this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2023
109 points (96.6% liked)

World News

32285 readers
1 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rationalistfaith@lemmy.ml -5 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Reveling on someone's death no matter how despicable isn't healthy in any way shape or form.

You can choose silence instead of spewing negativity.

[–] slugbones@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This ghoul did nothing but cause pain his whole life. We don't owe him anything. Your attitude actively cuts paths for bigots. It is much more shameful to say nothing or act like he wasn't evil.

[–] toastloop@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago

He spent his life making it as difficult as possible to be LGBT in this country. He repeatedly spat hatred and vile remarks towards me and my community. I have no remorse in reveling in his passing.

[–] kamenoko@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 years ago

This is the exact opposite of what to do when someone who has hurt so many dies.

[–] qprimed@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago

I am not so sure that its unhealthy. the man was a bigot hiding behind religion - something that countless bigots have done for thousands of years. a little shadenfreude can be quite healthy.

[–] Segnis@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Sir this is Pat Robertson we're talking about. Of course people who's lives have been impacted by his hate are going to be happy

[–] rationalistfaith@lemmy.ml -3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Being happy is one thing, but hating on a dead person is something else. Also It's one thing to say "I'm glad his negativity isn't around" versus cussing him out and saying cynical negative things. There's a balance here.

This is my opinion and my experience that hating on the dead isn't a good feeling for the one saying it and others reading it. These people claim to be morally better? Come on

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

It's disgusting that you would draw a direct equivalence between the hatred, suffering, and trauma caused by this man, and the expression of natural human emotions that harm no one. Any difference between, "I'm glad his negativity isn't around" and any other expression of joy exists only in your head.

[–] rationalistfaith@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

As a Muslim we're not allowed to hate on the dead https://hadeethenc.com/en/browse/hadith/5364

I thought that was shared with other backgrounds. Clearly not.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Shove your put-on airs of moral superiority where they belong. Adhering to any individual aspect of hadith might make you a better muslim but it doesn't automatically make you a better human being. You're using your religion to alienate yourself from people, you're weaponizing it. If you can't come up with an argument that isn't divine fiat, shove it. Just shove it.

These people claim to be morally better? Come on

You are saying that the people who are relieved they are not going to be abused and subjected to degradation and dehumanization by this man any longer are morally equivalent to this foul, evil man, simply because they dare utter their relief. And you're not just gossipping among your muslim friends, you're actually saying it to their face, like you have some kind of fucking personal moral authority on the subject that a stranger on the Internet is going to possibly respect.

Fuck you. I don't need to be told by a divine being that you're not being a good person. Your posturing and true motivations are obvious. There are moral cowards who hide behind every religion. I think you have more in common with Robertson than we do. "One should not speak useless words."

[–] Segnis@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

You should try pissing on margaret thatcher's grave some time.

There are some people who have far too much hate in their heart and the world is strictly worse off for their existence.

Those people are few and far between, but they do exist.

[–] stanleytweedle@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

You can also choose silence instead of spewing self-righteousness.

[–] realcaseyrollins@social.freetalklive.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] stanleytweedle@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I chose not to spew self-righteousness.

[–] realcaseyrollins@social.freetalklive.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@stanleytweedle How is judging somebody else for not celebrating death anything other than self righteousness?

[–] stanleytweedle@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I don't care if you celebrate or not. Reprimanding others for not sharing vacuous sentiments about death is the self-righteous part.

...and then you say: 'You're self-righteous for saying I'm self-righteous!'

[–] realcaseyrollins@social.freetalklive.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@stanleytweedle

> I don't care if you celebrate or not.

If you care so little about whether or not people celebrate death, why do you care so much when someone says to not celebrate death?

[–] stanleytweedle@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Because it's self-righteous, we've been over this.

[–] realcaseyrollins@social.freetalklive.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] stanleytweedle@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Maybe google it if it's an unfamiliar term for you. Also check out 'moral superiority'.

[–] realcaseyrollins@social.freetalklive.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@stanleytweedle If you don't know how it's self-righteous, don't say it's self-righteous.

[–] stanleytweedle@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I won't google the definition of words for you. But it's very self-righteous and morally superior if you ever get around to looking those up.

[–] realcaseyrollins@social.freetalklive.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@stanleytweedle Your inability to defend your position speaks for itself 🤷🏾‍♂️

[–] stanleytweedle@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The fact that you think it requires any 'defense' is kind of funny.

[–] realcaseyrollins@social.freetalklive.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@stanleytweedle Fair point. Why would anyone want to back up claims they make? Just saying things and refusing to demonstrate how or why you're right is normal. Proof that you're right, even.

[–] stanleytweedle@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't need to demonstrate it, you already did.

[–] realcaseyrollins@social.freetalklive.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@stanleytweedle That's true, I guess "go google a word" counts as demonstration 😂

[–] stanleytweedle@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The demonstration of self-righteousness was preaching to strangers about how they should feel about a dead person. If you genuinely don't understand how that is self-righteous, well... that makes this even more fun somehow.

[–] realcaseyrollins@social.freetalklive.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

@stanleytweedle Is it self-righteous to also preach to strangers that killing people is wrong?

[–] stanleytweedle@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

lol- how is that related to this conversation?

@stanleytweedle It's a cognitive dissonance test. They're quite fun to do.

You're saying that telling people what to do in one case is self-righteous, and I'm wondering you think that applies in all cases.

[–] rationalistfaith@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Hating on the dead isn't the same as calling out people that do.

[–] stanleytweedle@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

Right, their feelings about a dead hatemonger are none of your business so 'calling them out' is painfully self-righteous.