I mean, protecting/enabling a pedophile is directly doing something wrong, and so is obstruction of justice.

But the line is when the criticism is religious identity. The pope isn’t a piece of shit because he’s Catholic, he’s a piece of shit because he used his position of power (in the Catholic church) to protect someone who robbed a child of the capacity to feel safe for the rest of their life.

The behavior and use of organizational power to do harm is the issue, not the demographic he identifies with. As a general rule, shit rolls uphill; you’re allowed to criticize people in a religious organization who should have prevented heinous crimes. You shouldn’t be allowed to criticize someone for identifying with Catholicism or as a Catholic, but I’m not really seeing any example of that here.

I periodically see folks on lemmy talk trash to others on the basis that they’re religious, or condemn folks for believing in something non-secular. It absolutely happens here, but this (and your example) seem pretty unambiguous to me 🤷‍♂️

I think there’s a difference between criticizing religious people, and criticizing a religious organization.

Criticizing an organization isn’t discrimination on the basis of religious beliefs, and should be allowed

I feel likw this could be a case of a rule being written (a bit poorly) with reasonable intent, and then interpreted to the letter rather than the spirit.

I do get its important for mods to be consistent around rules if they want to avoid burn out and getting too pulled into disputes, but I think the rule is misworded around the important part- discrimination based on a person’s religious identity

For YouTube on android you can also use grayjay or revanced to set subscriptions as your home page!

(This is about a section in the video, not just a random non-sequitur 😅)