11 ms·
Extremism doesn’t need scientific backing to exist but it does need scientific backing to make the center complacent. The shooting was a good example but a bet
by pj_mukh 4y ago
Extremism doesn’t need scientific backing to exist but it does need scientific backing to make the center complacent.
The shooting was a good example but a better example is an extremist takeover of the government buoyed by a complacent public swindled by flimsy science. It’s happened before, it’ll happen again.
- dissent 4y agoCould you not argue that religious teaching should be suppressed since it often stands in opposition to fact, therefore is responsible for misinformation leading to violence? (and let's face it, that's probably pretty hard to argue against)
- trasz 4y agoWhat’s wrong with suppressing religious “teaching”? Let me remind you that freedom of religion was mostly about freedom from religion.
- dissent 4y agoDon't mistake me for a religious person. I think it's the bane of mankind. My point is that despite this, trying to ban it is counter productive.
- trasz 4y agoBanning harmful behavior promoted by religion can be quite productive. Hate speech laws are one example. Barring religiously-affiliated institution from government money is another.