recovered methamphetamine inside Kruger’s bedroom, the sources said.

    In recent months, he’d written on social media about a variety of alarming incidents at his home.

    In April, he posted that an ex-partner had broken into his home. “The door was locked, so he had somehow obtained a copy of my keys,” he wrote. He had allowed the man, whom he’d known for years “before his troubles,” to stay at his house briefly after being released from jail. He said he was able to deescalate the situation and the man eventually left, and he changed his locks.

    In August, someone threw a rock through his home window, he said. Then, about two weeks ago, he wrote on Facebook that someone came to his house searching for their boyfriend — “a man I’ve never met once in my entire life.” The person called themselves “Lady Diabla, the She-Devil of the Streets” and threatened him, he wrote.

    inquirer.com/…/josh-kruger-killed-point-breeze-sh…

    StereoTrespasser ,

    The conspiracy theories are strong in this thread. Nobody wants to believe that random acts of violence can happen. There always has to be some deeper conspiracy to try and make sense of it, and to feel like there is some semblance of control in our lives.

    PhlubbaDubba ,

    I think it’s part of their idea that everything wrong in the world comes from America, so if they topple the American capitalist system everything will be fixed.

    Random acts of violence don’t fit this narrative, the fact that there will always be psychopaths by sheer fact of the genetic lottery doesn’t fit this narrative, and the downfall of left leaning public figures through no fault of their own or that of some secret cabal of the US government doesn’t fit this narrative.

    The fact that bad shit will still need to be fixed and/or corrected for in a “post revolution” world just breaks their brains.

    It’s Turner Diaries logic, “no see, once we get rid of them the world will be perfect!”

    TimewornTraveler ,

    yes to all, minus “genetic lottery”

    Gabu ,

    You’re not making a very good point for what you think you’re arguing for. If anything, you’re just confirming 'murica is a shithole.

    Mr_Blott ,

    Bear in mind a lot of the commenters come from a civilised society, where a journalist getting shot is massive fucking news and implies something about his profession getting him killed

    People just don’t get shot in modern countries

    Apollo ,

    People just don’t get shot in modern countries

    Man this is going to trigger the gun nonces…

    Mr_Blott ,

    They can’t type and wank at the same time bud

    systemglitch ,

    He said modern countries, so America isn’t being considered here.

    oxjox ,
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    Except for the fact that this very likely had nothing to do with the victim being a journalist.

    Cyberflunk ,

    People just don’t get shot in modern countries

    Uhm… gonna have to refer you to waves hand to entire country

    ChaoticEntropy ,
    @ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk avatar

    Well, nothing that was written above makes it seem like this was random. This seems to have been very deliberate, but for reasons unrelated to their outreach work.

    oxjox ,
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    Right. In a Philly at least, the vast majority of gun violence is targeted and personal. That’s why so much of it is mostly ignored.

    ChaoticEntropy ,
    @ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk avatar

    “A specific individual waged a campaign of targeted harassment against a person they knew, for 6-12 months, before committing premeditated murder.”

    Another act of random violence. Who could have seen it coming.

    Fedizen ,

    even the the most generous and trusting reading of this would suggest that the US just selling unhinged people guns is possibly something that could be chalked up the cause of this murder. Permissive gun policies in this country and multiple court rulings that police don’t have to take protective measures seriously have degraded people’s ability to have control over their lives.

    Even if there was no intent here, this “random act of violence” is the result of generations of failed policies.

    jarfil ,

    Selling more guns than people, just to the fully hinged individuals, would still make it really easy for the unhinged ones to steal one.

    oatscoop , (edited )

    Investigators also recovered methamphetamine inside Kruger’s bedroom, the sources said.

    “Party and Play” (PnP) with meth is a thing and it’s as toxic and fucked up as you’d imagine.

    If that was what was going on … I can’t say I’m remotely surprised what happened did.

    stembolts ,

    Why speculate? When I see threads like this, that is my one and only thought. It adds no value, muddies the water, and doesn’t rely on evidence.

    Why speculate? I’m too autistic for this thread. I don’t speculate. I wait for evidence.

    some_guy ,

    On his website, he described himself as a “militant bicyclist” and “a proponent of the singular they, the Oxford comma, and pre-Elon Twitter.“

    [Emphasis mine] This is such an important issue to me. Contracts have been ruled upon because of the appearance or lack of the Oxford comma (a union got fucked because it wasn’t there). All his other traits are also admirable, but this is the unimportant-important thing that jumped out at me.

    schzztl ,

    We can’t let these fascists overtake society.

    Haywire ,

    They will be caught.

    irotsoma ,
    @irotsoma@lemmy.world avatar

    “They” are the ones in charge of catching each other, so not likely. Or they’ll find some black homeless person to take the blame and make it look like a robbery rather than a hate crime.

    phoenixz ,

    That’s a rather conspiracy theory stance right there

    irotsoma ,
    @irotsoma@lemmy.world avatar

    I mean there’s an official FBI report that says it white nationalists have infiltrated police departments and another that says they use their influence to prevent convictions of domestic violence perpetrated by white nationalists. Additionally there are plenty of reports in multiple cities to show that cops often plant evidence to convict people of crimes they didn’t commit in order to aid their career. And the victims are almost always black, usually mentally disabled, and often homeless or home-insecure. So it’s not a stretch.

    And I’m not talking about a conspiracy outside of the already proven idea that white nationalists have infiltrated police departments and alter evidence. One cop altering evidence for his buddies isn’t a conspiracy.

    And the only thing that could be considered a “theory”/hypothesis is that this was a targeted killing, rather than a random one like the media are already painting it as. And that the police will push that scenario and refuse to investigate white nationalist groups to see which ones sent him threats. We’ll just have to wait and see on that. I suppose it depends on if any witnesses or others go to the media with evidence.

    jasory ,

    “Cops often plant evidence to get convictions”- Police don’t prosecute, get your conspiracy theories straight.

    “This was a targeted killing”

    It almost certainly was, the victim was involved in drugs and probably knew violent people and kept in touch with them.

    The real case is far more likely to be “reformed drug addict killed by former acquaintance”, than “journalist killed for reporting issues”.

    irotsoma ,
    @irotsoma@lemmy.world avatar

    I didn’t say cops prosecute. But if they arrest someone and there’s no evidence, they don’t get credit for catching a criminal, just for throwing an innocent person in jail and that looks bad. So they plant evidence so that anyone they arrest gets convicted and sometimes so the real perpetrator doesn’t. It’s all very well documented. Just no one will arrest them for it since they are mostly all doing the same or have allowed it to happen without doing anything about it.

    jasory ,

    Again, no. Cops can detain and investigate without making a formal arrest or bringing someone to jail. If it is questionable circumstances, then they will simply take statements and go for an arrest later.

    There actually is a circumstance where police are incentivised to plant evidence, and that’s if you have a problematic individual (someone who gets the police called on them regularly), and planting evidence of a more serious crime would remove them from the street.

    phoenixz ,

    You make a long of strong claims that require a lot of strong evidence and sources

    i know there are incidents, but the US has 300.000.000 people living there, it’s a guarantee that you’re going to have assholes.

    You claim it’s structural, that there are groups conspiring together to get this done. That is a big, big claim that better not come from a Facebook page.

    Mind linking that FBI report?

    irotsoma ,
    @irotsoma@lemmy.world avatar

    I mean the report itself is not available to the public. There was a bulletin sent to police departments that was heavily redacted when released. This was like 15 years ago. Lots of other information has been released over time. The bulletin itself I couldn’t find with a quick Google search, but there is a lot of information about it that you can use Google to find. That’s not my job to prove. It’s not a small amount of info. So Google it. Here’s a link to get you started.

    pbs.org/…/fbi-white-supremacists-in-law-enforceme…

    oxjox ,
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    We should be more focused on people not making rash assumptions or accusations prior to all the facts of an event being known.

    This has absolutely nothing to do with fascists. I can’t even imagine how you came to that conclusion. It’s being reported as likely being a domestic dispute.

    systemglitch ,

    Man, get over yourself, you are just spitting nonsense here.

    JasSmith ,

    If by the fascists you’re referring to the criminals who murdered him, it’s too late. The victim was out there every day fighting to keep these criminals on the streets. We really do need to get tougher on crime, all over the West.

    InternetTubes ,

    I cannot imagine feeling safe in a country were lethal weapons are available so freely under a society where these outliers are not only being allowed to become far more predominant, but are actively being fueled by scummy politicians. Yeah, sure, it’s not all states, the problem is it increasingly doesn’t matter as long as they are willing to do anything and everything to take control of the federal government.

    American_Communist22 ,
    @American_Communist22@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    honestly just america being america

    Nima , (edited )
    @Nima@lemmy.world avatar

    deleted_by_author

    •
    queermunist ,
    @queermunist@lemmy.ml avatar

    America should be shit on at all times, no exceptions.

    Nima ,
    @Nima@lemmy.world avatar

    oh that’s awesome. have the day you deserve.

    Mafflez ,

    Judging by their attitudes they’ll have the exact day they deserve. And it will be their own making.

    Nima ,
    @Nima@lemmy.world avatar

    yeah seems to be an awful lot of people who just want to blame every death on “america.”

    nothing ever gets solved. no justice for this poor man.

    just “america sucks.”

    It’s depressing.

    Comment105 ,

    Yeah, honestly. Fuck your entire country, you suck donkeyballs. And especially Philadelphia. Isn’t that the town that immediately wrecked the “hiker robot” that had successfully made it all the way across Canada?

    You fucking suck. You choose to suck even when there’s nothing you gain from it. You value cruelty as a merit on its own.

    bobman ,

    Amen.

    Americans have a culture problem, and it’s only getting worse with each generation since the 60s.

    Nima ,
    @Nima@lemmy.world avatar

    what did I choose specifically? did I kill this man? am I advocating for his death?

    what is it you’d like one citizen to do. you want me to vote? I do that. every election. I canvas, I march, I try and protest things I want changed. I am doing all that I can. everyone I know does all they can.

    what else do you want from me? you’re talking like america is one giant collection of thugs. but that doesn’t help this man. doesn’t help his family. doesn’t help anything.

    Companion1666 ,

    where health care???!!!

    echodot ,

    Yeah whatever you do, don’t improve or advocate for change, that would be awful.

    Nima ,
    @Nima@lemmy.world avatar

    oh I do advocate for change. the xenophobia towards americans is starting to get concerning.

    I can’t tell if it’s just for the memes anymore.

    this innocent dude is dead and we have people chanting “death to America”

    nothing gets fixed. trolls get fed their up votes. I love the internet. never change, guys!

    echodot ,

    It isn’t xenophobia We’re not afraid of Americans we’re just sick of America’s complete refusal to improve even marginally, because “oh no not the constitution”.

    Nima ,
    @Nima@lemmy.world avatar

    the issue is assuming that every american wants this. lumping all of us in with the weirdos who shoot up innocent people when we want that to change.

    you want a revolution? fantastic. tell me. how do I start that? one person using a cheap smartphone to reply to a forum on. working a minimum wage job because that’s all I can do right now.

    I take issue with people pretending that every american is a school shooter or a redneck. we are all just normal people. the violence you see on your headlines want to grab your attention with vitriol towards a country.

    never solving the problem. if anything, making the issue worse. not better. it just separates the human issues and forces anger towards something that buys clicks.

    CommanderM2192 ,

    Speaking as an American, 💩

    electrogamerman ,

    Found the Putiny

    American_Communist22 ,
    @American_Communist22@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    that was extremely weak

    OceanSoap ,

    Two likely senarios:

    1. It’s someone he knows in the LGBT community who has beef with him over something not related to his activism. Maybe he pissed off someone he was trying to help. Maybe he was caught in a weird romantic triangle. Maybe he just befriended someone who is psycho.
    2. Or, it’s someone anti-LGBT who did it due to his activism or related to that.

    Could be either at this point.

    bane_killgrind ,

    There’s always a bigger motivator in ideological differences.

    jackalope ,

    Vast majority of violence is interpersonal and someone who was known prior to the violence.

    OceanSoap ,

    That’s just not true at all. Ideological killings in the west are far less than domestic related ones.

    electrogamerman ,

    In what world would scenario 1 even be considered an option. Be real.

    bobman ,

    That’s exactly what I was thinking.

    While I’d like to believe there’s some grand conspiracy to silence this guy, I actually think it’s more likely this was done by someone he knew or was working with.

    I could easily see some angry, deranged homeless person killing a journalist just because he “didn’t like him.”

    idiomaddict ,

    Everyone knows when a journalist dies, we should look first at the unhoused population.

    Mafflez ,

    Unhoused…that’s a fucking stupid term.

    Krauerking ,

    People downvoting you cause they don’t like that it’s truly stupid that we have decided to whitewash homelessness with a cute word that doesn’t make you feel as bad.

    They are homeless, without a home, without shelter, those that have been pushed from the basic need of private shelter.

    If they want to call it unhoused sure, but they are indeed shelterless.

    PsychedSy ,

    Involuntary outdoor enthusiasts.

    jasory ,

    Well, homeless may refer to people who don’t legally possess shelter, while unsheltered or unhoused refers to people who don’t reside in any shelter. I think it is a useful distinction because you do encounter people who consider couch-surfing to be homelessness, even though the physical circumstances are quite different from living on the street.

    Krauerking ,

    I have been homeless 3 times in varying ways and for one of them got a hotel once every few days to sleep and shower. I really wasn’t better off for it.

    We are homeless because we have no space to be safe and feel protected. We are without a home. And there will never be a perfect word that covers everyone and doesn’t quite cover the nuance. But you paint with a broad brush and fill in the nuance after.

    idiomaddict ,

    Well I’m the one who used it and I’ve been homeless twice, so I’m glad that falls under acceptable use for you.

    It’s a survey term that gets better responses, not a whitewashing or emotionally insulated term.

    Krauerking ,

    All ive seen on why I should use unhoused is because conservatives have tried to weaponize the word homeless into a pejorative term to blame the victim. Which means we are picking a new term to make people feel better about the issue and the consensus still seems to be homeless people say homeless.

    I would argue people would think being in a shelter makes you stop being unhoused while you are still very much homeless. Homeless reminds you the issue is that we can not get homes, just shelter. But maybe it makes people who feel the same while being better off feel bad idk.

    It’s like a return to hoovervilles. Sure there is shelter and it’s quasi housing but I doubt anyone in them at the time would call it a home. It’s not the word that is the problem but how people feel about the issue. A word change won’t change that entirely just confuse the dumber people for a minute while they catch up.

    idiomaddict ,

    Sorry you don’t like it.

    I have been homeless twice, but didn’t really feel it because I was able to get a hotel room and/or able to sleep at my workplace after work. I was working ~80 hours/week, so I was pretty insulated from feeling it, but it took years to realize that I was homeless (I don’t know, I grew up middle class and assumed it couldn’t be me?).

    It wasn’t until someone used the term unhoused, that I mentioned how my old boss used to let me and my ex sleep in the bar as long as we were gone by 11, then I realized that it had been me twice.

    Homeless technically refers to anyone without a home, but a lot of people who believe they are temporarily between homes would not identify as homeless (not even just out of classism, but not wanting to take resources from people who need them more, etc.). Unhoused tends to get a more complete response

    Mafflez ,

    No I for sure understand that unhoused can be used but it has a certain criteria to be used. but people are using a softer term for a serious issue and I hate it when it’s used to gloss over the harsher issue of the homeless like all they are struggling with is not having a home when it’s much more. Homeless and Unhoused are two very different terms.

    TopTierKnees ,

    It’s an option because a majority of victims know their killers personally. Now, that may also mean it’s scenario 2 or a family member or someone they had a bad business deal with or someone random. And I do take issue with the assumption that those two scenarios are the most likely. But it’s not out of the question.

    OceanSoap ,

    …do you pay attention to the news at all? The real world is soaked in domestic violence over ideological, especially in the west.

    oxjox ,
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    The real world. Are you serious?
    Have you ever read a news story or just headlines on social media?

    electrogamerman ,

    Yep, some weeks ago a crazy white guy shot dead an old woman for hanging the rainbow flag outside her store.

    oxjox ,
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    Ok. Did you bother to read the article at all before contributing such a stupid comment? No, you did not.
    Do better.

    electrogamerman ,

    Gotta love when someone doesn’t have more arguments: “dId yOu ReAd tHe ArTiClE?”

    Ullallulloo ,
    @Ullallulloo@civilloquy.com avatar

    The article says there were no signs of breaking in, so it is strongly implied that it was someone he was close to.

    OceanSoap ,

    Yup, which is why I’m inclined towards #1. Newer articles today state people close to him think it’s either domestic or drug related, which again, points more to scenario one.

    halfempty ,
    @halfempty@kbin.social avatar

    I'm always a bit suspicious when a Journalist is killed like this. Who were those who may have been threatened by what he published?

    prole ,

    The people in these comments talking like this is “just another day in a US city” have no fucking idea what they’re talking about. This is not the kind of violence that randomly happens. This person was clearly targeted.

    They also fail to grasp the concept of “per capita” crime/murder statistics.

    American_Communist22 ,
    @American_Communist22@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    no, targeting journalists to suppress left wing elements is as american as apple pie and as common as corn syrup

    RememberTheApollo_ ,

    Per capita? Really? Try per capita gun murders around the world and see what countries the US keeps company with. I mean, your argument is basically because there are lots of people, being shot is NBD because the odds are low because there are lots of people?

    And yeah, again, compared to other places this is the kind of violence that happens in the US.

    However, this was a targeted shooting. A deliberate murder. That does tend to be a more rare occurrence, but it’s dishonest to break it out and treat it separately from the overall use of crime related gun use in the US.

    prole ,

    What? Way to miss the point entirely. Not only that, but you’ve completely misrepresented my argument.

    First: yes, this was clearly a targeted shooting, so this discussion doesn’t really apply to this specific case. However…

    I haven’t said anything was no big deal, just pointing out basic statistics. Using the concept of “per capita,” when discussing phenomena among very large groups of people, is one of the (if not the) only ways to glean any valuable information from the data.

    1,000 gun crimes seems like a lot in a town of 23,000 people. 1,000 gun crimes in a city of 2,000,000 people? Not so much… (obviously these numbers were made up to make a point)

    RememberTheApollo_ ,

    No, I didn’t miss your point. I understand perfectly what you meant. However, you did miss my pointing out of your use of statistics via per capita as an argument to water down risk against the broader view of the US gun crime rate vs the rest of the world to point out that yes, Indeed, this is a US problem.

    prole ,

    If I implied anywhere that I thought it wasn’t a US problem, that was not my intention at all. Clearly it is.

    WoahWoah ,

    Per capita rates of gun violence in the United States are almost 90 times higher than the United Kingdom, for instance.

    prole ,

    Yes. This is a uniquely American problem. I am agreeing with you.

    WoahWoah , (edited )

    Actually, I was agreeing with you. I hadn’t posted anything prior, so you couldn’t have been agreeing or disagreeing with me. I think you confused me for the other person. 😀

    jasory ,

    “A targeted shooting a deliberate murder… that does tend to be more rare”

    Accidental fatal shootings are well known to exceed intentional ones.

    It’s rare to get an article on individual targeted killings, but they do in fact comprise the majority of killings. So no, this is not a rare form of killing at all, it’s simply being reported because it’s another journalist.

    TheCuriosity ,

    Or who would have been threatened by what would have been published, should he still be alive?

    x4740N ,
    @x4740N@lemmy.world avatar

    This is why journalists should invest in a dead man’s switch that will automatically publish stuff I the journalists cannot check in

    One last fuck you from the grave

    x4740N ,
    @x4740N@lemmy.world avatar

    Bigots a.k.a conservatives

    febra ,

    Wouldn’t surprise me one bit. There’s an epidemic of violence going through the conservative movement right now. They’ve been growing more and more violent. See Jan 6. and all the terrorist attacks/shootings coming from their side lately.

    freeindv ,

    I love the irony of the bigotry in your comment

    Nahvi ,

    It is a bit on the nose.

    OCATMBBL ,

    Someone needs to read more about the Paradox of Tolerance.

    freeindv ,

    Aka the new Mein Kampf’

    OCATMBBL ,

    Yes, not tolerating intolerance is the same as advocating for the destruction of people based on race. Grow up and quit sucking on Donnie’s toes.

    American_Communist22 ,
    @American_Communist22@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    you have the politics of a fucking lizard

    American_Communist22 ,
    @American_Communist22@lemmygrad.ml avatar

    I will be bigoted against bigots. Politics isn’t some purity fetish you fucking suburbanite.

    oxjox ,
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    inquirer.com/…/josh-kruger-killed-point-breeze-sh…

    “Either the door was open, or the offender knew how to get the door open,” he said. “We just don’t know yet.”

    Detectives believe Kruger’s death may have been the result of a domestic dispute or may have been drug-related, according to three law enforcement sources with knowledge of the case. The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation, said police investigators recovered troubling text messages between Kruger and a former partner. Investigators also recovered methamphetamine inside Kruger’s bedroom, the sources said.

    In recent months, he’d written on social media about a variety of alarming incidents at his home.

    In April, he posted that an ex-partner had broken into his home. “The door was locked, so he had somehow obtained a copy of my keys,” he wrote. He had allowed the man, whom he’d known for years “before his troubles,” to stay at his house briefly after being released from jail. He said he was able to deescalate the situation and the man eventually left, and he changed his locks.

    In August, someone threw a rock through his home window, he said. Then, about two weeks ago, he wrote on Facebook that someone came to his house searching for their boyfriend — “a man I’ve never met once in my entire life.” The person called themselves “Lady Diabla, the She-Devil of the Streets” and threatened him, he wrote.

    Nahvi ,

    Same here.

    I have an uncle who was killed due to an article he was doing research for. Sadly, he ended up in a coma and then someone came back to finish the job. It had a large impact on my mother and her siblings, though it was a few years before I was born. I had always wondered how much of it was an exaggeration until a couple years ago when we found an article saying basically the same things the aunts and uncles always had.

    jasory ,

    Is it because they interviewed the aunts and uncles as their primary source?

    Nahvi ,

    That is a great idea, but no. He was living in another part of the country from them at the time of the initial attack. The article was written in that area.

    HorseRabbit ,

    No doubt a fascist done this.

    dangblingus ,

    It would seem so.

    KillAllPoorPeople ,

    Cops definitely murdered this man.

    RizzRustbolt ,

    That’s my vote as well.

    dingleberry ,

    Police have said the motive behind the killing remains unclear, but that the pair were in a relationship.

    Davis’ mother and older brother said that relationship began years ago, when Davis was just 15, and involved sex, drugs, and abuse. They told The Inquirer in recent interviews that Davis said Kruger was threatening to post sexually explicit videos of him online before, police say, Davis shot him.

    Not a cop it seems.

    Chefdano3 ,
    @Chefdano3@lemm.ee avatar

    Knowing Philadelphia, I wouldn’t be surprised if he was shot by a homeless member of the LGBTQ+ community.

    Rearsays ,

    But who’s committing these crimes, and why so much senseless violence?

    gravitas_deficiency ,

    Probably a “good Christian”, since the fundamentalist are militantly (in a literal sense) against any sort of tolerance, acknowledgement, or compassion being expressed towards people who don’t completely conform to their heteronormative worldview.

    Daisyifyoudo , (edited )

    deleted_by_author

    •
    T00l_shed ,

    I mean it would par for the course.

    Nahvi ,

    Excuse me, but your bigotry is hanging out. Would you mind zipping up?

    almar_quigley ,

    Yes! That’s exactly what you should say to Christians when they start spouting off on their racist, homophobic, or otherwise prejudiced beliefs. You’re a great role model.

    Nahvi ,

    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.

    LadyAutumn ,
    @LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    What? You mean in America, the country ruled by Christians who impose Christianity on children in schools, where the majority religion is Christianity, where Christian organizations get preferential treatment by the government, where Christianity is the overwhelming majority religion of politicians, and where there is an active political movement to literally enforce state Christianity on the population, and where Christian moral doctrine is being widely used to restrict the bodily autonomy of women?? Ah yes so much Christian hate

    Unironically shut the fuck up

    Nahvi ,

    Unironically shut the fuck up

    You have thoroughly convinced me!

    Where can I sign up for the daily hate speech against Christians? Oh, nevermind, I forgot I already have a Lemmy account.

    It is unfortunate that rather than learning how to fight against their methods, you have instead decided to emulate them.

    prole ,

    “Hate speech against Christians”

    Please point out the hate speech in the comment you replied to. Telling you to shut the fuck up isn’t hate speech, and everything else is literally a straightforward fact about Christianity in America. Zero hate speech.

    Gotta play the persecution game though, am I right?

    Nahvi ,

    Those first two lines were intentionally sarcastic exaggeration. Was I supposed to include a /s for the cheap seats? It seemed pretty obvious from here.

    They pretty well lost me when they told me to “shut the fuck up”. I certainly wasn’t going to waste my time on a clearly worded response to someone who likely wouldn’t read it anyways.

    Not sure who you think is getting persecuted, I doubt many Christians would hang out in a place like this. Even those that push for the bodily autonomy of women would feel unwelcome with so many people openly hostile to their faiths.

    Catoblepas ,

    I doubt many Christians would hang out in a place like this.

    If they’re offended by people acknowledging the impact of Christians on LGBT people in the US, good. Leave. I don’t have time for straight Christians who want to hand wring and whinge about others acknowledging the historical and current negative impact Christianity has had on LGBT people.

    Do you know how many fucking anti-LGBT bills have been put forward just this year in the US? This isn’t rhetorical, a real number is attached to it. Don’t google it, think of a number.

    What number did you guess?

    Because it’s almost 500.

    How many anti-Christianity bills have there been in the past 50 years, again?

    Nahvi ,

    There is nothing wrong with calling people out when they try to suppress your rights. The problem is pretending all Christians are the same on this issue and using that as a justification to attack them all.

    npr.org/…/trans-religious-leaders-say-scripture-s…

    www.gaychurch.org/find_a_church/

    I live in BFE Texas and there are ten Affirming Churches in the area; five of them are within about 45 minutes of me. As a comparison there are only two Cowboy Churches in the same area. Every major City I checked had several Affirming Churches.

    Nearly two-thirds of Americans are Christian and they are not just going to give that up because you do not like their religion. These are people that need to be convinced of either the rightness of your cause or at least your right to live the way you want. Right now, all they are hearing is “They’re trying to turn your little boys into girls” or “Fuck the Christians”. Neither of these messages are helpful, and both make them feel the same way as you do when you look at that list. The difference is they have a lot more political influence.

    When every asshole that wants to accuse a random Christian of murder, without a single piece of evidence, gets overwhelmingly upvoted it makes that fight harder.

    DashboTreeFrog ,

    My man, I think a lot of evidence has been presented just in this thread.

    I get the point, you don't easily turn people to your cause with hateful rhetoric, but at a certain point, patience is lost when it feels like people are just ignoring reality and continuing to not just participate in, but support institutions that have created a lot of harm for people.

    Nahvi ,

    Not sure why this 2 day old comment just showed up in my inbox, but have a response anyways.

    Also an upvote for a well-worded response.

    but at a certain point, patience is lost when it feels like people are just ignoring reality and continuing to not just participate in, but support institutions that have created a lot of harm for people.

    I can appreciate their frustrations. I have certainly felt plenty of my own and dropped a slur or two particularly at politicians.

    Some of my issue is directly related to how they express those frustrations in a public forum, but what really tweaks my tail is how overwhelming the support is for those responses.

    I ignored them at first, but at some point I need to either address them or drop Lemmy, which at this point means dropping the last bit of social media that I am using. Places like Lemmy and Reddit help me stay informed, so I figured I would try pointing it out some before dropping social media again for a couple more years.

    Catoblepas ,

    Right now, all they are hearing is “They’re trying to turn your little boys into girls”

    Gee, I wonder who’s doing that? I wonder what religion they claim tells them to do it? I wonder how many Christians think that’s closer to the truth than trans kids knowing who they are? How many of them do you think would even listen to the trans religious leaders you use as a shield, who themselves are pointing out how fucked modern Christianity is?

    Have you expended 1/10th as much energy arguing with those people as you have whining in this thread about how a comment made on an obscure forum online is the reason so many Christians think trans people are the devil?

    SuddenlyBlowGreen ,

    I’m curious what you consider hate speed or bigotry against christians.

    If I dislike all christians that follow the bible/their gods commands and believe in their gods benevolence, would you say I’m a bigot?

    Nahvi ,

    tl;dr Maybe. It mostly depends on your wording and actions. Christians are not one group or thing anymore than Europeans or LGBT people are. They are a collection of highly varied peoples that can’t even agree on the number of books in the bible or whether Jesus was man, god, or both.

    If someone says or implies “all Christians” are this or that negative thing it moves closer to yes rather than maybe. If someone is accuses a person of being something for no other reason than a group they belong to, then the accuser is probably a bigot.

    ,

    ,

    This wall of text is an eyesore, so I added bold to your words and Italics to other quotes to help with readability. My words have neither.

    would you say I’m a bigot?

    If you personally dislike them, but you don’t let it affect the way you treat them, I really wouldn’t care one way or another.

    As far as I am concerned, fear and hatred of the unknown and different are as human and natural as love and lust. It is what people do with those emotions that matter.

    If someone’s lust encourages them to date and eventually spend their life with someone they are attracted to that is a good expression. If someone’s lust encourages them to violet the privacy of or assault someone then that is a bad expression.

    Fear of the unknown and different is similar. If it encourages someone to learn more about different peoples, foods, or animals, then it is a good expression. If it encourages them to disparage or commit acts of violence against them then that is a bad expression.

    I’m curious what you consider hate speed or bigotry against christians.

    a person who is intolerant or hateful toward people whose race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc., is different from the person’s own.

    www.dictionary.com/browse/bigot

    hate speech, speech or expression that denigrates a person or persons on the basis of (alleged) membership in a social group identified by attributes such as race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, age, physical or mental disability, and others.

    www.britannica.com/topic/hate-speech

    I see bigotry and hate speech as more words and actions than opinions. What does an opinion matter if it is not expressed through word or deed? Is someone really intolerant if they tolerate someone in all areas except their own mind?

    Mostly it comes down to treating any group, Christians in this case, as if they are the same and are each responsible for the acts of all the others.

    If I dislike all christians that follow the bible/their gods commands and believe in their gods benevolence,

    Protestants, Catholics, and Eastern Orthodoxy don’t even agree on the number of books in the bible. If you haven’t run into the idea of the Apocrypha you may find it interesting.

    Various numbers below (formatting edited for readability):

    The canon of

    the Protestant Bible totals 66 books—39 Old Testament (OT) and 27 New Testament (NT);

    the Catholic Bible numbers 73 books (46 OT, 27 NT),

    and Greek and Russian Orthodox, 79 (52 OT, 27 NT)

    (Ethiopian Orthodox, 81—54 OT, 27 NT).

    biblegateway.com/…/why-are-protestant-catholic-an…

    Lest you think that it is only the old testament that is debated here is info about the New testament in Martin Luther’s Bible:

    Though he included the Letter to the Hebrews, the letters of James and Jude and Revelation in his Bible translation, he put them into a separate grouping and questioned their legitimacy.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antilegomena#Reformation

    5in1k ,

    Religion is poison.

    Nahvi ,

    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.

    chunkystyles ,

    Finding wisdom in religion is like trying to pick corn out of shit.

    Nahvi ,

    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.

    gravitas_deficiency ,

    No there’s not.

    You can be a wise, moral and ethical person without religion. It’s easy. Tons of people do that every single day.

    kmaismith ,

    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 ,

    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.

    Nahvi , (edited )

    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.

    SuddenlyBlowGreen ,

    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?

    I_Fart_Glitter ,

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

    You gotta take a stand somewhere. The intolerant religious zealots would be a good place to start.

    Nahvi ,

    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.

    To borrow a line from /u/[email protected]

    lemmy.world/comment/3754441

    xanu ,

    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 ,

    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 ,

    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. 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 ,

    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]

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany#Na…

    xanu ,

    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.

    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 , (edited )

    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.

    xanu ,

    My problem with your stance is that you seem very quick to jump at “bigoted hate speech from LGBTQ+ people” and to defend the so-called progress that religious people have made. You don’t seem interested in calling out Christians for the documented facts that they are championing the call to eradicate minority populations they disagree with, or the legislation they are passing in increasing numbers to strip rights away from women, LGBTQ+, and racial minorities.

    Firstly, while it may look like “both sides” are hateful and bigoted, it’s extremely important to understand that both sides are not saying anything close to the same things. On one hand, you have a population of people who have been directly and consistently harmed for their fundamental identity that they cannot change by people who identify with certain beliefs and their - admittedly, but understandably, quite vitriolic - responses to that trauma. On the other hand, you have a population of people who have not been attacked or harmed directly falsely claiming that the other population is raping their children and destroying the country. This fear mongering is reinforced every single Sunday when they go to their church and get told these things directly by their leadership that claims they are the literal mouth of God. A belief system is much more mutable than intrinsic characteristics like gender identity, skin color, and sexuality - as demonstrated by the shift towards the LG and B parts of the LGBTQ+ community. The oppressed only cry out about injustices they’ve experienced and plead for equal treatment, which is then equivocated to the calls for the wholesale eradication of their population.

    Secondly, you seemed more concerned with the optics of justice than justice itself. Who does trans identity affect other than the trans person? that’s a genuine question because I cannot think of a single person except for the trans person’s doctor who should ever be concerned with that.

    the Trans community lost some PR ground when it came out that schools were intentionally hiding gender transitions from parents.

    This is just blatant propaganda that reveals your bias. I’ll take the time out of my day to break it down for you. Starting with “gender transitions”, I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you simply misspoke and meant “gender identity”. How would a minor begin gender transition without their parents knowledge or consent? are they taking school busses to underground, unregulated doctors that prescribe hormone blockers? and that brings me to the next point: there are literally no children that are receiving any irreversible treatments to aid in their gender expression. In some cases, minors below 16 may be prescribed puberty blockers, which have been used to treat various conditions for nearly half a century, are completely reversible, and demonstrably lower suicide rates in trans youth. Once a trans kid has hit 16 and has spent literal years with doctors and therapists, they may be prescribed hormones that help their body develop in a more comfortable way for their gender identity. These treatments are also decades old and again have demonstrably proved to be the most effective way to ensure trans people live long and healthy lives.

    Is “PR” (that’s actually just more lies and deception from the Christian right that purposely warps perceptions to demonize and vilify the LGBTQ+ community) more important than the literal lives of children? That question will remain relevant as I move onto my final point: if a child is having questions about their gender expression and their parents are vehemently opposed to that, to the point where it would put the child in imminent danger, often times lethal, if the parents were to find out, is it still morally correct to tell the parents based only on the inherently Christian idea that your parents are the sole deciders in the welfare of their children? to give a less politically charged example, let’s look at left-handedness. it was a hugely popular belief that left handed people were of the Devil and evil not too long ago. an extremely dogmatic religious couple who already verbally abuse and accost left handed people have a child who teachers discover is left handed. should the teachers be required to tell the parents about their child’s left-handedness, which will almost certainly lead to verbal and statistically likely physical abuse of that child? it isn’t like the teachers are secretly part of a left handed cabal set to destroy the world with their evil left handed demons.

    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 literally a call to sit back and placate the Christian right. what’s the transitional stance between “trans rights are human rights” and “we need to eradicate gender ideology from the public world”? should we only genocide half the trans community? that still wouldn’t satisfy the right and there would be less people fighting for justice. “don’t ask, don’t tell” was implemented after years of riots and demonstrations drawing attention to the rampant assault in the US military. it is not like clinton just woke up one morning and decided that the gays have been quiet long enough so maybe we should give them some rights. the only tried and true tactic when it comes to gay rights is violence and standing up for ourselves and people like us in direct opposition to Christians.

    Nahvi ,

    My problem with your stance is that you seem very quick to jump at “bigoted hate speech from LGBTQ+ people”

    Show me a Christian or conservative acting like a bigot in this post, community, or even instance and I will gladly call them out. I am sure a few are hiding somewhere around here but they are few and far between. I do understand that there are instances where it is more common from them, but I do not regularly visit those places.

    admittedly, but understandably, quite vitriolic - responses to that trauma.

    This is my main issue right here. None of this conversation would be happening u/I_Fart_Glitter had just acknowledged that u/gravitas_deficiency had spit out some vitriolic bigotry instead of defending. Their opinions may be understandable to you, but a public News forum is the wrong place to be spewing that kind of bigotry. If they gravitas has unresolved issues they need to get off their chest, there are plenty of appropriate forums for it.

    This fear mongering is reinforced every single Sunday when they go to their church and get told these things directly by their leadership

    This may be true for many Christians, but there are millions of American Christians that believe quite the opposite and would never tolerate that in a church.

    I live in BFE Texas and there are ten Affirming Churches in the area; five of them are within about 45 minutes of me. As a comparison there are only two Cowboy Churches in the same area. Every major City I checked had several Affirming Churches.

    www.gaychurch.org/find_a_church/

    npr.org/…/trans-religious-leaders-say-scripture-s…

    usnews.com/…/one-in-five-united-methodist-congreg…

    A belief system is much more mutable than intrinsic characteristics like gender identity, skin color, and sexuality

    Belief is as fundamental to a person as sexuality or gender identity. Some people’s beliefs, gender identity, and sexuality change several times through their lives, others stick with the one assumed at birth, and anywhere in between.

    assume you simply misspoke and meant “gender identity”.

    You are right, I meant transitioning gender identity, not “gender transition”

    based only on the inherently Christian idea that your parents are the sole deciders in the welfare of their children

    What? I am sure there are cultures and religions where something different would be the norm, but do any of them represent a significant chunk of the world’s population? I did a bit of web-searching but can’t seem to find anything remotely related to this. I am getting swamped with references to child welfare laws and related court cases.

    what’s the transitional stance between “trans rights are human rights” and “we need to eradicate gender ideology from the public world”?

    This is the first time I have gotten this deep into trans topics in a loooong time, but off the top of my head, I see two middle grounds between those stances.

    “If you want to live your life as a different sex than you were assigned at birth, that is fine but don’t expect everyone else to agree with or support that choice.”

    “Let adults live their lives as the sex they choose, but kids need to wait until they are out of high school if their parents refuse to accept it.”

    I am sure there are other middle grounds between those stances even if both sides are offended by them.

    How might it impact them? That brings me to your direct question.

    Who does trans identity affect other than the trans person?

    Really? Is this just a setup to call me a bigot instead? Fine, I will express the opinions I have seen or heard from women who could probably be described as TERFs even if they don’t see themselves as such, but only with a spoiler tag and a few caveats.

    Trigger warning. These are not my personal feelings. If someone taking oppositional stances or undercutting your self-identity will hurt you, please do not click this.Caveat: I am neither a woman nor trans, nor do I have daughters or sisters, nor have I ever had any close trans friends or family, only regular acquaintances, nor am I strongly opinionated about whether trans-women are actually women. I really do not have a leg to stand on when taking a stance around this issue. Another caveat: These are areas where the belief of what a trans person actually is controls the perspective. If you think a trans-woman is a woman, full stop, then this doesn’t make any sense at all. If you believe that a trans-woman is a man that prefers to live as a woman then it does, so in an effort to answer your question, I am going to frame it from that perspective. A final caveat, from my admittedly limited perspective these particular issues only typically apply to trans-women and not usually trans-men. Though I am sure there are some exceptions to that. First, the first woman X. I happened to have a conversation with a relatively young lady that went on a rant about Biden naming Rachel Levine as the first woman 4 star general of the Public Health Services Human Corps. She made quite the impassioned rant that it was undercutting women everywhere to call a “biological male” the first woman anything. Second, women’s sports. The Riley Gaines and Lia Thomas thing last year was hard to miss. The main point of women’s sports seems to be related to fields where men absolutely dominate the standings. Though there are definitely some women’s leagues for certain things where I can’t see how it would matter. As I understand it, many men’s leagues around the world have no rule against women, it is just exceptionally rare that a woman is selected for them. The NHL for example has had exactly one female player and it was for an exhibition game back in the 90s. Should leagues be based off of physical size like boxing? Or should there be a testosterone check? No idea, but some people assigned female at birth definitely think it affects them. Third, the old bathroom example. Men are feared in our society. Every one of us is viewed as a potential rapist. Women feel exceptionally uncomfortable in certain situations where a man is present or might be. It isn’t right, but it is the way things are. As long as bathrooms exist in their current form, some women, and some parents of young girls, are not going to be okay with people they see as men using the one for ladies.

    SuddenlyBlowGreen ,

    Trans community lost some PR ground when it came out that schools were intentionally hiding gender transitions from parents.

    Probably because they want to avoid the children getting abused at home, or worse

    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.

    Hmm, I wonder what would happen in we’d apply this to past social issues…

    “If you want to make progress on civil rights issues, I would suggest that the african-american 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.”

    “If you want to make progress on suffrage issues, I would suggest that women 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.”

    Nahvi , (edited )

    Probably because they want to avoid the children getting abused at home, or worse

    Most abusers do not wait for some specific reason to start abusing. I would be interested to see data how many abused LGBT kids were never abused before they came out to their parents.

    Edited in all of the above.

    Hmm, I wonder what would happen in we’d apply this to past social issues…

    This might be splitting hairs a bit, but it basically is what happened.

    Edits in italics: For US women’s suffrage they gained the right to vote in a number of cities, territories, and states then eventually gained the right to vote nationally.

    Also when slaves were freed, they certainly did not become equal members of society the next day. It has however gotten significantly better over time.

    If you want to push in a certain direction, you take a few steps forward, show people that the world did not burn down, and then take a few more steps forward.

    SuddenlyBlowGreen ,

    Most abusers do not wait for some specific reason to start abusing. I would be interested to see data how many abused LGBT kids were never abused before they came out to their parents.

    Are you claiming children haven’t been abused because their parents found out they were LGBTQ?

    This might be splitting hairs a bit, but it basically is what happened.

    Oh yeah, I remember when MLK said “While we wanted equal rights, me must acquiesce that we shouldn’t get all the rights white people have in order to appease those against us.”

    Big fan of moderates, MLK was. Or so I heard.

    Nahvi ,

    Are you claiming children haven’t been abused because their parents found out they were LGBTQ?

    Of course not, that would be nonsense.

    I was just avoiding attributing anything like reason to the abusers. The choices of abuse victims are not typically the cause of abuse. The pieces of shit willing to abuse children don’t need a particular reason to do it, and I am not interested in claiming something the victim did was the cause. Even if the abuse ramped up after coming out, it still sounds a bit like victim blaming any way I word it. Which in turn makes me wonder how many of them were already being abused.

    SuddenlyBlowGreen ,

    Of course not, that would be nonsense.

    Well then, there you have the reason schools keep it hidden.

    afraid_of_zombies ,

    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 ,

    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.

    healthline.com/…/meet-the-religious-groups-fighti…

    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.

    pewresearch.org/…/american-religious-groups-vary-…

    afraid_of_zombies ,

    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 ,

    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.

    usnews.com/…/one-in-five-united-methodist-congreg…

    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.

    usnews.com/…/united-methodists-are-breaking-up-in…

    afraid_of_zombies ,

    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 ,

    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.

    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.

    afraid_of_zombies ,

    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?

    SuddenlyBlowGreen ,

    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 ,

    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.

    lemmy.world/comment/4026429

    Edit: added people from

    Catoblepas ,

    Episcopalians are less than 2% of the US population. Jewish people and LGBT people are a bigger voting bloc. Using one of the most liberal and one of the smallest Christian denominations as evidence for what Christianity in the US is like is intentionally misleading, when more than 10x as many Americans consider themselves Evangelicals (about 1/4th).

    Nahvi ,

    as evidence for what Christianity in the US is like is intentionally misleading

    If I was trying to claim that is that standard view, then it would be misleading. Since I was actually claiming that there are a wide variety of beliefs among Christians, some even aligning with your values, it is pretty spot on representation. Treating them all the same is prejudicial behavior.

    A fair-minded person would give an individual a chance to act like an asshole before treating them like trash.

    gravitas_deficiency ,

    A fair minded person would see that the predominant effect that all sects of Christianity has on the US these days is negative, and that’s largely due to the evangelical/Nationalist Christian wing. And sure; they might not be the numerical majority of “all Christians in the US”, but they are having a disproportionately large impact on the rest of Christianity in the country, as well as the country as a whole.

    So sure: you can sit here and whinge all you want about how it’s unfair that people are becoming more and more hostile towards Christians because a subset of them are giving all the others a bad name (huh… where have we seen this dynamic before? Perhaps sometime in the early 2000s, in the context of a related but distinct Abrahamic monotheistic religion…?), but when an extremist sect does evil shit and the rest of the denomination does pretty much fuck-all to stop it, people are going to take an increasingly dim view of the religion as a whole. People don’t like it when you do shitty things to them. That’s just humans being humans.

    Put another way: I’ll stop pre-judging Christians in America as hypocrites of the highest caliber once they can get their own fucking house in order, because right now it looks a distressingly large proportion of them are doing their level best to tear the fucking country apart in some nihilistic pursuit of hastening the end times so they can get raptured to heaven or some shit like that.

    Nahvi ,

    once they can get their own fucking house in order

    This is the fundamental problem right here. There is no house. There are neighborhoods worth of houses. Some of them not even next to each other. Some of them share outdated morale codes. Some of them have moral codes you and I could both respect. They are no more in control of each other than we are of them.

    It is one of the definite weaknesses of all the separate denominations. If there was only one Christian group, we could try to talk with the Pope and the other Patriarchs and potentially have them all heard the group in the same direction.

    Just think of the Westboro Baptists, so shameful that even the KKK denounced them on their home page a few years back.

    prole ,

    “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.

    Nahvi ,

    Fair enough. I should have called it anti-religious bigotry.

    prole ,

    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 ,

    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.

    GnomeKat ,
    @GnomeKat@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    Religion is a choice

    Nahvi ,

    Expression of Religion is a choice. Belief in religion is often more fundamental to who a person is.

    GnomeKat ,
    @GnomeKat@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    nah

    gravitas_deficiency ,

    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 ,

    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 ,

    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 ,

    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/[email protected]’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

    lemmy.world/comment/3754441

    Drivebyhaiku ,

    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 ,

    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 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 ,

    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 , (edited )

    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 ,

    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 ,

    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.

    freeindv ,

    Yeah just like how you should excuse people for being racist when they’ve been repeatedly victimized by black people. You can NOT blame them as that is human nature, and you should be the first to speak out on behalf against those doing the victimization

    oxjox ,
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    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 ,

    this drug related domestic dispute murder.

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

    oxjox ,
    @oxjox@lemmy.ml avatar

    The article was significantly sparse on details.

    Yeah. No argument there…
    I posted this earlier lemmy.ml/comment/4475683

    Nahvi ,

    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 ,

    Nope, my pointed disdain for backwards, illogical, regressive, exclusionary, predatory cults is showing. I don’t have a problem with religious people as long as they don’t force their shit onto others. Nationalist Christians are trying to force their bullshit theocracy onto the whole country, and that’s very fucking far from ok.

    For the record, I was raised catholic, and I noped the fuck out of that bullshit once I got old enough to ask incisive questions. Maybe you should too.

    Nahvi ,

    It took going to a Bible College for me to break it down. That doesn’t mean that I have forgotten all of the good-hearted, well-meaning Christians that I met along the way. I haven’t forgotten all of the assholes either.

    Yes I know, there are plenty of busybody assholes that identify as Christians, just like there are plenty of busybody assholes that identify themselves as atheist, gay, straight, athlete or gamer. Some people just feel the need to tell others how to live their lives even when they don’t really understand them. It doesn’t mean that we should act like everyone in that group is the same.

    That sort of prejudicial reductionism is the real enemy. It is the thing reasonable, free-thinkers should be fighting against, not turning around for our own use.

    Sir_Kevin ,

    You are contradicting yourself.

    Nahvi ,

    Care to explain how?

    Sir_Kevin ,

    No.

    Mafflez ,

    Most honest answer I’ve seen this week.

    Nahvi ,

    Agreed. I certainly appreciate the direct honesty.

    Syldon ,
    @Syldon@feddit.uk avatar

    Your point seems to be that people should not generalise an opinion on a large group of people. But you fail to ask the question of when passivism becomes guilty by failing to act. Germany was held accountable for the atrocities of the holocaust. They moved on. They educate in schools in an attempt to prevent this from reoccurring. What is happening in the US with republicans can only persist if people support them, and polling suggests there is support there.

    Nahvi ,

    Your point seems to be that people should not generalise an opinion on a large group of people.

    That is indeed my exact point.

    But you fail to ask the question of when passivism becomes guilty by failing to act.

    That is actually one of my main concerns with the direction lemmy is heading. At some point when the bias becomes extreme enough we need to start calling out those that are crossing the line. If it seems like I am not pointing enough at the extremes of the republican side, it is only because their voices are few and far-between on Lemmy. Typically when I find them, they are already buried in down-votes and comments. I usually a downvote to the pile, upvote a few other comments, and then move on.

    Germany was held accountable for the atrocities of the holocaust. They moved on. They educate in schools in an attempt to prevent this from reoccurring.

    In principle, I agree with this, but in practice it seems to be having questionable long-term results. The rise of the extreme right seems as prevalent there as it is in the US. Though some of that may just be overreporting because of the general interest in Germany when it comes to right-wing extremism.

    What is happening in the US with republicans can only persist if people support them, and polling suggests there is support there.

    I think this issue is a bit more complex than that. I think it has to do as much or more with people being forced to support the side they feel less negative towards even if they don’t really agree with that side. Here is an interesting if imperfect analogy I read relating to it:

    Since the main topic is apparently too hot of a take, I’ll take pineapple on a pizza for example (Perhaps I’m getting into even hotter waters). Free of external influence (i.e. memes), I think most people will eat it without much thought. Some might like it, some might not, and I doubt it’s all that controversial–likely less than anchovies. If you don’t like it, you just don’t have to eat it.

    But if one extreme said we must ban pineapples from all pizzas, and the other end of the extreme said we must put pineapple on all pizzas, we have a very different scenario. I myself enjoy Hawaiian pizza and find pineapples to be a fine topping. But I certainly don’t want to eat only pineapple pizzas all the time. So, I’d look at both extremes and side with no pineapples ever. That seems better of the two options. I can no longer be a centrist because the idea of having only pineapple pizza seems horrible. But I don’t really eat whole pizzas by myself, I eat it with others. And if others are such great lovers of pineapple pizza, I’d be influenced to side with the other extreme of always having pineapple due to peers.

    I want to highlight that both of these extremes are authoritarian. One forces you to eat pineapple. The other forces you to not eat pineapple. Neither are true libertarian choices. They are forced viewpoints one forces on the other. That’s what forces people to have such strong negative emotion towards it. No one wants to be forced into things. This is important and I’ll come back to this later.

    Excerpt from lemmy.world/comment/3742406 from /u/[email protected]

    Syldon ,
    @Syldon@feddit.uk avatar

    My point was not about authoritarian. It is about the lies that are being told to the masses to convince them that being turkeys for Christmas is actually good for them. The lies have gone from extreme into the ridiculous. I watched Trump tell a crowd that climate change is not true and that he can sort out the forest fires tomorrow. He wants to make use of the wasted overflow pipes in cities. Where do you start on that one? Trump has caused murders literally; people died in the insurrection. He is affirmed as being a rapist in judicial hearing. In the UK we call this out as being a nonce. There were republican candidates who said they would follow Trump if he was elected while in prison. Worse still, this is only a minor take on the whole story. Boebert committing sex acts in front of kids. The open gerrymandering in states across the US. The attacks on the judicial system and civil employees. The way they used public servant wages as blackmail instead of using democratic leeway.

    How far down the rabbit hole do you have to go before thinking that there is something wrong here, and I have to use my position to prevent more of it?

    Nahvi ,

    Apologies, my intention wasn’t to imply you meant Authoritarianism is the main problem, but rather that I thought polarization was. Guess that is what I get for using part of someone else’s comment instead of writing my own.

    I see your point. Trump is a lying, liar, who lies. The problem is America has mostly shifted from voting for someone to voting against someone. Trump vs Clinton was an unpopularity contest that America lost, and maybe the world too.

    There are undeniably die hard trump supporters out there, but many people that voted for him in the last two elections, and who will likely vote for him again, aren’t really supporters of his, they are more against Biden and Democrats.

    Between their hatred for the Democrats and the fact that “we got him this time” was turned into a meme four years ago, there are a good portion of Republicans that have started to treat anything negative about Trump as another attack to be dismissed. Even when they see a video of his own words, it is dismissed as taken out of context, a misquote, a deep fake, whatever works for them. However anything seemingly positive is laid at his feet.

    The biggest problem at this point is attack ads and court cases just further convince the die hard supporters that he really is trying to “drain the swamp” and all the attacks are the response of the swamp. The individual issues that ridiculously pile up for a neutral observer are all just proof of his righteousness in their minds.

    Have you seen a version of this article where anti-trump conservatives had to stop running ads against Trump because they were helping him or doing nothing? www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/…/ar-AA1hsIwq

    Trump is definitely a problem, but he’s also a symptom of the larger problem of polarization. In the past, moderates were able to keep things in balance, but right now being a moderate is nearly a crime to both wings. Republicans tend to call them “RINOs” and Democrats tend to call them “basically Republicans”.

    I think even if we eliminate Trump, someone will quickly follow in his steps, and I am not convinced that it will necessarily be a Republican. Too many power-hungry people from across the spectrum have now seen that America is ripe for the taking by a certain kind of charismatic figure.

    The only way to slow this down in my mind is to begin building a bridge between the two sides. As a start we need to first and foremost stop forcing centrists to choose a side. Then we need to find a few things we still agree on, before moving on to more challenging issues. If we cannot even find a few issues we agree with the other side, then we at least need to find some issues where the extremes agree with the moderates and build from there. If we cannot even do that then it probably about time to figure out whether we are going for French style political purges or a Roman style first princeps.

    If we are throwing out the rule of law anyways them I am voting for the Governator! I am mostly kidding.

    and I have to use my position to prevent more of it?

    I lost you here. What position? Prevent more of what?

    Also, sorry if this turned out a bit on the rambling side, I should have waited until morning to write this.

    Syldon ,
    @Syldon@feddit.uk avatar

    I agree with a lot of what you say. I don’t think polarisation is a bad thing. Everyone has a different perception of where the priorities should be, sometimes that is just pure greed, sometimes it is genuine need. The biggest issue in the US (and the UK) imo, is the voting system. FPTP system are too easy to corrupt. Voters recognise that a vote for an independent can lead to what you really don’t want into power. This encourages tribal voting instincts. In my own area, I know I am going to have to pinch my nose and vote Labour. I will do this knowing full well that the person I am voting for has shown to be nothing but a grifter for over 10 years.

    A FPTP system only requires attention in the swing areas. The rest is largely ignored. A PR voting system has been gaining more and more popularity in the UK. A lot are recognising that FPTP has some very real dangers.

    Truth and media accountability has become a conduit for celebrity voting. They even used the same model that was used on Trump with Johnson in the UK. We got lucky because we got the idiot who was much easier to spot. Trump also recognised that by throwing out crumbs, people would see him as doing something. Johnson actively did as little as possible. Neither of these would have been voted into power with the media backing they got. I am hoping that our next PM sorts the media out in some way. Leveson Inquiry 2.0 is another item to be looked into, imo.

    We, in the UK, need a return to independent oversight. Johnson annexed what was previously independent bodies into government control. He then used them to justify government choices. Johnson was very close to gaining absolute power in the UK. Trump will do exactly this, if he ever gets in. Trump will mimic Erdogan, he will use his current predicament to justify doing even more extreme moves once in power. There is a fair to good chance you will not remove Trump and his family if they return.

    Independent oversight seems to be a thing that is greatly missed in the US. There does not seem to be any trusted bodies where people can turn to for an honest opinion on truth. The problem seems to stem from the power of the ruling class of the time having the complete control of who gets which job. Having individual politicians plant the highest power in the legal system into place is always going to cause an imbalance. We have exactly the same problem with the house of Lords. I like the idea of cross party review bodies being used to adjudicate key positions of influence, but a lot of ultimate power positions like SCOTUS need a much wider oversight committee.

    The biggest problem of all politics though has to be corruption. Politicians should not be able to earn money from secondary sources.

    I lost you here. What position? Prevent more of what?

    Not all republicans are bad. But the longer the good ones wait to take the bull by the horns, the harder it will be.

    Nahvi ,

    I definitely agree that FPTP is a weak voting system, though I think the US is a lot further away from it than the UK. There are a few places that have rank choice, but it doesn’t seem to be gaining much popularity nationally.

    There does not seem to be any trusted bodies where people can turn to for an honest opinion on truth.

    This is definitely a huge problem. There used to be some non-partisan bodies that could be trusted like the Congressional Budget Office, but the ones I am aware of have lost most or all relevance over the last 15-20 years. Independent oversight might be nice, but I suspect that there will be a constant battle of infiltration against those entities.

    a lot of ultimate power positions like SCOTUS need a much wider oversight committee.

    I agree that SCOTUS is a problem, though I am not sure oversight is the right answer. I think a constitutional amendment or two is in order regarding them; probably further limiting when or how they take court cases, and more importantly not allowing new precedents to be set when the court cannot even agree with itself. At the very least a 6-3 vote should be required for precedent but even better would be 9-0. If they cannot even agree amongst themselves whether something is constitutional at the time of a specific case, then setting new “constitutional” rules or rights anyways is foolishness. They could continue to take and decide cases by 5-4 majorities on an individual basis but those resolutions should be specific to those cases and make no declaration of being more.

    In my mind, SCOTUS has always has been a problem. When I look at history, it seems to me, as often as not, SCOTUS has inserted itself into highly contentious issues and driven a legalistic wedge through the nation by picking sides in issues where there is no clear popular opinion.

    Also, the thing that people see as SCOTUS’ prime responsibility, judicial review, is not actually mentioned in the constitution, it was co-opted by them shortly after our current constitution was signed. In the same case that they declared the constitution was not just a statement of ideals, but in fact a legal document, they also ignored that legal document and declared their right to unilaterally strike down the nation’s laws. Marbury v Madison In my mind, it is disgusting that the same body that functions as the interpreter of the constitution felt free to disregard it when it suited them, from its very beginning.

    Besides its overwhelming impact on US history, the reason for the Marbury v Madison itself is an interesting insight into how contentious US politics has always been.

    The biggest problem of all politics though has to be corruption. Politicians should not be able to earn money from secondary sources.

    I could not agree with this more if I tried. It is absolutely disgusting to see how many US politicians become rich while in office.

    Not all republicans are bad. But the longer the good ones wait to take the bull by the horns, the harder it will be.

    Thank you for the clarification.

    We have exactly the same problem with the house of Lords.

    As a side note, I have always found the House of Lord’s to be an interesting if problematic institution.

    Leveson Inquiry 2.0

    I tried to read through the wiki about this, but I suspect that my own free press bias was getting in the way of what I was actually reading. I will need to sit down sometime and look more into when I have time to process it all.

    Syldon ,
    @Syldon@feddit.uk avatar

    Besides its overwhelming impact on US history, the reason for the Marbury v Madison itself is an interesting insight into how contentious US politics has always been.

    Thanks, I read the wiki and watched a lecture from the Uni of Virginia. There is obviously a lot more history around the outcomes of the case, but it asked the question which always seemed blaringly obvious to me and the SCOTUS. How does a non elected body get such power? I will look into it more. I find the diversion between UK law and US law interesting. I have to own up to be an bit of a history geek.

    Nahvi ,

    How does a non elected body get such power?

    It is a great question.

    I find the diversion between UK law and US law interesting.

    Same here. I occasionally dive into something random about UK law and am blown away.

    I have to own up to be an bit of a history geek.

    If I had some better history teachers at a young age, I think I would have been also.

    I found the History of Rome podcast by Mike Duncan a few years back and binged the entire thing twice, as well as his Revolutions podcast. Been having a hard time finding other things that engaged me as much. I do like most anything by Dan Carlin but there is a lot less depth to it.

    Syldon ,
    @Syldon@feddit.uk avatar

    Added it to my lists.

    My current ones are: www.youtube.com/ (one of the most interesting. For someone who talks about rocks, it is actually very insightful) www.youtube.com/www.youtube.com/c/HistoryHit/videoswww.youtube.com/c/HistoryHit/videos

    Nahvi ,

    Added it to my lists.

    Fair warning, History of Rome was his first podcast and it took some episodes to get rolling. I would say the first 10-15 are slower and of a bit lower quality. It starts getting better as he gets more experience and better equipment.

    Syldon ,
    @Syldon@feddit.uk avatar

    History for granite is similar in as much the second one shows how much the guy has looked into it.

    I have watched a ton on history. With vloggers I generally watch for the bits I didn’t already know now. Vloggers tend to focus on the same stuff. What artists would consider pot boilers. It is great when you find someone with the different angle.

    American politics is a new fad of mine. I have been following Trump closely, along with the legal break downs that come with that. I strongly dislike the scum that are the Conservatives in the UK. The UK Conservative party is very much aligned with the US Republicans. They share the same think groups. The parallels with tactics are very stark.

    Maybury and Madison was brand new to me and filled in a fair few hours. I tend to read the fine print and follow the explanation links. My wife was not impressed when I told her that equal rights for women had not been ratified in the US as part of the constitution. More so when I told that Virginia had rejected another vote on it in 2019. It is the little things in life that make you smile. Education can be a dangerous thing, I will be inspecting my food for a few days.

    Nahvi ,

    The Equal Rights Amendment is definitely another one of those real oddities of American politics.

    Supported by the GOP and Southern Democrats until the 80s, opposed by Northern Democrats and Labor Unions for most of the same time period. Now generally supported by Democrats and opposed by Republicans. Both supported and opposed by various feminist groups at the same and different times.

    The UK Conservative party is very much aligned with the US Republicans. They share the same think groups. The parallels with tactics are very stark.

    Is this a relatively new thing? I was under the impression that the UK conservative party was fairly different than US conservatives. I had heard that Johnson was a bit of a johnson himself, but assumed things went back to “normal” with his ousting.

    It is the little things in life that make you smile. Education can be a dangerous thing, I will be inspecting my food for a few days.

    It seems that you are a man of not just culture but wisdom as well.

    Syldon ,
    @Syldon@feddit.uk avatar

    Is this a relatively new thing? I was under the impression that the UK conservative party was fairly different than US conservatives. I had heard that Johnson was a bit of a johnson himself, but assumed things went back to “normal” with his ousting.

    I really don’t know when it infiltrated the Tories. Thatcher from the 80’s for all she was hated because of the way she attacked unions was certainly not of that ilk. Part of Thatcher’s persona was honesty and integrity.

    Major who followed her did not seem that way. I listened to him giving an interview on TRIP, he seemed extremely genuine. He was also a major feature of Thatcher’s government.

    I think the rot started when the Tories took a major arse kicking in 2005. I have no real evidence or insider information to back that up.

    There was a lot of talk within the party regarding reform so they could get back on track. There was a very disturbing report written up from a group within the party. It was based around manipulation and where the party should aim for. One particular notable part pointed out that educating the poor was not good for Tory votes. People from poorer back grounds who gained degrees were less likely to vote Tory than any other group. DIRECT DEMOCRACY: An Agenda for a New Model Party. Page 12

    The decline in Conservative support has been particularly marked among the most educated. This is not always obvious since more education is associated with higher income, and higher income is still (just) associated with stronger Conservative support. However, other factors being held constant, the more educationally qualified someone is, the less likely he or she is to support the Conservatives. This is a problem to the extent that the more educated are likelier to vote, and are often influential in leading the opinion of others. It is also, of course, a problem in a country where nearly half of young people are now going to university.

    There is a conspiracy theory thrown around from time to time that defunding education in poor areas is done by design to increase the vote share. Something that is hard for a Tory to argue against in the UK, especially when you show the stats on funding.

    If you read the report in entirety you will see republicans are mentioned many times over.

    The first Tory PM in power after this was Cameron with Osborne as chancellor. I listened to Osborne on TRIP and was not impressed. I am going to say imo here, I CBA to dig up more details, it really annoyed me to listen to him. He told lies on his figures, he ducked and dodged with inuendo. It just felt massively different to Major talking. I have seen people quote stats on things that were wrong under Cameron and Osborne. This was not the view I had on them at the time, but that has since changed in hindsight.

    Teressa May who followed them seemed genuine to me. She also did an interview on TRIP. I felt at the time she got a bad deal from the Tory MPs and the infighting. That view has not changed.

    The rest is as they say history. Johnson, Truss and Sunak, all I can say is shithouses. And that is unkind to the toilet.

    Both parties are known for gerrymandering now, the Tories are changing the boundaries across the UK. Both are recognised for hiding information through obfuscation. Both have shown designs to bully influential depts (judicial system, elections control, police etc). Both have shown a prevalence for gaslighting and talking nonsense to fog over issues. Both are reputed to have Russian influence running through them. I would guess the Republicans are known for selling government contracts to donors, something the Tories are going to loose the next election over.

    Nahvi ,

    This was a really interesting read, thank you for laying it out.

    Are PDFs like that Direct Democracy common releases from the UK parties? It really spells things out, at least as far as I made it through before getting distracted.

    There did seem to be a couple sections that I read that the data didn’t seem to match what was being claimed. Particularly the section on the Broken Pendulum (Pages 8,9). The authors seem to claim that in 2001 and 2005 were unique in that the opposition party wasn’t able to gain from losses in the government. If however you look at 1964 and 1983 they seem to be even more stark examples of the same. Seems like the pendulum was a general trend at best.

    Syldon ,
    @Syldon@feddit.uk avatar

    I believe it was a report that was sold at the 2005 conference. The PDF was available for purchase on Amazon last time I looked. It made a few pounds in 2012 when Jeremy Hunt (the main author) was promoted.

    As for the discrepancies, they were trying to sell an idea. Truth was not at the top of their agenda.

    prole ,

    Christians love to play the victim, when you literally run the country.

    gravitas_deficiency ,

    Tangentially, my go-to aphorism when some American Christian starts whinging about how “persecuted” they are:

    get off the cross, we need the wood.

    And to be clear: any Christian in the US claiming “persecution” should be viewed with the same seriousness as white, upper-middle class people claiming everyone racist against white property… because both of those claims are categorically bullshit. Nobody in the US wants to or cares about persecuting white people or Christians. We just want all the Nationalist Christians to get the fuck out of our politics and stop trying to push theocratically-derived laws on the rest of us, because just like we don’t want to live under a Sharia legal system, we similarly don’t want to live under a biblical (or Torah-derived, or any-other-religious-text-derived) law system.

    jasory ,

    Theocratic Christians are such a minority that the risk of this is nil. This is like conservatives fear-mongering about the US going Stalinist.

    The US has never had a biblical law system and never will. (Certainly not in the near future, although with infinite time anything is possible).

    Rearsays ,

    Bigots and manipulating sociopaths have a difficult time reconciling that they’re terrible people.

    Xeknos ,
    @Xeknos@lemmy.world avatar

    Ah, the ol’ “the anti-bigots are the real bigots” response? Is that where we are now?

    Nahvi ,

    Looks like they are both bigots from here.

    jasory ,

    They randomly accused people they have no evidence of for commiting a crime. So yeah, they are being a bigot.

    Chr0nos1 ,

    I stole this from another poster, but it does indicate that it was probably his ex boyfriend, or drug related, and not a “good Christian” as you imply.

    Here’s some excerpts from the local paper.

    Detectives believe Kruger’s death may have been the result of a domestic dispute or may have been drug-related, according to three law enforcement sources with knowledge of the case. The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation, said police investigators recovered troubling text messages between Kruger and a former partner. Investigators also recovered methamphetamine inside Kruger’s bedroom, the sources said.

    In recent months, he’d written on social media about a variety of alarming incidents at his home.

    In April, he posted that an ex-partner had broken into his home. “The door was locked, so he had somehow obtained a copy of my keys,” he wrote. He had allowed the man, whom he’d known for years “before his troubles,” to stay at his house briefly after being released from jail. He said he was able to deescalate the situation and the man eventually left, and he changed his locks.

    In August, someone threw a rock through his home window, he said. Then, about two weeks ago, he wrote on Facebook that someone came to his house searching for their boyfriend — “a man I’ve never met once in my entire life.” The person called themselves “Lady Diabla, the She-Devil of the Streets” and threatened him, he wrote.

    inquirer.com/…/josh-kruger-killed-point-breeze-sh…

    freeindv ,

    What a strange hateful and bigoted worldview you hold

    Dkcecil91 ,

    Not all that strange, just go by a planned parenthood and check out the crazies accosting people outside of those.

    pete_the_cat , (edited )

    It’s Philly, this is nothing new (Edit: since people love twisting words, I meant violence in general not the specific targeting of an activist journalist for Christ sake). I grew up in South Jersey (half way in between Philly and Atlantic City, NJ) and there’s always a headline on the nightly news about “X people were killed in a shootout today in West/South/North Philly today”, most people don’t see it though since Philly is overshadowed by NYC (anyone from Central Jersey and North gets NYC news). Everything but Center City has always been a shit hole for the most part.

    Edit: I live in NYC for 5 years, it of course has shitty areas all over too. Everyone is trying to act like major cities are perfect, crime free areas. Did people forget that the Italian and Irish mobs ran NYC and Philly for decades?!

    Potatos_are_not_friends ,

    Having a home invader break into your house and gun you down is not a common occurrence, even in philly. It was a targeted attack.

    ABCDE ,

    That’s not what they said.

    Potatos_are_not_friends ,

    It’s Philly, this is nothing new.

    You got selective reading or something?

    ABCDE ,

    They said shootings, not your very specific example. You got a reason for your shitty attitude?

    pete_the_cat ,

    No, it’s more like people are twisting my words. I simply meant violence and murder is nothing new in Philly. If you read the rest of what I wrote I clearly state that. Whose the one with selective reading?

    pete_the_cat ,

    I didn’t say that was a common occurrence, I was saying violence and murder is common in Philly. It’s literally on the news almost every night.

    Of course this was a targeted attack.

    jimbo ,

    What do you mean by “targeted”?

    LadyAutumn ,
    @LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    This wasn’t someone gunned down in a shootout. This was a homeless and LGBT rights activist who was brutally murdered in his home.

    Nothing about that is ordinary.

    jimbo ,

    Is it “ordinary” for anyone in any career to be brutally murdered in their home?

    prole ,

    If you were halfway between Philly and Atlantic City, you were too far away from Philly to pretend to be an expert. But keep using that weak anecdotal “evidence” to continue your ignorant views on urban areas.

    Saying “Everything but Center City has always been a shit hole” gives you away. You have no fucking clue. Probably been at least a decade since you’ve driven within 30 miles of the city.

    pete_the_cat ,

    So apparently the ABC nightly news is “anecdotal evidence”. My aunt lives in Philly, my brother’s works there frequently, I’m pretty aware of how Philly is.

    prole , (edited )

    It’s sensationalist, absolutely.

    edit: ok you’re right, the ABC Nightly News isn’t sensationalist. 🙄

    I also like how immediately after you claim it’s not anecdotal, you talk about how you know people who live there lol

    OceanSoap ,

    I mean, shootings in bad parts of Philly and Camden aren’t new, but they’re gang-related. This sort of crime detailed in the article is not common, even in Philly. This guy was targeted. Someone he likely knew was in his home, because no one had to break in (I highly doubt he didn’t lock his door), and 7 shots is overkill. Journalists aren’t being targeted like this on the regular.

    Source: grew up 20 minutes outside of Philly in South Jersey

    bobman ,

    Major cities have always been cesspools of violent crime.

    xc2215x ,

    Very sad to see this. Unfortunate what happened to Josh.

    geekworking ,

    deleted_by_author

    •
    WarmSoda ,

    Right? Makes it sound like a targeted attack specifically because of those issues.

    BreadstickNinja ,

    You two are saying different things. The first poster just can’t read. Your point is more valid - we don’t know yet whether this attack was motivated by his activism. Though not unimaginable in the current circumstance.

    pete_the_cat ,

    Umm no it doesn’t…

    BombOmOm ,
    @BombOmOm@lemmy.world avatar

    Crime is pretty bad in Philadelphia, certainly not a place I would want to live. Though it does beat out St. Louis and Baltimore 3x over in murder rates.

    circuscritic ,

    He was shot 7 times. I’d bet this was personal, or that he was specifically targeted.

    To be clear, I know nothing other than what I just read in the article, but someone had to really want him dead to shoot him seven times, and no one else i.e. not a mass shooting.

    logicbomb ,

    When investigating a crime, and there is overkill like this, it usually points to a personal motive.

    afraid_of_zombies ,

    I bet when they find the guy he will claim skydaddy told him to do it.

    jonne ,

    Yep, this doesn’t look like a robbery.

    Wrench ,

    It takes a weekend to learn how to use lock picks to open a door in seconds. I know the police carefully frame it as “or knew how to gain entry”, but it’s not as high a bar as they make it sound.

    Not_Alec_Baldwin ,

    Ahh, I see I’m not the only fan of the lockpicking lawyer.

    Jakdracula ,
    @Jakdracula@lemmy.world avatar

    We wouldn’t want ya.

    jeffw ,

    Rural crime is pretty bad too. I’ve met literally like one person who was randomly attacked on the streets in Philly. The vast majority of crime is people killing people they know.

    BombOmOm ,
    @BombOmOm@lemmy.world avatar

    Philadelphia has over 3x the homicide rate as the country as a whole. Crime is quite bad in Philly.

    jeffw ,

    TIL homicide is the only crime that exists

    Even if we’re talking about violent crime (which, itself is a minority of crime), homicide doesn’t even make up a majority or plurality

    BombOmOm ,
    @BombOmOm@lemmy.world avatar

    It’s a pretty solid metric to start with as it is the hardest to fudge. Homicides will be discovered. Other crimes can easily fly under the radar if nobody reports them.

    prole ,

    Per capita. Red states are far worse when you look at an actual relevant statistic. Just Google it. Someone else in this thread even linked to the map.

    BombOmOm , (edited )
    @BombOmOm@lemmy.world avatar

    Per capita

    Correct. Philly has over 5x the per-capita homicide rate as the nation as a whole. The city has a high crime rate.

    Per-capita homicide rates:

    prole ,

    Bad faith, and your links prove it. Comparing apples to oranges and manipulating data to suit yourself. Your first link goes to the wiki for “crime in the United States.”

    Look at any (legitimate) source that breaks down the top most violent cities in the US, and see where Philly is on that list. Here’s one (based on FBI crime statistics): worldpopulationreview.com/…/most-violent-cities-i…

    Hmmm that’s weird, I don’t see Philadelphia at all… Baltimore is the only city I see on there that’s in the Northeast. Huh.

    Most of the cities in the top 20 are southern or Midwestern cities. Red cities and/or cities in red states.

    BombOmOm ,
    @BombOmOm@lemmy.world avatar

    My 2nd link is a Wikipedia list of cities by homicide rate, and Philadelphia is on it with a homicide rate 32.74. Did you even click the link?

    As I said earlier, Philadelphia has over 5x the homicide rate as the US as a whole (a rate of 6.5). Philadelphia has a high crime rate.

    bobman ,

    Can agree. Me and 4 of my friends all had our cars broken into in Houston.

    None of us reported it because we felt like there would be no point.

    prole ,

    Do you know what “per capita” means? And no, it’s not just a fancy word to make liberals’ statistics look good (yes, I’ve argued with someone who said that).

    Why don’t you take a good honest look at a map of the homicide rate per capita and learn something.

    If one were to assume you are actually correct about that number (which I don’t, I don’t buy it)… Over 3x the homicide, and over 1000x the people on average. Are you capable of understanding that basic math, or…?

    Kolrami ,

    ibb.co/ccBKjrd

    This Wikipedia article visually shows the per capita homicide rate and it’s not anywhere near as extreme as the other dude implied. …wikipedia.org/…/List_of_U.S._states_and_territor…

    It might not have been malicious though, because I see a lot of professional outlets talk about total numbers when per capita is more relevant.

    prole ,

    Hmmm, sure is interesting where the hot spots on that map are… curious.

    Kolrami ,

    A large portion of it seems to be explainable by the usual suspect: poverty.

    This is a similar map for poverty.

    census.gov/…/acs-5yr-poverty-all-counties.html

    JJROKCZ ,

    Asshats like you certainly don’t help the Lou be better, you’re welcome to stay away forever while we enjoy our T-ravs

    BombOmOm ,
    @BombOmOm@lemmy.world avatar

    How dare one not want to live somewhere because of… checks statement… high crime rates.

    JJROKCZ ,

    The crime rates are only the downtown city of St. Louis which due to STL’s unique political city/county split makes it an inaccurate comparison to every other city in the nation. Combine our county of city of St. Louis and St. Louis county together, and we’re not as bad as everyone makes us out to be. Every other city gets to use their full city metro area, both they love using St. Louis as a boogeyman because we’re split differently and they can count only the city downtown area for crime

    SheeEttin ,

    Every other city gets to use their full city metro area, both they love using St. Louis as a boogeyman because we’re split differently and they can count only the city downtown area for crime

    Says who? I checked the FBI crime statistics. and they have rows for the STL MSA for 2016, 2017, and 2018, though not in the latest one from 2019, probably because they didn’t report the numbers to the FBI.

    ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s

    PunnyName ,

    So, what causes crime to rise? What solutions do you offer?

    Not_Alec_Baldwin ,

    Reduce wealth and income inequality somehow. There’s been no research on UBI reducing crime afaik and honestly I don’t know that it would work for that. People need to feel like they are doing valuable work.

    Cops on foot patrol in neighborhoods NOT to punish anyone but literally just to get to know the community and make eye contact.

    Access to training and education to promote moving into higher income and responsibility jobs.

    Mental health support (although people won’t want help as long as they are Fighting against the system)

    There need to be healthy, organic, non-crime non-drug non-gang groups for people to be part of. I don’t know what is are into these days. Basketball? Dancing on Tiktok? Anything social.

    fosforus ,

    Reduce wealth and income inequality somehow.

    That’s not the whole story. Singapore is one of the safest countries in the world, and it has one of the highest gini coefficients (i.e. largest income inequality) in the world.

    prole ,

    You can also get executed for having weed.

    fosforus ,

    I’m not sure what your point is.

    PunnyName ,

    Is a place truly safe if you can be executed for having weed?

    fosforus , (edited )

    If you believe the data, apparently. I’m guessing you don’t believe the data. I’m not for even scolding people for possessing or using any drugs, personally, but this doesn’t seem to be necessarily at odds with safety.

    Not_Alec_Baldwin ,

    IIRC Singapore has a very specific and controlling demographic control system? Like regions have to have demographic breakdowns that approximate the national numbers or something?

    There are a bunch of social engineering things you can do to reduce crime. But good luck trying to tell Americans where they can and can’t move. Probably easier to just tax the super rich.

    prole ,

    More people means more crime. On the aggregate.

    This person is ignoring the fact that per capita statistics are what’s relevant here. And those are very clear. People like this just pretend they don’t exist because it literally shows the opposite is true. That red, conservative, rural areas have far more violent crime and murder per capita.

    pete_the_cat ,

    Yeah, I grew up in South Jersey, about an hour SE and there’s at least one news story about a murder that happened somewhere in Philly each night. Sometimes multiple separate shootings. Most of Philly is a shit hole.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •