Slashdot Mirror
Scientology's Credibility Questioned Over Video Channel
stonyandcher writes to share that the Church of Scientology has come under fire for some items on their recently launched video channel. Most notably, claims have been leveled that dignitaries in one of their videos were faked and at least one of the people featured in the video is claiming their statements were taken out of context.
I'd be more surprised if the site launched and everyone found out it was entirely on the up-and-up.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Impressive. Two posts into the thread and someone's already trying to turn it into a debate over all religions. I'm not accusing you of being a Scilon - merely pointing out that it's a tactic the Scilons try to cultivate, because it turns the entire discussion into a debate about theology, effectively distracting everyone from the main issue.
Were this a thread about religion, for instance, it'd be fine, but the Co$ debate isn't about theology.
Organizations that use barratry ("The purpose of a lawsuit is not to win, but to harass") and violence (consider the similarities between the mysterious fates of Judge Swearinger's dog in 1998, and the fate of an outed anonymous protester's cat earlier this week) as a matter of policy are not religions.
The whole point of a religion is that whatever's at the top isn't a person.
I'm sure they have plenty of credit with the financial institutions that they work with.
Why should that be important. Hell, the Anglican Church had an Archbishop of Canterbury who doubted the divinity of Christ. Does that mean the entire Episcopalian movement no longer qualifies as a religion?
The chief difference seems to be that a successful religion is a sect or cult that manages to get near-universal acceptance as a religion within the societies that it exists. Scientology is seen by most of society as a crazy-ass money-hungry cult with a pack of swirly-eyed true believers who pay their money and believe any and all nonsense that Hubbard and his heirs shove down their throats.
Mormons were in the same boat for decades. They were seen as sexually deviant heretics. Fortunately for them, in those days a cult could basically seize control of a large, unpopulated area and grow relatively undisturbed for decades, and by the time the greater society finally met them head on again, they're numbers were sufficient that they had to be dealt with as a religion.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
When I was down protesting on the 10th of February, I realized something disturbing. I had always thought of Scientology as something of a cult that suckers dumb people into believing that they are sick, and need to pay money to get better.
To some extent it is that, but there is a much creepier aspect. From what I have seen, Scientology seems to be more of a social club for wealthy people who are interested in learning how to use aggressive psychological attacks such as hypnotism.
I started reading Dianetics, and it really does seem like a manual for using psychological attacks. A thetan is like a soul, but also like an influence. Non scientologists are infected with alien thetans, and once you are "clear" of them, you can become an "operating thetan". Then you can begin infecting the minds of others. Before it had always confused me that non scientologists have to rid themselves of thetans, but scientologists refer to eachother as thetans.
It was pretty sickening to realize that so many scientologists know exactly what it is all about. They develop new psychological attacks. Then they train their followers. The followers then use those attacks to manipulate those around them so they can become more successful in their careers, and increase the size of the church. This money is then reinvested in developing new psychological attack methods.
Someone please correct me if any part of this is inaccurate.