191–200 of 201 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A) She was still a child. B) She was imprisoned, repeatedly, and tortured, as the article discusses. C) Is it your opinion that everyone was "lucky" to live in 1968 Spain under Franco. Or just her?
> A) She was still a child. Please don't call a 17-year old person a child. It's not as if on the night between 17 years, 11 months and 30 days, and 18 years humans undergo some sort of metamorphosis.
Similar stories were used to shut down mental hospitals in the U.S. and look what happened after that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I won't confuse empathy with tribalism, as you do. I’m just following your logic. You pointed to empathy as something even animals have. Empathy is a real thing in nature, you can see those feelings in brain scans. But so is tribalism or pack behavior. Why do you privilege one type of feeling or instinct over another? What’s the basis for that distinction? > I'll take humanism [1], the notion that every person is e…
> Why do you privilege one type of feeling or instinct over another? What’s the basis for that distinction? The basis is the context, is globalization. In prehistoric times a tribe where the people you'd physically meet. In a globalized world the tribe is much bigger, because of communication, commerce and transportation technologies broke the limitations of physical connections. > Is it a falsifiable scientific fact…
Is the difference in setting forceful? If the significant change is in the social environment, principles such as empathy would not be impacted. Or would you say the principles that apply to tribal life are different from those that apply to global life?
> You see, Karl Popper (the "falsiable" guy) wasn't 100% correct. We actually have a lot of stuff in science that is just a convention and isn't "falsiable". E.g. how cold you possible demonstrate to be false the basic geometric elements: a point, a line, a plane. They don't really exist physically, they're just abstractions.
Karl Popper is completely correct. He defines "science" as a narrow art, not the study of truth as a whole. Science is one discipline among many in pursuit of the truth.
> Life just feels better when you treat others the way you want to be treated by them, when you and them share the same rights.
My model is that truth is a matter of consistency, and that truth is related to good. Therefore, what one should do to be good is being consistent to one's beliefs. Beliefs are influenced by perception/experience, manifest in thoughts and actions, can be recorded in statements (accountability!), and so on. In practice, (a variation of) the Golden Rule is derived from this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Christians are more concerned about *causing* extreme child abuse > religion itself is the problem Religious flamewar isn't allowed here, so please don't post like this. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html --- Edit: It also looks like your account has been using HN primarily for ideological/political/religious battle. That's not allowed here (see https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=c…
So we're supposed to simultaneously discuss the article (General Franco's extremist Catholic task forces), but not identify the religious tropes behind this? I read the article, and discussing the article. And as hackers, im curious as how to fix the problems.
And even if it did, they didn't say it here. This is not the place for religious ideology. I passionately hate my neighbours who listen to music really loudly in their garden all the time, but I don't call for their eradication on public fora unless there's a really, really specific relevance (like here, for example) and I also don't campaign against them on GitHub, my local supermarket, local government meetings, or other places where people are trying to do other things.
There are places for me to rant about my neighbours. There are entire discussions about noisy neighbours, my vicinity, local customs and manners etc. If I wanted to rant about them, those would be the place to do it. But I don't, because I wouldn't actually gain anything from it. I'm not going to single handedly change the law on nuisance, and all a hate campaign could achieve would be, well, more hate. I want solutions, or quiet, and I won't achieve either of those by telling random strangers how terrible my neighbours are.
I'm sure you can think of the easiest solution to the hypothetical neighbour problem. It's not ideological and doesn't involve changing the hearts and minds of hundreds of people, none of whom are currently concerned about my neighbours.
It might look like I'm trivialising your point, but I promise, I'm not. Noisy neighbours, or an itchy foot, or even a literal broken fingernail, are a more immediate problem than 'we must rid the world of Christians', unless they are currently holding you hostage.
And the reason I'm bothering to write such a long-ass reply at all is because there is currently far too much intolerance and ethno-religious hatred being propogated and spread around the world. We know where this leads. It always leads the same way, there is no possibility of a happy ending. We have tried 'that religion is the problem, let's persecute them' repeatedly and we end up in the sort of fascist dystopia we were reminded of literal moments ago in the article.
It's not ok to do it to Jews or Muslims, which means it's not ok to do it to Christians. And it's not ok to let people spread those messages in bad faith, which means I've got to call out those spreading the same message in presumed good faith.
My neighbours are just annoying me, I can deal with that. Christians are just kinda weird but whatever, we've all got our foibles. Racists, dogmatics and puritans can believe whatever they want, I just won't listen to it.
And I invite you to step away from the brewing culture war too. It's more fun discussing tech and stuff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The issue in the US isn't lack of institutionalization, per se, it's the lack of mandatory mental health treatment. That is, it's very difficult and rare to require the mentally ill in the US to take medicine, even after repeatedly demonstrating an inability to control their conditions or even to take basic care of themselves. For one thing, there was an overcorrection in civil rights law that makes it difficult to e…
> While most countries have deinstitutionalized, they still make it much easier to force treatment on an out-patient basis. Where are you getting that? Which countries? Certainly in Ireland and the UK, I'm pretty certain that it is all but impossible to force outpatient treatment, and I think this is generally more or less the case in Western Europe as a whole. Involuntary admission to psychiatric hospitals is still,…
https://www.nhs.uk/mental-health/social-care-and-your-rights...
Easy to find stories people being threatened with these laws into accepting treatment:
https://www.mentalhealthforum.net/forum/threads/threatened-w...
If you're wondering why human rights treaty organizations are so involved with these laws, and with the similar laws concerning children, look up how the holocaust started. But ... you don't really want to know the connection there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They seem to be one of those individuals who cannot possibly comprehend the idea that many people simply find murder and rape to be horrible, awful acts that shouldn't be inflicted on others and hold that belief without needing to have the fear of god or an ancient collection of texts constantly reminding them to not rape and murder people. The very idea of a person believing murder and rape to be horrible without a…
> They seem to be one of those individuals who cannot possibly comprehend the idea that many people simply find murder and rape to be horrible, awful acts that shouldn't be inflicted on others I’m not denying that some people feel that way. Feelings are real, they’re chemical signals in your brain in response to stimuli. But we agree it’s not more than a feeling, right? And nothing makes the chemical signals in your…
Why does believing something is right or wrong require religion or is in any way religious?
Why does someone having signals in their brain making them a believer of religion make their beliefs more justified than someone who does not?
Have you ever asked someone why they believe in god or do you just immediately stop questioning the "legitimacy" of their beliefs the moment you realize they believe in religion so they must be right?
People have explained to you why they believe x is wrong, you refuse to accept their answer and insist they "sound religious"
Why, in your opinion, must nonreligious people constantly justify their belief in x being wrong if you don't demand the same of religious people? Double standards.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> When are we going to actually look at these issues dispassionately and realize that religion itself is the problem? Because it's not. I've been interrogating this sort of question for most of my life. I am a queer agnostic who grew up in a religious part of the South and saw shades of this kind of abuse firsthand, mostly around queerness. At first, I did blame religion, but with the benefit of hindsight, I realized…
Agreed. I've long thought that it's much more the case that a person's religion is a function of their values, not the other way around. Or, put another way, if a person's religion conflicts with their values (including prejudices), which one is more likely to give first?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A) She was still a child. B) She was imprisoned, repeatedly, and tortured, as the article discusses. C) Is it your opinion that everyone was "lucky" to live in 1968 Spain under Franco. Or just her?
> A) She was still a child. Please don't call a 17-year old person a child. It's not as if on the night between 17 years, 11 months and 30 days, and 18 years humans undergo some sort of metamorphosis.
A familiar story even today in the U.S: https://time.com/6997172/teen-torture-max-abuse-documentary/ “They are often a last resort for parents struggling with children with behavioral problems, suicidal thoughts, and substance abuse issues. Depending on the state, these rehab centers—a multi-billion-dollar industry—have few regulations, and there are no overarching federal standards governing them. Many are faith-bas…
If anybody wants to read a comic with the perspective of someone that went through one of these places and spent the years after fighting against them, I stumbled upon this one a few years ago: https://elan.school/ I am not in any way affiliated with the author, it's just one of the few books with real content that I've read in a long time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If anybody wants to read a comic with the perspective of someone that went through one of these places and spent the years after fighting against them, I stumbled upon this one a few years ago: https://elan.school/ I am not in any way affiliated with the author, it's just one of the few books with real content that I've read in a long time.
I can't not respond to this. That was horrifying. I am happy -at least- that that school is closed.