Hahahahahahahahahah
And another one
And another one
And another one bites the dust
this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2024
202 points (97.6% liked)
News
29397 readers
3178 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Meh, they're tax exempt and still own the land, so investment wise it was likely not a bad move.
They shouldn't allow hate museums about hate books that teach people it's OK to hate, because of religion.
What a waste of time, effort, and money. That's what religion is. Just a waste.
The problem isn't that someone can start a museum about something stupid. It's a private endeavor and they can do what they want. The problem is that, as a religious organization, we're essentially helping fund them through tax exemption.
But what about the Holocaust Museum? And that Hitler book? Should we ban them too?
Edit: 14 year old Lemmings with a single brain cell- "No, we should only ban the evil things! The solution is so obvious, and has not been discussed before in history."
What about ambulances and Mount Rushmore?!
I think we should ban solid ground.
Coulda got a pretty fly G6 and some cocaine for that money, what were they thinking?
That was just seed money. They were shooting for several G6's - one for each founder - and a metric shitton of cocaine.
You'll never be a real grifter unless you set your sights higher. Play the long game; stop thinking rookie numbers.
I wonder how many needy people could be fed for all that money...
Was anyone else hoping it was the Hobby Lobby funded one that bought fake antiquities?
That's exactly what I was hoping for. I'm sort of disappointed.
I was hoping it was that batshit insane creation museum in Kentucky run by equally batshit Ken "there were velociraptors and t-rexes on the ark" Hamm
Dude. If you take an edible and go there it's probably a trip
Is that dude still alive?! Man, that name brings back memories, he's a... character
While I wouldn't have wanted to support the place,
a collection of historic Bibles, including William Penn’s own
would have actually been interesting to see. For all the harm done in the name of Christianity, there is also a lot of amazing artwork and historic significance tied up with it. It's just better done in an actual museum and not a religious nutjob propaganda space.
We already have a Holocaust museum, which means we already have a museum dedicated to Christianity, just stick that old Bible in there.
This jerk kisses the ass of hate religious groups because they forced artists to paint pictures only of their bullshit religion for a thousand years. Screw this jerk, and screw that religion.
"But the crucifix has such pretty blood running down the side of the dead guy impaled onto it! So pretty!". What a nutjob.
I'm a deist but even I get weirded out by how selective ppl are with the evils of religion on lemmy. Before there were universities institutions of learning were funded by churches of practically all the major religions. A museum based on famous religious academics, artists, musicians, and writers would be very interesting and would hold major historical significance.
Stop being a deist. You are already an atheist who just needs to rip the band-aid off already.
were funded by churches of practically all the major religions.
And? If I did something nice 800 years ago do I get off the hook for every bad thing I have ever done forever? Good doesn't wash away bad. A doctor isn't allowed to just over people in the hospital parking lot to make it balanced.
That's not really what they were talking about though. Museums are interesting. That's why they exist. This particular museum was not at all an accurate representation, so I agree it shouldn't exist. That doesn't mean we should ignore the historical value of some of the things they did have.
Nope. Museums don't exist to be interesting. Museums literally exist to promote historical FACTS. They are a testament to things that actually happened. Religious "museums" are the opposite of this. They selectively use facts to push a false agenda.
They are not the same.
Yes...which is why this particular museum doesn't need to exist. But the artifacts that they do have are interesting and should be shown in a real museum.
Does religion having a monopolization on learning (in Europe) make up for all of the murder, torture, oppression, etc.?
Maybe if we didn't have all the learning but none of the queer people or the "witches" or the Jews or the Muslims or anyone else that Christians ended up massacring never got tortured and murdered, the world would be a better place.
Things can be relearned. People can't relive their lives.
I wrestle with this one because let's not pretend life was peaceful before religion - religion gave the structure that grew into us understanding those things are wrong. It's now obsolete but for s time I think it was a net positive
A net positive for whom? The wealthy and powerful?
Because so far your argument seems to be that Christian tradition in Europe kept knowledge alive... knowledge that had mostly been destroyed due to the Christianization and then collapse of the Western Roman Empire.
You don't get why people would get worked up about the evils of religion...?
Literal didn't say that but ok
I suspect when I hear people defend religion who aren't religious themselves that most of them have had a life that religion couldn't/wouldn't hurt them.
Don't have the equipment to get pregnant, live in some secular western country where religion is weak, wasn't raped as a kid by a man of the cloth, parents were boring and thought religion was go to some place for an hour once a year.
A lot of people don't get is that the churches didn't want knowledge for knowledge's sake. It was about power. Copy their unholy book, spread it to the masses, teach it to them and hold them as a weapon against the rulers of the countries they were in.
They had the wealth and the manpower from all the gullible fools they conned.
Sure, specific intellectuals did pursue advancement in science and technology under the wing of religion, but it was often that or be silenced.
Same as with the witch trials. It wasn't the Church that did that and even advised against it, it was their rabid followers who misunderstood the texts.
Remind you of any current group in particular?
I feel pity for the Renaissance. All that hubbub about enlightenment and yet we're still stuck in the ages before it.
Sure, specific intellectuals did pursue advancement in science and technology under the wing of religion, but it was often that or be silenced.
Like Copernicus, Galileo, Descartes? Silenced/censured by the church, often with threats. Or Bruno, burned alive...
Like Copernicus, Galileo, Descartes? Silenced/censured by the church, often with threats. Or Bruno, burned alive...
We don’t talk about Bruno.
Right? I was telling my wife the other day that I want to see a gallery of all the Jesus pictures that get donated to a Goodwill when a grandma dies.
Oh no! Now where are people going to go to get their Disneyfied understanding of the most translated and published book in history?
But more to the point, what is the NEXT religious-themed grift coming round the mountain?
“Structural limitations”? What were they trying to do?
The lord works in mysterious ways...
These people just don't get it. Very few religious people actually care about the religion. They care about using it to feel better about themselves. They don't read the holy books. To make a place they would want to go to, it would have to have VIP access if you have a letter from your pastor, and be all about how great you are for believing and much better than nonbelievers you are. But I guess the optics on that aren't the same.
Actually reading the damn book for real produces either atheists or screwballs who either abandon church based worship altogether for personal worship or who end up founding a whole new denomination that will go on to be dominated by the people who use religion to feel better about themselves.
view more: next ›