Summary

In October 2020, Samuel Paty, a French teacher, was murdered following a false accusation by a 13-year-old student who claimed he’d shown anti-Muslim bias. The girl had made up the story to cover the fact she had been suspended from school for bad behaviour.

In reality, Paty’s lesson on free speech included optional viewing of Charlie Hebdo cartoons, but he hadn’t excluded anyone. The student’s story triggered a social media campaign led by her father, who, along with others, is now on trial for inciting hatred and connections to Paty’s attacker, an 18-year-old radicalized Chechen.

The school will be named the Samuel Paty School from next year.

  • Carvex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    21 hours ago

    It will be a glorious day in the name of Humans when we finally dump the dumb shit and act like we control our own actions and future

    • Flax@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      154
      ·
      20 hours ago

      And then people start raping animals because no more rules

      • Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 hours ago

        The fact that raping animals is illegal is not the reason I don’t rape animals. If the only thing stopping you from committing horrific crimes is a belief in the sky man then I suggest you remove yourself from the general population (become a hermit) so us normal people don’t have to worry about you losing faith in your invisible friend and going berserk at a petting zoo.

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        46
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Are rules the only thing keeping you from raping animals right now? Because that says more about you than the rest of the world.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          59
          ·
          14 hours ago

          If there is no God, then morality doesn’t exist.

          • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 minutes ago

            Wow, just tell everyone that you are a sociopath with no conscience or empathy?

            If you have no morality without pedophiles and a global child abuse rings threatening you with torture for eternity, then you are a horrible person all around with or without religion.

          • pH3ra@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Did you read the article? Because I think the person beheading the guy had strong “religious morals”…

              • nyctre@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                19 minutes ago

                So not only did you weep when you read the bible, but you also promptly forgot everything it said and proceeded to judge others despite Jesus’ words. What a good christian. Please go away.

          • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            7 hours ago

            The religious does not have a monopoly on morality, ethics or the social contract. If they did, the secular people wouldn’t be outraged whenever a religious leader got caught diddling a kid.

          • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            38
            ·
            13 hours ago

            And that’s why you are not a good person. Most people don’t need the threat of eternal hellfire to empathize and understand that it’s bad to hurt people.

            • Flax@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              33
              ·
              11 hours ago

              That’s because there is a God and we have a moral compass that’s divinely designed. But without God, it can still be overridden. Everyone has committed evil at some point in their lives.

              • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                7 hours ago

                Your beliefs are not supported by anything other than an old book. Shit, Newtons theories of gravity have more evidence for them than your boom of fairytale and we’ve still discredited them. Regardless of the prominence of belief in the Christian God and its pervasiveness in western culture, that does not mean that morality does not exist without God unless you come at it from a specifically platonist philosophy. And therein we see the problem: your subscription to one form of ancient philosophy and denial that other ways of thinking even exist.

      • modifier@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        16 hours ago
        1. Not all rules come from imaginary gods
        2. Most people don’t need rules to keep them from harming others
        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          43
          ·
          14 hours ago
          1. Then where do they come from, if there’s no objective morality.

          2. Not true, abortion is becoming rampant because political factions are trying to change a moral fact. Nazi Germany also attacked the Church and started allowing the dehumanisation of Jews through secularism.

          • nyctre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            15 minutes ago

            Morality comes from the simple shit such as “I don’t like that…maybe I shouldn’t do it to others!” And stuff like “we’re stronger together”. Which even the creatures with tiny brains have managed to figure out before you. Congratulations.

          • Morality is a product of civilisation and community. It’s the ability of groups to decide on a single set of rules by which they would lime to be treated by, as breach of those rules can cause physical or emotional harm. And then there’s simple evolution, where certain “moral rules” allowed civilisations to survive and thrive better than others.

            At no point is “god” required here.

            • Flax@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              20
              ·
              11 hours ago

              The Nazis were absolutely NOT endorsed by the Pope. Romanist bishops were often jailed for speaking out.

                • Flax@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  9
                  ·
                  10 hours ago

                  Nazi breaches of the agreement began almost as soon as it had been signed and intensified afterwards, leading to protest from the Church, including in the 1937 Mit brennender Sorge encyclical of Pope Pius XI. The Nazis planned to eliminate the Church’s influence by restricting its organizations to purely religious activities.

                  Read your own article.

                  • Cypher@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    11
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    10 hours ago

                    Oh no! Leopards ate their faces. What a shame. Who could have seen this coming from fascists.

            • 2xar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              12 hours ago

              His point about Nazi’s attacking the Church is also blatantly false BTW. Nazi’s had a bit of a conflict with the Catholic church at the beginning, but they quickly reconciled and pretty much enabled them. Nazi’s also created their own version of Christianity, the biggest difference to other branches being that they claimed Jesus wasn’t actually jew, but of Aryan descent, and Hitler was the new Messiah:

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_Christianity

      • gwilikers@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Humans already rape animals on an industrial scale. That’s what artificial insemination is. Religion didn’t stop that.

      • ikidd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        15 hours ago

        I’d hoped this was missed sarcasm then I checked the profile. Its verifiable stupidity.

      • MelastSB@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        68
        ·
        20 hours ago

        … If there were no rules you’d rape animals? Maybe you should go to church, but don’t pretend we’re all like you

        • jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          43
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          No they certainly shouldn’t go to church. The next thing they’ll be doing is beheading people for wearing the wrong color socks. They need a therapist not a preacher.

            • nomous@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 hours ago

              Now now, we don’t know they’ve committed any crimes, just that they would if they weren’t superstitious.

              Besides, even (especially) inmates can benefit from a little therapy.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          35
          ·
          14 hours ago

          No, I’m not sexually attracted to animals. But if there’s no objective morality, then what’s wrong with raping animals?

            • Flax@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              25
              ·
              11 hours ago

              What’s wrong with it if morality is subjective and I’m my own god?

              • Maalus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                17
                ·
                11 hours ago

                Who told you you were the one deciding what’s moral and what isn’t? Just because objective morality doesn’t exist, doesn’t mean morality at all doesn’t exist. Your argument is flawed from the start. But hey, you do you, if existence of god is the only thing stopping you from being a total psycho then keep on trucking buddy.

                  • Maalus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    10
                    ·
                    9 hours ago

                    Because “morality” comes from what you have been taught as a child, and what is acceptable in a specific society / country. Hence why Americans do shit that is considered immoral in Europe and vice versea. That’s why there are people who actually do the things you said you wanted to do in the posts above. That’s why bloodthirsty dictators exist. That’s why people who grew up in different environments have different values. What’s immoral to the Amish will be moral to a Muslim. But you, a single random person don’t get to decide “from now on we do XYZ”. XYZ needs to be accepted in society to then be taught to people further and instilled over generations.

      • Tyfud@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Morality is not derived from religion. Society has moved well past that.

        If you don’t understand then you lack education, but that’s the only reason. You are not in the right here.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          32
          ·
          edit-2
          14 hours ago

          Clearly not since society’s idea of morality keeps changing. So it shows if there’s no God, there’s no morality.

          • 2xar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            12 hours ago

            Religious morality keeps changing as well. A few hundred years ago according to Christianity it was morally right to use black people as slaves, because they had no souls. Luckily, society has progressed and gradually it became immoral to enslave people all over the world. In the end, Christianity had no choice but to accept this - although it took some wars to convince them everywhere about it.

      • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        Or people commit genocide because of a command from an entity we just assume is the source of all morality and therefore their actions and commands cannot be immoral by definition.

        • Ogmios@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          20 hours ago

          How about committing genocide because genetic science proves that your race has superior genes? The problem is with people’s behaviours themselves, regardless of what excuses someone uses to justify them.

          • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            20 hours ago

            We can have a discussion about the moral frameworks where that would be wrong but an absolute moral giver allows for no such discussion.

            • Ogmios@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              20 hours ago

              Discussion is absolutely possible as to interpretations, specifically amongst those who actually hold the reigns of power.

              • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                19 hours ago

                Interpretation can be possible, but often the driver doesn’t seem to be a genuine seeking of a moral truth but working backwards to avoid morally unpalatable conclusions or outright cherry picking and ignoring certain parts of a text. I see that as a tacit admission that morals don’t actually come from the text itself but maybe there’s something I’m missing as I’m far from an expert.

                • Ogmios@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  19 hours ago

                  No matter how divinely inspired any text may be, it will ultimately suffer from the imperfections of the limited human ability to convey ideas amongst each other, and over thousands of years it becomes corrupt. This is obviously exacerbated by those who would deliberately seek to derive power from it, in ignorance of any truth which may have been professed at the origin.

                  • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    19 hours ago

                    I agree with you on this one for sure. That’s one of the reasons I think that a text is not a particularly good foundation for an absolute system of morals. I don’t know why we need to mess around with interpretations in that case.