• Quokka@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    1 year ago

    A draft law introduced on Wednesday seeks to protect the country’s “cultural roots” by promoting “traditional” Christmas and Easter celebrations.

    Shouldn’t they go back to worshipping the Roman gods in that case?

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fascism isn’t about logic or argument though; it’s about constantly defining and redefining the characteristics of the in-group so you can blame, persecute and kill those you exclude from it.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Roman empire had at least 7 fictional dying-and-rising gods, Jesus was only one of them. How about a display to Osiris, he was the god of multiple stuff including agriculture. Aren’t crops more important than just about anything else? I demand an Osiris nativity scene!

  • Cosmoooooooo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Gotta show off that fictional rape baby. OR ELSE! It’s just a highly religiously influenced state fighting against the people not giving a shit about bad religious fiction.

    “Don’t you take that rape baby display down! My fictional god raped that child to make that fictional baby, and you’re going to look at it every single year of your life!”

    • chitak166@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’m just curious, is it a rape baby because Mary was underage?

      Edit: Apparently the only reasons I’ve seen people mention are that:

      1. She was raped because she was underage.

      2. She was raped because she agreed to be impregnated by God, which has a power imbalance.

      You all can judge for yourselves, but I just figured I’d save you the time of sifting through this fairly-useless comment chain.

      • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I imagine they’re referring to Mary never really saying “yeah it’s fine if you impregnate me” before she gets impregnated.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        In the two narratives (that contradict each other because the authors were liars) she didn’t consent to getting pregnant.

        • chitak166@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          What does that mean? She consented to sex but not pregnancy? Essentially, “just pull out bro”?

          • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            How are you mystified by this concept? Sex should involve both parties agreeing that they are okay with what is going on. This also includes fertilization without sex. I, and no other male who has ever lived or will ever live, doesn’t have the right to just make a woman have my child without her agreeing. Mary did not consent to any of this in the story. It is rape.

            Good thing not a single aspect of the story occurred. Every nativity scene you have seen in your life depicts the fictional story of a woman raped. Maybe I shouldn’t have used the word woman given her age and should have said girl instead given her age.

            • chitak166@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Because it’s a very weird distinction to be taught in a religion? “Yes, Mary agreed to having sex but she did not agree to getting pregnant.” This just doesn’t make sense at a time when women were treated worse than a man’s property.

              Mary did not consent to any of this in the story.

              So like, did she say no? Were guards sent to capture her? I’m genuinely curious about the story being told, but all you’ve people done was tell me “she didn’t consent.” Is that it? Is that what the Bible says?

              The fact that you people are so averse to sharing this simple information with me makes me dubious of its existence.

              I’m willing to be proven wrong though!

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Italy’s far-right government is seeking to crack down on schools that scrap Christian nativity scenes in order to reflect greater religious diversity.

    A draft law introduced on Wednesday seeks to protect the country’s “cultural roots” by promoting “traditional” Christmas and Easter celebrations.

    “For some years now we have witnessed unacceptable and embarrassing decisions by some schools that ban nativity scenes or modify the deep essence of Christmas by transforming it into improbable winter festivities so as not to offend believers of other religions,” said Lavinia Mennuni, a senator for the ruling Brothers of Italy party, who introduced the bill.

    “Allowing the transformation of the Sacred Christian holidays into another anonymous type of celebration would constitute discrimination against the students and their families practicing the majority religion as well as an attack on the values and the deepest tradition of our people,” the draft text reads.

    Riccardo Magi, secretary of the left-wing More Europe party, wrote on X (formerly Twitter) that the Brothers of Italy’s proposal “should offend all believers, as well as being unconstitutional because it contradicts freedom of worship”.

    “Instead of governing the country, a duty they [the Brothers of Italy] don’t know how to manage, they continue to use ‘weapons of distraction’ like this law against principals who agree to the removal of the nativity scene at school,” said Luana Zanella from the Green Europe party.


    The original article contains 399 words, the summary contains 228 words. Saved 43%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • octatron@lmy.drundo.com.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Was gonna leave a comment here, but everything I could have said has been. Its heart warming to see so many people using their brains and backbone to speak out against this kind of bullshit. Although it probably won’t stop it being passed.

    Unless you could pass a law to stop old people from voting as they have less skin in the game then a child does.