this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2025
697 points (98.7% liked)

People Twitter

7505 readers
482 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] doomcanoe 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (16 children)

That's a linguistics debate. Are all Christians fake christians just because the god they believe in is an imaginary friend? Or are they real christians because they actively believe in their imaginary friend?

Or was your argument that the age of a belief lends creedence to it's legitimacy regardless of its truth value?

[–] QuoVadisHomines 2 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

It is a wholly constructed faith based partly on fragments of things that existed previously but with no input from those cultures so there's no "authentic" Wiccan beliefs other than those from the 1950s.

[–] doomcanoe 3 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

Sure, but that could be said about any belief system depending on when you start the clock.

While I don't personally believe in the authenticity of claims from any non-testable belief/faith/spiritual system, I do believe that any person who genuienly says they hold to one can fairly be called a member of that group.

Be it Wiccans, Christians, Scientologists, Saitanists, or Jedi. Hence why I say this is a linguistics conversation. An "authentic Wiccan" dosen't need our approval, nor is the validity of their beliefs relavent to them using the term to describe themselves.

[–] julietOscarEcho 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"genuinely" herein lies the key. Interesting to pick Jedi as an example because I think we can agree that people who out that on a census or whatever typically have their tongue firmly in cheek. Wicca probably sits somewhere on a spectrum between that and the major religions. You'd be mad naive to assume that everyone holds beliefs exactly as stated. My papi was a priest and we're pretty sure never believed in god. L Ron Hubbard himself was for sure was grifting FFS. Add to that and most religions can't even agree what authentic means for their community and LOL

[–] doomcanoe 2 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks for agreeing with and emphasizing my points! I thought using Jedi to elaborate the universality of my statement might be too subtle, so I'm glad you caught it.

But your last point about internal conflicts over authenticity within a religion did make me reconsider the necessity of "genuine" belief. Since spirituality is so personally definable, I guess all that is really necessary is for a person to claim the title. Technically, your papi was a priest despite a lack of a genuine belief.

We could (and people have) argue the requirements and definitions until we are blue in the face, but trying to get a working definition is like trying to nail jelly to the wall.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)