Slashdot Mirror

"If the document mentioned in the article is truthful, Scientology practitioners have been subjected to criminal activities such as harassment and physical attacks. If so, perpetrators of those acts should be prosecuted under existing law"

What do you mean "IF", they are obviously making it up. Oh the fucking irony of the "church" of CODology complaining about harassment.

"the Falun Gong, a spiritual movement that has been suppressed by the Chinese government since 1999"

Falun Gong. Do we need yet another weird cult added to the very long list of those already available. Something for everyone. What was wrong with the weird cults of yesteryear? Long live Mao and down with hegemony of running dogs for western capitalists exploiters.

I'd be more interested in killing Daylight Savings Time than dealing with Leap Year.

Feh. You can have my daylight savings time when you pry it from my cold dead hand.

Want a powerful life that you love? Try Landmark Education

If you're going to join a cult that uses lawyer and the DCMA to silence critics, why not go all the way for Scientology?

No, it's not. Mormons deny the doctrine of the trinity [1], they profess that there are sins the blood of Christ is incapable of paying for [2], they deny the existence of hell [3], and they deny the eternity and uniqueness of the Judeo-Christian God [4]. These are all basic tenets that have been fundamental to defining "what is a Christian?" ever since the question was first asked in the first couple centuries A.D. No Christian church accepts the unique doctrines that Mormonism teaches [5] [6].

Just as it is incorrect for non-Hindus to say, "This is the authoritative word on what is and what is not Hinduism," (or non-Muslims for Islam, or non-Atheists for Atheism, or what have you), it is incorrect for non-Christians to say, "This doctrine over here is Christian!"

No, it's not. Mormons deny the doctrine of the trinity [1], they profess that there are sins the blood of Christ is incapable of paying for [2], they deny the existence of hell [3], and they deny the eternity and uniqueness of the Judeo-Christian God [4]. These are all basic tenets that have been fundamental to defining "what is a Christian?" ever since the question was first asked in the first couple centuries A.D. No Christian church accepts the unique doctrines that Mormonism teaches [5] [6].

Just as it is incorrect for non-Hindus to say, "This is the authoritative word on what is and what is not Hinduism," (or non-Muslims for Islam, or non-Atheists for Atheism, or what have you), it is incorrect for non-Christians to say, "This doctrine over here is Christian!"

I'll feed you, troll.

First off, please feel free to call a Marine dumb to his/her face. Someone of such high calibre as yourself should be more than willing to do so. It's the honourable path, after all, and from your post I can see you know a thing or two about honour.

Your ambiguous post raises the question- do you realize that the Brits have Royal Marines? Serving in Iraq? How about the multinational coalition? Oh, ok.
Regardless, the forces aren't necessarily an 'invading force' (typically requires the goals of conquest or occupation; if you mentioned invading as a synonym for 'entering,' it's acceptable) and the forces aren't an 'oil-keeping force.' Rather, they are liberators who operated under the intelligence that Saddam a)supported terrorists(9-11 link later proved faulty...but as a result of faulty intelligence- is that hard to comprehend?), and he b) disobeyed numerous UN mandates after the first Gulf War (making him a terrorist to, at the very least, the Kurds).

Yes. I would expect anyone to be upset when civilians are deliberately targeted. If the hijackers could virtually rape the American airspace for so long with four separate airplanes over New York and the nation's capital, surely they could have done some damage to a military base. With all the protection the White House and its airspace have, I'm sure some small military base would have been a plausible target. Don't use civilized policy of attacking terrorists and insurgents as an excuse for their tactics of hiding among innocent civilians to create more of an excuse for their behavior. Besides..the suicide bombers are blowing their own people up as well.

Sunni v Shi'ite != recent problem (or one caused by American policy.)
Suicide bombings aren't brand new occurrences..
For a good read, check this for some good starters for topics to research.

Are you sure you aren't a Scientologist? I'm surprised at people's willingness to let them off so lightly. Obviously you haven't researched the group's history.

We have people who have been killed by Scientology. We have people who proteest it and end up bankrupted by lawsuits. My lawyer friends tell me they read quite a bit of case law having to do with Scientologists just because they litigate so frequently.

Don't you wonder why they aren't litigating against the Pledge of Allegience or In God We Trust, but instead to protect their "secrets"?

Repeat until it sinks in: NO other religion charges you money to believe. Or to find out just WHAT you are supposed to be believing in.

Scientology is a cult. A cult has a specific meaning in this case. It isn't a smaller (vs. Christians) persecuted (aren't they all?) religious (it might not be) group. It's a brainwashing group which keeps you from leaving. And other things.

With its plethora of lawyers and infiltration into the IRS and other governmental branches, Scientology has gone from being a harmless cult to a "religious" mafia.

Take the recent example: A misdemeanor which wouldn't normally be enforced gets you a year in jail. WTF? I'm worrying.

Random people attempt to define cult:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/sn-c ult.html
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/c09.html
http://www.ex-cult.org/General/identifying-a-cult
http://www.cultfaq.org/

Disclaimer: I'm Christian, so maybe I'm just offended at being lumped in with these people. I think my rights are more endangered when Scientologists' rights are being protected. At least as they've been protected so far.

What if the guy at the gate of this fabulous place told you that you can come in, but before he lets you in he wants you to tell 10 other people about it?

Then I'd recognize it as a scam. Sounds like a multi-level marketing scheme for a time-share or something. In fact it sounds a lot like the methods used by the Landmark Forum cult.

Those of us that believe in Jesus Christ know that we have a wonderful place to go. The "gatekeeper" asked us to do one thing before he went back to this wonderful place. He asked us to let everyone know that they could come along.

Certainly those who founded the cult of Jeshua ben Josesph knew their stuff; steal from previous mythologies, throw in a little of the old eternal life jimjam, and bam! You've got a top five religion on your hands.

(BTW, I think Jeshua himself was largely innocent of this, it happened after his execution.)

Anyway: by now everyone's heard of it. So, you've let everyone know, y'all can shut up about it now.

Step 4: Buy a compound with profit and stockpile weapons!

No no you're confusing Anarchism with Christian Cultists

Incarceration would likely drop(who knows, maybe drug use leads to violent crime irrespective of current laws...) but the activities that are currently considered crimes would likely increase...It is less clear how decriminalization will effect the rates of crimes related to laws that are not changed.

I can't tell whether your post is pragmatic, or succumbing to FUD. Our current prohibition laws are totally unscientific as it stands (and they were in the '30s when it all began). Our justification for them are either based on falsehoods, or based purely moral principles without any scientific basis (leading back to the false justifications). Furthermore, current data suggests that legalization and/or decriminalization would show a decrease in said drug use.

I am not, however recommending that we replace a senseless policy with another senseless policy. Of course study is warranted...but the opponents of changing our policy repeatedly refuse to accept any pragmatic data. In fact, they fabricate their own "facts" in order to contradict to this data (no idea what that site's all about...just the first link from a Google search).

Part of the problem is that the people in the US government (ONDCP, DEA, and those under the curtain of DH&HS) will do anything to keep their budgets and jobs. This includes fabricating data which the Congress relies on and results in poor lawmaking. Ultimately, this needlessly puts otherwise productive members of society in jail. I'd like to target both the hypocrisy and the jerks who purvey it in our reform of drug law.

You can thank $cientology for that. Google won't let ads for search terms for $cientology point to sites like xenu.net, or whyaretheydead.net, or even the apologeticsindex site for it.

We call it the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and we try to avoid violating it semi-constantly...also note our near lack of human-rights violations.