Why would anyone else be intereted in getting involved.Originally Posted by thewizeard
Poster
Why would anyone else be intereted in getting involved.
re-member
BT Rep: +1
there are enough memebers, so you can probaly better address that question to them... Strangely, it is often "well to do members" that join Ron's scam...
en(un)lightened
Yeah, kinda like "Skull and Bones" for liberals.
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
Poster
selfosophy!
also: scientology is a religion started by an author of bad sci-fi novels, who seems to have been a misanthropic drug-abusing psychopath. they copyright, trademark and sell their religious materials like free marketeers, shuffle the money around their various companies till the money (the part that hasn't been reserved for starting lawsuits and buying spiffy sea org uniforms, anyway) ends up in who knows whose pockets, behave pretty much like a for-profit business, yet scientology's companies pay no taxes. they insist that psychology & psychiatry are evil, yet scientology itself is just an abusive application of psychological theories obscured by a complicated insular vocabulary to protect it from outside scrutiny. then there's the mumbo-jumbo about aliens and thetans and engrams, which is possibly the most orthodox and least interesting part of the whole thing.
it's a scam, yeah. but it's a brilliant scam, considering how successful it's been, despite being so recently invented and so farcical in every aspect. i'm divided between disgust and admiration.
there is no god
I said I would vote "harmless fun" and when it comes to normal people, it is, then if you notice I put a "but".
Any religion is dangerous when it comes to the unhinged. I will say that religion isn't the only dangerous thing when it comes to the unhinged but it happens to be the subject in this thread.
My stance is clear, Scientology is no more dangerous or safe than any other religion, the danger is in the individual.
So, sorry, but I shall not single it out.
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
en(un)lightened
Similar statements are made in reference to firearms when comes time to argue about gun control laws, as I remember...
"Researchers have already cast much darkness on the subject, and if they continue their investigations, we shall soon know nothing at all about it."
-Mark Twain
there is no god
Well I will suggest a distinction.Similar statements are made in reference to firearms when comes time to argue about gun control laws, as I remember...
A religious nutcase as annoying as he/she may be, isn't a danger to me............unless he/she has a gun of course. (disclaimer: I realise that any other type of weapon could be used and by using gun as an example I am not ignoring other weapons or other physical dangers that may exist or dangers to personal freedoms that religious zealots may pose)
What an interesting thought though, a background check before you can have religion
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
Poster
So you are now saying that it's not harmless fun, is that it?
there is no god
My position hasn't changed, I simply repeated.So you are now saying that it's not harmless fun, is that it?
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
Poster
So what is it, harmless fun, or not harmless fun?My position hasn't changed, I simply repeated.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks