Two MS-13 gang members convicted of killing a teenage girl in a satanic ritual in 2017 have each been sentenced

[Slimshandy]

Santa Muerte, is a new religious movement, female deity, narco-saint, and folk saint in Mexican folk Catholicism and Neopaganism.  A personification of death, she is associated with healing, protection, and safe delivery to the afterlife by her devotees.

5 million devotees in Mexico, constituting approximately 5% of the country's population.


So, yeah, nothing at all to do with Satanism.

Which isn't to say that some nut-job who isn't religious and just wanted to look like a bad-ass might not care about the difference.

So do you feel you have a better grasp of what happened here than the murderer, kidnap victim and prosecution?

If someone dresses up as a nun, speaks in Latin and wears a rosary, that doesn't mean they actually believe in a version of Christianity that would be acknowledged as Christianity by other Christians, even if they claim to be Christian.

At best, this murderer has invented their own personal syncretic religion, in the same way that Santeria combines elements both of Christianity and of the indigenous Yoruba worship of orishas.

Given the prevalence of 'satanic panics', it isn't unlike that anyone who has actually read widely about religion will be able to be more precise with their terminology than a random nutter.

How motivated the press and court system are to correct the murderer's usage is open to speculation.

Would that be the court system’s place?
To correct his usage of the terms that he’s describing as the reason he murdered a teenage girl?




Btw- Santeria is a legitimate religion, even though it takes from other religions… I’m not saying it’s anything to do with Satanism, but there’s no reason not to view Santeria as a legitimate religion…

[Aletheia]

So do you feel you have a better grasp of what happened here than the murderer, kidnap victim and prosecution?

If someone dresses up as a nun, speaks in Latin and wears a rosary, that doesn't mean they actually believe in a version of Christianity that would be acknowledged as Christianity by other Christians, even if they claim to be Christian.

At best, this murderer has invented their own personal syncretic religion, in the same way that Santeria combines elements both of Christianity and of the indigenous Yoruba worship of orishas.

Given the prevalence of 'satanic panics', it isn't unlike that anyone who has actually read widely about religion will be able to be more precise with their terminology than a random nutter.

How motivated the press and court system are to correct the murderer's usage is open to speculation.

Would that be the court system’s place?
To correct his usage of the terms that he’s describing as the reason he murdered a teenage girl?

No.

I'm just saying that even if he says "I'm a Satanist" (and did he actually say that?), it doesn't mean he is one.

A responsible press would point this out. A press that knows talking about "Satanism" rather than "Santa Muerte" makes for headlines that sell more papers/adverts, might not.

[Della]

I’m thrilled that you think I look royalty

If there was a reply here, I didn’t get it…

No reply intended. I must have accidentally clicked submit.

[Slimshandy]

If someone dresses up as a nun, speaks in Latin and wears a rosary, that doesn't mean they actually believe in a version of Christianity that would be acknowledged as Christianity by other Christians, even if they claim to be Christian.

At best, this murderer has invented their own personal syncretic religion, in the same way that Santeria combines elements both of Christianity and of the indigenous Yoruba worship of orishas.

Given the prevalence of 'satanic panics', it isn't unlike that anyone who has actually read widely about religion will be able to be more precise with their terminology than a random nutter.

How motivated the press and court system are to correct the murderer's usage is open to speculation.

Would that be the court system’s place?
To correct his usage of the terms that he’s describing as the reason he murdered a teenage girl?

No.

I'm just saying that even if he says "I'm a Satanist" (and did he actually say that?), it doesn't mean he is one.

A responsible press would point this out. A press that knows talking about "Satanism" rather than "Santa Muerte" makes for headlines that sell more papers/adverts, might not.

If he’s (self admittedly) sacrificing teenagers to “the beast”, that’s relevant to the court case to prove motive, right?

I mean… how many people are needed to agree that whatever your beliefs are, are in fact your beliefs?

I mean… we hear about crazy Christians committing abuses ( think Carrie’s mom or FLDS) but the news never has to point out, oh but this isn’t actually what “real” Christian’s believe… why would they need to do that with other crazy people beliefs?

[Aletheia]

I mean… how many people are needed to agree that whatever your beliefs are, are in fact your beliefs?

If someone follows Santeria, would it be responsible for the press to quote their religion as "Christian"?

[Slimshandy]

I mean… how many people are needed to agree that whatever your beliefs are, are in fact your beliefs?

If someone follows Santeria, would it be responsible for the press to quote their religion as "Christian"?

Why wouldn’t the press say “Santeria”?

[Aletheia]

I mean… how many people are needed to agree that whatever your beliefs are, are in fact your beliefs?

If someone follows Santeria, would it be responsible for the press to quote their religion as "Christian"?

Why wouldn’t the press say “Santeria”?

The motives of the press in this hypothetical situation are irrelevant, because it is part of the 'given' that (for whatever reason) a journalist wrote a story in which they incorrectly attributed someone's religion.

And the question was, would that be a responsible thing for the journalist to have done?

[Slimshandy]

If someone follows Santeria, would it be responsible for the press to quote their religion as "Christian"?

Why wouldn’t the press say “Santeria”?

The motives of the press in this hypothetical situation are irrelevant, because it is part of the 'given' that (for whatever reason) a journalist wrote a story in which they incorrectly attributed someone's religion.

And the question was, would that be a responsible thing for the journalist to have done?

Lol why are we doing hypotheticals where the journalist incorrectly attributed someone’s religion?

Because you don’t personally feel like the guy that sacrificed a soul to the beast was satanic?