On the website https://bugmenot.com/ people can share their bs accounts. It has also a browser plug-in where you can select and automatically fill in fitting logins.
I am new here so this is a little confusing for me. In the Beehaw post you linked someone writes that they see only lemmy.world posts that where synced before the defederation. But lemmy.world users should still see the posts of Beehaw since lemmy.world has not defederated from Beehaw only the other way round, isn't it?
I surfed a little bit on E-H and I did not encounter any "white supremacist" content. You should also consider this: they did not defederate from lemmy.world. That means they still tolerate the opinion from here. So far only lemmy.world defederated from them because they can't tolerate this different opinions. And it is this kind of intolerance that interprets every deviating opinion as "nazi" and "white supremacy" and everyone who doesn't approve their lifestyle as "hateful" that let's me doubt if AskAChristian can be here. I fear that certain questions could not be answered honestly without it being labeled as "hate" and being banned and silenced.
But isn't religion also one of the protected classes? I would only state what i think my religion teaches I would not discriminate or cancel anyone and let other opinions stand. But when someone tries to cancel me for stating what i think my religion teaches wouldn't they discriminate against me because of my religion?
By "society" you mean the majority of people? And when the majority of people thinks something is wrong that gives them the right to cancel out a minority opinion just by calling it "hate"?
If someone comes to AskAChristian and asks what does your religion teach about xyz would I not be allowed to answer because the answer could be interpreted as harassment of a protected class?
What do you understand as "tolerant"? Does it have to be always affirming? Say, I state that a certain behavior is not good. You disagree. I tolerate your opinion even though I disagree. But you state that my opinion is hateful and want it to be banned. Who of us is "tolerant"?
Your link has a very shallow definition of the "No true Scotsman" fallacy.
A better definition is on Wikipedia:
No true Scotsman, or appeal to purity, is an informal fallacy in which one attempts to protect their generalized statement from a falsifying counterexample by excluding the counterexample improperly. Rather than abandoning the falsified universal generalization or providing evidence that would disqualify the falsifying counterexample, a slightly modified generalization is constructed ad-hoc to definitionally exclude the undesirable specific case and similar counterexamples by appeal to rhetoric.
But I can argue that the definition of Cristian comes from the behavior and teaching of Jesus and the new testament and thus excludes bigotry hate and racism.
Also, telling people that they will be tortured for etwrnity (hell) [...] is ultimately bigoted and hateful.
Unless that is really true. Then it would be unloving to not warn people.
When I lived in Europe I had a pact with the spiders in my home. They would stay up on the ceiling and I would not bother them but if they came down they had to die. They knew what they got themselves into.
Now I live in Africa and have a strict "no spider anywhere in the house" policy. Some spiders here can be rather unpleasant roommates. (The exception are jumping spiders. They are mostly nice and can stay if they do not come too near)
You could get a new garage door remote. The code should be as little switches on the inside of the old remote.