Slashdot Mirror


AU Senator Calls Scientology a "Criminal Organization"

An anonymous reader passes along news that an Australian senator, Nick Xenophon, has denounced the Church of Scientology as "a criminal organization" from the floor of Parliament. "Senator Xenophon used a speech in Parliament last night to raise allegations of widespread criminal conduct within the church, saying he had received letters from former followers detailing claims of abuse, false imprisonment, and forced abortion. He says he has passed on the letters to the police and is calling for a Senate inquiry into the religion and its tax-exempt status." It wasn't that long ago that the CoS was calling for Net censorship in Australia; a month later the organization was convicted of fraud in France.

43 of 511 comments (clear)

  1. Interesting name. by palegray.net · · Score: 5, Funny

    Senator Xenophon? He must be in the clutches of Xenu! Someone get me an e-meter, quick!

    1. Re:Interesting name. by ChromeAeonium · · Score: 5, Funny
    2. Re:Interesting name. by Blue+Stone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >"Someone get me an e-meter, quick!"

      >I'm afraid sir you'll have to buy your own. This is a business not a religion.

      Fixed that for ya.

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
  2. tax shelter by wizardforce · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I can't help but wonder if the COS would even exist without its tax exempt status. Sure the people up top would be doing well like any pyramid scheme but would there be such an incentive for new members to join without the tax exemption?

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    1. Re:tax shelter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
  3. Hmm by ZDRuX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    To me, all religions are a scam. Some have been around longer than others and thus emanate a sense of legitimacy but they're mostly cults with a God that we offer our prayers and money to in return for a hope of a better life.

    Religions come and go, their Gods are offered gold, placed upon altars and have great building and churches erected in their names - and yet, people die of violence, starvation, and famine. Their Gods grow weak and frail, their subjects grow old and a new religion eventually emerges and takes its place as the new "true" religion. A sad cycle indeed.

    --
    The magical number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    1. Re:Hmm by keeperofdakeys · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Religions give followers a sense of belonging and an answer to questions like who made the universe and what happens when I die. They also give a group of people a sense of belonging.
      It's just a pity when religions get in the way of our society (abortion, contraceptives and gay rights are good things) and when people take them too far (terrorism). Also when they exist solely for monetary gain.

    2. Re:Hmm by ZDRuX · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree 100% with you. My mother is highly religious - but I wouldn't dare try and convince her of my views. My father recently died of cancer just a year ago, and she seems to find peace and some sort of comfort and hope when she goes to church and has a personal relationship with God - and if that makes her life easier to live in this tough time, I don't care if she prays to a rock.

      I understand the role that religion plays in some people's lives, and being agnostic or an atheist is not for everyone. It's just religion is usually imposed upon people at a young age where they don't have a choice or can't mount a logical defense against what they're being told so they take it as truth. I wish people were baptized at the age of 20 or so, and I bet we'd have a lot less followers.

      --
      The magical number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    3. Re:Hmm by wizardforce · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Most religions don't copyright their message and charge large sums to move up the hierarchy. Most religions attempt to spead their message to as many as possible. The COS has gone as far to copyright the message and sue those who infringe. The most famous case of this happened right here on Slashdot.

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    4. Re:Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      At the height of its power the easiest way to get someone into a position of power within the various Christian churches in Europe was to cough up cash and the higher you wanted to go the bigger the donation. Rich families often did just that for their non first-born male children. For centuries the bible was not allowed to translated from Latin to limit who had access to it and keep the interpretations in the hands of the priests. Virtually the same thing as Scientology.

    5. Re:Hmm by the_womble · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, but you know that before you join.

      Anyone can find out exactly what the Mormon's believe, and they would be quite happy to explain it more fully if you are interested.

      The CoS wants you to pay first, before you decide whether what they believe is credible. Given what they belive there is a good reason for that....

    6. Re:Hmm by zx75 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There are religions that don't accept members (through baptism) until they reach adulthood. They are called Anabaptists (many sects began during the Reformation because they believed that Martin Luther didn't address all their grievances with the Catholic Church).

      One of the more widespread of the Anabaptist sects are the Mennonites (of which I am one). I was baptized at the age of 26, because prior to then I didn't have a reason or desire to attend church. But, things happen, and I found a reason and a need in my life to be part of the church. It hasn't changed my belief structure (I still am agnostic/athiest) but that does not preclude the need for the belonging and philosophy of church. I may not believe there is a god, but a small hope that it might be true can give strength in trying times.

      --
      This is not a sig.
    7. Re:Hmm by Temujin_12 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Mormon Church also requires large sums of money from it's members (a large percentage of your earnings) as well as mandated service.

      Can you read the Book of Mormon and/or information about it without joining the church.? AFAIK you can.

      Yes you can.

      It's also important to note that the Mormon Church has no paid clergy. So member donations go to the organization/religion itself rather than to its leaders.

      --
      Faith is a willingness to accept something w/o complete proof and to act on it. Reason allows you to correct that faith.
  4. A grasp of the obvious? by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's fairly rare among politicians. Congratuations, Austraila!

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  5. Related? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Nick Xenophon is the only independenr of the Australian Senate. I wonder if that is related, as he doesnt have to please his party?

    1. Re:Related? by keeperofdakeys · · Score: 4, Informative

      He seems to support topics of this kind, like anti-gambling. Things that a lot of people in the community would want, but big guys - like corporations - wouldn't.

  6. Should they get off tax-free? by Valdrax · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't like Scientology either but I value my freedom to associate.

    Should all associations be given tax-free status? If not, then what conditions deserve tax-free status, and should that status be irrevocable once obtained?

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
    1. Re:Should they get off tax-free? by electrons_are_brave · · Score: 4, Interesting
      It's opened up a good debate in Australia - should any religion be tax exempt? People here are mentioning other religions which are corrupt (Catholoic Priests and child abuse is never our of the media) or which operate commercial activities but get an unfair competitive advantage because they don't pay tax (Hill Song and the Seventh Day Adventists are being mentioned).

      Lionel Murphy (A High Court Judge) was responsible for campaigning to get Scientology recognised as a religion in Australia. He said it wasn't government's job to determine which religious beliefs are worthy of recognition and which are not.

      Overall, religions should have to pay their own way.

    2. Re:Should they get off tax-free? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It would be easy to test too. Religions that are not willing to publish their teachings on the web and give away free books are non profit, ones that sue people to take those teachings down are for profit and get to pay tax. Actually religions that try to stop other people talking about them should at the very least lose their tax free status and should probably be sued too.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    3. Re:Should they get off tax-free? by asamad · · Score: 5, Informative

      for example weet-bix, produce by sanitarium.

      Run by seventh day Adventist, given tax free status..... bet you didn't know that! How to other business compete with tax free status - it very hard.

    4. Re:Should they get off tax-free? by Capsaicin · · Score: 5, Informative

      Lionel Murphy (A High Court Judge) was responsible for campaigning to get Scientology recognised as a religion in Australia.

      Campaigning?! I'm calling bullshit on that one mate. (Though I'm open to change my mind if you can provide some evidence to back that claim up.) True he sat on the court that decided the "Scientology Case" but his wasn't even the leading judgment. I think a little quote from his Honour will serve to enlighten as to his attitude towards religion and towards its tax exempt status. Responding to the argument that the "commercial nature" of Scientology showed it wasn't "religious" in nature, he wrote:

      Most organized religions have been riddled with commercialism, this being an integral part of the drive by their leaders for social authority and power (in conformity with the "iron law of oligarchy"). The amassing of wealth by organized religions often means that the leaders live richly (sometimes in palaces) even though many of the believers live in poverty. Many religions have been notorious for corrupt trafficking in relics, other sacred objects, and religious offices, as well as for condoning "sin" even in advance, for money. The great organized religions are big business. They engage in large scale real estate investment, money-dealing and other commercial ventures. In country after country, religious tax exemption has led to enormous wealth for religious bodies, presenting severe social problems. ... Commercialism is so characteristic of organized religion that it is absurd to regard it as disqualifying.

      If anything Murphy J was "campaigning" to get rid of the tax exempt status for religions.

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    5. Re:Should they get off tax-free? by Caity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If they make no money to speak of and give most of that to (tax deductable) charities then spend the rest on (tax deductable) running costs then I doubt that their tax bill is going to be very high. The admin for it would increase running costs though (tax deductably). If they have an accountant in their flock they should be able to get it gratis, surely :)

    6. Re:Should they get off tax-free? by BluBrick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So what's the problem with taxing all religions as if they were businesses? Tax them a certain proportion of their profits - no profits, no tax. I'd expect that the Cult of Scientology would be among the first to get wholly reamed via the new taxation regimen.

      --
      Ahh - My eye!
      The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
    7. Re:Should they get off tax-free? by name*censored* · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm not GP, but this really bugs me:

      So you're argument is pretty much bunk. Rich people don't pay as much taxes as the poor or middle class right now, and my proposal is not to keep to the status qou. The opposite in fact.

      So, you've basically said

      1. We are in System A, which has problem X
      2. I propose System B
      3. System B is not the same as System A, therefore System B does not have problem X

      Really, this kind of black-and-white "not A therefore B" extremism (which is really a large family of bad arguments) is perhaps the biggest generator of problems in our democratic/capitalistic (ie, the masses decide) society. To wit:

      I don't see why we need to punish the successful.

      Tax is not a "punishment". (In theory) tax should be "We (the government) need money for services that are (arguably) untenable in or unsuited to private enterprise, how are we going to get it?". It's not "Hey, I don't like that guy, let's rob him! *cackle maniacally*". You are again making the "NOT A THEREFORE B" mistake by conflating "tax" with "punishment", because they both fit into the broader category "authorised arbitrated unpleasantness based on behaviour". But just as a motorbike is not an automobile (despite their many similarities), TAX IS NOT A PUNISHMENT, IT IS AN UNFORTUNATE NECESSITY.

      I don't see why we need to punish the successful. Especially, those who worked damned hard to get it.

      Some people are poor because they deserve to be.

      Not every poor person is a lazy bum, and not every rich person is a hard worker. Now whilst I have no specific moral objections to tax in and of itself (I don't like it, but don't find it immoral), you regard it as a "punishment", and therefore imagine that you're "punishing" people simply for being poor - and conversely, rewarding people for being rich. Which would be fine if everyone who was poor deserved it - but for the third time, NOTHING IS THAT BLACK AND WHITE (even you admit there's not 100% correlation). Is it that you have no ethical quarrel with "punishing" people for probably being lazy (in which case, you are a frighteningly heartless person), or do you simply ignore corner cases (ie, another incarnation of the black-and-white mistake)?

      As for the actual point you were trying to make about tax reform, I'm not going to enter into that. I'm merely going to point out that

      • Reducing the tax rate on luxury items to the same rate as non-luxury non-essentials
      • Removing the tax on non-essentials
      • removing the tax on income
      • Removing the tax on property
      • Removing the tax on possessions

      means a MUCH smaller tax revenue (unless you plan to simply make the figures your tax proposal extremely high, which will probably create a black market and public outcry). Although many here might support reducing tax and reducing services (and this is an argument I *DEFINITELY* don't want to enter into), no government would never agree to it, in the same way that no employee would ever agree to take a massive pay cut just to make a moral stand (especially when morals are highly subjective - an argument I don't want to enter into because anyone who argues for universal morality is a damned moron, and I have better things to do than argue with morons).

      --
      Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
    8. Re:Should they get off tax-free? by DangerFace · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Here in the UK there is a fascinating point of law - religions only get tax-exempt status if they are monotheistic. Richard Dawkins has a big thing about trying to persuade a Hindu temple to go to court for charity status, since they are legally a polytheistic, and thus heathen, religion, but actually all the gods are avatars of the one God, or something. Anyway, profit should be taxed, whether you dance around chicken innards or sell chocolate.

  7. Re:Makes me sick by Onetus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For those unfamiliar with the australian parliment - the definition of what "Parliamentary Privilege" is: http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/pubs/briefs/brief11.htm#1

    I think you miss understand the purpose of "parliamentary privilege", my fellow australian. Our elected representitives can discuss such issues as the authenticity of Scientology, without fear of slander/libel suits or gag orders or general legal hoop-la to silence their criticisms. It is their role to raise issues of their consitutents in such as manner, so that members of the public can come forth/organise/e.t.c to provide the necessary PROOF that the laws are being broken. Then the appropriate law enforcement agency can be engaged.

    Sorry mate - I don't want to live in your world where if no-one talks about a problem it doesn't exist - that's just plain foolish.

    But regardless, by READING THE FIRETRUCKING ARTICLE, you would have encountered the first two paragraphs stating:
    "Senator Xenophon used a speech in Parliament last night to raise allegations of widespread criminal conduct within the church, saying he had received letters from former followers detailing claims of abuse, false imprisonment and forced abortion.
    He says he has passed on the letters to the police and is calling for a Senate inquiry into the religion and its tax-exempt status."

    First sentence of your post: "If you think a person has broken the law then call the cops" ... Check - he's passed on the letters to the police.
    As for the rest - I can't believe you're trying to align criticism of Scientology with an attack on your freedom to associate ... Unless you're a scientologist too...

    Addendum: For those in America - Australia doesn't have a "Bill of Rights". We work on the principle you have a right to everything, unless prohibited by law. There's no explicit listing of rights that you guys have ... YFMV? (Your Freedom May Vary)

  8. A word on Xenophon by RichPowers · · Score: 5, Informative

    Xenophon, for those unfamiliar, was an ancient Greek general best known for writing The Anabasis -- an account of the trials and adventures of The Ten Thousand, a group of Greek mercenaries hired by Cyrus the Younger. After he's killed in battle, the Greeks have to march back to Greece from deep within enemy territory. It's quite a thrilling tale with plenty of action and treachery. Surprised they haven't made a movie out of it a la 300.

    If I was Mr. Xenophon, I'd rather go up against the Persians than the Scientologists :D In any event, he has an awesome last name.

    1. Re:A word on Xenophon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Cyrus the younger" you say. This morning the spokesman and vice president of COS Australia was defending his religious organisation on the radio and other media. His name was... Cyrus, Cyrus Brooks. One day Senator Xenophon may give an account of the "trials and adventures of The Ten Thousand"s of scientologists in Australia. :)

  9. Read The Full Article by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 4, Informative

    Following on from the informative comment from Onetus, The Age also has a full transcript of Xenophons speech to the Senate. He makes it clear that he is tabling letters in the Senate with names removed to protect informants and innocents and has left the names in the copies sent to the Australian Federal Police.

    The point of his speech is to open dialogue in the Senate with a view to holding an inquiry into the CoS tax exemption. The purpose of sending the letters to the police with original names is for the police to investigate any criminality. Kind of a pincer movement really, good on him.

    From the speech:

    These allegations are serious, and many names have been removed from the letters I have tabled in the Senate tonight, but those names have not been removed from copies I am providing to the police. This organisation must be investigated. These victims of Scientology have spoken out at considerable personal risk, and I commend them for that. And I would encourage other victims of Scientology to come forward, contact the police or contact my office -- but, most importantly, speak out.

    --
    I don't therefore I'm not.
  10. Celebrity backlash, awesome! by Lord_of_the_nerf · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can only hope this means no more promotional tours from John Travolta and Tom Cruise. That's a protest I can live with and love. Also, Jenna Elfman.

  11. On wikipedia right now... by Zarniwoop · · Score: 5, Funny

    "In November 2009, Xenophon labelled the Church of Scientology as a criminal organisation in a speech to the Senate. [42] This is clear evidence that he has very large testicles."

    I'm not in favor of vandalism, but LOL!

    --
    Still not dead.
  12. Re:Xenophon and Socrates by palegray.net · · Score: 4, Informative

    Pretty OT here

    No, you've got it all wrong. This is OT.

  13. PM is "concerned" too by dakameleon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister, has said he's concerned too, and wants to see the material before calling a full inquiry.

    It's a sudden outbreak of common sense in the House in the Hill, that's for sure.

    --
    Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
  14. Xenophon? Sounds Foreign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Xenophon? Sounds Foreign

  15. Re:L Ron was a failed entreprenuer? Not anymore... by ThePengwin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You don't get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you start a religion. - L. Ron Hubbard, 1948

  16. I used to be a Scientologist by leereyno · · Score: 5, Interesting

    .....and I can tell you from personal experience that it really is pure concentrated evil.

    Scientology has gotten away with innumerable crimes over the years in part because the average person is incapable of imagining that anything can be so completely malign in its goals. The organization is completely sociopathic.

    They kicked me out because I wouldn't drink the koolaide.

    If you want to know more, I recommend you check out operation clambake (www.xenu.net)

    --
    Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
    1. Re:I used to be a Scientologist by MoralHazard · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How did you get involved, originally? My first guess (having known a few scientologists) is that your parents were/are members and you were raised in it. Second guess: One of the substance abuse programs. Third guess: One of their entrepreneurial outreach programs.

      Any hits? Just curious--I'm always happy to see somebody leave the CoS. it's a terrible, hurtful thing, and I've seen it ruin peoples' lives while making them feel it's their own fault.

      Also, out of curiosity, have you ever been diagnosed with ADD/ADHD, or at least seen the symptoms in yourself?

      Personally, I think there's substantial co-morbidity between substance abuse problems and scientology for a very specific reason: Undiagnosed (or untreated) ADHD, mostly the "inattentive" kind (which is pretty substantially under-diagnosed, since the kids aren't unruly or acting out). It tends to breed feelings of worthlessness in afflicted adults, and opens up a lot of psychological vulnerabilities. Many suffers either self-medicate (hence the substance abuse issues), and/or get attracted to cults that promise direction, motivation, and self-improvement. Scientology, in particular, has substance-abuse outreach and treatment programs, which makes a handy recruiting strategy for the larger cult.

      Of all the scientologists I've met (~2 dozen), almost all of them seem like classic ADHD cases. That is partly based on observing behavior, and partly on what people have said about their life histories, and partly on what they say about their relatives (ADHD is highly inheritable). I've also met a lot (~100s) of 12-steppers (mostly AA)--the proportion of them showing ADHD symptoms or personal/family histories isn't quite as high, but it's still enormous, far more than the normal population.

      (Interesting side-note: According to my psychiatrist uncle (who performed a lot of criminal insanity consultations, and is borderline ADHD, himself), American prison populations also show substantial ADD/ADHD over-representation, possibly as high as 70-80% of all prison inmates. As an adult with ADHD, I have to suppress a chuckle at that little trifecta: Prison, addiction, or scientology--take your pick, kids, so many ways to ruin your life.)

      For the general Slashdot audience: If you or your family have symptoms of ADHD or inattentive (no-H) ADHD, I'd recommend reading Nancy and John Ratey's books, and then going to see a psychiatrist, in that order. Even if you decide not to try the drugs (which can be helpful, but aren't a magic cure by themselves), there is a LOT you can do to improve your life. It's cheaper than a cult, too.

    2. Re:I used to be a Scientologist by smellsofbikes · · Score: 4, Informative

      How did you get involved, originally? My first guess (having known a few scientologists) is that your parents were/are members and you were raised in it. Second guess: One of the substance abuse programs. Third guess: One of their entrepreneurial outreach programs.

      My girlfriend recently graduated from college with degrees in communications and marketing. She was almost immediately contacted with a job offer, from a company that said they were public relations consultants. She went into the interview and there were ten other people there, also waiting. The person running the interview sat everyone down and gave them a form to fill out and sign before they started the interview process. One of the items on the form was a non-disclosure clause for everything in the interview, and another was a statement that L. Ron Hubbard's words were infallible. To which she had to agree in writing before she could get an interview. At which point she realized that she was being recruited to be a Scientologist recruiter. She walked out. But just so you know, that's one way Scientology gets new members: they hire people with degrees being convincing to go get more people.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  17. Re:What a difference 2000 years makes! by Beelzebud · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Religions aren't about money and mind control? Really? That's an incredibly naive statement.

    I see Operation Clambake and raise you the house arrest of Galileo, the crusades, 9/11, Salem Witch Trials, etc, etc, etc, etc. The list is pretty long...

  18. Nooooo! by martin-boundary · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nooooo! Somebody please stop the Australians before the Americans wake up, or else Tom Cruise is going to jump up and down on the sofa again!

  19. It should even have been dissolved here in France by Yvanhoe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It should have been dissolved in France but what happened instead is really shameful. The judge was probably going to order the dissolution of the scientology, considered culprit of being a criminal organization of fraudulent aim (that means that money was considered their driving motivation). But two weeks before the verdict (a perfect synchronization). Our parliament made a "mistake". Inside a huge corpus of law modification (aimed at simplifying the laws regarding buisnesses and companies), someone "inadvertently" put a law removing the dissolution as a possible verdict for fraud. Nobody was able to point out the person who put this amendment (how comes !?) and everybody said it was a mistake and they would correct it with a new law. Unfortunately, the verdict was due two weeks later and instead of dissolution, the scientology got a record fine.

    They are loosing adepts, but they still have people in the higher spheres...

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  20. Re:So - how's he gonna end up? by vandy1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Stephen Fielding is the one you're talking about - Xenophon is anti-pokies, and seems to me to be relatively deliberative on other matters, and generally reasonable. Stephen Fielding is a climate change skeptic; Nick Xenophon is not.

    Cheers.

  21. Zen Buddhism/Hebrew prophets by Kupfernigk · · Score: 5, Insightful
    That would include the Zen masters that told people that the secret of the good life is to overcome your training, experience things for yourself and "just be natural"? Or the Hebrew prophets who told anyone who would listen that God was not interested in temples, altars and sacrifices, but wanted people to live ethically and at peace with their neighbours?

    The sad truth is that religions become centres of power, and centres of power attract criminals. It's interesting to see how even the green movement is being plagued with criminals selling people massively uneconomic wind and solar systems, because people's desire to do good often exceeds their ability to see through bullshit. But some religions - Zen, Quakers, Reform Judaism, the liberal wing of the Episcopalian Church - have proven very resistant to criminal infiltration. That's possibly because they attract mainly very educated people. To be blunt, one reason Scientology is so successful might be because it has targeted the rich and gullible.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."