Scientology - harmless fun or dangerous cult

[vidcc]

My position hasn't changed, I simply repeated.

So what is it, harmless fun, or not harmless fun?

Ok last repeat:

To a normal person- someone capable of reaosnable thought and personal behaviour control- harmless fun


To an unhinged person- someone perhaps with low mental capacity and easily influenced to accept and perhaps act in a way any normal rational person would not- dangerous.

While I believe the vast majority of people belong to the first group I am not ignoring the latter.

[What'spunk.]

So what is it, harmless fun, or not harmless fun?

Ok last repeat:

To a normal person- someone capable of reaosnable thought and personal behaviour control- harmless fun

So you think that it's harmless fun to a normal person. Thanks for clearing that up.

[Biggles]

On a whimsy, I sat their psychological test many years ago (1975 I think). It took a while and was in itself a tad tedious. They then kept me waiting two hours while the analysed the results. I had a train to catch so I left before finding out that they could have undoubtedly helped me if I followed their directions and joined.

Fortunately, I caught my train, although it was touch and go. However, they subjected me to two hours of boredom - perhaps not dangerous but certainly a pain the butt. I skimmed through one of Ron's books whilst waiting - I was unimpressed. I never went back.

I would classify as "best avoided"

[j2k4]

I would classify as "best avoided"

Like any Tom Cruise movie.

Y'know, when he pissed off Brooke Shields with his ill-chosen remarks a while back, I remember wishing she'd challenge him to a duker.

I think she'd have kicked his ass, the little pip-squeak.

[Fromagepas]

On a whimsy, I sat their psychological test many years ago (1975 I think). It took a while and was in itself a tad tedious. They then kept me waiting two hours while the analysed the results. I had a train to catch so I left before finding out that they could have undoubtedly helped me if I followed their directions and joined.

Fortunately, I caught my train, although it was touch and go. However, they subjected me to two hours of boredom - perhaps not dangerous but certainly a pain the butt. I skimmed through one of Ron's books whilst waiting - I was unimpressed. I never went back.

I would classify as "best avoided"

I really, really wish you hadn't posted that. It saddens me more than you can ever imagine.

[Smith]

Wasnt the creator or Scientology convicted of fraud?

[j2k4]

On a whimsy, I sat their psychological test many years ago (1975 I think). It took a while and was in itself a tad tedious. They then kept me waiting two hours while the analysed the results. I had a train to catch so I left before finding out that they could have undoubtedly helped me if I followed their directions and joined.

Fortunately, I caught my train, although it was touch and go. However, they subjected me to two hours of boredom - perhaps not dangerous but certainly a pain the butt. I skimmed through one of Ron's books whilst waiting - I was unimpressed. I never went back.

I would classify as "best avoided"

I really, really wish you hadn't posted that. It saddens me more than you can ever imagine.

I think we need more of the "why" of that sentiment.

[Biggles]

On a whimsy, I sat their psychological test many years ago (1975 I think). It took a while and was in itself a tad tedious. They then kept me waiting two hours while the analysed the results. I had a train to catch so I left before finding out that they could have undoubtedly helped me if I followed their directions and joined.

Fortunately, I caught my train, although it was touch and go. However, they subjected me to two hours of boredom - perhaps not dangerous but certainly a pain the butt. I skimmed through one of Ron's books whilst waiting - I was unimpressed. I never went back.

I would classify as "best avoided"

I really, really wish you hadn't posted that. It saddens me more than you can ever imagine.

I am saddened that you are sad.

Like J2, I am intrigued as to why though. It was, after all, a minor event over 30 years ago (notwithstanding butterflies and hurricanes).

[Fromagepas]

You, a respected person (and I mean by me and others whose opinions matter, not someone who has been here for a certain time) have effecively trivialised something I see as dangerous and insidious.

I have had some personal experience with cultism (close family member) and we managed to nip same in proverbial bud. However that highlighted even more to me just how easy it would be for someone to become part of that type of thing. I have taken to researching things I previously laughed at, or mocked in an off-hand manner.

Scientology is a dangerous cult, it is not harmless fun.

[Biggles]

You, a respected person (and I mean by me and others whose opinions matter, not someone who has been here for a certain time) have effecively trivialised something I see as dangerous and insidious.

I have had some personal experience with cultism (close family member) and we managed to nip same in proverbial bud. However that highlighted even more to me just how easy it would be for someone to become part of that type of thing. I have taken to researching things I previously laughed at, or mocked in an off-hand manner.

Scientology is a dangerous cult, it is not harmless fun.

Fair point - although in my defence I did say "best avoided" - something I actually meant. I voted dangerous cult although I felt that perhaps over-stated things. There are more dangerous. I never liked the Moonies or the Children of God who I would definitely class as more dangerous. They want you body and soul - the Scientologists are more interested in your wallet (and continued donations). I also find the Gouranga mob a tad scary although I don't know much about them. I think it is the anoraks and clip board that worries me.