I know exactly what Scientology is.
May I suggest you read up on the criminal activities of other more traditional religions.
A good point to start would be the funding of terrorist organisations or the hiding of peadophiles.
The difference being that in those cases it is possible to separate the religion from the organisation. One can be a Christian without being part of any of the main churches. Christianity ISN'T the Church, the Church is just a Christian organisation. $cientology IS the Church of $cientology. Try practising it outside the Church and they'll slap you with an intellectual property lawsuit.
This isn't about the law licensing it as a religion, but a couple who want to get married wanting to do it in a Scientology chapel which wasn't licensed.
Just because they've licensed the chapel for marriages doesn't mean Scientology suddenly a state recognised religion. You can marry in hotels, stately homes and castles these days and as long as they're licensed for marriages, they don't have to be religious buildings.
Yes I have. Have you heard of a young woman, in need of medical help, being held against her will until she died? Of 16-year-olds being trafficked abroad and basically forced to work as slaves?
Tell me the last time the Catholic Church forbade a mother to attend the funeral of her only child, the way Scientology did last year?
Does the Catholic Church force female staff members to have abortions because having a child would cut down the amount of hours they could work in a week?
This isn't about the law licensing it as a religion, but a couple who want to get married wanting to do it in a Scientology chapel which wasn't licensed.
Just because they've licensed the chapel for marriages doesn't mean Scientology suddenly a state recognised religion. You can marry in hotels, stately homes and castles these days and as long as they're licensed for marriages, they don't have to be religious buildings.
I'm afraid you're wrong. The Scientology buliding could have been licensed for marriages, but would have had to have been open to everyone.
This whole case was just a ruse to get Scientology recognised as a religion because the 'church' will be able to claim millions of pounds in tax relief now.
Yes I have. Have you heard of a young woman, in need of medical help, being held against her will until she died? Of 16-year-olds being trafficked abroad and basically forced to work as slaves?
Tell me the last time the Catholic Church forbade a mother to attend the funeral of her only child, the way Scientology did last year?
Does the Catholic Church force female staff members to have abortions because having a child would cut down the amount of hours they could work in a week?
No it just encourages worldwide bigotry, the spread of disease and treats its sexually abusive priests like sports stars with all their promotions and transfer deals and protecting them from the law.
Did you hear the one about the Irish woman who wasn't allowed an abortion and died because of it?
The punchline is God. Let's stop pretending these guys are somehow worse, they are amateurs in comparison to the real religious bigwigs out there dragging humanity down.
Good for science I say. Scientists have for many years been the butt of jokes and now they have formed a union so as not to be ridiculed. Nerds no more.
I'm afraid you're wrong. The Scientology buliding could have been licensed for marriages, but would have had to have been open to everyone.
This whole case was just a ruse to get Scientology recognised as a religion because the 'church' will be able to claim millions of pounds in tax relief now.
But this isn't state recognition of it as a religion. It would take an act of Parliament to do that and as there's been so much controversy over it back in the 60's and 70's I doubt the government will be doing that any time soon.
The Church of Scientology has around eight million members
With A-list celebrities among its followers and a string of unsavoury allegations from former members, the Church of Scientology is rarely far from the headlines.
But newly released government files from the National Archives at Kew show controversy surrounding the church in the UK is nothing new.
In the 1960s and 1970s officials debated whether or not to lift a ban on foreigners entering the UK to work or study at the church.
In the documents, high-ranking mandarins referred to the church as "evil" and some described it repeatedly as a "cult".
Many of the documents discussed a series of lawsuits filed by the church in the years after the entry ban was introduced in 1968.
Set up in the United States in 1954 the church, according to the files, started to spread to the UK in the 1960s.
It offered self-improvement on the basis of the writings of the late science-fiction author L Ron Hubbard, who spelled out principles that he called Scientology and Dianetics.
John Sweeney shouted at a Scientologist during a documentary
Back in the 1970s government files revealed the church had gained a reputation for targeting critics, as well as mistreating and exploiting members.
At that time the government was considering its position in relation to Scientology and whether its entry ban was still valid.
A report into the church by Sir John Foster had argued it was wrong to exclude Scientologists when there was no law preventing them becoming UK citizens.
But the files showed some in government did not agree.
A confidential report produced by the then Department of Health and Social Security in 1977 for Home Secretary Merlyn Rees stated the church was a "considerable evil".
No it just encourages worldwide bigotry, the spread of disease and treats its sexually abusive priests like sports stars with all their promotions and transfer deals and protecting them from the law.
The punchline is God. Let's stop pretending these guys are somehow worse, they are amateurs in comparison to the real religious bigwigs out there dragging humanity down.
Scientology doesn't have a God. If you spend a few hundred thousand pounds on services you can reach the level where you get told all religious beliefs are because of alien implants.
If you want to challenge other religions for their abuses then go and do so. I'm not going to stop criticising Scientology because other religions. That's like arguing we shouldn't prosecute shoplifters because other criminals burgles homes.
The fact is this ruling means all UK taxpayers will now be subsiding an evil organisation with no redeeming features and which provides no benefit to society because it's doctrine forbids any acts of charity.
A church which advocates that gay people and those with educational and physical disabilities should be 'disposed of, quietly and without sorrow'.
But this isn't state recognition of it as a religion. It would take an act of Parliament to do that and as there's been so much controversy over it back in the 60's and 70's I doubt the government will be doing that any time soon.
It's legal recognition of it being a religion in the UK, no act of parliament required.
If you want to challenge other religions for their abuses then go and do so. I'm not going to stop criticising Scientology because other religions. That's like arguing we shouldn't prosecute shoplifters because other criminals burgles homes.
Good thing I didn't argue anything of the sort then I guess? Bash them all you want, I just find it silly to pretend they are somehow the big bad of the religious world. I see no problem with them receiving the same treatment as other religions, because inherently they are truly no different.
A sensible stance that is probably beyond some of the usual suspects on these boards.
Thank you. It does get exasperating when you are trying to expose criminal and immoral activity, but keep running into the fallacious argument that all religions are the same.
I love freedom of speech and would defend the right of anyone to believe we are all infested with the ghosts of dead aliens, it it makes them happy. Nick Xenophon summed it up beautifully in the Australian Senate when he said,
In Australia there are not limits on what you can believe but there are limits on how you can behave. It's called the law, and no one is above it.
Actually, all of you saying its as bad / the same as all the other religions are wrong; Its considerably worse....
Most other "religions" don't *require* you to pay in order to receive its teachings.
Most other "religions" don't *require* you to pay in order to receive the promised "reward"
Most other "religions" don't cut you off from friends and family if they are not part of the "religion".
Most other "religions" don't actively intimidate people.
Most other "religions" don't actively seek to shut any form of dissent / opposite POV
Most other "religions" don't adopt a military ideology in their structures, complete with militaristic uniforms and titles
Most other "religions" don't actively prevent people from leaving if they want to; even resorting to a virtual house arrest that they call "counseling". You and I may call it something completely different.
They are a pyramid scheme at best.
NB I cannot use the actual word for their "religion" which begins with a "C" because they will sue me should it ever come to their attention.
Thank you. It does get exasperating when you are trying to expose criminal and immoral activity, but keep running into the fallacious argument that all religions are the same.
You're not some pioneering crusader here. Everyone knows they're crooked and, in many cases, downright evil. But it is not fallacious to say that the other religions are just as much so.
You're not some pioneering crusader here. Everyone knows they're crooked and, in many cases, downright evil. But it is not fallacious to say that the other religions are just as much so.
Maybe. They all exercise their dreadfulness in ways that are sometimes similar and sometimes vastly different, if no less awful.
It's just silly, to me, to pedantically quibble over the statement "they're all the same" with a response like "no, these guys do THIS and THIS and THIS" when obviously the "same" is in reference to them existing to exploit their followers and exert power over as many as possible for maximum gain. That's how religions are all the same.
Your income tax will now be used to fund such practices as hooking a six-year-old child up to a basic lie detector machine so they can be repeatedly asked these questions until they give an answer the adult auditor is satisfied with.
Have you ever done anything to some else's body that you shouldn't have?
Have you ever noticed something wrong with your body that you were afraid to tell anybody about?
Since there's no lower age limit on being an auditor you can have a scenario (and it has happened) where a teenage girl gets to ask a middle-aged man such questions as,
Have you ever raped anyone?
Have you ever been raped?
Have you ever practiced cannibalism?
Have you ever practiced homosexuality?
Have you ever practiced or assisted intercourse between women?
Have you ever had intercourse with a member of your family?
Have you ever practiced sex with animals?
Have you ever exhibited yourself in public?
Have you ever hidden to watch sexual practices?
Have you ever practiced sodomy?
Have you ever had anything to do with pornography?
Have you ever taken money for giving anyone sexual intercourse?
Have you practiced sex with children?
Have you ever used hypnotism to practice sex with children?
Have you ever been a prostitute?
Have you ever slept with a member of a race of another color?
Have you ever been a voyeur?
Do you have any bastards?
Have you ever masturbated?
You're not some pioneering crusader here. Everyone knows they're crooked and, in many cases, downright evil. But it is not fallacious to say that the other religions are just as much so.
It's not a valid comparison. It's possible to follow any religion without directly financially supporting a criminal enterprise. It is not possible to be a $cientologist without directly financially supporting a criminal enterprise.
Once we start comparing $cientology to "other" religions, they've won half the battle. It makes more sense to compare them to other Ponzi schemes.
You're not some pioneering crusader here. Everyone knows they're crooked and, in many cases, downright evil. But it is not fallacious to say that the other religions are just as much so.
I've never claimed to be, but your argument to ignore the wrongs of one organisation because there are others just as bad isn't logical and is merely a diversionary tactic.
It's not a valid comparison. It's possible to follow any religion without directly financially supporting a criminal enterprise. It is not possible to be a $cientologist without directly financially supporting a criminal enterprise.
Once we start comparing $cientology to "other" religions, they've won half the battle. It makes more sense to compare them to other Ponzi schemes.
That they are more overt about their desire for gain is not enough of a distinguishing factor in my eyes. I've given my reasons above for why I compare them to other religions (some of which deserve the title "criminal enterprise" no less) and to me they are very valid.
I've never claimed to be, but your argument to ignore the wrongs of one organisation because there are others just as bad isn't logical and is merely a diversionary tactic.
Then you misunderstand, because that is in no way my argument.
Comments
The difference being that in those cases it is possible to separate the religion from the organisation. One can be a Christian without being part of any of the main churches. Christianity ISN'T the Church, the Church is just a Christian organisation. $cientology IS the Church of $cientology. Try practising it outside the Church and they'll slap you with an intellectual property lawsuit.
Just because they've licensed the chapel for marriages doesn't mean Scientology suddenly a state recognised religion. You can marry in hotels, stately homes and castles these days and as long as they're licensed for marriages, they don't have to be religious buildings.
Yes I have. Have you heard of a young woman, in need of medical help, being held against her will until she died? Of 16-year-olds being trafficked abroad and basically forced to work as slaves?
Tell me the last time the Catholic Church forbade a mother to attend the funeral of her only child, the way Scientology did last year?
Does the Catholic Church force female staff members to have abortions because having a child would cut down the amount of hours they could work in a week?
I'm afraid you're wrong. The Scientology buliding could have been licensed for marriages, but would have had to have been open to everyone.
This whole case was just a ruse to get Scientology recognised as a religion because the 'church' will be able to claim millions of pounds in tax relief now.
Did you hear the one about the Irish woman who wasn't allowed an abortion and died because of it?
The punchline is God. Let's stop pretending these guys are somehow worse, they are amateurs in comparison to the real religious bigwigs out there dragging humanity down.
But this isn't state recognition of it as a religion. It would take an act of Parliament to do that and as there's been so much controversy over it back in the 60's and 70's I doubt the government will be doing that any time soon.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jun/15/scientologist-girl-lie-abuse-allegation
Did you hear the one about the heavily pregnant woman forced to sleep in a parking garage and do heavy manual labour as punishment?
Scientology doesn't have a God. If you spend a few hundred thousand pounds on services you can reach the level where you get told all religious beliefs are because of alien implants.
If you want to challenge other religions for their abuses then go and do so. I'm not going to stop criticising Scientology because other religions. That's like arguing we shouldn't prosecute shoplifters because other criminals burgles homes.
The fact is this ruling means all UK taxpayers will now be subsiding an evil organisation with no redeeming features and which provides no benefit to society because it's doctrine forbids any acts of charity.
A church which advocates that gay people and those with educational and physical disabilities should be 'disposed of, quietly and without sorrow'.
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/london/2008/06/401702.html
It's legal recognition of it being a religion in the UK, no act of parliament required.
TBF that appears to be the view point of pretty much every (not all) religions there has ever been
A sensible stance that is probably beyond some of the usual suspects on these boards.
Thank you. It does get exasperating when you are trying to expose criminal and immoral activity, but keep running into the fallacious argument that all religions are the same.
I love freedom of speech and would defend the right of anyone to believe we are all infested with the ghosts of dead aliens, it it makes them happy. Nick Xenophon summed it up beautifully in the Australian Senate when he said,
Most other "religions" don't *require* you to pay in order to receive its teachings.
Most other "religions" don't *require* you to pay in order to receive the promised "reward"
Most other "religions" don't cut you off from friends and family if they are not part of the "religion".
Most other "religions" don't actively intimidate people.
Most other "religions" don't actively seek to shut any form of dissent / opposite POV
Most other "religions" don't adopt a military ideology in their structures, complete with militaristic uniforms and titles
Most other "religions" don't actively prevent people from leaving if they want to; even resorting to a virtual house arrest that they call "counseling". You and I may call it something completely different.
They are a pyramid scheme at best.
NB I cannot use the actual word for their "religion" which begins with a "C" because they will sue me should it ever come to their attention.
Few are as litigious.
It's just silly, to me, to pedantically quibble over the statement "they're all the same" with a response like "no, these guys do THIS and THIS and THIS" when obviously the "same" is in reference to them existing to exploit their followers and exert power over as many as possible for maximum gain. That's how religions are all the same.
http://www.xenu.net/archive/books/isd/isd-5i.htm
For example,
Since there's no lower age limit on being an auditor you can have a scenario (and it has happened) where a teenage girl gets to ask a middle-aged man such questions as,
It's not a valid comparison. It's possible to follow any religion without directly financially supporting a criminal enterprise. It is not possible to be a $cientologist without directly financially supporting a criminal enterprise.
Once we start comparing $cientology to "other" religions, they've won half the battle. It makes more sense to compare them to other Ponzi schemes.
Well that will mean loads of tax breaks for Scientology now, so expect them to expand and hoover up more members.
Personally, I'll stick with the Epsilon Program.
Kifflom! Brother Brother
I've never claimed to be, but your argument to ignore the wrongs of one organisation because there are others just as bad isn't logical and is merely a diversionary tactic.