Scientology: Digging the Dirt

[quote]twojarslave wrote:
They are just another group of people swindling other people out of their money by convincing them to believe in nonsense.
[/quote]

So, no different from televangelists, in other words.

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]twojarslave wrote:
They are just another group of people swindling other people out of their money by convincing them to believe in nonsense.
[/quote]

So, no different from televangelists, in other words. [/quote]

I’d say that Scientology and televangelists occupy roughly the same spot on the spectrum of harm. Televangelists probably have the upper hand in that their nonsense seems to have a broader appeal. Scientology may turn a greater profit on a per capita basis, but the undeniable popularity of Jesus gives the televangelist a much wider net to cast.

Edge: Televangelist

Still, being able to run your business from a fleet of massive ships in international waters is a sure sign of your religion’s success, but I think you are still in the bush leagues until you get your own little country to run your religion out of. It makes things so much easier that way.

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]twojarslave wrote:
They are just another group of people swindling other people out of their money by convincing them to believe in nonsense.
[/quote]

So, no different from televangelists, in other words. [/quote]

I’d say that Scientology and televangelists occupy roughly the same spot on the spectrum of harm. Televangelists probably have the upper hand in that their nonsense seems to have a broader appeal. Scientology may turn a greater profit on a per capita basis, but the undeniable popularity of Jesus gives the televangelist a much wider net to cast.

Edge: Televangelist

Still, being able to run your business from a fleet of massive ships in international waters is a sure sign of your religion’s success, but I think you are still in the bush leagues until you get your own little country to run your religion out of. It makes things so much easier that way.
[/quote]

The House of Saud have a pretty good thing going now they’ve found all that oil but they made a pact with the guy who actually invented the religion(Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab) - or at least he created a new sect and trained fanatical warriors who he promised would be loyal to the Saud family. Over the centuries they eventually conquered most of modern day Saudi Arabia. Ibn Saud found oil and wanted to settle down with his fortunes. But the Wahhab family and their warriors; the Ikhwan camel raiders wanted to attack the British and continue the jihad into modern day Kuwait and Jordan. They rebelled against the royal family and he had the leaders of the warrior bands machine gunned and the remnants disbanded and formed into the Saudi national guard. Then in 1979 the grandson of the leader of the Ikhwan uprising of the 20’s claimed he was the prophesied Mahdi who will bring about the return of Jesus. He stormed the Grand Mosque of Medina with hundreds of fanatical holy warriors where they holed up for weeks on supplies snuck in on bin Laden family trucks, before they were all shot or captured and beheaded. True story.

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
No religion likes its believers to question dogma too hard. Some will say that they encourage their followers to “seek the truth” and “ask questions”, but only if their seeking and questioning leads them back to the dogma. Name me one religion in which heresy is tolerated.[/quote]

Well, you have a right to your opinion. But I am going to go out on a limb and say this is not a religion. It does not have a central figure of worship. Most religions at least in the west do not seek to control it’s people and you can leave anytime you like without showing up.
I don’t know if it can be avoided, but I really don’t want to drag other religions into it. I am not looking for a religion vs. atheism thread, again. You have your opinion, I don’t figure anything I can say would ever change it. But Scientology is woven of a completely different cloth all together. That’s what I am after. Not yet another commentary on the stupidity of religious people in general.

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
No religion likes its believers to question dogma too hard. Some will say that they encourage their followers to “seek the truth” and “ask questions”, but only if their seeking and questioning leads them back to the dogma. Name me one religion in which heresy is tolerated.[/quote]

Well, you have a right to your opinion. But I am going to go out on a limb and say this is not a religion. It does not have a central figure of worship. Most religions at least in the west do not seek to control it’s people and you can leave anytime you like without showing up.
I don’t know if it can be avoided, but I really don’t want to drag other religions into it. I am not looking for a religion vs. atheism thread, again. You have your opinion, I don’t figure anything I can say would ever change it. But Scientology is woven of a completely different cloth all together. That’s what I am after. Not yet another commentary on the stupidity of religious people in general.[/quote]

I can’t speak for Varq, but I don’t really see it that way at all. From my point of view the beliefs and practices of Scientology are no less outlandish than Christianity, and Varq’s cartoon illustrated that perspective quite well.

I also don’t understand how you can say Scientology is not a religion. It is not YOUR religion, that much is clear, but it fits all of the general criteria for the term. Lord Xenu even fits the bill for a deity, if you feel one is necessary for it to pass your personal religion test. He did, after all, transport millions of souls across the galaxy to deposit them in Earth’s volcanoes. Besides, what difference does it make if your religion’s supernatural being is an alien overlord who lived 10 million years ago or an invisible wizard who lives in the sky today?

Furthermore, I do not believe that Scientologists are physically restrained from leaving the religion, at least not by church policy. Maybe if they are stuck on those boats, but plenty of people can and have left that church. And LOL at your statement that religions in the west don’t seek to control their people. Isn’t there a list of commandments that all true believers must follow or burn in hell if they don’t? What’s that, if not controlling the believers?

What you are doing is applying a non-believer’s thought process to criticizing a specific set of beliefs that you don’t have any faith in, in this case Scientology. Which I am all for, all day. I just criticize a bit more indiscriminately than you do, and I don’t think you get to call foul if you start a thread pointing out the absurdity of one religion and the same type of criticism gets turned on your own set of beliefs.

Scientology has the big disadvantage of being a new religious movement that doesn’t have thousands of years of tradition behind it. Otherwise it is almost exactly like every other religion out there, promising some form of spiritual fulfillment, asking for financial support from its members and doing whatever it can to promote its dogma. Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.

I will concede that Scientology is an easier religion for me to dislike. Christianity certainly has a lot of positive things going for it, and if all of the Christians in the world were suddenly replaced with Scientologists I do not think humankind would be better off at all.

Now, if all of the Christians were suddenly replaced with Raelians, we might be on to something. I think we could all take a few cues from a cult of UFO worshiping sex fiends.

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
No religion likes its believers to question dogma too hard. Some will say that they encourage their followers to “seek the truth” and “ask questions”, but only if their seeking and questioning leads them back to the dogma. Name me one religion in which heresy is tolerated.[/quote]

Well, you have a right to your opinion. But I am going to go out on a limb and say this is not a religion. It does not have a central figure of worship. Most religions at least in the west do not seek to control it’s people and you can leave anytime you like without showing up.
I don’t know if it can be avoided, but I really don’t want to drag other religions into it. I am not looking for a religion vs. atheism thread, again. You have your opinion, I don’t figure anything I can say would ever change it. But Scientology is woven of a completely different cloth all together. That’s what I am after. Not yet another commentary on the stupidity of religious people in general.[/quote]

I can’t speak for Varq, but I don’t really see it that way at all. From my point of view the beliefs and practices of Scientology are no less outlandish than Christianity, and Varq’s cartoon illustrated that perspective quite well.

I also don’t understand how you can say Scientology is not a religion. It is not YOUR religion, that much is clear, but it fits all of the general criteria for the term. Lord Xenu even fits the bill for a deity, if you feel one is necessary for it to pass your personal religion test. He did, after all, transport millions of souls across the galaxy to deposit them in Earth’s volcanoes. Besides, what difference does it make if your religion’s supernatural being is an alien overlord who lived 10 million years ago or an invisible wizard who lives in the sky today?

Furthermore, I do not believe that Scientologists are physically restrained from leaving the religion, at least not by church policy. Maybe if they are stuck on those boats, but plenty of people can and have left that church. And LOL at your statement that religions in the west don’t seek to control their people. Isn’t there a list of commandments that all true believers must follow or burn in hell if they don’t? What’s that, if not controlling the believers?

What you are doing is applying a non-believer’s thought process to criticizing a specific set of beliefs that you don’t have any faith in, in this case Scientology. Which I am all for, all day. I just criticize a bit more indiscriminately than you do, and I don’t think you get to call foul if you start a thread pointing out the absurdity of one religion and the same type of criticism gets turned on your own set of beliefs.

Scientology has the big disadvantage of being a new religious movement that doesn’t have thousands of years of tradition behind it. Otherwise it is almost exactly like every other religion out there, promising some form of spiritual fulfillment, asking for financial support from its members and doing whatever it can to promote its dogma. Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.

I will concede that Scientology is an easier religion for me to dislike. Christianity certainly has a lot of positive things going for it, and if all of the Christians in the world were suddenly replaced with Scientologists I do not think humankind would be better off at all.

Now, if all of the Christians were suddenly replaced with Raelians, we might be on to something. I think we could all take a few cues from a cult of UFO worshiping sex fiends.
[/quote]

Welp, so much for that. I don’t care to illustrate the differences nor explain things that are obvious. I could say the same things about atheism. No one is safe from people propagating crazy ideology with in a belief system. You guys think crazy shit too. Your not ontologically above anybody.

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
No religion likes its believers to question dogma too hard. Some will say that they encourage their followers to “seek the truth” and “ask questions”, but only if their seeking and questioning leads them back to the dogma. Name me one religion in which heresy is tolerated.[/quote]

Well, you have a right to your opinion. But I am going to go out on a limb and say this is not a religion. It does not have a central figure of worship. Most religions at least in the west do not seek to control it’s people and you can leave anytime you like without showing up.
I don’t know if it can be avoided, but I really don’t want to drag other religions into it. I am not looking for a religion vs. atheism thread, again. You have your opinion, I don’t figure anything I can say would ever change it. But Scientology is woven of a completely different cloth all together. That’s what I am after. Not yet another commentary on the stupidity of religious people in general.[/quote]

I can’t speak for Varq, but I don’t really see it that way at all. From my point of view the beliefs and practices of Scientology are no less outlandish than Christianity, and Varq’s cartoon illustrated that perspective quite well.

I also don’t understand how you can say Scientology is not a religion. It is not YOUR religion, that much is clear, but it fits all of the general criteria for the term. Lord Xenu even fits the bill for a deity, if you feel one is necessary for it to pass your personal religion test. He did, after all, transport millions of souls across the galaxy to deposit them in Earth’s volcanoes. Besides, what difference does it make if your religion’s supernatural being is an alien overlord who lived 10 million years ago or an invisible wizard who lives in the sky today?

Furthermore, I do not believe that Scientologists are physically restrained from leaving the religion, at least not by church policy. Maybe if they are stuck on those boats, but plenty of people can and have left that church. And LOL at your statement that religions in the west don’t seek to control their people. Isn’t there a list of commandments that all true believers must follow or burn in hell if they don’t? What’s that, if not controlling the believers?

What you are doing is applying a non-believer’s thought process to criticizing a specific set of beliefs that you don’t have any faith in, in this case Scientology. Which I am all for, all day. I just criticize a bit more indiscriminately than you do, and I don’t think you get to call foul if you start a thread pointing out the absurdity of one religion and the same type of criticism gets turned on your own set of beliefs.

Scientology has the big disadvantage of being a new religious movement that doesn’t have thousands of years of tradition behind it. Otherwise it is almost exactly like every other religion out there, promising some form of spiritual fulfillment, asking for financial support from its members and doing whatever it can to promote its dogma. Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.

I will concede that Scientology is an easier religion for me to dislike. Christianity certainly has a lot of positive things going for it, and if all of the Christians in the world were suddenly replaced with Scientologists I do not think humankind would be better off at all.

Now, if all of the Christians were suddenly replaced with Raelians, we might be on to something. I think we could all take a few cues from a cult of UFO worshiping sex fiends.
[/quote]

Welp, so much for that. I don’t care to illustrate the differences nor explain things that are obvious. I could say the same things about atheism. No one is safe from people propagating crazy ideology with in a belief system. You guys think crazy shit too. Your not ontologically above anybody.[/quote]

Please do not confuse my lack of belief in your supernatural claims with hostility towards them. I think Christians are fine when they are being polite and not trying to use public resources to promote their religion. I’m just not one of them.

I make no claims of supernatural knowledge and hold an equal lack of belief for all religions. If that’s crazy shit to you, well, put me in a straight jacket.

I realize that my lack of belief is inherently offensive to some, but that’s too bad. It is not like the good old days when you could just drag the atheist out in the street for a good stoning to shut me up about it.

Well, not in this country, at least.

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
No religion likes its believers to question dogma too hard. Some will say that they encourage their followers to “seek the truth” and “ask questions”, but only if their seeking and questioning leads them back to the dogma. Name me one religion in which heresy is tolerated.[/quote]

Well, you have a right to your opinion. But I am going to go out on a limb and say this is not a religion. It does not have a central figure of worship. Most religions at least in the west do not seek to control it’s people and you can leave anytime you like without showing up.
I don’t know if it can be avoided, but I really don’t want to drag other religions into it. I am not looking for a religion vs. atheism thread, again. You have your opinion, I don’t figure anything I can say would ever change it. But Scientology is woven of a completely different cloth all together. That’s what I am after. Not yet another commentary on the stupidity of religious people in general.[/quote]

I can’t speak for Varq, but I don’t really see it that way at all. From my point of view the beliefs and practices of Scientology are no less outlandish than Christianity, and Varq’s cartoon illustrated that perspective quite well.

I also don’t understand how you can say Scientology is not a religion. It is not YOUR religion, that much is clear, but it fits all of the general criteria for the term. Lord Xenu even fits the bill for a deity, if you feel one is necessary for it to pass your personal religion test. He did, after all, transport millions of souls across the galaxy to deposit them in Earth’s volcanoes. Besides, what difference does it make if your religion’s supernatural being is an alien overlord who lived 10 million years ago or an invisible wizard who lives in the sky today?

Furthermore, I do not believe that Scientologists are physically restrained from leaving the religion, at least not by church policy. Maybe if they are stuck on those boats, but plenty of people can and have left that church. And LOL at your statement that religions in the west don’t seek to control their people. Isn’t there a list of commandments that all true believers must follow or burn in hell if they don’t? What’s that, if not controlling the believers?

What you are doing is applying a non-believer’s thought process to criticizing a specific set of beliefs that you don’t have any faith in, in this case Scientology. Which I am all for, all day. I just criticize a bit more indiscriminately than you do, and I don’t think you get to call foul if you start a thread pointing out the absurdity of one religion and the same type of criticism gets turned on your own set of beliefs.

Scientology has the big disadvantage of being a new religious movement that doesn’t have thousands of years of tradition behind it. Otherwise it is almost exactly like every other religion out there, promising some form of spiritual fulfillment, asking for financial support from its members and doing whatever it can to promote its dogma. Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.

I will concede that Scientology is an easier religion for me to dislike. Christianity certainly has a lot of positive things going for it, and if all of the Christians in the world were suddenly replaced with Scientologists I do not think humankind would be better off at all.

Now, if all of the Christians were suddenly replaced with Raelians, we might be on to something. I think we could all take a few cues from a cult of UFO worshiping sex fiends.
[/quote]

Welp, so much for that. I don’t care to illustrate the differences nor explain things that are obvious. I could say the same things about atheism. No one is safe from people propagating crazy ideology with in a belief system. You guys think crazy shit too. Your not ontologically above anybody.[/quote]

Please do not confuse my lack of belief in your supernatural claims with hostility towards them. I think Christians are fine when they are being polite and not trying to use public resources to promote their religion. I’m just not one of them.

I make no claims of supernatural knowledge and hold an equal lack of belief for all religions. If that’s crazy shit to you, well, put me in a straight jacket.

I realize that my lack of belief is inherently offensive to some, but that’s too bad. It is not like the good old days when you could just drag the atheist out in the street for a good stoning to shut me up about it.

Well, not in this country, at least.

[/quote]

Good can we talk about scientology then? If I wanted to have a long dick contest about whose beliefs are most rational, I would have started a thread about that.

[quote]pat wrote:
Good can we talk about scientology then? If I wanted to have a long dick contest about whose beliefs are most rational, I would have started a thread about that.[/quote]

Isn’t that exactly the type of thread you’ve started here?

[quote]pat wrote:
I want to know what the motivation is. I want to know what people see in it that makes them so passionate about it. [/quote]

If you want to avoid a discussion about the rationality of a particular set of beliefs, why are you asking questions about the origin of that faith? Doesn’t that naturally lead to the sort of critical thought processes we are undertaking here?

As a man of faith yourself, shouldn’t a simple “Scientologists have faith in their beliefs” be a perfectly adequate answer to the question you asked? In matters of faith, what more should be said to justify one’s beliefs?

Unless, of course, you are looking for some kind of rational basis for that faith. But that leads us right back to where you don’t want to go.

If you are really interested in just having some fun with examining one wacky set of beliefs and the people who follow it, just watch the South Park Episode “Trapped in the Closet”. Season 9, episode 12. You can watch it for free at SouthParkStudios dot com.

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Good can we talk about scientology then? If I wanted to have a long dick contest about whose beliefs are most rational, I would have started a thread about that.[/quote]

Isn’t that exactly the type of thread you’ve started here?

[quote]pat wrote:
I want to know what the motivation is. I want to know what people see in it that makes them so passionate about it. [/quote]

If you want to avoid a discussion about the rationality of a particular set of beliefs, why are you asking questions about the origin of that faith? Doesn’t that naturally lead to the sort of critical thought processes we are undertaking here?

As a man of faith yourself, shouldn’t a simple “Scientologists have faith in their beliefs” be a perfectly adequate answer to the question you asked? In matters of faith, what more should be said to justify one’s beliefs?

Unless, of course, you are looking for some kind of rational basis for that faith. But that leads us right back to where you don’t want to go.

If you are really interested in just having some fun with examining one wacky set of beliefs and the people who follow it, just watch the South Park Episode “Trapped in the Closet”. Season 9, episode 12. You can watch it for free at SouthParkStudios dot com.

[/quote]

I think Pat wanted us all to jeer at Scientology, the only religion in the world created cynically by a con artist with an eye to improving his own financial situation.

I can’t think of any other religion that has ever existed whose goal is acquisition of material wealth, property, and power, which uses brainwashing techniques on its gullible members, jealously guards the secrecy of its operations at the highest levels, and will not tolerate heresy or apostasy.

Can you?

"…I can’t think of any other religion that has ever existed whose goal is acquisition of material wealth, property, and power, which uses brainwashing techniques on its gullible members, jealously guards the secrecy of its operations at the highest levels, and will not tolerate heresy or apostasy…

“…Can you?..”

Varq:

Your quips and comebacks can be PRETTY sharp and to-the-point!

Is it safe for me to say that you were being sarcastic?

Mufasa

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
"…I can’t think of any other religion that has ever existed whose goal is acquisition of material wealth, property, and power, which uses brainwashing techniques on its gullible members, jealously guards the secrecy of its operations at the highest levels, and will not tolerate heresy or apostasy…

“…Can you?..”

Varq:

Your quips and comebacks can be PRETTY sharp and to-the-point!

Is it safe for me to say that you were being sarcastic?

Mufasa

[/quote]

That’s a pretty safe bet in general.

Variety may be the spice of life, but sarcasm is the wasabi.

LOL!

Mufasa

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Good can we talk about scientology then? If I wanted to have a long dick contest about whose beliefs are most rational, I would have started a thread about that.[/quote]

Isn’t that exactly the type of thread you’ve started here?

[quote]pat wrote:
I want to know what the motivation is. I want to know what people see in it that makes them so passionate about it. [/quote]

If you want to avoid a discussion about the rationality of a particular set of beliefs, why are you asking questions about the origin of that faith? Doesn’t that naturally lead to the sort of critical thought processes we are undertaking here?

As a man of faith yourself, shouldn’t a simple “Scientologists have faith in their beliefs” be a perfectly adequate answer to the question you asked? In matters of faith, what more should be said to justify one’s beliefs?

Unless, of course, you are looking for some kind of rational basis for that faith. But that leads us right back to where you don’t want to go.

If you are really interested in just having some fun with examining one wacky set of beliefs and the people who follow it, just watch the South Park Episode “Trapped in the Closet”. Season 9, episode 12. You can watch it for free at SouthParkStudios dot com.

[/quote]

I think Pat wanted us all to jeer at Scientology, the only religion in the world created cynically by a con artist with an eye to improving his own financial situation.

I can’t think of any other religion that has ever existed whose goal is acquisition of material wealth, property, and power, which uses brainwashing techniques on its gullible members, jealously guards the secrecy of its operations at the highest levels, and will not tolerate heresy or apostasy.

Can you?
[/quote]

That was well-played.

I think you are right in that Hubbard probably holds the distinction of being the most openly cynical founder of a successful new religion. I don’t think anyone except true believers actually think he believes the nonsense he wrote.

But who knows, maybe he did on some level?

If we compare Hubbard to another enterprising American, Joseph Smith, I can’t help but wonder if Smith really believed his nonsense. Was he a pious fraud or was he equally cynical but keen enough to hide his motives behind feigned piety?

The cynic in me believes the latter. I think he knew exactly what he was doing. Now the Mormons have Utah and harems! Talk about success!

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

Now the Mormons have Utah and harems!

[/quote]

Mormons have neither…I mean they annoy me too (and I have to live with them) but every time somebody repeats these things it just makes me cringe.

Don’t be that guy.

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

Now the Mormons have Utah and harems!

[/quote]

Mormons have neither…I mean they annoy me too (and I have to live with them) but every time somebody repeats these things it just makes me cringe.

Don’t be that guy.[/quote]

I was being facetious, but point taken.

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Good can we talk about scientology then? If I wanted to have a long dick contest about whose beliefs are most rational, I would have started a thread about that.[/quote]

Isn’t that exactly the type of thread you’ve started here?

[/quote]
It seems despite my best efforts that’s what it’s going to turn out to be. So be it.

Whether their beliefs are rational or not, I don’t know I don’t know what they actually believe. It’s apparently a big secret locked in a safe only unlockable to those who have millions to spend.
My main inquiry is the behavior of the people in the organization, according to former members I understand to be quite nefarious. And it runs from the top down, the spying, the isolation of it’s members, the requiring of mothers to get abortions, etc. Could they be lying? Sure. It could all be sweetness and light. I am apt to be negative towards it, certainly, but it’s based on primary negative information. Anything positive is locked in a ‘pay to play’ vault. While I can find a genuineness in other faiths, or even lack of faiths, I see no such genuineness here. It’s even been labeled a ‘dangerous cult’ in British courts.

My question if you recall is ‘what do people know about it?’ What’s been their experience. It’s not specifically to knock it, but seeking any good information to give it any regard as anything legitimate whatsoever. So rather than knock me, I would like information. Make me see the light.

But my inquiry was partially based on the following documentary. I have spent some time looking at more than this, but this is more or less it’s genesis:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Good can we talk about scientology then? If I wanted to have a long dick contest about whose beliefs are most rational, I would have started a thread about that.[/quote]

Isn’t that exactly the type of thread you’ve started here?

[/quote]
It seems despite my best efforts that’s what it’s going to turn out to be. So be it.

Whether their beliefs are rational or not, I don’t know I don’t know what they actually believe. It’s apparently a big secret locked in a safe only unlockable to those who have millions to spend.
My main inquiry is the behavior of the people in the organization, according to former members I understand to be quite nefarious. And it runs from the top down, the spying, the isolation of it’s members, the requiring of mothers to get abortions, etc. Could they be lying? Sure. It could all be sweetness and light. I am apt to be negative towards it, certainly, but it’s based on primary negative information. Anything positive is locked in a ‘pay to play’ vault. While I can find a genuineness in other faiths, or even lack of faiths, I see no such genuineness here. It’s even been labeled a ‘dangerous cult’ in British courts.

My question if you recall is ‘what do people know about it?’ What’s been their experience. It’s not specifically to knock it, but seeking any good information to give it any regard as anything legitimate whatsoever. So rather than knock me, I would like information. Make me see the light.

But my inquiry was partially based on the following documentary. I have spent some time looking at more than this, but this is more or less it’s genesis:

[/quote]

None of it is super-secret anymore. Jewbacca linked all of their “secret” “technology” on the first page of the thread.

The South Park episode I mentioned is also really funny and uses the same source material - actual Scientology teachings - as the joke. It knocks the hell out of this wacky set of beliefs.

I’ve also watched the documentary you linked and enjoyed it quite a bit.

As far as your inquiry about “legitimacy”, well that’s what I’ve been saying the whole time. This particular made-up story about the universe is just as legitimate as any other made-up story about the universe. So in that respect it is nothing new or unique at all, and no less legitimate than any other set of beliefs (from my point of view, at least).

There have been countless creation myths dreamed up over time. People have been judging others for not believing in their favored creation myth for as long as creation myths have been around. Scientology is just another bullshit story being sold to people who want to buy it.

I believe Scientology attracts people the way all religions do. It gives them some answers they seek about life, gives them a community who they automatically have something in common with, maybe gives them purpose that they were lacking before, and it generally appeals to them in a way that other religions do not.

What’s it matter if it is all based on made-up bullshit? There’s thousands of religions and they can’t all be right, so there’s obviously quite a bit of made-up bullshit floating around that gets taken very seriously. What’s one more?

Unless we can manage to dig up an actual practicing Scientologist to chime in, I would be willing to bet that they follow Scientology for the same basic reasons that people follow . They probably believe in what they are being told. Faith is obviously very important. The community and lifestyle of church participation probably appeals to them as well. Perhaps they believe it is a path to immortality of sorts.

In short, they probably follow Scientology for many of the same fundamental reasons that you follow Christianity. I don’t think that statement is a stretch at all.

And I wouldn’t place too much stock in what British Courts believe is safe or dangerous. A fart in the wind is one match strike away from being considered military ordnance by British Courts, but that’s another topic altogether.

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Good can we talk about scientology then? If I wanted to have a long dick contest about whose beliefs are most rational, I would have started a thread about that.[/quote]

Isn’t that exactly the type of thread you’ve started here?

[/quote]
It seems despite my best efforts that’s what it’s going to turn out to be. So be it.

Whether their beliefs are rational or not, I don’t know I don’t know what they actually believe. It’s apparently a big secret locked in a safe only unlockable to those who have millions to spend.
My main inquiry is the behavior of the people in the organization, according to former members I understand to be quite nefarious. And it runs from the top down, the spying, the isolation of it’s members, the requiring of mothers to get abortions, etc. Could they be lying? Sure. It could all be sweetness and light. I am apt to be negative towards it, certainly, but it’s based on primary negative information. Anything positive is locked in a ‘pay to play’ vault. While I can find a genuineness in other faiths, or even lack of faiths, I see no such genuineness here. It’s even been labeled a ‘dangerous cult’ in British courts.

My question if you recall is ‘what do people know about it?’ What’s been their experience. It’s not specifically to knock it, but seeking any good information to give it any regard as anything legitimate whatsoever. So rather than knock me, I would like information. Make me see the light.

But my inquiry was partially based on the following documentary. I have spent some time looking at more than this, but this is more or less it’s genesis:

[/quote]

None of it is super-secret anymore. Jewbacca linked all of their “secret” “technology” on the first page of the thread.

The South Park episode I mentioned is also really funny and uses the same source material - actual Scientology teachings - as the joke. It knocks the hell out of this wacky set of beliefs.

I’ve also watched the documentary you linked and enjoyed it quite a bit.

As far as your inquiry about “legitimacy”, well that’s what I’ve been saying the whole time. This particular made-up story about the universe is just as legitimate as any other made-up story about the universe. So in that respect it is nothing new or unique at all, and no less legitimate than any other set of beliefs (from my point of view, at least).

There have been countless creation myths dreamed up over time. People have been judging others for not believing in their favored creation myth for as long as creation myths have been around. Scientology is just another bullshit story being sold to people who want to buy it.

I believe Scientology attracts people the way all religions do. It gives them some answers they seek about life, gives them a community who they automatically have something in common with, maybe gives them purpose that they were lacking before, and it generally appeals to them in a way that other religions do not.

What’s it matter if it is all based on made-up bullshit? There’s thousands of religions and they can’t all be right, so there’s obviously quite a bit of made-up bullshit floating around that gets taken very seriously. What’s one more?

Unless we can manage to dig up an actual practicing Scientologist to chime in, I would be willing to bet that they follow Scientology for the same basic reasons that people follow . They probably believe in what they are being told. Faith is obviously very important. The community and lifestyle of church participation probably appeals to them as well. Perhaps they believe it is a path to immortality of sorts.

In short, they probably follow Scientology for many of the same fundamental reasons that you follow Christianity. I don’t think that statement is a stretch at all.

And I wouldn’t place too much stock in what British Courts believe is safe or dangerous. A fart in the wind is one match strike away from being considered military ordnance by British Courts, but that’s another topic altogether.

[/quote]

And I disagree with why you think people of scientology believe in it. But you are right, unless we have a scientologist to explain it, or some one who has done a fair amount of research on it we won’t truly know.
Again, it’s more their behavior than their beliefs that catch my critical eye. I get one person’s reality is another man’s myth. Not really worried as much about that. The paranoid schizophrenic behavior of the church that piqued my interest. Is it really tied to their beliefs? Or are they protecting themselves from being found out about criminal activites. Or maybe their big secret is there is no big secret, beats me.
To say it’s the same reason anybody believes any religion, I don’t buy. Most religion has a deep historical basis and theology that ties in with reason. Does scientology have that? Is Xenu and his Theatons just a ruse to cover up something else? It certainly does not have history going for it. If it has any reasonable basis for it, I sure haven’t seen it.

And your wrong about the world’s religions. Of the major ones, save for Buddhism, all share a common core of beliefs. Belief in a Creator of existence, belief in existence and share basic moral tenets. Their acts of worship or communication may be different, but we all share those basic beliefs.
And you and other atheists believe in existence for it’s own sake. And you have your own leadership who controls what the flock believe. You have Dennet, Hitchens, Harris and Dawkins. Well, 3 horsemen and a monkey riding a dog in the case of Dawkins, who has appeared to come unglued in recent years. I’ll be damned if you weren’t influenced by those guys yourself and find yourself quoting them while attacking religion. Your beliefs are no more founded or unfounded than mine. The question still remains why scientology? Basically, I am guessing you don’t know. Neither do I, I would like to find the relevant basic truth, or core philosophy behind it. Then maybe I would understand why someone would want to be it, in the face of the negativity that it seems to represent.

[quote]twojarslave wrote:

None of it is super-secret anymore. Jewbacca linked all of their “secret” “technology” on the first page of the thread.

[/quote]

I never saw his post previously. I am looking at it now. So far, interesting but nothing new. But that may change, perhaps it’s my answer.

And as you don’t trust the British Judicial system, I do not trust South Park to be anything other than entertainment with an atheist slant. I think to give it more credit than that is beyond it’s design and intent.