The Internet vs Scientology

[Paelos]

Fine, just go forward with the little protest. I'm not on board. I think the tactics here suck. When the protest fails, the movement will lose steam because everyone will go, meh, and move on to the next stupid cause. Live on with the dreams of grandeur emerging from the bowels of cyberspace.

The average American won't give a shit because the few deaths were never criminally linked to the organization and the infiltration amounted to 5 years for the 11 people who were convicted thirty years ago. Honestly, this is not shocking shit. This is not OMG THEY ARE EMBEZZLING MILLIONS FROM THEIR PEOPLE AND HERE'S THE PROOF stuff.

[schild]

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh

ok

[Paelos]

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh

ok

I'm willing to believe Schild. I'm willing to believe something that happened in the last DECADE that shows me these people are filtering money to themselves. Anything concrete. Please link it and I'll completely revert the past statements and come on board. I'll hop right in line. I'm dead serious about this.

[Phildo]

May 2002 - Link

Google was accused Wednesday of effectively removing from the Internet a Web site that is critical of the Church of Scientology after it deleted links to some of the site's pages from its search engine.

[schild]

I think the bigger issue here is that Paelos has done zero research outside of maybe googling Snow White. And still decides to chime in.

Why even link to the google thing? Just link to what happened in January with the Tom Cruise videos.

[Kitsune]

Single-prong attacks aren't going to work on something as big as Scientology.  They have a lot of money, a lot of lawyers, and a lot of rubes.  Even if you wage a perfect information campaign against them and get their money stripped away by outraged governments, they'll still have their legions of adherents to whip more money out of.  The only way to decisively end them is to remove the adherents.  And that's going to be a bitch.  If the feds hadn't blown up the Davidians, they'd probably still be around today; you can't easily part a cultist from a cult.  Take away their leaders, take away the buildings, take away the money, and the cultists will still be gathering in living rooms to be culty together, and the whole thing will eventually reform with new leaders abusing and stealing from the victims.  With that in mind:

1. Stop the flow of recruits.  This is where revealing them to the public will do the most good.  If people start viewing them as a dangerous organization, they'll be less likely to fall for it.  But even if you cut out the new blood, you're left with all of the current members.  Logistics aside, money-supply for the cult aside, we're talking about a lot of people, some of whom are suffering.  That leads to

2. Get the current members out.  This is the hard part.  Set aside the content people to start with, you aren't getting them out shy of using force.  But there are plenty of people, according to accounts, who are being kept there.  Through force, coercion, blackmail, or family members being held by the cult.  We need to break those people out.  All of 'em.  There needs to be an organization dedicated to rescuing people out of Scientology.  This isn't a simple thing.  By the time a member's being kept on cult property, they usually have no cash left and no property, they could have a whole rainbow of mental traumas, and if they've been a member since childhood they're saddled with a useless education on top of it all.  So we're left with needing an organization that has the legal means to enter the place and extract people plus the financial resources for extensive rehab afterwards.  That pretty much restricts it to the governments, as it could get very messy if private citizens took it in their heads to break into private property.

[Paelos]

I think the bigger issue here is that Paelos has done zero research outside of maybe googling Snow White. And still decides to chime in.

Why even link to the google thing? Just link to what happened in January with the Tom Cruise videos.

I read the links, I saw the videos. I watch all the youtube stuff you've linked. I've looked through the belief structure stuff. The Xenu crap, the body Thetans, the levelling, the ding-grats, Clears, etc. I'm still trying to figure out where the people are pulling the frustration from on the taxes.

Most of the crimes listed by these critics were not convicted, or if they were it was for menial time. http://www.scientology-lies.com/crimesindex.html There's a list of them, go nuts. I could point to dozens of fraud cases in the Christian church as well, and they've all been nailed down by the government. Now, if you want to tell me that Scientology has now risen to the point where the government will completely turn a blind eye to the facts that are obviously out there, then we have a much larger problem.

Again, show me the money. Seriously. Where is this documentation? In other words, what have I missed?

[Aez]

I don't see how Scientology is worst than any other religion.  Do an interview with one of those dumbass from the bible belt and you'll get the same out of this world unrealistic crap. 

I prefer an organisation that steal cash from retards than an organisation than steal cash from retards while fucking the altar boy.
Not so long ago, you could steal an old women, kick her in the face, go to church, buy redemption with half the money, go directly to paradise.
Creationism?
Hardcore Islam? Blow yourself up in a pack of Jews and you'll get 77 virgins!
What about Buddhism?  What do you have to do has a blade of grass to move up the reincarnation chain?
 

[Venkman]

I'd replace "hardcore" with "brainwashed fanatical", but that's just me.

Otherwise, I'm scared to post in this thread 

Edit: Spelling

[SurfD]

The very fact that you put Buddhism in the same page (let alone same post) as Scientology leaves me little hope for you AT ALL.

[Venkman]

Ah screw it, gonna jump in:

I can see Paelos' point. I don't think he's pulling the argue-through-obfuscation thing the Tobacco industry did or the anti-global warming folks do. But I do think if we're going to support the American way of thinking, people and groups are guilty only after being proven as such.

That doesn't mean the average TV news viewer hasn't already assigned blame, because the media has already assigned blame.

The purpose of the public protests is to get the media to look at all. They're not going to look at the internet activities of a bunch of self-styled radical hackers. They can't support the Internet as a fount of activity nor information because their business is to be that for people (sound familiar?). They still consider YouTube and usergen content the exception. So that internet nonsense can be ignored.

Public displays cannot though. Too many witnesses.

[Aez]

The very fact that you put Buddhism in the same page (let alone same post) as Scientology leaves me little hope for you AT ALL.

I know Buddhism is not an evil religion but the mythology/believe is just as dumb as the others.

[Venkman]

I'm almost agnostic. However, I respect that there are religions out there and that people believe in stuff, and that for all the bad, there is some good that's come from it in a general society sense. Can we not insult the most of humanity that have some sort of belief structure please? I thought this was about the practices themselves and whether they're good and legal or bad and worthy of public protest.

Damn, I'm as bad as Geldon with the edits lately... must use Preview button.

[Aez]

It's a hard subject, I'm not trying to insult anyone.  My point is that the linked interviews are not special at all.  You could get the same type of talk from every religion.

And the link with the honk if you hate Scientology.  Replace Scientology with a more mainstream religion, how well would that pass?

[Venkman]

Ah, good point. The origins of a number of religions wouldn't really survive scrutiny any better, events otherwise erased by time and a lack of witnesses. I've always been curious what it would be like if some of the today's religions were just now forming in a connected media age, with particularly public coverage of how those religions were founded and spread.

(This is not a CoS-apologist opinion, just a general curiosity).

[Paelos]

I think there would be just as much skepticism as there was back then. The current church would call Jesus's actions unsanctioned and decry him as a fake. People would call the miracles magic tricks. They would have magicians recreate them. They would call photoshopping and camera tricks. I still believe if God spoke to the world, people would question if it was really God.

[Aez]

I think there would be just as much skepticism as there was back then. The current church would call Jesus's actions unsanctioned and decry him as a fake. People would call the miracles magic tricks. They would have magicians recreate them. They would call photoshopping and camera tricks. I still believe if God spoke to the world, people would question if it was really God.

Oh they would, and they would be damn right about it.  Miracle strangely stopped at the exact same time we discovered the technology to record/prove it. 

[Kitsune]

This has nothing to do with the beliefs and everything to do with the behavior of Scientology.  I absolutely don't care one bit about whatever beliefs a person chooses to hold.  Not my place to throw stones, live and let live, etc.  However, I get ornery about people having their cash drained out of them and being held captive.  There's a bit of a difference between "haw haw, that guy makes funny 'om' noises with his legs all curled like a pretzel!" and "maybe we shouldn't stand by while people abuse the shit out of other people in our country". 

If you replaced "Scientology" with "crazy hardline woman-stoning Islam" I'd say the same thing, but all of the woman-killing people are off in other countries and thus difficult to stop.  And if you replaced it with "crazy hardline woman-beating Christians", I'd point out that those people do get busted and arrested on a fairly regular basis in the US.

I'd also point out that being dicks isn't an inherent piece in the belief structure of Islam or Christianity but rather an example of people corrupting the source material, whereas Hubbard himself explicitly told people to be dicks to others in his writings.

[Llava]

I don't want to be a dick about it, but your sample size sucks Llava.

Admittedly.  What's your sample size for your claim that the public outside of the Internet savvy is aware of the threat of Scientology?

[stray]

I first heard about the weird stuff from a friend outside the internet. Not trying to provide an "example" really though. I just remember she was telling me about some couple she knew who were basically having their lives imposed upon in extreme ways by the church. Mainly to do with finances and property. At the time, they wanted to get out, but it was becoming harder for them to do so. I don't remember the details though.

[Chenghiz]

While the beliefs of a Scientologist seem wierd and out there, that isn't why most people have a problem with Scientology. People have a problem with it because instead of improving its community and the lives of its members, Scientology's doctrines make people poor, estrange families, and prey on peoples' weaknesses for the benefit of those who are in on the scheme. While this may also be true of some Christian organisations, most famously certain televangelists, the central doctrines of Christianity don't call for its believers to cut contact with family members who aren't "in," doesn't extort money from its members, and provides a community that is supportive and encouraging - and that's not even the real point of the religion, just an effect of the behaviors that the Bible encourages.

I don't know as much about other religions, but I should think that the comparison makes my point obvious.

[Dtrain]

Please let's not go there, Arthur - that's a debate for another time and place. I'm upset enough that comparisons to other religions are being drawn here - as that's totally not the point. But we have gone there, and I'm compelled to come along.

Most of the world's major religions came from thousands of years of traditions, culminating with a great prophet, followed by a further couple thousand years of development for them to become our current recognized institutions.

And before I go any further, let me just say that I intend no offense to anyone who is a member of a major religion. After all, even if you believe deeply in your own faith, you have to admit that they can't all be right. So please do not think I am attacking you personally.

As has been mentioned previously, the major beliefs of these religions were developed long before the advent of science; long before humanity could be expected to distinguish truth from fancy. Depending on who you are and where you grew up, you could have had a major head trip laid upon you by your parents, your community, your religions institution itself, and the thousands of years of history it represents. The social ties that bind most humans together practically guarantee that the major religions of the world will continue for a long time to come.

The problem here is that I refuse to sit idly by and let the church of scientology become one of those major religions. The difference is that scientology arrived, unbidden, entirely from the imagination of one man, who easily available evidence can prove, was a criminal and a liar. It's tradition, history and beliefs derive from easily debunked forms of pseudo-science and 50's era pulp sci-fi. As an organization it can easily be described as paranoid schizophrenic, megalomaniacal, conniving, and sociopathic - traits that were, without any surprise, shared by it's creator.

Regardless of whether or not you feel your ancestors had any chance to deny the religions they followed, you have to recognize that these are our times, our legacy to our ancestors, and our problems to either face or ignore. To those who are too apathetic to care about anything, and those who seek the advancement of scientology, I have only one thing to say: Not on my watch.

For the rest of you who do not entirely agree with the fight against scientology in particular, let me advance a line of argument. The problem with scientology is not just that it's beliefs are wrong. The problem exists in the extent to which they are willing to go on roads already well traveled by major religions. And that does make this a position that depends on the degree to which something is wrong. It's a hard position to advance for that reason. People like to think in absolutes - something is either right or wrong because X Factor=right or wrong. But you have to draw the line somewhere. The difference between a handshake and crushing someone's hand is how much force you exert. The difference between scientology's wrong beliefs and the wrong beliefs of the major religions are the extent to which they effect people.

Tithing: Most major religions ask for a tithe to advance the cause of the religion. Scientology demands a fee to study the religion and punishes you for not providing it - a condition they call 'downstat.' While the tithe suggested by most religions is quite bearable, the fee on religious materials that the scientologists charge easily amounts to hundreds of thousands of dollars to advance your knowledge in the religion. The littered corpses of burnt out bankrupt and thoroughly consumed scientologists truly are legion.

No Psychological Treatment: Most major religions have no problem with their members receiving any medical treatment that science can provide - they declared a calm truce against science long ago. One of the core tenants of scientology is that psychology is wrong. It's members forgo medical treatment in lieu of church treatment, which amounts to just more batshit crazy pseudo-science. Lisa McPherson is an extreme example, but she's become a poster child for the anti-scientologists because it strikes to the core of how the teachings and practices of scientology are dangerous. And there are plenty of other examples of people who were denied medication or treatment and met with a bad end because of it - Jeremy Perkins for example. A bit more of a hard sell because he happened to stab his mother 77 times though, but you can't say she didn't set herself up for it.

Outside Criticism: Most religions will defend themselves if attacked verbally - just as any reasonable person or organization should. The problem with scientology is that they are willing to pursue their attacks through subversive non-verbal, physical and personal means. Paulette Cooper, and Bonnie Woods to name just a couple. And that's not even getting into their legal actions designed to suppress outside information about the church. Why are they so secretive anyways?

Member Domination: The social pressures keeping people inside most major religions have already been examined. Without the benefit of thousands of years of (real) history, Scientology resorts to forced disconnects, outright extortion and kidnapping to keep it's members inside it's church. A few of the links provided previously in the thread detail these offenses.

Seriously, you may have other agendas when it comes to religion, but the current offenses of the major religions are a game of tiddlywinks compared to what scientology is doing right now in your home town. Don't compare it to any of the major religions - Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, or Hinduism. It's offenses are so many times greater in terms of magnitude so as not to be in the same ball park at all.

Special notes to Aez: the fact that your example on Islam goes right to the balalala extreme minority is not only an offense to the 99.99% of decent hardcore Muslims, but an offense to the intelligence of the readers of this board. And while you can freely discuss the problem inside the catholic church, if you tried to accuse a scientologist of having sex with an altar boy I would not be surprised if you were sued, and had your neighborhood plastered with flyers accusing you of the crime. Fanatics are truly the antithesis of progress in this world, you are right on that point. However, because of the tight control scientology exerts on it's religion, the entire organization is one of fanatics - watch that Tom Cruise promo video and tell me he's not a fanatic. Tell me the angry/crazy look that he reserves, apparently, for dramatic scenes and talking about SPs wouldn't look right at home on the face of a radical jihadist with a vest strapped full of explosives and ball bearings.

[Venkman]

I appreciate your post and your point. However, I don't forgive the origins and expansion policies and practices of the "major" religions so easily. This is not to apologize for CoS by any stretch, nor excuse their practices. The difference is we bear witness to all of this in a distributed media age, whereas in the past you (not you personally) either didn't know about it or knew not to ask about it, in the face of aggressive religious expansion (because often that expansion had less to do with faith than other reasons).

The other difference though is as you and others have mentioned: you can't so easily force a reality-tweaking belief structure in the Age of Reason, no matter how much mainstream media channels try to bark it out atcha. Backlash is expected from clear thinking folks, if they can organize.

And this leads to the protests. Being an internet-only protest means most of the masses the likes of CNN and Fox reach won't know about it. The media doesn't want to push the idea that everyone is a source of information, because then they lose their lock on it (sound familiar?). This is why the pace at which they report is roughly the same online as on TV and radio. And these are the places the masses get their info.

However, actual in-public protests are harder to ignore. Too many witnesses

So even if they start small and get laughed it, it's a start.

But I also think these shouldn't happen to the exclusion of the other things either.

[Shavnir]

For those that say the public knows about Scientology...

...why did the CoS try so hard to take down the Cruise video?

EDIT : Going by some postings about a protest today in Orlando there were between 50 and 100 people there.  This is the week before the 'main' protests.  I think a few of us here are underestimating the scale we're looking at.

[Aez]

Dtrain :

I agree with your post. I think we simply have a disconnect on the level of involvement.  I used basic one liner to put a new perspective on the interviews I saw.  Tom Cruise and Steven Fishman would look just has batshit insane if they were describing any other religious myth.

The liberty I took with easy racial profiling is exactly because I believe in the intelligence of the readers of this board.

[Dtrain]

It's all good - I probably drama queened a little on the balala thing anyways.

I'm going to the protest here in Houston for an hour before I have to go to work that day. Aside from idle conversation, that's the extent of my personal involvement in this thing. That's easy enough for anyone to do.

I figure it would be fun if for no other reason than to see what it looks like in person.

[Kitsune]

Aez,

I'm a heretic.  A bona-fide, walking and talking affront to Christianity.  I don't believe in the concept of the Trinity; the incidences of the Holy Spirit in the Bible always struck me more as the visible manifestation of divine power than an entity in and of itself, and while I have no issue with Jesus's divine origin, I'm unsure whether he should have equal billing with God.  I worry that the Trinity concept is stepping dangerously close to a violation of the second commandment (that's the 'shalt not worship other gods' one, for people not keeping track at home), just like the Catholics' Pope-and-saint-reverence has rubbed me as being a bit too close to worship.

My particular outlook lost a doctrinal fight around the fourth century; my views were fairly common in the ancient days (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism and that's Arian not Aryan; no Godwin, thank you) but got pushed out of the accepted Christian doctrine and are now essentially unheard of.  Protestant churches deviate from each other in minor details only, none of them to my knowledge stray nearly so far from the 'ground rules'.

I have deviated in a not-insignificant manner from the rest of my religion.  And I have not been excommunicated, blackmailed, threatened, kidnapped, harmed, framed, or abused.  And that is the crucial difference, here.  Among my friends, there are a couple of atheists, a couple of deists, a Wiccan, a Buddhist, a Catholic, a couple of random Protestants, and me, the Arian heretic.  We get along with our bizarre potpourri of faiths because none of us have any particular desire to be dicks about it, but more importantly because none of us are being harmed by our religions.  If one of my friends was forced to sell all their stuff to give everything they owned to their religion and had to devote most of their waking hours to working for that religion, the rest of us would have to kick their asses and drag them out.  Not because of any beef with their faith, but because it's clearly harming them; we'd do the exact same thing if they picked up an addiction to something.  There is a boundary between a healthy and an unhealthy relationship between a person and their faith, and Scientology is fostering the unhealthy kind.  This isn't at all about Hubbard and space souls, this is about a body count and a giant pile of cash.

[Dtrain]

This are serious scientology.

[DraconianOne]

I think there would be just as much skepticism as there was back then. The current church would call Jesus's actions unsanctioned and decry him as a fake. People would call the miracles magic tricks. They would have magicians recreate them. They would call photoshopping and camera tricks. I still believe if God spoke to the world, people would question if it was really God.

Oh they would, and they would be damn right about it.  Miracle strangely stopped at the exact same time we discovered the technology to record/prove it. 

You mean, like all the miracle cures that occurred at Lourdes that stopped when a medical committee was set up to oversee claims of "miraculous healings" in 1947. Wait! No they didn't.  Turns out that people are still recovering from incurable conditions for no scientifically explainable reasons.  You may be a sceptic and believe that there is a scientific explanation for these events but you can't deny that, as of yet, nobody has been able to explain it all away yet - modern technology or not.

You might also want to read up on the highly controversial figure of Sai Baba and his "cult" of followers.  He claims to have performed miracles not unlike those of Jesus - cures, materialisations and even raising from the dead.  I know people who have "witnessed" minor miracles in his presence.  Personally I think he's a charlatan and a fraud but there are plenty of people who think he isn't.  There is even alleged scientific investigation of some of his "miracles" which apparently can find no explanation although many other sceptics say it's all sleight of hand and illusion.  Apparently he's got about 50 million followers - how many people on this board have honestly heard of him?

[Tebonas]

Except the Placebo effect IS a scientific explanation, isn't it?

[DraconianOne]

Except the Placebo effect IS a scientific explanation, isn't it?

In this case, what you call placebo, others will call divine intervention.  There's no substantial proof for either.  Your decision on what to call it is likely to depend on your own beliefs - whether your god is the Christian one or Science.  The point is that these things still happen even though "we discovered the technology to record/prove it". 

[schild]

Just because we can't explain it yet, doesn't mean "these things happen."

If we called everything without an explanation a Miracle, well. I can't make a good analogy this early in the morning so I'll just use an exclamation.

HOGWARTS!

[Dtrain]

You got Jesus in my Xenu.

[schild]

Xenu drinks Olde English.

I like how he rolls.

[Sky]

And while you can freely discuss the problem inside the catholic church, if you tried to accuse a scientologist of having sex with an altar boy I would not be surprised if you were sued, and had your neighborhood plastered with flyers accusing you of the crime.

Wait. Scientologists are Republicans?