this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2026
1084 points (99.2% liked)

Murdered by Words

2575 readers
5 users here now

Responses that completely destroy the original argument in a way that leaves little to no room for reply - a targeted, well-placed response to another person, organization, or group of people.

The following things are not grounds for murder:

Rules:

  1. Be civil and remember the human. No name calling or insults. Swearing in general is fine, but not to insult someone else.
  2. Discussion is encouraged but arguments are not. Don’t be aggressive and don’t argue for arguments sake.
  3. No bigotry of any kind.
  4. Censor the person info of anyone not in the public eye.
  5. If you break the rules you’ll get one warning before you’re banned.
  6. Enjoy the community in the light hearted way it’s intended.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Look at basically every none-abrahamic faith

Especially those religions without gods per se, but rather concepts and ideas

[–] Uruanna@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You'll always find in History a group that will push for the spread of a religion because it allows them to oppress others and take shit for themselves. And slaughter people who say no. Some religions may start as philosophical and social liberation for small groups, but it is still violence that spreads them the most in a larger society. Yes, even the ones about internal peace, as long as others create external riches and influence about it.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Looks up "Taoist Religious Wars" - 0 results

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Everything is convenient when you close your eyes for whatever doesn't suite the agenda. Yellow Turban Rebellion didn't happen, or did it not qualify as a war?

[–] Uruanna@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Right! "The way of the great peace." Peace for us, step 1: violently overthrow the corrupt ruling class. Not that I'm disagreeing, that's an example of someone preaching peace and finding that it doesn't exist without standing for the people, and protecting them from oppression means killing those that are doing the oppressing (Ed Sheeran in shame), we're just putting that in a book and calling it a religion.

To be fair, in China through these ~500 years, every current of thought or philosophy was called a religion, and the line between religion, politics, and philosophy, was pretty much nonexistent. If someone had an idea and put it in a book so others can think about it, that was a religion. It's a bit weird for us today to read "legalism is considered a religion? and legalism is... Absolute administrative power, everyone is equal under the rule of law? Sounds familiar... Oh, there you go, the ruler writes whatever he wants and then kills whoever he wants by designating them as enemies. Like those dummy thinkers and book-writers." "all right, fine, let's look at Mohism: egalitarian society and universal love, cool! First paragraph on Wikipedia: paramilitaries-- oh."

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago

The rebellion against the oppressive regime? That one?

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

I'll admit I've dismissed them all as mumbo-jumbo but please correct me if I'm wrong - not eating cows (hinduism?) despite being a suitable source for protein seems pretty limiting. Living in celibacy with an odd haircut (Buddhism) is downright weird to me. Sihks seem alright, although those turbans (the name escapes me) seem oppressively heavy. Do you have any other religion in mind that isn't a tool for oppression?

Edit: Sikhs are warriors with swords as part of their uniform. Doesn't get much more oppressive than war. Scientology extracts wealth from the members to keep the leaders happy. I don't know of any "concepts and ideas" religions. Please feel free to enlighten me.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

I wanna see your bad faith uncharitable takes on Humanism and FSM, these are hilarious to see how you'll twist anything even slightly religious to look evil

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

FSM is a joke, made for a dude to be able to wear a colander on their passport.

Humanism as a religion - where do we draw the line on "is a religion"? Is coffee a religion? Is Marxism a religion? Is the color purple a religion?

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Damn that's the good stuff, I'll have to share this thread with my friend, this is hilarious

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

I find it quite humorous how you try to defend religion by bringing up the truly defining beliefs with up to a staggering 500 practitioners worldwide to support your point. Arguing that "there is nothing to believe in" is a religion sure is something else.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 6 days ago

Oh, and I forgotten about Humanism and FSM

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Oh of course, the best religion, Leveyan Satanism

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Objectifying women was considered oppressive last I heard.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Leveyan Satanism does that?

It's atheism, but they formed a "religion" just so that they were able to use it as a form of activism against any religious freedom laws by going "oh, so we're allowed in right?" to show the contradictory nature if they say no

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Men and older women should dress in black robes during rituals, young women should dress sexy to please and arouse the men. Naked woman to be used as an altar when an altar is needed.

Edit: granted, this is according to the Wikipedia page on LaVeyan Satanism - maybe the spelling difference is of significance?

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It's literally not an actual religion???

It's a satire of religion.

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't know, seems some take it seriously.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Satanism is a belief that there is no god

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

But it's not atheism nor nontheism - seems to be a religion. :)

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago

It's literally just a religion for the express purpose of pissing off theists

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Hindu eat beef? It's not against the religion to eat it.

That's a misconception, they just make sure they die with dignity and lived as happy a life as possible.

Which some sects argue it's impossible if they're not living a wild life in nature, and argue one shouldn't eat them ever (as there's basically no such thing as wild cow anymore.) But there's no ban, it's just seen as immoral.

Sikh having a warrior thing is funnily enough fuck all to do with war. It's a holdover from ancient times that's just stuck around as part of it.

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And those that don't eat beef out of religious conviction that it's not moral are not hindu, or is their religion not true?

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They're just a different subsection of the same faith

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 21 hours ago

So they are hindu and doesn't eat beef, just as I said? Wew.

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And nazism didn't start any wars these last 10 years so it's all good? Geez, I've selldom seen cherry-picking this obvious.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

It literally did? Israel Palestine

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 21 hours ago

That's zionism. Don't be silly.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Spiritualism, Wicca, Taoism to a degree, Confucianism

[–] dracc@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Taoism basically wants you to disappear so that others can decide what happens next. Very oppressive.

Confucianism oppresses women heavily, they're supposed to follow their father, husband or sons depending on what stage of life they're in. Suicide to protect chastity after a husband has died has also been a theme there, as losing your chastity has been seen worse than starvation.

Spiritualism isn't considered a religion where I'm from, can't say I'm familiar.

Wicca seems to be whatever you want it to be, where many think there are two gods, some think there are many, some one and some none. Some seemingly think karma is a thing (called something else) which is very limiting (although mostly sound), while some say there's no such thing. I guess those get a pass, as they don't really exist as a homogenous group?

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

An incredibly uncharitable reading of all of them.

Taoism especially bad. It wants you and the world to become no longer at odds, with two main paths argued for it, you shape the world, or you let the world shape you.

Wicca it's fully a faith about "customisation is the point" yeah, so it can be basically anything (though sadly a lot just use it as Christianity+)

Spiritualism is inspired by Native American faiths, and the root of it is "every thing, living or dead, have some sort of essence be it a spirit or a soul or just an amount of energy", and then from that extends the idea that because of it you should treat nature and by extension each other with respect. Rocks have a spirit, trees have a spirit, dogs have a spirit, etc.