Who & what are the demons ?

Why is that the case ?In some circumstances, I can agree - you cite neo-Nazi and Klan beliefs, and I would agree with you there.But I think that we need to have a harm based assessment of beliefs, before we feel that there is an absolute need for them to be ridiculed and tested.If someone believes in something which we feel is demonstrably wrong (YECism, demons, an athlete tying their shoes in a particular fashion to improve their chances of winning), then I think that we act disrespectfully in attacking those beliefs, unless the belief (or the desire to promulgate it in science lessons, for example) can cause harm to others.Life's a difficult old course, a lot of the time, and if someone's belief helps them through it, without harming others, then I don't begrudge them that belief.

I can agree that it is not possible to conclusively and absolutely disprove the existence of demons, but only in the logical context where you agree that:(a) the odds of their existence are precisely the same as the odds of existence of pink unicorns, fairies, Thor and Vishnu (for example); and(b) the odds of their existence are incredibly small, when compared to more mundane, prosaic explanations, for which we have considerable bodies of evidence (for example, we are aware that psychoses exist - there is a vast body of evidence to support their existence - and the odds that a murderer kills because he is psychotic are much greater than the unevidenced proposition that he was possessed by demons).(We can then have some fun debating how rational it is to ignore occam's razor)