UK Teen Cited For Calling Scientology a "Cult"

An anonymous reader writes "A 15-year-old in the UK is facing prosecution for using the word 'cult' to describe the Church of Scientology at an anti-Scientology demonstration in London earlier this month. According to the City of London police at the scene, the teen was violating the Public Order Act, which 'prohibits signs which have representations or words which are threatening, abusive or insulting.' There's a video of the teen receiving the summons from the City of London police at the demonstration (starting about 1 minute in), and now he's asking for advice on how to handle the court case."

Comments

The first problem is

[Anonymous Coward]

naming an act the "Public Order Act."

The next thing London will do is put up posters saying that you are secure beneath the watchful eyes.

Perhaps they thought Orwell was writing an instruction manual?

Re:The first problem is

[Z00L00K]

And I avoid to call them "Church", just "Scientology" is sufficient.

Calling them "Cult" will also lend them credibility for something they aren't.

And by the way, isn't "Church" a Christian designation? But Scientology is a completely different thing, and has really not much to do with Christianity.

And by the way - My opinion is that you should be able to have a religion, or copyright, but never both.

Anyway - one person's view can be "Religion", another "Cult" and a third it can be "Lifestyle".

Re:The first problem is

[Stellian]

Cult:

1. a. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
      b. The followers of such a religion or sect.

2. A system or community of religious worship and ritual.

3. The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual.

4. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease.

5. a. Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing.
      b. The object of such devotion.

6. An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest. The Scientologysts themselves always claimed to be 2. & 3. The whole point is that they are not, they are a profit-seeking corporation.
I think the teen can use meaning 1. without qualifying as "threatening, abusive or insulting". This was, after all, an anti-Scientology demonstration. There's nothing insulting or abusive in calling your religion false, most form of orgnised religion claim that every other religion is wrong.
Otherwise, it should be illegal to use any kind of signs of religious nature: if I have a poster declaring Cthulhu the only God and savior, that would imply you belief in The Spaghetti Monster as the only God and savior is wrong, thereby insulting or abusive.

Once again

[Ekhymosis]

Once again, what would seem a basic 'right' is being brutally oppressed by an organization under the cloak of 'religion'. I wonder just how much longer this will continue? Until we are all 'clears' or cleared out of our money from the lawsuits?

Re:Once again

[Ortega-Starfire]

>I couldn't say that about George W Bush without being arrested.

Yes you can. If we could not, 80% of the country would be in prison right now.

Whats the difference?

[Merls the Sneaky]

Whats the difference between religions and cults? As far as I can tell they really are the same thing.

Re:Whats the difference?

[Soporific]

The number of people following them is all.

~S

Re:Whats the difference?

[Zombie Ryushu]

I agree wholeheartedly. Christianity, and especially Islam would be seen as completely psychotic if they were not several thousand years of tradition surrounding these religions, and countless reforms to make them remain relevant in our technologically advanced world. Christianity has changed especially in its nature drastically over the last century alone. It just seems normal to us.

That doesn't make it any less a cult. Its still hurting us collectively.

You should watch this video on Youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVuw1wEuaAQ

And there are a series of videos on Youtube by a guy called Thunderf00t that is very intelligent about this topic.

Re:Whats the difference?

[blind biker]

I think this characteristic:

4) In order to easier manipulate them, it will try to weaken the members by severing their ties with their families and friends.

is extremely important, for the devastating consequences it has.

Re:Whats the difference?

[Danny Rathjens]

It's all about the numbers:

• religion. >= x believers
• cult. < x and >= 2 believers
• nutcase. 1 believer
• mythology. 0 believers (but was >x at some point)
• fantasy or science fiction. 0 believers (if rises above 0, see above)

x is obviously subjective.

Re:Not censorship

[Anonymous Coward]

Exhibit A:

Why the heck is this tagged censorship?

Exhibit B:

There's a law against insulting signs.

...?

Balls of steel

[A beautiful mind]

From TFA:

The teenager refused to back down, quoting a 1984 high court ruling from Mr Justice Latey, in which he described the Church of Scientology as a "cult" which was "corrupt, sinister and dangerous".

This action hereby has the Duke Nukem seal of approval.

Re:Not censorship

[Mr. Slippery]

Why the heck is this tagged censorship? There's a law against insulting signs.

Because a law against "insulting" signs IS censorship, just as a law against "insulting" books or "insulting" speech would be.

Would this still be tagged censorship if it were the Conservative Party instead of Scientology?

Yes. Of course it would. It saddens me that you have to even ask this.

You have the right to stand on the corner with a sign saying "X is Y!" for any values of X and Y. Any values at all. (Dictatorial governments may, of course, not recognize that right; it exists nonetheless.)

"Scientology is a cult". "The Conservative Party is a cult." "The City of London police are a bunch of mindless jerks." "The Flying Spaghetti Monster is better than Jesus." "Tom Swiss is a dweeb."

Anyone who attempts to forcibly stop you from saying any of these things is engaging in censorship.

Re:Bizarreness matters too

[Oktober Sunset]

Yea, I hear about this cult who worship a 2000 year old zombie Jew and believe they can turn bread and wine into his flesh and blood that then then devour in a cannibalistic ritual. Nutters eh?

Re:Bizarreness matters too

[zappepcs]

More bizarre and/or insane than what? FFS man, talking telepathically to an imaginary friend who is solely responsible for all that happens in the universe (including putting dinosaur bones in place as is to fool us) compares to evil galactic rulers and volcanoes in a better light in exactly what way?

I have often spoke when I shouldn't have, but I have to say that there are far too many people who 'know' about religion, or think they do when in fact they know about some parts of ONE religion.

Yes, the CoS is a cult, so is the CoE, by technical definition all religions are cults. That is what makes the entire censorship here totally ridiculous. It's rather like saying that there are dangerous humans at 1600 Pennsylvania avenue, or 10 Downing street.

Drinking blood and eating flesh? Is that bizarre enough for you? How about sacrificing your own children? Incest? Genocide? The Christian Bible is full of examples of things that would just not work in today's society.

I fail to see how CoS is any more bizarre than Christianity.

Re:Britain 1, USA 0

[pnewhook]

I agree. Every religion in the world can be considered a cult by other religions because their beliefs are not mainstream in the other society.

Even within a religion you can have cult references. American Christian Fundamentalists are certainly considered a cult by most Catholics and Anglicans that I know.

Re:I forget...

[russotto]

How do you mod someone Bushy-bearded nut job on the street corner?

In today's world? +1, Insightful.