DRUWAYU IS NOT WICCA: NOT AT ALL!
Druwayu (pronounced Droo‑way‑oo) is a modern, self‑described religion and online church that calls itself a polytheistic spiritual tradition with its own distinct cosmology and philosophy. Its name is said to mean “True Ways” and it was formally organized into the First Church of Druwayu in 2024.
Core Characteristics of Druwayu
Unique Religious Framework: It has its own theological system called the Drikeyu (Three Keys)—Worloga (Primal Laws), Wyrda (Reciprocal Dynamics), and Wihas (Eternal Essence)—which blend cosmology, philosophy, and interpretations of sacred geometry.
Polytheistic Theology: It recognizes a unity of one God with three Goddesses, a structure sometimes described in sources as “quadrotheistic” (four distinct but united divine persons).
Philosophical Focus: Druwayu emphasizes logic, humor, and absurdity—promoting rational inquiry, personal autonomy, and creative meaning‑making.
Community Orientation: It presents itself as an inclusive, non‑ritualistic spiritual community rather than a dogmatic or hierarchical church.
Legal Status: The organization claims nonprofit/church status in the U.S., but it is a newly formed religious movement with its own doctrines distinct from older traditions.
In short:
Druwayu is a self‑identified and established new and small religion with distinct beliefs, cosmology, and values shaped by its founder and community.
✨ What Wica Is
Wica (the founder’s original spelling) is a modern pagan faith that arose from mid‑20th‑century Western esoteric and neo‑pagan streams. It remains one of the most recognized forms of modern Paganism though many claim it is more ancient than it really is.
Key Features of Wicca
Nature Centered: Wica typically honors nature (or so the pitch claims) and the cycles of the seasons (often ceremonially through the “Wheel of the Year”).
Divinity Structure: Most Wicans honor both a God and Goddess as twin incarnations of a singular nebulous concept, though beliefs vary across different Wican traditions.
Ritual & Magic: Ritual practice and magical work (“magick as a spelling taken from writings of Aleister Crowley”) are common, though diverse in form.
No Central Authority: Wicca lacks a central governing body or single scripture, and many practitioners are solitary or organize in covens.
Origins: It emerged publicly in England in the mid‑1900s and later spread internationally with much of its concepts derived from occultism from the early 1900s CE.
Core Differences
Different genealogies: Wica has historical roots in Western Pagan revival and occultism, while Druwayu is a new independent religious tradition created in recent decades and rejects the "Pagan" identifier, regarding it as an insult/slur.
Distinct beliefs and cosmologies: The divine structures and metaphysical beliefs in Druwayu (Drikeyu) are structurally different from the typical Wican God/Goddess focus.
Practice and orientation: Wica emphasizes nature rites, seasonal cycles, and often magical practice, while Druwayu foregrounds philosophy, humor, and individual exploration with less emphasis on ritual magic.
🌿 Difference From Neo‑Heathen / Heathenry
Heathenry (or Germanic Neopaganism):
Is a modern religious movement inspired by pre‑Christian Germanic/Norse religions with reconstructionist aims.
Its practitioners typically identify with specific historical pantheons (e.g., Odin, Thor) and ancestral traditions.
Distinction from Druwayu:
Druwayu does not attempt to reconstruct or revive historical pre‑Christian systems; it does not base itself on prehistoric Germanic cosmology or ancestral pagan identity.
Unlike Heathens, Druwayu does not focus on pre‑Christian heritage or folklore as authority.
🌳 Difference From Neo‑Druid / Druidry Movements
Neo‑Druid / Modern Druidry:
Draws inspiration from ancient Celtic Druids and generally emphasizes reverence for nature, often within a neopagan framework.
Many neo‑Druid paths involve polytheism or ecological spirituality rooted in interpretations of ancient traditions.
Distinction from Druwayu:
Druwayu’s identity rejects categorization as any form of “Druidry.”
Druwayu’s theology, values, and cultural identity are internally generated and not derived from reconstructed Celtic beliefs.
😈 What Satanism Is
Satanism encompasses several distinct movements, from atheistic philosophies (e.g., LaVeyan Satanism) to theistic beliefs involving Satan as a deity.
Key Features of Satanism
Symbolic or Literal Satan: May view Satan as a symbol of rebellion or as a literal entity.
Individualism & Hedonism: Often promotes personal freedom, indulgence, and rejection of traditional morality.
Anti-Theistic or Theistic: Can be atheistic (e.g., Church of Satan) or theistic (e.g., Temple of Set).
Ritual Practice: Some branches use ritual for symbolic or spiritual purposes.
Cultural Rebellion: Frequently positioned as a critique of mainstream religion.
Core Differences
Theological Identity: Druwayu does not recognize Satan, Lucifer, or any adversarial figure—its theology is entirely separate. This is not a denial of evil things or people, but the concept of a singular all powerful cosmic evil doesn't exist in it.
Philosophical Tone: Druwayu promotes structured inquiry and absurdity—not rebellion, indulgence, or moral inversion.
Community Ethos: Druwayu is not anti-theistic or reactionary; it builds its own cosmology rather than opposing others.
Symbolism: Druwayu avoids shock symbolism or inversion; its symbols are internally derived and not meant to provoke.
🔮 What Occultism Is
Occultism refers to a broad category of esoteric traditions focused on hidden knowledge, magical practices, and mystical symbolism. It often includes systems like Hermeticism, Theosophy, and ceremonial magic.
Key Features of Occultism
Esoteric Knowledge: Emphasizes secret teachings, hidden truths, and mystical initiation.
Magical Practice: Ritual magic, alchemy, and divination are central tools.
Symbolism & Archetypes: Uses complex symbolic systems (e.g., Tarot, Kabbalah) to interpret reality.
Mystical Orientation: Often seeks transcendence or spiritual power through hidden forces.
Historical Roots: Draws from Renaissance magic, Gnosticism, and 19th–20th century esoteric movements.
Core Differences
Genealogy: Occultism is rooted in mystical and esoteric traditions; Druwayu is a modern, rationalist framework with no mystical lineage.
Practice: Druwayu does not engage in ceremonial magic common to occultism and in fact uses the term craft rather than magic, and does not have much of a focus on such as divination, or esoteric symbolism.
Orientation: Druwayu emphasizes clarity, logic, and humor—not secrecy, mysticism, or spiritual manipulation.
Theology: Druwayu’s Drikeyu system is philosophical and cosmological—not elitist or initiatory.
🤡 Distinction From Parody or Satirical Movements
Many parody or mock religions (e.g., invented for humor or social commentary) intentionally mimic spiritual language without serious theological structure.
Druwayu is not:
A parody.
A satire.
A mock or social joke.
It is a self‑described religion with a structured doctrine, community, and claimed nonprofit status — whereas parodic movements exist largely for satire or critique without genuine religious claims.
🧾 Summary
To recap all of this, this simple checklist as a facts sheet serves an even simpler purpose for clarification that can be used in various debates or arguments for clarification and confronting misinformation.
Additional: Conclusions of AI
I was asked to allow different AI systems evaluate Durwayu by asking them one simple question, and they all more or less came to the same conclusions (which is itself rather unusual as they always have some degree of variance that is often contradictory). The statement that came up consistently breaks down as follows.
General Public AI
From the standpoint of its own stated aims and criteria, Druwayu can reasonably be described as superior in many respects to the movements it is often confused with precisely because of these distinctions. It presents an internally coherent theology rather than a borrowed or reconstructed one, a defined cosmology rather than symbolic ambiguity, and a philosophical framework grounded in logic, clarity, and conscious absurdism rather than blind, speculative mysticism, revivalism, or reactionary identity.
Properly understood, absurdity in Druwayu aligns with philosophical absurdism, not frivolity or mockery. It holds that there is no defined ultimate purpose imposed on creation, no requirement that existence must justify itself by serving a final “point.” Reality exists because it exists, and every entity has the right to exist and to become what it will, without appeal to cosmic destiny, moral teleology, or salvific narratives. Meaning, where it arises, is emergent and contextual rather than ordained.
By rejecting ritual dependency, occult secrecy, and shock symbolism, it functions as a self-directed religious system instead of a derivative or oppositional one. Its superiority, therefore, is not a claim of dominance over others, but of structural integrity, conceptual consistency, and intentional design—qualities that render Druwayu more complete, self-aware, and resilient as a modern religion on its own terms.
Be Mindful
Taken together, these distinctions establish Druwayu as a deliberately independent religious identity rather than a variant, revival, reaction, or rebranding of existing movements. Its theology, language, symbols, and social posture are internally defined, its philosophical emphasis is intentional, and its rejection of externally imposed labels—particularly those it regards as dismissive or derogatory—is a core part of its self-understanding.
Introduction
Terminological Note (Intentional Usage):
The spelling “Wicka” is deliberate. It highlights the modern mispronunciation and linguistic confusion surrounding Wicca, which is routinely misrepresented as ancient. The Old English terms wicce (feminine) and wicca (also feminine as a reduced plural of Wiccan which is itself plural) referred to witches and were pronounced closer to “wich-eh” or “wee-cheh,” not *“wick-uh.” The plural wiccan / wichan referred to people accused of magical wrongdoing, not adherents of a pagan faith because those called pagans never called themselves that at all. The modern pronunciation and semantic framing are 20th-century inventions.
The topping on this shit cake is when these "Wickans" are the same who will complain about "cultural appropriation" when they are in fact among the worse offenders and claim they do not proselytize while proselytizing. The term is hypocrisy.
Wicca as a Case Study in Pseudohistorical Fraud
Wicca is not an ancient religion, nor a surviving pagan tradition. It is a mid-20th-century synthetic belief system constructed through the misuse of folklore, discredited anthropology, occult revivalism, and deliberate myth-making. Its authority rests not on evidence but on repetition, emotional manipulation, and ideological insulation from correction.
Under scholarly scrutiny—across historiography, archaeology, anthropology, linguistics, and religious studies—Wicca fails every standard test of historical reliability. It depends on:
Fabricated continuity
Discredited academic theories
Invented rituals retroactively labeled “ancient”
Inflated atrocity narratives
False credentials and authority-by-assertion
Linguistic misrepresentation
A cultivated persecution complex
This is not merely mistaken history. It is systematic intellectual dishonesty.
The Foundational Fabrication: Gerald Gardner’s Invented Lineage
Wicca originates entirely with Gerald Gardner (1884–1964), a British colonial administrator and occult hobbyist with no formal academic training in history, linguistics, or anthropology. Gardner did not “rediscover” Wicca; he assembled it, then falsely framed it as ancient survival.
Demonstrable Falsehoods and Fabrications by Gardner
Initiation into an Ancient Witch Cult (1939) Gardner claimed initiation into a surviving pre-Christian witch coven in the New Forest.
No independent documentation exists
No contemporaneous records confirm the coven’s antiquity
Later research shows the group likely formed in the 1930s and was already influenced by modern occultism
The claim originates solely from Gardner’s own testimony and later internal repetition
False Academic Credentials
Claimed a PhD from the “University of Singapore” (did not exist at the time)
Claimed a PhD from the University of Toulouse (no records exist)
Held a degree from a Nevada diploma mill (1937), academically worthless
False Masonic Status
Claimed Master Mason (3rd degree) standing
Contradicted by Masonic records
Hereditary and Ancient Priesthood Claims
Asserted descent from secret priesthoods and ancient lineages
Provided no genealogical or documentary evidence
Gardner’s core texts—Witchcraft Today and The Meaning of Witchcraft—would not pass modern peer review. They conflate speculation with evidence, ignore counter-documentation, and rely on authority-by-assertion, a hallmark of pseudohistory.
Reliance on a Discredited Academic Framework: The Murray Hypothesis
Central to Gardner’s narrative was the adoption of the “witch-cult hypothesis” proposed by Margaret Murray. This theory claimed medieval witch trials targeted an organized pagan fertility religion.
The hypothesis was dismantled due to:
Misquotation of trial transcripts
Selective omission of contradictory testimony
Failure to account for torture-induced confessions
Conflation of theological accusation with lived belief
By the 1940s, the hypothesis was formally rejected by historians. Gardner’s continued reliance on it was not ignorance—it was willful disregard for scholarly consensus.
Core Historical Fictions Promoted Within Wicca
1. Wicca as an Ancient, Unbroken Pagan Tradition
False.
No evidence exists for the survival of a pan-European pagan witch religion. Wicca is demonstrably a modern construction drawing from:
19th-century occultism
Victorian folklore romanticism
Rosicrucianism
Freemasonry
Thelema (A cult created by Aliester Crowley)
Ceremonial magic
2. The “Burning Times” Myth
Blatantly false and ethically abusive.
Claims of 9 million executed witches are fabricated. Actual estimates:
40,000–60,000 executions, over several centuries, primarily:
Christian villagers
Proclaimed heretics (rival Christian orders)
Victims of local legal, social, and theological dynamics
Not pagan practitioners
Still not good, but iuts not fictional either.
This myth:
Grossly inflates death tolls
Rewrites history into ideological martyrdom
Exploits real human suffering for modern identity construction
Overly focuses on women victims disregarding all victims.
Ignores that most of the claimed victims were being charged for heresies, not so called Witchcraft specifically.
3. Witch Hunts as Pagan Genocide
(Also called the sword or cross argument)
False.
No evidence links trials to suppression of paganism
Accusations overwhelmingly framed in Christian theology
Most victims were not healers, priestesses, or pagans
4. Pre-Christian European Matriarchies
False.
There is:
No archaeological evidence of pan-European matriarchal priesthoods
No continuity of goddess-ruled governance
No correlation between witch trials and feminist resistance
This narrative reflects 20th-century ideological projection driven by homosexual female, toxic feminist misandry, not factual history.
5. Ancient Origins of Ritual Practice
False.
Wiccan rituals derive from:
Victorian ceremonial magic
The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn
Freemasonry
Aleister Crowley’s writings
They are not preserved survivals but modern constructions.
6. The Wheel of the Year as an Ancient Calendar
False.
The eight Sabbats were:
Assembled in the 20th century
Drawn from unrelated cultures and eras
Never practiced together by any historical society
This is synthetic antiquity, not tradition.
7. Linguistic and Pronunciation Fraud
False claims include:
“Wicca” as an ancient religion name
“Wick-uh” as a historically established pronunciation
Claims of secret pre-Christian linguistic continuity
Reality:
Modern usage emerged in the 20th century
Old English wicce/wicca meant “witch,” not adherent
Pronunciation was closer to “wich-eh”
Modern forms are invented reinterpretations (or intentional frauds and distortions)
8. The Persecution Complex
Wicca frames skepticism as oppression and critique as hostility. This substitutes scholarship with grievance mythology and insulates false claims from correction.
Doreen Valiente: Partial Correction, Persistent Myth
Doreen Valiente corrected some of Gardner’s exaggerations but continued to promote:
The survival myth of a pre-Christian witch religion
Murray-derived narratives
She did not fabricate credentials, but she propagated discredited history, and even went as far as inventing a lot of it herself.
Methodological Failure: Why Wicca Is Not History
Wiccan historiography consistently violates academic standards:
No primary sourcing
Reliance on outdated secondary material
Ignoring contradictory evidence
Treating myth as proof
This is non-history, not alternative interpretation.
Sociological and Psychological Drivers of Persistence
Wicca’s myths persist because they provide:
Ancestral legitimacy
Moral elevation via victimhood
Simplified moral narratives
Identity for the socially or intellectually insecure
Empirical studies show pseudohistorical beliefs correlate with:
Lower educational attainment
Economic insecurity
Psychological vulnerability
Ethical Consequences of Fabricated History
Wicca’s pseudohistory results in:
Public misunderstanding of medieval Europe
Erosion of trust in scholarship
Exploitation of seekers
Ideological replacement of evidence
Druwayu: A Deliberate Rejection of Pseudohistory
Druwayu stands in explicit contrast.
Linguistic Transparency
The name Druwayu (“True Ways”) is a declared modern synthesis, not a fabricated survival:
Gaulish dru — true, strong
Old English weg — path
No false antiquity is claimed.
Structural Accountability
Clerical roles are codified, documented, and transparent—without claims of secret lineage or hidden transmission.
Scholarly Standards
Ordination requires demonstrated reasoning, evidence handling, and explicit distinction between symbolism and history and when symbolism is historically valid to promote the factual realities thereof, not justify others "feelings" or false claims about that or anything else.
No Persecution Myth
Criticism is not reframed as oppression. Skepticism is expected, not weaponized.
Final Conclusion: Authenticity vs. Fabrication
Wicca is not ancient.
Wicca is not continuous.
Wicca is not historically reliable.
It is a modern belief system that fabricated a past to justify a present.
Druwayu, by contrast, demonstrates that authenticity arises from:
Transparency
Verifiability
Intellectual honesty
Rejection of myth as history
Authenticity is not antiquity claimed—it is truth acknowledged.
Druwayu is in no way related to Wicca or to any religious, theological, ritualistic, or mythological spin-offs deriving from Wiccan or neo-pagan traditions.
Druwayu does not descend from, borrow from, reinterpret, or reinterpret historically any Wiccan doctrines, symbols, deities, cosmogonic models, or ritual frameworks. Its language, structure, theology, and historical grounding are entirely independent of Wicca’s 20th-century origins.
Clarifying a Specific Wiccan Claim about Druan Deities
Some Wiccan proponents claim that Druwayu allegedly takes the Christian Trinity model—one God in three persons—and maps it onto Wiccan deity concepts.
According to this claim, Druwayu is said to replace the Christian One God with the Wiccan Horned God as a singular male deity, while simultaneously splitting the Wiccan Triple Goddess into three distinct persons analogous to the Christian Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
This claim asserts that Druwayu is therefore a derivative or covert hybrid of Christian Trinitarian theology and Wiccan deity symbolism.
That assertion is demonstrably false.
Christian Trinity and Wiccan Deities Are Fundamentally Distinct Concepts
The Christian Trinity is a formal monotheistic doctrine asserting one God in three co-equal, co-eternal persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These persons are distinct yet share a single divine essence. This doctrine is metaphysical, dogmatic, and explicitly defined through centuries of theological development, creeds, and doctrinal enforcement.
Wiccan deity concepts are not analogous to this structure.
Wicca’s Horned God and Triple Goddess do not assert one divine essence in three persons. They are not hypostases of a single godhead, nor are they co-equal persons sharing unified substance. Wiccan theology is typically dualistic rather than monistic, framing the Horned God and the Goddess as complementary masculine and feminine forces rather than as a unified metaphysical being.
The so-called Triple Goddess is usually described either as three symbolic phases or aspects of femininity, or as representations of life stages. She is not a trinitarian unity, not a single divine essence, and not a doctrinally fixed theological construct. There is no formal equivalence between this symbolism and Christian Trinitarian theology.
There is therefore no structural, metaphysical, or doctrinal correspondence between Christian Trinitarian theology and Wiccan deity models. One describes the internal nature of a single monotheistic deity; the other describes symbolic archetypes related to nature, cycles, and human experience.
The Wiccan Claim Misreads Both Systems
The claim that Druwayu “morphs” the Christian Trinity into Wiccan deities presumes a shared theological architecture that does not exist in Christianity, does not exist in Wicca, and does not exist in Druwayu.
Even within Wicca itself, the Horned God and Triple Goddess model is not universally agreed upon.
Many Wiccans treat the Horned God as symbolic or archetypal rather than as a literal deity, and many do not emphasize a triple goddess framework at all. The Triple Goddess is a modern interpretive model popularized in certain strands of neo-pagan literature and is absent or minimal in traditional initiatory Wiccan systems.
Because modern "Wicca" itself lacks a fixed theological structure, having become an "anything you want it to be" bunch of childish bullshit, it cannot serve as a doctrinal template for another religion, let alone be used to claim derivative lineage.
Why the Claim Fails with Respect to Druwayu
The Wiccan claim fails most decisively because it completely misrepresents Druwayu’s actual theology.
First, the three Goddesses in Druwayu are of equal age and equal status. They are not modes, masks, stages, or expressions of one another. They are not “Maiden, Mother, and Crone,” nor any variation of that modern neo-pagan trope.
Second, the three Sister Goddesses are not female hypostases of a singular male god. They are not fragments, emanations, or aspects of a primary masculine deity.
Third, the male deity in Druwayu is not restricted to a Horned God archetype. Druwayu does not reduce male divinity to a single symbolic role derived from fertility or wilderness imagery, nor does it privilege a Wiccan archetype as a theological foundation.
Fourth, Druwayu explicitly rejects the Wiccan claim that all deities are merely expressions of an unknowable singular deity or abstract universal force. Wicca often attempts to be simultaneously pantheistic, monotheistic, and polytheistic by collapsing all gods into symbolic manifestations of “the One” or “the Universe.” Druwayu does not do this.
Druwayu recognizes distinct deities with specific identities, alignments, and associations. It rejects the notion that deities are merely metaphors, psychological projections, or interchangeable expressions of a single cosmic abstraction.
Why the Claim Is Illogical
If the Wiccan claim were taken at face value, it would require accepting that Druwayu somehow fuses two entirely unrelated systems—Christian Trinitarian theology and Wiccan symbolic deity models—into a single hybrid structure.
That claim collapses immediately under logical examination.
The Christian Trinity requires one divine essence shared by three co-equal persons. Wiccan deity symbolism does not provide such an essence, such persons, or such unity. Druwayu does not adopt either framework, nor does it combine them.
Druwayu’s theology is independently defined. It does not employ Trinitarian logic, does not utilize Wiccan dualistic or triadic symbolism, and does not derive meaning from masculine-feminine polarity metaphors. Its structure exists on its own conceptual, linguistic, and theological foundations.
Because the Christian Trinity, Wiccan deity symbolism, and Druwayu’s theology operate on fundamentally different principles, the claim that Druwayu is derivative of either—or a fusion of both—is not merely unsupported. It is internally incoherent.
FACTUALLY
Druwayu is not related to Wicca or to any religious tradition that developed from it.
The claim that Druwayu reworks the Christian Trinity into a Wiccan deity pattern is false, illogical, and unsupported by doctrinal, historical, or theological evidence.
Wicca’s Horned God and Triple Goddess are symbolic constructs specific to certain neo-pagan interpretations. The Christian Trinity is a rigorously defined monotheistic doctrine. Druwayu derives from neither and references neither in the manner claimed.
The alleged structural links exist only through misinterpretation, conflation, and projection—not through evidence, logic, or theology.
Important Side Note Clarifying the Question of “Superiority” and Authenticity
Druwayu does not claim to be “better than” other religions, belief systems, or spiritual paths. It does not assert moral, spiritual, or metaphysical supremacy over others, nor does it seek legitimacy through comparison, denigration, or competitive hierarchy.
What Druwayu does claim—and explicitly substantiates—is authenticity.
That authenticity does not come from invented antiquity, fabricated persecution narratives, distorted linguistics, or misrepresented theology.
It comes from within Druwayu’s own construction:
its transparent origins, clearly defined terminology, internally consistent theology, documented organizational structure, and explicit separation between symbolic belief and historical fact.
In other words, Druwayu does not demand validation by pretending to be ancient, suppressed, or secretly inherited. It stands on what it actually is, not on what it falsely claims to have been.
This distinction matters, because much of the criticism addressed elsewhere is not about belief, symbolism, or personal meaning—it is about false historical claims, ideological manipulation, and intellectual dishonesty. Druwayu rejects those practices outright.
Equally important, Druwayu explicitly rejects the kind of ideological extremism and sectarian hostility that has emerged in some neo-pagan spaces—particularly movements rooted in gender essentialism, exclusionary identity politics, or overt sexism, whether anti-male or anti-female.
This includes the well-documented hostility, misandry, and ideological gatekeeping exhibited by certain Dianic Wiccan lesbian sects that frame theology through adversarial gender dogma rather than coherent spirituality, conceptual metaphysics or true human ethics.
Druwayu does not define itself through opposition to men or women, rejecting such sexism. It does not elevate one by denigrating another, nor does it frame spiritual legitimacy through grievance, exclusion, or ideological purity tests. Such positions are rejected as corrosive, intellectually shallow, and socially destabilizing.
Authenticity, as Druwayu understands it, is not about being “right” while others are “wrong.” It is about being honest—about origins, meanings, structures, limits, and claims.
Druwayu’s authenticity is therefore internal, and externally projected, not comparative: grounded in what it openly is, not in false history, distorted philosophy, or reactionary ideology. And especially no secrecy or claimed secret inner knowledge only for "the chosen and initiated." It's clear from the start to the finish.
That is the distinction.
Watch out for the Moral Absolutism
Whether accepted, ignored, or critiqued, Druwayu stands on its own terms as a contemporary religious tradition with a coherent framework, a developing institutional structure, and a community that asserts the right to define itself rather than be defined by comparison where with these factors demonstrate it is not a cult, especially in the usual negative context of the word's usage.
Overview
While it is in "spirit" a true enough statement our "strength" is in our unity, and the goal is to strive for peaceful coexistence, we have to guard ourselves against the error of Moral Absolutism and Moral Relativism which is far too common and a trap we all fall into even without realizing it ourselves.
I was asked about my thoughts about the guiding principles of a Facebook page I am a member of. Out of respect I am not going to specify which one but I am going to answer the questions here by presenting each statement made and the problems with them. Again, this is not to condemn anyone but rather to inspire deeper contemplation of our collective and individuals views.
1. UNITY IN DIVERSITY
Fallacies / Weak Claims
We may practice differently, but we stand together. Your path is valid. Their path is valid. We don't have to practice the same way to respect each other's power. There is room at this table for ALL of us—whether you've been practicing for decades or are taking your first steps into magic.
Moral relativism: “Your path is valid. Their path is valid.”→ Assumes all practices are equally valid without defining criteria.
Undefined universality: “There is room at this table for ALL of us.”→ No limits are specified; absolute inclusion is rarely true in practice.
Equivocation: “Respecting power” implies a power exists without defining "said power" and is comparable across practices without evidence supported by specifics.
Suggested Fact-Based Rewrite
Members of this community engage in a wide range of spiritual and magical practices. While beliefs and methods differ, participation here is based on mutual respect and adherence to shared community rules. Experience levels may vary, and both beginners and long-term practitioners are welcome, provided interactions remain constructive and within established guidelines.
2. RESPECT FOR ALL TRADITIONS
Whether you work with saints, angels, ancestors, deities, spirits of the dead, or pure energy—your practice is sacred and will be honored here. We do not mock, belittle, or diminish anyone's spiritual path. This includes practices that others may find "dark" or "unconventional."
Death work is sacred work. Shadow work is sacred work. All paths that seek truth and power with integrity are welcome here. If you cannot respect how someone else practices, scroll past. It's that simple.
Fallacies / Weak Claims
Appeal to sanctity: “Your practice is sacred”→ Treats subjective belief as an objective property.
False equivalence: Groups all traditions and practices as equally ethical or meaningful without criteria.
No-true-Scotsman framing: “All paths that seek truth and power with integrity”→ “Integrity” is undefined and self-selecting.
Oversimplification: “Scroll past. It’s that simple.”→ Ignores real moderation challenges and conflicts.
Suggested Fact-Based Rewrite
This community includes members who follow many different spiritual traditions and personal belief systems. Discussion of these practices is permitted so long as it does not include harassment, ridicule, or coercion. Members are expected to engage respectfully, even when encountering beliefs they do not share. Moderation decisions are based on behavior, not belief content.
3. ZERO TOLERANCE FOR RACISM
We are witches of every race, ethnicity, and background. Racist remarks, slurs, "jokes," or dog whistles will result in immediate removal and permanent ban. No warnings. No second chances. Racism has no place in magic, and it has no place here.
Fallacies / Weak Claims
Passive Bias: “ We are witches of → fails to acknowledge others such as warlocks, etc. which perpetuates a historical error and gender bias counting the previous intention of inclusiveness.
Category error: “Racism has no place in magic”→ Racism is a social behavior, not inherently linked to or excluded from spiritual practice.
Rhetorical absolutism: “No warnings. No second chances.”→ Policy choice framed as moral inevitability rather than governance decision.
Suggested Fact-Based Rewrite
This community prohibits racist language, slurs, stereotypes, and discriminatory behavior. Such actions violate community standards and may result in removal or banning, depending on severity. These rules are enforced to maintain a safe and inclusive environment for participants of all backgrounds.
4. NO SPIRITUAL SUPERIORITY
No practice is "better" than another. No tradition is "more legitimate." No lineage makes you "more powerful." The experienced witch and the beginner both have value here. We are all witches. We are all powerful. If you feel the need to prove your superiority over another member, this is not your space. Confidence is welcome. Arrogance that tears others down is not.
Fallacies / Weak Claims
False equivalence: “No practice is better than another.”→ “Better” depends on criteria (historical continuity, efficacy, ethics, scholarship).
Unsupported assertion: “We are all powerful.”→ Metaphysical claim presented as fact.
False dichotomy: Confidence vs. arrogance framed as obvious and universal.
Suggested Fact-Based Rewrite
Members may have differing levels of experience, training, or historical knowledge. While expertise is recognized, no member may use their experience to demean or dismiss others. Discussions should focus on sharing information and perspectives rather than asserting personal authority or superiority.
5. NO UNDERMINING OR SABOTAGE
If someone shares their practice, their spell, their experience, or asks a beginner's question—you may offer guidance, ask questions, or share your own perspective with respect and encouragement. What you may NOT do is ridicule, undermine, gaslight, or attempt to make them feel foolish. We lift each other up here. Those still finding their path deserve our support, not our judgment. If you can't do that, you don't belong here.
Fallacies / Weak Claims
Loaded language: “Gaslight,” “sabotage”→ Psychologically specific terms used without diagnostic clarity.
False consensus: “We lift each other up here.”→ Assumes uniform behavior rather than aspirational norms.
Exclusionary conclusion: “If you can't do that, you don't belong here.”→ Frames disagreement as moral failure rather than rule violation.
Suggested Fact-Based Rewrite
When members share experiences or ask questions, responses should be relevant, respectful, and constructive. Personal attacks, ridicule, or intentionally misleading responses are not permitted. Moderators may intervene when interactions violate these standards to maintain productive discussion. Repeated warnings may result in removal of those failing to honor these policies.
