• @SiegeRhino@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    331 year ago

    when “one side” wants to take away everyone’s rights and burn down the planet, I think the “both sides” neutrality arguments should fuckin STOP

    • @Tristaniopsis@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      -21 year ago

      Reporting the reactions of both sides is technically neutral.

      However I totally agree that ‘both sides-ing’ in terms of legitimising shitty views is unhealthy. I think the piece does not legitimise the xtian views as much as holding them up as the entrenched mindset that the SC is trying to (rightly) break.

    • @EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -31 year ago

      Why on earth are people so angry at this for simply reporting the facts? This comment section is fucking hilariously nuts right now. Lol

      • @Tristaniopsis@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        -21 year ago

        Indeed. I certainly do not support the xtian whackos. And the Satanic club sounds like great thing.

        The Guardian is definitely a left-leaning paper so accusations of bias against the ‘satanic club’ is likely not true.

        I think the reporting is accurate in that it’s telling the reader about the reaction ‘on the ground’ to this piece of social progress, by the parochial xtians.

        People are left to read what they want into the reporting (neutral) but I really don’t think it’s ‘promoting’ the xtian view.

        • @EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -11 year ago

          The only thing I can think of is that the other poster doesn’t understand the difference between opinion and fact, and thus confuses their opinion (one I share) for fact. So anything that doesn’t push their opinion seems counterfactual.