Asklemmy

56046 readers

250 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 7 years ago

MODERATORS

Why don't movie ratings just have letters indicating objectionable material? (feddit.org)

submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by ki4jgt@feddit.org to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

63 comments fedilink hide all child comments

LVNSD would be much more informative than "Rated R," or, "PG-13."

L - Language
V - Violence
N - Nudity
S - Sex
D - Drug use
B - Blasphemy

Let's include recommended age at the end, so theaters can know whom to exclude (legal reasons):

Family Guy LVNDB-18

Dexter's Lab V-8

Looney Toons VD-8

Telly Tubbies 0

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MaxLemminist@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

But if something on TV is blasphemous, it would upset A LOT of people. That isn’t an opinion, it is simply a fact, like it or not.

Violence, drug use, nudity exist, unlike your magic man in the sky.
Of course some will argue this, but it's a belief at best.
And no you have no right to ask me to cater to your beliefs.
All these religions have their quirks and things not to do.
Can't drink alcohol, can't do shit on Saturday, wear this or that only for this occasion, can't open a jar of pickles on your toilet, etc...
If someone from their own cult doesn't do this, or say something about them, they can complain to them.
For the rest of the world it doesn't exist and don't need to be bothered with it.

Religions and cults imposing their ways on non-believers are a known part of history.
They have literally killed for it.
It is a matter of principle to not give in to any infringements of personal freedom.
No matter how little effort it would take.
I don't care if that upsets you.

If the majority of the world is going to be religious, it will have to be catered to, or else a lot of people will make a fuss.

the majority of the world is unfortunately.
But "you have to bend because there's more of us" is not an argument.
It is obnoxious at best if not threatening.
It's a small step from "don't say something bad about our invention you have nothing to do with" towards "follow these rules of our invention you have nothing to do with"

[–] elixir_fan@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 weeks ago

I find arguments like this a bit silly. I believe that religion has to be confined to personal life, and religious harm has to be reduced through a socialist government, but religious people killing others is an idealist argument. Religious people didn't just kill because of ideals, but rather because of the material reality that gave rise to their religion. I personally believe that religion, like the state, might wither away through socialism, but just like the state, it's about handling class contradictions and engaging through a historical and materialist lens, else we're just being idealistic ourselves. Not only that, but practically speaking many of our comrades are religious, as long as they agree with us on examining society through diamat and commit to reducing religious harm, I don't care if they pray or not. Let their religious views inspire them towards positive change, and influence their own religious communities through organizing.