![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 15 March 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The rationale of why a distinct article like this one should exist in Wikipedia is explained in the header:
This article is about ritualistic child abuse in real life. For the conspiracy theory involving vast networks of paedophiles abusing children, see Satanic ritual abuse
This section —:
Ritualized child abuse is also related to infanticide. Before colonization, in the Hawaiian islands all children, after the third or fourth, were strangled or buried alive. At Tahiti fathers had the right (and used it) of killing their newborn children by suffocation. The chiefs were obliged by custom to kill all their daughters. The Rajput killed a proportion of his daughters, sometimes in a very singular way. A pill of tobacco and bhang might be given to the new-born child; or it was drowned in milk; or the mother's breast was smeared with opium or the juice of the poisonous datura. A common method was to cover the child's mouth with a plaster of cow-dung, before it drew breath. In India children were thrown into the sacred river Ganges, and adoration paid to the alligators who fed on them. Where this custom prevailed in the beginning of the twentieth century as a sacrifice the male child was usually the victim.
—was taken from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, a publication now in the public domain.
The article is a stub. I have informed other editors that have been interested in starting this article to expand it & correct it.
Cesar Tort 08:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
OK. But some scholars do not think that the motivation of the ancient Incas was totally different from the motivation of a modern child abuser. Since this topic is related to the legitimacy of this article, what I am about to quote is not soapboaxing.
See how psychologist Robert W. Godwin mocks the anthropologists who idealize the Capacocha child sacrifice:
“ | I will cite just one out of thousands of examples, the recent discovery in the mountains of Chile of three children who had been ritually sacrificed 500 years ago [ National Geographic, November 1999]. Lest you think there was anything horrifying and barbaric about this practice, these children were actually the benefactors of "the highest honor the Inca civilization could bestow: becoming a human gift to the mountain gods." In fact, one of them had even her head placed in a vice from birth, so that she would have the distinction of her skull growing "into the shape of a mountain peak," thus resembling the god to whom she would be sacrificed. Although they were buried alive, we are assured that the children "exude an air of tranquility," and that "this was not a time of terror and horror but of peace and worship." And with this fortuitous archeological find, researchers are hoping the little ones "prove as valuable to science as they were precious to their people." Here we see a fine example of complete moral inversion, in what amounts to the glorification of collective intimidation, humiliation, and thought control, with all its potential for unhinged sadism. | ” |
— Cesar Tort 03:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
The problem (as I see it) is that you (cesar)seem to be defining what is abuse, and yes by our standards they are, but at the same time I think you're going to have to find references that call these things abuse. Yes, all of these things are ghastly, horrid and <insert adjective here> but without sources that specifically mention them in the context of abuse it seems to me to be WP:OR. Remember, we want verifiability not truth WP:V. -- Woland ( talk) 01:27, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
maltrato de niños
": Spanish translation of "child abuse". But he and others did use the equivalent terms to what since the 20th century is called abuse or crime. Nobody can refute that both the Spaniards (and even some Indians) were appalled by child sacrifice and used the terms of their epoch and cultures to reflect their horror. Is this a semantic discussion or a substantial one? I thought the horse was already dead...
Cesar Tort 19:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
CT deleted this from the talk page, due to its being a "rv long & irrelevant soapboax." It is relevant, it replies to his definition:
Not all agree with the definition of Satanic Ritual Abuse at the top of the talk page: " For the conspiracy theory involving vast networks of paedophiles abusing children, see Satanic ritual abuse" It may be long, but necessary to clarify the data. Abuse truth ( talk) 04:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Here are some different definitions of SRA.
two peer-reviewed sources
"Deviant Scripturalism and Ritual Satanic Abuse" Part One: "Possible Judeo-Christian Influences." S. Kent - Religion 23 no.3 (July, 1993): 229-241.
"A plausible explanation for satanic abuse accounts that is not explored by critics is that deviant: either develop satanic rituals from material that exists in easily accesible mainstream religious texts, or sanctify their violence by framing it within passages in otherwise normative scriptures." p. 231
"Multiple Personality Disorder and :Satanic Ritual Abuse: the Issue Of Credibility" Dissociation, Vol. III, No. 1 March 1990 S. VanBenschoten
Ritual abuse may or may not have satanic overtones. However, many of the allegations of ritual abuse which have surfaced over the present decade specifically implicate allegiance to or worship of Satan as the basis for accomplishing or justifying the ceremonial activities performed. Although the prevalence of satanic ritual abuse is not known, its involvement in a variety of social contexts and diverse belief systems has been reported. Highly secretive and rigidly structured cults have been implicated, as well as groups exploiting day care centers, groups disguised as traditional religious structures, families (including rnultigenerational involvement), small self-styled adolescent groups, child pornography and drug rings, and individuals acting either independently or within loosely knit groups (Brown, 1986: Gallant, 1986, 1988; Gould, 1986, 1987; Kahaner, 1988; Young, 1989).
two skeptical sources
http://www.religioustolerance.org/sra.htm
Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA) can be defined as the psychological, sexual, and/or physical assault forced on an unwilling human victim, and committed by one or more Satanists according to a prescribed ritual, the primary aim of which is to fulfill the need to worship the Christian devil, Satan.
by Kenneth V. Lanning, Supervisory Special Agent
Behavioral Science Unit
National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime
1992 FBI Report --Satanic Ritual Abuse By Kenneth V. Lanning, Supervisory Special Agent Behavioral Science Unit National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime
What is "Ritual" Child Abuse?
I cannot define "ritual child abuse" precisely and prefer not to use the term. I am frequently forced to use it (as throughout this discussion) so that people will have some idea what I am discussing. Use of the term, however, is confusing, misleading, and counterproductive. The newer term "satanic ritual abuse" (abbreviated "SRA") is even worse. Certain observations, however, are important for investigative understanding. Most people today use the term to refer to abuse of children that is part of some evil spiritual belief system, which almost by definition must be satanic.
Satanic Ritual Abuse: The Evidence Surfaces
By Daniel Ryder, CCDC, LSW
http://home.mchsi.com/~ftio/ra-evidence-surfaces.htm
The report was written by supervisory special agent Kenneth Lanning. It has gone out to law enforcement agencies around the country; and has been cited consistently throughout the media the last several years. The report states, in regards to "organized" Satanic ritual abuse homicide (that is, two or more Satanic cult members conspiring to commit murder Abuse truth ( talk) 04:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
This page is Cesar's vanity piece and it needs to be integrated with psychohistory, or deleted.
It's been created by Cesar as a POV fork from SRA, in order to shift content from that article into this one, thus stripping the SRA article of substantiated cases of ritualistic abuse, and enabling Cesar to entrench his own POV in the SRA article. See [ here]:
On the same page, he accuses me of meatpuppetry and so on. His creation of this article is just another example of his refusal to AGF in relation to editors who disagree with him. It wouldn't be such a problem if this article actually had any merit, but he's just taken material from the article on psychohistory, and, in his own words, added "some content totally unrelated to deMause’s theories to justify the moving".
The result is a vanity piece that rests on a few theorists (deMause and Miller) whose theoretical influence is limited to the 1980s. The content is bizarre and I've never come across anything like it before - it is a clear example of synthesis, original research and undue weight, and his conduct fails to AGF. -- Biaothanatoi ( talk) 23:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
“ | At the moment, I'm advocating for the reform of the Satanic Ritual Abuse article on Wikipedia. Whilst the role of ritualistic activity in organised child sexual abuse is not clear, we know that it does occur, and that it is related to the most severe forms of child maltreatment and sexual exploitation. For years, the SRA article has instead suggested that most people with a history of SRA are fantasists, and the professionals who support them are malicious and corrupt. In my experience as a researcher, nothing could be further from the truth. | ” |
User:P4k has removed a section that is mostly taken from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition. I wonder what does he mean? Isn't the Encyclopædia Britannica a convenient source?
— Cesar Tort 05:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
<undent>We prefer icy politeness and keep our gratuitous bashing to e-mail. I've tripped off several work-based filters now. Note that Hrafn is going at the page now, which should be interesting. WLU ( talk) 16:42, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the intro WLU. ;) I think this quote from Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition is informative:
Contemporaneous beliefs about race and ethnicity often prevailed in the Encyclopedia's articles, to the detriment of their factual accuracy.
Is it really a WP:RS on such issues? Hrafn Talk Stalk 16:50, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I have restored the SRA link to the see also section as per policy, "see also section provides a bulleted list of blue internal links to related Wikipedia articles." ResearchEditor ( talk) 02:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
How about adding a section about modern day exorcisms on children? Currently, this is mentioned in Exorcism#Exorcism-related_deaths, but I think there needs to be some mention about this here as well. This article only talks about the past and ones that take place amongst native peoples, but there is no mention about it happening in contemporary Western culture. Forest Path ( talk) 19:22, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Does no-one else consider circumcision to be religious abuse? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.185.189.32 ( talk) 22:58, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm confused by this line: Artificial deformation of the skull predate written history and date back to Neanderthal times.
What is meant by "Neanderthal times" exactly? Does it mean the Middle Paleolithic or is it saying that Neanderthals practiced body modification? If what is meant is the middle paleolithic (or some other time period) then it should be more precise. I don't think that its referring to body modification by Neanderthals, simply because after reading a lot on them I've never come across this. -- Woland ( talk) 18:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
I have added this section in Satanic ritual abuse:
Some feminist critics of the SRA diagnoses maintained that, in the course of purging or cleansing evil, the panic of the 1980s and 90s obscured real child abuse issues. Unlike the "multiple victims, multiple perps" which characterizes many allegations of SRA, the parental, intrafamilial sexual abuse, which is much part of this world, had thus "been robbed of larger significance." [1] The National Center for Abuse and Neglect had to elaborate a different term, "religious abuse", to explain the evidence of exorcisms, poisonings and drownings of children in non-satanic religious settings to avoid confusion with SRA. [2] [3]
Google gets 595,000 hits in "religious abuse". I wonder therefore if moving this page is in order? That would broaden the scope of what could be included in the article. Thoughts?
— Cesar Tort 18:27, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help)
{{
cite book}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)
I am adding {{ synthesis}} to this, because it doesn't appear to be about a clearly defined topic. We have
googling the term,
I find it seems to refer to the act of abusing people by attempting to hurt their religous feelings rather than to physical abuse motivated by religion. E.g., "religious abuse" appears in news stories such as
and even the abuse of a religion (as in, Islam is being abused by Islamist terrorism)
but also
dab (𒁳) 15:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
I would say that to split this page into only two topics is myopic. Religious abuse is vastly psychological, which is hugely more topical and common than human sacrifice and satanic ritual abuse. My opinion, and it has been affirmed in my own small academic circles, is that religious abuse is inflicted on people when they are punished for veering from the allowed doctrine of their fellow congregationalists and religious organizations. Please see my senior thesis at www.religioustrauma.com for the complete story, which, although quite extreme, peeks into a mind-set of fundamentalism that is becoming all too common and very psychologically dangerous. The "religion" presented in the thesis is only one of a growing number of religions that dominate and exert mind-control tactics. I once had a therapist who tried to clump me in with the satanic ritual abuse category since that is the only type of cult that seems to get attention, at least with uninformed therapists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.173.96 ( talk) 06:42, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
the fbi can stop that and the police too —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.230.65.225 ( talk) 17:15, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Definitions:
This may be of use, it was posted on Talk:Satanic ritual abuse, but is not of use to that article. KillerChihuahua ?!? 16:05, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
The whole section on "psychological abuse against children" is linked to a Richard Dawkins interview. (that is broken link anyways.) Can we rely on a fanatical Atheist priest for an objective assessment here? Other areas concerning religious upbringing in general, just sound like common prattling rants of neo-atheists. 184.153.187.119 ( talk) 13:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I agree that merging Spiritual abuse and Religious abuse would be a good thing. They seem to be pretty much the same thing, and clearly notable. I'm not sure how a person could tell if a given incident is spiritual abuse or religious abuse. Kitfoxxe ( talk) 05:21, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
Abuse is found in many groups, both religious and secular. Wikipedia has no place for ugly bigotry. Wikipedia is not the place to spread personal prejudices. Jimjilin ( talk) 14:44, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Here is a sample Christian one from 1930s in Poland
https://pl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muraszkowcy#
See the photos here: http://retropress.pl/tajny-detektyw/nowy-rasputin/
-》 Let us add them.
Zezen ( talk) 19:15, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
On mobile,so I could quickly find these only:
https://www.academia.edu/Documents/in/Russian_Judaizing_Heresy
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302552227_BUDIVNICI_NOVOGO_ERUSALIMU_IVAN_MURASKO_I_MURASKIVCI_fragment Zezen ( talk) 14:17, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Kali cult in 21 c, and many more.
Sample cases: http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,322673,00.html
https://m.timesofindia.com/city/ahmedabad/Boy-sacrificed-to-appease-goddess/articleshow/41900118.cms -> why are these missing here? Zezen ( talk) 14:21, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2023 and 12 May 2023. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Annamariefdaly (
article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Annamariefdaly ( talk) 02:26, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
I think it's absurd that a page titled "religious abuse" does not include anything about American Indian boarding schools nor Stolen generations. Wallby ( talk) 14:09, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 15 March 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The rationale of why a distinct article like this one should exist in Wikipedia is explained in the header:
This article is about ritualistic child abuse in real life. For the conspiracy theory involving vast networks of paedophiles abusing children, see Satanic ritual abuse
This section —:
Ritualized child abuse is also related to infanticide. Before colonization, in the Hawaiian islands all children, after the third or fourth, were strangled or buried alive. At Tahiti fathers had the right (and used it) of killing their newborn children by suffocation. The chiefs were obliged by custom to kill all their daughters. The Rajput killed a proportion of his daughters, sometimes in a very singular way. A pill of tobacco and bhang might be given to the new-born child; or it was drowned in milk; or the mother's breast was smeared with opium or the juice of the poisonous datura. A common method was to cover the child's mouth with a plaster of cow-dung, before it drew breath. In India children were thrown into the sacred river Ganges, and adoration paid to the alligators who fed on them. Where this custom prevailed in the beginning of the twentieth century as a sacrifice the male child was usually the victim.
—was taken from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, a publication now in the public domain.
The article is a stub. I have informed other editors that have been interested in starting this article to expand it & correct it.
Cesar Tort 08:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
OK. But some scholars do not think that the motivation of the ancient Incas was totally different from the motivation of a modern child abuser. Since this topic is related to the legitimacy of this article, what I am about to quote is not soapboaxing.
See how psychologist Robert W. Godwin mocks the anthropologists who idealize the Capacocha child sacrifice:
“ | I will cite just one out of thousands of examples, the recent discovery in the mountains of Chile of three children who had been ritually sacrificed 500 years ago [ National Geographic, November 1999]. Lest you think there was anything horrifying and barbaric about this practice, these children were actually the benefactors of "the highest honor the Inca civilization could bestow: becoming a human gift to the mountain gods." In fact, one of them had even her head placed in a vice from birth, so that she would have the distinction of her skull growing "into the shape of a mountain peak," thus resembling the god to whom she would be sacrificed. Although they were buried alive, we are assured that the children "exude an air of tranquility," and that "this was not a time of terror and horror but of peace and worship." And with this fortuitous archeological find, researchers are hoping the little ones "prove as valuable to science as they were precious to their people." Here we see a fine example of complete moral inversion, in what amounts to the glorification of collective intimidation, humiliation, and thought control, with all its potential for unhinged sadism. | ” |
— Cesar Tort 03:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
The problem (as I see it) is that you (cesar)seem to be defining what is abuse, and yes by our standards they are, but at the same time I think you're going to have to find references that call these things abuse. Yes, all of these things are ghastly, horrid and <insert adjective here> but without sources that specifically mention them in the context of abuse it seems to me to be WP:OR. Remember, we want verifiability not truth WP:V. -- Woland ( talk) 01:27, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
maltrato de niños
": Spanish translation of "child abuse". But he and others did use the equivalent terms to what since the 20th century is called abuse or crime. Nobody can refute that both the Spaniards (and even some Indians) were appalled by child sacrifice and used the terms of their epoch and cultures to reflect their horror. Is this a semantic discussion or a substantial one? I thought the horse was already dead...
Cesar Tort 19:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
CT deleted this from the talk page, due to its being a "rv long & irrelevant soapboax." It is relevant, it replies to his definition:
Not all agree with the definition of Satanic Ritual Abuse at the top of the talk page: " For the conspiracy theory involving vast networks of paedophiles abusing children, see Satanic ritual abuse" It may be long, but necessary to clarify the data. Abuse truth ( talk) 04:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Here are some different definitions of SRA.
two peer-reviewed sources
"Deviant Scripturalism and Ritual Satanic Abuse" Part One: "Possible Judeo-Christian Influences." S. Kent - Religion 23 no.3 (July, 1993): 229-241.
"A plausible explanation for satanic abuse accounts that is not explored by critics is that deviant: either develop satanic rituals from material that exists in easily accesible mainstream religious texts, or sanctify their violence by framing it within passages in otherwise normative scriptures." p. 231
"Multiple Personality Disorder and :Satanic Ritual Abuse: the Issue Of Credibility" Dissociation, Vol. III, No. 1 March 1990 S. VanBenschoten
Ritual abuse may or may not have satanic overtones. However, many of the allegations of ritual abuse which have surfaced over the present decade specifically implicate allegiance to or worship of Satan as the basis for accomplishing or justifying the ceremonial activities performed. Although the prevalence of satanic ritual abuse is not known, its involvement in a variety of social contexts and diverse belief systems has been reported. Highly secretive and rigidly structured cults have been implicated, as well as groups exploiting day care centers, groups disguised as traditional religious structures, families (including rnultigenerational involvement), small self-styled adolescent groups, child pornography and drug rings, and individuals acting either independently or within loosely knit groups (Brown, 1986: Gallant, 1986, 1988; Gould, 1986, 1987; Kahaner, 1988; Young, 1989).
two skeptical sources
http://www.religioustolerance.org/sra.htm
Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA) can be defined as the psychological, sexual, and/or physical assault forced on an unwilling human victim, and committed by one or more Satanists according to a prescribed ritual, the primary aim of which is to fulfill the need to worship the Christian devil, Satan.
by Kenneth V. Lanning, Supervisory Special Agent
Behavioral Science Unit
National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime
1992 FBI Report --Satanic Ritual Abuse By Kenneth V. Lanning, Supervisory Special Agent Behavioral Science Unit National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime
What is "Ritual" Child Abuse?
I cannot define "ritual child abuse" precisely and prefer not to use the term. I am frequently forced to use it (as throughout this discussion) so that people will have some idea what I am discussing. Use of the term, however, is confusing, misleading, and counterproductive. The newer term "satanic ritual abuse" (abbreviated "SRA") is even worse. Certain observations, however, are important for investigative understanding. Most people today use the term to refer to abuse of children that is part of some evil spiritual belief system, which almost by definition must be satanic.
Satanic Ritual Abuse: The Evidence Surfaces
By Daniel Ryder, CCDC, LSW
http://home.mchsi.com/~ftio/ra-evidence-surfaces.htm
The report was written by supervisory special agent Kenneth Lanning. It has gone out to law enforcement agencies around the country; and has been cited consistently throughout the media the last several years. The report states, in regards to "organized" Satanic ritual abuse homicide (that is, two or more Satanic cult members conspiring to commit murder Abuse truth ( talk) 04:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
This page is Cesar's vanity piece and it needs to be integrated with psychohistory, or deleted.
It's been created by Cesar as a POV fork from SRA, in order to shift content from that article into this one, thus stripping the SRA article of substantiated cases of ritualistic abuse, and enabling Cesar to entrench his own POV in the SRA article. See [ here]:
On the same page, he accuses me of meatpuppetry and so on. His creation of this article is just another example of his refusal to AGF in relation to editors who disagree with him. It wouldn't be such a problem if this article actually had any merit, but he's just taken material from the article on psychohistory, and, in his own words, added "some content totally unrelated to deMause’s theories to justify the moving".
The result is a vanity piece that rests on a few theorists (deMause and Miller) whose theoretical influence is limited to the 1980s. The content is bizarre and I've never come across anything like it before - it is a clear example of synthesis, original research and undue weight, and his conduct fails to AGF. -- Biaothanatoi ( talk) 23:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
“ | At the moment, I'm advocating for the reform of the Satanic Ritual Abuse article on Wikipedia. Whilst the role of ritualistic activity in organised child sexual abuse is not clear, we know that it does occur, and that it is related to the most severe forms of child maltreatment and sexual exploitation. For years, the SRA article has instead suggested that most people with a history of SRA are fantasists, and the professionals who support them are malicious and corrupt. In my experience as a researcher, nothing could be further from the truth. | ” |
User:P4k has removed a section that is mostly taken from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition. I wonder what does he mean? Isn't the Encyclopædia Britannica a convenient source?
— Cesar Tort 05:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
<undent>We prefer icy politeness and keep our gratuitous bashing to e-mail. I've tripped off several work-based filters now. Note that Hrafn is going at the page now, which should be interesting. WLU ( talk) 16:42, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the intro WLU. ;) I think this quote from Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition is informative:
Contemporaneous beliefs about race and ethnicity often prevailed in the Encyclopedia's articles, to the detriment of their factual accuracy.
Is it really a WP:RS on such issues? Hrafn Talk Stalk 16:50, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
I have restored the SRA link to the see also section as per policy, "see also section provides a bulleted list of blue internal links to related Wikipedia articles." ResearchEditor ( talk) 02:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
How about adding a section about modern day exorcisms on children? Currently, this is mentioned in Exorcism#Exorcism-related_deaths, but I think there needs to be some mention about this here as well. This article only talks about the past and ones that take place amongst native peoples, but there is no mention about it happening in contemporary Western culture. Forest Path ( talk) 19:22, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Does no-one else consider circumcision to be religious abuse? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.185.189.32 ( talk) 22:58, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm confused by this line: Artificial deformation of the skull predate written history and date back to Neanderthal times.
What is meant by "Neanderthal times" exactly? Does it mean the Middle Paleolithic or is it saying that Neanderthals practiced body modification? If what is meant is the middle paleolithic (or some other time period) then it should be more precise. I don't think that its referring to body modification by Neanderthals, simply because after reading a lot on them I've never come across this. -- Woland ( talk) 18:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
I have added this section in Satanic ritual abuse:
Some feminist critics of the SRA diagnoses maintained that, in the course of purging or cleansing evil, the panic of the 1980s and 90s obscured real child abuse issues. Unlike the "multiple victims, multiple perps" which characterizes many allegations of SRA, the parental, intrafamilial sexual abuse, which is much part of this world, had thus "been robbed of larger significance." [1] The National Center for Abuse and Neglect had to elaborate a different term, "religious abuse", to explain the evidence of exorcisms, poisonings and drownings of children in non-satanic religious settings to avoid confusion with SRA. [2] [3]
Google gets 595,000 hits in "religious abuse". I wonder therefore if moving this page is in order? That would broaden the scope of what could be included in the article. Thoughts?
— Cesar Tort 18:27, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help)
{{
cite book}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)
I am adding {{ synthesis}} to this, because it doesn't appear to be about a clearly defined topic. We have
googling the term,
I find it seems to refer to the act of abusing people by attempting to hurt their religous feelings rather than to physical abuse motivated by religion. E.g., "religious abuse" appears in news stories such as
and even the abuse of a religion (as in, Islam is being abused by Islamist terrorism)
but also
dab (𒁳) 15:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
I would say that to split this page into only two topics is myopic. Religious abuse is vastly psychological, which is hugely more topical and common than human sacrifice and satanic ritual abuse. My opinion, and it has been affirmed in my own small academic circles, is that religious abuse is inflicted on people when they are punished for veering from the allowed doctrine of their fellow congregationalists and religious organizations. Please see my senior thesis at www.religioustrauma.com for the complete story, which, although quite extreme, peeks into a mind-set of fundamentalism that is becoming all too common and very psychologically dangerous. The "religion" presented in the thesis is only one of a growing number of religions that dominate and exert mind-control tactics. I once had a therapist who tried to clump me in with the satanic ritual abuse category since that is the only type of cult that seems to get attention, at least with uninformed therapists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.173.96 ( talk) 06:42, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
the fbi can stop that and the police too —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.230.65.225 ( talk) 17:15, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Definitions:
This may be of use, it was posted on Talk:Satanic ritual abuse, but is not of use to that article. KillerChihuahua ?!? 16:05, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
The whole section on "psychological abuse against children" is linked to a Richard Dawkins interview. (that is broken link anyways.) Can we rely on a fanatical Atheist priest for an objective assessment here? Other areas concerning religious upbringing in general, just sound like common prattling rants of neo-atheists. 184.153.187.119 ( talk) 13:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I agree that merging Spiritual abuse and Religious abuse would be a good thing. They seem to be pretty much the same thing, and clearly notable. I'm not sure how a person could tell if a given incident is spiritual abuse or religious abuse. Kitfoxxe ( talk) 05:21, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
Abuse is found in many groups, both religious and secular. Wikipedia has no place for ugly bigotry. Wikipedia is not the place to spread personal prejudices. Jimjilin ( talk) 14:44, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Here is a sample Christian one from 1930s in Poland
https://pl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muraszkowcy#
See the photos here: http://retropress.pl/tajny-detektyw/nowy-rasputin/
-》 Let us add them.
Zezen ( talk) 19:15, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
On mobile,so I could quickly find these only:
https://www.academia.edu/Documents/in/Russian_Judaizing_Heresy
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302552227_BUDIVNICI_NOVOGO_ERUSALIMU_IVAN_MURASKO_I_MURASKIVCI_fragment Zezen ( talk) 14:17, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Kali cult in 21 c, and many more.
Sample cases: http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,322673,00.html
https://m.timesofindia.com/city/ahmedabad/Boy-sacrificed-to-appease-goddess/articleshow/41900118.cms -> why are these missing here? Zezen ( talk) 14:21, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2023 and 12 May 2023. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Annamariefdaly (
article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Annamariefdaly ( talk) 02:26, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
I think it's absurd that a page titled "religious abuse" does not include anything about American Indian boarding schools nor Stolen generations. Wallby ( talk) 14:09, 11 December 2023 (UTC)