Cherished beliefs

[catsittingstill]

There is a belief in Africa (possibly in other parts of the world too) that children can cause harm to their parents and neighbors using supernatural powers.  People who suspect a child of causing harm with supernatural powers punish the child.  Machetes sometimes feature.  So does acid, drowning, beatings, starvation and burnings.

Some people offer exorcism services to drive the evil spirits out of the children.  Which, it turns out, in addition to being very expensive, also feature machetes, acid, beatings and starvation.

The Independent has an article.
So does the New York Times.
So does CNN
And MSNBC

Of course, suggesting that the supernatural doesn't exist, or that the idea that anyone, much less a child, could cause harm by supernatural means is bollocks, would be mockery.  And some believers resent that rudeness and attack skeptics physically.

Part of the problem here is that well-respected individuals often share these evidence-free beliefs.  Even senior police officers may genuinely believe in witchcraft, leaving the children, and the skeptics who would like to protect them, with nowhere to turn.

So when you're mad at skeptics, because the evidence for a cherished belief some people hold isn't strong enough to convince them yet, remember that a little skepticism can prevent a lot of harm, and that having someone say something that makes you think they think you are dumb when you're not is pretty small potatoes in the larger scheme of things.

Comments

Re: The tracks of my reactions

[pocketnaomi.livejournal.com]

I agree with you that it's an issue for many Americans who have to face the religious right here. But smallship1 is neither American nor right-wing, nor even religious himself as far as I can tell. He defends religion because he thinks it can do good as well as evil, and he is just as disgusted with the evil done in its name as you are. So I don't think he's the right target for such a fight.

One of the things I see American progressives having the most difficult time realizing is that you don't tear your own base apart by fighting with your friends about things which you don't absolutely need to agree about. There's a reason the term "politically correct" came originally out of the lesbian feminist community as a snide comment on those of us (since I count myself as both a lesbian and a feminist) who didn't always want to have sex in a way which was approved as sufficiently anti-patriarchal by the rest. Yes, I think that atheists in this world, especially in America, have to do a certain amount of fighting against those who already persecute us to some extent and would do so more if they could. But smallship1 isn't one of those people, and I don't think we need to fight him. And since he is not only a genuinely nice human being and a good friend of mine, but also someone who is passionate about doing political good in the world, including trying to see to it that nobody persecutes anybody, I'd rather see him treated as an ally with whom we have some differences, rather than an enemy who is thrown into that category needlessly.

Re: The tracks of my reactions

[tig-b.livejournal.com]

thank you