HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Religion & Spirituality » Religion (Group) » "Going Clear" f...

Thu Apr 2, 2015, 09:45 AM

"Going Clear" fallout: secretive damage-control by Scientology

Just one example. This article:

http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-religions-youve-got-all-wrong-because-hollywood/

Four Religions you got wrong.

4. Being Rastafarian is about way more than smoking weed. They are essentially a christian cult and believe that Ras Tafari Makonnen, emperor of Ethiopia, was the second coming of Christ.

3. Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the biblical apocalypse is already happening. Right now.

2. The Amish do use electricity and technology. Each community decides on a case-by-case basis what may be introduced and what not.

1. Scientology is a normal religion, just like every other. Is it really that bad that Scientology believes in that alien-stuff? And Scientology charges a lot of money because maintenance of the buildings is expensive. And you are not forced to go to courses or be audited. Scientologists aren't banned from talking to non-Scientologists, merely told to avoid harassers. Okay, Scientology can be combative at times, but you have to understand all that shit they have been through! (Germany discriminates against them by putting Scientology on a government watchlist for dangerous organizations!) That's why they are so testy about their image! Scientology is also opposed to psychiatric medicine, but have you seen the torturous treatments that were used in psychotherapy in the past? And Scientology also does social welfare-stuff. So, you see, Scientology is a totally normal religion, just like every other. If you single out Scientology for criticism, you are a hypocrite.
http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-religions-youve-got-all-wrong-because-hollywood_p2/


---------------------------
Some commenters claim that the author is a Scientologist, but a quick search yielded nothing.

9 replies, 1923 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to DetlefK (Original post)

Thu Apr 2, 2015, 09:50 AM

1. .

As this is a protected group that "." Is my only comment. I don't want to be a suppressive person...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Original post)

Thu Apr 2, 2015, 09:59 AM

2. "Now apologize to Tom Cruise. Or go be an asshole to every celebrity who openly follows a religion"

This is not going to end as planned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Original post)

Thu Apr 2, 2015, 10:02 AM

3. Reminds me of Jim Jones

His was a controlling cult type religion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Original post)

Thu Apr 2, 2015, 10:06 AM

4. If not a Scientologist than certainly an apologist.

And Scientology charges a lot of money because maintenance of the buildings is expensive.


Unless the religion actually requires them to have 'really expensive to maintain buildings' that's a totally bogus excuse for milking the suckers.

Edit: I retract my statement about apologist. The linked article currently does not actually include the line about building maintenance. I don't know if the author updated, or the line in the OP was supposed to be a paraphrase, but I don't feel the author deserves to be judged on something he's not actually saying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Original post)

Thu Apr 2, 2015, 10:15 AM

5. To be clear, you have completely re-written this article and your re-write bears little

resemblance to what this guy actually wrote.

He does seem to defend scientology to an questionable degree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #5)

Thu Apr 2, 2015, 10:18 AM

6. ??? Where does the content of my text deviate from the content of his text?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #6)

Thu Apr 2, 2015, 10:26 AM

7. Seriously? This is what the article actually says:

Scientology is probably the religious group whose image is most skewed by Hollywood because all the information we receive on Scientology, good or bad, is almost entirely straight out of Hollywood's mouth. But not everyone who follows the religion is a celebrity, and they're not all getting bilked out of their money, either. You may have seen Going Clear recently and now think Scientology is a huge piece of shit. And, yes, they've done some bad stuff, but what religion hasn't, honestly? They have, in fact, done some good things, too.

Yeah, all the stuff that the South Park episode said Scientologists believe is actually true. They do believe in Thetans and Xenu and all that stuff. But let me ask you this: Is that fact so terrible? Is it worse or really that much weirder than any other religion in the world? Sure, it's different because aliens, but religious scholars have indicated that it's a perfectly legitimate faith. It even shares vague commonalities with Eastern religions and also resembles early Gnosticism.

And, yes, they do charge money for auditing and certain courses, but churches are, you know, expensive. Most religions require a tithe, up to 10 percent of your income. They don't force you to pay it (or most don't, anyway), and Scientology doesn't force its followers to be constantly audited or go to courses, either. They also don't have centuries of resources built up like other religions.

Scientologists also aren't banned from talking to non-Scientologists, but they are advised to avoid people who will harass them about their religion and also to just not be shitty, like any other religion.


more at link

you have rewritten this in a highly editorial way

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #7)

Thu Apr 2, 2015, 10:31 AM

8. Yes... I condensed his unwieldy text into handy bullet-points.

Where do you see differences in the content?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #8)

Thu Apr 2, 2015, 10:36 AM

9. When I read your post, I couldn't imagine why anyone might think the writer

was a scientologist.

When I read the actual article, I then understood.

You didn't just condense it, your editorialized it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread