Scientology - harmless fun or dangerous cult

[vidcc]

You've already said that you think it's harmless fun. However your argument for that seems to rest on your opinion that other things are hocus pocus, or are as bad. That may or may not be true. However it really is irrelevant, the poll is not a comparative study. It relates to Scientology, which is a dangerous cult. Whether other things are hocus pocus, superstition or just plain nonsense is irrelevant.

My stance is clear, Scientology is no more dangerous or safe than any other religion, the danger is in the individual.

You do not decide what is relevant to anyones point or what can be discussed. It would be a pretty unfair and unbalanced debate if scientology were singled out without being able to show comparisons upon which ones reasoning is based.
without balance or comparison it's nothing more than a schoolyard flaming statement.

If the people that choose scientology as their belief system want to give money then that is up to them.

Maybe at the very start, but not for long. that's how it works.

Have you carried out much research into Scientology? Or indeed into any other cult? it may be worth your while doing so, just in case someone you know, or heaven forbid are related to, announces that they are joining it. I seriously would not want your reaction to be "Oh, well, it's just a bit of harmless fun".

It's called a cult by those that believe in other religions.....to me all religions are cults and we take responsibility for our own actions.

[ilw]

The followers don't seem to be killing themselves or anyone else afaik, so why is it dangerous?

[Fromagepas]

My stance is clear, Scientology is no more dangerous or safe than any other religion, the danger is in the individual.

You do not decide what is relevant to anyones point or what can be discussed. It would be a pretty unfair and unbalanced debate if scientology were singled out without being able to show comparisons upon which ones reasoning is based.
without balance or comparison it's nothing more than a schoolyard flaming statement.

If the people that choose scientology as their belief system want to give money then that is up to them.

Maybe at the very start, but not for long. that's how it works.

Have you carried out much research into Scientology? Or indeed into any other cult? it may be worth your while doing so, just in case someone you know, or heaven forbid are related to, announces that they are joining it. I seriously would not want your reaction to be "Oh, well, it's just a bit of harmless fun".

It's called a cult by those that believe in other religions.....to me all religions are cults and we take responsibility for our own actions.

It is not just called a cult by people who believe in other religions. It's called a cult by many people, religious or not.

My point is, your defence of Scientology as harmless fun is based on comparing it to other religions, rather than on analyzing what Scientology teaches and how it treats it's members.

Let us assume, for the purposes of your argument that every other religion is a dangerous cult. It's all nonsense and hocus pocus, it's all just rubbish.

How does that effect whether Scientology is a dangerous cult, or harmless fun? It doesn't, it's a non-argument.

I can see how you would use that type of argument to debate that it was no worse than say, Christianity, but that's an entirely different issue.

[TheDave]

i watched the south park on mormons today. mormonology is a respected religion right? it's just as suck as scientology or believing the world is 6000-7000 years old

[Fromagepas]

i watched the south park on mormons today. mormonology is a respected religion right? it's just as suck as scientology or believing the world is 6000-7000 years old

How much research have you done into the beliefs of the Mormons and where they came from?

Is it just the one episode of soth Park, or have you spread your net a bit wider?

[TheDave]

i watched the south park on mormons today. mormonology is a respected religion right? it's just as suck as scientology or believing the world is 6000-7000 years old

How much research have you done into the beliefs of the Mormons and where they came from?

Is it just the one episode of soth Park, or have you spread your net a bit wider?

just one episode of south park


is it not true that it was started by one guy said he found 4 gold tablets with scripture in a foriegn language on, and that he translated them using two magic stones. then when asked to replicate the first translations, he couldn't, because he pissed god off

[vidcc]

It is not just called a cult by people who believe in other religions. It's called a cult by many people, religious or not.

to me all religions are cults

My point is, your defence of Scientology as harmless fun is based on comparing it to other religions, rather than on analyzing what Scientology teaches and how it treats it's members.

that is your creation, not my arguement.

my argument is -

the danger is in the individual.

I think scientology is complete bunkum, but as I said before I am not going to single it out as being different from any other religion. If you wish to tunnel the subject feel free to do so, I will not.

I can see how you would use that type of argument to debate that it was no worse than say, Christianity, but that's an entirely different issue.

Originally Posted by vidcc
My stance is clear, Scientology is no more dangerous or safe than any other religion, the danger is in the individual.

I shall re-quote this

the danger is in the individual.

edit: Quotes fixed

[Fromagepas]

How much research have you done into the beliefs of the Mormons and where they came from?

Is it just the one episode of soth Park, or have you spread your net a bit wider?

just one episode of south park


is it not true that it was started by one guy said he found 4 gold tablets with scripture in a foriegn language on, and that he translated them using two magic stones. then when asked to replicate the first translations, he couldn't, because he pissed god off

I think that's pretty much it. Other than it was a bloke called Joe Smith.

http://www.exmormon.org/fourteen.htm

[TheDave]

We believe we know the truth by our feelings. We do not rely on and we will disregard any facts that contradict what our feelings tell us is true. If something feels bad, like someone telling us that Joseph Smith was a fraud, then we know that Smith must of been a prophet since falsehoods create bad feelings and it feels bad when someone tells us that we have been duped. In other words, if we get a bad feeling, we are hearing bad things which must be lies. We feel good when we read the Book of Mormon, therefore it is true. Archeology, genetics, science, metallurgy, agriculture and animal studies are irrelevant since our feelings tell us it is a true book revealed by God. This good feeling applies to all aspects of our lives. We determine if we should do something or know the truth of something if we have prayed about it and have a good feeling about it.


yeah, so, that's pretty fucked up right there


as zany as that what the bleep do we know video

[3RA1N1AC]

Judging by those we see advocating Scientology specifically (Cruise, et.al.), I find it telling that we continually see the moneyed types pushing for legitimacy-I remember hearing Cruise once compare the gradual (and "inevitable") acceptance of Scientology to that of chiropractic medicine over the past 30-35 years.

well, i reckon it's the mandate of every scientologist, whether moneyed or not, to win mainstream legitimacy for the church.

one might be tempted to say that tom cruise's behavior in tv interviews & such over the past year seem to be merely a result of him being one individual nut. or it's an unique result of his brain being scrambled by a cult. except his attitude toward simple conversation is not really unique among representatives of scientology. for all the seeming attempt at making the church seem innocuous, they place a heavy emphasis on winning the battle which the rest of us call conversation. whether by lying, by verbal sparring & intimidation, or by lawsuits. i'm fairly certain i've seen tom cruise attempt to use a couple of those techniques while he was being interviewed about scientology. if you can look up some quotations from scientology's public relations instruction manuals, cruise's behavior might not seem any more crazy/hostile than the church's own prescribed P.R. methods (in fact they might appear to be exactly the same).