Slashdot Mirror
Surprise Arrest For Online Scientology Critic
destinyland writes "An online critic of Scientology was confronted at a routine hearing Tuesday with surprise arrest warrants and thrown into jail. Six years as a fugitive ended in February. (After picketing a Scientology complex in 2000 over the unexplained death of a woman there, he'd been arrested for 'threatening a religion' over a Usenet joke about 'Tom Cruise Missiles.') But 64-year-old Keith Henson had been out on bail, and was even scheduled to address the European Space Agency conference on Space Elevators. He's a co-founder of the Space Colony movement, and one of the original researchers at Texas Instruments. In this interview he discusses both space-based solar energy and his war with the Scientologists — just a few days before he was arrested."
Why is this news?
Not threatening a religion.
He was convicted of interfering with a religion. The same law would apply to someone with a Nazi arm band protesting out side a synagogue with sign saying "Dirty Jews killed Jesus!". And I for one would be hard pressed to shed a tear if some was arrested for that.
He was protesting at their church. While I don't like Scientology and think they manipulate the law very effectively I have to say that there is also the Freedom of Religion in the US. People have the right to worship as they choose without being harassed. The balance between freedom of speech and freedom of religion is the question here. Now getting arrested for the Tom Cruse missile joke on a news group. That is totally bogus.
The law has good intentions but I don't know about this case. I also think this guy might be a little paranoid. I just don't see gangs of Scientologists killing people in county jails as being very likely. But then this is California so who knows.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
The guy jumped bail in 2001 and "split for Canada"... How is this a "surprise arrest"? And while there's no denying that scientology is creepy and just plain silly, this guy seems to have a few screws loose himself.
People with strong religious affiliations shouldn't even be allowed to hold public office. It's a conflict of interest. We really should only allow atheists to hold office, but we could let the occasional agnostic hold office if enough atheists will vouch for his religious impartiality.
Why? You value his freedom of speech more then the people going to the synagogue's freedom of religion? Both are protected under the law. He is not prevented from saying what he wants he is just limited from saying it in a way that violates other peoples rights.
As I said it is a balance between the two rights.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Don't forget:
* Believe us or we'll crush you with our tanks -Communism
* We'll throw you into concentration camps whether you believe us or not -Nazism
* If you don't believe us, you're probably violating our constitutional rights (so prepare to be considered dangerous and stupid and possibly even the target of new legislation and scrutiny by the ACLU) -Militant Atheism
Coercion isn't limited to theistic religion. Anyone who feels strongly enough about something has a "holy cause" and marches about trying to change the world to better suit him.
The bill of rights was not supposed to originally apply to state laws. After the 14th amendment things have changed a bit, and there has been a battle for states' rights in the Supreme Court ever since. But it isn't clear that a law which punishes "interfering with a church" would be inherently unconstitutional.
Scientology is a money-making scam, nothing more
In that case, what do you call christianity (you do know they still collect taxes, don't you).
Why, yes! I AM new here.
He knew Scientology was ruthless. He knew they were shady and underhanded, and he took them on anyway. Then, when he finally had to deal with something everyone with a cursory knowledge knew would happen all along (including him) he ran.
He wasn't prepared for something he should have been prepared for well before beginning his crusade. And your excuses don't change the fact that he made a choice, had to face the consequences of his choice, and fled like the criminal that he is.
I'm no supporter of Scientology, but you don't take on something like that unless you're prepared to go all the way. Whine about it all you want, that's how it is.