view the rest of the comments
World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
This user's entire post history is hating artists and actively praising fascism.
Specifically artists, even. Very odd.
There's anti-art hate spewed by the right, it surprised me too but its there. A lot of them usually start their rants with "art isn't political" or "art has no value except monetary" and go from there
That gorilla account got banned btw
poor baby, did you need attention?
Baby you had to cope so hard you made another account just to comment here 😂
You can keep talking but I won't see it. Enjoy!
There's no reason to provide "genuine criticism" to a rabid dog.
Lol. You managed to abandon your supposed disdain for ad hominem after (checks notes) one comment...
I don't have a disdain for ad homs if they actually come attached with something. Whether it's an argument, explanation, rebuttal, literally anything. But if the ad hom is used as a replacement for substance then is it meaningless and fallacious, but also shows a great deal of intellectual laziness.
You probably think this is a galaxy brain gotcha, when in reality it just shows you're incapable of comprehend the concept of context. I gave an opinion. You can either agree or disagree. If you disagree then either state that you disagree and leave or explain your disagreement. Leaving ad hom and pretending it's an explanation is literally the textbook example of why this fallacy is a fallacy. It doesn't make you any less wrong or me any less right. It just showcases your inability to actually rebuttal what was said. With that being said, if some moron is clearly engaging in bad faith,, then there's nothing for me to explain. There's literally no argument for me to counter, therfore, these morons just get a reflection of their engagement
my favorite part of their shitty take is their account was banned a few hours ago for what I assume is their shitty takes lol
How does this relate to an issue people face?
https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/italian-government-limits-parental-rights-of-gay-couples-1.6312851
That's pretty standard
Standard or not (which I checked in Canada it varies by province), it's still a step backwards and creates unnecessary stress for already existing family units. That's not even including the extra paperwork, time, and money spent by all parties involved just to fix a parental rights issue that didn't exist. So how is this an issue that effects the people other than negatively?
I agree that it shouldn't affect existing family units, but at the same time this isn't anything unusual. The non biological parent has to go through the normal adoption process to be considered a legal guardian. The same thing should apply to heterosexual couples where one, or both, of the parents aren't the biological parents of the children.
We'll have to agree to disagree on whether something is the right thing to do if it's considered the standard.
I understand where you're coming from and there could be a lot of scenarios where adoption is a good option but at the end of the day homosexual couples don't necessarily have the chance of both being biological parents like heterosexual couples do. What you're describing is equality, but I would argue that it's also discriminatory.