(Disturbing images are included.)
In April and May each year, now, there comes a sudden upsurge of interest in these posts:
These slate the malpractices of ritual killing and sacrifice, and of all blood sports, and although the first one, for example, has been viewed sometimes hundreds of times a day, with a peak of 2 826 times last May, it has attracted hardly any comments to date. This indicates that the viewers were looking for support for these customs rather than to denigrate them.
I was under the misconception that Africa was providing the bulk of the interest – speculating that perhaps it was due to pending legislation or for a regularly-set subject in tertiary education. This does not appear to be the case. While South Africa does feature, a significant number of other clicks come from places like the European Union and even France and the UK. I would love to have the explanation as to why interest peaks at this time of the year. Any good guesses?
Those who contemplate inhumane practices connected with pleasing or placating spirits or barbaric ancestors, or raising some mystical energy, or in commemoration of some (undoubtedly spurious) scriptural event, or in response to a supposed commandment by some deity or prophet, are under a severe misconception. Any god or whatever who requires such practices would be unworthy of veneration and should only attract loathing and contempt. Having created something, a god requires that a part of that something be destroyed simply in order to demonstrate how much you worship him/her/it? Despicable.
Unfortunately, human nature is such that inflicting harm, or watching it inflicted, is something that is enjoyed. Having a religious or tradition-driven pretext for that harm is therefore valued by people who are prepared to submerge their intellects in order that their base instincts can climb on top of the intellects and drown them.
It is astonishing that in this modern age there has yet to be a widespread overturning of the exemptions given in national constitutions regarding archaic rights of religions or cultures. Legislation should take precedence over ‘custom’ in all matters where the ‘cultural’ or religious practices conflict with humane, health, hygienic, or safety standards, or provide undue inconvenience to non-adherents. Rights to rites should be limited.