Slashdot Mirror


Belgium May Prosecute the Church of Scientology

sheean.nl writes "A Belgian prosecutor recommended after a 10-year investigation that the government prosecute the church of Scientology. The church is accused of being a criminal organization involved in extortion, fraud, unfair trading, violation of privacy laws, and unlawfully practicing medicine. Both the Belgian and the European branches of the church should be brought to court, according to the authorities. The investigation was started in 1997 after former Scientologists complained about intimidation and extortion by the church. Other European countries such as Germany have problems with Scientology, but in the US it is officially recognized as a religion. Scientology has 10 million members including high-profile followers such as Tom Cruise and John Travolta." Scientology has long used heavy-handed legal and other tactics to suppress opposition on the Net.

26 of 755 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Who is next? by Gorm+the+DBA · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The Pope? hard to Sue...

    The Catholic Church, on the other hand... No so very hard at all

  2. All churches are guilty of that by flyingfsck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I happen to think that talking unsubstantiated nonsence and practising extortion and fraud is a hallmark of all religion...

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    1. Re:All churches are guilty of that by Selfbain · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was raised in an extremely Christian environment and when I grew up I stopped going to church and rejected their belief system. However, I never once received death threats from the church and for the most part, I believe their intentions were good however misguided I believe them to be. To put it simply, the church I was forced to attend in my childhood never scared me. These people do.

      --
      Well, it has never been successfully tested.
  3. Seems stupid by rm999 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A religion doesn't become legitimate until the people are persecuted for a little while (see the Jews, Christians, Muslims, Mormons, etc)

    Why don't we all just ignore the cult and let it die on it's own? Apparently the 10 million figure is highly exaggerated, which makes people think they are more of a threat than they really are. High up, Scientology WANTS to be persecuted so they can energize their followers and gain the sympathy of others.

  4. Re:Why Is This On Slashdot??!!! by VJ42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It might be something to do with this. Scientologists issued a DCMA takedown notice against /. after part of OT III was posted on here by a random user.

    --
    If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
  5. European headquarters here too. by bmcage · · Score: 5, Insightful
    What is interesting in this is that the European headquarters are also in Belgium, Brussels to be exact. So some very high ranking scientologists can be sued.

    In 1998 or so they where already being cataloged as a sect, not a church, which is important here (state money and benefits I suppose). It is estimated that Belgium has 8000 Scientologists, which is pretty lousy on 10 million, but still, with the headquarters, it could be painful for them.

  6. Re:Who is next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You can't sue the Pope. As the Bush administration rightly pointed out (and you have no idea how rare it is for me to agree with that administration), in the U.S. the Pope is considered a foreign head-of-state, with all of the legal protections that that entails. We could invade the Vatican and bomb the Pope, but we could not sue him in a U.S. court of law any more than we could the Prime Minister of the U.K.

    Tell that to Manuel Noriega

  7. Re:Fucking Scientologists. by VENONA · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Scientology is so bizarre that I can't tell if you're being facetious or not.

    --
    What you do with a computer does not constitute the whole of computing.
  8. Re:Who is next? by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That said, Scientology's accused of: "extortion, fraud, unfair trading, violation of privacy laws, and unlawfully practicing medicine." I'm not sure that you can accuse Roman Catholicism (as a whole, discounting fringe groups that aren't practicing core doctrine) of most of those.
    This is really the crux of the matter. No matter how bizarre or wacky you find a particular religious group (or philosophical group for that matter), you should only be able to sue for particular acts that the group, or individuals within the group, perform. I have no particular liking for Scientology, but one should focus on the bad and illegal things they have done, not the parts of their religion that are deemed absurd. I mean, American Atheists has claimed that the human race would have gone to the moon by the 3rd century (yes, the 3rd century C.E.) if it hadn't been for those "evil Christians" (this is in "Atheists: The Last Minority"). This is patently absurd, but I don't think anyone should sue them for it. However, if the head of American Atheists commits wire fraud (just for example, I'm not saying he/she has ever done anything unethical or illegal), then drop the legal hammer on the bastard.
  9. Re:Scientology not a Cult? by norite · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Cult (n) A small, unpopular religion.

    Religion (n) A large, popular cult...

    --
    -- Fuck Beta
  10. Re:Why Is This On Slashdot??!!! by VJ42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seriously, I'm a Christian (and fan of everything scientific and technological), and I'm asking myself that same question. Why is this on Slashdot? I'm not asking this because I want the story removed or anything, I'm actually indifferent. But I find it funny that this site has more debates on religion then I see anywhere else on the web. What's the deal, why all the interest in all things religious? Actually, it's not religious discussion on/. but discussion about Christianity, and usually the very specific anti-science American right wing Christianity at that (I'm British hindu, I've never seen a debate about my religion here). And that is why there is so much debate here; we're a scientifically minded site, and when the anti-science version of religion tries to influence the world's most powerful government, there's cause for debate.

    On a side note, why would a religion restrict the distribution of their "gospel"? Christianity does not stop people from reproducing pieces of the Bible. Just as long as you are accurate, and properly reference the citation with book, verse, and version (ex. John 3:16 NIV). Because IMO Scientology is not a religion, it's closer to a pyramid scheme than anything else. Why do I think this? Because as you say, they charge for access to their religious texts. To me, this isn't a very religious thing to do. Indeed, some Scientologists have realised this, and set up an unofficial version.
    --
    If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
  11. Good luck Belgium by Synchis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Speaking from personal accounts, those who take on the $ciclos must be greatly prepared. My good friend Keith Henson is still serving his sentence for "Interfering with a religion" in Riverside, CA. He's a good example of what the $ciclos can and *will* do to keep those who would oppose them in check.

    I personally disagree with the fundamentals of scientology, I'm Wiccan.

    --
    Thomas A. Knight
    Author of The Time Weaver
  12. Re:Fucking Scientologists. by Colin+Smith · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Doesn't sound any more bizarre than Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

    --
    Deleted
  13. Re:Scientology not a Cult? by DavidTC · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It doesn't matter whether it's a 'cult' or not.

    It matters that they use extortion to silence critics. Repeatedly. They accuse them of child porn, they have them arrested on bogus charges, they break into their houses and harass them at work. They've even kidnapped 'errant members' before, and at least such one person has actually disappeared while in their custody.

    It has nothing to do with the rather surreal beliefs of their religion.

    Incidentally, whether not something is a cult also has nothing to with the beliefs. It is simply a list of things like 'requires members to cut off contact with family' and 'uses sleep/food deprivation as a form of mind control' and stuff like. Scientology uses some of the cult tricks, and not others, so whether or not it actually is a cult is debatable, but that is not why they run into legal trouble, they run into legal trouble because parts of their organization operate illegally in attacking critics.

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  14. Re:How rich is the catholic church? by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Plenty rich. However, the Church's wealth was accrued with somewhat more complexity than $cientologies, as anyone with even the vaguest understanding of the lengthy (and sometimes horrific) history of the Church would know.

    The Church most certainly was not founded as a money-making scheme, but rather was the scion of some semi-legendary 1st Century holy man's ramblings. It's wealth was gained, by and large, not by forcing its members to pay big bucks (let's remember, for most of its history, the vast majority of Catholics did not possess anything approaching a disposable income), but rather because it became politically intertwined with the various European principalities, for which it (and the principalities) managed to accrue rather large fortunes in money, treasure and art (in some cases by pillaging other people, notably those poor Eastern Orthodox bastards).

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  15. Re:Fucking Scientologists. by VENONA · · Score: 5, Insightful

    OK. I visited your links. Now I have to wonder if he's a fifth-columnist, in which case I'd have to say, "Nicely done!"

    But see posts later in the discussion, regarding a Slate post that CoS isn't any weirder than others, just newer.
    http://www.slate.com/id/2171416/

    At some level, religion of any stripe disturbs me, as I see it all as both irrational and irrelevant. That said, at least some religions seem able to at least maintain a bit of dignity in their celebrations, and not *completely* insult the intelligence of their followers. I thought lost tribes of Israel present in central America (contrary to genetic evidence, but then we're not speaking of people who would believe in genetics), and wearing underwear that seems to serve the function of a wearable Post It note was a bit odd.

    Now I'm trying to quantify the limits of weird, thinking of how reincarnation would rate, etc. At some point, my head will explode. Have you seen Tim Burton's _Mars Attacks_? Yeah, like that.

    --
    What you do with a computer does not constitute the whole of computing.
  16. Reductio ad absurdum by rumblin'rabbit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's the thing isn't it? Scientology is bizarre and ridiculous, and yet how can one criticize it without casting doubt on all religions? How can one say that stories about volcanoes, space ships, and H bombs are silly, but being swallowed by a fish and then regurgitated after 3 days is not?

    Scientology serves as the "Reductio ad absurdum" for all religion. This may explain why so many feel so uncomfortable about it.

    1. Re:Reductio ad absurdum by Dun+Malg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's the thing isn't it? Scientology is bizarre and ridiculous, and yet how can one criticize it without casting doubt on all religions? How can one say that stories about volcanoes, space ships, and H bombs are silly, but being swallowed by a fish and then regurgitated after 3 days is not? The way I see it, absurd mythology invented by bronze age children surviving into the present day due to the inertia of tradition is religion. Absurd mythology invented 50-odd years ago by a greedy asshole third-rate science fiction writer and compulsive liar with delusions of grandeur in order to enrich himself and elevate him to the position of "prophet", well, in my eyes that's fraud. Most examples of the former were created with the best of intentions. Scientology was not.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    2. Re:Reductio ad absurdum by rumblin'rabbit · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Most examples of the former were created with the best of intentions.
      I accept your point about scientology, but how do you know that traditional religions were created with the best of intentions? How do you know that Christ or Mohammad were not con men of the first caliber, the Hubbards of their age?

      And at any rate, what does it matter? If one accepts that knowing the truth is a good thing, belief in an absurd mythology is bad no matter where it came from.

      I'm going to hell for these postings, aren't I?
    3. Re:Reductio ad absurdum by rumblin'rabbit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the tale of Jonah isn't literally true, what else in the Bible isn't true? Perhaps someone could go through with a yellow highlighter and mark off those parts I should believe, and those parts I can dismiss as mythology. Given that the world's largest religion is based on it, I think knowing which bits are true would be rather important.

      My point being that if the Bible is the infallible word of God then there is no room to pick and choose. If the tale of Jonah is a myth then the gospels are suspect as well.

      I have no such problem with The Iliad because no one is basing a religion on it. It's just a rip-roaring action adventure and the truth of it matters little.

    4. Re:Reductio ad absurdum by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I personally love how various translations can give you completely different interpretations, as well.

      For example, if you quote Psalms 22:21 from the King James Version you get " Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns. " and then someone somewhere along the line realizes that there were no unicorns, so to keep the "truth" "truthful" they translated it a little differently in the New International Version " Rescue me from the mouth of the lions; save me from the horns of the wild oxen. "

      So, if we believe the King James Version, then there were unicorns in biblical times, and since we are reasonably certain there were no unicorns, we'll just sweep that under the rug and change them into 'wild oxen'... that way people will continue to believe the bible is factual and will keep coming to Sunday services and tithing...

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
  17. Re:Fucking Scientologists. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    > Doesn't sound any more bizarre than Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

    The Jews, Christians, and Muslims don't charge $360,000 for it, nor do they sue people who hand out copies of their scriptures.

    It's not the doctrines, it's the ensuing lawsuits, that mark the difference between a religion and a racketeering operation. Why does God need a starship? Same reason he needs a team of copyright lawyers: he doesn't, and anyone claiming he does is a fraud.

  18. Good news by ynotds · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There is something profoundly wrong with societies where somebody like Keith who has lived a productive, generous, pioneering life can have their liberty curtailed because they piss off somebody with greater access to The Law's capacity to pursue single dubious issues against anybody who has really lived.

    But we should place more blame on the personal empire builders who are ensuring untrammeled expansion of The Law-Politics-Mass Media axis of evil^Hauthoritarianism than even the criminally motivated cult which has become so good at exploiting our excessive 'authorities'.

    --
    -- Our systemic servants do not good masters make.
  19. Who Cares by slyn · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Regardless of whether religion of any sort has truth or not, I could care less. Mythology of any given religion is irrelevant.

    Though an argument could be made otherwise (crusades, inquisition, etc.), for the most part (IMO) religion has benefited mankind as a whole.

    The main points (in major summation) to most religions are: Be nice, and worship X deity. Only the former really matters.

    I like the way Douglas Adams puts it:

    And then, one Thursday, nearly two thousand years after one man had been nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change, one girl sitting on her own in a small cafe in Rickmansworth suddenly realized what it was that had been going wrong all this time, and she finally knew how the world could be made a good and happy place. This time it was right, it would work, and no one would have to get nailed to anything. Though I don't agree with any given religion's beliefs, I do agree that being nice to yourself and others is a good thing. If a religion says that it does such and practices doing so, I'm cool with that religion.
  20. Re:Fucking Scientologists. by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Well actually the author is being facetious. Whilst the scientology executives did pathologically defend the little yarn with copyright and other legal and even illegal threats, it was never meant for public distribution, but only ever intended for the gullible, naive and those suffering from various psychological maladies,and only once they had achieved a specific level of mental suggestibility. So public distribution of it, is basically mocking it and a facetious use of it.

    At least Belgium is looking to treat it for what it is a money making corporation and not a religion or even a cult. The cynicism of that corporation is beyond normal reason, they abhor psychiatrists and psychologists because apparently those professions directly threaten their main revenue source, by curing those individuals suffering from mental diseases, the preferred target of the scientology corporation.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  21. Re:No, the Co$ has some well-established company by dave420 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    To be honest, that's a tiny percentage of Muslims doing that. EVERY Scientologist leaving gets shit for leaving.