Are you sure about the KKK? Those folks had a march in NYC just prior to the 2000 elections. I recall because Giulliani tried having it banned based on an odd law that said you couldnt wear a disguise while marching, or something bizzare like that.
Sword_of_Light on
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure. "
You say that the Catholic Church harbors people accused of being criminals (preists doing various naughty stuff)? Well, the thing with the law is, its not really wrong until they are convicted. That whole innocent until proven guilty schtick.
It's presumed innocent until proven guilty - and that is related to the burden of proof within the justice system resting upon the prosecution. Plus, you'll note I wasn't discussing whether what the Catholic Church had done was against the law, but whether it was still actively involved in harmful things. It may not be technically illegal but it certainly is wrong. And also, I think you'll find harbouring fugitives is indeed illegal.
It has little to do with whether or not someone is actually innocent. The Catholic Church as an organisation is aware of what those who its protects have done. Afterall, it offered safeharbour to the priests and only gave them up under international pressure (which speaks volumes in and of itself). Let's not forget its silent approval of the behaviour of its emiisaries in Bosnia. Or the fact that pedophiles within its ranks just get transferred to other parishes and their victims score some hush money.
But no, you're right, unlike the Church of Scientology, the Catholic church is squeaky clean and comes out smelling of roses.
You say that the Catholic Church harbors people accused of being criminals (preists doing various naughty stuff)? Well, the thing with the law is, its not really wrong until they are convicted. That whole innocent until proven guilty schtick.
It's presumed innocent until proven guilty - and that is related to the burden of proof within the justice system resting upon the prosecution.
And if the prosecution comes from a very Catholic city, say, for instance, Boston, they wouldnt dare go after a big name in the organization, say, for instance, Cardinal Bernard Law, for crimes like Child Endagerment, Conspiracy to Commit a Felony, Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor, oh, what else? Obstruction of Justice? Yeah....
Wouldnt happen because it didnt happen. I'd have conviend a Grand Jury against him, minimum, even if it meant my career. Cardinal Law is free and somewhere other than the U.S. - skulking in the Vatican somewhere if memory serves correct.
Sword_of_Light on
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure. "
Hmm, turns out that in America that is true, because of 1st Amendment rights to free assembly. In Canada, they are listed as criminal / terrorist organizations and are illegal.
Turns out the ACLU actually had to fight in defense of the KKK for their right to assembly.
You say that the Catholic Church harbors people accused of being criminals (preists doing various naughty stuff)? Well, the thing with the law is, its not really wrong until they are convicted. That whole innocent until proven guilty schtick.
It's presumed innocent until proven guilty - and that is related to the burden of proof within the justice system resting upon the prosecution. Plus, you'll note I wasn't discussing whether what the Catholic Church had done was against the law, but whether it was still actively involved in harmful things. It may not be technically illegal but it certainly is wrong. And also, I think you'll find harbouring fugitives is indeed illegal.
It has little to do with whether or not someone is actually innocent. The Catholic Church as an organisation is aware of what those who its protects have done. Afterall, it offered safeharbour to the priests and only gave them up under international pressure (which speaks volumes in and of itself). Let's not forget its silent approval of the behaviour of its emiisaries in Bosnia. Or the fact that pedophiles within its ranks just get transferred to other parishes and their victims score some hush money.
But no, you're right, unlike the Church of Scientology, the Catholic church is squeaky clean and comes out smelling of roses.
Fuck you.
Please point out where I said that nothing should be done to the Catholic Church or any other organization that breaks the law? Its not my fault that people would rather take hush money than prosecute. That includes the governments that tacitly condone the behavior in order to keep aid packages and homeless shelters open.
I said if and when an organization breaks the law, it should be dismantled and in the case of Religions, removing their tax shelters etc etc would be a start.
The biggest reason that the Catholic Church didnt face more backlash is because you could not prove that the Churches organizational members did more than approve a transfer. Again, its the Organization that must be held accountable, you cant hold an idea accountable. And if you cant prove that the Organization broke any laws, you have to settle for prosecuting the individuals that did.
I could care less if you worship Xenu the Spacelord, Zombie Jesus, or a Magic Fairy called YHWH.
I could care less if you worship Xenu the Spacelord, Zombie Jesus, or a Magic Fairy called YHWH.
I don't see these gullible, irrational beliefs as entirely separate from the corruption and sketchiness of the organizations based around those beliefs. I think they breed each other in a vicious cycle.
I could care less if you worship Xenu the Spacelord, Zombie Jesus, or a Magic Fairy called YHWH.
I don't see these gullible, irrational beliefs as entirely separate from the corruption and sketchiness of the organizations based around those beliefs. I think they breed each other in a vicious cycle.
If you cant see the forest for the tree's, then that may be the start of your problem where you say you cant dismantle the religion. You dont need to take away the religion, just the power structure.
Islam is pretty good at being a religion without a single unifying voice. Though it makes it harder to blame the whole religion for things gone wrong.
I think the term Islamofascist is disingenious, since the term holds pretty much the same meaning if you take Islam out of it.
Hmm, turns out that in America that is true, because of 1st Amendment rights to free assembly. In Canada, they are listed as criminal / terrorist organizations and are illegal.
Turns out the ACLU actually had to fight in defense of the KKK for their right to assembly.
Jake: [To a patrolling officer] Hey, what's going on?
Police Officer: Ah, those bums won their court case so they're marching today.
Jake: What bums?
Police Officer: The fucking Nazi party.
Elwood: Illinois Nazis!
Jake: I hate Illinois Nazis.
Sword_of_Light on
"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure. "
I could care less if you worship Xenu the Spacelord, Zombie Jesus, or a Magic Fairy called YHWH.
I don't see these gullible, irrational beliefs as entirely separate from the corruption and sketchiness of the organizations based around those beliefs. I think they breed each other in a vicious cycle.
If you cant see the forest for the tree's, then that may be the start of your problem where you say you cant dismantle the religion. You dont need to take away the religion, just the power structure.
Islam is pretty good at being a religion without a single unifying voice. Though it makes it harder to blame the whole religion for things gone wrong.
I think the term Islamofascist is disingenious, since the term holds pretty much the same meaning if you take Islam out of it.
You're introducing an example counter to your own arguement.
Because the dismantling of the overarching power structures in islam did so much to reduce the violence and systematic abuse associated with the religion.
Oh wait, it was the opposite.
Jealous Deva on
0
Options
AbsoluteZeroThe new film by Quentin KoopantinoRegistered Userregular
edited January 2008
Didn't Hubbard once say that the easiest way to become a millionaire is to start a religion? Or something to that affect?
I could care less if you worship Xenu the Spacelord, Zombie Jesus, or a Magic Fairy called YHWH.
I don't see these gullible, irrational beliefs as entirely separate from the corruption and sketchiness of the organizations based around those beliefs. I think they breed each other in a vicious cycle.
You really believe that religious organizations are on the whole more corrupt and sketchy than other political or social group with shared interests?
If you cant see the forest for the tree's, then that may be the start of your problem where you say you cant dismantle the religion. You dont need to take away the religion, just the power structure.
THe problem with taking away the power structure is that the irrational people are irrationally beholden to that power structure and will see attacks against it as inducing martyrdom. I disagree that the power structure of religious institutions is the root of the problems associated with those religions. Such power structures seem to emerge naturally wherever there is a group of people with a gullible, myopic belief in supernatural forces.
Though the power structure is by nature more open to attack from legal and financial means. Is this what you mean?
Islam is pretty good at being a religion without a single unifying voice. Though it makes it harder to blame the whole religion for things gone wrong.
I think the term Islamofascist is disingenious, since the term holds pretty much the same meaning if you take Islam out of it.
I'm not sure how familiar with Islam you are, but even though there are deep schisms within the religion, each side has a rather involved power structure. For example, among the Sunni there are four schools of thought on legal and moral issues. Within each school is a heirarchy of ulema (similar to rabbis in Judaism). The ulema interpret the Quran and hadith, applying their interpretations to contemporary issues. In Islamic countries, ulema serve as judges and their interpretations are legally binding.
Whenever I have theological arguments with Muslims and present them with points or problems they cannot immediately respond to, they say something like "this is a question for the ulema, not for an amateur like me." Even outside of Islamic countries, Muslims are very often wrapped up in a power structure where they submit to the thoughts and rulings of religious specialists and bury any questioning or doubting to the assumption that a higher-level Muslim would surely know.
In Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, the religious law is brutally enforced by religious police called mutawa. Yes, the Islam of Saudi Arabia is not unified—there are Shia and groups that are openly hostile to the kingdom. But these groups aren't protesting for more freedoms—they want Saudi Arabia to be even more harsh and unforgiving in its power structure.
You really believe that religious organizations are on the whole more corrupt and sketchy than other political or social group with shared interests?
Definitely. They have almost zero accountability because they reinforce the gullibility of their backers. They can also hide behind a veil of sacredness.
Religion has always served as an effective tool to get people to give you shit you don't deserve. Check out the laws governing sacrifices in Leviticus. Did you know that Yahweh likes salt and seasoning on his sacrificial meat and baked goods? And don't forget the obligatory cut that the priests get.
I don't claim to know if scientology was founded on a bet or a scheme to make money, but I'm more willing to trust Harlan Ellison than a scientologist! Though I am biased, I suppose.
Ellison: Scientology is bullshit! Man, I was there the night L. Ron Hubbard invented it, for Christ Sakes!
I was sitting in a room with L. Ron Hubbard and a bunch of other science fiction writers. L. Ron Hubbard was famous among science fiction writers because he was the first one to have an electric typewriter.
Wings: He claimed to have written Dianetics in a weekend, and nobody can deny it.
Ellison: That's true. He wrote Dianetics in one weekend, and you know how he used to write? He used to take a roll of white paper, like paper you wrap fish in. He had it on the wall, and he would roll it into the typewriter and he would begin typing. When he was done, he would tear it off and leave it as one whole long novel.
We were sitting around one night... who else was there? Alfred Bester, and Cyril Kornbluth, and Lester Del Rey, and Ron Hubbard, who was making a penny a word, and had been for years. And he said "This bullshit's got to stop!" He says, "I gotta get money." He says, "I want to get rich".
Wings: He is also supposed to have said on that same night: "The question is not how to make a million dollars, but how to keep it."
Ellison: Right. And somebody said, "why don't you invent a new religion? They're always big." We were clowning! You know, "Become Elmer Gantry! You'll make a fortune!" He says, "I'm going to do it." Sat down, stole a little bit from Freud, stole a little bit from Jung, a little bit from Alder, a little bit of encounter therapy, pre-Janov Primal Screaming, took all that bullshit, threw it all together, invented a few new words, because he was a science fiction writer, you know, "engrams" and "regression", all that bullshit. And then he conned John Campbell, who was crazy as a thousand battlefields. I mean, he believed any goddamned thing. He really believed blacks were inferior. I mean he really believed that. He was also very nervous when I was in his office because I was a Jew. You know, he was afraid maybe I would spring horns or something.
Anyhow, the way he conned John was that he had J. A. Winter, who was a doctor, who was a close friend of John's, and he got him to run this article on Dianetics, the new science of mental health.
Wings: Dianometry was the first article, I believe.
Ellison: Right. And science fiction fans will go for any goddamm thing. They'll believe anything, man, they will believe in the abominable snowman and the Bermuda Triangle, in Pyramid Power, in EST, in Scientology, in the Second Coming, they'll believe in any goddamm thing, they don't give a shit. They go to see Star Wars; they think it is for real!
So science fiction fans picked it up, they began proselytizing, he started making money, when he had made enough money he was able to spread out a little more, then he got more cuckoos, you know, pre-Charlie Manson assholes that had no place else to go, and he began talking to these loons as if Dianetics really meant something. Then he wanted to get tax-exempt status, so he called it "The Church of Scientology".
Now, they've gotten so big that they own property all over the country, and it is impossible to stop it. They infiltrated the FBI, they infiltrated the tax department... , the funny thing is, Ron Hubbard and I still occasionally communicate with each other. Every once in a while, a couple or three times a year, we exchange letters. And I write to him, you know, and I say, "Hey Ron, when is this bullshit going to cease? These cuckoos are really driving me crazy! They come around the house with pamphlets!" And he writes me back, and he says, "It's the good work, it's the good work."
It's all very funny stuff. He was going to write a new story for me for the last Dangerous Visions, but I guess he got too busy counting his money. I don't know.
You really believe that religious organizations are on the whole more corrupt and sketchy than other political or social group with shared interests?
Definitely. They have almost zero accountability because they reinforce the gullibility of their backers. They can also hide behind a veil of sacredness.
Religion has always served as an effective tool to get people to give you shit you don't deserve. Check out the laws governing sacrifices in Leviticus. Did you know that Yahweh likes salt and seasoning on his sacrificial meat and baked goods? And don't forget the obligatory cut that the priests get.
Yahweh is also, by admission, kind of a dick. Yes, you can pick out many passages from the Bible that portray religion as controlling and fraudulent, yet you can also pick out many passages which actually give good moral advice. Its a two-thousand year old book and without any Orange Catholic Bible being made, it is what it is and you must pick and choose. There are many Catholics, Christians, Jews, Muslims etc who are amazingly good moral people, and by the same token, there are those in the same group that are utterly worthless as humans. Religion is ultimately what you make of it. Religion has also been good in that it has gotten some people, including a few freinds of mine, out of the literal gutter. Can you say that is wrong? They don't push it on me or try to convert me, or use it as a crutch or become bible thumping hicks but it was there when they needed it. Is that wrong?
Yahweh is also, by admission, kind of a dick. Yes, you can pick out many passages from the Bible that portray religion as controlling and fraudulent, yet you can also pick out many passages which actually give good moral advice. Its a two-thousand year old book and without any Orange Catholic Bible being made, it is what it is and you must pick and choose. There are many Catholics, Christians, Jews, Muslims etc who are amazingly good moral people, and by the same token, there are those in the same group that are utterly worthless as humans. Religion is ultimately what you make of it. Religion has also been good in that it has gotten some people, including a few freinds of mine, out of the literal gutter. Can you say that is wrong? They don't push it on me or try to convert me, or use it as a crutch or become bible thumping hicks but it was there when they needed it. Is that wrong?
Of course it's wrong. It's fucking bullshit. It's as wrong as any ancient Greek corpus of mythology—which, like the Bible, also contain some good morals, but unlike the Bible, do not contain any commandments to mercilessly slay women and children of rival ethnic groups. In other words, it's more wrong than ancient Greek religion.
Can wrong things have good uses? Yes. I am sure Scientology has helped a fair share of people out of the gutter too. (No offense to your friends.)
This was taken from /i/, and is supposedly a real story of an ex-scientologist. I never knew about ANY of this stuff.
MY EXPIERENCE WITH THIS CULT(pic is me )
1. Not allowed to see my mom but once a day when I was six. Was only permitted to see her at dinner for one hour.
2. My mom was made to work 12 hour days and was only paid $50.00 a week and given room and board.
3. I was made to live in a dorm at the age of six, separate from my mom or dad, with three other girls my age.
4. I was made to believe from a very early age that Scientologist were the better than other people, and if you were not in it, you were not good enough.
5. I was told to only tell my grandparents good things about myself when I visited, to not let on if I was behind in school, but just make them think I am a great student.
6. Scientologists constantly refers to people outside of their 'religion" as "Wogs". A derogatory term used commonly by members in it.
7. I was made to join staff when I was 14. I had to sign a billion year contract because of their beliefs in reincarnation.
8. I had to stop attending school when I was 14, to join staff. I could only attend school one day a week on Sunday for about 10 hours.
9. I was made to live in a two room apartment with seven other women when I was 14. Overcrowding is commonplace. I live like that for most of my seven years on staff.
10. I had 30 minute lunches, breakfasts and dinners. If I was late back to work I would get in trouble.
11. I was working 10 hour days, six days a week, from the age of 16. I was not getting paid overtime. I was only making $50.00 a week.
12. The only time I would have off, was every other week, if my production was good enough. Sometimes I would go a month without even one day off.
13. When I joined, I would not see my mom for days at a time. She lived in a different dorm than I did, and had a different eating schedule than me.
14. At the age of 15 I was made to stay up until 12 pm every Thursday and Friday to attend Scientology meetings and clean their facilities with all the other staff.
15. After Scientology events we were all assigned a number of books or tapes we were suppose to sell to the public. We had to make our quotas before we were allowed to go home. I started selling books when I was 15. Sometimes we had to call from lists we were given to make our quotas. Most of these lists were to Scientologist who were out of the state or out of the country.
16. The staff was not aloud to eat the nice food put out for public after events. It was only for the public, we would get in trouble if we were caught eating it.
17. The staff was not allowed to socialize with the public after events, only to sell books, we could not join them on the dance floor, or in the auditorium.
18. The Hacienda (apartment complex where the staff live) is set up so that staff can not just get up and leave when they want to. The Premises is surrounded by a large gate and bushes so that people cannot see in easily. There are several cameras around the complex to keep an eye on the staff. There is a security guard at the front gate at all times to let people in and out. Staff may not leave without first explaining where they are going and what they are doing to the security guard.
19. Sea Org staff are not allowed to own televisions, mine was confiscated when I was 14 or 15. Staff are not aloud to watch TV ever. Movies are only allowed on the weekend if you get approval to have time off. Movies are not allowed on weekdays.
20. Most staff do not have cars or cell phones because it costs to much money to own them. If you have a car, you have to check with the security guard if you want to leave, if he is suspicious he will not let you leave.
21. The only days staff are allowed to celebrate and dance together is the Christmas party and Beer and Cheese party. Twice a year. Don't ask, neither of these celebrations make much sense.
22. I was forced to cut all ties with my dad when I was 15. He was declared a Suppressive Person by Scientology, and that meant I could no longer talk or associate myself with him at all.
23. My mom died of cancer when I was 16. She was still on staff at the time, and she wrote in her will she wanted my brother and I assigned the guardians of Rusty and Linda Hilton, both on staff at Flag.
24. Once I joined staff I could no longer visit my relatives or grandparents for even a weekend without prior approval. At times my once a year request was denied for whatever reason, or no one had the time to look at it.
25. I was not allowed to socialize with anyone outside of the staff. If I did I was reported on and pulled in for questioning.
26. I was put on the e-meter once a week, along with all the other staff, to see if I had a clean or dirty needle. Clean meant I was OK, dirty meant I was hiding something. If it was dirty I was pulled in for questioning, and made to write up stuff I thought I was hiding
27. After each live success story we were suppose to stand up, clap, and say hip hip hooray three times to LRHs picture. This was daily. After each course completion in Scientology we had to tell everyone in our class our successes, once we were done we had to clap and say hip hooray to LRHs picture. His pictures are everywhere in their buildings. It was not optional you had to do it.
28. I had to get a divorce while I was in Scientology because my husband wanted out, and I did not. I was actually not told he was leaving until the day he left. He didn't even tell me, I was told by someone who knew him. It is against their rules to speak or mention to anyone in Scientology you are leaving staff. If you do, you can get kicked out and never be able to talk to your friends in it again.
29. When I finally decided I wanted to leave because I missed my ex husband too much, I was not allowed to just go. They made me work in the galley scrubbing pots and pans. They said I could not mention to anyone I wanted to leave, but everyone pretty much knew what I was doing. It took me three months of being separated from the group, all my friends, being put on the e-meter (lie detector) for two weeks straight and asked if I intend to contact my dad when I leave. I finally was aloud to leave, but was told I was moving to New Mexico to work for a Scientology school. I was told I could not return to Clearwater at all.
30. They made me sign a 10,000.00 waiver, promising that I would never talk out about my experiences with Scientology. I had to sign it before they would let me leave.
31. I was assigned handlers when I wanted to leave. I could not leave any of the buildings or walk outside without one of them. There are security guards assigned to each building, video cameras at each building entrance and exit, so if I wanted to leave without my handler, they would know.
32. I returned to Clearwater about a year after they sent me away. I was approached by one of their security guards and asked what I was doing here. I was on a public street on my lunch break. I just ignored him and walked away. They still thought they could control me, even though I was no longer on staff.
33. When my brother found out I was talking to my dad again, he refused to talk to me anymore. Now that I have associate myself with my dad, I am also declared, which means my brother can't talk to me.
34. Once I left, my "legal guardians' have never contacted me or spoke to me, even before I was declared.
35. I do not have one single friend I knew before I left Scientology (2002). They have all chosen to write me off because I no longer am a Sceintologist. Once I was declared, I was deleted from about 15 peoples myspace page. I did not delete them , they deleted me.
36. I am not allowed to talk to my Scientology school or teachers. They will also no longer talk to me. Once I left staff, they no longer thought it necessary to associate themselves with me.
37. I did not have a High School diploma when I left in 2002. I was 20 years old. Once I was married, they said I was now considered an adult and I no longer needed to attend school. I was only 17 when I married.
Yahweh is also, by admission, kind of a dick. Yes, you can pick out many passages from the Bible that portray religion as controlling and fraudulent, yet you can also pick out many passages which actually give good moral advice. Its a two-thousand year old book and without any Orange Catholic Bible being made, it is what it is and you must pick and choose. There are many Catholics, Christians, Jews, Muslims etc who are amazingly good moral people, and by the same token, there are those in the same group that are utterly worthless as humans. Religion is ultimately what you make of it. Religion has also been good in that it has gotten some people, including a few freinds of mine, out of the literal gutter. Can you say that is wrong? They don't push it on me or try to convert me, or use it as a crutch or become bible thumping hicks but it was there when they needed it. Is that wrong?
Of course it's wrong. It's fucking bullshit. It's as wrong as any ancient Greek corpus of mythology—which, like the Bible, also contain some good morals, but unlike the Bible, do not contain any commandments to mercilessly slay women and children of rival ethnic groups. In other words, it's more wrong than ancient Greek religion.
Can wrong things have good uses? Yes. I am sure Scientology has helped a fair share of people out of the gutter too. (No offense to your friends.)
I was asking about my friends benefit from religion is wrong. Which, you agree to. But I'm not so clear on whether you realize, that most people realize while Levictus talks about homosexuality being an abomination, it also talks about how if someone is wearing a shirt made of the wrong materials he can be killed and then make the logical choice that 'hey maybe this ain't a good idea no more'. You seen to talk as if the majority still follow these ancient tenets.
Yeah Qingu you really are trying way too hard to paint a bad picture of religion.
For every quote that you take from the Old Testament about intolerance and vengeance (quotes that very quickly became irrelevant to Christianity) there are 5 in the NT about tolerance and charity.
Okay lets ignore the power structure, the years of injustice, the twisting of words and the millions of crimes perpetrated in the name of God.
If I read the gospels in the Bible, and decide to try and live my life as Jesus commanded what harm could that possibly do to me or anyone else?
If I read up on the teachings of the Buddha, and decide to live my life as he tried to live his what harm could that possibly do to me or anyone else?
This was taken from /i/, and is supposedly a real story of an ex-scientologist. I never knew about ANY of this stuff.
MY EXPIERENCE WITH THIS CULT(pic is me )
1. Not allowed to see my mom but once a day when I was six. Was only permitted to see her at dinner for one hour.
2. My mom was made to work 12 hour days and was only paid $50.00 a week and given room and board.
3. I was made to live in a dorm at the age of six, separate from my mom or dad, with three other girls my age.
4. I was made to believe from a very early age that Scientologist were the better than other people, and if you were not in it, you were not good enough.
5. I was told to only tell my grandparents good things about myself when I visited, to not let on if I was behind in school, but just make them think I am a great student.
6. Scientologists constantly refers to people outside of their 'religion" as "Wogs". A derogatory term used commonly by members in it.
7. I was made to join staff when I was 14. I had to sign a billion year contract because of their beliefs in reincarnation.
8. I had to stop attending school when I was 14, to join staff. I could only attend school one day a week on Sunday for about 10 hours.
9. I was made to live in a two room apartment with seven other women when I was 14. Overcrowding is commonplace. I live like that for most of my seven years on staff.
10. I had 30 minute lunches, breakfasts and dinners. If I was late back to work I would get in trouble.
11. I was working 10 hour days, six days a week, from the age of 16. I was not getting paid overtime. I was only making $50.00 a week.
12. The only time I would have off, was every other week, if my production was good enough. Sometimes I would go a month without even one day off.
13. When I joined, I would not see my mom for days at a time. She lived in a different dorm than I did, and had a different eating schedule than me.
14. At the age of 15 I was made to stay up until 12 pm every Thursday and Friday to attend Scientology meetings and clean their facilities with all the other staff.
15. After Scientology events we were all assigned a number of books or tapes we were suppose to sell to the public. We had to make our quotas before we were allowed to go home. I started selling books when I was 15. Sometimes we had to call from lists we were given to make our quotas. Most of these lists were to Scientologist who were out of the state or out of the country.
16. The staff was not aloud to eat the nice food put out for public after events. It was only for the public, we would get in trouble if we were caught eating it.
17. The staff was not allowed to socialize with the public after events, only to sell books, we could not join them on the dance floor, or in the auditorium.
18. The Hacienda (apartment complex where the staff live) is set up so that staff can not just get up and leave when they want to. The Premises is surrounded by a large gate and bushes so that people cannot see in easily. There are several cameras around the complex to keep an eye on the staff. There is a security guard at the front gate at all times to let people in and out. Staff may not leave without first explaining where they are going and what they are doing to the security guard.
19. Sea Org staff are not allowed to own televisions, mine was confiscated when I was 14 or 15. Staff are not aloud to watch TV ever. Movies are only allowed on the weekend if you get approval to have time off. Movies are not allowed on weekdays.
20. Most staff do not have cars or cell phones because it costs to much money to own them. If you have a car, you have to check with the security guard if you want to leave, if he is suspicious he will not let you leave.
21. The only days staff are allowed to celebrate and dance together is the Christmas party and Beer and Cheese party. Twice a year. Don't ask, neither of these celebrations make much sense.
22. I was forced to cut all ties with my dad when I was 15. He was declared a Suppressive Person by Scientology, and that meant I could no longer talk or associate myself with him at all.
23. My mom died of cancer when I was 16. She was still on staff at the time, and she wrote in her will she wanted my brother and I assigned the guardians of Rusty and Linda Hilton, both on staff at Flag.
24. Once I joined staff I could no longer visit my relatives or grandparents for even a weekend without prior approval. At times my once a year request was denied for whatever reason, or no one had the time to look at it.
25. I was not allowed to socialize with anyone outside of the staff. If I did I was reported on and pulled in for questioning.
26. I was put on the e-meter once a week, along with all the other staff, to see if I had a clean or dirty needle. Clean meant I was OK, dirty meant I was hiding something. If it was dirty I was pulled in for questioning, and made to write up stuff I thought I was hiding
27. After each live success story we were suppose to stand up, clap, and say hip hip hooray three times to LRHs picture. This was daily. After each course completion in Scientology we had to tell everyone in our class our successes, once we were done we had to clap and say hip hooray to LRHs picture. His pictures are everywhere in their buildings. It was not optional you had to do it.
28. I had to get a divorce while I was in Scientology because my husband wanted out, and I did not. I was actually not told he was leaving until the day he left. He didn't even tell me, I was told by someone who knew him. It is against their rules to speak or mention to anyone in Scientology you are leaving staff. If you do, you can get kicked out and never be able to talk to your friends in it again.
29. When I finally decided I wanted to leave because I missed my ex husband too much, I was not allowed to just go. They made me work in the galley scrubbing pots and pans. They said I could not mention to anyone I wanted to leave, but everyone pretty much knew what I was doing. It took me three months of being separated from the group, all my friends, being put on the e-meter (lie detector) for two weeks straight and asked if I intend to contact my dad when I leave. I finally was aloud to leave, but was told I was moving to New Mexico to work for a Scientology school. I was told I could not return to Clearwater at all.
30. They made me sign a 10,000.00 waiver, promising that I would never talk out about my experiences with Scientology. I had to sign it before they would let me leave.
31. I was assigned handlers when I wanted to leave. I could not leave any of the buildings or walk outside without one of them. There are security guards assigned to each building, video cameras at each building entrance and exit, so if I wanted to leave without my handler, they would know.
32. I returned to Clearwater about a year after they sent me away. I was approached by one of their security guards and asked what I was doing here. I was on a public street on my lunch break. I just ignored him and walked away. They still thought they could control me, even though I was no longer on staff.
33. When my brother found out I was talking to my dad again, he refused to talk to me anymore. Now that I have associate myself with my dad, I am also declared, which means my brother can't talk to me.
34. Once I left, my "legal guardians' have never contacted me or spoke to me, even before I was declared.
35. I do not have one single friend I knew before I left Scientology (2002). They have all chosen to write me off because I no longer am a Sceintologist. Once I was declared, I was deleted from about 15 peoples myspace page. I did not delete them , they deleted me.
36. I am not allowed to talk to my Scientology school or teachers. They will also no longer talk to me. Once I left staff, they no longer thought it necessary to associate themselves with me.
37. I did not have a High School diploma when I left in 2002. I was 20 years old. Once I was married, they said I was now considered an adult and I no longer needed to attend school. I was only 17 when I married.
What I think separates Scientology from other religions is it's pretty obvious the people at the top knows it's fucking bullshit and a big scam. The whole system is built around making money. It's purpose is simply put to make money through manipulation.
Other religions do awful stuff to but more often than not I think they're done by genuinely misguided people who actually believe what they're doing is right.
I was asking about my friends benefit from religion is wrong. Which, you agree to. But I'm not so clear on whether you realize, that most people realize while Levictus talks about homosexuality being an abomination, it also talks about how if someone is wearing a shirt made of the wrong materials he can be killed and then make the logical choice that 'hey maybe this ain't a good idea no more'. You seen to talk as if the majority still follow these ancient tenets.
Even the ancient Jews didn't follow the tenets of the Old Testament, mostly because they were constantly conquered and made subject to more civilized societies' laws.
But even though people don't follow these laws, or even acknowledge them, they claim that the book which contains these laws is a special book. Special in a way that the Code of Hammurabi or other Mesopotamian legal texts are not special—it's a "good book."
I find this claim morally wrong. I don't believe the few useful moral passages in the New Testament excuse the barbarism of the rest of the book. I believe this claim that the Bible is a special, "good book" gives refuge to the people who do take these laws seriously. It's not a good book, it's a cultish, barbaric book, even for the time in which it was written.
And by the way, I don't believe the people going on about how there are "five times as many good parts as bad parts" in the Bible have actually read the Bible. They should.
Okay lets ignore the power structure, the years of injustice, the twisting of words and the millions of crimes perpetrated in the name of God.
What twisting of words? I do not have to twist words to get a commandment of genocide and a green light for slavery from the Old Testament. That is exactly what the text says. Feel-good Christians are the ones twisting Jesus' words to suit their own moral compasses.
Honestly, have you read the Bible?
If I read the gospels in the Bible, and decide to try and live my life as Jesus commanded what harm could that possibly do to me or anyone else?
You could, for example, take his statement in Matthew 5:17 to heart (about upholding the OT law) and kill anyone who tried to tell you that your religion is wrong. You could also own slaves, which was explicitly allowed by Paul and explicitly commanded in Deuteronomy for war captives. You could beat your wife for disobeying you—man is the head of woman just as Christ is the head of man.
Or you could twist and ignore Jesus' words and live like your enlightenment morality says you should live.
If I read up on the teachings of the Buddha, and decide to live my life as he tried to live his what harm could that possibly do to me or anyone else?
I'm not nearly as familiar with Buddhism as I am with the Biblical religions. As I understand it, Buddhist philosophy places an excessive value on detachment, which I believe is problematic.
What I think separates Scientology from other religions is it's pretty obvious the people at the top knows it's fucking bullshit and a big scam. The whole system is built around making money. It's purpose is simply put to make money through manipulation.
Other religions do awful stuff to but more often than not I think they're done by genuinely misguided people who actually believe what they're doing is right.
There are plenty of telemarketers who probably believe what they're selling is bullshit.
And I'm not sure if the current people at the top of Scientology know it's bullshit. L. Ron Hubbard probably did, but I don't know about his followers. I don't think any of us know enough about the actual power structure of Scientology to make any statements about the authenticity of its leaders.
Osama bin Laden heads a cult power structure much more powerful than Scientology and I am pretty sure he believes his bullshit.
I also think it's possible to start out not believing your own bullshit but then eventually believe it simply by virtue of repeating it and acting like you believe it so much. 1984 explored this dynamic; even though it was fiction I wonder how applicable it is to cults.
I wasn't accusing you of twisting words- your commentary is well informed. I meant the various schisms and developments in christian doctrine.
and oh yeah-
A christian man can totally beat his wife because Jesus beat the church all the time.
Now you are twisting.
and like I said before you are telling me you can take the one comment that Jewish law still abides and commit murder and ignore the ONE MILLION quotes about turning the other cheek and EXPLICITLY state the Jesus thought it is wrong to try to cause harm to anyone.
Okay, maybe twisting words is the wrong phrase. "A selective focus" would be better.
You know that Christianity is a religion focused on love, evangelism and humility. Yet you keep on going back to deuteronomy because its what angers you the most about religion.
My point is this:
I don't see how being a Christian is inherently any worse than being an objectivist or a communist or a nihilist.
Man, anyone who lives by Jesus's example is a cool dude. Thats a given.
What exactly do you think was so great about Jesus' example? He was not tolerant of people who did not believe his bullshit ("Anyone who is not with me is against me"). He repeatedly threatened people with afterlife punishments for not following him. His parables are all rather frightening in their moral dimensions. He encouraged his followers to desert their families to follow him. He preached an extreme, ascetic form of Judaism, and managed to convince everyone that they needed a solution for a problem that did not actually exist (salvation from nonexistent afterlife judgment).
In short, he sounded like either a charlatan or a fucking nutcase. Of course, that's only going by what the gospels portray him as, and the gospels are innaccurate legends written by competing sects 50 years after the fact.
Well yes- I'm not judging either religion based on the plausibility of its theology. What I'm saying is remarkable about Christianity is that it does NOT condone strong-arm tactics, brainwashing, 'we don't give a fuck about anybody else' mentality, financial commitments, violence.
The New Testament actually commands you to give almost all your money and possessions to charity. (Funny how many American Christians are opposed to social welfare).
But it certainly does preach a "don't give a fuck about anyone else" mentality. Believers are encouraged to ditch their families for the sake of the cult:
"Truly I tell you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields, for my sake and for the sake of the good news, who will not receive a hundredfold now in this age—houses, brothers and sisters, mothers and children, and fields, with persecutions—and in the age to come eternal life." —Jesus, Matt 10:29
As for strong-arm tactics, both Jesus and Paul used strong-arm tactics. Jesus physically smashed up moneylender stalls in the temple. He repeatedly threatened his followers and anyone who would listen with hellfire and damnation, lest they don't believe his message. Paul consolidated his cult by browbeating his listeners into a subservient role: he often characterizes his audience as his "children." He also displays an open hatred of rival sects, joking that a pro-circumcision sect of Christians should go all the way and cut their entire penises off in Galatians.
Pretty much the only bad things you can say about it is that it is a) too focused on guilt and b) too focused on evangelising. It really is a benevolent religion. And before you throw out an example of a christian who did one of those things, I'm just talking about the original doctrine (as close as we know).
Sorry, but I don't agree, and I don't think the history of the religion is a surprise judging from the Scriptures. The above examples are quite cultish.
And again, you are ignoring the intimate connection the New Testament has with the Old. Christians are told that the laws of the Old Testament are moral and just, and that they should try to follow them, even if they no longer have to because of the sacrifice. Is it really a surprise that Christians began killing heretics as soon as they achieved political sovereignty?
Where exactly does the NT command near complete donations to charity?
Exactly what 'strong arm tactics' did Paul use?
I cant think of one, even through he endured countless.
As for his hatred to 'rival sects', they were gaining power by deliberately twisting the teachings of both Paul and Jesus to serve their needs. I think his 'hatred' and derision were completely justified.
As for Jesus in the temple, he was rebelling against the strong arm tactis of the temple priests. They were using their power and scripture to force people to trade their 'pagan' money into acceptable money at outlandish rates, and taking a cut. Jesus cleared the temple of the moneychangers for the good of all the Jews in the Temple. And you seem to hold the view that any belief which is exclusive, such as Jesus saying He is the only way to heaven, is a strong arm tactic. Thats a little ridiculous.
It seems you are applying your quote from Matthew in a very narrow way. The view you are presenting is of a new convert leaving his entire family out to dry. Could it not also be an older convert taking care of his family but also leaving to serve his God? Also, much more likely, could it not also refer to a new convert being kicked out of his family, or suffering outright persecution? And what is the drive behind this? It is to share the 'good news' with those who have not heard it, it is to serve other people. Certainly, it doesnt fit into the thought that Christians are taught 'not to give a fuck about anyone else'. (also, have you not heard of the Salvation Army, Christian Children's Fund, etc.)
And the connection between the OT and the NT is much more complicated than what you presented. I think human nature is normally far more responsible than Christian teaching when it comes to 'cultish' practices.
Where exactly does the NT command near complete donations to charity?
"Sell your possessions, and give alms. Make purses for yourselves that do not wear out, an unfailing treasure in heaven, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys." —Luke 12:33
"So therefore, none of you can become my disciple if you do not give up all your possessions." —Luke 14:33
"Give to everyone who begs from you; and if anyone takes away your goods, do not ask for them again." —Luke 6:30
Exactly what 'strong arm tactics' did Paul use?
Mostly in his rhetoric, for example:
"I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—not that there is another gospel, but there are some who are confusing you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8But even if we or an angel* from heaven should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you, let that one be accursed! 9As we have said before, so now I repeat, if anyone proclaims to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let that one be accursed!" —Galatians 1:6
Paul repeatedly asserts his divine authority to browbeat doubters. He has always struck me as a glorified televangelist manipulating his flock through threats and bullshit claims about his powers.
As for his hatred to 'rival sects', they were gaining power by deliberately twisting the teachings of both Paul and Jesus to serve their needs. I think his 'hatred' and derision were completely justified.
They were going around claiming Christians should be circumsized. Amazingly, this follows exactly from what Jesus supposedly said in Matthew 5:17. (Some scholars believe that Matthew was actually written by sympathizers of one such sect and is a repudiation of Paul's theology.)
There were many sects of Christians at the time of Paul's writings, but I suppose you think they were all of them heretics worthy of hatred and derision?
As for Jesus in the temple, he was rebelling against the strong arm tactis of the temple priests. They were using their power and scripture to force people to trade their 'pagan' money into acceptable money at outlandish rates, and taking a cut. Jesus cleared the temple of the moneychangers for the good of all the Jews in the Temple.
Strong-arm tactics are of course justified to combat perceived social problems.
And you seem to hold the view that any belief which is exclusive, such as Jesus saying He is the only way to heaven, is a strong arm tactic. Thats a little ridiculous.
It is psychological bullying.
There are people today who suffer neuroses from the hellfire threats they received growing up in Catholic and fundamentalist churches.
It seems you are applying your quote from Matthew in a very narrow way.
Of course I am, otherwise you'd actually have to address the morality of the Old Testament laws that Jesus explicitly says you should follow.
The view you are presenting is of a new convert leaving his entire family out to dry. Could it not also be an older convert taking care of his family but also leaving to serve his God? Also, much more likely, could it not also refer to a new convert being kicked out of his family, or suffering outright persecution?
I don't know, Jesus didn't see fit to elaborate. Perhaps Scientologists who leave their families for their cult also do so under such circumstances.
And what is the drive behind this? It is to share the 'good news' with those who have not heard it, it is to serve other people.
That's certainly what drives Tom Cruise. Scientologists are the only ones who can help at traffic accidents.
Certainly, it doesnt fit into the thought that Christians are taught 'not to give a fuck about anyone else'. (also, have you not heard of the Salvation Army, Christian Children's Fund, etc.)
I prefer Unicef and the World Food Programme, but whatever floats your boat. Note that Scientology also has charitable programs they sponsor.
Frankly, religious charities have always struck me as emotional bribery. You are paying for good will towards your cult. Jesus wasn't the first to appreciate the efficacy of charity in spreading ideology, and he wasn't the last: Hamas runs a number of charities in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon.
And the connection between the OT and the NT is much more complicated than what you presented.
I'm sure the doctrines of Scientology are much more complicated than what has been presented on this forum as well.
I think human nature is normally far more responsible than Christian teaching when it comes to 'cultish' practices.
I think your human nature is what allows you to delude yourself into taking such a rosy view of your own cult.
and oh yeah-
A christian man can totally beat his wife because Jesus beat the church all the time.
And how does Jesus (being God) treat church members who disobey and fall from grace? Specifically, after they die. I understand there is a lake of fire involved, and eternal torture.
Now you are twisting.
and like I said before you are telling me you can take the one comment that Jewish law still abides and commit murder and ignore the ONE MILLION quotes about turning the other cheek and EXPLICITLY state the Jesus thought it is wrong to try to cause harm to anyone.
First of all, I never claimed the Bible said it is okay to commit murder. "Murder" is defined as unlawful killing, and much of the Bible's legal code is devoted to teasing out which kind of killing is lawful and which is unlawful. (Much more is lawful in the Bible than under the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights.)
Secondly, there are not ONE MILLION quotes about turning the other cheek, there is exactly one quote, in Matthew 5:38. Incidentally, Jesus also says "I have come not to bring peace but the sword."
Ah, fuck it. I'm through talking about Christianity in this thread, it's off the railz.
and oh yeah-
A christian man can totally beat his wife because Jesus beat the church all the time.
And how does Jesus (being God) treat church members who disobey and fall from grace? Specifically, after they die. I understand there is a lake of fire involved, and eternal torture.
Now you are twisting.
and like I said before you are telling me you can take the one comment that Jewish law still abides and commit murder and ignore the ONE MILLION quotes about turning the other cheek and EXPLICITLY state the Jesus thought it is wrong to try to cause harm to anyone.
First of all, I never claimed the Bible said it is okay to commit murder. "Murder" is defined as unlawful killing, and much of the Bible's legal code is devoted to teasing out which kind of killing is lawful and which is unlawful. (Much more is lawful in the Bible than under the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights.)
Secondly, there are not ONE MILLION quotes about turning the other cheek, there is exactly one quote, in Matthew 5:38. Incidentally, Jesus also says "I have come not to bring peace but the sword."
Ah, fuck it. I'm through talking about Christianity in this thread, it's off the railz.
Posts
It's presumed innocent until proven guilty - and that is related to the burden of proof within the justice system resting upon the prosecution. Plus, you'll note I wasn't discussing whether what the Catholic Church had done was against the law, but whether it was still actively involved in harmful things. It may not be technically illegal but it certainly is wrong. And also, I think you'll find harbouring fugitives is indeed illegal.
It has little to do with whether or not someone is actually innocent. The Catholic Church as an organisation is aware of what those who its protects have done. Afterall, it offered safeharbour to the priests and only gave them up under international pressure (which speaks volumes in and of itself). Let's not forget its silent approval of the behaviour of its emiisaries in Bosnia. Or the fact that pedophiles within its ranks just get transferred to other parishes and their victims score some hush money.
But no, you're right, unlike the Church of Scientology, the Catholic church is squeaky clean and comes out smelling of roses.
And if the prosecution comes from a very Catholic city, say, for instance, Boston, they wouldnt dare go after a big name in the organization, say, for instance, Cardinal Bernard Law, for crimes like Child Endagerment, Conspiracy to Commit a Felony, Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor, oh, what else? Obstruction of Justice? Yeah....
Wouldnt happen because it didnt happen. I'd have conviend a Grand Jury against him, minimum, even if it meant my career. Cardinal Law is free and somewhere other than the U.S. - skulking in the Vatican somewhere if memory serves correct.
Though I have to admit Tom Cruise really put it into perspective with this quote: "It was just like...like..pshooo."
I'm tottaly joining.
Scientology: It's like pshoooo
Turns out the ACLU actually had to fight in defense of the KKK for their right to assembly.
MWO: Adamski
Fuck you.
Please point out where I said that nothing should be done to the Catholic Church or any other organization that breaks the law? Its not my fault that people would rather take hush money than prosecute. That includes the governments that tacitly condone the behavior in order to keep aid packages and homeless shelters open.
I said if and when an organization breaks the law, it should be dismantled and in the case of Religions, removing their tax shelters etc etc would be a start.
The biggest reason that the Catholic Church didnt face more backlash is because you could not prove that the Churches organizational members did more than approve a transfer. Again, its the Organization that must be held accountable, you cant hold an idea accountable. And if you cant prove that the Organization broke any laws, you have to settle for prosecuting the individuals that did.
I could care less if you worship Xenu the Spacelord, Zombie Jesus, or a Magic Fairy called YHWH.
MWO: Adamski
Islam is pretty good at being a religion without a single unifying voice. Though it makes it harder to blame the whole religion for things gone wrong.
I think the term Islamofascist is disingenious, since the term holds pretty much the same meaning if you take Islam out of it.
MWO: Adamski
L. Ron Hubbard is the Scientology god, apparently.
Jake: [To a patrolling officer] Hey, what's going on?
Police Officer: Ah, those bums won their court case so they're marching today.
Jake: What bums?
Police Officer: The fucking Nazi party.
Elwood: Illinois Nazis!
Jake: I hate Illinois Nazis.
You're introducing an example counter to your own arguement.
Because the dismantling of the overarching power structures in islam did so much to reduce the violence and systematic abuse associated with the religion.
Oh wait, it was the opposite.
You really believe that religious organizations are on the whole more corrupt and sketchy than other political or social group with shared interests?
https://medium.com/@alascii
Though the power structure is by nature more open to attack from legal and financial means. Is this what you mean?
I'm not sure how familiar with Islam you are, but even though there are deep schisms within the religion, each side has a rather involved power structure. For example, among the Sunni there are four schools of thought on legal and moral issues. Within each school is a heirarchy of ulema (similar to rabbis in Judaism). The ulema interpret the Quran and hadith, applying their interpretations to contemporary issues. In Islamic countries, ulema serve as judges and their interpretations are legally binding.
Whenever I have theological arguments with Muslims and present them with points or problems they cannot immediately respond to, they say something like "this is a question for the ulema, not for an amateur like me." Even outside of Islamic countries, Muslims are very often wrapped up in a power structure where they submit to the thoughts and rulings of religious specialists and bury any questioning or doubting to the assumption that a higher-level Muslim would surely know.
In Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, the religious law is brutally enforced by religious police called mutawa. Yes, the Islam of Saudi Arabia is not unified—there are Shia and groups that are openly hostile to the kingdom. But these groups aren't protesting for more freedoms—they want Saudi Arabia to be even more harsh and unforgiving in its power structure.
Religion has always served as an effective tool to get people to give you shit you don't deserve. Check out the laws governing sacrifices in Leviticus. Did you know that Yahweh likes salt and seasoning on his sacrificial meat and baked goods? And don't forget the obligatory cut that the priests get.
Yahweh is also, by admission, kind of a dick. Yes, you can pick out many passages from the Bible that portray religion as controlling and fraudulent, yet you can also pick out many passages which actually give good moral advice. Its a two-thousand year old book and without any Orange Catholic Bible being made, it is what it is and you must pick and choose. There are many Catholics, Christians, Jews, Muslims etc who are amazingly good moral people, and by the same token, there are those in the same group that are utterly worthless as humans. Religion is ultimately what you make of it. Religion has also been good in that it has gotten some people, including a few freinds of mine, out of the literal gutter. Can you say that is wrong? They don't push it on me or try to convert me, or use it as a crutch or become bible thumping hicks but it was there when they needed it. Is that wrong?
Can wrong things have good uses? Yes. I am sure Scientology has helped a fair share of people out of the gutter too. (No offense to your friends.)
This was taken from /i/, and is supposedly a real story of an ex-scientologist. I never knew about ANY of this stuff.
I was asking about my friends benefit from religion is wrong. Which, you agree to. But I'm not so clear on whether you realize, that most people realize while Levictus talks about homosexuality being an abomination, it also talks about how if someone is wearing a shirt made of the wrong materials he can be killed and then make the logical choice that 'hey maybe this ain't a good idea no more'. You seen to talk as if the majority still follow these ancient tenets.
For every quote that you take from the Old Testament about intolerance and vengeance (quotes that very quickly became irrelevant to Christianity) there are 5 in the NT about tolerance and charity.
Okay lets ignore the power structure, the years of injustice, the twisting of words and the millions of crimes perpetrated in the name of God.
If I read the gospels in the Bible, and decide to try and live my life as Jesus commanded what harm could that possibly do to me or anyone else?
If I read up on the teachings of the Buddha, and decide to live my life as he tried to live his what harm could that possibly do to me or anyone else?
https://medium.com/@alascii
Sounds just like most religions I know. :roll:
That's is some creepy ass shit right there.
Other religions do awful stuff to but more often than not I think they're done by genuinely misguided people who actually believe what they're doing is right.
But even though people don't follow these laws, or even acknowledge them, they claim that the book which contains these laws is a special book. Special in a way that the Code of Hammurabi or other Mesopotamian legal texts are not special—it's a "good book."
I find this claim morally wrong. I don't believe the few useful moral passages in the New Testament excuse the barbarism of the rest of the book. I believe this claim that the Bible is a special, "good book" gives refuge to the people who do take these laws seriously. It's not a good book, it's a cultish, barbaric book, even for the time in which it was written.
And by the way, I don't believe the people going on about how there are "five times as many good parts as bad parts" in the Bible have actually read the Bible. They should.
Honestly, have you read the Bible?
You could, for example, take his statement in Matthew 5:17 to heart (about upholding the OT law) and kill anyone who tried to tell you that your religion is wrong. You could also own slaves, which was explicitly allowed by Paul and explicitly commanded in Deuteronomy for war captives. You could beat your wife for disobeying you—man is the head of woman just as Christ is the head of man.
Or you could twist and ignore Jesus' words and live like your enlightenment morality says you should live.
I'm not nearly as familiar with Buddhism as I am with the Biblical religions. As I understand it, Buddhist philosophy places an excessive value on detachment, which I believe is problematic.
And I'm not sure if the current people at the top of Scientology know it's bullshit. L. Ron Hubbard probably did, but I don't know about his followers. I don't think any of us know enough about the actual power structure of Scientology to make any statements about the authenticity of its leaders.
Osama bin Laden heads a cult power structure much more powerful than Scientology and I am pretty sure he believes his bullshit.
I also think it's possible to start out not believing your own bullshit but then eventually believe it simply by virtue of repeating it and acting like you believe it so much. 1984 explored this dynamic; even though it was fiction I wonder how applicable it is to cults.
and oh yeah-
A christian man can totally beat his wife because Jesus beat the church all the time.
Now you are twisting.
and like I said before you are telling me you can take the one comment that Jewish law still abides and commit murder and ignore the ONE MILLION quotes about turning the other cheek and EXPLICITLY state the Jesus thought it is wrong to try to cause harm to anyone.
Okay, maybe twisting words is the wrong phrase. "A selective focus" would be better.
You know that Christianity is a religion focused on love, evangelism and humility. Yet you keep on going back to deuteronomy because its what angers you the most about religion.
My point is this:
I don't see how being a Christian is inherently any worse than being an objectivist or a communist or a nihilist.
https://medium.com/@alascii
In short, he sounded like either a charlatan or a fucking nutcase. Of course, that's only going by what the gospels portray him as, and the gospels are innaccurate legends written by competing sects 50 years after the fact.
Where exactly does the NT command near complete donations to charity?
Exactly what 'strong arm tactics' did Paul use?
I cant think of one, even through he endured countless.
As for his hatred to 'rival sects', they were gaining power by deliberately twisting the teachings of both Paul and Jesus to serve their needs. I think his 'hatred' and derision were completely justified.
As for Jesus in the temple, he was rebelling against the strong arm tactis of the temple priests. They were using their power and scripture to force people to trade their 'pagan' money into acceptable money at outlandish rates, and taking a cut. Jesus cleared the temple of the moneychangers for the good of all the Jews in the Temple. And you seem to hold the view that any belief which is exclusive, such as Jesus saying He is the only way to heaven, is a strong arm tactic. Thats a little ridiculous.
It seems you are applying your quote from Matthew in a very narrow way. The view you are presenting is of a new convert leaving his entire family out to dry. Could it not also be an older convert taking care of his family but also leaving to serve his God? Also, much more likely, could it not also refer to a new convert being kicked out of his family, or suffering outright persecution? And what is the drive behind this? It is to share the 'good news' with those who have not heard it, it is to serve other people. Certainly, it doesnt fit into the thought that Christians are taught 'not to give a fuck about anyone else'. (also, have you not heard of the Salvation Army, Christian Children's Fund, etc.)
And the connection between the OT and the NT is much more complicated than what you presented. I think human nature is normally far more responsible than Christian teaching when it comes to 'cultish' practices.
"Sell your possessions, and give alms. Make purses for yourselves that do not wear out, an unfailing treasure in heaven, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys." —Luke 12:33
"So therefore, none of you can become my disciple if you do not give up all your possessions." —Luke 14:33
"Give to everyone who begs from you; and if anyone takes away your goods, do not ask for them again." —Luke 6:30
Mostly in his rhetoric, for example:
"I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—not that there is another gospel, but there are some who are confusing you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8But even if we or an angel* from heaven should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you, let that one be accursed! 9As we have said before, so now I repeat, if anyone proclaims to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let that one be accursed!" —Galatians 1:6
Paul repeatedly asserts his divine authority to browbeat doubters. He has always struck me as a glorified televangelist manipulating his flock through threats and bullshit claims about his powers.
They were going around claiming Christians should be circumsized. Amazingly, this follows exactly from what Jesus supposedly said in Matthew 5:17. (Some scholars believe that Matthew was actually written by sympathizers of one such sect and is a repudiation of Paul's theology.)
There were many sects of Christians at the time of Paul's writings, but I suppose you think they were all of them heretics worthy of hatred and derision?
Strong-arm tactics are of course justified to combat perceived social problems.
It is psychological bullying.
There are people today who suffer neuroses from the hellfire threats they received growing up in Catholic and fundamentalist churches.
Of course I am, otherwise you'd actually have to address the morality of the Old Testament laws that Jesus explicitly says you should follow.
I don't know, Jesus didn't see fit to elaborate. Perhaps Scientologists who leave their families for their cult also do so under such circumstances.
That's certainly what drives Tom Cruise. Scientologists are the only ones who can help at traffic accidents.
I prefer Unicef and the World Food Programme, but whatever floats your boat. Note that Scientology also has charitable programs they sponsor.
Frankly, religious charities have always struck me as emotional bribery. You are paying for good will towards your cult. Jesus wasn't the first to appreciate the efficacy of charity in spreading ideology, and he wasn't the last: Hamas runs a number of charities in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon.
I'm sure the doctrines of Scientology are much more complicated than what has been presented on this forum as well.
I think your human nature is what allows you to delude yourself into taking such a rosy view of your own cult.
What I got, was fail.
Stop derailing the post. This is actually interesting to some of us.
First of all, I never claimed the Bible said it is okay to commit murder. "Murder" is defined as unlawful killing, and much of the Bible's legal code is devoted to teasing out which kind of killing is lawful and which is unlawful. (Much more is lawful in the Bible than under the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights.)
Secondly, there are not ONE MILLION quotes about turning the other cheek, there is exactly one quote, in Matthew 5:38. Incidentally, Jesus also says "I have come not to bring peace but the sword."
Ah, fuck it. I'm through talking about Christianity in this thread, it's off the railz.
Thats cause Jesus didn't take no shit.
Now! Opinions and thoughts on Anon's Operation Chanology:
http://partyvan.info/index.php/Project_Chanology
http://partyvan.info/index.php/Project_Chanology/Target_IRL