The Irony of Witchcraft

Avatar Image
Davethedog | 10:40 Fri 02nd Mar 2012 | Religion & Spirituality
16 Answers
The Daily Mail today calls beleif in Witcraft a "feral superstition" Last year I am sure they when running some articles supporting Exorcism.

Am I in error.


1 to 16 of 16rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Davethedog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
they did run a fairly neutral feature on the subject

though looking through it... it does seem, from the names, that the exorcists they talked to may have been white. It's possible that witchcraft is only "feral" if you're not.
Question Author
Witchcraft is a fairly loose term... many cultures have witches that would not be recognised as such by those of others
Question Author
Rowan I am no more being critical of Witchcraft, in any form, than I am of any other supernatural belief. I am trying to point out the dual standards of the Mail in their dealings of it. Also as JNO says if the particpants were not African there nay have been a different take.
"Witch Gone Wild" eh ?

I'm unsure the OP shows any conflict. One may consider religions to be superstition and yet note the possibility of needing regular exorcise.
The practices of witchcraft and religion are indistinguishable. Incantations, and rituals are the centrepieces of their cults.
There is an irony here – and it’s not a question of colour. Organised religion – that demands our respect and gets it - promotes belief in the Devil, and in evil spirits, and it continues to perform antiquated rituals including exorcisms. If educated western cultures accept without question that such practices are rational, and therefore perfectly acceptable, then what hope is there for the less educated? It’s all feral superstition.
Naomis post highlights the dissonance perfectly. We have a subset of christians in the West, who consider themselves to be part of the advanced culture - unyet they appear to accept wholesale some of the whackier precepts within their religion - and exorcism is certainly one of those.

And this highlights the danger of an uncritical acceptance of the alleged literal word of god, as interpreted by a "preacher" , and that acceptance then being carried out with evangelical zeal.

There have been several, high profile cases in the UK, and I am sure many hundreds more around the globe, where the extreme response and violence meted out to "drive out the evil spirits" results, tragically, in the death of the alleged witch - all this with the approval of the church preacher, and instigated by the parents, who believe and fear in their superstitions more than they love and understand their children (because its mostly children, and girl children at that, to whom such horrific deaths occur)

And of course such practice allows us advanced westerners to label the perpetrators of the violence and the believers of such fairy tale as "savages", or "barbarians" - but as Naomi says, the self same westerners are perfectly happy to wallow in their own, mellower versions of the same superstitious fairy tales, failing to see the irony of their position.

And then, within western society, we get JWs attempting to deny their children life saving blood transfusions, or Christian Healing ministries having a prayer circle around a girl who later died from a mundanely treatable diabetic coma. Or the quack, modern day religion of Scientology, which refuses to believe in mental health defects.

And whilst we are at it - How about killing people over the the burning of a book?

Religion - a blight on society.......
↑ Wot he said.
I see religion as a form of 'care in the community' for those unable to or not wishing to come to terms with the real world with which we interact. As long as we humour them and curb their extremes when they go too far with their fantasies then they don't do too much harm. However when (in whatever name, witchcraft or christianity) they cause suffering and harm to their fellow man then they are obviously mentally ill and should be treated accordingly.
//However when (in whatever name, witchcraft or christianity) they cause suffering and harm to their fellow man then they are obviously mentally ill and should be treated accordingly. //

The whole lot of it causes harm - albeit in varying degrees. Teaching 'creation' causes harm, just as teaching people they are sinners from birth causes harm. We once had a Muslim born man here on AB who had converted to Christianity, and who, in an attempt to rid his friend of the devils that he believed were causing his friend to be 'gay', acquired the services of an exorcist. Potty!

LG cites the religious who kill people for book burning – and when it happens, instead of soundly condemning it, the world accepts that that’s what these people do when they’re ‘offended’, and bows to the madness. When the Mohammed cartoons were published in Denmark, the British press, prompted by the violent reaction of Muslims across the world, refused to print them. When Salman Rushdie wrote ‘The Satanic Verses’, the Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa calling for the death of the author, and that was supported by some prominent individuals and groups including The Union of Islamic Students' Associations in Europe. Whilst not condoning the ‘fatwa’, various public figures including the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Chief Rabbi of Great Britain disregarded any issue of freedom of speech and expressed sympathy for the people of Islam, advocating the prohibition of the publication of material likely to offend a section of society by showing contempt for its religious belief.

If these things were done by a few, that few would be considered mentally ill, but because they're done by the many, society is expected to accept it as rational behaviour - but the fact is, it isn’t.
Spot on, Naomi - where do Christians stand these days on "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" (Exodus 22:18)?
Many atheists find religious material quite offensive, for good rational reasons rather than the mumbo jumbo.

However there is no such recpect for those people. Religions can loudly provlaim their belifs from the most prominent places in the community.

Pointless, tuneless, intrusive bell ringing on a Sunday morning is a great example for the rudeness of the religious who demand the right to impose their values on wider society.
Part of a conversation between George H W Bush and Robert I. Sherman, a reporter for the American Atheist news journal.

Sherman: What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are atheists?

Bush: I guess I'm pretty weak in the atheist community. Faith in God is important to me.

Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists?

Bush: No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.

Sherman Do you support as a sound constitutional principle the separation of state and church?

Bush: Yes, I support the separation of church and state. I'm just not very high on atheists.

(Copied from the internet - edited)

1 to 16 of 16rss feed

Do you know the answer?

The Irony of Witchcraft

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.