this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2026
258 points (99.6% liked)

World News

55553 readers
1272 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Bad_Ideas_In_Bulk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

A muscovy duck isn't a duck. Technically.

But if someone complains about all the misbehaving ducks in the pond and your defense for your duck's musbehaviour is "technically not a duck!" you're not really saying anything of worth.

[–] EatMyPixelDust@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I can only infer from your statement that "Muscovy ducks aren't technically ducks" which you've followed up by stating "anyone who says technically not a duck isn't saying anything worthwhile", means you're telling me what you're saying isn't anything of worth.

Well, thanks, we already established that.

[–] Bad_Ideas_In_Bulk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Why would I think this was worthwhile? You "Um Actually"-ed my post about the moral behavior of atheists who get religious about atheism.

This was only ever a long shot at best.

[–] EatMyPixelDust@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Ah, but that wasn't what you originally said:

Atheism is a religious stance, and is practiced like one.

Don't try to change your argument when it gets proven wrong.

[–] Bad_Ideas_In_Bulk@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

My man, it's a stance on a theological issue. You don't want to admit that, and I'm not going to force you. What does going "Yah-huh / Nuh-uh" back and forth forever do for anyone?

What does trying to pretend you said something different to what you actually said do except make you look like the liar you are?