I'm not going to pretend to know a lot about Wiccans as I have only met a handful of them online, all were young females. One thing that became clear from dialog with them is that they had all bought into an underground rebellion of sorts. It appeared to me to derive its appeal from being different and having some element of "shock value". It may well be the fastest growing religion in America but the numbers are still insignificant. It is more likely to wane in popularity in coming years than it is to maintain its recent growth, I would go as far as calling it an internet fueled fad. Absolutely, we must inevitably develop a self discipline to objectively determine the difference between that which we simply dislike and that which does in fact is causing a negative effect on society.
How does one objectively consider the consider the effect something has on society when the very words "positive" or "negative" one might use are subjective? I suspect many things you think would be a "positive" change in society, I would call "negative, and vice versa. A large portion of it is cultural, and most things factually have both positive and negative aspects, whether we are talking about religion, gay marriage, drug use, or rap music. Frankly, I don't see a whole lot of difference between a religious person proselytizing and an atheist trying to push his lack of belief, or some of his other tribal/cultural values on you. The more starry eyed the believer and his particular special blend of facts, the more in your face they get. Someone on this very forum was beating me over the head just the other day about how Obama needs to be re-elected to save this country with Keynesian economics. I asked him what he knew about economics. He told me "I've been very successful in my business dealings, so quite a bit". Just another religious asshole peddling something he doesn't know the first thing about, which, at this point in history, could have a very negative effect on society.
In my opinion whoever cites another religion for "false" does it only to make sure people don't change their mind, and doing so they still stay all united even if it can trigger some hate towards others. There is no false, if there would be 1 false then everybody should be considered false right? This subject is a delicate matter anyway and should be approached differently, you shouldn't attack each others to begin with but share your opinions in a decent manner. I'm not a religious person but I know I don't have the right to accuse or attack someone who believes in any god because we're all different and we all have the right to choose what and what not to believe in. And truth be told I'm sick with all those atheist going around and attacking others with the "I know it all and you're brainwashed". Even if it is a brainwash so what? are you brainwashed? NO! And for me those religious fanatics who claim falseness on other religions are just war mongers, same as racists with low self esteem and judgement capability.
You are making a valid point when speaking of that which is subjective but so much that is undertaken in the name of religion is pretty clear cut as being negative. Right here on this very forum we see examples of outright lies, intentional misinformation to advance religious agenda and the vilification of minorities to give but three examples of activities that are clearly detrimental to any society.
I'm going to guess that English is your second language but I think I understand most of what you are trying to say and I agree.
We get it all too well. An individual who has not done any research whatsoever on the subject of third world aid is attempting to disparage a group of people who do not share his beliefs . . . . by taking the low road. The image also represents an element of cheap self justification for providing the type of conditional aid that religious organizations have gotten away with for years. The part left out of the image and therefore depriving it of its legitimacy, is the fact that if those were two atheists missionaries, they would not be trading aid for indoctrination. It probably means something different to you.