I feel like this is reason to continue the events not call them off. Change the tone to somber or angry but stopping things plays into their hand of inciting fear. We go to pride to show people we aren't afraid, we're willing to be visible, and that if they threaten us they have to deal with an entire community. I've never considered it to just be a fun party and I've always assumed something dangerous might happen. I'd be out there twice as hard today
this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2026
261 points (99.6% liked)
World News
57623 readers
1338 users here now
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.
-
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 OCTOBER 19 2025
-
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
Ask Historians !askhistorians@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
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
💭 To consider antireligion instead of atheism
“The harm of religion is historically evident whereas the presence or absence of gods is not. Ultimately, the continued existence of religion is predicated on the indoctrination of children and suppression of rational thought. Therefore I am against religion but not necessarily against the idea of gods. For all we know gods are computer scientists and we are in their video game.” ―https://www.arscyni.cc/file/antireligion.html
[…] Not only is religion vague, it is dishonest. Homosexuality for instance. While conversing with a Muslim former colleague A, I noticed that even though the religious say they supposedly want tolerance and acceptance for all, do they actually believe it?
Q: “Do you have a problem with homosexuality?”
A: “Look. They can do whatever they want, but it's abnormal you see?”
Q: “In the strict definition of the word abnormal I agree, i.e., heterosexuality is a lot more prevalent than homosexuality, making the latter rare—“abnormal”. But I don't consider it wrong. Do you? Do you consider it a sin even though it harms no one?”
Long silence…
A: “Yes, I consider it a sin.”
Q: “Okay then.”
Christopher Hitchens was right, religion does poison everything. Even though colleague A said people are free to do whatever they please, following it up with “homosexuality is a sin” arguably exposes his feigned tolerance. […]
I am against religion and the idea of gods, as well as every other superstition.
I wish everyone would quit making shit up and focus on reality.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Not gonna defend religion or anything, but this
Even though colleague A said people are free to do whatever they please, following it up with “homosexuality is a sin” arguably exposes his feigned tolerance. […]
is a non-sequitur argument. Or at least it has an unspoken premise, of what it means for something to be a sin.
People are usually free to commit sins, and other religious people tolerate their sinning. As long as they're the socially accepted kind of sins in that religious community, like drinking alcohol, hitting your children, coveting your neighbours wife, you name it. Hypocrisy is an integral element of any religious community I know.
But the hypocrisy here is not, that homesexuality is called a sin. It is, that it is usually regarded as a graver sin than all the others that are happily tolerated.
is a non-sequitur argument.
I think I have to disagree, but I understand where you're coming from, hence the "arguably". Believing something is a sin indeed doesn't equal taking someone's freedom to do so. However, his revulsion was uttered with such conviction and certain facial expressions that it signaled if he had free rein, he would not tolerate homosexuality at all, i.e., would prohibit it.
freedom of religion is a requirement for freedom from religion.
No, it is not. Freedom to pick a bullet caliber to shoot your neighbour is not a requirement to NOT shoot your neighbours
load more comments
(1 replies)
freedom of religion is a requirement for freedom from religion.
“freedom of ~~religion~~ brainwashing is a requirement for freedom from ~~religion~~ brainwashing.”
A spurious but innocuous sounding argument.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
A religious person whose religion explicitly forbids homosexuality commits violence against queer people. I too wonder at what the motivation could possibly be 🙄.
Yes, not all religious people are this way. But don't forget with things like this, it is almost always a relgious and/or far right person. The sentiment with rape of "not all men but always a man" applies here too.
There was that attack by an Arab atheist a while back, in Germany no less. Just saying for the sake of it.
I was curious about his motivation, so I did some reading to find out.
In a video he made some time before the attack, he was very upset about someone stealing a USB stick from his mailbox. He's former muslim, anti-islam, pro-Israel, and generally right wing, though he called himself a leftist. He admires Alex Jones and Elon Musk. He tried to get close to the AfD while atheist organizations distanced themselves from him due to his extreme views. He tried to explain his motive for the vehicle attack during the trial, but was rambling, incoherent, disconnected.
He was sentenced to life in prison, which seems reasonable to me.
If religion caused violence I'm not sure why it's not way more common. Evil shit heads are always looking for an excuse.
Domestic violence is pretty common amongst religious and far right people, no?
load more comments
(8 replies)
load more comments
(19 replies)
sigh
Fucking pathetic! What a horrid waste of a life who was presumably a better person than the van driver.
This is not good news as this will enbolden the AfD party. They will increase in popularity due the origin of the purpetrator. Especially it is an election year in certain German states.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›