[WikiEN-l] cancelation of the deletion review of the satanism userbox

[George Herbert]

On 5/31/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:

> To the outside world (and to me) it thus appears that the Wikipedia
> project is providing all users with a facility to label themselves
> according to beliefs, and by implication, encouragement to do so.
> This is especially problematic with disreputable religions and
> pseudoreligions (I apologise if this offends American sensibilities
> attuned to First Amendment absolutism) such as Satanism, Scientology
> and the like.



Please provide a citation for Satanism being disreputable.

Disliked, sure.  Disreputable implies that they're actively harmful to
people.  Even in the relative core of satanism in the US, San Francisco,
where LaVey founded it and all,  their neighbors mostly don't notice them.
They're among the least offensive San Francisco freaks.

Also, exactly how do you justify Zoroastrianism being disreputable?


-george william herbert
gherbert at retro.com / george.herbert at gmail.com