Slashdot Mirror
UK Prosecutors Say 'Cult' Acceptable
An anonymous reader notes that following our discussion this week about the 15-year-old who was under threat of prosecution for calling Scientology a cult in a recent demonstration, the UK Crown Prosecution Service has decided that there is no case to answer. They have issued new guidance to the City of London police clarifying when they can use their public order powers. Quoting: "A [CPS] spokesman said: 'In consultation with the City of London Police, we were asked whether the sign was abusive or insulting. Our advice is that it is not abusive or insulting and there is no offensiveness (as opposed to criticism), neither in the idea expressed nor in the mode of expression.' A spokeswoman for the City of London Police said: 'The CPS review of the case includes advice on what action or behavior at a demonstration might be considered to be "threatening, abusive or insulting." The force's policing of future demonstrations will reflect this advice.'"
...the Cult of Scientology is about to ask for its money back.
Every religion is a cult, just a popular one. Scientology isn't popular in any definition of the world and as such "cult" is very appropriate.
i would say amongst the slashdot community it certainly is, but in wider society, its a simple descriptor of a small religion. you may happily supply the negative connotations of calling something a cult, but as these judges wisely ruled, the negative connotations are not automatically implied
if the student held up a sign saying "bill gates is a geek", amongst the 13 year old male jock contingent, this is a horrible slander. but with the rise of the internet, its almost a compliment, especially as "geek" implies new wealth nowadays
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Now, I'm an athiest, but I can't stand the misuse of terminology, even if it feels clever to do so.
Cults engage in serious mind control. Religions are just a set of spiritual principles. For example, there are some Christians who worship in a cult-like society, and some that do not.
To those who want to cite bible passages, you're missing the point. It is the current behavior of the group that defines this, not what's in their books.
Anyone who studies scientology will know how intense their brainwashing is, and since I was once part of a Christian church that was not a cult, I know it is as different as night and day.
Cult behavior is along the lines of 'removing subject's ego, connections outside the church, ability to question doctrine', and these factors can sometimes be found in any religion, but are not attributed to the whole set of that religion.
Since the Church of Scientology is a hierarchal organization, it can be classified as a cult, but there are practitioners of Scientology beliefs in the 'Freezone' which do not answer to the CoS command and are not cultlike.
"I only speak the truth"
Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
that there is somewhere in the world where the system works rationally and figures itself out.
Chris [CapitalC]
I saw that Ontario is passing (or passed, maybe) new hate crime legislation that's limited to offenses against a "vulnerable minority". If the law is going to be applied selectively to defend only groups the prosecutors care about, it seems preferable to just state it up front like they're doing.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
So using the word "cult" is not insulting or offensive, so he gets away... well, good for him, but that's the wrong principle. Freedom of speech is serious business, damnit! Everyone must have the right to insult and offend and wipe the butt clean on the holy books of every damn religion out there.
Circumcision is child abuse.
While I don't disagree, I can't help but wonder how things would have gone if the statement was "The Anglican church is a dangerous cult." The wording of the ruling basically says this is criticism and is fine. It will be interesting to see this tested.
All negative connotations aside, the only functional difference between a cult and a religion is popular acceptance and usually membership size.
Scientology doesn't really care about winning these cases. One of their tactics to cause fear and control people is by prosecuting and harassing them. This is nothing new!
If thats not coercian of the worst kind I don't know what is. And it was a part of the roman catholic church - a supposed religion.
It's a crime to insult someone?
I thought that hate speech, inciting a crime, or defamation are the only types of speech that are illegal?
So what does freedom of speech mean then if you can't insult anyone or any organization? It's negative criticism generally insulting?
While I fear that _anything_ being posted below this rather abusive first post will get modded Troll, I have to say that wasn't all that offtopic in the first place.
Maybe American readers of this site are not that much aware of the situation in Britain, but for the last years signs held up at demonstrations asking to 'behead those who insult Islam' or for 'death to Israel' have gone 'unnoticed' by the British authorities, meaning that no-one ever got arrested for displaying them (or relentlessly shouting similar slogans). Many Europeans are already taking this as proof that Britain has finally fallen to the Islamists.
In that light, it would have been outrageously laughable if voicing this rather common sense opinion on Scientology would have resulted in prosecution.
A World in a Grain of Sand / Heaven in a Wild Flower,
Infinity in the Palm of your Hand / And Eternity in an Hour.
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable" - JFK