Interesting Global News
What is global news?
Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media posts
Avoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
- [email protected] - International and local legal news.
- [email protected] - Technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
- [email protected] - Interesting articles, projects, and research that doesn't fit the definition of news.
- [email protected] - News and information from Europe.
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
view the rest of the comments
The religious lawsuit is kind of bullshit, in my opinion - but they’re right to take action over what is essentially overt, purposeless cruelty to deprive people the ability to look outside simply in order to punish them for acts they’re already being punished for.
Maybe if you let prisoners appreciate nature and life outside and science a bit more they would have a bit more motive to stay on the safe side of the law in the future. Random punitive shit like this only causes resentment and recidivism, which is I’m sure what the legal system wants anyway.
I more think it's the optimal legal strategy to frame it this way, even though probably most of the plaintiffs aren't necessarily thinking about it from a religious angle.
It’s not bullshit if the court is religious. Especially if they frame it as wanting to see the eclipse to better appreciate the Jesus.
Moon Jesus is the best jesus...
Moon Jesus is the best the Jesus…
Would it be bullshit if this were about Christian inmates being denied the ability to receive communion? Or if they were forcing Muslim or Jewish inmates to break halal and kosher respectively by making them eat certain things?
Remind me what the First Amendment is about again?
Also, quick google search found this SCOTUS case from 2005 that seems pretty cut and dry regarding this type of thing: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna8047388
Indulge me for a moment, and read the first paragraph of this article:
Can you imagine reading that amidst the Satanic Panic 2.0 we've been experiencing these past few years? LOL. They would completely ignore the implications that the case would have on their beliefs, knowing full well that the rules would continue to be applied selectively. That way they're "hurting the right people."
Any conservatives who were of voting age back then: would love to see you actually reckon with this. I mean, you won't, but it would be nice.
… yeah man I don’t think it’s an unfair assessment to say that at least the 10 guys all of different religions getting together and saying they all have a vaguely stated religious need to see the solar eclipse aren’t at least kind of bullshitting.
They’re still right to do it. But no dude, these are not a group of guys who legitimately feel watching the solar eclipse is vital to their religion lol. They’re a group of guys trying to scrap a bit of freedom and dignity in an oppressive environment.
The human experience is vast, and it's presumptuous, naive, and arrogant to pretend to know the full extent of what other people believe.
I’ve got a bridge to sell you
Hopefully it's not in Baltimore
Brooklyn, actually.
Oh... Well I'll pass. My background in engineering and construction tells me that it would be an awful investment due to liability and cost of maintenance/upkeep, especially given our crumbling infrastructure.
Thanks for the heads up though. Where do you even find a sale like that, Zillow?
You’re not the smartest cookie are you
Oh wow. Whoa! You've encountered sentient cookies?! And not only that, but they have intellect that surpasses some humans?! I
That sounds pretty extraordinary; why don't you have a Nobel prize?
It’s nice that me saying you might be a bit gullible has caused you to entirely intellectually regress
A bit of a soft baked cookie, if you will.
Probably the first and only correct thing you've said about me. At least I think... I pretty much immediately lost interest in, and forgot what this little sub-thread is even about. Besides fucking with you.
I truly hope that you understood that my last few comments were facetious.
Yes, I can only hope you’ve been deeply high this whole time. The alternative is concerning.
I think it's kind of adorable that you took everything I said seriously.
… you really aren’t the smartest cookie. Almost impressively so
At this point I just need to assume that you're on the spectrum.
In which case, I apologize if it was inappropriate to mock you for not realizing that my comments were silly jokes (essentially dad-level).
Yes well, maybe look in the mirror if we’ve come this far and you didn’t realize I was calling your ‘dad jokes’ embarassing- and that I did not actually believe you for a moment thought I had found a talking cookie.
Really, it’s genuinely impressive. It’s like you started playing peak-a-boo with a grown adult, who then called you an idiot for doing so, and then you interpreted that as if you were actually disappearing and got scared.
Keep going, I love to hear from you.
It's fine if you don't get it... as we all know jokes become funnier the more you explain them...
But maybe I was intending to show my complete ambivalence toward you and the original topic of this comment thread by continuing with obviously awful, anti-jokes that were related to your comment, but not to the actual content of the comment? To refuse to engage with anything you said, and instead choosing to make the dumbest, most annoying jokes ever in the hopes that you'd just go the fuck away. You'd think most people would get the hint and just ignore it.
And then when it clearly triggered you very quickly, and the ad hominems started flying... I knew that I had to continue.
You made yourself a mark when you thought my "jokes" were being told in earnest, but you showed everyone who you really were when you almost immediately resorted to personal attacks.
What was that about being on the spectrum
Well, 1 - you think I wanted to have to explain a, frankly, stupid throwaway bit to some rando on the internet because he just can't grasp the concept of someone on the internet acting differently in a comment for laughs?
And,
2 - Unlike your comment, my comment about being on the spectrum was 100% neutral, or if anything, pretty friendly I thought. Kind of a bit low to use that in a derogatory way.
All because I called you a little gullible. This is incredible.
Is that what it was? You think I gave a shit about that? You definitely have it twisted. I made a corny joke and it triggered you. I probably should have just let it go there, but sometimes I just can't help myself...
And the funny thing is, looking back at your ad hominems.... They're just soooo bad lol. That's why I kept going. Just go back and look at the shit you were saying, it's so dumb lol.
My jokes were completely neutral, and at first I thought they weren't that bad. Like the Baltimore thing? You're the one who made it personal.
… yeah dude. I think that’s what it was lmao.
Go back and read the thread... I was making neutral jokes like the one about the bridge you're selling being in Baltimore (which, c'mon, pretty good).
You, my friend, are the one who made it personal and turned it negative. I just followed your lead.
This is actually because I said you wernt “the smartest cookie”?
Honestly, this shit is so strange. Like are you even for real? You got mad at me for making bad jokes and it's getting to the point of creepiness.
Did I seem upset at those comments? Or did I just make silly jokes about them? I mean seriously dude, take a step back. Maybe log off the internet for a day or two and interact with some real people because... yikes.
I'm done indulging this bizarre obsession you've got. This will be my last reply here. I hope you work out whatever you need to work out.
… this is all because I said you wernt the smartest cookie…?
No. I would say that "this is all because" I made an innocuous (and purposely bad) joke about sentient cookies in response to that.
That really seemed to set you off for some reason. So then it was off to the races, one bad (but completely neutral) joke after another and each time you got seemingly more and more upset... Which I found hilarious in a meta sort of way.
Anyway, it doesn't matter, it's all here in the open to see. Not that literally anyone else on the planet should waste the brain cells reading it.
And here I am doing what I said I wouldn't. It would be nice if Lemmy had that option like reddit where you can disable inbox replies so I don't have to see your befuddled questions...
… it’s because I didn’t laugh at your joke?
Yeah highly doubt that...
Keep in mind, that article is about events that occurred in 2005. To say a lot has changed since then would be a colossal understatement. Especially when we're talking about the attitudes of the average Republican then vs. now.