Why Is Scientology Viewed As Being Wackier Than Any Other Religion?

[stopbush]

Seriously.

It can't be due to the wigged-out celebrities like Tom Cruise. Every religion has its
share of prominent wackos, so it must be the tenets of the religion itself. But how are
the tenets of Scientology any more fantasy based or wacko than any of the major religions?

As far as today's threads on Mr Cruise, his comments on his future culinary desires were
clearly meant in a humorous way. I actually applaud him for taking the, "you think I'm wacko
NOW, wait 'til you hear this," tact to disarm his critics. I didn't even have problems with his
Matt Lauer appearance - I was glad someone took issue with that gasbag.

BTW - I'm not a Scientologist, but I have had a few friends and acquaintances in the past who joined
up. To a person, they all made significant changes in their lives, most noticeably in their financial
status which improved quite dramatically after they joined Scientology (what's up with that?). I don't know if
they've stuck with it, but at least they never tried to impose their beliefs on me.

I know that's a limited view on a select number of people, but there it is.

Not meant as flame bait. Comments? :)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. It's newer and smaller.

Give it a few hundred years.

[MountainLaurel]

6. I think that's it in a nutshell

:applause:

[Sinti]

9. Yup, new kid on the playground -- it's not un-PC to bash it :) n/t

[ugarte]

I don't care what they believe

Most criticism of Scientology stems from the way they treat people, particularly their critics. They threaten reporters, sue anyone who talks about them. They have a very nasty reputation, indeed.

[stopbush]

24. But how is that worse than religions who kill their "critics?"

[Solo_in_MD]

49. You should see what $cientologist do to their enemies

in some ways it makes Islam look good.

[NAO]

65. Uh, take a look at what Christians did to their enemies

from Robert Ingersoll's Heretics and Heresies

... the cross and rack were inseparable companions. Across the open Bible lay the sword and fagot. Not content with burning such heretics as were alive, they even tried the dead, in order that the church might rob their wives and children. The property of all heretics was confiscated, and on this account they charged the dead with being heretical -- indicted, as it were, their dust -- to the end that the church might clutch the bread of orphans. Learned divines discussed the propriety of tearing out the tongues of heretics before they were burned, and the general opinion was, that this ought to be done so that the heretics should not be able, by uttering blasphemies, to shock the Christians who were burning them. With a mixture of ferocity and Christianity, the priests insisted that heretics ought to be burned at a slow fire, giving as a reason that more time was given them for repentance.

No wonder that Jesus Christ said, "I came not to bring peace, but a sword."

In 1208 the Inquisition was established. Seven years afterward, the fourth council of the Lateran enjoined all kings and rulers to swear an oath that they would exterminate heretics from their dominions. The sword of the church was unsheathed, and the world was at the mercy of ignorant and infuriated priests, whose eyes feasted upon the agonies they inflicted. Acting, as they believed, or pretended to believe, under the command of God; stimulated by the hope of infinite reward in another world -- hating heretics with every drop of their bestial blood; savage beyond description; merciless beyond conception, -- these infamous priests, in a kind of frenzied joy, leaped upon the helpless victims of their rage. They crushed their bones in iron boots; tore their quivering flesh with iron hooks and pincers; cut off their lips and eyelids; pulled out their nails, and into the bleeding quick thrust needles; tore out their tongues; extinguished their eyes; stretched them upon racks; flayed them alive; crucified them with their heads downward; exposed them to wild beasts; burned them at the stake; mocked their cries and groans; robbed their children, and then prayed God to finish the holy work in hell.

According to the theologians, God, the Father of us all, wrote a letter to his children. The children have always differed somewhat as to the meaning of this letter. In consequence of these honest differences, these brothers began to cut out each other's hearts. In every land, where this letter from God has been read, the children to whom and for whom it was written have been filled with hatred and malice. They have imprisoned and murdered each other, and the wives and children of each other. In the name of God every possible crime has been committed, every conceivable outrage has been perpetrated. Brave men, tender and loving women, beautiful girls, and prattling babes have been exterminated in the name of Jesus Christ. For more than fifty generations the church has carried the black flag. Her vengeance has been measured only by her power. During all these years of infamy no heretic has ever been forgiven. With the heart of a fiend she has hated; with the clutch of avarice she has grasped; with the jaws of a dragon she has devoured; pitiless as famine, merciless as fire, with the conscience of a serpent: such is the history of the Church of God.

Read the whole piece here for a historical overview of the violent, cruel, destructive superstition known as "Christianity"
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/robert_ingersoll/heretics_and_hericies.html

[haktar]

51. maybe

http://whyaretheydead.net/

eventually you should also read http://home.snafu.de/tilman/index.html

[Ian David]

29. Well, they have a significant financial interest at stake

It's like a pyramid scheme.

If they want to make the next level, they have to "pay to play."

They get a discount for each person who takes their "free personality test" and signs-up to the program.

Plus, that $cientology therapy gets expensive. They gotta get "cleared" and all. Again, they need to recruit people so they can pay their therapist.

Imagine if you couldn't afford to go to the doctor unless you got him at least one new referral per month?

By the way, if you want to make $cientologists stop calling you, just tell them that you want to learn how to use Scientology as a weapon to destroy your enemies. Tell them you're working on an "Engram Bomb" that can encode negative engrams on crowds of people who can then be programed to do your bidding.

[htuttle]

2. Xenu, volcanos, hydrogen bombs and alien ghosts

I think that about sums it up.

http://www.xenu.net

The sea-going forced labor colonies don't help either.

[MissB]

4. What you said.

[Ksec]

3. Because it involves space men

Other than that ??

[MrModerate]

5. Dependence on Space Aliens from millions of years ago . . .

is pretty telling. But I think what gets people's back up is that it's so obviously a con job: paying for sacraments is pretty unseemly. Even religions that require heavy thithing don't have a rate card on your level of enlightenment.

[Buddyblazon]

7. I lived in old Hollywood for a couple of years...

and I saw a lot of creepy stuff involving Scientology.

I think part of it is that Hubbard was a science fiction writer. And their whole premise is based on one of his writings...a piece that several say he stole from another writer.

He was like Ed Wood. Sub-par, eccentric work.

Now if Wood had started a religion, how could anybody take it seriously?

[progressoid]

60. I'd go to The Church of Ed Wood!

[Burning Water]

8. Maybe because

the founder was a science fiction writer. Maybe because it's new. Maybe because it is. Who knows?

[bluerum]

10. I am not sure it is. But it does have element of sci fi that probably

makes the non-science crowd skeptical right up front. Certainly rubs up against the supreme being intelligent design stories.

[lapfog_1]

25. exsqueeze me!

Having a wacko sci fi basis not only make the "non-science" crowd skeptical... the more science oriented are pretty damn skeptical too, especially the part about evil alien overlords and souls of dead aliens inhabiting humans (Bush, Rummy, and Cheney COULD be an existence proof to this, I guess).

I think most people don't count Scientology as a religion since it behaves like a cult. Which is not to say that some more mainstream religions (especially fundies of any stripe) don't act like cults as well. But Scientology is strictly like a Jim Jones thing. It's sad to see people so full of doubt about themselves that they would turn to this (or any other cult).

[soothsayer]

11. L. Ron Hubbard's sketchy founding of it, most probably based on

a stolen sci-fi novel. I think that's the biggie. Otherwise, yeah, it's just as good as FSM, or Catholicism, etc.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

68. long ago, I heard a rumor that hubbard started it on a bet.

He and a friend were talking about how gullible the sheeple were and that anyone, with a plan, could create their own successful religion.

I have no proof that bet occured, but long ago, this story was being passed around.

[dysfunctional press]

12. i don't view it as any whackier than mormonism-

both of them have total looney-tunes for followers, and outlandish stories at their base.

kinda like christianity.

[Lance_Boyle]

13. they charge more for membership, for one thing.

Also, the whole "invented out of whole cloth by a science fiction writer who hated paying taxes on his book royalties" thing. The stories of scientology are no more asinine than those of any other organized faith, I suppose. Spaceships or magic men who walk on water - take your pick.

[Initech]

14. Could it because Scientology headquarters is located on Hollywood Blvd?

That might have something to do with it!

[wtmusic]

21. The Celebrity Centre building on Franklin is beautiful

Restored Chateau Lysee hotel

[Sinti]

15. The Mormons have a space-connection too, Jesus makes them palatable

Sans Jesus they'd be getting kicked around, too. They apparently each get their own planet when they die, if they were good. John Smith was a clever dude, though -- Angel Moron(i) indeed.

[SPKrazy]

72. No, They Aren't "Palatable"

without attacking the religion, they aren't tolerated much really.

[The2ndWheel]

16. They haven't had a good war yet

The Cruisades?

You need to build up some respect first. Invading armies, blood, people willing to kill and be killed for Xenu, that kind of stuff. Maybe when they take over the US Government they'll use state terrorism to get their point across. Everyone else does.

[madmom]

17. I wondered that my own self, my favorite saying...I used to believe

in fairytales too, then I turned 7.

[stopbush]

19. Like when Steve Martin did his medieval physician routine on SNL.

"...we know now that it's caused by a tiny dwarf living in your stomach."

[Redstone]

18. Well the aliens in the volcanoes might have a little bit to do with why

people might look at them askance, yes?

Redstone

[stopbush]

22. But is that wackier than the human zombies, unicorns & fire-breathing

dragons in the Bible?

[TallahasseeGrannie]

34. Where are the unicorns and fire breathing

dragons in the Bible? I assume you are refering to Christ as a human zombie.

So I get that. I really get it. I get it over and over and over again.


I get it.

[stopbush]

42. No, Christ isn't the human zombie I was referring to:

(Mat 27:50 NRSV) Then Jesus cried again with a loud voice and breathed his last.

(Mat 27:52 NRSV) The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised.

(Mat 27:53 NRSV) After his resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many.

Unicorns?: Isaiah has it!

34:6 The sword of the LORD is filled with blood, it is made fat with fatness, and with the blood of lambs and goats, with the fat of the kidneys of rams: for the LORD hath a sacrifice in Bozrah, and a great slaughter in the land of Idumea.

34:7 And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness.

Dragons? Isaiah is your source for that one as well:

Isaiah 13:22 And the wild beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in their pleasant palaces: and her time is near to come, and her days shall not be prolonged.

14:29 Rejoice not thou, whole Palestina, because the rod of him that smote thee is broken: for out of the serpent's root shall come forth a cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a fiery flying serpent.

30:6 The burden of the beasts of the south: into the land of trouble and anguish, from whence come the young and old lion, the viper and fiery flying serpent

[TallahasseeGrannie]

56. I can't tell you how happy I am that Jesus was not the zombie

you referred to! I try not to be too thin-skinned about things and don't always succeed. I have heard other refer to him as a zombie on DU, and let's face it, the definition of zombie is the undead. So it fits.

But that Old Testament had some wild and wooly stuff in it, huh? What in the heck were they TALKING about???

[Random_Australian]

79. Let me tell you, the cockatrice -not even highlighted- was the weirdest

one of the bunch by a freaking mile, let me tell you! Like a cross between a rooster... and a basilisk! WTF were they thinking?

[mike_c]

20. I don't view it as any less plausible than most other religions...

...and at least it has the advantage of not relying on the supernatural, which actually makes it somewhat less wacky in my estimation!

[movonne]

23. Could it be any wackier than the moonies...

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

80. I think in this case we have a tie.

With Moonies winning out on the "closest to the nuclear button" untying criteria.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

26. Scientology seems pretty wacky

but I believe Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into heaven. So who am I to judge?

But you want to talk wacky? Read every post on DU for a day. (just doing so qualifies you as wacky) There are some very unique people and views here. And when I saw "unique" I am being DU-correct so I don't get a pizza delivery.

mmmm pizza. Maybe I'll call Papa John's.

T-Grannie

[charlie]

32. It's squirrelly,

shadowy, cultic, hyper-litigious, and often dangerous. Everything from the ridiculous name down is a con job. Scientology is a "religion" I'm perfectly OK with having open contempt for.

[Critters2]

27. As a pastor, I can tell you why it strikes me as wackier than my faith...

Scientology is based on the idea that Xenu killed millions of people 75 million years ago. Now the ghosts of those dead are attaching themselves to our bodies, and being general pains in the ass. If yu give Scientology enough money, they'll get rid of the pesky critters--I like to call them "Space Ghosts"--for you. Right nice of 'em.

The problem for me is that there are no extant documents from anywhere near the time that Xenu offed all those poor souls. When I prepare a sermon, I'm expected to do a careful study of texts that were written within a hundred years of Jesus' life time. I'm expected to study them critically, pointing out both the ways in which they can offer inspiration, and the problems with the texts. For instance, I preached the Marcan resurrection texts. I pointed out that we know the post-resurrection appearance stories in Mark were very late additions to the text and are therefore not at all reliable. I alos noted that the original manuscript of Mark tells of the empty tomb, but no post-resurrection appearance of Jesus. Thus, Mark allows for the possibility that Jesus' resurection was not a physical one.

The Xenu story offers me no such texts. Just some silly story made up of whole cloth by a fiction writer, who has no way of knowing what happened 75 million years ago. There are no stories written within 100 years of Xenu's attacks. Just LRH's fertile imagination.

Then there's the fact that Christianity as I know and practice it works for justice for the poor and minorities. I don't see how Scientology makes the world a better place, an important goal of any faith I'd be interested in. But that's me.

Oh, and you've got a space ghost on your back.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

33. Okay, I feel better now.

T-Grannie

[stopbush]

39. Your arguments ring a bit hollow.

First, you set a standard for contemporaneous witness to validate your god figure: "within 100 years." We all know that
there are no contemporaneous accounts to be found anywhere that Jesus actually existed. Setting a parameter of
"within 100 years" of a supposed birth is arbitrary, at best. Maybe I believe that any texts needed to written within 10
years of Jesus death for them to be reliable...that 100 years is plenty of time to twist the story and alter the myth (or
the facts of an actual life). I'd think the most important distinction that would need to be addressed would be whether or not the person actually existed,
and that can no more be proved for Jesus than it can be for Xenu.

Second, most Xtians believe that the Bible is the revealed word of god. If true, then it doesn't matter if that word was
revealed before or during Jesus' life, or 100 or 2000 years after the fact. In that respect, and applying your 100 year standard,
I should give ol' L Ron even more cred because his "revelations" happened within the past 60 years or so.

Third, when you speak of there being "no texts" existing for the Xenu story - which I imagine you mean to be ancient texts -
you fail to mention that there were myriad god figures who pre-dated the Jesus story by millenia, gods whose lives
presaged the Jesus mythos in remarkable ways (Mithras, Apollo, etc). And as far as LRH's fertile imagination, he doesn't
hold a candle to John's Revelation...or the writers of the imaginary exodus from Egypt which never happened.

Finally - Scientology may have its Space Ghosts but Xtianity has its devils and demons. Where's the distinction?

[Critters2]

45. Well, there's the fact that I don't believe in devils and demons

I see them as metaphor. I'm always amazed that neither conservative Christians nor their critics, nor Scientologists are familiar with the concept of "metaphor".

[stopbush]

46. Agreed. But who gets to decide what's a metaphor? Your

devil & demon "metaphors" are very real entities to many Xtians.

Sometimes I think that most every Xtian on Earth is processing through their
own version of the Jeffersonian Bible.

[Critters2]

47. I always admit that there are things that other Christians believe that

don't ring true to me. I just don't believe 'em. For me, the issue iw whether the faith motivates you to help others. That's the test.

Does Xenu feed the poor?

[stopbush]

50. Does Jesus feed the poor?

BTW - Xenu may not motivate Scientologists to feed the poor, but I'd guess that many Scientologists
donate to non-religious-based charities that feed the poor. Or am I wrong? Are Scientologists precluded by their
religion to donate to the poor (I don't know, I'm asking)?

Sorry is the man who depends on religion for his morality.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

58. You say that like it is a bad thing? n/t

[TallahasseeGrannie]

57. You wrote..

'Second, most Xtians believe that the Bible is the revealed word of god"

I don't know that that is true. None of the Christians I know do; but I don't know real statistics.

Many believe like I do, that the OT is myth and oral tradition written down, and the NT is four carefully chosen accounts of the life of Christ, and also the letters of Paul, etc.

[Imperialism Inc.]

61. But if the OT is myth then...

why would you believe in Jesus saving mankind? The thing he is saving from happened in the OT correct? I mean, if there was no fall then there is no need for a redeemer right? If the prophecy Jesus was fulfilling was only a myth then why not conclude that Jesus himself is a myth? Or at the very least that the divine and redeemer part is.

Plus , didn't he make reference to the OT himself and say that he was from the God mentioned there? If that God is a myth doesn't that make him a little nuts or having delusions of grandeur? If instead you decide that those parts of the NT are themselves myth, then how do you decide where to stop declaring things myths? I don't get it.

As far as many believing that way, I think you are making that up. I've never met a Christians (before you) that thought the Bible was a myth. The obvious reason is that the logical conclusion is as outlined above.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

62. You don't know many Episcopalians

and Catholics, do you? And a good number of Presbyterians, Methodists, UCC and many other mainstream churches? The Bible literates are mostly fundamentalists and evangelicals and they are not the majority. Frankly, I have never met a person who believed in Adam and Eve. Well, I do know two. An elderly couple. Nobody else.

I think perhaps you are underestimating the word "myth." It is not just something somebody thought up. It is something that grew in oral tradition from the primal archetypes of humanity. The fact that there are OT prophesies about Christ within that myth and oral tradition I find even more amazing. The myth of the Fall is an allegory. The fact that it is not literal does not negate its value. You know, nowhere in the Bible does it say the Bible is true!

I believe Christ is not a myth because of my personal experience with Him. If you don't have that experience, then I can see why you would classify Him that way. He IS a myth to you. And that's fine with me. I don't evangelize. I think everyone believes what they are supposed to believe.

And I get to decide, as a believer, what I believe and what I don't! I believe the Gospels are much more recently written and while I know they have been modified and codified I think their similarities are striking. But again, I have a relationship with an inner being I identify as Christ, and that is my main touchstone with what is Truth and what is not.

And I don't make things up. I would estimate at least 50% of the folks on this list are "believers" and I seriously doubt more than ten believe the OT is to be taken literally.

[stopbush]

64. Actually, many of the OT references appear only in Matthew,

in the "this was done to fulfill the prophecy" vein. Unfortunately for Matthew, many of those
"prophecies" were taken horribly out of context and had nothing to do with prophecy about
a Jewish messiah. Matthew probably thought he'd get away with it because he wrote in Greek and
assumed (hoped?) that his readers couldn't read Hebrew to unmask his mistakes and non sequitors.
In fact, Matthew even mis-attributed some of his citations to the wrong OT books.

Nothing a blind man running for his life would notice, but still...

A decent analysis on "fulfilling prophecy" is here: http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/matthew.htm

[SPKrazy]

73. Well, Meet Me

I think that much of the OT is metaphor and oral tradition passed mythology of nomadic peoples of the region

Some of it is quite beautiful mythology

but to take the OT as literal would imply that most people that read the bible believe that the earth is around 6K years old.

Fundies may believe that, and they make the most noise these days trying to tell the rest of us that we're all wrong.

But the majority of Christians don't think such nonsense

[manic expression]

74. A few things

It's quite the established fact that the Gospels were constantly and consistently rewritten. Celsus pointed this out in the 2nd century. However, that's a minor point.

I'm sorry, but Christianity has not made the world a better place. Think of all the religions and cultures of the world which have been devoured and raped by Christian missionaries. Think of all the progress hindered by ignorant Christians clinging to the Bible (geocentrism, anyone?). The fact that the faith has sometimes been used as a vehicle for social justice (Romero in El Salvador, Dr. King in the US and so on) is relatively in the minority IMO, especially when contrasted with the times when it has been used for the opposite (slavery, racism and more used the Bible as justification...false and manipulative justification you might argue, but that changes little). Furthermore, just about every faith has been used to further justice as well, without the problems I outlined above.

Just my opinion. Sorry for going off topic.

[Ian David]

28. Because L. Ron Hubbard made it as a joke-- part of a bet with Isaac Asimov

Hubbard deliberately made it wacky, thinking that once people attained a "high enough level" they would "get it" and realize they'd been suckered.

Imagine if Jesus sat around smoking grass with the disciples and said, "Hey, you guys. Stop fighting over whether we're going to say Judas hung himself, or whether we're going to say he threw himself off a cliff. You guys just write your own 'gospels," man. It's all good."

Oh, wait...

[papau]

31. Damn - finally someone has the same memory of L Ron and Asimov that

I do!

:-)

When Isaac Asimov was on the faculty of Boston University (late 50's and 60's) he was the star of the annual Sci FI picnic. And in either 62 or 63 he while on that picnic said that L Ron had said - while at an award dinner where he spoke in the mid-40's to late 40's - that the income tax was evil and that he was going to start a religion to get around that tax. Damn if I can recall what award was being given or even if L Ron was the fellow getting the award. In any case it was not the Hugo - despite my years of assuming that it was (never assume - but I was young then).

L Ron later claimed that his philosophy was supposedly fully expounded in a never published "Excalibur" that was written in 1938. Believe that if you like! :-)

In any case he wrote some nice Sci Fi back then:
Buckskin Brigades (1937) ISBN 1592120121 (pbk)
Slaves of Sleep (1939) ISBN 0884046559
Final Blackout (1940) ISBN 1592120555 (pbk)
The Automagic Horse (1940, published 1994) ISBN 088404906X
Death's Deputy (1948)
The Masters of Sleep (1948) ISBN 0884046559
The Kingslayer (1949)

Typewriter in the Sky (1940)

Fear (1940)

The Kingslayer (1949)
====================================================

FROM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._Ron_Hubbard

Although he claimed to have graduated in civil engineering from The George Washington University as a nuclear physicist, university records show that he attended for only two years, was on academic probation, failed in physics, and dropped out in 1931. It is also claimed that he obtained his Ph.D from Sequoia University in California, which was later exposed as a mail-order diploma mill

in a study of L. Ron Hubbard's text, one is impressed from the very beginning by a tendency to generalization and authoritative declarations unsupported by evidence or facts

IN A bio not authorized by the Church http://www.spaink.net/cos/rmiller/index.html it says:

"Hubbard claimed to have conducted years of intensive research into the nature of human existence; to describe his findings, he developed an elaborate vocabulary with many newly coined terms <9>. He codified a set of "axioms" <10> and an "applied religious philosophy" that promised to improve the condition of the human spirit, which he called the "Thetan." The bulk of Scientology focuses on the "rehabilitation" of the thetan.

Hubbard's followers believed his "technology" gave them access to their past lives, the traumas of which led to failures in the present unless they were audited. By this time, Hubbard had introduced a biofeedback device to the auditing process, which he called a "Hubbard Electropsychometer" or "E-meter." It was invented in the 1940s by a chiropractor and Dianetics enthusiast named Volney Mathison. This machine, related to the electronic lie detectors of the time, is used by Scientologists in auditing to evaluate "mental masses" surrounding the thetan. These "masses" are claimed to impede the thetan from realizing its full potential."

[Ian David]

38. They have the "E-Meters" at county fairs now in the $cientology tents

You know what I'd love to do (but my wife won't let me)?

Sit down with them to take their "Stress Test" as they call it (they don't call it the "Is there an evil pain-ghost on your back test").

And then, as I grasp the big metal E-Meter bars, fall out of the chair convulsing with foam coming out of my mouth, yelling, "Xenu! Xenu! Xenu!"

Someday I just might go to the county fair with some Alka Seltzer tablets in my pocket...

Years ago, when I was young and naive, the $cientology tent was set-up across from the National Guard tent. I asked The National Guard guy, "Any chance we can napalm those Scientologists?"

The Guardsman, to his credit, was a professional. He said gravely, "You ever see what napalm actually does to people?"

I got the point and let it go at that.

But I suppose, if I wanted to piss him off, I could have said, "Why? Do you have something worse we could use?"

[papau]

44. Pay to play- we talk after check clears- is not my kind of religion

In the earlier years they handed out his book at airports so as to increase the "sales" figures.

Oh well - I liked him as a sci fi writer in the 40's and 50's, and I rather admire the way he hustled Hollywood types. He was an interesting fellow!

:-)

[wtmusic]

54. too funny

I can't go near them. Religious people in military-style uniforms give me the willies.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

35. Wow

so like the purpose of the faith..the ultimate enlightenment.. is to figure out it's a scam?

That's hilarious.

And I like the idea of Jesus telling the Apostles.."It's all good..."

I don't know that they had weed in the desert, but Jesus had a a great source for wine.

[Solon]

67. Actually, that would be the Lotus eaters...

From Homer, I think Odysseus men went to the land of the Lotus Eaters, they basically ate some brownies(not literally), got high, and were robbed. Make of that what you will, but it was the Mediterranean area, and I probably messed it up a little bit, but what does that sound like to you? So, it is certainly possible that Jesus Toked, a lot of other great figures in history did, Lincoln would be one.

[Book Lover]

84. I recall the story was that the bet was with Ellison (nm)

[applegrove]

30. They insist of stepping into science and envicerating it. Untill this

round of fundies.. in the last few hundred years... science has been accepted (slowly, cautiously, but once it demonstrated its inherent prowess at solving some problems it was accepted by religion, with a pass on birth control and other highly copious examples).

That's the nutshell.

Scientilogy sees some science as in competition for souls. Perhaps some fundies are looking at science that way too these days.

BBBBBBBBAD stuff!!!

Good science is good information. And a soul should have access to that to get closer to god or whatever...

[Lydia Leftcoast]

36. Because you're REQUIRED to pay to join and to "ascend to higher levels"

People attend churches for years and never pay a dime. This is frowned upon, but most churches won't kick you out for it.

[haktar]

37. A religion ? rotflmao

In Hubbard's own word the only obligation is to make money, to make more money and to even make more money.

Btw it is not even considered a religion in the US. it got tax ex tempt status (arguable through bribery and blackmail) but not the "Church" status.

as Scientologist you have to access the internet through some sort of cybercitter here is a link to the list of sites
you are not allowed to visit. http://www.taniwha.com/crack.list.html

BTW OT III and NOT levels are available on the internet. Read them and laugh
OK if you think there may be some truth in it, don't read them, because if you do read them unprepared, according to Hubbard you will die a terrible death.

A organization involved in spying, blackmail, slave labor and murder, even bush could learn something from them.

so now you may declare me a suppressive person :-;

And no, i was never involved with scientology. The accusation of an disappointed ex member doesn't stick.

[Ian David]

40. Hubbard smelled bad, had bad breath, was very drunk and loud & obnoxious..

I DON'T BELIEVE IT..... This last week, my e-mail has been packed with forwarded messages dealing with a possible threat to suggestible minds posed by the "Battlefield Earth" movie starring John Travolta. It's rather well known that Travolta and Tom Cruise - among many movie stars and celebrities - are devoted Church of Scientology members. To anyone who knows the history of this group, that means total, unwavering, fanatical, dedication to the science-fiction notions upon which this cult is based.

I only met the founder of Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard, twice - and then only briefly. On both occasions, it was at social gatherings of sci-fi authors in Sea Bright, New Jersey, where the likes of Isaac Asimov, Lester Del Rey, Fred Pohl, and George O. Smith would convene as The Trap Door Spiders. Hubbard smelled bad, had bad breath, was very drunk and loud, and obnoxious. Not my idea of a religious leader - which he subsequently became.

More:
http://www.randi.org/jr/05-15-2000.html



Subject: Re: Isaac Asimov speaking of L. Ron Hubbard
From: [e-mail] (Paulettec)
Date: 31 Oct 2004 02:30:26 GMT

>Asimov was never involved and that he
had a very low opinion of crackpots and charlatans.

Isaac discussed Scientology with me a few times many years ago and he was very negative about it.

He also apologized to me once, saying that he felt partially responsible for Hubbard's success (perhaps by not exposing him; he wasn't clear but I remember the conversation very clearly.)

Paulette Cooper

More:
http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/isaac-asimov-paulette-cooper.htm

[Ian David]

41. Scientology infiltrating our public schools to recruit drug-addicted youth

The final piece is about Scientology's war on psychiatry, which exposes how Scientology aims to expand through Narconon - its pseudo-scientific drug rehabilitation program. Getting schools to agree to these programs is key to this plan, and Narconon representatives have given lectures on drug prevention to millions of students. Unfortunately Narconon actually doesn’t work because it is based on completely false premises on how drugs act on the body:

According to the Scientology handbook, "Answers to Drugs," the core treatment for those who abuse drugs like marijuana, Ecstasy or cocaine is sweating out drug residuals and other toxins by taking saunas and jogging. Remedies also include the B-complex vitamin niacin, oils and other minerals, a detoxification service which "is available under expert supervision in Scientology organizations and missions around the world."

In the past year, thanks in part to a series of articles by Nanette Asimov in the San Francisco Chronicle, city officials and school districts in California have taken a closer look at the Narconon curriculum. In a letter to the San Francisco Unified School District, Steve Heilig, director of health and education for the San Francisco Medical Society, wrote: "One of our reviewers opined that 'this reads like a high school science paper pieced together from the Internet, and not very well at that.'"

A study by the California Healthy Kids Research Center for the California Department of Education established that Narconon imparts inaccurate information. Narconon's discredited teachings include the pronouncements that drugs burn up the body's vitamins and minerals, that these vitamin deficiencies cause pain (which prompts more drug use), that rapid vitamin and nutrient losses cause the "munchies" among pot smokers, and that drugs build up in fat tissue and spur flashbacks and a hunger for more drugs.

"This theoretical information does not reflect current evidence that is widely accepted and recognized as medically and scientifically accurate," the study found.

School administrators need to be aware of the dangerous and pseudo-scientific nature of Narconon, and its real purpose which is to attract more members to the cult. Already the California State Superintendent has recommended a ban on Narconon, and San Francisco and Los Angeles school districts have outlawed it. One hopes other districts will realize what Narconon is and ban it too.

More:
http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/07/salon_on_scient.html

[rd_kent]

43. A cult is what large congregations call small congregations.

I think the main reason why so many are quick to point out eccentricities of other peoples religion is because it deflects criticism of their own religion.

[Ian David]

48. No. A cult is a group that excessively exploits their members...

Here are some warning signs of what makes a cult:

Excerpted from:

THE UNLIKELIEST CULT IN HISTORY
BY MICHAEL SHERMER


* Veneration of the Leader: Excessive glorification to the point of virtual sainthood or divinity.

* Inerrancy of the Leader: Belief that he or she cannot be wrong.

* Omniscience of the Leader: Acceptance of beliefs and pronouncements on virtually all subjects, from the philosophical to the trivial.

* Persuasive Techniques: Methods used to recruit new followers and reinforce current beliefs.

* Hidden Agendas: Potential recruits and the public are not given a full disclosure of the true nature of the group's beliefs and plans.

* Deceit: Recruits and followers are not told everything about the leader and the group's inner circle, particularly flaws or potentially embarrassing events or circumstances.

* Financial and/or Sexual Exploitation: Recruits and followers are persuaded to invest in the group, and the leader may develop sexual relations with one or more of the followers.

* Absolute Truth: Belief that the leader and/or group has a method of discovering final knowledge on any number of subjects.

* Absolute Morality: Belief that the leader and/or the group have developed a system of right and wrong thought and action applicable to members and nonmembers alike. Those who strictly follow the moral code may become and remain members, those who do not are dismissed or punished.



http://www.2think.org/02_2_she.shtml

[rd_kent]

70. You made my point for me.

All religions started small, with nearly every point you listed in your post. As some grew into mainstream ideologies, they became more accepted. Say, for example, christianity did not exist today, then tomorrow, it got off the ground in the same manner it did 200 years ago. Would the major religions of today call it a cult? Would it fit the description? Apply this scenario to any religion.

[haktar]

52. On the lighter side

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9t8LkfRkIDk

[Silent3]

53. Perhaps one reason why Scientology seems weirder...

...is that most of the weirdness of "traditional" religions addresses more fundamental questions than Scientology does, in exchange for the expected price in any religion of believing a bunch of strange stuff in the face of little or no evidence -- questions like: where did we come from, where did the world come from, what are we supposed to be doing with our lives, what happens when we die? Believing in the Christian God "answers" a lot of these questions.

But what does believing in Xenu and intergalactic wars get you? All it does is add an extraneous layer of drama to the story of the world we live in, without getting down to the more fundamental things often addressed by religious dogma.

Of course, maybe if I bought my way into the inner circles of Scientology I'd find out that there was more in the way of Big Answers to Big Questions. :)

Also, I'd guess that the sci-fi like nature of the Scientology story, as fantastical as it is, doesn't carry the same kind of psychological impact as things which seem more "purely spiritual". Without that kind of mystical impact, fewer people are, I'd imagine, inclined to grant such dogma the same permission to defy logic and escape demands for evidence.

From what I know of Scientology, it comes off more like a strategy to deal with one's problem and limitations in life, problems as viewed in the light of Scientology's dogma, than it does a Spiritual Way. Hey, it's all BS to me, but at least I think I can see some reasons why, apart from simple matters of newness and number of followers, why Scientology tends to trigger skepticism and derision more than "traditional" religions do.

[bluedeminredstate]

55. Rolling Stone had a great expose last month

and if they are to be believed it's some funky shit. Tom Cruise is at an OT level seven or something quite high on the path to earthly superman status which allows him to control other people's behavior, levitate, read minds and other things that would frighten anyone under his thumb (paging Katie Homles...).
It was a long article that had lot's of information from access the writer got from the church itself. Quite eye opening and creepy.
:wow:

[Donald Ian Rankin]

59. A few possible factors.

Most religions make claims about issues that don't really have much to do with science. This means that there's a lot of ambiguity about them. Scientology, I believe, makes much more "scientific" claims. This makes them much easier to test and hence falsify. You can get a lot further bullshitting about something to people if it's something they don't understand terribly well.

Scientology has, I believe, a rather mystery-cult like structure. In general cults are less respected than larger, more open religious organisations. It's no less disrespected than cults that are subsets of other religions.

Scientology is newer than most other religions, and smaller. This means that people don't grow up being told "and Scientologists believe..." in the way that they do for Hindus, Christians, Jews etc (and also for the ancient Greeks, Romans, Egyptians and Norse), and so Scientologist views come as more as a shock.

I think it's probably also fair to say that the tenets of Scientology *are* also more "fantasy based and wacko" than those of most major religions, in as far as that's objectively measureable, although I'm not sure a less perjorative term wouldn't be better.

[nemo137]

63. Christianity draws from millenia of Near Eastern and European tradition

Scientology draws on 20th century pulp space opera? Just a guess.

[NAO]

66. Old religions are ashamed of how wacky they are, and need to bash others

to feel better about their own irrational, superstitious nonsense.

I have read some of the really whacked out stuff from Scientology - it is definitely BS - but I think it is less stupid and far less repulsive than Christianity and Islam.

[Strong Atheist]

69. Good question...

:evilgrin:

[Post]

71. Dynamic Transitioning

Cool new blog on personal/professional/spiritual development. http://dynamictransitioning.blogspot.com/

[catbert836]

75. It's not as believable.

They would probably have a lot more adherents if they taught something about a burning bush talking, a virgin birth, or someone just rising right up into the sky, but all this space stuff just isn't that easy too swallow. ;-)

[sakabatou]

76. An Ex-Scientologist Speaks Out

http://user.tninet.se/~haj197g/my_story.html

[varkam]

77. Because, frankly...

Scientology is comprised of the brain-droppings of a mediocre science-fiction novelist (Ronald Hubbard) who has said that the way to strike it rich is to found a religion (which, surprise! he did). Hubbard himself is a charlatan at best and a criminal at worst. Similarly, scientology is a warped following at best and an outwardly-destructive cult at worst (what with it's ongoing opposition to psychiatry and psychology - because, you know, Hubbard's idea of mental health--Dienetics--is so far ahead of the curve).

It's as if people actually believed in the FSM and gave their life savings to the cause. Seriously, that is a realistic as I can put it for you.

Don't have to take my word on it, go have a look at the wiki for yourself.

[NMMNG]

78. He got cheesed because the real scientific community denounced his

theories as the pseudoscience they were. In 1952 his Dianetics foundation was closed after proceedings were started against him for teaching medicine without a license. Next thing you know Scientology the Religion is born. The beauty of the maneuver is that while a science can be discredited, a religion cannot. A religion also has tax-exempt status. So of then they go on to teach their adherents that psychiatry/psychology is a sham and evil as revenge for the community having told the truth about Hubbard's pseudo-science back in 1950.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

81. They can believe whatever they want, but...

it is NOT considered good form in mainstream religions to provide spiritual advice ONLY to people who pay large amounts of money.

[Dogmudgeon]

82. One big reason: The Internet hates it

The Church of Scientology is afflicted with a ba-a-ad case of power-lust, and to that end, it decided to try to destroy the Internet in the 1990s. In one particular absurd act, Helena Kobrin, a Scientology lawyer (with an uncanny resemblance to Katherine "Don't Call Me Kathy, Call Me Katherine" Harris), issued a Unix command to delete the Internet! (A "RemoveGroup" command, I think.)

About the same time, Scientology "apostates" were getting the Free Zone going. The Freezoners are generally the older Scientologists who got kicked out and the newer ones who don't want to get within a mile of an official Church of Scientology, but still see some value in Hubbard's ideas. Even if you hate Hubbard with a passion bordering on madness itself, since much of Scientology is taken from existing sources, there actually may be some value in it -- at least enough to draw people in. (Many people are so enraged at Scientology that any remark perceived as positive, no matter how minor or qualified, becomes "fighting words". Don't make that mistake. No matter how much invective you may want to use to describe Hubbard, he was not an idiot.)

Anyway, since the Internet encouraged the growth and expansion of the Free Zone, official Scientology tried to act against that development, too. This caused the "Freezone Bible Association" to be created, which issued about 85% of all of Hubbard's writings over the Internet from untouchable websites in Russia, Poland, and Ukraine. The church spent years threatening ISPs to try to suppress these FZBA documents, but they are on all the P2P networks (like Limewire, e-Mule, etc.) and never disappear.

Sure, there's more to it than just that, but the mixture of Scientology and the Internet is one of those fire/gasoline things. Scientology hatred is up there with Bill Gates hatred -- only Bill Gates tried to buy the Internet, not delete it.

--p!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

83. I would be very interested indeed

To see an analogous thread posted in an alternative universe where America was largely scientologist, and Christianity was a fringe group, with posts from (the alter egos of) the same people...

I'd bet dollars to dimes that the balance of opinion would be far more anti-scientologist.