"Scn = religion" meme inculcated

Discussion in 'Situation Rooms' started by Anonymous, Aug 8, 2013.

  1. Anonymous Member

    Why are the HK in that list? I actually do a considerable amount of work in the area of cultism, and it gets my goat when folks like yourself equate genuinely dangerous groups with not dangerous groups because you misuse the word ‘religion’ to equivocate between them. It is precisely this sort of lazy thinking that has provided cover for abusive groups like Scientology.

    There is a particular reason why references to HK in this manner sets me off though. It is a rarity to ever find examples of where a group involved in abuses managed to change, like genuinely change, and put in place measures to prevent those abuses from happening into the future. The abuse in this particular case was one of child abuse. Think the Catholic Church but amplify it due to the HK commune lifestyle and you’ll get the idea. Unlike the Catholic Church, and many other institutions both religious and non-religious it must be said, the HK meaningfully tackled the issue instead of merely paying lip-service.

    I cannot think of a single case of an abusive group meaningfully transforming to a non-abusive group that surpasses the HK example. But to notice this you would have to actually looking to groups and their actions rather than being conned and blinded by the label of ‘religion’. Whether a group is or is not a ‘religion’ has fuck all to do with whether a group is or is not abusive, and an example of how potent that distraction is can be seen in the above quoted comment.

    Also – fucking lol at how you think people should be able to easily walk away from conditioning and getting mentally fucked. Wish it worked like that. There wouldn’t have been any need for Chanology if this were true.
  2. Anonymous Member

    Even if the authorities understood this, I am unsure how much legal weight it would have. While not the US, I think the legal structure is sufficiently similar in Australia to make this court decision from Australia relevant:
    Charlatanism is a necessary price of religious freedom, and if a self-proclaimed teacher persuades others to believe in a religion which he propounds, lack of sincerity or integrity on his part is not incompatible with the religious character of the beliefs, practices and observances accepted by his followers.
    Full decision here:

    But, then again, since I consider even granting any sort of special privileges to nonsense that such a ruling would exist doesn’t surprise me.
  3. Anonymous Member

    See the Super Power thread for how many hundreds of millions of dollars have been collected for the Super Power building, alone, since 1998.

    Religious status was not sought by Scientology to draw new people into Scientology. You need to read up the the reason for, and history of, Scientology's religious cloaking.

    When Scientology vanishes let me know.
  4. Anonymous Member

    There's no "religious character" in Scientology. It's a business.
  5. Random guy Member

    You are still not paying attention, do you? Did I write "amend the constitution"? No, I wrote "interpret the constitution". And that actually do happen. Remember prayers in schools?

    But sure, I'm right behind you on getting the 1993 ruling overturned. We haven't found out how to get the IRS off their big ass yet, though. I'm open to suggestions.
  6. All of the best frauds are religious.
  7. Anonymous Member

  8. Anonymous Member

    Every Hubbard quote is opposed by an equal and opposite Hubbard quote.
    • Like Like x 3
  9. jensting Member

    • Like Like x 1
  10. jensting Member

  11. afternon Member

  12. Anonymous Member

    The Scientology cult is busy using Hubbard's and Miscavige's religion angle. You don't have to do it for them. Really.
  13. JohnnyRUClear Member

    Arguing over what "Scientology" is would make a lot more sense if y'all first chose which definition of that word you were going to debate. Since that wasn't done, the thread is a giant dance of faggots waving their e-peens right past one another, each declaring victory by default.

    I'm a pretty big deal, so let me help you out here.

    Scientology as a practice and a set of beliefs might qualify as a religion; that is worthy of discussion. However, when people say "Scientology stalks its critics" they are not referring to that. They are referring to the organization(s) DBA the "Church of Scientology" and the many other groups/organizations under the same organizational umbrella. Those are very different meanings for the same word.

    It's important to notice the relationship between a religion and an organization (or a network of organizations). They are distinct. The Roman Catholic Church, for example, is one organization (or, again, a network of them), but there are other organizations within the religion of Christianity (Anglicans, Lutherans, Baptists, Eastern Orthodox, etc. etc.) which are not operationally connected with the RCC, and only share the commonality of being "Christian". Within Islam -- of which I am no scholar -- we may note that there are Sunnis and Shiites, sharing a common ancient origin of their religious traditions but being quite fragmented organizationally since then. They do not cooperate well, but they all would claim to be Muslims. Within Judaism there are at least 3 major categories of "Jews", and while they each would self-identify as "Jew" they do not agree with each other enough to be under the same organizational umbrella. The same can be said for any major religion, I think.

    For one organization to claim a total monopoly on a religion is rather extraordinary, IMO. I'd like to see this point drawn out much more in the future, because I think this is where "Scientology" (the organization) will lose control of "Scientology" (the religion, to the extent that it is or can be one). The Indies, et al, are the tactical Achilles' heel of the cult proper. Regardless of whether "Scientology" (the belief system) can be called a religion, no single organization can claim to be (to exclusively encompass) a religion. That would violate the freedom of association of practitioners of that religion; hello, jurisprudential flyswatter.

    You're welcome.
    • Like Like x 3
  14. Anonymous Member

    ^ The distinction between 'religion', as in beliefs, and 'religion', as in organisations, was already pointed out earlier ITT.
  15. JohnnyRUClear Member

    Obviously not well.
  16. Anonymous Member

    That's been said for thirty years.

    Very few people remain "Indies" for very long. The brainwash wears off.

    Aside from your speculating, please take a look at actual situations, not imagined ones.
  17. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 2
  18. Random guy Member

    Thus we should promote inies over the mother cult when those are the options. Better yet, we should fire up the clams a bit so they start sprouting their hatred for the indie-camp. Nothing dispels the "oh, we're so religious and victims of bigotry" when the "victims" themselves start frothing from religious indignation.
    • Like Like x 5
  19. Anonymous Member

    Nashville Church of Scientology celebrates International Day of Friendship with a forum dedicated to religious tolerance.
    Nashville, TN (PRWEB) August 14, 2013
    The Church of Scientology & Celebrity Centre of Nashville hosted an interreligious forum on United Nations International Friendship Day July 30, bringing together leaders from across Tennessee to coordinate actions to raise the bar on religious tolerance throughout the state.
    Attending were leaders of the Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, Muslim, Jewish and Scientology communities and representatives of Religions for Peace USA, the Tennessee Human Rights Commission, Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition, Nashville Human Relations Commission and Vanderbilt University.
    In 2011, the UN General Assembly proclaimed International Friendship Day to “inspire peace and build bridges between communities” through “friendship between peoples, countries, cultures and individuals.” Those attending the forum embodied this purpose in their determination to combat religious intolerance and bigotry.
    “Freedom of thought, conscience and religion are fundamental human rights,” said Rev. Brian Fesler, President of the Church of Scientology & Celebrity Centre of Nashville.
    These rights are expressed in Article 18 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which lays out the 30 rights all people have simply by being human. The Declaration urges every individual and social institution to “strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms.”
    “Human rights education fosters understanding and tolerance,” said Fesler, who emphasized the need to mandate education for all youth and young adults.
    The Church of Scientology has published the brochure Scientology: How We Help—United for Human Rights, Making Human Rights a Global Reality to meet requests for more information about the human rights education and awareness initiative the it supports. To learn more, visit
    Scientology Founder L. Ron Hubbard wrote, “Human rights must be made a fact, not an idealistic dream,” and the Scientology religion is based on the principles of human rights. The Code of a Scientologist calls on all members of the religion to dedicate themselves “to support true humanitarian endeavors in the fields of human rights.”
    Press Contact: Karin Pouw
    Tel: (323) 960-3500
    E-mail: MediaRelations(at)ChurchofScientology(dot)netFor the original version on PRWeb visit:
  20. Anonymous Member

    It was in 1968 that Hubbard told Scientologists to use "human rights," and the UN Declaration of Human Rights, "that sort if thing," as a gimmick.

    "Each time Scientology is attacked, we will build into society an actual stimulus-response mechanism where as an attack on Scientology is actually an attack on Scientology."
  21. Damn good Psychologist lol
  22. Anonymous Member

    That a typo. That should read, "Each time Scientology is attacked, we will build into society an actual stimulus-response mechanism whereas an attack on Scientology is an attack on human rights."
    • Like Like x 1
  23. The Internet Member

    That's like saying, "Miscavige is the problem." In reality, Scientology itself --LRH's stuff-- is the problem.

    Also, first person language is key. If the Scientologists say that per their religion, critics ought to be handled using investigations and dead agent tech, that means that stalking critics is religious for those people.
    • Like Like x 2
  24. jensting Member

    New 'round these parts, ain'tcha?

    From we have

    • Like Like x 2
  25. jensting Member

  26. The Internet Member

    I was actually thinking of the time the CoS tried to claim "fair game" was a religious practice. Thanks for the reference.

    The point I'm trying to make: I don't see much advantage in the "sure religion is fine; but the organization is crap" tactic. Because both the religion and the organization are crap.
    • Like Like x 1
  27. Anonymous Member

    That exact phrase doesn't show up on google results because you removed all his "er"s and "ah"s from the transcript:
    "We’ll build into the society an actual stimulus response mechanism.Er, ah,whereas an attack on Scientology is ah is actually an attack on human rights" is ah is actually an attack on human rights"
    So there is recorded audio of him saying this? YES!
    Youtube link timestamped 16 minutes 14 seconds in
    • Like Like x 4
  28. Incredulicide Member

    Great quote! I've added the excerpt at
    • Like Like x 1
  29. JohnnyRUClear Member

    You're making a point which isn't necessary here. All of what you just said is correct, and none of it is relevant to what I said.

    What is relevant, tactically at least, is this:
    Good points, and that brings us to something which actually does bear on the question of whether "Scientology" is a religion:

    The point about 30 years, brainwashing wearing off, etc. is a very important one, because those ex-members who continue to practice [at least some of] Scientology outside the COS are the only parties with the fucking RANK standing to press my legal point in a court case; if none of them retain enough Hubbardiness long enough to sue on the grounds I raised, then what does that mean?

    If practice of Scientology can only survive long-term within one organization (or, more accurately, one network of organizations), then is it really a religion? Is there any example of a religion being permanently contained within one organizational structure?
  30. Anonymous Member

    Denise spells it out . . .

  31. Anonymous Member

  32. The Internet Member

    If you look at Scientology in a general way, as we are inclined to look at Christianity, you can see that it shares a number of core doctrines with other New Thought groups:
    - dualism and reincarnation
    - spiritual practice leading to the ascension of self-as-God rather than other-as-God
    - "you create your own reality"
    - the power of affirmation and agreement
    - the need to banish counter-intention which might block the flow of affirmative power
    - hidden mysteries protected by secrecy and only available to those at certain training levels
    - a social caste system correlating with spiritual progress (higher beings guiding lower beings)
    - an expectation that uncanny abilities will emerge as one ascends spiritually

    LRH was an OTO magician with Scientology as his master work. So other sufficiently ascended Scientologists should get along fairly well with the OTO.

    Great magicians at the top of any ascension path would be expected to leave their Master --whether LRH or Crowley or some other guru-- to found their own magical pyramid filled with gullible suckers. Probably the reason that OT8 results either in a Master Squirrel or a failed master sent down for remedial education.

    In Hubbard's day there were more Master Squirrels. Miscavige likely altered OT8 to produce more failed masters in need of re-training. More cash cow milking; less competition. Makes sense, until you factor in the eventual rebellion.
  33. Anonymous Member

    No, it's not a religion. It's a mind-control cult, operated as a business, and disguised as a religion.
    • Like Like x 1
  34. JohnnyRUClear Member

    The organization is, yes. But what about the practice of Scientology outside of the organization?

    I'm starting to wonder if this effort would be better served by just posting cat pictures.
  35. Hubbard makes mention of "customers" in several different lectures, policies, and technical bulletins, referring to his 'congregation'.

    I think it's safe to say that not even the smarmiest guru, much less leaders of more widely practiced religions ever referred to their pigeons marks parishioners as "customers", at least not to their faces.
  36. Anonymous Member

    What do you mean by the practice of Scientology ?
  37. JohnnyRUClear Member

    Is that needing to be defined? Simply put, I mean following Hubbard's Scientology teachings and instructions -- or, attempting to do so as much as possible/practical/advisable/acceptable outside of the COS organization.

    I'm curious what prompted you to ask for that clarification.
  38. Anonymous Member

    The organization is based on Hubbard's Scientology teachings.

    Even if Miscavige were blamed for the "squirreling" of Scientology, and everything, let's say, after 1980, was discarded, you'd still have Scientology circa 1970s, which was a nasty piece of work.
  39. Anonymous Member

    You are assuming a similarity that doesn't exist.

    Hubbard might have ripped off some structure from OTO, but the likelihood of former members of either group embracing the ideology of the other is pretty nil. Mostly because to someone with any knowledge of occult lore and proceedure, Hubbard's stuff is crap and I imagine the blatant sexual imagery of OTO would tend to scare off devout scis. The confessions are amusing reading to those in the know. Hubbard was a sucky magician and he probably knew it.

    As far as gurus and pyramid schemes, Rick Ross forum is full of them. There are far more christian cult leaders than any other kind because most of the heavy lifting for acceptance has already been done. After that, eastern cults based on Hinduism and Buddhism seem to predominate. The fact that Hubbard stole as much as he could from buddhism, including the maitreya stuff indicates that he didn't rely entirely on OTO as a model and knew it wouldn't sell well in Peoria.

    PS: The actual aim of western esoteric practice is the 'Great Work', similar to buddihist enlightenment. A magician who goes out and sets up his own pyramid is a huckster, not a 'great magician'.
    • Like Like x 1
  40. The Internet Member

    Let me introduce you to 23 year old Shirley Niceperson who breaks up with her boyfriend, gets depressed, reads some inspiring self help books then winds up in Scientology in her quest for existential meaning. She genuinely practices Scientology as her religion. Ask her; she will tell you.

    Shirley has friends who follow other religious paths. Some read "The Secret," and go to an eclectic "Church of Christ" congregation. She's gone a few times to their church and enjoyed the talks. She's also invited her friends to a few events at the CoS. These people all like to read inspiring books about the power of positive thinking and receiving guidance from dead loved ones on "the other side."

    So I ask you, what is to be gained by telling Shirley that Scientology is not actually her chosen religion?

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins