World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
You'd think Allah wouldn't allow that to happen.
Either that or he doesn't exist.
Not sure which.
Surely they could just relocate the Kaaba to a more hospitable location. It's not a large structure, should be easy to dig up and move.
Might have to update a few direction markers for Salah, though. That could be a bit of work.
Can't Allah just make the weather cool and pleasant?
Not omnipotent enough?
Is there any religious prohibition against enclosing the whole thing? Just make everything indoors, problem solved
A better solution would be to fight climate change, it wasn't this hot before.
Naw, they already added cooled platforms and safe areas for the rich people.
And they are mostly rich from selling oil.
I remember them saying climate change is a hoax and we should use more of their oil.
I'll tell them
You can't relocate the Kaaba, it is just stone. And muslim do not worship the stone. It is just a marker to point the compass to.
These arguments go for Christianity as well obviously. But I think the theological answer will depend a bit on their interpretation of how omnipotent this God is or if even suffering is part of his ways. And don't forget that "outside" of our universe there could be one and it's just a way of destiny. It's not such a snarky remark.
Oh yes, I didn't mean it to only apply to one god. All gods are false.
In this case it’s the same god so you’re covered.
Allah does what he wants, and he is not bound by the opinions of humans.
Love the hand-waving here to justify that if your "Allah" exists (he doesn't, there's plenty of plot holes in the Quran), he's clearly not so loving.
Most Wise, Most Loving, Most High (probably on weed)
Hand waving to you sure, but to many believers that is the truth. You cannot say that this action is bad because you do not possess the ability, i mean think about the butterfly effect for an example why it is not possible. But Allah is infinite therefore he possesses this ability.
Secondly it is his choice, for how to exercise his love, whether in this world or the afterworld. Muslims believe that he is most loving so when we don't see it in this world the assumption is that we will get it in the hereafter.
This world is not a place for justice and neither is it fair, for we get it in the hereafter.
No? Just because some people believe it doesn't make it true. That's like saying because many people believe you can see the great wall of China from space, that it's true.
A millenium-old book which makes grand claims with no real evidence (and many things wrong!) to back them up so a pedo warlord could live a life of relative luxury with his several wives and conquer Arabia does not count as evidence by the way.
... The butterfly effect is well proven and very easy to see with simply a double pendulum.
Are you telling me what I can see right in front of me does not exist?
Or to never exercise it at all clearly. Maybe it's because he doesn't exist?
Very convenient way of explaining away the fact that good things and bad things happen randomly and/or as a direct result of human actions, not as a result of "Allah" choosing how to "exercise love".
How do you know that? There is zero real proof and any "proof" in Islam has been well and truly debunked. You can't just take an old book at it's word you know.
What is "this ability" you're talking about? And Allah doesn't exist, sorry to break it to you.
That said, I feel for the families of the people who died.
Firstly, i am happy and appreciate that you feel for the families of the victim.
Im not saying it is makes it true. But because of my belief (and the belief of the people who died and go for hajj), it is truth for me.
In the end I am responsible for my actions, and my time here on earth.
Butterfly effect and double pendulum are both examples of chaotic systems. We cannot predict their motion because the tiniest changes lead to huge changes later on.
What I am saying is that, we humans can not predict what will happen because of the butterfly effect but since Allah is not bound by the laws of the universe (ie. He is infinite). Therefore the judgment that an action he took is wrong or right is not something we can know.
That's just your opinion and i obviously disagree.
Again the difference between your statement and my statement is that my statements come from my belief in Allah and yours from your disbelief in Allah.
My belief in Allah and thereafter is based on my personal experiences. And unless you experience it as well I doubt that you will become a believer because of my experiences. I do pray that you experience it as well but that's about all that I can do.
The ability to know both future and past. He is all knowing. In islamic theology, Allah exist outside of the universe and not bound by its rules. Everything else has to follow some rules/laws, he is the creator and everything else is created.
Again, we disagree because of our belief systems.
The difference is I disbelieve because I've read portions of the Quran and found logical faults/inconsistencies which can't be made by an omnipotent being and you believe because... ??
I believe because of my personal experiences. You cannot know what could or couldn't be said by an omnipotent being unless you are omnipotent as well, especially when the Quran is not a book of proofs and mathematics.
I'm sorry but when the Quran makes it out that the sun and moon both orbit Earth when that is very clearly false I can't take it seriously.
Copying from a comment I made on Reddit:
The Quran is considered the unchanging word of Allah passed down to Muhammed by Gabriel. But then what does it mean when the Quran is demonstrably wrong? Well, it means Islam falls apart as the "word of Allah" is disproven.
For example, I'm going to note a verse from the Quran which reveals the Quran's model of the solar system:
"It is not for the sun to overtake the moon, nor doth the night outstrip the day. They float each in an orbit." (Quran 36:40)
I've picked this verse because typically when the Quran conflicts with well-known, proven, modern fact and science, the defense from Muslims is that it's metaphorical in some way (how convenient). But here not even the metaphorical interpretation makes sense, so its a good verse to solidly disprove.
First, the literal interpretation:
The idea of "overtaking" and the sun and moon's inability to do so requires the two objects (in this case, the sun and moon) to be moving along roughly the same path/direction (or in the case of celestial objects, the same orbit), else the sentence makes no sense. Following this, this means that according to the Quran, the sun and moon follow the same orbit, an orbit around Earth (i.e. an Earth-centred solar system). This isn't true, and is easily proven nowadays.
The metaphorical interpretation:
If we take "overtaking" to mean appearing to cross over in the sky and not literal overtaking, well, that's still wrong. Because exactly that happens during a solar eclipse. The moon appears to overtake the sun in the sky, crossing over it and eclipsing it in the process. So the metaphorical interpretation is also incorrect.
As we can see, no matter which way we decide to interpret this verse, literal or metaphorical, it's wrong. The "word of Allah" is wrong, and Islam crumbles.
They seem to be saying "Allah can do this and you can't, therefore Allah is real." Which is a very odd attempt at an argument.
Allah doesn't seem to give a shit about some of his most faithful humans since he lets them die of heat exhaustion while doing the specific thing he told them to do.
Not my fault if their god is an asshole.
Thats your take, not the take of the people who go there. In your eyes, letting them die is "not caring about them" but in islam, that just means that they will get much better rewards in the hereafter.
In islam, the world is a place of test, not a place where to get justice. You get justice in the hereafter.
So Allah picks and chooses amongst his most faithful who gets the best rewards?
That still makes him sound like an asshole.
No, no! Skydaddy good! Everyone else is ignorant!
I welcome this person to keep trying to convince me that their god is not an asshole for being omnipotent but letting 1000 of his faithful die for doing the specific thing he told them to do, but they're sure going to have an uphill battle.
I don't expect you to be convinced because obviously you are not a muslim. Im just showing the flaw in your logic/assumption
You really haven't showed me a flaw in my assumption that the Allah Muslims claim to exist is an asshole.
I don't think i can convince/prove to you that he isn't but my intention is show that you can't prove he is as well. In the end, you believing him to be an asshole is just that, a belief.
I'm not sure why you think that's some great revelation. My believing I'm not a brain in a vat dreaming that I'm having a conversation with you is just a belief. I can't assume anything about anything. It's all belief.
However, I think I have proved sufficiently that by any moral standard, he would be considered an asshole. You defended it by saying he rewards them more after death.
Like I said, if I stab you in the eye and then give you $1000, I'm still the asshole that stabbed you in the eye.
Similarly, if Allah lets 1000 of his most faithful die agonizingly in the heat while doing what he commands of them but then rewards them later, he's still the asshole who let them die agonizingly. The reward doesn't make up for it.
You called Allah an asshole and i just showed you that it is not the objective truth, it is just an opinion.
Your analogy of stabbing in the eye, does not fully apply mainly because you have applied your own limitations on it. If Allah is the creator then he can very easily make the whole process of "eye stabbing" pleasant and painless and then "the stabbed" gets the eternal reward. Which does not sound bad.
And yet the asshole god didn't make those 1000 people's deaths pleasant and painless, did he?
Sounds like an asshole to me.
And I love that is your defense.
Unironically, that is what i believe. So spot on!
Sure from your world view, because you are not omniscient. If Allah chooses to do something it is his decision, we cannot ask for an explanation, at least not in this world because that would make the "test" too easy. And that's just if we even could understand it, which we most likely can't.
"I can't explain why he's being an asshole" doesn't make him not an asshole.
What i am saying is, it is not possible to say someone is an asshole, unless you know the full consequences of someone's action.
To say that he is or isn't both requires us to know this full context.
I say he isn't an asshole because of my belief.
You say he is an asshole because of your belief.
Of course it's possible to say someone is an asshole without knowing the "full consequences." Other than you telling me things you can't possibly prove, I've been given no reason to believe that a supposedly omnipotent being allowing 1000 people doing specifically what he commanded them to do die makes him an asshole. If he exists.
If you have the power to stop 1000 people from dying, then you tell them to do something and let them die (and not peacefully either considering how unpleasant heat exhaustion is), you're an asshole. And telling me that they will be rewarded later (which, again, you cannot prove) doesn't make up for it. If I stab you in the eye and then give you $1000, I'm still the asshole who stabbed you in the eye.
If he doesn't want to be called an asshole, let him defend himself. Or is he not omnipotent enough to do that and you have to do it for him based on your own unprovable claims?
How can you judge an action without knowing all that led to it and all that will happen because of it?
Sure, if i (a human) were to do it, I would be an asshole but we can't judge an entity that is infinite with the same logic.
I don't think he cares what you think considering you do not have the same knowledge as him (we all are created and he is the creator). But even if he were to defend, based on your request, there are multiple assumptions you made. Such as he needs to show up and talk in front of you, when it could be that me agruing here is the manifestation of him defending himself.
I know you keep saying that I can't judge your god, but I can and I do. And if he doesn't care, maybe you shouldn't care either.
Your neckbeard, fedora, and trench coat are ready for you good sir.
It's really sad that people like you think all atheists are that way considering people like Daniel Radcliffe and Helen Mirren, famed neckebearded fedora and trench coat wearers, are very outspoken atheists.
It's interesting that in one post you're a religious Jew and in another one you're an atheist.
When did I ever say I was religious? Why are you lying?