Scientology Charged With Slavery, Human Trafficking

eldavojohn writes "A formal complaint was filed in California (caged PDF) last week by John Lindstein naming David Miscavige and the Church of Scientology International as defendants. Lindstein claims that for sixteen years (from age 8) he was forced to work as a slave at Gold Base, a secret CoS site run by Golden Era Productions with 'razor wire, security guard patrols, surveillance posts, and three roll calls each day.' The pay was $50 a week. The allegations include 'Violations of wage and hour laws as well as unfair/illegal business practices actionable under California B&P 17200 Et. Seq.' and a complaint under the 13th Amendment of the US Constitution, which abolished slavery. Members of the group Anonymous praised the summons."

Comments

really?

[sopssa]

Was this a surprise to anyone?

Re:really?

[Narcocide]

I hate those motherfuckers and I live right in their neighborhood but seriously, it was a surprise to me.

Re:really?

[Jugalator]

Yes, definitely.

Re:really?

[Anonymous Coward]

Posting anonymously because... well... I'm anonymous, and this information has been removed from slashdot before due to COS C&D letters.

In the words of Trey Parker and Matt Stone, 'THIS IS WHAT SCIENTOLOGISTS ACTUALLY BELIEVE!!'

As quoted from L. Ron Hubbard:

The head of the Galactic Federation (76 planets around larger stars visible from here) (founded 95,000,000 years ago, very space opera) solved overpopulation (250 billion or so per planet, 178 billion on average) by mass implanting. He caused people to be brought to Teegeeack (Earth) and put an H-Bomb on the principal volcanos (Incident II) and then the Pacific area ones were taken in boxes to Hawaii and the Atlantic area ones to Las Palmas and there "packaged".

His name was Xenu. He used renegades. Various misleading data by means of circuits etc. was placed in the implants.

When through with his crime loyal officers (to the people) captured him after six years of battle and put him in an electronic mountain trap where he still is. "They" are gone. The place (Confederation) has since been a desert. The length and brutality of it all was such that this Confederation never recovered. The implant is calculated to kill (by pneumonia etc) anyone who attempts to solve it. This liability has been dispensed with by my tech development.

One can freewheel through the implant and die unless it is approached as precisely outlined. The "freewheel" (auto-running on and on) lasts too long, denies sleep etc and one dies. So be careful to do only Incidents I and II as given and not plow around and fail to complete one thetan at a time.

In December 1967 I knew someone had to take the plunge. I did and emerged very knocked out, but alive. Probably the only one ever to do so in 75,000,000 years. I have all the data now, but only that given here is needful.

One's body is a mass of individual thetans stuck to oneself or to the body.

One has to clean them off by running incident II and Incident I. It is a long job, requiring care, patience and good auditing. You are running beings. They respond like any preclear. Some large, some small.

Thetans believed they were one. This is the primary error. Good luck.

Re:really?

[DA_MAN_DA_MYTH]

[This comment has been removed due to legal action by the Church of Scientology]

Re:really?

[interkin3tic]

...so how much do I now owe the church of scientology for reading that?

Re:really?

[jcr]

Was this a surprise to anyone?

No surprise that they did it, but I'm a bit surprised that someone finally filed the charges. Most Scientology escapees just want to be left alone.

-jcr

Re:really?

[NitroWolf]

If your question is serious, the serious answer is about $500,000.

That's about how much you have to pay to get to that "level" of information.

Re:really?

[Vyse of Arcadia]

That reads like a badly translated NES game manual. I expected to see "and then ninjas kidnapped the president."

Re:really?

[thoughtspace]

I bet Nigerian scam artists must marvel at how the CoS created such a fanciful story. How many clues do people need that CoS is a scam?

Re:really?

[TheoMurpse]

What surprised me is that after visiting a page entitled "Scientology Charged with Slavery, Human Trafficking," I was greeted with a summary about a civil case, not a criminal case. Color me disinterested when someone sues Scientology. Wake me when the DOJ indicts members of the Cult of Scientology.

Re:really?

[Pranadevil2k]

I'm confused. How did Mr. Hubbard find such a following of morons with such terrible writing? At least the bible and similar works don't need parenthetical explanations (to help people understand the vague information etc) to con people into believing it.

Re:really?

[wiredlogic]

That's part of the appeal. The Scientology texts are written with obtuse "tech" that is akin to gnostic religious writings in that is is intended to solidify group identity through secret knowledge. To understand this nonsense means that one is an insider and part of an elite group different from "normal" people who can't understand what is being written about. That being said, even with the tech, Hubbard's grammar is notably poor and the line of discussion meanders everywhere. It definitely seems like it was written while he was spaced out on drugs. I certainly have no interest in reading any of his fiction if this is what he typically writes like.

Re:really?

[Anonymous Coward]

i once read an excellent comment wherein a commenter made note that by comparing the ridiculousness of scientology texts to the ridiculousness of other religions' texts, you are in fact granting scientology a legitimacy that it does not deserve.

Re:really?

[Reziac]

Might be this one has nothing left to lose. That's probably the ideal situation for fighting a cult -- if they can't hurt you (other than killing you).

If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[tekrat]

Slaves aren't paid, last I checked. Did he file a 1099?

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[Anonymous Coward]

Historically, American slaves were fed and clothed, and occasionally paid. A few saved up to buy their freedom (less of the agricultural variety, more of the city-dwellers who could collect tips.)

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[NFN_NLN]

Slaves aren't paid, last I checked. Did he file a 1099?

1. Force people to work for you
2. Pay them 1 cent a year as an annual salary
3. Hire as your lawyer
4. Profit

Something isn't right, isn't there suppose to be a '???"' somewhere. Oh well...

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[elrous0]

Silly fool, working for $50 a week. Lord Xenu pays *his* slaves $100 a week.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't believe you actually did check. Every definition of slavery has nothing to do with compensation or lack thereof, and everything to do with being bound, out of your control, in service to another.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[Anonymous Coward]

Slavery actually connotes a position of involuntary servitude rather than one where payment is withheld. That is, it is the lack of freedom that is the main attribute of slavery, not the lack of compensation.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[Suiggy]

Pay as meager as $50 is similar to the allowance given to indentured servants back in old times. He was also forced into labor, he couldn't leave. That $50 had to be spent on the compound at the canteen. It was slavery.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[jjohnson]

The negro workers in the deep South, picking cotton on plantations before the civil war, were given food and a roof over their heads. By common labor law, that counts as compensation. Does that mean they weren't slaves?

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[confused one]

Forced labor. There, is that better?

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[Anonymous Coward]

Slavery actually connotes a position of involuntary servitude rather than one where payment is withheld. That is, it is the lack of freedom that is the main attribute of slavery, not the lack of compensation.

Slavery actually connotes a position of involuntary servitude rather than one where payment is withheld. That is, it is the lack of freedom that is the main attribute of slavery, not the lack of compensation.

The barbed wire at Gold Base is on the inside of the fence not on the outside.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[elrous0]

You don't count being held in a compound surrounded by razor wire and forced to work 16-24 hours a day at age 8 as "involuntary servitude"? Wow, you must have had a much rougher childhood than me.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[AndrewNeo]

There's a minimum floor of income under which you don't have to pay taxes.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[Chris Burke]

You don't count being held in a compound surrounded by razor wire and forced to work 16-24 hours a day at age 8 as "involuntary servitude"?

No, obviously they do count that as involuntary, since the point was to contradict a post claiming this wasn't slavery due to him being paid. In other words, they are saying he was a slave.

This post has been brought to you by the Center For Explaining the Obvious to the Reading Comprehension Impaired, a tax-exempt religious charity organization that you can join and learn more about for the low low cost of $5000.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[aekafan]

This is exactly right. It is why I consider a Military or Civil draft slavery.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[Toonol]

I agree. Compensation is irrelevant; what matters is that it is voluntary.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[lwsimon]

Contrary to popular culture, most slaves in the US where fairly well taken care of. It was an enormous investment to purchase and maintain slaves, and the owner wouldn't risk that lightly.

Of course, there were horrific exceptions to this.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[DynamiteNeon]

Let me get my checkbook.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[Tiger4]

Perhaps you do, and you might be moraly right. But at least in the US, the military draft was not ended by the national ban on slavery. The US federal courts and Supreme Court ruled it was not covered, and the draft continued off and on for another 110 years after the 13th Amendment. Other nations take pretty much the same attitude.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[Richy_T]

So the government decided that only the government can own slaves. Quel surprise

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[jcr]

Contrary to popular culture, most slaves in the US where fairly well taken care of.

Considerably better than Irish day laborers. There are many stories of Irishmen being given tasks to do that were too dangerous to risk losing a slave.

-jcr

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[couchslug]

Slaves are normally fed, even in concentration camps.

This is not "compensation" due to the coercive nature of the labor arrangement. :)

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[_Sprocket_]

Do you have a pop psychology book and a secret black box with some electrodes I could tape to my skin?

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[grcumb]

Allow me to re-phrase that for you:

Contrary to popular culture, most livestock in the US where fairly well taken care of. It was an enormous investment to purchase and maintain livestock, and the owner wouldn't risk that lightly.

The problem wasn't the conditions in which slaves were kept; the problem is that human beings were indistinguishable from livestock in the minds of their owners.

You ought to learn about what the loss of liberty does to a human being before you trot out this useless tripe again.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[Ahnteis]

Should I pipe up here about DeBeers and those diamond mines?

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[Chris Burke]

Do you have a pop psychology book and a secret black box with some electrodes I could tape to my skin?

I'm normally not supposed to answer questions like this until you pay the initial $5000 fee, but the answers respectively are "no, psychology is a mole-men conspiracy" and "yes, but the electrodes don't go on your skin, and you need lube not tape".

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[StarWreck]

WRONG! Slavery is involuntary servitude, regardless of whether or not you are paid.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[MBGMorden]

He never said the slavery wasn't bad. Merely that most people's conceptions of every "massa" trotting out the whip at the drop of a pin is generally inaccurate. The reality of a situation is either bad enough to warrant distaste in it's own right (in which case slavery is), or it's not. Lying or exaggerating to prove a point isn't justified.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[Ungrounded Lightning]

Oh that's okay then.

He wasn't claiming it was "okay". He was just correcting a factual error. Big difference.

It's a lot easier to understand history - and avoid being led around by current and future crops of highly-placed liars and ignoramuses - if you know what really happened instead of believing whatever propaganda of the winning side used (even if they were "the good side".)

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[MBGMorden]

You don't have to pay, but I believe you still have to file.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[jpate]

Someone who also has stock options?

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[asaz989]

Only when it's directly tied to a responsibility of the federal government laid out in the constitution (that was the reasoning in the supreme court case)

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[mister_playboy]

Someone who already has more than enough money to get by handsomely.

These days it's trendy to claim a $1 a year salary while you have millions given to you as stock options, paid expenses, etc.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[spathi-wa]

Yes, but does that preclude him from filing tax returns? I think not.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[Rakshasa Taisab]

He was saying exactly that; slaves were taken better care for than most people think. Same as livestock is exactly the point, they were better taken care of than most people think.

What you are spouting is typical for people who can't hold a discussion about a subject without going for hyperbole. In a discussion about the physical well-being of slaves there's no reason to muddy the waters by bringing in freedom, when that's not the aspect under discussion.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[stupid_is]

You don't count being held in a compound surrounded by razor wire and forced to work 16-24 hours a day at age 8 as "involuntary servitude"? Wow, you must have had a much rougher childhood than me.

When I was a child, that was considered luxury

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[azmodean 1]

I think you're overreacting a bit here, the GP isn't saying that slavery isn't horrific, just that a case isn't disqualified from being slavery just because the victim is fed, clothed, and paid.

What the GP says sounds reasonable (I don't know enough about history to state whether it is accurate or not), I think you're seeing apologism for slavery where it doesn't exist.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[doug141]

The barbed wire at Gold Base is on the inside of the fence not on the outside.

It's common for barbed wire fences to be installed wrong, just look around businesses in your neighborhood. I don't know if it's plain ignorance, or a desire to put the fence at the limit of the property and remain in one's airspace, or both. A look at the nature of the businesses doing this makes it clear it's not always a nefarious desire to keep people in.

Re:If he was paid $50, he wasn't a "slave"

[RockDoctor]

He never said the slavery wasn't bad. Merely that most people's conceptions of every "massa" trotting out the whip at the drop of a pin is generally inaccurate.

Of course the "massa" wouldn't get out the whip at every random opportunity. What do you think he ("Massa") gives his overseer slave a better hut and an extra serving of food for? It's to energise his whip arm.
As the old joke goes - you don't buy a dog and then bark for yourself.

two words

[martas]

hell yeah!

I love it!

[mcgrew]

Now if we can see a slashdot article saying that they were found guilty and someone went to prison for it... the fat lady ain't sang yet, boys.

Re:I love it!

[zero0ne]

But it is a step in the right direction!

Re:I love it!

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, that won't happen. The Co$'s lawyers will ensure that they get off. Not only that, but they've infiltrated the government and justice system to the point where I'm surprised they don't have laws exempting them from these types of charges.

Re:I love it!

[SpaceCadets]

I can if you want. :P

Re:I love it!

[mcgrew]

You're a fat lady? Let me buy you a beer...

Re:I love it!

[SpaceCadets]

/hug If you live in Australia I might take you up on that! :)

Re:I love it!

[mcgrew]

I have the worst luck! I'm in the US, about as far from Australia as one could be =(

I'm probably too old for you anyway...

That's pretty evil.

[FatSean]

First the Catholics with child rape, now the Scientologists with slavery and human trafficking.

Any wagers on which one true religion will be busted next?

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Darkness404]

It isn't religion that is the problem, it is organization and trust. Take any group of trusted people and you will find that a minority want to use their trust for personal gain. In America, corporations, schools, etc. are all looked at pretty thoroughly for abuses, religion usually isn't.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[PalmKiller]

The Church of Nibbles and Bits for Compu-fornication maybe?

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Xtravar]

Hmm, how come every Scientology story must have some post diverting attention to Catholicism, trying to lend legitimacy to Scientology as a religion?

Let's stick to the topic at hand, shall we? And that topic is that Scientology apparently enslaved this person.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[houstonbofh]

I think you started a little late. The Muslim crusades. The Catholic crusades. The Inquisition. (What a show...) The common thread is people... A corrupt person has no problem using anything as an excuse from religion, to communism, to security, to social justice. No "idea" stays pure once people start to use it.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Religions, though, have the unpleasant architectural problem of (in the vast majority of cases) coupling social and organizational power with strongly implied, or even overt, assertions of trustworthiness.

Because they purport to deal in moral and divine matters, those who have power within the organization generally(either as an official point of doctrine, or in lay understanding) tend to be imbued with greater "goodness" or "holiness" or access to divine command, or whatever. Priests and CEOs are both potentially dangerous, and quite likely to cover for their buddies; but you don't generally tell children that CEOs are trusted authority figures who deserve their respect and obedience.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[WarwickRyan]

> but you don't generally tell children that CEOs are trusted authority figures who deserve their respect and obedience.

Well, unless their name is Steve Jobs.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[elrous0]

I have it on good authority that the Amish are running a dog fighting ring.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you learn more about the inquisition and compare it with the other trials of the time (that is, not by today's standards), you'll surely prefer to be judged by the inquisition; and the spanish one which so much bad publicity was better than the anglican one, which burnt the most witches.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[eegad]

Any wagers on which one true religion will be busted next?

Fortunately, truth and our ability to discern it and believe it doesn't have anything to do with our ability to live up to it.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Anachragnome]

Sticky subject that is likely to insult somebody, no matter how you approach it.

I can say that I have met some Jewish people with questionable business morals, but then again I've met people with NO religious beliefs that are far worse.

As far as slavery and forced labor goes, the long-running genocide in Darfur is essentially Muslim controlled militias attacking indigenous tribes-people, people that have been a source of slaves for Muslim slavers for hundreds of years.

The rallying cry for some of the Janjaweed (means "devil on horseback") militia forces has been "Kill the slaves, kill the slaves!"

But then again, the region where the Janjaweed are killing defenseless, unarmed villagers also happens to center around a government-held oil pipeline that sends 80% of the regions oil to China.

So maybe religion has nothing to do with it? Maybe some people are just assholes?

And to complicate matters, some people seem to feel compelled to put Scientology in the same group as Christianity and Islam when we ALL know Scientology is just a big SCAM. It is NOT a religion just because they say it is. It is a scam disguised as a religion.

Oranges and Apples, my friends...Don't give them the credit they so desire.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[tbannist]

Many people would say some organizational structures are better able to resist corruption than others. It's been my perception that (monotheistic) religion is particular vulnerable to corruption since it's trivially easy for the organization to be corrupted from the top down. In most cases the leader is expected to be the holiest of people and thus even questioning the leader can easily be cast as lack of faith in the entire religion.

Even if everything can be corrupted, but it might useful to look at how easily corrupted different organizational structures are.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Archangel Michael]

FSM

It is cruelty to withhold spaghetti.

But that is my opinion.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[drinkypoo]

Hmm, how come every Scientology story must have some post diverting attention to Catholicism, trying to lend legitimacy to Scientology as a religion?

Snicker, snort. You're mistaking digs at Catholic Cultism for ascription of legitimacy.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Archangel Michael]

you don't generally tell children that CEOs are trusted authority figures who deserve their respect and obedience.

"Trust me" - Every Politician

Just to let you know, I'm one of those "religious" type people. I don't tell people to trust any man. In fact, I tell people to trust no man. All men fail at some point.

In fact, I would tell you that my faith actually makes the case that you can't trust men. But what do I know, I'm a religious nutjob.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[camperdave]

I wish Acts 17:11 would get preached more: "Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true."

Healthy skepticism is part of a noble character.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's stick to the topic at hand, shall we?

Well, not everyone is using Verizon's FiOS, like you are.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[nEoN nOoDlE]

diverting attention to Catholicism, trying to lend legitimacy to Scientology as a religion?

I think the posts diverting attention to Catholicism are trying more to discredit Catholicism by comparing it to a cult than the other way around.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Capt.DrumkenBum]

Hmm, how come every Scientology story must have some post diverting attention to Catholicism, trying to lend legitimacy to Scientology as a religion?

I believe you have it backwards. I think the post you reference is trying to point out that there is really no reason not to treat catholicism with the same utter contempt that we treat scientology.
I personally think it should be taken one step further than that. All organized religion should be treated with utter contempt.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Capt.DrumkenBum]

Forgot this:
Q: What is the difference between a religion and a cult?
A: Time.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[D Ninja]

Well, unless their name is Steve Jobs.

Why would it matter if the child's name is Steve Jobs?

(Yeah...I'm all over that grammar.)

Re:That's pretty evil.

[syousef]

It isn't religion that is the problem

I disagree. Religions all require you to believe in things that cannot be proven, despite their being unlikely. Religion requires that you leave your brains at the door, at least on certain points. So when something damaging or wrong is suggested it can be justified or endorsed based on fantasy/fiction, and you're left without the defense of common sense or scientific method.

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. " - Steven Weinberg

Re:That's pretty evil.

[osu-neko]

I wish Acts 17:11 would get preached more: "Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." Healthy skepticism is part of a noble character.

I don't think examining the Scriptures to see if something is true can be reasonably considered "healthy skepticism". This would more properly be described as an unhealthy skewing of the meaning of "skepticism". Someone with a healthy level of skepticism would not consider examining the scriptures as a means of verifying truth. At best it can uncover contradictions, but proving that what Paul said was consistent would in no way indicate whether what Paul said was true. The Bereans, it appears, suffered from some very unhealthy misconceptions

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Anonymous Coward]

It isn't religion that is the problem, it is organization and trust.

The Catholic Church has the additional problem that they prohibit their authority figures from engaging in normal heterosexual relationships. To put it bluntly, one of the key criteria they use to select authority figures is abnormal sexuality. Many of the Catholic Church's authority figures are probably just asexual and some are probably homosexual - but there are also obviously quite a few who are pedophiles. That's not to say that people with abnormal sexuality are bad - just that the child molesting by authority figures in the Catholic Church wasn't just random chance (it was a direct result of their celibacy requirements).

Re:That's pretty evil.

[sznupi]

It isn't religion that is the problem, it is organization and trust.

What you just wrote could be probably called almost a model of contradictory statement. Religions are organizations that are built largely on trust (or so the claim goes...)

Take any group of trusted people and you will find that a minority want to use their trust for personal gain. In America, corporations, schools, etc. are all looked at pretty thoroughly for abuses, religion usually isn't.

...because they've had many generations to perfect the organizational aspects of their existence, of using trust to their benefit.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Garridan]

You're a fan of disorganized religion, eh? How's that work? You get lost on your way to church, and when you get there, the priest has NO idea where he saw God last, much less where he is now? The name of the GOd or goDs change all the time, as does their message(s)? The priest keeps forgetting to put pants on, but that's ok because the pulpit will cover up the naughty bits if he can ever find it...

Hmm... yes, this does sound more entertaining than an organized religion. Where can I sign up? Oh, you lost the form? Well... call back if you find it...

Re:That's pretty evil.

[icannotthinkofaname]

First the Catholics with child rape, now the Scientologists with slavery and human trafficking.

Any wagers on which one true religion will be busted next?

Wait, wait, wait, isn't the VERY important difference the fact that the Catholic Church does not condone child abuse, and does not justify the actions of those who acted inappropriately?

Pardon me if I'm ignorant of how things actually work. I live by the published teachings of things like being a decent person and protecting children.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Culture20]

It isn't religion that is the problem, it is organization and trust. Take any group of trusted people and you will find that a minority want to use their trust for personal gain.

And Scientology was built to (c)overtly abuse that trust. The majority of Scientologists want to use trust for personal gain.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Stregano]

Unless the CEO's name was Steve Jobbs. Enjoy.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[cyber-vandal]

Scientology is a religion in the same way as Dunkin Donuts is a restaurant

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Culture20]

And that topic is that Scientology apparently enslaved this person.

And not misguided Scientologists, not a subsidiary of CoS, the CoS. With the Catholic diversion posts, an argument can be made that the Catholic Church and Catholic (Cristian) faiths are not one in the same. With the CoS, their heavy copyright on the faith documents means that Scientology and Church of Scientology are one in the same.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Kreigaffe]

I personally think you took one step too far when you afforded the CoS the respect of referring to them as an organized religion. They're not, catholicism is, there's a huge difference.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[flyingfsck]

Ewww, catholicism doesn't exactly have a good name either. The Catholic Church has been a war lusting, child molesting scam for almost 2000 years.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[el3mentary]

Really, I heard the Amish were behind Conficker.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[flyingfsck]

Uhhmm, all religion is a scam.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I nowhere said that all religious people suffer from misplaced trust problems, or even all religious organizations exhibit pernicious hierarchical trust. I do say, though, that religious organizations are markedly more likely than other organizations to couple trust and power(In the sense that the powerful are trusted, not that the trusted are made powerful) which makes them particularly vulnerable to problems of that flavor.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[jimicus]

I personally think you took one step too far when you afforded the CoS the respect of referring to them as an organized religion. They're not, catholicism is, there's a huge difference.

Yep, about two thousand years and a few million followers.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[jimicus]

Wait, wait, wait, isn't the VERY important difference the fact that the Catholic Church does not condone child abuse, and does not justify the actions of those who acted inappropriately?

Yet senior figures in the Irish catholic church have done everything in their power to suppress investigation of child abuse allegations.

At the risk of being branded a "think of the childruuuuun!" nutjob, suppressing investigation is tantamount to condoning.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[vxice]

The problem is not any specific organization but organizations in general. You only have to have a few "bad apples" realize that they can take advantage of the organization by doing stuff and if the witnesses are also members of the organization they will want to deal with the problem privately to avoid bringing a bad name to the organization which is tainted by a few bad individuals. The problem gets worse once the bad apples gain most of the power in the group and then force its members to go along still while they think they can change it from the inside because basically all you can do then is either change the group as a whole or leave and admit that the group that you thought was good really isnt weather or not it started out that way.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[WarwickRyan]

Is it implied that you're refering to the first subject (i.e. the children) and not the second (the CEOs)?

I don't know the rules for English, but I do know that the grammar's pretty forgiving when it comes to the subject. Or at least it is when compared to dutch (and german / other germanic languages). That's what allows a lot of british humour (and it's why you don't see much German humour - the language it too precise for it).

Re:That's pretty evil.

[icannotthinkofaname]

So then the Irish are wack-jobs, if that's true.

I still haven't heard anything about the Bishop of Rome appearing to approve even remotely of any of these actions.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Omestes]

Scientology is a religion in the same way as Dunkin Donuts is a restaurant

Not to sound like a troll, but what is the difference between Scientology and the class of entities called "religion", to me this sounds like the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. You don't like Scientology, but you like your religion of choice, therefore Scientology is not a religion, in spite of sharing many similar characteristics.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Xtravar]

You don't start a Scientology debate when Catholicism is in the news, so you shouldn't start a Catholicism debate when Scientology is in the news. It's completely asinine, and it's what the Scientologists want to 'legitimize' their organization. Whether you think the Catholic Church is more or less legitimate is irrelevant.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[interkin3tic]

I personally think it should be taken one step further than that. All organized religion should be treated with utter contempt.

That's an interesting thought, I'd like to hear more. Actually, no, I'll just blindly follow your authority. Could I give you money? If I treat all other organized religions with utter contempt, maybe declaring a holy war against them, will I go to some type of pleasurable afterlife?

Re:That's pretty evil.

[D Ninja]

Well, the average person would understand what you meant (which is why you were modded +5 Funny). And, I did too...I just wanted to respond. However, in the case of your sentence, their didn't specifically refer to the first OR the second - it had to be inferred.

I actually laughed at your joke, though. ;-) It was good.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[MightyMartian]

I've seen $cientologists use the reasoning "Well Catholics believe in Zombie Jesus, so our beliefs aren't really any worse." On a purely metaphysical level, they're right, of course, it all looks like outrageous bunk. But Catholicism (and Christianity in general) has long been an integrated, and for a long time integral part of the wider Western society. What that generally means is that whatever cultish aspects may have been present in Early Christianity were pretty much paved over as the Church became more closely aligned with the State and with the wider society.

As goofy as Catholic beliefs can appear to the non-believer, they are indeed more mainstream, and as we can see by the vast amounts of money paid to victims of abuse, they are, in the long run, anyways, more willing to admit their complicity in criminal acts. $cientology's leaders have yet to come to that point yet, and maybe never will. I really doubt that the cult will be much of a force in 50 years. Other cultish groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses are already in a bit of a nosedive.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Xtravar]

I don't really care if it was light-hearted or not. Associating the two followings, even through satire and jokes, only makes things worse. We all can agree that Scientology is bad. We all can't agree that Catholicism is bad. If we confuse the two, we end up with both in the end. If we focus on Scientology, we all are better off.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[element-o.p.]

Baby...bathwater?

Yes, individuals -- and even rather large groups of individuals -- have abused faith for personal gain. I personally believe there is an especially toasty corner of Hell reserved for such as those.

However, even the most jaded, cynical atheist cannot deny that organized religions have also done some amazing things for the societies in which they existed. Read about Sisters of Providence and Providence Hospital. Or perhaps the Brother Francis shelter in Anchorage Alaska. How about Catholic Social Services? The church where I am a youth pastor spent the last four weeks feeding the homeless at another church downtown. YMMV, but I have seen religion lift people out of some very, very dark places and empower others to do things they never would have been brave enough to try otherwise.

With all due respect, saying that "all organized religion should be treated with utter contempt" is every bit as ignorant and superficial as claiming that someone cannot drive because their plumbing is different than mine or that someone has no value because they have a significantly better tan than I do. Prejudice is prejudice, period.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[JohnBailey]

First the Catholics with child rape, now the Scientologists with slavery and human trafficking. Any wagers on which one true religion will be busted next?

Capitalism?

Re:That's pretty evil.

[labnet]

Religions, though, have the unpleasant architectural problem of (in the vast majority of cases) coupling social and organizational power with strongly implied, or even overt, assertions of trustworthiness.

I think your post is spot on. Churches have been behind the 8 ball on this matter for a long time. Our Church and many others have now implemented formal Child Safety Policies in recognition of this problem. All staff or church members dealing with children must have a blue card (A govt supplied card that performs basic criminal checks). It deals with how staff react when they come into knowledge of possible criminal behaviour. There is even a requirement that children must be taken to the toilet by two adults, and the event recorded in a log book. Remember that 99+% of Christians are very loving, supportive, trustworthy; but a small minority will always be tempted to do the wrong thing or attempt to use the Church for their own evil motives. This may not stop the determined crimnal, but it does raise the bar for expectations and reduce risk by reducing opportunity.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[AlXtreme]

In empirical science, we accept that the observations of our senses is real (at least at some level), even though we have no "proof" that anything outside our thoughts is really real (remember DeCartes?)

Except that science only requires observation as a postulate and no other 'leaps of faith'. That is the difference between science and religion. Science doesn't expect you to believe in a bearded man on a cloud that watches your every move, or in angels or in eternal damnation. Observation and thought, that's it.

But as long as your religion doesn't condone those slaves in the basement, that's fine with me.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[couchslug]

"Hmm, how come every Scientology story must have some post diverting attention to Catholicism, trying to lend legitimacy to Scientology as a religion?"

The comparisons I make tend to show why both should be attacked. Superstition deserves contempt, and sustained attack can pay off for those who value humanity over nonsense.

Note that the Catholic Church base of support has now moved to the most simple and backward people. It is growing strong in Africa, and in the US many churches rely on congregations of ignorant immigrants.

Expose religion to the weapons that work against it, which are scorn and contempt. Laugh at it and the fools who believe it, for it deserves no more protection than any non-superstitious belief. The Catholics grovel before priests who bugger their children (the hundreds of millions of hush money/settlement dollars prove my point), and Scientologists grovel before leaders who enslave them. How's THAT for an apt comparison?

Re:That's pretty evil.

[bledri]

... trying to lend legitimacy to Scientology as a religion?

if statement.contains("religion") and statement.contains("legit*"): head.explode()

Re:That's pretty evil.

[couchslug]

"It isn't religion that is the problem, it is organization and trust. "

We know religion is superstition designed to persuade fearful simpletons into submitting to their masters, be those masters priest, preacher, or mullah. Religion is absurd to truly modern man, and belief in imaginary friends is a psychological defect.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Obfuscant]

You don't like Scientology, but you like your religion of choice, therefore Scientology is not a religion, in spite of sharing many similar characteristics.

It would be easy to respond to such a statement in kind. You don't like any kind of religion, so you fail to discern the differences in your attempt at lumping them all together as worthless and meaningless.

Yes, scientology and any real religion share "certain characteristics". They are made up of people. That's the main one. They believe in things you can't prove (but then, doesn't everyone?) They get together to meet with like-minded believers. All very damning similarities, I know.

This does not mean that others cannot make the discernment. For example, cults which have "secret handshakes" or require payments to achieve various levels of "salvation", versus religions that don't.

Go to a tent meeting sometime and ask the people there what their religion is about. You'll walk away having been told just about everything you need to know, and what you weren't told you can ask and find out. (I didn't say you'd believe it or understand it yourself, but the information will be made freely available.) Try the same thing at a Scientology meeting. Apples and rutabagas.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[couchslug]

The ideas were never pure, and designed to be excuses for one man to master another.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[need4mospd]

Then I guess you won't mind when all the churches stop handing out free meals and homes to the needy? Or sponsor large blood drives? Or give out free counseling to those in need? If Scientology was wiped from the map, the world would be a better place in every possible way, and you can't say that for the Christian church. I say this as an entirely non-religious person... Religion is silly to me either way.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[WarwickRyan]

Ahh, that's what I thought.

Know what's really bad? English is my first language, but my grammar's terrible. Was never taught it at school (they may have tried, but they taught languages as an art, which resulted in haphazard teaching).

Move to the netherlands, and learn dutch. The language is taught logically. The grammar is all rule based. Syntax work. Very similar to learning a programming language (actually identical). Results are that an ostentatiously complex grammar system is actually easier to understand than that of an apparently simple one. My knowledge of dutch grammar is better than my knowledge of English grammar. Can't write for shit in it though.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Attila Dimedici]

I don't have a reference currently. However, I came across an article a few years ago that contended that a larger percentage of the NEA (National Education Association--a teachers' union) were guilty of sexual abuse of children than the percentage of Catholic priests who were. That seems a stretch to me, but not a very large one.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[dbIII]

Hmm, how come every Scientology story must have some post diverting attention to Catholicism, trying to lend legitimacy to Scientology as a religion?

Australia had a court case like that that played right into the hands of this Dianetics scam with a new name. It didn't help that the lapsed Catholic Judge wanted to take a dig at real religeons by comparing them with these scammers.
The deliberately try to escalate these disputes into Church vs State instead of organised crime vs State.
We should give up on their trap of trying to define religeon and showing they are not because we've seen where this scam has come from. They've had decades to some up with confusing arguments and can play the game for years and get all kinds of unlikely allies on their side if they frame it as Church vs State.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Anonymous Coward]

They examined the Old Testament to see if what Paul said was true. The Old Testament had been distributed among them a few generations beforehand.

+5 Insightful, nice troll.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Anonymous Coward]

I feel compelled to point out one key difference between the catholic priests who liked little boys and the CoS. The abuses exacted by the the catholic priests were neither organized or endorsed by the catholic church organization. The fact that it became so widespread was little different then dirty cops or corruption in unions. Positions of power tend to corrupt unless specific safeguards are put in place to prevent it. Ultimately the problem was with the individuals who happened to be part of the organization, the organization was only indirectly responsible in that they created the position of power that the individuals took advantage of. The CoS on the other hand, is engaging in human trafficing and other illegal activities as a core part of it's organized operations. There is a big difference between an organization that basically does good but has some individuals in it's ranks that engage in illegal activities outside the scope of the organization, and an organization that is engaged in egregious and pervasive illegal activity as a part of it's core operations.
 
Posting anonymously as I don't want a scientologist getting all illegal on my buttocks.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[syousef]

At some point, everything depends on faith. In empirical science, we accept that the observations of our senses is real (at least at some level), even though we have no "proof" that anything outside our thoughts is really real (remember DeCartes?)

No I don't depend on faith. If someone provides a good counter argument (e.g. shows me to a high degree of certainty that my senses are at fault) I am free to change my beliefs.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[dbIII]

Possibly, but not all scams are religions.
This one isn't because we've seen it get a new label when dianetics hit legal problems. It's just like "Jedi", we've all seen the movie so we know it's not real.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[thoughtspace]

It isn't religion that is the problem

I disagree. Religions all require you to believe in things that cannot be proven, despite their being unlikely.

What? Like the universe was created from a big bang from out of nowhere?

That is why religion and science still co-exist. We just can't know everything.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[thoughtspace]

All organized religion should be treated with utter contempt.

Hear! Hear! What we need is more disorganised religion.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Scrameustache]

In fact, I would tell you that my faith actually makes the case that you can't trust men. But what do I know, I'm a religious nutjob.

Your faith was given to you by..? Men. You trust them.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[StarWreck]

The Scientologists are pretty good with the whole "child rape" thing too: http://sexual.taxexemptchildabuse.net/

Re:That's pretty evil.

[DamnStupidElf]

And yet, presumably, you've put your trust in a book and teachings written (and translated) by a bunch of people? Maybe I've totally misjudged you and you've gone through a Kantian self-discovery of religious ideals, but most religious people trust a book that was put together by humans over the last couple millennia, or in some cases since the 1950's.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[shutdown -p now]

The Catholic Church has the additional problem that they prohibit their authority figures from engaging in normal heterosexual relationships.

To be fair, this isn't the case for the entire Catholic Church - Eastern Rite Catholics don't have clerical celibacy for non-monastic clergy (which is inherited from Orthodox tradition, where in fact it is considered highly suspicious and improper for a minister to be unmarried, due to the commandment to "be fruitful and multiply").

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Scrameustache]

I can say that I have met some Jewish people with questionable business morals

Not where the B'nai Brith can hear you, you can't. Not with impunity, at least.

we ALL know Scientology is just a big SCAM. It is NOT a religion

Religions are scams, the lot of 'em: Give us your money and obedience in life, and we promise you rewards when you're dead. You'll notice that the rewards are all hypothetical in the 'afterlife', but they sure don't refrain from dishing out real punishment in real life.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[shutdown -p now]

If you learn more about the inquisition and compare it with the other trials of the time (that is, not by today's standards), you'll surely prefer to be judged by the inquisition

Which standards? European standards of the time? Or, say, those of the Ottoman Empire, or, better yet, Caliphate of the Islamic golden age?

It's not so simple.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[DamnStupidElf]

Nah, science just needs natural selection. The people who practiced bloodletting and mercury tonics and thought the earth was flat have died off as opposed to the ones who promoted statistical evidence based science, double-blind studies, and antibiotics. Even if they're all fundamentally wrong, they're quite a bit more fit than any other general group of humans have been in the past. If the current wrongness matters, subgroups with more right-ness will replace them in the future. This doesn't exclude religion, because it's clearly a part of human experience for a lot of people. But it probably means that religions will simply continue to shift and adapt to the changes in society as it has in the past, and attachment to any particular instance of it as a universal truth is probably a bad idea.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Jamu]

I believe your definition of reality differs significantly from the obvious one.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[element-o.p.]

lol, I actually have to agree with your main point. I had a math teacher in junior high school who essentially said, "All of our perceptions of reality are just models. They are quite useful in as much as they can help predict and describe the world around us. But don't ever make the mistake of thinking that what is and what you believe are exactly the same."

Re:That's pretty evil.

[overbaud]

"Religions all require you to believe in things that cannot be proven, despite their being unlikely"

Sounds like quantum physics... which also has a large number of people (spending money) that believe in something that can not be seen or proven. Physicists around the world a dedicating a large amount of their lives to theories many of which ARE MUTALLY EXCLUSIVE meaning someone is going to be wrong. Mathematically 'proof' exists of a 4th dimension... but just because the maths 'adds up' and it could be possible doesn't mean that it does exist, yet many many smart people believe that it does. Before you bust on religion I suggest you educate yourself some more belief in things that do not exists is not limited to relion but also a healthy chunk of the scientific domain. The irony is that Steven Weinberg IS JEWISH and a physicist that believed in the Higgs boson at one point... to date no one has seen any traces of the Higgs boson.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Crypto Gnome]

Maybe some people are just assholes?

!!!! People Are Assholes !!!! (TANSTAAFL, YMMV, VOID Where Prohibited, NOT an absolute truth in absolutely all cases)
seriously folks, why is this news to *anyone*?

Organized Religion just gives The Assholes an opportunity to leverage power in a more absolute way with *some* kind of perhaps-legitimacy.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[element-o.p.]

We all have to believe in something, I guess :)

Re:That's pretty evil.

[vjoel]

I can say that I have met some Jewish people with questionable business morals, but then again I've met people with NO religious beliefs that are far worse.

A qualified use of an ugly stereotype? Perhaps you mean well, but that's just diluted bigotry.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[plague911]

IT is in part "religion" itself which causes the problem. religion of all kinds fundamentally teach that there is something beyond the scope of normal human understanding and logic. Once that boundary has broken in someones psyche they are damaged good. Since there is something beyond logic horrible immoral deeds which are clearly illogical for society and the person can be "justified" as being just part of that religion as the beholders already believe that they are beyond logic

Re:That's pretty evil.

[MindlessAutomata]

Let's believe in ANYTHING, then! Since idle speculation is on the same grounding as observation, anything and everything is real, if only you believe!

Re:That's pretty evil.

[calmofthestorm]

I'm pretty sure the majority of religions out there don't charge a set price for salvation. Not that it's quite that simple in Scientology but believe me, it ends up working out that way.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[MBGMorden]

The thing is 70% of the US population subscribes to the same (general) organized religion. You're going to have a hell of a time getting them to treat their own religion with contempt. Frankly I'm amazed that the first amendment is stood up as long as it has. Lets hope we get at least another few hundred years out of it.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[AK Marc]

It might bring you a little more skepticism towards the assumptions you don't even realize you are making.

Or not. What if I assume all my senses work and that everyone else's work the same as mine? Doesn't that take care of most of the existential crap?

Re:That's pretty evil.

[MBGMorden]

Even an athiest can't find much fault with the purely philosophical religions like Taoism or Confucianism.

What I've noticed is that the BASIC ideas of a lot of religions match. Strip out the deities, afterlife, and such and there's often a general behavior pattern amongst most religions that boils down to: don't be an asshole. Most of it is probably rooted in governments trying to control their populace and make them behave - the rest is just meant to strike enough fear into people to make them obey it.

If you're gullible enough to believe it, which carries more weight?

1) Don't be an asshole because the world will be a better place if we all do.

2) Don't be an asshole or you'll go to hell and burn for all eternity.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[lennier]

"Religions all require you to believe in things that cannot be proven"

Not really, at least not in the mystical faiths. Mysticism is all about personal experience and has a lot in common with psi investigation. Some scientists arbitrarily declare these fields to be off-limits on the circular grounds that "science has proven that non-physical reality does not exist, therefore only insane people have these kinds of experiences", but that isn't actually correct. There's at least 150 years worth of evidence for the existence of the spiritual which does not require blind faith.

http://www.amazon.com/Irreducible-Mind-hard-find-contemporary/dp/0742547922/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259721768&sr=8-1

"But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."

Or any sufficiently compelling cause, such as Communism, Fascism, Free Market Economics, or Manifest National Destiny. All of which accomplished a lot of good for some people while also shafting others who got in their way.

Good people doing evil things in the name of a good cause is a fact of human life, not just religion.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[plague911]

No science dose not require that. As an individual working with the scientific method one can only realize that events probably work this way. The idea is not that science allows us know the truth. It allows us to work towards the truth like an asimptote. It is perfectly logical to take Descartes' brain in a jar idea and still work with the scientific process. Science can be read something like this "Yes I may be a brain in a jar however all my previous experience indicate that the world acts in ways i have previously experienced, If things change I will adapt my perspective until this point i will continue to think that the world will probably act as it has before." There is no faith in that statement at all.

In history many people believed that the world is flat. There are probably more people who have believed that than have believed in a roundish world. The fact is that any number of popular beliefs have not been substantiated and thus it is inappropriate to hold them as reliable. Your claim that you have experiences with god is not, and can never be substantiated. Thus it illogical trust your claim. Any moderately intelligent theologian would tell you the same. The idea behind faith is that it is illogical and unreliable that if faith was logical and provable it would no longer be faith. In short you have no idea what your talking about. Thanks for trying.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[citizenr]

It isn't religion that is the problem, it is organization and trust. Take any group of trusted people and you will find that a minority want to use their trust for personal gain. In America, corporations, schools, etc. are all looked at pretty thoroughly for abuses, religion usually isn't.

You say its not religion ... and then describe religion :/. Religion is a belief shared by many in imaginary things. Doesnt matter if its an alien warlord or bearded pedophile.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[citizenr]

I personally think you took one step too far when you afforded the CoS the respect of referring to them as an organized religion. They're not, catholicism is, there's a huge difference.

Yep, about two thousand years and a few million followers.

I would say ~900 years. Just look what Christians did 900 years ago.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[citizenr]

And to complicate matters, some people seem to feel compelled to put Scientology in the same group as Christianity and Islam when we ALL know Scientology is just a big SCAM. It is NOT a religion just because they say it is. It is a scam disguised as a religion.

Oranges and Apples, my friends...Don't give them the credit they so desire.

So how is Christianity not a scam? Does the leader live in his own Castle/City/State while preaching modesty? Do you know of a single Cardinal/Bishop/whatever that lives in something smaller than a mansion and drives something less than a 100K car?

Re:That's pretty evil.

[colinrichardday]

More like a billion.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[mister_playboy]

I believe your definition of reality differs significantly from my definition of reality.

FTFY

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Obfuscant]

So how is Christianity not a scam? Does the leader live in his own Castle/City/State while preaching modesty?

I know where the "leader" of my church lives. Normal house. Four kids. Not a castle, and not his own "city".

Do you know of a single Cardinal/Bishop/whatever

Were you asking about Christianity or Catholicism? Please pick one. I know all of the elders of my church, and no, they also don't live in their own castles in their own cities. All of them are smaller than a "mansion". I've never bothered to ask about their cars, they are free to buy whatever they want with the salary they make at their day jobs. It's none of my business. Why do you imagine it is any business of yours?

Re:That's pretty evil.

[bryan1945]

Except in religions you do not have to accept anything. You do not have to go, you do not have to pay. I personally believe in a God- I do not push it on anyone, I normally stay out of religious debates.

Here, saying Scientology is a religion is pretty dumb. To "ascend" you need to spend thousands of dollars to reach new levels of "enlightenment". In normal religions you do not need to give money, though individual churches may pressure you.

Also, please don't call people who believe in a religion "brainless". I know there is no scientific proof of a God, but I still believe in one. As long as I try to live a good life, what is the harm in that? Besides, just because something has not been proven yet does not mean it will not be proven in the future. There was a point when the sun revolved around the earth, and space was filled with 'ether'.

While you are at it, prove that a black hole is a singularity. Or prove that relativity causes time frames to shift (no, you can not use the space shuttle or satellites for slight differences in timing due to all the external influences that were not specifically isolated). Prove how the universe was created.

I'm just saying there is no reason to bash people who know what they are embracing as morons. If there is no God, then what have I lost by being a nice and decent guy all my life? It gives me and my family a personal level of comfort that is not rational, but allows us to get through life's rough moments. If it's not real, does it bother you that it makes me happy imagining my grandpa with his old hounddog up in the sky? I prefer that image rather than rotting bones in the ground, even if I'm wrong.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[michaelmuffin]

the root of fighting in darfur isn't religion. the war began between african farmers and nomidic arab herdsmen who traditionally shared the land's water. drought brought them into conflict. from there it spun out of control

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Arancaytar]

Well, not that there was anything pure about the tenets of Scientology before people started using them. It started out as it is now - a get-rich scheme.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[elronxenu]

quantum physics... which also has a large number of people (spending money) that believe in something that can not be seen or proven.

FAIL - [...] there is no doubt that quantum physics is the most successful theory of physical phenomena yet invented by the human mind. Why is it successful? Because it predicts physical phenomena, phenomenally accurately.

Physicists around the world a dedicating a large amount of their lives to theories many of which ARE MUTALLY EXCLUSIVE meaning someone is going to be wrong.

Perhaps you don't understand the scientific process. That's OK if they are mutually exclusive. One day somebody will make a prediction and do an experiment which falsifies one or other of the theories. Then the false theory will be amended or discarded, perhaps both (since investigation of theories is not a process limited to a single person). Science is a quest to find the truth, and false starts and back-tracking is part of the process.

Not at all like Religion, which is: Get an idea. Ignore contradicting evidence. Keep idea forever. (thanks to WellingtonGrey for that).

Re:That's pretty evil.

[TheoMurpse]

Like it or not, Catholicism is considered to have legitimacy and be a religion. By comparing Scientology to Catholicism, you imbue Scientology with some of Catholicism's legitimacy. You'd be a fool to deny that Catholicism has legitimacy. Ever been outside your little world and seen how many adherents it has? It has its own country for friggin sake.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[syousef]

But in the meantime, you are relying on an unproven assertion that your senses are not merely the products of an overly active imagination...i.e., faith.

I'm taking much less - in fact the minimum - on faith compared to a religious person. And I'm open to taking less on faith if you give me a way. There is nothing I believe or take on faith that a religious person does not. There is a lot that they take on faith that I dismiss as nonsense. The existentialist arugment is a weak one from a pragmatic point of view. No matter how much you prove I'm taking on "faith", you are doing it more.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[dissy]

However, even the most jaded, cynical atheist cannot deny that organized religions have also done some amazing things for the societies in which they existed.

I don't think anyone has denied they have done some amazing things.
If they have, they are simply wrong.

Those facts however do not at all change the fact that they enslaved an 8 year old child.

By that thinking, I too can enslave an 8 year old child legally, because prior to that I have done some pretty nice and amazing things.

How many old ladies do I need to help across the street before murder is OK?

Re:That's pretty evil.

[mahadiga]

"Religion was born when the first con man met the first fool." -- Mark Twain

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Jason Levine]

Go join a Christian church or a Jewish temple. Worship there for a year or two. Now tell everyone that you've decided to leave the faith. I'm sure they'll argue with you, try to convince you to stay, but they won't use force. In the end, they'll likely wish you well and secretly (or not so secretly) hope you'll come back to the fold. In short, you are free to come and go as you please.

Now go join a Scientology group (sorry, not quite sure what their "houses of worship" are called). Be a member in good standing there for a year or two. Now try to leave. Go ahead, try. You'll find a lot more than words keeping you in. Read the accounts of people who have left or tried to leave. Physical threats are not uncommon.

You might not agree with the beliefs of religions (and it is your right to disagree), but they are nothing like Scientology. Saying that they are the same either gives Scientology too much credit or knocks religion for things it doesn't do.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[MightyMartian]

You say "don't trust any man", but the the next sentence you didn't write demonstrates his point. You'll probably say "I trust God", but at the end of the day, the only way you can reasonably know that is via some document; the Bible, the Qu'uran, Book of Mormon, whatever. Now you may like to believe any or all of these books are somehow a deity's words, but the only evidence we have is that they are the words of men. In the end, you still have to trust men.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[BC Guy]

And to complicate matters, some people seem to feel compelled to put Scientology in the same group as Christianity and Islam when we ALL know Scientology is just a big SCAM. It is NOT a religion just because they say it is. It is a scam disguised as a religion.

Oranges and Apples, my friends...Don't give them the credit they so desire.

yeah. christianity and islam are just as big scams. don't give them credit by putting them up on separate pedestals. the orange (scientology) is dead but still kinda fresh, while the apples (christianity and islam) have been rotting for hundreds of years.

-bc

Re:That's pretty evil.

[MightyMartian]

It's a very good point. If you want to become a Catholic, Baptist or Muslim, you don't have to spend a dime. In fact, representatives of these groups are more than happy to spend their own time converting you, teaching you the basics and so forth. Judaism is a bit trickier, but there are converts, and again, they do not have to spend money to become Jews. Most organized religions have some sort of fund raising, but I've been to Catholic services and have seen people not donate, so while it's obviously important, you're not going to be considered a lapsed Catholic if you can't tithe.

None of these religions require you to sell your house, pay money for each level you achieve (as there really aren't that many levels that one can achieve, other than to become a priest, reverend or mullah). Scientology is kind of a midway cult in a way, because unlike a lot of the crazier cults where you pack up your family, move into the compound and are in one way or another segregated from the wider society, Scientology has an enormous profit motive, which means people have to have jobs. Still, they do have their means of discipline, particularly for certain segments of the Church, and these most certainly are heavily cultish practices.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[spathi-wa]

I'm sure the germans have *some* humour, but I guess they wont have many puns.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Pfhorrest]

It would be easy to respond to such a statement in kind. You don't like any kind of religion, so you fail to discern the differences in your attempt at lumping them all together as worthless and meaningless.

Except that he's not, as far as I can tell at least, failing to discern the differences; he's saying the differences are negligible in light of their similarities.

To borrow the theme of another analogy:
Say one group of people thinks that all puppies should be brutally tortured to death. Another group used to do that, but now they only advocate that puppies should all just be taken out and shot in the head, quick and (relatively) painless. Clearly there is a difference here, and I'm confident most people would object <em>more</em> to the former group than the latter, but hopefully most people would likewise condemn them both and ask "why would you want to kill puppies to begin with!?"

The people condemning other religions in the same broad brush as they condemn scientology may very well agree that mainstream religions are generally less harmful today than scientology is, and yet see them both as sharing the same intolerable flaws despite their other differences.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[AK Marc]

You should have a bit more skepticism over your assumptions, then.

Why? If I can make a simple assumtion, that I know to be wrong, and apply it liberally, I save massive amounts of time and the result is not significantly different than what you are proposing.

How do you KNOW that what you see as "blue" is the same as what someone else sees for "blue"?

I was about 5 when I first asked that question. At 7, I learned it doesn't matter. The name is the important thing. Why? Because that's the comparitive communication. If everyone's "favorite" color is really my blue, but for some people, they see it as red, or yellow, and that's why they call my blue "blue" but like red better, I don't care. We can communicate preferences. We can speak about colors with an appropriate reference. We may be wrong, but it doesn't matter. So, why waste time on things which don't matter? I gave up on such mental masturbation. And no, I wasn't exaggerating, I remember being in first grade and asking how I know that the color I see as blue is the same as everyone else says it is during a painting time. And, of course, the teacher was unable to answer the question.

And really, do you exist?

If we don't, what would you do different, and why? If you wouldn't do anything different, then it's a useless question that deserves none of my brainpower.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[drinkypoo]

I don't really care if it was light-hearted or not.

I don't either, nor did I address that point. Ever heard of gallows humor?

Associating the two followings, even through satire and jokes, only makes things worse.

Worse for who? People who can tell that Lord Xenu is made up, but can't figure out the same thing about Jehovah? You can't help everyone.

We all can agree that Scientology is bad. We all can't agree that Catholicism is bad.

You can't help everyone, I guess.

If we confuse the two, we end up with both in the end. If we focus on Scientology, we all are better off.

You are creating a false dichotomy; it is not at all clear that conflating the ridiculousness of the two essentially equivalent religions (both of which are synthetic religions which use and abuse their followers for the profit of their ruling class) will result in any kind of boost for either one, or that it will delay the demise of either. I would argue that by making the argument, you are lending Catholicism unwarranted legitimacy. Too much tolerance of logically fallacious ideas (like all these so-called Catholics who feel free to disagree with the pope) simply leads to more logically fallacious behavior... like that you're currently demonstrating.

You can focus on Scientology if you want. Don't try to tell me what to do. In addition, you're trying to turn your original comment into something it isn't. You asserted that the references to Catholicism in stories on Scientology were an attempt to lend legitimacy to Scientology, and I disagreed. That is all. You may continue to rant and rail irrelevantly, but you're not going to convince me that Catholicism is anything other than a cultish sect of Christianity led by a guy with a funny hat who isn't mentioned anywhere in the bible, which is further on its way out. Catholicism is circling the toilet bowl due to a combination of a batshit pope who says what's wrong with the world is an overabundance of demonic possession and the basic fact that the church is doing spectacularly less than it could do to stop raping young boys. I don't really see how you can say that Scientology is any crazier or any worse than that.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Omestes]

You don't like any kind of religion, so you fail to discern the differences in your attempt at lumping them all together as worthless and meaningless.

A bit of a strawman there; I never said or implied that I didn't like religion. I think religion, like all human endeavors, is capable of wonderful things, and terrible things alike. My own faith, or lack thereof, doesn't play into this.

If Scientology isn't a religion, then what is it? This is a simple question. If you claim it is a cult, not a religion, then we run into the problem that there isn't really a good definition for either that excludes the other. If we claim it is a "for profit scam" we still have to include some very popular Christian sects in America (think TV evangelism, and mega churches), not to mention the pre-reformation Catholic church.

Scientology is a religion. This doesn't say that all religions are bad, or that your particular brand of religion is bad, it just says (barring further evidence) that SOME religions can be bad. This shouldn't be shocking to anyone.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[bledri]

Even an athiest can't find much fault with the purely philosophical religions like Taoism or Confucianism.

Sure, and as far as I know Bahai is a wonderful religion that promotes peace and I do like a lot of Zen Buddhism as well. What causes my head to explode is the tendency for arbitrary holy texts and dogma to overrule rational thought. In my opinion, most popular religions (like Scientology - see this is on topic) require the disciple to acquire irrational beliefs and actively practice twisted logic. Plus, they tend to have long rambling texts that can be interpreted to define pretty much anyone you don't like as an asshole. And for those with fundamentalist tendencies, the rambling texts can usually be used to justify killing, torturing or at a minimum, stripping the civil liberties of "assholes."

Re:That's pretty evil.

[yuhong]

Another example I can think of off the top of my head is GoDaddy's Bob Parsons. Yep, the CEO with a radio show, which caused trouble during an attempt to IPO in the year 2006 thanks to the quiet period, ultimately this IPO had to be pulled for this and other reasons! And to think the SEC relaxed the rules for this in December 2005 thanks to Google and Salesforce breaking them during their IPOs in the year 2004! And I wonder how Wall Street would react to such a CEO if the IPO did succeed.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[mpe]

Priests and CEOs are both potentially dangerous, and quite likely to cover for their buddies; but you don't generally tell children that CEOs are trusted authority figures who deserve their respect and obedience.

Were do politicians, even cops, rate on how much children are told to blindly trust?

Re:That's pretty evil.

[modustollens]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjO4duhMRZk&feature=related i suppose that can apply to this cult too...

Re:That's pretty evil.

[MattBecker82]

Except that science only requires observation as a postulate and no other 'leaps of faith'.

Not really. How about:

1. Inductive reasoning
2. Deductive reasoning
3. That the universe is governed by physical laws
4. That said laws are parsimonious and homogeneous in time and space
5. That abstract mathematics applies concretely to the real world
6. The fundamental axioms of said mathematics

All of which are (quite reasonably) taken for granted in the exercise of natural science.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[mpe]

Except that science only requires observation as a postulate and no other 'leaps of faith'. That is the difference between science and religion. Science doesn't expect you to believe in a bearded man on a cloud that watches your every move, or in angels or in eternal damnation. Observation and thought, that's it.

Nothing stops scientists having religious beliefs. Also plenty of religious would discount "a bearded man on a cloud..." as being incompatable with their faith.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Jedi Alec]

You're a fan of disorganized religion, eh? How's that work? You get lost on your way to church, and when you get there, the priest has NO idea where he saw God last, much less where he is now? The name of the GOd or goDs change all the time, as does their message(s)? The priest keeps forgetting to put pants on, but that's ok because the pulpit will cover up the naughty bits if he can ever find it...

Hmm... yes, this does sound more entertaining than an organized religion. Where can I sign up? Oh, you lost the form? Well... call back if you find it...

The roots of protestantism lie in disorganized religion. They rejected the concept of needing an organization with priests and a lot of crap standing between them and their god, and took the right to read and interpret the bible back into their own homes.

How hard is it to make up one's own mind on what one believes, and then act based on those beliefs? There you go, disorganized religion.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[qazsedcft]

You might want to read a few things on this subject.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Jedi Alec]

If you're gullible enough to believe it, which carries more weight?

1) Don't be an asshole because the world will be a better place if we all do.

2) Don't be an asshole or you'll go to hell and burn for all eternity.

Hmm, lessee.
1) sounds like an evaluation made by a conscious intelligent being.
2) portrays a level of reasoning that can be matched by a dog (don't piss on the carpet or bosslady will smack you with the newspaper).

Re:That's pretty evil.

[secondhand_Buddah]

Of course Atheists are charitable. Altruism is a human trait that we perpetuate in spite of any religious conditioning. Some of the most thoughtful and kind people I know are atheists.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[vegiVamp]

GP was talking about business, not religion.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[dkf]

but you don't generally tell children that CEOs are trusted authority figures who deserve their respect and obedience.

Well, unless their name is Steve Jobs.

Doesn't count. Apple are a religion.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[dcollins117]

If you learn more about the inquisition and compare it with the other trials of the time (that is, not by today's standards), you'll surely prefer to be judged by the inquisition; and the spanish one which so much bad publicity was better than the anglican one, which burnt the most witches.

Besides, nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[FTWinston]

You're confusing "monotheistic" religion (one with a single supernatural being in charge), with "patriarchal" religion (one with a single, mortal being in charge). Monotheistic religion without centralised power and a "top-down" structure is, it would seem to me, a lot more resistant to corruption than a patriarchal religion, simply because there are no "head honchos" to corrupt.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[FTWinston]

Cos those buddist monks are totally in it for the epic lewt?

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Dan541]

Islam, or did 9/11 already do that?

Re:That's pretty evil.

[RivenAleem]

First the Catholics with child rape, now the Scientologists with slavery and human trafficking.

Any wagers on which one true religion will be busted next?

Google

Re:That's pretty evil.

[RivenAleem]

And the Catholic church hasn't recently taken anyone (Dan Brown) to court over saying bad things about them.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[1800maxim]

The misconceptions are in you.

The Beroeans were already believers in the scriptures existing prior to the writings of Paul (Hebrew scriptures). They verified everything that Paul wrote by comparing and referencing what they already believed.

They were skeptical within the context of what they believed.

Just because you have different beliefs, doesn't change the course you'd take if you came across something new. You would verify against what you already believe.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[tbannist]

I suspect that a decentralized power structure wouldn't be stable over time when attached to a monotheistic religion. I think that inevitably that organization would either migrate to an autarchal system, or splinter into multiple smaller autarchal systems.

The reason I think this is that if the ideal religion has a single being leading it, then it follows naturally that the expression of the religion in the real world should follow the example set by the religion.

Embracing the precepts of a religion has to have a certain effect on how its disciples expect the world to work. Monotheistic religions lend themselves to certain simplistic points of view. In particular, I think they implicitly encourage the view that there is a single right answer to every problem (WWJD). Now, if there is always a single right answer, then there is little need for collaborative leadership. The religion merely needs the best (most moral, pious, or whatever) person to decide what the right course of action is, and everyone else should do that simply because it's the right thing to do.

In the long run it seems inevitable that monotheistic religions will become autarchal systems which are easily corrupted from within.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Archangel Michael]

You're wrong. All organizations built on "Trust" are inherently broken. Just look at all the corruption in Political Parties and systems. I dare say, the whole concept of Parties and Politics in general is based on the whole "Trust and Power" model you claim. It isn't just "religious", it can be applied elsewhere.

I do agree that Religious organizations are a part of the problem, but I believe it has more to do with "trust and power", and isn't limited to or by anything else. And that explains why I'm a Libertarian, because I see the problem, not just where symptoms are.

Man cannot rule himself, what makes you think he can rule other men.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Taibhsear]

In America, corporations, schools, etc. are all looked at pretty thoroughly for abuses

You obviously didn't grow up in Chicago...

Re:That's pretty evil.

[FTWinston]

Protestantism is designed, at least in part, to counter this tendency. See the fundamental principals shared by (almost) all protestant denominations... specifically, Justification by Faith Alone and the Universal Priesthood of Believers - essentially the idea that there is nothing one can do to become "holier" or "better" than fellow believers, and following from that, the abolishment of any form of heirarchal system. That all members should (in principle) take part in, or at least be represented in, the entirety of any decision making process.

So, instead of power concentrating in the hands of an elect few, the whole organisation splits up into several. Repeatedly. And usually acrimoniously. So that sucks, but its probably better than the alternative...

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Capt.DrumkenBum]

Yes, send me all your money and all your questions will be answered.
Just to be clear:
I was brought up Catholic.
I went to Catholic School.
I was an alterboy.
I was never molested by anyone.
I seriously considered becoming a priest.
I am not now, nor have I ever been an atheist.
For reasons that are far too complicated and personal to go into here I started looking at all religions in a historical perspective. The conclusion I came to is that religion has caused more pain and suffering than any other one cause in history.

Please note, I said "religion" not faith, not God, and not The Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[curare19]

You're closer to truth than you think. My family boycotts anything Amish because their culture does not value animal life, and therefore has a long-standing tradition of neglect and cruelty toward dogs.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/amish8.htm

Re:That's pretty evil.

[element-o.p.]

You (and the moderator who rated my earlier post "Troll") completely missed my point. How, exactly, is "my personal observation and experience" as well as the testimonies of boatloads of people throughout history "idle speculation"?

We use science because it seems to work -- I observe things with my senses, and because I don't have anything better to base my judgments upon, I assume that what I perceive is real. Based on those observations, I hypothesize about how the things I perceive work. From those hypotheses, I design tests to see if the model of reality that I have built in my mind is consistent. From those tests, I either accept that my understanding is adequate or I formulate a new hypothesis and rinse, lather, repeat.

This is exactly what I did between the ages of 15 and 34. I decided that the religion I was brought up with was dead, and I wanted no part of it. So I began searching for the truth. In my search, I hypothesized, tested, and observed the results. As a result of that search, I experienced some things that suggest to me that there is a God. However, YMMV. If you disagree with me, then that is your right, and I bear you no ill will. I do, however, get annoyed at pseudo-intellectuals who aren't even willing to consider that they could be mistaken, and therefore consider that anyone who disagrees with them is either a nutjob, a wacko or is doing things out of an ulterior motive.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[element-o.p.]

Go way, way, way back up the thread to this post and you will see what I launched down this chain of reasoning. Most people I talk to are making assumptions without even realizing they are doing so. syousef claims that he doesn't ever do anything on faith. I say that he does, but doesn't realize it. He is accepting on faith that the observations that are the basic foundation of science are accurate. The truth, however, is that we cannot ever *know* that what we are observing is real (Hume discusses this in his philosophy).

In everyday living, I agree with you -- it doesn't really matter, and since I have no better basis for understanding than what I observe, I will act as if my observations are correct. The point, however, is that ultimately, at some point, we all choose what we are going to believe -- our senses, faith, nothing at all...but it ultimately all boils down to, "this makes sense to me, so I am going to act upon this belief." In my case, I have chosen to believe that there is more to "reality" than what my physical senses perceive (which is also based upon my personal experiences, and not something I can "prove" to anyone else, unless they are willing to experiment the same way I did).

Re:That's pretty evil.

[element-o.p.]

Let me see if I understand you correctly.

In science, we observe, hypothesize, test, repeat in a process of continually improving understanding. If multiple people can achieve the same results on the basis of this process, then it is good and reliable.

However, if I observe, hypothesize, test and repeat in the process of determining whether or not a particular faith is valid, and refine my faith on the basis of that process -- which is the same process as that used in science -- then, even if other people have the same experiences I do, then it is "illogical" and "unsubstantiated"? That sounds rather like dogmatism to me.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[BobMcD]

Why do we assume that examining the Scriptures excludes or includes any other sources of information? This doesn't seem to be stated here.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[element-o.p.]

Not at all.

As I said elsewhere in this thread, I believe there is an particularly toasty corner of Hell reserved for those who abuse religion for personal gain, whether that is a Scientologist enslaving an 8 year old child, a Catholic priest molesting an alter boy or an Islamic fundamentalist flying an airplane into a building. All of these things are evil, and there is no excuse for any of it.

I merely pointed out that it is wrong and prejudiced to judge all religions by the things that evil people have done in the name of religion.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[BobMcD]

Except that science only requires observation as a postulate and no other 'leaps of faith'. That is the difference between science and religion. Science doesn't expect you to believe in a bearded man on a cloud that watches your every move, or in angels or in eternal damnation. Observation and thought, that's it.

The science you're referring to doesn't actually exist in the real world. While the above is all that is required, this is NOT all that is practiced. Take the recent debates into data cookery with climate change - if there were no other 'leaps of faith' requested, why are we being asked to believe that the behaviors were all within our best interests? Why not release all the data and let us decide for ourselves? In my opinion, because to this select set of individuals (at a minimum), climate science is their religion and only they know the 'Truth' so only they may read the 'Holy Data'. The pure science you're advocating has been shut out.

As much as it fits the atheist (and anti-theist) mantra, modern science is in fact not the opposite of religion. It is merely another flavor of it.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Obfuscant]

If Scientology isn't a religion, then what is it? This is a simple question. If you claim it is a cult, not a religion, then we run into the problem that there isn't really a good definition for either that excludes the other.

The problem you have is that you are still trying to lump all religion into the same basket. You are saying that all Christianity is a cult because some cults claim to be versions of Christianity. Here, let me quote you doing this:

If we claim it is a "for profit scam" we still have to include some very popular Christian sects in America (think TV evangelism, and mega churches), not to mention the pre-reformation Catholic church.

The fact that some cults are offshoots of Christianity doesn't make all Christians cultists. I used a very reasonable definition of how to detect a cult in my posting. If you have a "secret handshake" -- information that only the insiders know and levels of "salvation" that take money to achieve -- you're a cult.

You painting "mega churches" and "TV evangelists" as cults is a mistake, since they are not, by definition, cults. Just because a church is large isn't a sign it has any properties of a cult. Just because a guy is on TV doesn't make him a cult, either. You seem to think that "large" and "for profit" are synonyms, or "asks for donations" and "for profit", ditto. "For profit" is not a defining property of cults; many Christian bookstores exist solely to make a profit, but they are not shilling cult material just because they do so.

If you want a realistic definition of what a cult is, refer to "Kingdom of the Cults", an excellent book on the matter. Yes, Scientology is a cult, along with many groups that call themselves Christian. But once again, just because a cult group calls itself Christian is neither proof they are nor proof that real Christians are cultists.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Reziac]

And the only reason the Co$ doesn't have its own country is because by its founding era, there weren't any available.

But I agree, conflating Co$'s evils with the Catholic church's own failings really does nothing but feed the notion that Co$ is a "religion".

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Reziac]

God, to Messiah, just prior to deployment:

"Remember, no battle plan survives contact with the enemy!"

Re:That's pretty evil.

[TheoMurpse]

And the only reason the Co$ doesn't have its own country is because by its founding era, there weren't any available.

But I agree, conflating Co$'s evils with the Catholic church's own failings really does nothing but feed the notion that Co$ is a "religion".

It seems like we are in agreement, but I want to be nitpicky and point out that just because the CoS could have its own country doesn't mean it does. National sovereignty lends credence to an organization. The "if only I had been created earlier, I could have had national sovereignty" fact does not lend credence to an organization. So your point may be nonresponsive to the argument. However, I'm lazy, as we all are, so it's possible I could just not be thinking deeply enough about the issue.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[laddiebuck]

People always bring this quote up. Bullshit. All you need for good people to do evil things is for more than one good person to act together -- organisation, in a word. Or is Microsoft a religion? Yet I'm sure that if you took each person there alone, you would consider them quite average. Is Wall Street a religion? Are credit card companies religions? Was Communism a religion? Was Pol Pot a Pope?

This Steven Weinberg obviously spent 1 minute thinking about the problem, but not a further minute once he had come up with a good soundbite.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Reziac]

Hell, we could all have our own countries if we'd been born a few centuries earlier, and had the resources to carve 'em out. Doesn't make any of us the New Messiah either!

Anyway, I think my point was that it's a non-point re whether Co$ is legit or not, let alone whether the Vatican is.

Now, where did I park that time machine? :)

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Rakarra]

If we claim it is a "for profit scam" we still have to include some very popular Christian sects in America (think TV evangelism, and mega churches), not to mention the pre-reformation Catholic church.

I think that would be a great start.

It's very hard to argue against the notion that the pre-reformation Catholic Church greatly went against the very principles it was based on. Same with opulent mega-churches, though probably not to the same extreme.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[TheoMurpse]

Hell, we could all have our own countries if we'd been born a few centuries earlier, and had the resources to carve 'em out. Doesn't make any of us the New Messiah either!

Anyway, I think my point was that it's a non-point re whether Co$ is legit or not, let alone whether the Vatican is.

I think we're using "legitimate" differently. You seem to be using it as a qualifier of religious merit. I'm using it as a qualifier of social acceptance.

I think this makes our conclusions radically different. CoS's religious merit is beside the point because we're debating its social and political influence, not whether it provides salvation. Therefore, I believe social acceptance is the more important quality in this analysis. We should, to limit the CoS's influence, seek to prevent the appearance of social acceptance from being imputed to CoS by comparing it to religions that do have social acceptance, those religions' merits be damned.

This is similar to why I believe we should try al Qaeda operatives as criminals rather than as soldiers. TO try them in military tribunals lends the aQ cause legitimacy, as if they are actually soldiers fighting for something worthy. To treat them as criminals by trying them in traditional criminal courts says to the world: These men are morally bad, and we are treating them accordingly.

It's not the actual, objective Truth that matters, but the appearance that matters. Short of divine intervention, it is appearance that empowers.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[Reziac]

[blink] Oh, I see ... no, I was actually pointing at the same conclusion as you, but in much more abridged language :)

To wander down a tangent... I don't think we have any way to know if ANY religion (or purported religion) actually offers salvation, so whether they're "socially acceptable" (which I'd further qualify as whether they reasonably balance what good and harm they do, as *perceived* by average people of other religious persuasions) is really the only useful criterion.

A lot of fringe and minority religions may be socially acceptable since they don't truly do any harm, and may occasionally do good, or cause their adherents to become better people, as perceived by society at large. Conversely, the only good thing I can attribute to Co$, and that only very indirectly (in fact it's kept as separate as possible, only linked through Bridge Publications), are the Writers/Artists of the Future competitions, which have brought a number of excellent new authors and artists into published SF. Otherwise, I can't think of a single way in which they've improved society or the lives of their members. (Unless you consider enabling schizophrenia a benefit.) So... net fail for the "appearance of being socially acceptable" criterion.

Good point about al Qaeda. If they don't behave like proper military (which is to say, follow the accepted conventions of warfare) then I agree they are behaving as common criminals and should be treated as such, not as legitimate soldiers.

Likewise... if Co$ doesn't behave as a proper religion (which is to say, at least attempting to be a net benefit to their adherents and to society at large) then I see no reason why we should accord it any appearance of legitimacy by lumping it in with or comparing it to socially-acceptable religions. However, comparing it to other pyramid schemes is probably a valid approach. ;)

So... new discussion! How does Co$ compare to Amway, or whatever other major pyramid schemes are out there that fail to come to mind at the moment..??

Re:That's pretty evil.

[AK Marc]

He is accepting on faith that the observations that are the basic foundation of science are accurate.

I find a difference in the definitions of "assumption" and "faith" such that he is right. I don't take it on "faith" that my senses work the same as everyone else's. I know that's incorrect. I work off the assumption that my senses work the same as everyone else's. There is a difference, and I'm faithless in that particular point. So, if someone works off an undeclared (and perhaps unknown) assumption, does that make it faith? What if they know it's wrong sometimes, but still use it?

Re:That's pretty evil.

[slim]

Ugh, I'm contributing to this thread terribly late.

I think the GP has it exactly right.

Scientology is a religion in the same way as Dunkin Donuts is a restaurant

... because you could certainly argue that Dunkin' Donuts is a restaurant. It serves food. It has seating.

So it's all a matter of semantics. Is Scientology a religion? Depends on your definitions.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[kbahey]

As far as slavery and forced labor goes, the long-running genocide in Darfur is essentially Muslim controlled militias attacking indigenous tribes-people, people that have been a source of slaves for Muslim slavers for hundreds of years.

The rallying cry for some of the Janjaweed (means "devil on horseback") militia forces has been "Kill the slaves, kill the slaves!"

But then again, the region where the Janjaweed are killing defenseless, unarmed villagers also happens to center around a government-held oil pipeline that sends 80% of the regions oil to China.

Some missing data points here:

1. Both sides in Darfur are Muslim. This is not a bad Muslim vs. infidel thing.

2. Each side belong to a different linguistic group (African/Arab).

3. Each side have a different lifestyle (nomadic tribes vs. settled agriculturalists).

4. Desertification has caused resource issues and helped one group encroach into the others. Previously each group had enough.

I am not saying that other factors (e.g. oil, China, Khartum ...etc.) are not relevant, but there are other relevant factors that are ignored by most news outlets.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[osu-neko]

They were skeptical within the context of what they believed.

That's not skepticism.

Just because you have different beliefs, doesn't change the course you'd take if you came across something new. You would verify against what you already believe.

See, you don't really get what skepticism is. If you reject something because it conflicts with what you already believe, that's every bit as unskeptical an attitude as if you accept it. A skeptic who comes across something that conflicts which what he or she believes questions those beliefs as well as the new bit.

Technically, anyone who has strongly held beliefs to begin with is unskeptical. A skeptic is more likely to accept information that conflicts with what he or she already believes precisely because he or she is a skeptic, and therefore doubts these provisionally held beliefs.

Re:That's pretty evil.

[bryan1945]

I just wanted to say that that was an excellent post, in my opinion.

Classified as a religion?

[guruevi]

Since they are classified as a religion (thanks to infiltration of CoS into the IRS) wouldn't his service be considered 'worship' and 'volunteering'. However it wouldn't surprise me if they actually were actually doing much worse than just killing people.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[poetmatt]

what do you mean? they already had some kind of formal document about shooting people when necessary, there isn't much more out there. CoS needs to be gone, period.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[Anonymous Coward]

Its called audit method R2-45. Two .45 cal slugs to the chest will release the thetans inhabiting even the most infected person.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[asdf7890]

Since they are classified as a religion (thanks to infiltration of CoS into the IRS) wouldn't his service be considered 'worship' and 'volunteering'. However it wouldn't surprise me if they actually were actually doing much worse than just killing people.

It wasn't infiltration, though I'm not saying they didn't try that too. They basically said "give us religious status for tax purposes or we'll all misfile out forms and delay payments as long as possible, good luck finding the resources to pursue even a fraction of our members", and the IRS conceded that it would cost less to let them have their way than to try force them to behave.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[Darkness404]

R2-45 (the document in question) was clearly a joke when it was made, and was simply used as an euphemism for murder in later contexts. While Scientology has lots of problems (suppression of information, extortion, slavery, etc), R2-45 is more of a joke than anything else and should be taken as such. It should be taken in the same vein of the Darwin Award.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[Minwee]

However it wouldn't surprise me if they actually were actually doing much worse than just killing people.

What, like making them watch BloodRayne?

Re:Classified as a religion?

[SnarfQuest]

Since they are classified as a religion (thanks to infiltration of CoS into the IRS) wouldn't his service be considered 'worship' and 'volunteering'. However it wouldn't surprise me if they actually were actually doing much worse than just killing people.

Well, there is the annual reenactment, where they stack thousands of people on a volcano, then blow it up with a nuclear bomb.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[houstonbofh]

Not that I agree with the Co$, but the Christians have a formal document abut killing people for lots of reasons... However, most of us do not take it literally, and those that do end up in prison or the loony bin.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[shutdown -p now]

Its called audit method R2-45. Two .45 cal slugs to the chest will release the thetans inhabiting even the most infected person.

But only if both the pistol and the ammunition are purchased from a CoS-approved vendor!

Re:Classified as a religion?

[houstonbofh]

The key is consent... By your definition, they can make rape OK. Doesn't work for rape, and we have lots of case law supporting that. (Even if you are "married" to that 14 year old.)

Re:Classified as a religion?

[Vindicator9000]

modded funny, but R2-45 is actually documented Scientology scripture, explained in exactly the same way as the parent post. It's funny because it's 100% true.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[LandDolphin]

Ha. Ha. It's funny because it's true.

I read it like that in the voice of the character from Family Guy. It gave me a good laugh.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[AioKits]

Since they are classified as a religion (thanks to infiltration of CoS into the IRS) wouldn't his service be considered 'worship' and 'volunteering'.

Interesting point, but the document linked by Iphtashu Fitz (the complaint filed) addresses this as follows:

The First Amendment does not exempt purported religious organizations from Minimum Wage and Child Labor Laws. Elvig v. Calvin Presbyterian Church, 397 F.3d 790, 792 (9th Cir 2003).

Bottom of page 6, top of page 7 in the Complaint (look for Iphtashu Fitz's link further down). It also details his age at the time of said service and the extent of services rendered.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[Vindicator9000]

Yes, in the context it was written and referred to by LRH, it's very easily written off as a joke. The problem is that in courtroom testimony, former COS members have, on a few occasions, admitted that COS management had at least *suggested* that they R2-45 someone, in contexts that could be construed as being serious.

Hubbard himself gave the order on 6 March 1968, referring to *specific people* in an HCO Ethics order that was seized during an FBI raid. Referring to these once valued Scientologists, LRH said, and I quote, "They are declared Enemies of mankind, the planet and all life." ... " They are fair game." ... and "Any Sea Org member contacting any of them is to use Auditing Process R2-45."

Would you consider that a joke? If so, it's a pretty bad one.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[darkmeridian]

I think GP is referring to an instance where the Church of Scientology bugged the conference room of an IRS office. That's pretty ballsy, in my opinion.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[DiLLeMaN]

R2-45 is more of a joke than anything else and should be taken as such. It should be taken in the same vein of the Darwin Award.

From Teh Wiki (WITH citations, it seems):

On March 6, 1968, Hubbard issued an internal memo titled "RACKET EXPOSED," in which he denounced twelve people (Peter Goodwin, Jim Stathis, Peter Knight, Mrs. Knight, Nora Goodwin, Ron Frost, Margaret Frost, Nina Collingwood, Freda Gaiman, Frank Manley, Mary Ann Taylor, and George Wateridge) as "Enemies of mankind, the planet and all life," and ordered that "Any Sea Org member contacting any of them is to use Auditing Process R2-45."[7][8] Former Scientologist Bent Corydon wrote that in late 1967 at Saint Hill, he personally received a copy of an order naming four former Scientologists as enemies and "fair game" and ordering any Sea Org member who encountered them to use R2-45.[9][10]

Yeah, that sounds real fucking funny to me. I LOL'd.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[Anonymous Coward]

It wasn't infiltration, though I'm not saying they didn't try that too. They basically said "give us religious status for tax purposes or we'll all misfile out forms and delay payments as long as possible, good luck finding the resources to pursue even a fraction of our members", and the IRS conceded that it would cost less to let them have their way than to try force them to behave.

The comment you're replying to was probably referring to Operation Snow White.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[poetmatt]

do you see people taking scientology as a joke? think of that applied to R2-45, and your answer no longer fits.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[element-o.p.]

Hmmmm...in that "formal document" you refer to, I seem to remember reading something along the lines of, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone" which is a pretty good argument against killing someone. I also read something in that same "formal document" that states, IIRC, "Thou shalt not kill.". As for the laws that were given to the Israelites that end in, "...that person shall be put to death...", I believe they every one of those rules had a provision to offer a sacrifice to remove that guilt. I admit I haven't (yet) read the entire Bible cover to cover, but I have been through a fair amount of it and quite honestly, I can't recall a single example where anyone ever was actually put to death (rather than offering a sacrifice and making atonement) for any of those things...at least until the Pharisees began killing the Christian "heretics" in the New Testament, but then again, that wasn't Christians killing people, either.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[nog_lorp]

And L. Ron Hubbard apparently ordered it used on several occasions by Sea Org on certain individuals!

I need to look at the refs on this fucking wikipedia article this is unbelievable...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R2-45

Re:Classified as a religion?

[Crypto Gnome]

They basically said "give us religious status for tax purposes or we'll all misfile out forms and delay payments as long as possible, good luck finding the resources to pursue even a fraction of our members", and the IRS conceded that it would cost less to let them have their way than to try force them to behave.

Just like the GFC (financial institutions going crazy, government bailouts), if you violate the law with *enough* force, they just turn a blind eye and pretend it's all good.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[calmofthestorm]

Not only is it a bad joke, but it's not one I think Hubbard could reasonably trust his fanatical followers to take as one.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since they are classified as a religion (thanks to infiltration of CoS into the IRS) wouldn't his service be considered 'worship' and 'volunteering'. However it wouldn't surprise me if they actually were actually doing much worse than just killing people.

It wasn't infiltration, though I'm not saying they didn't try that too. They basically said "give us religious status for tax purposes or we'll all misfile out forms and delay payments as long as possible, good luck finding the resources to pursue even a fraction of our members", and the IRS conceded that it would cost less to let them have their way than to try force them to behave.

I doubt very much that was the whole story.
The IRS would happily put 10,000 people in jail for not paying taxes. They'd do it in a heartbeat. 10,000 is a lot of people but they wouldn't break a serious sweat. 100,000, if the COS actually had that many followers willing to go to jail? Maybe... Still, I think the IRS would push it anyways.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[kramerd]

I'm pretty sure involuntary worship or volunteerism would still be considered slavery.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[Yvanhoe]

We need a so-fucking-seriously-fucked-up-it-is-funny mod point...

Re:Classified as a religion?

[darthflo]

My guess would be he's referring to the largest (uncovered) infiltration of the U.S. gov't.

Re:Classified as a religion?

[BobMcD]

There actually was infiltration: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Snow_White

There were convictions as well, so this isn't exactly allegation:

Five of the Scientologists were sentenced to four years in jail, with four of the convicted being taken immediately. Mary Sue Hubbard, wife of L Ron Hubbard, was sentenced to five years. Each of the six faced a fine of 10,000 dollars.[61] The next day the four remaining Scientologists were sentenced. Three of the four faced a fine of $10,000 and five years in jail. The fourth was fined $1,000 and sent to jail for six months. Upon release she was given five years of probation and community service. All of the Scientologists immediately began to appeal.[62] Their appeal was rejected.[63]

Whether this had an hand in their status isn't something I've looked into, but with the group convicted of this incident, it isn't even difficult to imagine that there have been many others of which they go un-convicted.

obligatory

[Jeian]

Anonymous is not a group, etc. etc.

Re:obligatory

[biryokumaru]

It makes me wonder where they really get messages from "Anonymous." Do they troll /b/?

Re:obligatory

[AndrewNeo]

Of course it's not. Everyone knows it's one person!

Re:obligatory

[^_^x]

True, I knew a few "anonymous cells" (4chan, 711chan, Wakachan, etc) before they ever went after CoS - they're a group in the same way mankind is a group, and have no cohesive agenda or points of common agreement. It's more like at any given time, enough people are willing to identify themselves as "anonymous" and go protesting, but anonymous is... anonymous. It is just people who have not made their identities known.

About damn time.

[NotBornYesterday]

It looks like it's just a civil complaint, though. I'd love to see these guys brought up on criminal charges. If this suit makes any headway, I wonder if criminal charges will eventually follow? I can't imagine the DA would refuse to prosecute for slavery. It will be interesting to see what Scientology goodies come to light in the discovery process.

Re:About damn time.

[Red Flayer]

I can't imagine the DA would refuse to prosecute for slavery.

Are you kidding? What does a prosecutor have to gain from prosecuting CoS for slavery? A little publicity for prosecuting on hearsay? You think he'll get warrants to investigate the tight-as-a-witches-bum CoS? Likely to backfire.

What do they have to lose? Credibility? Their career? Personal safety?

Re:About damn time.

[Patch86]

If the civil suit is successful, that implies that the plaintiff (who obviously shoulders the burden of proof) was able to convince a judge that a major American and multi-national organization illegally enslaved him in a secure compound for a decade and a half.

The DA might take an interest considering a lot of the leg work will already have been done for them.

Re:About damn time.

[Delwin]

The burden of proof in a civil suit is much lighter than in a criminal suit.

Re:About damn time.

[NotBornYesterday]

Yes, but in bringing the civil suit they might be able to make public a lot of damaging information about CoS, and the DA might be able to find evidence in there of criminal activity, which might support the execution of search warrants, which might unravel things further ...

Hey, it could happen.

Re:About damn time.

[phantomcircuit]

But is still higher than that required for a warrant.

Re:About damn time.

[sjames]

Exactly. While the DA will have to collect enough evidence for "beyond reasonable doubt" he at least gets to start with a "preponderance of the evidence" rather than from a vague rumor.

Perhaps more importantly to this, if the public hears they lost in civil court, what DA will want to NOT prosecute slavery?

Re:About damn time.

[NotBornYesterday]

The church has rules to instruct their followers to go out and assault, rob, torture and murder anyone who does anything close to what the DA would need to do. Not just the DA, but his friends and family.

And if they did, they would bring about own demise, but not by the vigilante means you describe. Their own actions would force the Federal government to treat them like a) a organized crime syndicate, or b) a terrorist organization. Either way, they could possibly lose their protected status as a "religion", and likely have all their communications intercepted, movements watched, and finances scrutinized. Eventually, their various compounds would be raided, revealing enough incriminating evidence to jail their leaders, seize their assets, and essentially disband them.

Re:About damn time.

[BobMcD]

But is still higher than that required for a warrant.

This.

Also, CoS will likely commit crimes against the parties in the suit. This can also bootstrap a larger investigation, if handled correctly.

Tom Cruise

[dakkon1024]

Really?I thought Tom Cruise would make more... I guess you really can't put a price on crazy though

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[Old97]

Of course it belongs. Didn't you notice the reference to "science" in "scientology"? BTW, Scientology liberally uses lawyers and law suits to intimidate and silence its critics - including the on-line critics.

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[shutdown -p now]

Scientology has become relevant to Slashdot and its readership ever since CoS removed content from Slashdot under DMCA. It's quote obviously News for Nerds now, and, noting the DMCA reference (and the fact that it's common CoS practice, not a single isolated case), definitely related to Your Rights Online. If it's still not clear, try posting OT-III materials in a /. comments and see how that goes.

Charged or charging?

[vvaduva]

I think the headline is wrong...they usually charge people for services, not vice versa! wtf?

Re:Charged or charging?

[natehoy]

"Charged" as in "Charged with a crime"

FLSA

[Lord Ender]

There is no law against working in a compound which has barbed wire. So that sounds like some crap to feed the media.

The $50/week pay could be grounds for him to sue them for back wages, supposing he has proof that he worked more than 10 hours per week and that they only paid him $50 during such weeks.

For the slavery charge, he would need to prove that he tried to quit/leave but was forcibly prevented from doing so. Did he call the police on such occasions?

I'm thinking he may have a hard time proving his case. Accusations alone won't do it; he'll need evidence.

Re:FLSA

[Iphtashu Fitz]

Read the complaint (see my post below for a link to it). For a time it sounds like he was forced to live in a place described as similar to a prison camp, complete with guards, barbed-wire fences, search lights, etc. I seriously doubt they would have let him have access to a telephone in a place like that if his claims are valid.

Re:FLSA

[LOLLinux]

For the slavery charge, he would need to prove that he tried to quit/leave but was forcibly prevented from doing so. Did he call the police on such occasions?

Yes because when you are held captive against your will somewhere the people holding you there will make sure you have ready access to phones so that you can call the police.

Re:FLSA

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Armed guards, security posts and 3 roll calls per day, but you can just leave any time. Yeah, good luck finding a judge that buys that.

Re:FLSA

[O('_')O_Bush]

The original complain states that he did not have unsupervised access to telephones, internet, or outside communication, so you are likely correct in your doubts.

Re:FLSA

[Lord Ender]

it sounds like he was forced to live in a place described as similar to a prison camp

Having guards and fences is not illegal. Being "forced" to live somewhere is a crime (called "kidnapping"). There needs to be sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was kidnapped, and not staying voluntarily.

I seriously doubt they would have let him have access to a telephone

Well, if there's no evidence that he was forcibly detained, there will be no successful prosecution.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure the CoS will get a free trial according to US law. Religion is quite popular here, and the majority of the religious dislike the CoS passionately enough they may be predisposed to overlook the letter of the law. Think about black men on trial for violent crimes in the segregated South back in the day...

I have no sympathies for any particular religious group. I just hope the law is upheld and no prosecution based solely on unsupported claims is successful.

Re:FLSA

[schon]

he may have volunteered for all this work, in the name of the cause.

Yes, and I'm sure that he insisted on having the barbwire fences and armed patrols in case he changed his mind, right?

After all, that's how was able to prove he was volunteering in earnest - he obviously (at 8 years old) was capable of fully understanding what it was he was signing up for, and insisted that he must be prevented from leaving by armed guards in case he lost that understanding as he matured!

Re:FLSA

[Lord Ender]

My boyscout camp had roll calls. "Gated communities" have guards and fences. Even some private schools have roll call, guards, and fences. Hell, my cushy office building has guards. These things are not, on their own, evidence of a crime.

If guards were to testify that they were trained to keep people from leaving, rather than to keep people safe from outsiders, we may have evidence of a crime. So far, though, we just have one man's unsubstantiated claims.

(BTW: the word to describe people who lack skepticism is "gullible")

Re:FLSA

[LOLLinux]

My boyscout camp had roll calls. "Gated communities" have guards and fences. Even some private schools have roll call, guards, and fences. Hell, my cushy office building has guards. These things are not, on their own, evidence of a crime.

Yes because any of those things are comparable to a forced labor camp. You're really stretching on this one.

If guards were to testify that they were trained to keep people from leaving, rather than to keep people safe from outsiders, we may have evidence of a crime. So far, though, we just have one man's unsubstantiated claims.

Yes, because the guards and people involved would never possibly lie or anything, right?

(BTW: the word to describe people who lack skepticism is "gullible")

Skepticism isn't the same as being a contrarian.

Re:FLSA

[schon]

There needs to be sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was kidnapped, and not staying voluntarily.

No, there doesn't.

"Beyond reasonable doubt" is reserved for criminal cases. This is a civil suit, in which the standard of proof is "preponderance of the evidence".

if there's no evidence that he was forcibly detained, there will be no successful prosecution.

Again, this is a civil suit, so there is no prosecution.

Re:FLSA

[mcrbids]

There needs to be sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was kidnapped, and not staying voluntarily.

Did you miss the point that he was eight years old at the time?

Well, if there's no evidence that he was forcibly detained, there will be no successful prosecution.

Yep. you missed the point that he was eight years old at the time!

Eight-year-olds do not have free will under California law. They have the legally recognized ability to tattle, and that's about it. On the other hand, there *are* strict child-labor laws in effect.

I have no sympathies for any particular religious group. I just hope the law is upheld and no prosecution based solely on unsupported claims is successful.

First is the question: are they actually a regligious group? See France's recent rulings for more information. There's certainly reasonable doubt on the question!

Second: The claims are very, VERY widely supported. Literally hundreds of people (and I mean literally, not figuratively) have come forth with their stories of harrassment, false imprisonment / kidnapping, extortion, and plenty more.

Just take a look for yourself...

Re:FLSA

[Lord Ender]

What kind of bias is motivating you to accept one person's accusation without a shred of evidence? The law does not assume guilt until proven innocent, and for a very good reason. This fact seems lost on you.

Guards are simply not proof of a "forced labor camp." If anyone could claim any place with guards is a "forced labor camp," and YOU were a DA, you would spend all your day prosecuting shopping mall operators based on the claims of bored teenagers.

When thinking, I recommend that you your brain, not your bias.

Re:FLSA

[Culture20]

Is the barbed wire on the inside or outside of the top of the fence? The way it leans tells a story.

Re:FLSA

[Anonymous Coward]

You are missing his age. Slavery becomes much easier to prove if it's a child.

Re:FLSA

[Fulcrum of Evil]

go read the complaint - people who tried to leave without permission were punished, people who left were captured, returned, and punished, no personal freedom, no free communications, brainwashing, etc. This was nothing more than a prison camp.

If guards were to testify that they were trained to keep people from leaving, rather than to keep people safe from outsiders, we may have evidence of a crime. So far, though, we just have one man's unsubstantiated claims.

This

(BTW: the word to describe people who lack skepticism is "gullible")

And this stand in stark contrast. Maybe you're just a scientologist plant - who really knows. You can't really prove that you aren't and it's convenient to claim that you are.

Re:FLSA

[Fulcrum of Evil]

What kind of bias is motivating you to accept one person's accusation without a shred of evidence?

Who needs evidence? You're arguing that the claims are without merit by comparing the described conditions to something legal - whether they're true or whether the complainant is on crack, the described conditions are that of a prison labor camp.

Re:FLSA

[sjames]

Urmmm, according to TFA he was 8 years old when it started. That changes things a great deal.

Re:FLSA

[Vindicator9000]

It actually points both ways at Gold Base, where the plaintiff was allegedly held.

You can see the fence in this picture

Re:FLSA

[StarWreck]

There's plenty of evidence that Scientology will go out of their way to prevent you from leaving when you work for them. Including: Locking you in a cage. Read "Blown for Good"

Re:FLSA

[Scrameustache]

There is no law against working in a compound which has barbed wire. [...] For the slavery charge, he would need to prove that he tried to quit/leave but was forcibly prevented from doing so.

Read that back a few times, until it dawns on you.

Re:FLSA

[Lord Ender]

One of the more amusing bullshit-internet-debate tactics is the classic "my opponent is a plant!" This is obviously false to all readers, as plants are unable to type.

Re:FLSA

[Fulcrum of Evil]

okay, fine: not vegetable, therefore animal or mineral. funny how you object to having the same sort of underhanded tactic used against you.

Care to address the substance of the response? Specifically, when you read the actual complaint, it is a prison labor camp. The question of whether his claims are supported is a different issue.

Re:FLSA

[Culture20]

Jeez, that's worse than razorwire. Those things look like they can kill!

Re:FLSA

[Rakarra]

First is the question: are they actually a regligious group? See France's recent rulings for more information.

According to federal law, yes. France's recent rulings have no jurisdiction or bearings on our laws, any more than their recent anti-Muslim ordinances too.

As much as I might want it, I don't see the federal acknowledgement of Scientology changing anytime soon.

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[Anonymous Coward]

no.

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[MooseMuffin]

They take the money of the rich and stupid.

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[natehoy]

It hasn't been around as long as some of the other religions, so its follower base is smaller, which somewhat limits the damage they can do?

The incredible amount of obvious attempts at secrecy and loud legal threats keeps them in the spotlight, keeping all but the most gullible and weak-willed from being stupid enough to join up?

Sorry, that's all I've got.

Original complaint

[Iphtashu Fitz]

For those of you who are interested, you can read the original court complaint filing here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/23175190/Complaint-filed112509

Re:Original complaint

[Anonymous Coward]

For those of you who are interested, you can read the original court complaint filing here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/23175190/Complaint-filed112509

Wow, how did you get that link? Did you read the first sentence fragment of the summary or something?

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Umm...

Hitler wasn't a scientologist?

Yes...

[SuperKendall]

I'm not fan of scientology, or any cult really - but a mainstream organization with illegal work camps? I just never expected that, at all. You'd think the lid would have come off something that extreme some time ago. And what are they even having them do in these camps, build the theta monitors?

Re:Yes...

[royallthefourth]

I think you're confusing "mainstream" and "infamous"

Re:Yes...

[Penguinisto]

Dude - there are (and were) cults out in the US today that do much, much worse. Past examples? Branch Davidians (Waco), the SunYungMoon group during the 1980's ("Moonies"), and the recent polygamy compound in Colorado City, Arizona. They all stand out as some rather egregious examples, and I don't doubt there are more of 'em out there today.

They don't have barbed wire and guards per se, but I'm willing to wager that their denizens are brainwashed enough that none of the fencing and such is necessary.

Re:Yes...

[eldavojohn]

And what are they even having them do in these camps, build the theta monitors?

From the Infinite Complacency Link:

At 12, he was “deemed finished with schooling” and Golden Era Productions, an unincorporated division of Church of Scientology International (CSI) hired him as a messenger and errand boy.

But in 1997, at the age of 15, he was demoted to the post of dishwasher. “He worked 16-hour days cleaning pots, pans and the dining facilities,” says the lawsuit.

And soon afterwards, he was assigned to do construction at the base near Hemet, California.

So the answer to your question is messenger, dish washer then construction worker. I mean, why use all the money you take from your followers to hire people to do this work when you can force the followers to do it for less or even free? L Ron Hubbard's Get Rich Quick Scam is yet another valid title for Scientology.

Re:Yes...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like grad school to me...

Re:Yes...

[dreamchaser]

Quite right. GP also referred to the CoS as 'mainstream'. There is nothing mainstream about them. Most other countries don't even recognize them as a religion. They are a money making / power grabbing scheme dreamed up by a second rate megalomaniac science fiction author that has now taken on a life of its own.

Re:Yes...

[KiloByte]

Yes, for example church-run (ie, most of them) orphanages in Ireland. All of physical abuse, sexual abuse and forced labor.

Re:Yes...

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude - there are (and were) cults out in the US today that do much, much worse. Past examples? Branch Davidians (Waco), the SunYungMoon group during the 1980's ("Moonies"), and the recent polygamy compound in Colorado City, Arizona. They all stand out as some rather egregious examples, and I don't doubt there are more of 'em out there today.

They don't have barbed wire and guards per se, but I'm willing to wager that their denizens are brainwashed enough that none of the fencing and such is necessary.

What did the Branch Davidians do that was so much, much worse?

Re:Yes...

[Runaway1956]

Yes, please, define "mainstream". Just because an organization makes the news frequently doesn't make them "mainstream". Take a hard look at the people who claim to be Scientologists. Fringe freaking element, all around. Huh? You point to some celebrity or other? Your point being what, exactly? Whoa, dude, you need to look at those celebrities again. We make celebrities out of people like Roman Polanski, who likes little girls. We make celebrities out of the likes of Michael Jackson, who liked - uhhh - sleepovers with little boys. We make celebrities out of rap singers who "sing" about killing cops. We make celebrities of other "singers" who celebrate gang raping little girls. Just because Tom Cruise happens to be in movies, people like his movies, does NOT make CoS "mainstream".
America worships freaks, but that worship doesn't make them "mainstream".

Re:Yes...

[madprof]

Er, killed a load of people and set fire to the compound.

That is what you might consider "pretty harsh".

Re:Yes...

[ravenshrike]

AFAIK, there was never any sort of actual evidence of this. It was merely rumors without an established source. Of course, the rumors did give the .gov the excuse to attempt to invade the compound during which they killed off most of the Branch Davidians and then managed to lose the 6 separate locations worth of film that was running during the process so that they couldn't be released through FOIA requests.

Re:Yes...

[smitty777]

David Koresh fucked a bunch of teenagers. That also happened to be legal, though.

Scuse me - the "legal age" in Texas at that time was 14 for marriage with consent. He was with children as young as 10 years old.

Re:Yes...

[Anonymous Coward]

It did. The debt slavery in $cientology has been documented by its former members for years, including the child labor used to keep their buildings intact. Young $cientologists grow up with quite a large debt to the cult for their "auditing" sessions, during which they also confess any crimes with the e-meter, actually a primitive polygraph test whose results are often faked, and those confessions can be used to blackmail members into remaining in the cult or remaining silent if they ever escape.

Details are over at www.factnet.org and www.xenu.net, it's fascinating material.

Re:Yes...

[couchslug]

"Mainstream" does not at all exclude abusing the flock.

Note the HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars paid by the Catholic Church to dampen the scandal caused by their decades-long support of rampant pedophilia.

Given the lawyers such money would buy, the willingness to hand out that level of settlement/hush money is telling.

Re:Yes...

[corbettw]

Most other countries don't even recognize them as a religion. They are a money making / power grabbing scheme dreamed up by a second rate megalomaniac science fiction author that has now taken on a life of its own.

So how are they not a religion? Just substitute "science fiction" with "fantasy" and you have pretty much every religion out there.

Re:Yes...

[interkin3tic]

And what are they even having them do in these camps, build the theta monitors?

Worse! From TFA:

By age 16, Lindstein says, he was working for Golden Era Productions, Scientology's film production company, restoring Hubbard's films from the 1970s. He says he often worked 24-hour days at the "tedious, frame-by-frame work that would normally cost more than $400,000 per movie to accomplish at industry rates."

Not sure which part of that would be more hellish, the long tedious work for slave wages... or having to watch movies by the guy who wrote "Battlefield Earth."

Re:Yes...

[gknoy]

What did the Branch Davidians do that was so much, much worse?

Er, killed a load of people and set fire to the compound.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_Siege :

Besides allegations of sexual abuse and misconduct, Koresh and his followers were accused of stockpiling illegal weapons....

It is not known who fired the first shots, but each side later claimed it had been the other.[20] It is reported that the first firing occurred at the double front entry doors. (One door, riddled with bullet holes, was removed and lost very shortly after the siege's end). ATF agents stated they heard shots coming from within the compound, while Branch Davidian survivors claimed that the first shots came from the ATF agents outside...

The deaths that resulted were because the Davidians thought they were defending themselves from an assault. Several parts of the FBI and ATF forces wanted to negotiate more, but another faction wanted to ramp up the use of force. Tanks and CEVs were brought in. At some point, the compound was heavily tear-gassed.

After more than six hours no Davidians had left the building, sheltering instead in a cinder block room within the building or using gas masks. The official FBI claim is that CEVs were used to punch large holes in the building to provide exits for those inside. Most Davidians dispute this claim because the "exits" were blocked by debris, structurally unstable, elevated and largely inaccessible due to smoke and large quantities of tear gas.[citation needed] Several Davidians were blocked when a floor above collapsed, and nearly all Davidians said they feared being shot were they to leave.[citation needed]

At around noon, three fires broke out almost simultaneously in different parts of the building. The government maintains the fires were deliberately started by Davidians.[20][45] Davidian survivors maintain the fires were accidentally or deliberately started by the tank assault.

I think it's safe to say that it's a tragedy, no matter how you look at it, but I certainly feel that a large portion of the blame for the deaths at the Waco siege were caused by the unwillingness of the ATF/FBI to negotiate, and their eagerness to push with force against a target that they knew would interpret that as requiring self-defense.

The Davidians' "wrongdoings" were small change compared to what happened there. Koresh was a polygamist, and I certainly don't condone his actions, but I don't think it's fair to blame him and his followers entirely for the deaths during the siege.

Re:Yes...

[royallthefourth]

Yes, of course. But consider that Catholicism is both mainstream and infamous while Scientology is still a cult and most people don't really know what it is except that Tom Cruise joined it and went nuts.

Re:Yes...

[Anonymous Coward]

What makes them mainsteam is that their actions are given tacit approval by the state with tax exemption, and that people are so complacent that they hear the stories and think "Someone should do something about that... Oh well, not my problem."

Everyone has heard of these guys by now and almost no one is doing anything.

Re:Yes...

[fiannaFailMan]

I'm not fan of scientology, or any cult really - but a mainstream organization with illegal work camps? I just never expected that, at all. You'd think the lid would have come off something that extreme some time ago.

After the likes of the Ryan Report, nothing surprises me. Religion can be used as a cover for the most heinous of crimes against humanity.

Re:Yes...

[ted.hansson]

Tom Cruise joined it and went nuts

You could question the order of these two events.

Re:Yes...

[BlackSnake112]

No evidence? How about the sworn testimonies of people who said Koresh took the wives and daughters of other people and had sex with them. The husbands were told not to have sex with their wives.

Re:Yes...

[dbIII]

Quite true about in Ireland and many other places, however you've fallen into the trap of pretending that this is a religeon and theoretically has positive aspects instead of what it is - the Dianetics scam wrapped in another extra layer of lies.

Re:Yes...

[easyTree]

Note the HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars paid by the Catholic Church to dampen the scandal caused by their decades-long support of rampant paedophilia.

Money previously belonging to the parents of the abused children. Something tells me the catholic church came off better.

Re:Yes...

[Belial6]

I work with a woman who was a neighbor of the Dividians at the time. Her telling of the story is that they were decent neighbors who didn't bother anyone. They did have large stockpiles of guns, but that as far as anyone could tell, they were legal firearms delivered through normal channels, and that having a bunch of guns wasn't all that unusual for that area.

According to her telling of events, the altercation started when one of the Dividians neighbors complained about the noise from their target practice. The local sheriff went out and asked them to keep it down. She claims the sheriff had already resolved the issue before the Fed decided they had an excuse to assault the church.

Re:Yes...

[Belial6]

I agree that having sex with prepubescent kids is despicable. Now, if only we could get the same kind of action taken against the worlds biggest, riches, most powerful child molestation ring. You know, the Catholic Church.

Re:Yes...

[cynical kane]

Not to defend statutory rape, but it's not the same as "liking little girls". Of course, if you're one of those "think of the children" crowd, it doesn't make a difference to you...

Re:Yes...

[wisnoskij]

As long as they have big celebrities that are scientologists and publicly endorse the cult they are mainstream, in my opinion.

Re:Yes...

[StarWreck]

Are you sure its the Catholic Church? http://sexual.taxexemptchildabuse.net/

Re:Yes...

[Runaway1956]

I used a euphemism, sorry. The fact is Polanski got a little girl who had just reached puberty drunk, drugged her, then forcibly raped her. I've read the transcripts at thesmokinggun.com What a disgusting pig. And, it wasn't a one-off thing - he's had other little girlfriends, both publicly acknowledged and otherwise.

Re:Yes...

[StarWreck]

Forget the celebrities. Here's a conversation with a "mainstream" scientologist. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyUAVz414_M

Re:Yes...

[Noren]

Considering that the FBI pumped 77 pounds of a flammable aerosol into the compound, you might want to rethink who was to blame for the fire. But I do agree, it was "pretty harsh".

Re:Yes...

[ph0rk]

They don't have barbed wire and guards per se, but I'm willing to wager that their denizens are brainwashed enough that none of the fencing and such is necessary.

In a free society, provided the brainwashed are all adults (and no physical restraint is used in the brainwashing), this is perfectly legal.

Now, if the organization then empties the bank accounts of the brainwashed, or, say, ties them to beds and forgets to water them then there may be a problem.

Re:Yes...

[overbaud]

Yes, please, define "mainstream". Just because an organization makes the news frequently doesn't make them "mainstream".

Reminds me of Linux users... only not in the news as much.

Re:Yes...

[LordKronos]

I work with a woman who was a neighbor of the Dividians at the time. Her telling of the story is that they were decent neighbors who didn't bother anyone.

I've read similar stories from the neighbors of serial killers. I'm not sure what the point is. For the same reason that "guilt by association" isn't valid, "innocent because the neighbor said so" doesn't carry much weight either.

Re:Yes...

[Belial6]

Yes, I am sure that the Catholic Church is bigger, richer, and an international child molestation ring. It hasn't even been a secret for at least a generation. I know all my life, someone being refered to as an 'alter boy' mean that they were getting buggered.

Re:Yes...

[LihTox]

The distinction between a religion and a cult, to my mind, isn't the quality of their beliefs-- we all believe utterly ridiculous things. (Do you actually believe in the *electron*? Or that we're all actually collections of waves? Quantum mechanics is as ridiculous as the virgin birth-- in fact, quantum mechanics ALLOWS for the virgin birth, since everything is possible (if highly improbable) in quantum mechanics). The difference is in the sincerity of the religion/cult's founders and leadership: do *they* believe in what they're saying, and are they primarily motivated by their belief? I personally think that Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Baha'i, Buddhism, etc were founded in all sincerity, and even through the contempt I feel for the evangelical Christian movement, and for the Pope (speaking as a Catholic), I think they are acting from a position of sincerity.

Scientology, on the other hand, was founded by a science fiction writer who is on record saying that founding a fake religion would be a great way to make money. Now, I think there are a number of Scientologists who are sincerely so, but I don't trust their leadership, and that makes them a cult to me.

Re:Yes...

[Montezumaa]

We do not know whether David Miscavige is a nut job? Seriously? Have you ever looked into Scientology? You are either very gullible or very dumb, neither of which are good choices. Either that or you are a member of the nut job cult and you are trying to take up for the organization without trying to blatantly defend it.

Re:Yes...

[asamad]

I don't understand why they could just wait them out, Nobody in or out of the compound, I am guessing bu t after a couple of days they would have given up. Does it cost that much money to have police/fbi/... people to surround a place.

Re:Yes...

[Rakarra]

There is no reason to negotiate with people who rebel against the state, and every reason to kill them. Killing rebels poses an appropriate, stabilizing "barrier to entry" to power. Either get voted in, or fight a successful revolution.

Well, it certainly does show how ultimately fruitless the "I'll have my .45 to protect me against the corrupt lawman" attitude is. Small-scale revolts aren't much use, unless you consider the negative attention the ATF got to be an aim in itself.

Re:Yes...

[Rakarra]

Not to defend statutory rape, but it's not the same as "liking little girls".

So he's in the clear.. as long as he didn't actually like her. ;-)

Re:Yes...

[Atario]

the SunYungMoon group during the 1980's ("Moonies")

N.B.: the Moonies were not limited to the 1980s. They are still around and going strong, most notably in the form of the Washington Times, which some persist in mistaking for a real newspaper.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Times

Re:Yes...

[Miamicanes]

> So how are they not a religion?

Name a single mainstream religion, practiced anywhere in the world, whose core, sacred beliefs are aggressively guarded by the holy writ of copyright law and a small army of lawyers.

Re:Yes...

[horza]

You see, for many people this would be a bad thing. In fact Polanski had to flee his home country. Within Scientology, things like rape and forced abortion is something simply to hide from outsiders, not something abnormal. So you are right in saying just because a celebrity does something it doesn't make it mainstream, but you are wrong comparing Cruise to Polanski. The latter knows full well what he has done is wrong. We aren't going to be seeing Polanski on Oprah next week exhorting young kids, "Hey, raping underage girls is cool". However, the former has made himself public apologist for a criminal organisation. He gets regular cover in large media outlets for his views. He gets mutual support from other high-profile infiltrators such as Travolta. It is well known that if you try and oppose any of their views or criticise them, they will try and destroy your life and are well funded and backed by an army of brainwashed fanatics. Compared to other cults/religions, they are definitely mainstream.

Phillip.

Re:Yes...

[jc42]

Now, if the organization then ... ties them to beds and forgets to water them then there may be a problem.

Or, if they're part of the US government, ties them to beds and over-waters them.

Of course, so far there don't seem to have been any prosecutions of this practice. They're even bringing a fellow to trial after they water-boarded him more than a hundred times to get his confessions, and the judge hasn't laughed at them and ordered the guy freed.

Such practices are normal for lots of big organizations, especially governments who have nobody to answer to. The only thing really unusual about this story is that it's a religious organization with no (obvious) ties to the government. Of course, we don't know what might have been going on behind the curtains, to prevent the California and US governments from breaking up the operation.

Re:Yes...

[lennier]

"I'm not fan of scientology, or any cult really - but a mainstream organization with illegal work camps? I just never expected that, at all. You'd think the lid would have come off something that extreme some time ago."

It has, if you were paying attention.

CoS's 'Rehabilitation Project Force' labour camps and other extreme 'Ethics' measures have been common knowledge since the 1990s - just check the extensive files on Operation Clambake - http://xenu.net/ .

However, CoS tends to sue massively and engage in lots of dirty tricks whenever the mainstream media cover them at all negatively, which is why you may not have heard about this stuff if you don't get your news from the Net.

They tried to censor Usenet back in the early 90s. It didn't work so well for them. Anonymous is just the latest round in a long battle of CoS Versus The Internet.

Re:Yes...

[rock_climbing_guy]

The theory is that laws against polygamy serve as a stabilizing force in society.

I don't have the data right at my fingertips, but the idea is that if rich, powerful men are allowed to keep harems of women for their personal enjoyment, then there will necessarily be a large number of single men who have to chance to have a mate, unless of course, you also allow for young men to be castrated and sold as slaves.

Does having a society full of horny men who will never ever score sound like a good idea?

Re:Yes...

[lennier]

"They are a money making / power grabbing scheme dreamed up by a second rate megalomaniac science fiction author that has now taken on a life of its own."

I've often wondered about the parallels between L Ron Hubbard and Gene Roddenberry.

Both ended up creating science-fiction themed military-naval organisations with hordes of loyal fans that generate tons of money...

Re:Yes...

[mister_playboy]

Does having a society full of horny men who will never ever score sound like a good idea?

The widespread infanticide of female infants in China due to the one-child policy and a preference for male children is setting China up for just such a destabilizing situation in the future.

Re:Yes...

[Neffirithion]

So how are they not a religion? Just substitute "science fiction" with "fantasy" and you have pretty much every religion out there.

regardless of what I personally believe, every other religion, factually, is not a "money making scheme" because of the sole fact that the other religion's attempts to make money all hindge on the "good will" of others to give money. Churches (outside CoS) aren't "pay to play." but rely on donations to stay open. They don't charge you for coming to church sunday morning... if they did, I think about 90% of the people that go to church wouldn't anymore. Although the argument could be made about the power grabbing... but calling every religion a money grabbing scheme is not only inaccurate, but down right stupid.

Re:Yes...

[hackstraw]

Two years later: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing

Re:Yes...

[asaz989]

Just because they're a nut job cult doesn't mean they're automatically guilty of every offense they're accused of.

Re:Yes...

[TubeSteak]

And confusing "Charged with" with "Found guilty of".

I think you're confusing "not found guilty" and "not charged" with "innocent"

Either all these former Scientologists are in some kind of multi-decade conspiracy to slander CoS
OR the CoS really has been doing horrible things since its founding.
Which is the more plausible proposition?

Re:Yes...

[plover]

Cult: n, A small, unpopular religion.
Religion: n, A large, popular cult.

Re:Yes...

[trajanus22]

Dude - there are (and were) cults out in the US today that do much, much worse. Past examples? Branch Davidians (Waco)

Slow down there friend and check this documentary out before you write off the Davidians as a bunch of psychos. Normal? No. But worse than slave labor, I think not.

Re:Yes...

[spathi-wa]

We will never really know if his going nuts was an effect of joining the CoS or the cause of it.

Re:Yes...

[plover]

Quite right. GP also referred to the CoS as 'mainstream'. There is nothing mainstream about them. Most other countries don't even recognize them as a religion. They are a money making / power grabbing scheme dreamed up by a third rate megalomaniac science fiction author that has now taken on a life of its own.

Apparently you have never read any of his books, so I fixed that for you.

Re:Yes...

[Hucko]

How did a noise complaint make it to the Feds attention?

Re:Yes...

[JumperCable]

At gold base? Yes. They have built e-meters there. I'm not sure if it's still done at that base. They also produce their books, CDs, DVDs, promotional material. It is also the location of Golden Era Productions where promotional films are made. Also fun stories of cleaning out their shit pond & septic systems by hand... no seriously with their hands.

In the The Big Blue building in LA they make the RPF workers build furniture in confined spaces.

Re:Yes...

[ravenshrike]

Did these sworn testimonies come about before or after the raid?

Re:Yes...

[JumperCable]

Oh, well that brings us back to cases like Lisa McPherson & Herbiert Pfaff.

Re:Yes...

[JumperCable]

The cult claims more than 6,000 churches missions & related groups, but I don't see anywhere near that amount listed on their website. And they claim 8-12 million Scientologists, but there are only about 25,000 in the US. http://www.timesanddemocrat.com/articles/2009/11/06/features/14122340.txt> .

If you really think there are 8 million Scientologists, then were the heck are they all? Shouldn't those Orgs be packed full? Seriously, how many should be in any major city in the US. They just aren't there. They are lying to you & all you have to do is a little basic research. Start of with the question of 6,000 churches, missions & related groups. That should be simple to verify from the scientology.org website alone.

Re:Yes...

[jhol13]

It always amazes me how ready people are to bash religions while at the same time think they can change the future. After all, according to every scientific theory we have changing the future is impossible.

Maybe they are frightened of the religions and what they propose?

Re:Yes...

[corbettw]

Sure, nowadays. But the Catholic Church once required prompt payment of various fees to gain forgiveness of sins; and many smaller churches and cults have demanded tithes on a regular basis. Though it is true that other religions aren't nearly as money grubbing as the CoS is. Instead, the older ones just go for the real goods: power and devotion. With enough of those, you don't need money.

Re:Yes...

[corbettw]

That was a pretty good troll. For a second there, I actually thought you were serious. But no one can be that insane to propose that every single scientific theory in existence postulates the existence of fate and a completely deterministic universe, so you must just be trolling.

Hat tip to you, good sir!

Re:Yes...

[Tybalt_Capulet]

There are lots of scientology hate websites on the internet, xenu.net for one.

Also, you have to love 4chan, anon does you proud.

Re:Yes...

[skine]

The problem is not religion necessarily, but that religion, by its very nature, can very easily be corrupted.

Re:Yes...

[Meski]

I'm not sure you can attribute Tom Cruiise's nutdom to COS. Perhaps they fertilised them, but I think the original seeds[1] were already there.

[1] Seeds of nuts, would be nuts, but I don't feel like amending.

Re:Yes...

[Meski]

We're working on not recognising them as a religion, but they're fighting back. google xenophon senator scientology ...

Re:Yes...

[Meski]

So how are they not a religion? Just substitute "science fiction" with "fantasy" and you have pretty much every religion out there.

With the exception of The Church of the flying spaghetti monster. You've pretty much got to accept that one as genuine. :^) {1]

[1] I feel unclean, putting the tongue-in-cheek emoticon there.

Re:Yes...

[Meski]

Ack! doubly so, I mismatched the braces.

Re:Yes...

[Belial6]

By having the Feds already waiting for an excuse to assault.

Re:Yes...

[seebs]

The big difference is that we have the founder on record, in writing, claiming that:

1. He came up with this stuff under the influence of drugs.
2. That this is not a religion, in any way, shape, or form.
3. Later, that there is now a "religion angle" which exists only for tax and legal reasons, but that there is no change at all of the underlying facts.

They have written documents saying that they are not a religion, are not intended to be a religion, and are purely scientific. That does go a long way towards suggesting that they are perhaps not a religion. Generally, if you put in writing that you are filing forms saying you're a religion only for tax reasons, and not because you actually think you're a religion, that's a big sign.

Re:Yes...

[opposabledumbs]

Does having a society full of horny men who will never ever score sound like a good idea?

Works for Slashdot, doesn't it?

Re:Yes...

[AlamedaStone]

Just because they're a nut job cult doesn't mean they're automatically guilty of every offense they're accused of.

No, but the fact that they're a nutjob cult does in fact mean they're automatically nutjobs - which was the point of the post to which you are replying.

Re:Yes...

[someone1234]

What exactly is the difference, other than size?

Re:Yes...

[fractoid]

Religion: n, A delusion shared by many people. Cult: n, A group that uses cognitive dissonance to recruit and indoctrinate it's followers.

I fail to see how this distinction is either technical or profound. I'm curious, however, and willing to learn.

Re:Yes...

[bh_doc]

The distinction between a religion and a cult, to my mind, isn't the quality of their beliefs-- we all believe utterly ridiculous things. (Do you actually believe in the *electron*? Or that we're all actually collections of waves? Quantum mechanics is as ridiculous as the virgin birth-- in fact, quantum mechanics ALLOWS for the virgin birth, since everything is possible (if highly improbable) in quantum mechanics).

The electron model and quantum mechanics both are predictive and thus testable, experimentally observed, and thoroughly verified to be accurate descriptions of reality. Suggesting that belief in them is "ridiculous" is, well, ridiculous. If something accurately describes reality, how can you distinguish it from reality?

Re:Yes...

[msheekhah]

you wouldn't believe what they've gotten away with this. there is a ton of dox on their abuses, but the people who have them are too scared to come forward. i can't wait to see what else comes out to the public.

Re:Yes...

[asaz989]

But it doesn't mean their accuser is honest or right - which actually was what the parent was saying, as opposed to whatever more reasonable thing you mentally inserted instead.

Re:Yes...

[dbIII]

Yes, but that's not really relevant - they just want you to think it is.
Here is how the trap works:
There is the announcement - a SF writer proclaims Dianetics is now a religeon!
The question is asked, so you say you are a religeon, what is religeon anyway? Now we can ponder that for decades if we have Jesuits to argue with and probably find out the question has more meaning than any answer, or get into a fist fight with a Pentacostal lay preacher in minutes if we argue with them and never resolve anything. If the rightful authorities get involved in this question it becomes Church vs State and just about every religeon with reluctantly come in on the side of Ron Hubbard's scam so restrictions won't get applied to them later. Scientologists have had decades to fine tune the confusion this generates.
A better question to ask: "Is this a scam"? Criminal investigations can answer that one while they can't answer the first possibly unanswerable question.

Re:Yes...

[JasterBobaMereel]

The difference was that the Catholic Church at the time was the established religion, i.e. state run, state sanctioned, and laws were passed to uphold this status and force people to pay ... *one* of the reasons for separation of church and State in the US

The CoS wants complete control over it's followers because they have no power over the general populace or the media

Re:Yes...

[dcollins117]

Do you actually believe in the *electron*?

Actually, I do. I believe there are many of them, right here in this room.

As for the matter of the virgin birth, I think there is a better explanation than quantum mechanics. I think that Mary has been holding out on us.

Re:Yes...

[loutr]

Well for starters mainstream christianity and islam don't make you work for fifteen fucking hours a day for $200/mo against your will. Oh, and they also didn't organize "the single largest infiltration of the United States government in history".

Re:Yes...

[dintech]

Members of the group Anonymous praised the summons.

In other news, scientists have confirmed that bears do actually shit in the woods. Also coming up, our Vatican correspondent reports on breaking news that the Pope is indeed catholic.

Re:Yes...

[mlush]

its one of those irregular verbs:

• My Faith
• Your Religion
• His Cult

Re:Yes...

[dintech]

Mods, how the FUCK can you mod down a post as off-topic but mod up a reply

Umm, because we don't agree?

Re:Yes...

[Cederic]

A virgin birth is pretty easy to arrange, even with 2000 year old technology.

The hardest part is finding the virgin and a reason to do it..

I also don't think that leaders of major religions truly believe the shit they espouse. Fucking con artists the lot of them.

Re:Yes...

[Cederic]

You mean, with enough of those you get the money anyway.

Re:Yes...

[Cederic]

You want to summarise that one for people that have no intention of going to that website on any internet connection that can be traced back to them?

Re:Yes...

[stupid_is]

Churches (outside CoS) aren't "pay to play." but rely on donations to stay open. They don't charge you for coming to church sunday morning... if they did, I think about 90% of the people that go to church wouldn't anymore.

How about the Mormon tithe, then? While not "mandatory" to contribute the full amount, it would seem that there would be a lot of pressure to stump up that 10%. It even applies to children, too.

Or then there's Islamic Zakat - a compulsory 2.5% (although I guess you get to give it direct to a charitable cause, and not to the central church).

Re:Yes...

[digitig]

Either all these former Scientologists are in some kind of multi-decade conspiracy to slander CoS OR the CoS really has been doing horrible things since its founding.

A. On that argument, I assume you believe the blood libel against the Jews? After all when lots of people say bad things against a target of hate, it must be true, mustn't it?
B. Even if they have been doing lots of horrible things (which seems to be the case), that isn't proof that they've done this particular horrible thing. Lots of folks here seem to think it is.

Re:Yes...

[stim]

also didn't organize "the single largest infiltration of the United States government in history".

I'm not so sure about that, there's an awful lot of Christians in the US Gov.

Re:Yes...

[ultranova]

Why, it's simple: it lets butthurt atheists to put two snipes about religion into a single unit, therefore being twice as effective in making themselves feel superior.

Re:Yes...

[Phoghat]

I was born into the Roman Catholic religion and to paraphrase George Carlin stayed a Catholic until I attained the age of reason.

I have a great many reasons to believe the Church is money grubbing. The nuns who taught in grammar school and high school were never paid a salary, have no Social Security benefits or pensions. When they retired these dedicated (and sometimes slightly loony) women have No Money. I get letters from the Diocese to contribute to their welfare, while the Church is the biggest landlord in NY, and there is more art in the Vatican that no one ever sees that could be sold off to pay for their welfare.

I now consider myself to be somewhat Buddhist in my philosophy.

Money isn't the root of all evil. The love of money is the root of all evil. Look it up.

Re:Yes...

[jhol13]

Show one scientific theory which gives you a possibility to affect future.

I recommend you do not start your search from quantum mechanics as they definitely do not.

Re:Yes...

[fractoid]

...well snap. I'm actually gonna have to pay that one. Well played!

Re:Yes...

[JasterBobaMereel]

The time I was talking about the Catholic Church ran (or had major influence over) the running of most of Europe and beyond ....

In Italy the Catholic church is still an established religion ....and so yes you paid to maintain your historic buildings (many of which are churches)

Re:Yes...

[coinreturn]

Legal prostitution could help balance polygamy. Also war.

Re:Yes...

[Anonymous Coward]

Salute mah dog!!

"He got his beagle and he literally had somebody tailor a blue vest sweater for his beagle dog and made up epaulets, these Sea Org ranks in the Sea Organization," said Rathbun [27-years in Scientology & 'Inspector General'], referring to the religious order within the Church. "And he had four stripes put on, captain, for the dog. And he would bring the dog in. And if those guys didn't salute the dog, he would just viciously berate them and invalidate them."

Amy Scobee gave her account. "[Miscavige] comes with his dog, with a sweater, with commander stripes. And, the dog let out a little bark when she saw me. And, uh, David Miscavige said, you know ... 'You've got somethin' goin' on. Because sh ... she is detecting out ethics. And you have something going on.' I think what the dog was really saying is, you know, 'You look like the only halfway sane person to me. Help me outta this outfit.'"

Nope, definitely not a nutjob...

Re:Yes...

[TheTurtlesMoves]

What is wrong with Polygamy? why is that the "wrongdoing" you bring up. You know even the bible doesn't out rule polygamy.

Re:Yes...

[Whorhay]

The "wrong" of polygamy is that it's currently illegal. Because it is illegal it is practiced in secret. Which opens the door to all kinds of abuses, much like how the prohibition of alcohol led to the rise of organized crime. There isn't anything, outside of religious propoganda, that is wrong with polygamy and it's opposite polyandry.

Re:Yes...

[KnownIssues]

there are (and were) cults out in the US today that do much, much worse.

Yes, and being murdered is worse than being raped, but you can bet I don't want either one to happen to me. Comparing something bad to something more bad doesn't make it any less bad.

Re:Yes...

[KnownIssues]

quantum mechanics ALLOWS for the virgin birth, since everything is possible (if highly improbable) in quantum mechanics).

I just have to nitpick about this. Quantum mechanics doesn't say everything is possible. It says--by one interpretation--that everything that can happen does happen. The key words are probable and possible. Every possible alternative, no matter how improbable, exists. But that doesn't mean that everything is possible.

In the classic experiment with a lead sheet with slits in it and shining a light through it, the light passes through all the slits, not just one or the other. The light does not pass through the lead or show up on Mars or turn into water.

Re:Yes...

[Makido]

I waffled on whether or not to respond to this post, beings as what I wanted to say about it has already been said and modded out of veiw, but here it goes anyway:

Your comment achieves nothing more than offending both camps of which you speak. You offend the religious and those willing to believe in inexplicable miracles by discounting the value and power of their faith in the otherwise unbelievable. The point of their beliefs (in many cases) is that they ARE ridiculous, in the common sense. They don't require proof and will frequently reject it so that their faith stands on only their own power of will -- a character trait that they and many others value.

You offend those of a more scientific persuasion by asserting that the individuals who have actually done the first-hand work of technical and observational science (and those who trust in their consensus) are either liars or are participating some kind of mass halucination.

Your judgment on the sincerity of 'religions' is nearly as misguided. Organized religion is used by its leaders almost as often for personal gain as it for personal enlightenment. If you'd like to contest that, I suggest you do some research into ownership of most of the private land of the Rocky Mountains and many important corporations of America. In the case of those that follow the New Testament, such lavish positions of power and money is unwise if not directly hypocritical for as Jesus is reported as saying to Lazarus, "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of needle than it is for a rich man to pass through the gates of Heaven."

In addition, so many of these churches in the past, particularly the Anglican and Catholic, have only proven Mao Zedong's famous quote that religion is the opiate of the masses by mixing church and state to the point of justifying great political atrocities. All those leader's had to do assuage the concerns of the ruled populace is claim that God told them to do it. Doesn't sound very sincere to me; and if it isn't, does that make all these listed mainstream religions into cults, is that all it takes?

My real point of contention is that your post was modded as Insightful, when all it really amounts to is uninformed, egocentric assertions deserving little more than a Flamebait tag.

Re:Yes...

[spidercoz]

General Relativity.

It has been demonstrated that the faster you move in relative space, the slower you move in relative time, while external relative time progresses normally. Simply travel fast enough, for long enough, and when you return you arrive in a time which would otherwise have been long after your natural life would have ended. Therefore, you have affected the future. Q.E.D.

Re:Yes...

[iluvcapra]

What a disgusting pig.

When your wife, pregnant with your child, is murdered by the Manson Family, it can have a certiain disfiguring effect on your personality. Not that he isn't guilty or anything, but someone recently made the observation that no one ever calls Warren Anderson a "disgusting pig," even though he's culpable in the death of 20,000 people, fled the nation of his arrest after being indicited, and uses vagaries of extradition laws to avoid punishment.

Re:Yes...

[BobMcD]

I also don't think that leaders of major religions truly believe the shit they espouse. Fucking con artists the lot of them.

Christ himself said basically the same thing of the Pharisees, etc, during his time. In fact he got angry enough to open a can of whoop ass on at least one occasion.

Re:Yes...

[spidercoz]

Except Roddenberry's wasn't the product of drug-addled psychosis and sociopathic greed

Re:Yes...

[Runaway1956]

I can't accept that having your wife murdered might turn you into a pedo, or a child molester. (Since the girl had reached puberty, Polanski isn't technically a pedo, but he's real close to it.) Like millions of other men from his era, my Dad was blown to bits in the pacific, and shipped home in a basket. It didn't turn him into a pedo, a rapist, a dopehead, or any other sort of a criminal. I simply can't accept any excuses for what a man CHOOSES to do.

Re:Yes...

[spidercoz]

way to contradict yourself in the same paragraph

Re:Yes...

[iluvcapra]

I dunno, someone getting killed in a war, for an actual reason, is sorta different. I'm not saying he isn't responsible, but if you call him a monster you're just trying to gloss over the humanity of the situation.

So you're little Roman Polanski, the Nazi's invade your country and at the tender age of 10 you're forced to live in the Warsaw Ghetto. Your family is shipped off to Auschwitz but you manage to escape and live in the Polish countryside, where the odd bored Wermacht corporal takes pot shots at you, and when they miss they laugh at themselves in their drunkenness. The war ends, your father survived and you go to film school, make a few excellent movies, and move to Hollywood and make The Fearless Vampire Killers and you fall in love and marry the most beautful redhead in Los Angeles. You go to London to shoot a movie, and while you're there she and your best friend and his girlfriend are murdered at your house. No one knows at first how it happened, but the papers are happy to report that your wife and friends all committed suicide in some sort of hedonistic orgy. So you get to come home and tell the LA Times, that no, your wife was not a satan worshipper who was killed as part of a sex ritual.

Years later, he's caught for the statutory rape, he makes a plea bargain and confessess to the crime under its conditions. Despite the bargain being in place, the judge renegs and makes it clear he's going to send him to prison anyways. The judge just wants to make an example of this Hollywood type, and a foreigner to boot.

Still had sex with a little girl, doesn't take that away. But if he is a monster, I can only hope that in such a situation I would maintain such a monsterous composure. Again, I cannot see how anyone gets more excited about this than the ridiculous injustice of not extraditing Warren Anderson. It's just more evidence that our people and justice system are obsessed with celebrity and sex crimes, when plain murders walk among us and are tolerated.

Re:Yes...

[conureman]

Perhaps my information is faulty, all I know about it was from the news, and the film "Rules of Engagement". I've seen FLIR imagery of firefights in our Asian colonies, and the film showed a remarkable simulation of submachine gun bursts being directed into the windows and escape routes of the burning Branch Davidian residence, at least until the tank was able to knock down and seal up that end of the building.

Re:Yes...

[Cederic]

Indeed. Ironic really :)

Re:Yes...

[Reservoir Penguin]

So does it mean you don't know how Mainstream Christianity in the form of Catholicism practically strongarmed Irish government into ignoring decades of child abuse and pedophlia? Or maybe how the same Christian sect still tries to control activities of civilian government in Italy and Poland?

Re:Yes...

[operagost]

That's like saying that Silicon Valley was infiltrated by MIT grads.

Re:Yes...

[operagost]

Probability distributions and the "uncertainty principle" are both part of quantum mechanics; that doesn't match the layperson's concept of "predictive".

Re:Yes...

[operagost]

That episode of The Next Generation was totally rad.

Re:Yes...

[loutr]

I'm not a fan of Catholicism, nor any religion for that matter, I'm aware of the problems you mention, and I condemn them, but seriously, the catholic church is really not on the same level of malevolence as the CoS. Some catholics have done a lot of good to mankind recently (Mother Theresa of course, L'Abbé Pierre here in France, ...), but I don't know of any scientologist who has done the same because of his faith.

All I'm saying is that some religions really are more dangerous than others.

Re:Yes...

[operagost]

These people didn't lead an armed rebellion, Captain Fascist. They broke some serious laws, but were not a danger to anyone outside their compound.

Re:Yes...

[BobMcD]

The social workers claimed at the time there was not sufficient ability to prosecute. They had been out to the compound on a number of occasions, had the sense that it was going on, but had not yet been able to act.

The order of events, then, was:

1) Children being abused. Can't roll tanks in and burn them alive, yet.

2) Taxes allegedly not paid on guns (some of the guns alleged were never found there)

3) Meth lab alleged to exist (which was also never found)

4) Stand-off and seige

5) Reno says we can roll tanks and burn them alive because children inside need saving

To me this DOES NOT make sense.

Re:Yes...

[jhol13]

What???

According to quantum mechanics (QM) every quantum change is fully predictable by current quantum state (some theories give a possibility of random input, which you obviously cannot affect) -> your every movement in the future has "been decided" by current situation (plus the possible randomness).

Some theories considers time as just another dimension, not something that changes. We just perceive it as "time" (for unknown reasons).

So in your example your travel is not something you really can decide to take or not take if every action in your brain goes according to QM laws.

If, on the other hand, QM is not correct there is not many other scientific theories left. There are a lot of speculative ideas, but then you might as well believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Re:Yes...

[Reziac]

My understanding is that they claim membership for anyone who ever takes a class, and I'd guess they probably extend that to anyone whose name they can acquire by any means whatever.

Re:Yes...

[bheerssen]

Your second point could be debated. See The Family.

Re:Yes...

[spidercoz]

what you describe is but one of the many untestable hypotheses spun out of QM, besides, I'm not talking about quantum interactions here, and I don't buy quantum determinism anyway

but excellent demonstration of the incompatibilities between QM and GR, kudos

Re:Yes...

[cas2000]

Some catholics have done a lot of good to mankind recently (Mother Theresa of course,

actually, Mother Teresa wasn't all that "good". If anyone bothers to look behind the propaganda and into her actual practices, and the company she kept, there's a lot of evidence to support the belief that she was actually a cruel, sadistic, evil bitch who wanted the dying to suffer horribly because suffering would bring them closer to jesus.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=mother+teresa+cruel+sadistic

(this is not to dispute your argument that some religions/cults are worse than others - Scientology is definitely far worse than Catholicism - but Mother Teresa was *NOT* a good example for your point, she contradicts it)

Re:Yes...

[Hucko]

Okay that is the pivot point, but why were they already waiting? What was the attraction?

Re:Yes...

[Hic sunt leones]

I'm not religious, but I think "support" is a bit of a strong word. The Catholic Church never outright supported it, but turned a blind eye to it. Now whether or not that is worse is up for debate...

Re:Yes...

[Runaway1956]

Not a bad write up - except for one thing. The judge did not renege on a bargain. The plea deal was in place, and Roman was going to be sentenced for one single charge. But, Roman got scared, and ran before the sentencing. In the transcript where Roman pleads guilty, he is made to clearly understand that the judge is not bound by any terms of a plea deal, and that sentencing would depend, in part, on the results of the psychiatric evaluation.
After those few weeks of evaluation, Roman simply decided that he would not face sentencing, and he skipped.

It's great to have millions, and the media at your disposal, so that you can spin a story your way, and make most of the world believe that you have been wronged.

Re:Yes...

[someone1234]

I asked about the difference between "Cult" and "Religion".
Scientology is not a religion, nor a cult. It is a tax evasion scheme.
So, while your note is correct, your answer implies i am not correct.
Christianity started as a cult, grew into religion.
Mostly by the actions of Constantine I who saw the opportunity in it.

Re:Yes...

[LihTox]

The light passes through all the slits UNLESS the wavefunction collapses, in which case the light goes through one specific slit. More generally, a particle's wavefunction is a superposition which describes all possible positions in the Universe, and so if the wavefunction is collapsed, there is a small but ridiculously low probability that it will appear on Mars.

Mind you, as an explanation for virgin birth, I do find quantum mechanics unsatisfying. :) The probabilities are much too low for really strange things to occur. However, quantum mechanics describes a universe in which there is so much we do not know and CANNOT know: the state of a single photon, for instance, is described by a continuous variable, but only one bit of that variable is accessible. That leaves plenty of room in which a Master Programmer can tweak with the Universe without our knowing about it. (And yes, I know about Bell's theorem on hidden variables, but I'm not trying to construct a formal theory of the physics of miracles here, just proposing a philosophical argument.)

Re:Yes...

[F34nor]

I did answer this above and got modded flamebait incorrectly. There is a difference that is a technical definition from abnormal psychology. A Religion is a set of beliefs that without support would seem abnormal but are generally accepted. I said "A delusion shared by many people" slightly to be a dick but it nonetheless totally true. A cult is a group that uses cognitive dissonance to recruit and indoctrinate it's followers. Cognitive dissonance means the difference between what you do and what you believe. The result is that if there is a difference between thought and action thought will change to match action. So if you do something without a really good reason, say money, then you will come to believe that what you did was right or correct. It is easier to alleviate mental pain by changing you believe to match your executed actions of the past.

Cult use this as a stepped system to make you believe more and more and more and more until... "oh my, my actions are controlled by alien space ghosts."

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[multisync]

Please stop this Scientology bashing. We know its a kooky scam, but it sure as hell doesn't belong on this site

Hmmm ...

You don't think a story about a religion that was founded by a science fiction writer, teaches that we are from some other planet and uses something called an "E-meter" to locate and eliminate "engrams" in its followers belongs on Slashdot?

I must be new here.

I know, I know!

[RJBeery]

The Religion of Anthropogenic Global Warming...! :)

Re:I know, I know!

[Sebilrazen]

The Religion of Anthropogenic Global Exothermia...! :)

As a member of R.A.G.E. I fixed that for you.

Re:I know, I know!

[sorak]

The Religion of Anthropogenic Global Warming...! :)

Right, because you never hear criticism of that!

Ah My Homeland

[BJ_Covert_Action]

As a Californian I wonder how much interest this is going to garner in my home state regarding the abuses of Scientology. On the one hand, my state is populated with pipe dreamers, smoked out idealists, flower children, hippy nutjobs, and all sorts of other forms of extreme liberalism. On the other hand, we have very rich communities like Hollywood, the OC, and Roseville. We also, apparently, have enough orthodox, classic right wingers that we voted down legalizing gay marriage recently. We have farmers. We have students. We have programmers. We have ranchers. We have movie stars. We have one of the most diverse culture mixtures in the world I bet. That's part of why I love it here...

Of course, along with that diversity is an unfathomable tolerance for some particularly poignant cases of stupidity...like our state budget. There is no doubt that the strong and vocal religious groups here in California would raise exception and a helluva kerfuffle over their church being towed to court for slavery. But I wonder if any of those groups see a case regarding Scientology as a threat. After all sometimes the most belligerent opposition to one religion comes from another religion. I have seen folks in Fawkes masks walking around my local famer's market protesting Scientology. However, I have also had Scientologists try to recruit me both in my home town and when I wander the rest of the state. So this will certainly be an interesting case to watch. I hope it garners some attention and noise in this state and, perhaps, even in our country. Exposing Scientology for the cult and crime syndicate it is certainly is, in my opinion, a righteous cause....

Well if there's one thing we Californians know how to do, its garner attention and make some noise. I'm gonna go pop some popcorn...

Re:Ah My Homeland

[CodeBuster]

We also, apparently, have enough orthodox, classic right wingers that we voted down legalizing gay marriage recently

It was voted down because the left failed to take into account that a large percentage of the immigrants now living in California come from Mexico and Latin America where Catholicism, which views marriage as a sacrament and takes a dim view on homosexuality, is very strongly entrenched. So while these immigrants are typically a reliable constituency for the left, they are NOT liberal when it comes to issues of sexuality or marriage. The left miscalculated their support for gay marriage in California because they took those immigrants' votes for granted. In fact, it is likely that gay marriage will not happen any time soon in California because the number of immigrants from the aforementioned countries, as a percentage of the population, is only going to increase in the years to come.

Re:Ah My Homeland

[phantomcircuit]

I'm guessing zero.

I'm currently in San Francisco and I can tell you that people in cali have a strong affinity for finding crazy ass conspiracies everywhere except where a conspiracy actually exists.

Honestly the stupidity of the average person here is astonishing.

Re:Ah My Homeland

[BJ_Covert_Action]

I'm currently in San Francisco and I can tell you that people in cali have a strong affinity for finding crazy ass conspiracies everywhere except where a conspiracy actually exists.

Wait, wait, wait, I thought that The Shi were already hard at work battling The Hubologists ... I mean ... The 'Scientologists' in your town...

Re:Ah My Homeland

[dbIII]

Exposing Scientology for the cult and crime syndicate it is

The tricky bit is seperating the two things in peoples heads, if Scientology is a religeous cult then so was the IRA. This scam is so bad it actually gets credibility when they fool people into thinking they are a cult and not just a bizzare twist of organised crime.

Re:Ah My Homeland

[G-Man]

Furthermore, blacks are generally socially conservative (with Southern Baptists replacing Catholics in this case), and their higher turnout to vote for Obama also brought in more votes against gay marriage. It was actually the high turnout of hispanics and blacks that doomed gay marriage, but folks find it much easier to direct their ire at a few Mormons.

Re:Ah My Homeland

[Fulcrum of Evil]

folks find it much easier to direct their ire at a few Mormons.

No, the ire was properly directed: the LDS church, based in utah, using money collected, i assume, as part of church operations, bankrolled a campaign to kill prop 8 in another state (cali). This is a church taking an active position in politics, which should never be allowed.

Re:Ah My Homeland

[MightyMartian]

Well, I think the First Amendment most certainly should allow the Church of Mormon to do this. What should happen, however, is the minute they raise money for explicitly political ends, they should lose their tax-exempt status with the IRS.

Re:Ah My Homeland

[Fulcrum of Evil]

well, sure. If they lost their tax exempt status for political campaigning (different from your statement, sure), that'd be just fine. Just like that bishop or whomever that told some kennedy to stop taking communion because of his stance on abortion - remove the tax exempt status for the church from that state.

Re:Ah My Homeland

[Reziac]

I'd generalize it even further: every cent that isn't directly spent on "good works" should be taxed. This would get rid of tax cheating conspiracies like Co$ and H$U$.

Re:Ah My Homeland

[Rakarra]

It was voted down because the left failed to take into account that a large percentage of the immigrants now living in California come from Mexico and Latin America where Catholicism, which views marriage as a sacrament and takes a dim view on homosexuality, is very strongly entrenched.

In addition, the African-American community heavily voted against Prop 8. They turned out in record numbers, far greater than normal, to vote for Barack Obama for President.

So the election of Obama, while great for the left, also helped to kill gay marriage in California. The ironing is delicious.

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[dirk]

Well, if you are on Verizon FiOS, then your internet will get cut because it's off-topic!

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does it have to be about something online to be of relevance to nerds?

The war between Scientology vs. The Internet has been going on pretty much since there was an Internet.

The Co$ practically invented the Hipcrime sporgery attack technique that still plagues USENET to this day. It was directly responsible for taking down the world's first anonymous remailer (anon.penet.fi) in 1996, and compromised every user of that service. Its shill legislator got his name stamped onto the Mickey Mouse Protection Act in 1998.

It has been a consistent and implacable foe of the free exchange of information on the Internet for the better part of 20 years, and it will not stop until it - either the Cult or the Internet - ceases to exist in its current form. Anything that could deplete the cult's financial reserves is a priori a good thing for Your Rights Online, and anything that the cult wants is a priori a threat to Your Rights Online.

Asking "What does the Co$ have to do with YRO?" is like asking "What does NSA have to do with surveillance?" Both are threats to your ability to speak freely. NSA may break the law from time to time, but for all we bitch about it, at least it acknowledges the existence of legal restrictions on its ability to carry out its mission. Co$ doesn't even recognize the concept of law, except as a means of filing strategic lawsuits against public participation, or as a means to otherwise harass its critics.

ok

[JeanBaptiste]

link 1
link 2
link 3

"If you want to control your child, simply break him into complete apathy and he'll be as obedient as any hypnotized half-wit. If you want to know how to control him, get a book on dog training, name the child Rex and teach him first to "fetch" and then to "sit up" and then to bark for his food. You can train a child that way. Sure you can. But it's your hard luck if he turns out to be a blood-letter. Only don't be half-hearted about it. Simply TRAIN him. "Speak, Roger!" "Lie down!" "Roll over!" Of course, you'll have a hard time of it. This - a slight oversight - is a human being. You'd better charge right in and do what you can to break him into apathy quickly. A club is best. Tying him in a closet without food for a few days is fairly successful. The best recommended tactic, however, is simply to use a straight jacket and muffs on him until he is docile and imbecilic. I'm warning you that it's going to be tough; it will be tough because Man became king of the beasts only because he couldn't as a species be licked. He doesn't easily go into an obedient apathy like dogs do. Men own dogs because men are self-determined and dogs aren't. --Official church documents

I got nothing better going on.

Re:ok

[JeanBaptiste]

See the thing is that I really don't care. I didn't look for a specific passage, I just grabbed one at random. I really don't care to spend much time on it. Next time I'll find something about the aliens or thetans or whatever. That one happened to already be in text format so I just copied it. I didn't feel like looking at the PDFs and transcribing it to text.

and here I am responding to a scientology anonymous coward. well back to CoD-MW2.

Re:ok

[LanMan04]

Wow, that makes me sick to my stomach. Literally.

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[MightyMartian]

I think the bad reputation marks against Scientology are getting a lot of press, but in defense of the poor guy getting beat up, are there any good things to say about Scientology?

That's really hard, because the benefits of most religions are often highly subjective. The only defense I can think of is that they could be a lot worse (ie. Jonestown, Heaven's Gate), and they certainly aren't worse than the TV evangelist types who also rake in obscene amounts of money from the True Believers.

I remember one article I read on them stated that their biggest problem is their intense paranoia of the outside world. A lot of the reasons they've done some of the nasty things they've done (like infiltrating Ontario government offices in the 1970s) are ill-informed and misjudged attempts at security.

L. Ron Hubbard was most certainly a con artist, but he was also a bit of a paranoid type, not to mention the self-aggrandizing that he got out of a lot of the cloak-and-dagger bullshit. The problem for $cientologists after him is that I think a lot of them didn't get the joke. In short, their inheritors of L. Ron's madness, but in a more pure and fanatical form.

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[confused one]

So, what you're saying is this thread will be shut down an.....

Tom Cruise & Scientology:

[stakovahflow]

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/scientolulz (there's my two cents... I'm out. :)

Re:Tom Cruise & Scientology:

[MsGeek]

That Flash animation is full of WIN. Epic WIN.

Gold Base (Gilman Springs, CA)

[Ohio Calvinist]

I live near this facility (map/image) and it looks more like a gated-resort community than anything. I haven't seen any razor wire, but there are high fences and access is controlled through a gate, and there are cameras on the road and on the fence. For the interested, there is a wiki page that strikes me as being pretty accurate and NPOV.

Re:Gold Base (Gilman Springs, CA)

[TheHawke]

Barb wire can be laced just under the top of the wall, and be observant of any narrow trails leading up to and around the inside perimeter of the wall.

I'd suggest that you open your eyes further more, look for odd things that appear out of place.

Re:Gold Base (Gilman Springs, CA)

[Anonymous Coward]

That is so cool - followed your link to Gold Base then switched to Google street view. At the corner of their property I saw a small compound with a cement block building - surrounded by a barbed-wire fence facing inward!

Re:Gold Base (Gilman Springs, CA)

[Anonymous Coward]

and it looks more like a gated-resort community than anything. I haven't seen any razor wire, but there are high fences and access is controlled through a gate, and there are cameras on the road and on the fence.

It depends where you look. Here is a collection of photos of various parts of the Gold Base security. From what I've been able to make out, it sounds like the blade fences (not razor wire) are concentrated in the north-east part of the base, around where their detention facilities are thought to be.

Re:Gold Base (Gilman Springs, CA)

[Buelldozer]

Is that a prison to the south surrounded by Sublette Road? Because that's sure as heck what it looks like! It follows all the classic prison design rules.

Re:Gold Base (Gilman Springs, CA)

[Anonymous Coward]

I grew up in scn and spent a year in the sea org. If you are in good standing you are relatively free to come and go, but if they have any inkling that you might be contemplating doing a runner, they will keep you under lock and key. I was physically chased and restrained from leaving on one occasion. Growing up, seeing sea org members being kept under 24 hour guard, sometimes for weeks was not unusual enough to cause any alarm for a child who had grown up under that mentality.

There are ways to leave. It's called routing out. A process that is part forced scn auditing and part physical labour. I've seen some people spend upwards of 6 months routing out. Failing to comply with this process and leaving anyway (which could entail escaping if they are already on to you, or just slipping away if you've been smart enough to keep your disgruntledness to yourself) will result in excommunication with it's attendant effects on your eternity (scientologists are very precious about their eternities which they buy from the church) and more importantly on your closest family members' willingless to stay in contact with you.

Re:Gold Base (Gilman Springs, CA)

[doug141]

surrounded by a barbed-wire fence facing inward!

It's common for barbed wire fences to be installed wrong, just look around businesses in your neighborhood. I don't know if it's plain ignorance, or a desire to put the fence at the limit of the property and remain in one's airspace, or both. A look at the nature of the businesses doing this makes it clear it's not always a nefarious desire to keep people in.

Re:Gold Base (Gilman Springs, CA)

[BobMcD]

I clicked, looking for a smoking gun, but I don't think this is it:

1) I can't tell that it is facing inward. How can you tell?

2) It is clearly meant for storage, with little room for forced labor around it. Unless it is perhaps covering an entrance to something underground. Otherwise, the fence is likely to prevent theft.

3) It reminds me a lot of a communications building such as might house a telephone switch.

What are you seeing that I'm not?

No difference than the Christian cult

[mlawrence]

My parents forced me to go to church every week, then sunday school, and during the week I would be forced to work as an altar boy for no pay. All the time I was brainwashed with repetitive prayers and actions. A cult is a cult is a cult. It doesn't matter that here in North America we tend to be fond of a particular one.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[Literaphile]

My parents forced me to go to church every week, then sunday school, and during the week I would be forced to work as an altar boy for no pay. All the time I was brainwashed with repetitive prayers and actions. A cult is a cult is a cult. It doesn't matter that here in North America we tend to be fond of a particular one.

That's a very poor argument. You can swap out "church" for almost any other childhood activity. For example, soccer:

My parents forced me to go to soccer every week and play a game on saturday, and during the week I would be forced to go to soccer practice for no pay. All the time I was brainwashed with repetitive stretches and drills.

In other words, equating Sunday school and being an altar boy to doing film editing production is silly. The former are childhood activities, not jobs. But I suppose most Slashdotters take any opportunity to bash Christianity (note: I am not a Christian).

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[Just Some Guy]

Yeah, my parents had me in church a lot as a kid. As an adult, I pretty much stopped going. Know what? My mom still likes me and I still have plenty of friends who go to church, and as far as I know none of them have shunned me as a pariah. I don't think you can really give a group "cult" status when there's no penalty for leaving and they're still nice to you afterward.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[Literaphile]

A cult by definition is a religious group - it's silly for you to equate a religious activity with a sports activity.

A cult is a religious group, but a religious group is not necessarily a cult. If all 'A's are 'B's, all 'B's are not necessarily 'A's. As another poster mentioned, Christianity is far from a cult. Yes, it has rituals, as does any religion. But rituals do not make a cult. You're free to leave the Christian church at any time. Blame your parents for keeping you in church as a kid, just as a kid who doesn't like soccer might blame his parents for keeping him in the sport against his will.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[el3mentary]

You've clearly never been to a football game. (Soccer for you Yanks)

Trust me, over here for a huge number of people football is a religion.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[mlawrence]

By definition, Christianity is a cult. You are comparing apples to oranges. No where does it say the definition of a cult is an organization that makes it difficult to leave. You comparing your sports "repetitive stretches and drills" to religious activities designed to brainwash is silly, and not worth my time.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[fermion]

This is not the greatest example, but the element of truth is there. Many people want to separate the church of scientology from mainstream religions because the scientology people highlight so much of the corruption inherent in the system. For instance, the catholic church has clearly been abusing boys for a very long time. We recently saw a report saying some of the irish church and police knew this to be true,

We now have mega churches controlled by a single family, not owned by the congregation. In such cases, it is very unclear how much of the volunteer work benefits the family, not the church, and how much is actually church related. We have profit making bookstores in location that are supposed to on tax exempt property. We have no transparency, and so do not know how many so-called holy people are, for all practical intents and purposes, enslaving congregants for personal gain. Or how many continue to demand sexual favors.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[yoshi_mon]

Bullshit. Your soccer camp did not tell you how to live other than to run a lot. Your soccer camp did not tell you were were going to hell if you did something wrong 'in the eyes of god'. Your argument is so full of shit and had I mod points you'd be -1. Someone please do such.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[couchslug]

"That's a very poor argument. You can swap out "church" for almost any other childhood activity. For example, soccer:"

A soccer coach has less scope for compelling sodomy than does a priest representing an imaginary celestial friend.

BTW, soccer coaches aren't paying hundreds of millions of dollars in pedophilia settlement money.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19762878/

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/04/us/boston-archbishop-will-sell-residence-for-abuse-payout.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4655265.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4147431.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3872083.stm

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/29/us/catholic-priest-who-aids-church-sexual-abuse-victims-loses-job-military-chaplain.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/aug/17/religion.childprotection

http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/scandal/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/aug/17/religion.childprotection

Too bad this doesn't happen more often:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/24/geoghan/index.html

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[Crypto Gnome]

It doesn't matter that here in North America we tend to be fond of a particular one.

What do you mean "we", kemosabe?

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[MightyMartian]

By what definition is Christianity a cult? Please enlighten me here, but a religion that encompasses over a fifth of the world's population could hardly be called a cult, unless you invent your own private definitions.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[Jason Levine]

Ok. How about: Scientology heavily restricts access to their "holy works" even to members and maintains strict copyright control over them to the point of threatening lawsuits against people who post copies of their "holy works."

Now let's try substituting Christianity or Judaism. Here's a translation of the Jewish bible: http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0101.htm (Copyright is claimed over the HTML, but it's still given out pretty freely.) Here's a Christian version of the same thing: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+1&version=NIV

I don't see any lawsuits demanding that these online bibles be taken down because someone church owns the copyrights on them. If anything, the churches/temples would *want* you to read their holy books. Walk into any Jewish bookstore and ask for a set of Art Scroll texts (that publisher is highly regarded) and you won't be asked to prove your "Judaism level" (as if there were such a thing). You won't even be required to be Jewish. You could then take those books and show them to a dozen people and no temple would file suit or come knocking at your door to seize your "forbidden knowledge."

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[Moridin42]

You were doing okay until you went to "brainwashed by repetitive stretches and drills" ..

Because you weren't. You were physically conditioned by them, but brainwashed not so much.

Your coach wasn't telling you that some of you stretchers were good, some of you were bad, and little Timmy in the back is the anti-Pele because he can't half-volley from 18.
Soccer practice teaches you about, surprisingly, soccer. If you learn something about yourself, interacting with other people, or how to foul while the ref isn't looking then great. But it wasn't the intent of soccer practice. Might have been the intent of your parents in making you go but not the intent of the drills. Religion, by contrast, teaches you about behavior. Not just in church (or temple, mosque, synagogue, sylvan clearing, laboratory) but every day you live, everywhere you go.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[flak89]

"That's a very poor argument. You can swap out "church" for almost any other childhood activity. For example, soccer:"

A soccer coach has less scope for compelling sodomy than does a priest representing an imaginary celestial friend.

[...]

If we isolate variables, for all setbacks being equal for church and soccer (abuses, brainwashing, training), maybe soccer teach tactics, teamwork and make you healthy. I don't know what is the 'altar boy experience' is giving as an advantage in this context.

BTW, soccer coaches aren't paying hundreds of millions of dollars in pedophilia settlement money.

But adult soccer players may be payed millions of dollar! Not adult altar boy.

PS: I am no altar boy nor a soccer player...

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[FTWinston]

I certainly know people who treat soccer like a religious activity - complete with its own crusades and everything.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[Schadrach]

So, from your point of view, what differentiates a "cult" is negative consequences for leaving?

Doesn't that mean that Christianity *was* a cult for a very, very long time, and only ceased being a cult when they were large enough that general social pressure combined with indoctrination at a young age were enough to maintain their numbers?

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[DaveV1.0]

Please list in detail the qualities of and the differences between a cult and a religion.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[mlawrence]

Go look in any dictionary. Popularity has nothing to do with the definition. 1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies. 2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers 3. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc. People are used to hearing the word "cult" when describing a religion other than their own, but the term applies to any religion, including Christianity. Unless you have your own private dictionary.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[mlawrence]

I don't think there any any differences.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[BobMcD]

Bullshit on your bullshit. Junior sports preaches all sorts of things - diet, abstinence, exercise, fitness, teamwork, humility, etc, etc, etc

None of these are intrinsic to success in the sport, as is evidenced by just about any of them on the professional level.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[BobMcD]

You're free to leave the Christian church at any time.

This.

Also, you don't have to pay a membership fee to access the materials, and are more than free to start up your own version of the organization.

Christian cults could exist, to be sure, but this is not the design of 'Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature', and should be the exception rather than the rule.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[rcastro0]

"Your coach wasn't telling you that some of you stretchers were good, some of you were bad, and little Timmy in the back is the anti-Pele because he can't half-volley from 18."

LOL

Wish I could mod you up as funny.

Re:No difference than the Christian cult

[rcastro0]

Seems to me you are not working from a definition of a cult, and trying to see if it differentiates Judaico-Christian mainstream religious groups from Scientology. Rather, you are going in the oppostite direction: looking at scientology, trying to find how it is different, and then creating a definition of "cult" based on that.

If you are going to procede like that, might as well say that "Scientology is based on the works of contemporary writer L. Ron Hubbard, while Judaico Christian religions are based on texts which are over 1,000 years old". Or any of several trivial observations like that. But you will be missing the point. Go look at the definition of cult in the dictionary. It has nothing to do with how popular/widespread a religion is, or how old the texts are, or how possessive they are with said texts/revelations.

I Was Surprised

[eldavojohn]

Was this a surprise to anyone?

As the submitter, yeah I have to admit it kind of was. This is a really unique opportunity for a case against CoS because normally the cases come from outsiders.

Lindstein was eight years old and says he was forced to work for 16 years. He was removed from school at age 12. Now, if you were removed from school at age 12, you probably aren't very well suited for a high paying job. So you have someone who's lost much of their youth to Scientology and has the motivation to see this suit through to the end.

You see, when you sue or slander Scientology, you might not realize what you're getting yourself into. People end up doing jail for posting verbal attacks on Scientology online. To quote the late L. Ron Hubbard on his policy:

This is the correct procedure: Spot who is attacking us. Start investigating them promptly for felonies or worse using our own professionals, not outside agencies. Double curve our reply by saying we welcome an investigation of them. Start feeding lurid, blood sex crime actual evidence on the attackers to the press. Don't ever tamely submit to an investigation of us. Make it rough, rough on attackers all the way. * "Attacks on Scientology" (25 February 1966)

That's what you're dealing with. That's what Lindstein has in his future. He probably knows it, his lawyer probably knows it. But he will soon be subjected to character assassination, harassment of just barely legal amounts, indirect threats and the same for any family he may have.

So yeah, I'm a pleasantly surprised that such an opportune individual has stepped forward to speak and let us know what Scientology is. Because in so many other cases, the individual has been silenced one way or another. And scientology has refined it's processes to force its members quiet and they have the resources and legal representation to make magic happen in the courts.

I hope Lindstein is telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I wish him the best of luck in the courtroom and for justice to be brought against those who forced him into labor and stripped him of his right to knowledge.

Re:I Was Surprised

[b4upoo]

I would think that if retaliation is likely that the authorities can issue him a different identity so that he can live as usual during the case. They must protect him if there is a real threat.

Re:I Was Surprised

[Culture20]

I hope Lindstein is telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

I hope he's lying, and that they really aren't that terrible. But if they are, CoS will soon have its own Waco.

Re:I Was Surprised

[Thagg]

They're really that terrible. Sorry.

The very first thing that happens when you're brought into Scientology is that they convince you that all that money you're spending on doctors is wasted, that Scientology will fix everything. Some people with actual life-threatening problems don't survive this phase. Doesn't bother Scientology a bit, though.

Re:I Was Surprised

[DreadPiratePizz]

I'm afraid this seems in line with what I've heard about them in the past. The book L ROn Hubbard: Messiah or Madman? details child and slave labor on the sea orgs, and forced labor such as this case. This is not new at all.

Re:I Was Surprised

[Culture20]

There's is nothing bad about that prospect except the possibility of government casualties.

And all of the Church's slaves. I'm sure there's some "kill all believers" doomsday scenario that L Ron set up for when the Feds come (it would keep the head honchos on their toes).

Re:I Was Surprised

[nog_lorp]

Just a minor point about having job skills:
In allegation 5, where he was working for $50 hours a week -
he was working 'digitally restoring films' which
'would normally cost $400,000' per film to restore.

I bet that is a marketable job skill! But I agree that CoS is evil and all that.
But for me that is easy, because I think anything that claims to be a religion (accurately or not)
is probably mostly evil in the end, no matter the good intents of the people who started/practice it.

I, personally, attended a small private elementary school that was run by a family who were
CoS members (atleast, some sort of practicing Scientology, I assume it was mainline). For a long
time various L. Ron Hubbard texts were in the curriculum - Learning How to Learn was one I
remember pretty distinctly. The most I got from it was that, according to Hubbard, if you lost focus
mid-page while reading, it meant you had not understood a word or concept earlier in the page.
This principle works pretty well sometimes, even if it just helps you get back into the frame of reference.
Other than that, I just remember that proficient use of a dictionary was heavily emphasized, including
memorizing the alphabet backwards in order to quickly do an approximate binary search to your word.

But from what I heard years later, there was a lawsuit and all Hubbard texts were removed from the
curriculum. The school seems to be doing well.

Re:I Was Surprised

[StarWreck]

Scientology was just supposed to be another, run-of-the-mill, suicide cult like Jim Jones in the Jonestown massacre or The Heaven's Gate cult... but Hubbard died from a drug overdose before he got to kill everyone. So, now it just wanders along its merry way with the sole purpose of making as much money as possible for the sole benefit of David Miscavige.

Re:I Was Surprised

[sco_is_for_babies]

I hope Lindstein is telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

So help me Xenu

Re:I Was Surprised

[roguetrick]

Yeah, many forms of "alternative" medicine(homeopathy, christian science) do the same shit. I have yet to see people protesting those homeopathy wackos. That is not to say I think they should stop protesting Scientology, I'd just say that particular evil is pretty common.
http://whatstheharm.net/index.html

Re:I Was Surprised

[Rakarra]

You see, when you sue or slander Scientology, you might not realize what you're getting yourself into. People end up doing jail for posting verbal attacks on Scientology online. ...

That's what you're dealing with. That's what Lindstein has in his future. He probably knows it, his lawyer probably knows it. But he will soon be subjected to character assassination, harassment of just barely legal amounts, indirect threats and the same for any family he may have.

I think most people also don't realize just how much worse a situation Lindstein is in. For non-Scientologists, the Church really has to work to try to dig up skeletons in the closet, to figure out just what could possibly embarrass and discredit you. But for ex-Scientologists, it's much worse, because they already know everything about you. You see, confession is part of the religion. That's hardly abnormal, but the difference is that you must confess something new. And you have to confess. So you'll be in a room with a dozen people screaming at you to confess some past sin. Something. And then that information is written down. Over the years they wring everything out of you, and it's all documented. Then when you turn against the church later in life, that information is released. Did you ever have a romantic affair with a fellow staffer? That will come out. Maybe when you were really young you curiously touched the family pet when he was humping your leg? Oh, you bet that will be shown. Everyone has something that they're not proud of that they don't want anyone to know. And the church will have confessionals for all of it. Of course they don't WANT to do this. " Yingling and Davis said the church doesn't relish using documents from ethics files. But after the four defectors spoke out against Miscavige, the lawyer and spokesman said they had no choice." That statement and others can be found from the amazing St. Petersburg Times series on Scientology: http://www.tampabay.com/news/article1012148.ece. Utterly amazing.

So yeah, Lindstein is in for a rough time.

Re:I Was Surprised

[mark-t]

So what happens when one doesn't spend any money on doctors because they live in a nation that provides free health care through normal taxation?

Or do they recommend that one not pay taxes?

Re:I Was Surprised

[Fred_A]

Some people with actual life-threatening problems don't survive this phase. Doesn't bother Scientology a bit, though.

It doesn't bother them *if* their mark lives long enough to sign the cheques. Otherwise they know they're wasting valuable time.
The COS isn't a charity.

Re:I Was Surprised

[BobMcD]

Scientology attack plan, step 1:

Get over your guilt. Take out a billboard of your past crimes and expose them all yourself.

Takes a lot of that power away. Plus, since you've been through the auditing, you know everything they have written down, don't you?

Re:I Was Surprised

[Rakarra]

Plus, since you've been through the auditing, you know everything they have written down, don't you?

I wonder how many people make up stuff to confess just so they can get out of that torture. Hey, it's all forgiven anyway, right?

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[Vindicator9000]

Because it's a common tactic used by Scientologists in all negatively-slanted Scientology stories.

Look around for COS stories on the internet, and read the comments. You'll find some derivation of that exact comment over and over in every single one of them.

Fighting Cults: Rick Ross

[reporter]

If you know anyone who is trapped -- physically or mentally -- inside a cult like the Church of Scientology, then please contact Rick Ross. The life of the victim may depend on your getting Ross' help as soon as possible.

This isn't the first time

[smellsofbikes]

It sounds like Lindstein was caught in the Rehabilitation Project Force program, which is where Scientology dissidents are placed until they get better, where 'better' is defined by the people who put them there. Gold Base is by no means the only such place people are kept: the first RPF people were on ships, cleaning out the sewage systems by hand. Sort of hard to call the police when you're being held on a ship in international waters...

Those are not mainstream

[SuperKendall]

Dude - there are (and were) cults out in the US today that do much, much worse.

Yes there are, but nothing on the scale of Scientology. The bigger the group the bigger the target, the harder to keep secrets.

That's what I mean by being surprised. A local compound in one city? Zero information coming out of that would surprise me. But again, for something as large and well known as scientology... it is odd to me that this has not come forward before and is being practiced at all. They don't need to do this after all, they are making money hand over fist as it is.

Re:Those are not mainstream

[Anonymous Coward]

People have known about the forced servitude of scientology for a long time. Its just that this is perhaps the first time anyone has had the combination of resources and bravery to stand up against it. And this is an example of bravery, some people that speak out against scientology have found themselves mysteriously dead.

Re:Those are not mainstream

[shaunbr]

Actually, the Moonies own the Washington Times -- still pretty big, but not nearly as big as the Post.

Re:Those are not mainstream

[Skuld-Chan]

Its not like no-one knew about Scientology work camps - some german documentary team went out to go visit it and got stopped by a bunch of armed men (this was in the early 90's) - wish I could remember the title.

Re:Those are not mainstream

[lennier]

"The bigger the group the bigger the target, the harder to keep secrets."

That's why it's not a secret. www.xenu.net have covered the story for over a decade. Did you try Googling?

Re:Those are not mainstream

[lennier]

Washington Times, yes. And also a private fleet of submarines. Or did he flick them on to North Korea?

http://www.albionmonitor.com/9801a/darkmoon.html

Moon is pretty much a James Bond villain. It's a funny old world eh!

Re:Those are not mainstream

[Hucko]

Identification?

Re:Those are not mainstream

[tsa]

I tried to find the compound on Google Maps, but Hemet is quite a big place so there's a lot of ground to search around it. You should be able to see the barbed wire in Satellite view. I couldn't find it though.

Re:Those are not mainstream

[Anonymous Coward]

http://maps.google.com/maps?t=k&q=33.741944,-116.983056&ie=UTF8&ll=33.83392,-116.987947&spn=0.008056,0.016437&z=17&layer=c&cbll=33.833863,-116.987863&panoid=ScDakaAc53_lq7Q0y2gx2w&cbp=12,58.1,,0,3.97

Re:Those are not mainstream

[tsa]

Thanks! I had expected some desolate area with some small buildings on it, but apparently it's not that bad. The scientologists obviously don't want to make themselves too conspicuous by building what I had in mind.

Re:Those are not mainstream

[fractoid]

Someone's been reading too much Dan Brown.

The Da Vinci Code has annoyed me ever since it was pointed out to me (which it shouldn't have had to have been, in retrospect) that calling it the 'Da Vinci Code' would be like writing a book about a code developed by Leonard of Quirm and calling it "The Of Quirm Code".

Re:Those are not mainstream

[Toonol]

I am suspicious. I don't think your error was an error at all.

Wow, you just exude Tom Cruise level craziness.

Re:Those are not mainstream

[jandersen]

That's what I mean by being surprised.

That isn't what surprises me - what I find surprising is that it has taken so long for the system in America to take action against what is very obviously a criminal organisation. I would really like to understand why.

Re:Those are not mainstream

[niktemadur]

Actually, the Moonies own the Washington Times -- still pretty big, but not nearly as big as the Post.

The Times has approximately 12% of the circulation of the Post.
Simultaneously, the Times also enjoys a microscopic, maybe even subatomic fraction, of the Post's prestige and credibility.
The numbers are not surprising, as the Times is for the printed word as Clear Channel is for radio, Faux for cable news.

In the Wikipedia article, there is a quote on the Times by historian Thomas Frank, published in an essay for Harper's Magazine. Here's what Frank had to say:

There is even a daily newspaper—the Washington Times—published strictly for the movement’s benefit, a propaganda sheet whose distortions are so obvious and so alien that it puts one in mind of those official party organs one encounters when traveling in authoritarian countries.

Tellingly, the newspaper-reading target audience for this sort of manure is much, much lower than in radio and television.
Those damned Right Coast intellectual elites!

Re:Those are not mainstream

[catman]

And around there was this: http://www.lermanet.com/cos/enggulag.html

Re:Those are not mainstream

[Loko Draucarn]

I believe it's the Washington Times that they own, Not the Washington Post.

Re:Those are not mainstream

[spidercoz]

great place to lay siege to, get up on the adjacent hills and light 'em up

Re:Those are not mainstream

[spidercoz]

I would really like to understand why.

bribery, extortion, intimidation; the usual

Re:Those are not mainstream

[operagost]

The numbers are not surprising, as the Times is for the printed word as Clear Channel is for radio, Faux for cable news.

Which means: the left hates them.

Re:Those are not mainstream

[Bourbonium]

Look, it took almost a hundred years for the courts in Ireland to finally investigate the Catholic Church, and specifically the Christian Brothers organization, which just last week admitted to having known for decades about well-documented cases of child molestation, flogging, child slavery and horrible physical abuse at the hands of priests in their midst all through the 20th century (and probably earlier, but those victims are long dead). The church leaders knew about it and covered it up. It took some brave people to sue them and shame them in public to bring this out into the open. Now, the Christian Brothers have agreed to pay over $240,000,000 in damages to the surviving plaintiffs (some of which are now in their seventies and retired) to compensate them for the abuse they suffered as children.

Go to Netflix and rent "The Magdalene Sisters" for an eye-opening expose of what the church has done to children for many, many years. The film is fictitious, but based upon actual accounts of what went on in the Magdalene Asylums, as admitted by a number of nuns who left the order and wrote confessions about them.

The Church of Scientology is an evil organization, but they take inspiration from cults that are much older, and far more skillful at hiding their evil and masquerading themselves as "divinely ordained to save mankind." Too many people in this sick world are as stupid as cattle, and willing to believe any nonsense someone in authority spouts into their ears, especially when they are impressionable children. The fact that they continue to believe this garbage into their adulthood is a scathing indictment of our broken educational system.

Re:Those are not mainstream

[conureman]

They also own a big chunk of our fishing fleet, and the New Yorker Hotel, where Nicola Tesla spent his last years. I find this strangely disturbing.
That paper of theirs is like FOX News; Pretty hard to stomach. They played a not insignificant role in the "Reagan Revolution" and the way the Ku Klux Kristians took over the Republican Party. My Uncle John used to brag about the millions that Moon was investing in getting the "Right People" elected. (John's a hard-core Moonie, and fan of Michael Savage and Rush Limbaugh; A Fascist.)

how is that different from old mining towns?

[ChipMonk]

"You load sixteen tons, and what do you get?
Another day older and deeper in debt.
Saint Peter, don'tcha call me 'cause I can't go,
I owe my soul to the company store."

That song reflected the reality of tens of thousands of people in Appalachia.

Re:how is that different from old mining towns?

[Tiger4]

True, but they were not bound to work for The Man, except that no other opportunity presented itself.

At least in theory, they could walk away from the mine, or farm or whatever with no legal penalty or restriction, as long as they paid their debts. Since the only way to make money was to work for the guy you owed money to, you were stuck, morally. But there wasn't a fence holding you back.

Re:how is that different from old mining towns?

[MBCook]

Nope. Debtor's prison, for one. And since the camps were the town, they usually controlled law enforcement. If you wanted out, you probably had to sneak out and get FAR away before you were found. Maybe they wouldn't kill you, maybe they would. You were starting fights and resisting arrest after all. They had to do it, for public safety.

Who knows what they'd do to your family if you left them behind.

They were effectively slave camps. Just because they didn't have people on guard tower's with shotguns doesn't mean they weren't.

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[sorak]

Umm...

Hitler wasn't a scientologist?

Oh, my, a Reverse Godwin! Ladies and Gentlemen, I think we have our winner.

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[relaxinparadise]

Most organized religions have some sort of charitable causes. Doesn't Scientology have any? Dianetics for the poor? I have a hard time believing that all Scientologists are evil people trying to take over the world.

Congratulations Scientology...

[Null Perception]

...you are now officially a religion.

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[greywire]

I think most nerds are interested in a lot of topics beyond computers, sci-fi and anime. Thats the only reason needed. News for Nerds, stuff that matters... thats potentially everything, but with a nerd bias.

In other words, intelligent news.

If you want news about a cute doggy that's adopted a litter of kitty cats, then watch TV. If you want news about a study of inter-species social interactions, read slashdot.

You're all over comlicating these things.

[ComputerGeek01]

You know what forget this 'slavery' crap. He was 8 when he started, it's on page 2 people in black and white. http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/MinorsSummaryCharts.pdf Although I have no idea how the statute of limitations applies for this individual I would guess that they are doing the same crap to other kids.

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[nstlgc]

I think http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_versus_the_Internet answers your question.

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[MightyMartian]

I think they've tried it a few times (I know some volunteers were in New Orleans after Katrina), but as an actual charitable organization, no, $cientology doesn't do charities in the way you'll find many churches, mosques and the like do.

Re:Fighting Cults: Rick Ross

[Anonymous Coward]

What are his qualifications, beyond "has been fighting Scientology & cults" long enough to be a self-titled expert? On the website I see no educational background, no references I can talk to first.

CoS "base" in Colorado

[macraig]

I once had the opportunity to read part of the diary of a teenage girl who had been at a Scientology "Base" in Colorado. I don't recall the name of it, or even whether she mentioned it by name (this was 20 years ago). The disruptive, corruptive effects her involvement with this Base and the CoS had on her state of mind were obvious from what she wrote. While I don't recall whether she described any physical enslavement, the mental enslavement was apparent.

Why they're still getting away with it mystifies me; pretty much everyone now knows what they're doing and how they're doing it.

Re:CoS "base" in Colorado

[mathx314]

Christians, for the most part, don't rape young boys, so stop lumping them all together. According to Wikipedia, 76% of the US population identifies as Christian. Do you really believe that 76% of Christians rape young boys? Yes, it does happen sometimes. When it comes to light, though, those responsible have been brought to justice. That hasn't happened yet for Scientology's crimes.

Re:CoS "base" in Colorado

[couchslug]

"When it comes to light, though, those responsible have been brought to justice."

Sometimes, when they aren't reshuffled by Church leadership as was done by the Catholic Church in many cases.

Re:CoS "base" in Colorado

[Scrameustache]

Christians rape young boys? Yes, it does happen sometimes. When it comes to light, though, those responsible have been brought to justice. That hasn't happened yet for Scientology's crimes.

The horrible bi is the "when it comes to light" part: Goings on that lasted for decades (centuries?), with cover ups a plenty.

Maybe this here case is a bit of scientology being brought to light (maybe it's not, I have no idea).

Re:CoS "base" in Colorado

[mlawrence]

Scientologists, for the most part, don't engage in human trafficking. Why are we lumping them all together?

Re:CoS "base" in Colorado

[BobMcD]

"When it comes to light, though, those responsible have been brought to justice."

Sometimes, when they aren't reshuffled by Church leadership as was done by the Catholic Church in many cases.

I think the disconnect here is that you're expecting the church to hand out the justice. This would equate to the CoS stopping these camps on their own accord, which isn't what people are calling for here. We're looking to our legal system to intervene.

Unless you're implying that the church has enough power to subvert the legal system. And while that might be true in deeply-Catholic areas, that absolutely cannot be true across the entire nation.

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[Toonol]

Ah, Scientology as a force for FUNNY.

Re:Fighting Cults: Rick Ross

[Anonymous Coward]

He's two letters away from Rick Roll.

The form? It's right here:

[Weaselmancer]

Principia Discordia.

Disorganized religion. There you go. Read it now, thank me later fnord.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Directed Madness Weapon?

[Fantastic Lad]

I find this particular flavor of insanity both sickly-disturbing and somewhat fascinating. That it happens to come from Frank Zappa doesn't validate it for me. He's just a creep who happened to get some spotlight.

I've seen this kind of disjointed writing style appear throughout the cult/conspiracy/fringe-science field and whenever it appears, there seem to be certain features which remain common between each example. That is, it appears to be evidence of a very specific kind of mind problem.

Anyway, it just struck me now that this type of personality would make a great tool in sculpting public awareness. --As I said, there is something very disturbing about this type of writing. It creates, in me anyway, a deep and strong emotional response. I just want to get the hell away from whoever is acting this way. It's clearly an automatic response, probably linked to some sort of disease avoidance. I don't want to catch whatever the heck is wrong with the person writing this way. --And I'd be surprised if this kind of response isn't common among most healthy people.

When grape farmers want to stop birds from destroying their crops, they employ a variety of different deterrents. Everything from scare-crows propane noise cannons called, "Bird Bangers". --Well, anyway, one system which is used employs speakers and the recorded sound of a dying crow. This apparently plays upon an aspect of avian psychology; when birds hear one of their kind howling in pain, they stay away. Human beings, animals that we are, are similarly wired with these deep and ancient response mechanisms. And when it comes to human manipulation, it is a very safe bet that somebody, somewhere with vast resources has probably not only considered every facet of the question, "How to manipulate populations", but has also come up with practical systems employing what they have learned. That is, if I can think it up on my free time, then somebody with a great deal more paid time and resources has very likely gotten there first and is actively using it.

A few damaged humans prodded into the right fields would certainly act as a psychological deterrent to other humans. Or in the case of Zappa and similar, used to pull listeners into darkness. (A great way to subvert the Hippie movement.)

Just a thought.

-FL

Re:Directed Madness Weapon?

[mister_playboy]

Easily the biggest WHOOOOOOOOOOOOSH I have ever seen on /.

Re:Directed Madness Weapon?

[Fantastic Lad]

Easily the biggest WHOOOOOOOOOOOOSH I have ever seen on /.

What can I say? --I like to remain open to lateral thinking moments. It's how I learn.

Up Up and AWAAAAAY.

-FL

Wage and Hour?

[BlueBoxSW.com]

Really? It took Wage and Hour to bring down these guys?

WTF?

Re:Wage and Hour?

[Scrameustache]

Really? It took Wage and Hour to bring down these guys?

WTF?

Al Capone got caught over taxes.

Re:Wage and Hour?

[BobMcD]

Really? It took Wage and Hour to bring down these guys?

WTF?

Al Capone got caught over taxes.

David Koresh, too.

Slaves rescued?

[thelonious]

Does anyone have a post to the corresponding story where the D.A. takes some police officers to bust the slave camp up? You know, where people rush up to him and yell "we are free! finally someone to set us free!". Hasn't that happened yet? No?!?! You mean they are just going to let the slaves who haven't escaped rot in there? Oh, the humanity

Re:Fighting Cults: Rick Ross

[Anonymous Coward]

And in fact, this is even more enlightening - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Scott_case

Yeah, I wouldn't be going anywhere NEAR this fellow.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[Culture20]

Have you ever put a square mustache on El Ron? It'll shock the thetans right out of you.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

freeloader's debt

[un1xl0ser]

So if the defendant is trying to get back pay, then aren't they just going to pull the "freeloader's debt" thing, and sue him for unpaid auditing?

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[Culture20]

Most organized religions have some sort of charitable causes. Doesn't Scientology have any? Dianetics for the poor?

They're a business. Businesses sometimes to charity when they can get a tax break. CoS doesn't need any tax breaks. The poor are poor because they have too many thetans to work in Gold Base and make $50 a week.

Oblig. Fraiser quote

[AgentPhunk]

Fraiser (to Niles): "Remember Niles, that which doesn't kill you only makes you stronger."

Nile: "Yes, but what about the people that don't make it into that second group?"

Re:Oblig. Fraiser quote

[Anti_Climax]

"That which doesn't kill you only makes you stronger."

"Tell that to someone with Polio"

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[Arthur Grumbine]

Geez, Tom, no need to take it personally.

Parents Rights & Freedom of Contract

[AlexLibman]

If he started working there with the permission of his parents, and if his "right to emancipation" was not violated, and if he stayed there of his own free will - then there is a chance that the Church of Scientology has done nothing wrong, at least according to a rational approach to what law ought to be.

Government interventionism in private contracts (i.e. minimum wage) and family life (i.e. child labor laws) are socialist bullshit imposed by demagogues in order to legitimize their power!

Re:Parents Rights & Freedom of Contract

[Fulcrum of Evil]

damn socialists, trying to shut down our forced labor camps!

Re:Parents Rights & Freedom of Contract

[Fulcrum of Evil]

go read the complaint, especially the bit about what happens to those who try to leave.

Re:Fighting Cults: Rick Ross

[Anonymous Coward]

Here here. I know Rick (personally). While I don't agree with him on all matters, he is a good man and has helped countless people. While he was unable to help my friend (Dawn Ward...she's referred to on his site), I stand by my statements.

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[Cal27]

Well... it's better than vista.

Re:Fighting Cults: Rick Ross

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, your link is amazingly enlightening.

In the trial, Jason Scott was represented by Kendrick Moxon, a prominent Scientologist attorney.

...

In November 1996, the CAN name, logo and telephone number were bought in Bankruptcy Court by another Scientologist attorney, Steven Hayes, whose partner Timothy Bowles had at one time been partners with Moxon.

...

The Jason Scott case brought about the demise of the "Old CAN", marking the end of the cult wars in North America.[1][2] Controversies surrounding new religious movements have continued, but the debate has mostly moved to other arenas than the courts.[1][38] With the Scott decision, deprogramming came to an almost complete halt in North America,[38][39] and the practice was largely given up in favor of voluntary exit counseling.[40] Following the acquisition of the CAN name and number by Scientologists, a "New CAN" was established with their backing, which serves as an information and networking center on nontraditional religions;[41] it is managed by former opponents of the "Old CAN".

Sounds like if you're trying to escape Scientology, this guy is exactly the person you need to talk to.

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[couchslug]

"The only defense I can think of is that they could be a lot worse (ie. Jonestown, Heaven's Gate), "

Their body counts run in the millions so their net effect was and is vastly worse!

Jonestown and Heaven's Gate were good religions because their believers self-terminated before the beliefs metastasized.

Just a few differences

[sjbe]

That's a very poor argument. You can swap out "church" for almost any other childhood activity. For example, soccer:

I'm not aware of any soccer team that claims to know how the universe was founded, what the afterlife is like, demands worship of deities and threatens eternal punishment for not following their rules. I'm not aware of any soccer team that has tortured and killed those who play other sports and refused to play soccer. I'm not aware of any soccer team that claims their coach rose from the dead and absolved them of their sins. I'm not aware of any soccer team that claims their coach performs supernatural acts. I'm not aware of any soccer team that regards you as an immoral person because you don't share their mythology.

In short, there is a HUGE difference between religion and most other childhood activities.

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[Larryish]

I actually read the first half of Dianetics during a stint in a county jail, and quite a bit of it made sense.

Engrams, IIRC, are things that have happened to people during their childhood and are repressed to the point that they are damaging. A lot of what goes on in the "auditing" (again, IIRC) is equivalent to regressive hypno-therapy. Breaking down those walls could possibly open people up to entirely new aspects of life, and worlds of possibility.

Of course once the walls are broken down, they lay on the sci-fi-churchy-brainwashing-crapola. That is where I stopped reading.

When wikileaks first got famous in relation to Scientology, I grabbed copies of every available piece of CoS literature that I could download. Upon skimming through it I found there are some methods that seem quite useful as tools for training salespeople.

There are protocols where people train one another, for example one shouts obscenities at the other person nonstop for hours on end, and then the roles reverse and the training continues. Imagine how valuable this could be to salespeople, to make them immune to criticism and unafraid of verbal confrontation.

There are some good bits in the CoS materials, don't dismiss it out of hand.

The cult part of it is crap though. :)

And here is one for you, CoS - L. Ron Hubbard was a drunken pedophile who wishes he could lick the sweat out of my asscrack. Your religion is a cult, and your cult is worthless. Get a life, losers.

Word.

I'm loud and I'm proud

[TiggertheMad]

Contrary to popular culture, most slaves in the US where fairly well taken care of. It was an enormous investment to purchase and maintain slaves, and the owner wouldn't risk that lightly.

Damn straight! Here in the states, we owns some of the best treated slaves in the world! USA #1! USA #1!

Not everyone is so nice

[sjbe]

I don't think you can really give a group "cult" status when there's no penalty for leaving and they're still nice to you afterward.

Except that they often aren't nice to those who do not share their religion. Think about how many wars have been started over religion. There have been polls that clearly show that the most hated "religion" in the US is atheism - much more so than islam. I've seen with my own eyes discrimination and even brutality against those who are of a different religion. There are copious recent examples of muslims being assaulted and castigated even though they have no association besides their faith with a group of terrorists.

Your mom is nice but don't be lulled into thinking that everyone feels the same way. There are places in this world I would be killed if I said I did not believe in a god at the wrong time. The only difference between a religion and a cult is how accepted it is in society.

Re:Not everyone is so nice

[Just Some Guy]

Except that they often aren't nice to those who do not share their religion.

You're talking about specific small-but-vocal sects who are largely derided by mainstream Christian groups. Yes, there are groups of insane Christians/Buddhists/Muslims/Atheists, but you don't get to generalize to all members of those (lack of)? belief systems.

Re:Not everyone is so nice

[Jason Levine]

And some who are atheistic hate with a passion anyone with any religious belief whatsoever. Don't generalize what a small (but admittedly vocal) group says. Personally, I would never criticize someone solely on their personal religious belief. However, I reserve the right to criticize if that belief includes needing to "save" me (either my soul or my brain or whatever) by "converting me" to the "one true path" (be it religion or atheism).

Re:Not everyone is so nice

[sjbe]

Yes, there are groups of insane Christians/Buddhists/Muslims/Atheists, but you don't get to generalize to all members of those (lack of)? belief systems.

Actually yes I do get to generalize because otherwise it's impossible to point out that SOME people are intolerant towards others who do not share their exact belief. The only other way to do it is to point out the (numerous) specific examples of that intolerance and I'm pretty sure you can look those up yourself. If it were some rare occurrence I might concede the point but it happens EVERY DAY in every country around the world. Not just here and there in rare circumstances.

Re:Not everyone is so nice

[sjbe]

Don't generalize what a small (but admittedly vocal) group says.

I don't have to because the groups I'm talking about aren't small. Far from it in fact. 52% of Americans say they would not vote for a well qualified atheist for president. When asked the question "I would disapprove if my child wanted to marry a member of this group," atheists led the parade of disapproval with 41% disapproving. (followed by muslims with 34% and blacks with 27%)

It's not even remotely difficult to find examples of discrimination, hatred and violence between religious groups either. Ask the jews if they feel accepted by those of other faiths sometime. The US Constitution had to explicitly outlaw religious discrimination and bar Congress specifically from making laws regarding specific religions precisely because the known inability of religious groups to be quietly tolerant of each others faiths. I'm not even remotely talking about tiny little pockets of intolerance - I'm talking about widespread institutionalized intolerance that on too frequent occasions even becomes hatred or even violence.

Personally, I would never criticize someone solely on their personal religious belief.

I wouldn't either but mostly because I don't really care what crazy mythology someone subscribes to so long as they don't cause me any trouble. Like you I start to have a problem with religions when their members decide that I need to join them in their irrational beliefs. If all religious believes did was to worship quietly and gently in private, I might think the members odd but I'd be generally supportive or at worst indifferent to their beliefs. Many of my friends and family who are religious fit exactly this description - I'm sure you know people too who are "faithful" but welcoming of others who aren't.

Unfortunately it doesn't work that way FAR too often. Religions as institutions aggressively try to spread their membership, they castigate (directly or indirectly) those who aren't members, and they brainwash (there is no other word for it) people and worst of all children into their irrational dogma. I don't really want freedom OF religion, I want freedom FROM religion.

Re:Not everyone is so nice

[BobMcD]

You're correct, but your example is exceptionally weak. Bigotry exists, yes. However, this does not turn all religions into cults any more than it turns all racists into L Ron Hubbard.

Re:Fighting Cults: Rick Ross

[metalhed77]

I had no idea Rick Ross went after the CoS when not rapping.

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[MightyMartian]

They're recognized as a religion by the IRS, so they couldn't use charitable tax breaks, because they get the best tax break there is.

Southpark did it

[Nicolas MONNET]

.. with an entertaining animated film made with construction paper (virtual construction paper, actually).

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[Scrameustache]

Why is it that everytime $cientology is posted on Slashdot, some dolt posts a derivation of :

  Slashdot should stick to its stated goal of news for nerds. This simply isn't it.

Because someone says that in EVERY thread?

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

oh my!

[WeeBit]

They are getting desperate.

Cross - Crusade, ergo... "Muslim" crusades?

[zooblethorpe]

The etymology of the word "crusade" arises from the word "cross", so on that basis alone I don't know if the term "Muslim crusade" makes much sense. Perhaps there's a different term you'd like to use?

(NB: Some reference material for those so inclined -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam#History)

Cheers,

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[Buelldozer]

Hold on, you think that Televangelists shilling for dollars on your TV are in the same league as a "Religion" that allegedly deals in human slaves, has infiltrated governments and influenced their decisions, and threatens the free flow of information on the Internet?

Wow! I'm curious, where exactly would I find you on Sunday morning Mr. Martian? Do you attend the "Gold Bunker" or do you call another facility home?

Re:Fighting Cults: Rick Ross

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh and don't go to the Cult Awareness Network. It was bought by Scientology after they and Landmark Education sued them into bankruptcy and bought their name and records of people seeking to leave a cult, including Scientology.

I'm not going to post a source. Anyone who rose an eyebrow at the headline, you failed.

I Predict A Bright Future

[dynamator]

From TFA:
"By age 16, Lindstein says, he was working for Golden Era Productions, Scientology's film production company, restoring Hubbard's films from the 1970s. He says he often worked 24-hour days at the "tedious, frame-by-frame work ...."
This lad is well prepared for a career in visual effects.

This guy doesn't have a chance of winning...

[Neffirithion]

... cause they will get to court and he will have to admit he couldn't find Xenu to serve him properly...

Re:German Documentary on Gold Base

[JumperCable]

Its not like no-one knew about Scientology work camps - some german documentary team went out to go visit it and got stopped by a bunch of armed men (this was in the early 90's) - wish I could remember the title.

Missing in Happy Valley
 
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2742505831051424517

Re:Fighting Cults: Rick Ross

[Hucko]

Thank you Mr Coward, we'll be in contact should we have further questions.

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[MightyMartian]

I consider stealing from the elderly and incompetent to be pretty damned low, but no, I don't think it's as bad as slavery.

Re:Scientology as a force for good?

[Buelldozer]

I didn't think you really felt that way. For the record I think that Televangelists are lower than a worms belly.

Re:serious question: Isnt this a "Monastary"?

[mister_playboy]

young adults

This guy was put in there at age 8... let's not even get into the shit about razor fences and armed guards.

Gold Base is not a monastery.

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[Psaakyrn]

I wouldn't say the cult is worthless. I'd say it's worth billions, or more. (even if the billions are earned on questionable morals).

After Hearing About Jaycee Dugard's Kidnapper

[HannethCom]

Garrido was on parole when he kidnapped Jaycee Dugard, and he was still on parole 18 years later when they found out he kidnapped and was raping her.

For 18 years she was in his back yard and the parole officers regularly visited him.

If that can happen by someone who is being watched by the law, why would illegal work camps surprise you?

Of course with the number of countries that have tried and convicted Scientology of many different crimes, why they aren't watched closer by the law in the US I don't know.

In Canada they are listed as a Criminal Organization. Sometimes our laws don't work, but I am sure glad when they do.

Re:serious question: Isnt this a "Monastary"?

[JumperCable]

Monasteries typically don't have:
* Sniper nests
* Double bladed razor fences
* Motion sensors facing inside
* Armed security guard preventing people from leaving
* A full arsenal of guns
* People are allowed to leave
* Phone calls & mail are not monitored & prefiltered
* Phone calls from concerned relatives are not coached
* People inside are not punished when someone leaves
* Nunneries don't coerce females to have abortions to keep up productivity
* Emergency calls to the police actually go to the police & not internal security
* Don't make 'bad' monks clean septic tanks with their hands (no tools, JUST their hands).
* Don't throw members into a shit pond for not behaving by their standards.
* Get to see their family
* Are not physically beat, kicked or strangled by their leader David Miscavige.
* Are not asked by their leader David Miscavige to beat/attack other members who are not living up to the leader's standards.
* Are permitted time for personal hygiene when being punished for information leaks.
* Do not go into lock down when information leaks

David Miscavige

[FreakyGreenLeaky]

Is it only me, or does anyone else also read David Miscarriage whenever they see this guy's name?

Chatolic

[AliasMarlowe]

opus dei (a chatolic sect wholly approved by pope ratzinger)

"Characteristic of or pertaining to being boring or flat"? Well, you nailed that one all right!
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/chato
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-lic

Tom Cruise is the Charles Manson of Religion

[JamesonLewis3rd]

Rumor has it that this is a not-so-well-kept secret. I avert my eyes from his image and mute the audio immediately upon being confronted. I then switch to Military Channel.

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[scner]

What was the Guardian’s Office and does it still exist?

The Guardian’s Office, known as the GO, was initially created in 1966 as a unit to deal with the Church’s legal and external affairs. It no longer exists. It was permanently disbanded in the early 1980s by current Church management.

The GO had been infiltrated and set up to fail in its mission to protect the Church. It was influenced to abandon its original mandate and established itself as an independent, autonomous unit, answerable to nobody. It was isolated not only from the mainstream activity and management of the Church, but even from the Founder of the religion. Some GO executives actually tried to gain exclusive control over Church corporate and financial affairs.

The first warning that all was not well with the Guardian’s Office came in the late 1970s. Representatives of Church management realized that the GO no longer had the best interests of the Church and its Founder at heart. The GO’s management of the Church’s external affairs was notably deficient and many parishioners and staff began to suspect that matters for which the GO was responsible were not being dealt with in accordance with the teachings of Mr. Hubbard. In fact, by this time, the Guardian’s Office had abandoned any pretense of following the principles described in Mr. Hubbard’s writings.

It subsequently came to light that a handful of GO staff members had been influenced to adopt an “anything goes” approach in dealing with government discrimination against the Church. These dupes infiltrated and burglarized several U.S. government offices to obtain copies of files maintained and circulated about the Church. Obviously such activity was illegal and directly violated Mr. Hubbard’s policies.

However, while such illegal conduct was afoot, the GO managed to keep its operations secret from Church management, staff and membership. Its autonomy shielded it from accountability. Most Scientologists were altogether unaware of GO clandestine activities.

Even the government prosecutor in the later criminal case that arose from this illegal conduct testified that only a handful of people in the GO had engaged in or even knew about these illegal acts. The rest, including thousands of staff and millions of parishioners, had no involvement or knowledge of such unlawful activities.

When the GO’s criminal activities were discovered by those who today form the core of the Church’s leadership, the GO was disbanded, no small feat since it was the GO officials who held corporate control. Its functions were completely reorganized and brought under the control of the Church’s ecclesiastical management officers. Many of the GO staff were not involved in any of the unlawful activities and, wanting to conduct their affairs in accordance with the Founder’s teachings, abandoned their former GO leaders. They then gave their full support to Church management in the clean out and disbanding of the GO. Those who participated in or knew of the GO’s illegal conduct in any way were removed from Church staff and forever banned from future Church employment.

Sadly, there were also some people in the Church, but outside of the GO itself, who sympathized with the GO because of their own agendas to achieve autonomy and gain control of the Church’s finances. In some cases, it was the Scriptures themselves they wanted to pervert for their own ends. Given these people had proven themselves to be avowed enemies of L. Ron Hubbard and the religion, they were excommunicated.

Today, some of these same people, no longer part of the Church, are loudly and bitterly critical of the Church’s current management. It is these few apostates who are most often the ones who spread vitriol in the media about Scientology and Church leaders. When they make allegations of wrongdoing, they are referring to th

Re:Anonymous: RACISM & RELIGIOUS HATRED

[meringuoid]

How cute. Scientologists are trying character assassination. On Anonymous.

Here's a clue for you. Think of the worst, most awful, evil, appalling vice you possibly can. Now make it worse. Include a goat. And a small child. And two girls. And one cup. Got the mental image? Anonymous enjoys that stuff. They post pics of it, they're jaded about it, they even have a cute bear mascot to celebrate it.

If you want to insult Anonymous, suggest that they prefer it consensual and in the missionary position, for purposes of procreation. That's about the only thing they consider wrong.

Re:Biased; And proud of it, man.

[conureman]

My only up-close experience with CoS, (Scientology, a friend's dad started the Co[Satan]) has been talking to their recruiters on Hollywood Boulevard, and once when I tried talking to a rather well-configured female acolyte, or whoever the blue-uniformed busload groups are, by the "Celebrity Center" or whatever their HQ is called. The panic and fear was rather amusing. It appeared that she was afraid of my talking to her, like something she'd been warned about. I was blocked by four of their handlers while she was hustled safely away. After my experiences with Erhard Seminars Training, and a few weekends at various Unification Church indoctrination camps, (Good News! The Messiah has returned! True Father is a Korean businessman!) I have developed a feel for the finer points of cult practice. It is not dissimilar to miltary boot camp, and I thought it interesting that Mose Durst, and that woman (Kristina Seher) leading the chanting at Camp K, were both allegedly PhDs in Psychology. (According to their website I was misinformed about that, but the phenomena of conditioned response and brainwashing is amazing.) I believe it is of some importance to isolate the new inductees while their beliefs are installed. Forty years in the wilderness, anyone? I could be projecting my erroneous perceptions onto this situation, but I'm disposed to believe the allegations. YMMV.

Re:Fighting Cults: Rick Ross

[intheshelter]

And who is accountable to their state board and oversight in this area? What kind of certification are you referring to that you would find acceptable?

Re:I Was Surprised - Some people win...

[vinnybobdog]

From http://www.skeptictank.org/gen1/gen00587.htm Quoting The Canadian Supreme Court rulling in regards to aggravated libel against Casey Hill. who was awarded $1.6 million:

July 1995
The Supreme Court in Canada affirms Hill's libel judgment against CoST. The ruling reads, in part:

"Scientology continued its attack against Casey Hill throughout the trial of this action, both in the presence of the jury and in its absence. More than once, it reiterated the libel even though it knew that these allegations were false. ...

"In summary, every aspect of this case demonstrates the very real and persistent malice of Scientology. ...

"Scientology's behavior throughout can only be characterized as recklessly high-handed, supremely arrogant and contumacious. There seems to have been a continuing conscious effort on Scientology's part to intensify and perpetuate its attack on Casey Hill without any regard for the truth of its allegations. ...

"There can be no doubt that the conduct of Scientology in the publication of the injurious false statement pertaining to its 'enemy' was malicious. Its publication was carefully planned and carried out in a manner which ensured its widest possible dissemination in the most damaging manner imaginable. ... Scientology's actions from the time of publication, throughout the trial, and after the trial decision was rendered constituted a continuing attempt at character assassination by means of a statement which it knew to be false. It was such outrageous conduct that it cried out for the imposition of punitive damages.

Scientology finally pays Casey Hill, including interest. Seven of the ten existing Scientology organizations in Ontario are subsequently closed.

Re:How Is This Nerd News??!!

[Rycross]

How convenient for them. Run their illegal shit under a "different branch," and when they're caught simply disband it and claim that the problem is dealt with. Of course, they did something similar with the entire concept of "Fair Game," except that there was no indication that they actually were trying to stop the practice, but rather were concerned about PR.

The GO's management of the Church's external affairs was notably deficient and many parishioners and staff began to suspect that matters for which the GO was responsible were not being dealt with in accordance with the teachings of Mr. Hubbard. In fact, by this time, the Guardian's Office had abandoned any pretense of following the principles described in Mr. Hubbard's writings.

Given that the doctrine of "Fair Game" came from Hubbard himself, this is bullshit. Hubbard's principles included harassment, character asssassination, and murder. I'd also like to point out this little tidbit

As early as 1960, L. Ron Hubbard had proposed that Scientologists should infiltrate government departments by taking secretarial, bodyguard or other jobs.[8]

That little [8] there is a citation, by the way. Looks like Hubbard was OK in principle with the actions of the GO. Scientology did a 180 on it when it became bad for PR. Forgive me if I don't take the words of a Scientology shill as anything more than the ramblings of a habitual liar.

Oh shit...

[conureman]

They're on to us.