Summary

In October 2020, Samuel Paty, a French teacher, was murdered following a false accusation by a 13-year-old student who claimed he’d shown anti-Muslim bias. The girl had made up the story to cover the fact she had been suspended from school for bad behaviour.

In reality, Paty’s lesson on free speech included optional viewing of Charlie Hebdo cartoons, but he hadn’t excluded anyone. The student’s story triggered a social media campaign led by her father, who, along with others, is now on trial for inciting hatred and connections to Paty’s attacker, an 18-year-old radicalized Chechen.

The school will be named the Samuel Paty School from next year.

  • @LavenderDay3544
    link
    English
    -447 minutes ago

    Religion of peace, my ass.

    The only peace they support is having the whole world be subjugated by their barbaric fairytale. The name Islam literally means submission.

    But of course when you point this out the ‘but it’s all relgions’ politically correct brigade shows up to simp for the perpetrators.

    • Cethin
      link
      fedilink
      English
      330 minutes ago

      It’s because, as I’m sure you know, all religions have done the same. Speaking like you are is as hateful as what you’re claiming to be against. Fuck off.

      Criticism is valid. Criticism against an entire group of people without also giving voice to those in the group against it is fomenting hatred, which you should be against if you’re logically consistent (which I’m not accusing you of being because I doubt you are).

  • @solsangraal@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    14220 hours ago

    jfc when is the human species going to grow up and see religion as the make-believe bullshit that it is

    • Cethin
      link
      fedilink
      English
      126 minutes ago

      Probably never sadly. There’s always going to be something people go towards that gives their life meaning, and that will (almost by requirement) create a group that is against them. Even if it isn’t “religion” it’ll be something like politics or something else, which people don’t actually think about and just believe in.

    • @Carvex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5820 hours ago

      It will be a glorious day in the name of Humans when we finally dump the dumb shit and act like we control our own actions and future

      • Flax
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -14720 hours ago

        And then people start raping animals because no more rules

        • @LavenderDay3544
          link
          English
          453 minutes ago

          If you need a make believe story to prevent you from doing that then you are the problem.

        • @Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 hour ago

          The fact that raping animals is illegal is not the reason I don’t rape animals. If the only thing stopping you from committing horrific crimes is a belief in the sky man then I suggest you remove yourself from the general population (become a hermit) so us normal people don’t have to worry about you losing faith in your invisible friend and going berserk at a petting zoo.

        • @SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          4414 hours ago

          Are rules the only thing keeping you from raping animals right now? Because that says more about you than the rest of the world.

          • Flax
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -5513 hours ago

            If there is no God, then morality doesn’t exist.

            • @pH3ra@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              41 hour ago

              Did you read the article? Because I think the person beheading the guy had strong “religious morals”…

            • @Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              86 hours ago

              The religious does not have a monopoly on morality, ethics or the social contract. If they did, the secular people wouldn’t be outraged whenever a religious leader got caught diddling a kid.

            • @SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              3613 hours ago

              And that’s why you are not a good person. Most people don’t need the threat of eternal hellfire to empathize and understand that it’s bad to hurt people.

              • Flax
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -2911 hours ago

                That’s because there is a God and we have a moral compass that’s divinely designed. But without God, it can still be overridden. Everyone has committed evil at some point in their lives.

                • @GiveMemes@jlai.lu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  36 hours ago

                  Your beliefs are not supported by anything other than an old book. Shit, Newtons theories of gravity have more evidence for them than your boom of fairytale and we’ve still discredited them. Regardless of the prominence of belief in the Christian God and its pervasiveness in western culture, that does not mean that morality does not exist without God unless you come at it from a specifically platonist philosophy. And therein we see the problem: your subscription to one form of ancient philosophy and denial that other ways of thinking even exist.

        • modifier
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2715 hours ago
          1. Not all rules come from imaginary gods
          2. Most people don’t need rules to keep them from harming others
          • Flax
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -4013 hours ago
            1. Then where do they come from, if there’s no objective morality.

            2. Not true, abortion is becoming rampant because political factions are trying to change a moral fact. Nazi Germany also attacked the Church and started allowing the dehumanisation of Jews through secularism.

            • Morality is a product of civilisation and community. It’s the ability of groups to decide on a single set of rules by which they would lime to be treated by, as breach of those rules can cause physical or emotional harm. And then there’s simple evolution, where certain “moral rules” allowed civilisations to survive and thrive better than others.

              At no point is “god” required here.

            • knightly the Sneptaur
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2112 hours ago

              Then where do they come from, if there’s no objective morality.

              They come from people, of course. Here’s a history lesson: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisprudence#History

              Not true, abortion is becoming rampant because political factions are trying to change a moral fact.

              False, abortion rates in the US have been in decline since the 80’s:

              • @2xar@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                911 hours ago

                His point about Nazi’s attacking the Church is also blatantly false BTW. Nazi’s had a bit of a conflict with the Catholic church at the beginning, but they quickly reconciled and pretty much enabled them. Nazi’s also created their own version of Christianity, the biggest difference to other branches being that they claimed Jesus wasn’t actually jew, but of Aryan descent, and Hitler was the new Messiah:

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_Christianity

        • @gwilikers@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1815 hours ago

          Humans already rape animals on an industrial scale. That’s what artificial insemination is. Religion didn’t stop that.

        • @ikidd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1515 hours ago

          I’d hoped this was missed sarcasm then I checked the profile. Its verifiable stupidity.

        • @MelastSB@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          6720 hours ago

          … If there were no rules you’d rape animals? Maybe you should go to church, but don’t pretend we’re all like you

          • @jatone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            39
            edit-2
            19 hours ago

            No they certainly shouldn’t go to church. The next thing they’ll be doing is beheading people for wearing the wrong color socks. They need a therapist not a preacher.

              • @nomous@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                18 hours ago

                Now now, we don’t know they’ve committed any crimes, just that they would if they weren’t superstitious.

                Besides, even (especially) inmates can benefit from a little therapy.

          • Flax
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -3113 hours ago

            No, I’m not sexually attracted to animals. But if there’s no objective morality, then what’s wrong with raping animals?

              • Flax
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -2111 hours ago

                What’s wrong with it if morality is subjective and I’m my own god?

                • @Maalus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1510 hours ago

                  Who told you you were the one deciding what’s moral and what isn’t? Just because objective morality doesn’t exist, doesn’t mean morality at all doesn’t exist. Your argument is flawed from the start. But hey, you do you, if existence of god is the only thing stopping you from being a total psycho then keep on trucking buddy.

                • knightly the Sneptaur
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  210 hours ago

                  Depends on what sort of god you are. Most are harmless, but the malicious ones get Nietzche’d.

        • @Tyfud@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3220 hours ago

          Morality is not derived from religion. Society has moved well past that.

          If you don’t understand then you lack education, but that’s the only reason. You are not in the right here.

          • Flax
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -28
            edit-2
            13 hours ago

            Clearly not since society’s idea of morality keeps changing. So it shows if there’s no God, there’s no morality.

            • @2xar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1412 hours ago

              Religious morality keeps changing as well. A few hundred years ago according to Christianity it was morally right to use black people as slaves, because they had no souls. Luckily, society has progressed and gradually it became immoral to enslave people all over the world. In the end, Christianity had no choice but to accept this - although it took some wars to convince them everywhere about it.

        • @Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          Or people commit genocide because of a command from an entity we just assume is the source of all morality and therefore their actions and commands cannot be immoral by definition.

          • Ogmios
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -1019 hours ago

            How about committing genocide because genetic science proves that your race has superior genes? The problem is with people’s behaviours themselves, regardless of what excuses someone uses to justify them.

            • @Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1019 hours ago

              We can have a discussion about the moral frameworks where that would be wrong but an absolute moral giver allows for no such discussion.

              • Ogmios
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -419 hours ago

                Discussion is absolutely possible as to interpretations, specifically amongst those who actually hold the reigns of power.

                • @Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  519 hours ago

                  Interpretation can be possible, but often the driver doesn’t seem to be a genuine seeking of a moral truth but working backwards to avoid morally unpalatable conclusions or outright cherry picking and ignoring certain parts of a text. I see that as a tacit admission that morals don’t actually come from the text itself but maybe there’s something I’m missing as I’m far from an expert.

      • @2xar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        15
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        Organized religion is a really effective way and tool for brainwashing. Of course there are many other tools as well, but religion is probably the best one. That’s why it’s so popular.

        Just like with guns. If you control and ban firerarms, there are still going to be some murders. But much-much less, because you take away the easiest way of commiting one.

        • The Stoned Hacker
          link
          fedilink
          English
          112 hours ago

          I’m of the opinion that a lot of gun control is ineffective, especially given what guns are supposed to mean. Yes places like Australia have been extremely successful in removing guns, but also look at their policing system and governmental overreach which is honestly quite terrible. I’m of the opinion that the most effective gun control is changing the culture surrounding guns. Bring back (optional) shooting classes in schools, teach kids (and adults) gun safety and actual useful knowledge about firearms. Regulate the access, storage, and use of ammunition. Change the culture from people thinking they’ll be John Wick once they get their glock to people who actually understand that firearms are tools that can be used as weapons, and that they require time, effort, training, and a lot of responsibility to use safely. The cat is out of the bag in the US; guns aren’t going away. Acting like we can remove them is silly, but we can change the perception around them.

          I also think we need similar movements for a lot of things, like cars.

          • @filister@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13 hours ago

            In most developed countries you don’t even need a gun. Why would you need a gun if you are living in Paris, or Rome for example, or New York.

            • The Stoned Hacker
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 hours ago

              In Paris and Rome most of the police don’t have automatic rifles.

              And I think plenty of people would tell and show you exactly why you need a gun in NYC.

          • @Fedegenerate@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            As a counter point, America has fewer gun restrictions and more convicts than Australia. Gun laws and government overreach do not seem connected.

            • The Stoned Hacker
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 hours ago

              America has a lot of government overreach too, don’t get me wrong. I’m just saying that American gun laws were originally meant to be modeled after Swiss gun laws and if we had also adopted Swiss gun culture we wouldn’t have the problems we do today.

          • @2xar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            211 hours ago

            My post was actually about religion and I only used gun control as a theoretical comparison.

            However, it seems funny to me that you start by stating that ‘gun control is ineffective’, and then proceed to describe gun control in great detail and praise it.

            Gun control =/= banning all guns.

    • John Richard
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1320 hours ago

      The funny thing is that most politicians know it is make believe yet they pretend to be religious just to get the votes. It is also a highly effective mechanism to subdue and control the population and manipulate them.

        • @filister@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 hours ago

          And let’s not fool ourselves. It is all about controlling the masses.

          Right now politics and religion is one dividing factor that fuels enormously the racist views of the population. It simply divides us more than it unites us.

    • Ogmios
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      The problem is that it’s not just make believe bullshit, but over thousands of years, and being abused repeatedly by those seeking to derive power from it, the original message/intent gets lost entirely.

    • @technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -3
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      The most deadly religion isn’t even recognized by those who claim to oppose… As long as people bow down to costumed cops, robed judges, and phony politicians… As long as people worship their slaver “fathers” and swear their lives to defend some slaver’s pact… There will be zero rationality as we regularly see.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_religion

    • Flax
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -2220 hours ago

      Ah yes, so we can murder each other over political ideologies instead

    • @idiomaddict@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      16
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      Just fyi, it’s “sweep it under the rug.” Swiping is a doing small motion, used mostly for smart phones and sleight of hand, whereas sweeping can be a much larger motion, and often involves a broom or a careless aspect. My husband has the best non-native English I’ve ever heard from someone who didn’t live in an anglophone country as a kid, and he cannot keep those two and swab straight, so I’d consider it a pretty easy mistake to make :)

        • @jaybone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1119 hours ago

          Swish is what you do with something in water, like to rinse it off. Or rinse your mouth out with water or mouthwash. Or the sound those things make.

          Swipe is a small hand motion you might perform with an object like a credit card you swipe through a card reader. It can also mean to steal something, since that usually involves a quick hand movement. And of course a gesture on a touch device like a phone or tablet.

          Swap is to exchange one item for another item. To trade. In the US we have things called “swap meets” which are like things called “flea markets” where you can trade things. Usually you are trading cash for some type of used item. You swap out old parts for new ones when performing maintenance on a car or machine or computer.

          Sweep you do with a broom. Like you might sweep dust under a rug as a shortcut rather than using a dustpan to collect it and properly dispose of it into a garbage can. But it can also refer to a broad approach. For example a police sweep of the area. Or sweeping legislation for broad laws. Or sweeping changes within say an organization.

          Swoop is what a bird does when it comes in to grab its prey, or to grab your sandwich. Or what your manager does when out of nowhere he shows up looking over your shoulder to “swoop in.” Or the shape of the path the bird takes when it performs this action could be a swooping motion. Superman might also do this when he flies in to rescue you.

  • @technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -34
    edit-2
    17 hours ago

    So what kind of blasphemous stuff did this teacher show about jesus? Colonialism? Or was it solely an attack on muslims? This is France so I think I know the answer…

    • @filister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      53 hours ago

      You are missing the point that the girl who accused the teacher completely made it up, she was not even having a class with this teacher this day and she lied to her father because she was expelled that particular day for bad behaviour.

    • @Luvs2Spuj@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2616 hours ago

      It was a lesson on free speech. I’m certain there were plenty of talking points and examples but it really isn’t the point of this story.

      Muslims will remain as part of that topic for as long as they react the way they do about drawings of their imaginary friend, or anything else they try to impose onto everyone else.

  • John Richard
    link
    fedilink
    English
    0
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    What I see in this story is a question of whether Brahim Chnina ever was actually in contact with Abdoullakh Anzorov, and if he was if he ever instructed or encouraged violence against Samuel Paty. I wouldn’t be surprised if he did, but I also wouldn’t be surprised if they are attempting to use this incident to criminalize free speech, which is exactly what it appears Samuel Paty would not have wanted.

    Here in the US, would we want the government locking people up for calling Trump a fascist or even a Nazi, especially if one of the alleged assassination attempts had been successful? If I make a video saying I hate Marjorie Taylor Greene and she’s a dangerous sociopath, and the next day they go and kill her, does that mean I should be locked up as well? What if I call Trump the antichrist… afterall, it could be claimed that I participated in a video presenting “false and distorted information intended to arouse hatred.”

    • acargitz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1019 hours ago

      Frankly, I think this is new territory. We have a new kind of phenomenon: stochastic terrorism, that has specifically as a vehicle the virality of social media. I don’t think old absolutes, like the American First Amendment, are useful, sort of like how your Second Amendment was written at a time of muskets, not assault weapons. Social media virality plus algorithms that prioritize engagement at all costs (including via rage) over accuracy are a new thing, causing a new problem. It’s right for courts, legal scholars, and lawmakers to be taking on this problem.

      Your concern over balancing the different social goods is of course legitimate and at the centre of this debate.