The Church Of Scientology Makes An Intelligent Move By Reforming Website
If this story is true, and the Church of Scientology has revamped, beefed up and otherwise improved their website with open, straightforward answers about who they are — that is fabulous.
The article suggests Anonymous, educated and guided by a host of experienced and well-read ex-Scientologists and critics, had prompted the Church to try a different tactic.
Instead of going on the attack, suing their critics and otherwise behaving suspiciously, they decided to look inward and fix something internally.
I haven’t had more than cursory glance so far but will look more closely. For now though, this is a sign.
It would be great if Scientology could survive, reformed into a force for the positive. I really don’t have an issue with Dianetics. Obviously it has something to it or people wouldn’t keep trying it.
But the leadership must go.
Pink Stripe WordPress Theme Designed by Joni Mueller &
If nothing else, this shows very clearly that Scientology is a business and not a religion.
What? People disagree with us? Well, lets just change what we are then!
It’s like renaming IUD’s to IUC’s and putting them back on the market hoping no one will remember all the problems they caused in the first place.
Comment by Anonymous — March 20, 2008 @ 12:33 am
Is Daivid Miscavge wearing a bright orange jump-suit with a list of charges to answer for? …nope.
More truth needed, a change of the guard is not near enough to end this.
Too many have been harmed, there needs to be a very large investigation. Then MAYBE those who chose to study the tech can with a fresh start in the eye of the public.
Comment by Cal Anon — March 20, 2008 @ 12:48 am
The website shows what Scientology always has been. It’s nothing new if you are already a Scientologist, and I have been since 1976. It’s all been there in black and white since the beginning. We just have new tools for getting our message out now, and our press releases and true information can no longer be suppressed or distorted by the news media. Now someone can just go to our website and hear our side of the story.
Comment by Theta2008 — March 20, 2008 @ 1:07 am
The truly brilliant thing is that, by doing this, they are admitting they are wrong, they just aren’t smart enough to figure that out yet.
This is a small step. A forced, coerced, unwilled, and petulant step, but a step nonetheless. Not sure in which direction, though.
Comment by PlainJaneLane — March 20, 2008 @ 1:07 am
You forgot the h in http:// on your link.
Comment by AnonTiger — March 20, 2008 @ 2:58 am
The link http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,25642,23407107-5014239,00.html
is broken. The XHTML reads:
ttp://www.news.com.au/
rather than
http://www.news.com.au/
Comment by anonymous — March 20, 2008 @ 3:09 am
A FACELIFT is a FACELIFT. it doesn’t cure the cancer inside.
is $cientology still using Hubbard’s hypnosis-tech?
is $scientology still spying their critics?
does evil David Miscavige still run the cult?
yes, yes and yes. FLUNK
Comment by Josh — March 20, 2008 @ 4:14 am
After many, many attempts to reason with critics, I found that they are unwilling to admit that the Church of Scientology does any good for anyone anyplace – even in the face of overwhelming testimonials from people that Scientology has helped. They believe whatever proves their own pre-conceived ideas. They aren’t really interested in objective, rational, sane and respectful discussion. They often sit in judgement of my Church, and mock our efforts to improve things, while they themselves don’t really do anything to help ease any of the world’s ills. Theyr’e just interested in fighting and hating. Their primary activity is attacking a group of people who are trying to make a better world.
Comment by Theta2008 — March 20, 2008 @ 5:33 am
To Theta2008 (Comment 7):
I understand your comment about the overwhelming testimonials from those happy with Scientology, but what about the overwhelming testimonials of those who aren’t? I haven’t seen proof from either side of this Anonymous/Scientology thing that they are any better than one another other than these stories and personal accounts. Why should I believe the positive testimonies over the negative ones, or visa-versa?
-John W.
Comment by John Warling — March 20, 2008 @ 5:57 am
Theta2008, how much did you have to pay to belong to Scientlogy??
Comment by Anon_Thetan — March 20, 2008 @ 6:00 am
You know, the Nazi’s used to say they were trying to make3 the world a better place!
Just saying!
Comment by Anon123 — March 20, 2008 @ 6:06 am
Re Dianetics and Scientology “doctrine”, it depends what you mean by “something to it”. It clearly makes some people feel better. But it’s firmly rooted in easily disproven pseudoscience, and I for one think that’s rather different than the allegorical stuff believed by members of mainstream religions, or the unprovable stuff such as “is there a god?”.
Other than that, I think the vast majority of anonymous and other critics agree that people should be able to believe and follow whatever they like. If Scientologists are at least able to analyse their faith critically, and still come away believers, than that’s all I want (beyond reform of the church itself of course, which is desperately needed).
Comment by Musketeerwang — March 20, 2008 @ 7:19 am
I realize I may not have made myself totally clear, but I still feel that if they are “Revamping” their website to inform the public at least that’s the right kind of steps to be taken over say, suing people.
I am not Anonymous and I have stated all along that what I want to see at the end of all this is NOT the destruction of “scientology” but rather a dismantling of its organizational structure and a removal of its management, this however doesn’t mean I want those people who voluntarily, willingly and knowingly wish to follow their tech to no longer have the opportunity to use it. It should be free and NOT treated like a sinister business and a greedy cult.
In reality, Dianetics is just another “therapeutic” tool which may truly work for people. How is it any fair to take that away from people than it is for Scientology to take pysch drugs away from people who need it?
I would caution Anonymous to not become that which they oppose. Get rid of the rotten parts and let’s see what’s left.
All religions have rocky beginnings, it’s not up to me to decide what works for someone. But it is society’s responsibility that corrupt, illegal and immoral activities stop.
All I said was this was a step and a sign. Nothing more.
Comment by D — March 20, 2008 @ 7:44 am
Comments from the critics here reinforce what Theta2008 said. They are not interested in hearing any iota of how Scientology is helping people get off drugs, improve literacy or be happier. None of them have any concept of the the theology of Scientology and are completely misinformed about its goals and creed. The new Scientology website is a good place to see what Scientology actually is and does. By the way Anon123 has it backwards. The Nazis and Goebbles used a propaganda machine just like the Anonymous bigots. Tell half-truths, lies and innuendo over a period of time to get the German people malleable and ready to destroy a race. Such are the tactics of a faceless group show deal in hatred and destructive intentions.
Comment by smarc — March 20, 2008 @ 7:58 am
You mean like the levels?
Comment by Anon123 — March 20, 2008 @ 8:06 am
You mean like the vicious hounding of critics?
Comment by Anon123 — March 20, 2008 @ 8:11 am
You mean like the total denial of anything except the party line?
Comment by Anon123 — March 20, 2008 @ 8:12 am
You know what frightens me? Not the people who doubt, but the people who do not doubt! The moment doubt is suspended is the moment you are no longer free to think for yourself!
Comment by Anon123 — March 20, 2008 @ 8:14 am
Having been a Scientologist for over 30 years let me just say that my main concern here is Freedom of Religion. Certain members of Anon state that they are not against this freedom but from an individual point of view it certainly feels likes that. May I suggest that you simply read a book such as “New Slant on Life” to get some understanding. Do realize that many of the statements being quoted on picket signs that are attributed to Hubbard are very much out of context. My opinion here, this constitutes an attack on the religion. Here is an accurate quote, “Freedom for man does not mean freedom to injure man. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to harm by lies”, (from the above mentioned book).
Comment by jkay — March 20, 2008 @ 8:23 am
big·ot
–noun
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
[Origin: 1590–1600; < MF (OF: derogatory name applied by the French to the Normans), perh. < OE bī God by God]
Maybe you have a diferent definition of the word than I do, but I’m here about the crimes and injustice within the “CHURCH”, not the practice of the religion itself. As much as you would like to tar Anon with this brush I think you will find that Anon is made up of people of all races, religions (including Scientology) and sexual orientation, so it doesn’t really wash.
Comment by Anon123 — March 20, 2008 @ 8:24 am
1st of all, L. Ron Hubbard was a liar and a person who condoned lying.
This is a fact.
Does the “church” keep this hidden from the members? YES.
When the “church” actually comes clean about their deceptions up to this point in time, THAT would be a step in the right direction.
prettying up the $cientology website means nothing.
Comment by Clyde — March 20, 2008 @ 8:25 am
D, broken linky… (h)ttp://
Comment by DangerMouse — March 20, 2008 @ 8:41 am
I have taken more than a cursory glance at the new website and the best analogy I can come up with is ‘lipstick on a pig’. They really do nothing more with their initial deceptions other than put it in a new box.
They are still a bait-and-switch operation who lures unsuspecting people in with the promise of religious compatibility and lack a full disclosure to their origins and intentions. They still bankroll countless front groups whose money falls dubiously under their tax-exempt umbrella which they procured through illegal infiltration and perversion of the judiciary system. They still operate a policy of disconnection as evidenced by Susan Lentsch and her brief visit with her daughter while accompanied by an OSA agent. They still maintain a superiority complex over non-members and marginalize their existence with derogatory labels such as raw-meat and wogs.
A well financed trip to the spa and makeover may fix the exterior, but it does not correct what lies beneath the surface. It is not the aesthetic aspects of the Scientology organization that we oppose, but rather the fundamental driving forces.
Comment by Anon1376 — March 20, 2008 @ 8:41 am
After many, many attempts to reason with critics…
By “reason” do you mean how scilons ignore every single word critics have posted? Or, does it mean ad hominem nonsense, throwing the word “bigot” around as if it was the word “the”? If so, your Scientology dictionary is significantly different than Webster’s, which has a much different definition of the word.
Anon has said constantly that they don’t care what you believe. What they oppose (and rightly, I may add) is the organization that runs your church. It has been proven, time and time again, that the church is run by men and women who don’t give a damn about who they destroy, as long as they still keep making money. (I know that it’s been said before, but it bears repeating: Operation Snow White. Operation Freakout. Fair Game. Google them.)
Personally, I think your beliefs were written by a psychotic man with some hypnosis skills and delusions of grandeur. (Although personally, I use a **very** revised version of TR-0 when jogging indoors.) But this is America, you’re free to believe whatever you wish. No one wants to impede that.
That said, don’t you dare think that you can shut up anyone who disagrees with you. Your so-called church has done these crimes. They have held people against their will in so-called “Introspection Rundowns,” driving them further into psychosis or suicide. (Who knows is R2-45 may be around the corner…)
Mike Rinder blew, and so can you.
NYCanonNYC
Comment by NYCanonNYC — March 20, 2008 @ 8:45 am
Fixed link.
~k
Comment by k — March 20, 2008 @ 8:48 am
To Scilon Centurian jkay,
Do you not see the irony in your quotation?
“Freedom for man does not mean freedom to injure man. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to harm by liesâ€
Scientology as an organization goes to great lengths to lie (if it serves the most number of dynamics). OSA and other official groups within Scientology also promote violence and injury of fellow man. DM has physically assaulted many people. There are many court testimonies that show this. DM’s own father told a police officer to “beat him instead of a ticket” when his vehicle was pulled over.
http://www.lermanet.com/exit/images/ron-miscavige-misdemeanor-01.jpg
http://www.lermanet.com/exit/images/ron-miscavige-misdemeanor-02.jpg
http://www.lermanet.com/exit/images/ron-miscavige-misdemeanor-03.jpg
Comment by DangerMouse — March 20, 2008 @ 8:48 am
The problem is that it uses coercive persuasion hypnotic techniques. That is its core. Any “benefits” are illusory, despite how fervently the subjects are convinced of them.
Cult is cult is cult. They are all the same. There are many others, Co$ just happens to be the most powerful, and, therefore, the most corrupt and dangerous.
“Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Comment by marcab — March 20, 2008 @ 8:51 am
To Scilon Centurian smarc,
“Tell half-truths, lies and innuendo over a period of time to get the German people malleable and ready to destroy a race. Such are the tactics of a faceless group show deal in hatred and destructive intentions.”
Read some history about your organization. You might be surprised how the “Mecca” of Scientology got started. When they landed in Clearwater it was many years of “half-truths and lies”. They bought property and filed paperwork in a different name. They lied about who they were and it was out-ethics to even mention scientology to anyone from Clearwater.
Scientology came in and destroyed that town. Property tax is gone on many of those buildings. Income tax is gone as most staff are barely paid if even legally on the books. Any income ends up back in the church as a tax-free donation, so I’m sure there is no tax money left for the community. Do you even charge sales tax on the books you sell in your bookstores?
Comment by DangerMouse — March 20, 2008 @ 8:59 am
It’s interesting to note that they’ve removed any mention of L. Ron Hubbard from their website… and replaced him with current leader, David Miscavige
One could easily wonder as to the motives behind this move, no?
Comment by Anoynymause — March 20, 2008 @ 9:03 am
WAY too many Ex-scientologists and family of scientologists, and detractors of scientology have come forward to tell their sad stories for ANY ONE person to claim that it is completely benign. I would like a complete explanation of what happened to Lisa McPherson (and why NO ONE was held accountable her death) from any of you. Remember, there IS NO statute of limitation on MURDER.
Tax exemption will be lost.What the heck do you NEED a navy for? Billion year contracts are pathetic. Labeling people PTS and SP’s is childish. My only advice is to not drink the kool-aid.
I found this link to be interesting:
http://itsyourtimes.com/?q=node/3528
Comment by Domino — March 20, 2008 @ 9:11 am
Scientology updated their website?
Isn’t that like polishing a turd?
Comment by Cornwaite — March 20, 2008 @ 9:19 am
I’m afraid that I can’t look at the site at the moment, but by the sounds of what D is saying, they’ve addressed some issues on this site?? (ie. disconnection policy, Lisa McPherson, etc…) Am I right in assuming this? Otherwise, it’s not really a step in the right direction is it? Kind of a step sideways…
Comment by Thomas — March 20, 2008 @ 9:58 am
@ Theta2008
“They aren’t really interested in objective, rational, sane and respectful discussion”
I’ll give you that, out of all of the Scientologists I’ve traded posts with, you seem to be the most rational thus far. Lurk the different articles here and let me know how many rational, sane and respectful comments you see coming from your side of the fence, though. I’ve asked countless questions in respectful tones and practically pleaded for an answer and got nothing. If I got anything, it was an attack on me personally or a complete derailment and avoidance of the question.
“Theyr’e just interested in fighting and hating. Their primary activity is attacking a group of people who are trying to make a better world.”
See, here you start to go the way of the less than rational Scientologist. That is not at all what we’re interested in. While there are stacks of documents and allegations damning the CoS, I think we can all agree that, even though it looks, feels, smells and tastes like proof, in a court of law, we don’t don’t have tangible evidence. What we do have is a well documented case for an investigation. I believe 100% of Anonymous would be ecstatic if a fair investigation were conducted. We are interested in getting the truth from an investigative 3rd party. The sad thing is that you likely believe that our intentions are to stop you from doing good. I hardly think, with the overwhelming allegations leveled at the CoS, that any good intentioned (which I believe most of you are) would object to stopping these crimes if they turn out to be true. But, then you’ve been indoctrinated with CoS’s definition of ethics and crimes and freedom. Even if something is fundamentally considered “out-ethics”, if it furthers the CoS agenda, the ends justify the means.
@ smarc
“They are not interested in hearing any iota of how Scientology is helping people get off drugs, improve literacy or be happier”
I’ll admit, that Scientology has served some people well. Key word being Scientology, not the Church. Scientology is not unlike Freudian psychotherapy and other forms psychology. But, my question is when will you start hearing what we’re saying and investigate what could very well be happening in your Church? What if what’s been said about the CoS is true and you defended that? If there is any iota of truth to these allegations, you owe it to the sanctity of your religion to have it investigated and stopped. Otherwise, you’ll be forever known as a religion that harbors and condones criminal behavior.
“None of them have any concept of the the theology of Scientology and are completely misinformed about its goals and creed”
I’ve read the creed and could debunk it (and have in other posts) line by line using excerpts LRH tech.
@ jkay
“my main concern here is Freedom of Religion.”
No, your main concern is freedom of YOUR religion. Which no one here wants to take away from you or anybody else. But let’s be straight. The CoS has drawn all this in. All this damage to it, it’s inflicted on itself. The wind of change has been blowing for years where the CoS is concerned. It’s been saying, “reform or collapse”. It was bound to happen, we’re just expediting things. But, ultimately, the decision collectively lies you, the Scientologists hands as to which outcome the CoS will see. Reform or collapse.
See you in April. Cheers.
Comment by Anon, Anon, My Boyfriend's Back! — March 20, 2008 @ 10:08 am
The movement is toning down, I’d say. There are NO big suits going, and if Scientology dropped its suit against Gerry Armstrong, that would be even more progress. None of the ex senior members speaking up are being “dead agented” to the degree the Scientology Office of Special Affairs has done in recent decades, so that is truly the bigger reform that has already taken place over the past 10 years. There is the propagandizing smearing of the “Religious Freedom Watch” (google it), and I’ve had a small amount of smearing by Scientologists in 2005. The two biggest problems of Scientology a) they still consider a HUGE number of ex Scientologists as “suppressive persons” and this causes the family splitting problem. b) Scientologists are not allowed to discuss openly their upper levels theology, “body thetans” theology, the simple theology is that we are infested with tens of thousands of spirits/souls, the dead souls of humanoids from other planets who were murdered in a massive genocide here on earth 75 million years ago at the orders of a space leader known as Xenu. This upper levels theology about “body thetans” is THE most troublesome problem Scientology faces. I say they will have significantly reformed when they resolve a) and b) above. The solution to a) is for them to declare an “international amnesty” and remove the suppressive person status of all persons Scientolgy has so labeled. The solution to b) is simply STOP enforcing all penalties against members for discussinng “body thetans” theology and the Xenu story in public. Those two reforms would change the face of Scientology majorly! A 3rd reform would be to tame David Miscavige or oust him out of the leadership role, where he’s turned into a Mussolini and he calls ALL the major shots. Scientology top ranks echelons used to have two large council bodies, Watchdog Committee and the Executive Strata. Those two council bodies have to be functioning, and wrest power from Miscavige.
Chuck Beatty
ex Scientology staffer (1975-2003)
412-260-1170 Pittsburgh, USA (anyone call me anytime!)
http://www.freewebs.com/chuckbeatty77/
http://tinyurl.com/295khy
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05205/542899.stm
http://tinyurl.com/38ptz8 buffalo video
http://tinyurl.com/ywhgaf buffalo poster
Comment by Chuck Beatty — March 20, 2008 @ 10:13 am
I’m with those who say the website change is only a change in marketing. Real, positive change would involve freedom within the CoS and the CoS respecting its critics’ right to free speech, as others have already stated.
And I simply must comment on your remark, D, that Dianetics must have “something to it.” Really, I would say it’s a lot of malarkey from a guy who simply was never qualified to develop any “science of the mind.” It has nothing to it. It’s just a successful scam, IMO.
But here’s where it’s important for Scientologists to pay attention: Just because I think Dianetics and Scientology are bullshit and scams DOESN’T mean I don’t respect your right to practise it. Read that last sentence again, Scientologists – many of you seem to have reading comprehension problems. You have the right to choose your religion, and I and nearly everyone else respect that. Anonymous has clearly stated that repeatedly, I might add.
I also think Islam is BS. Same with Christianity, Buddhism and Judaism. I like Scott Adams’s description of Christianity-Islam conflict as “people who think a man walked on water versus people who think horses can fly.” But I still respect the rights of Christians, Muslims et al. to worship as they wish.
Comment by Narcissus — March 20, 2008 @ 10:32 am
Hey! I’m anonymous and I’m a critic and I will not say Scientology has never done any good. There you happy? That being said, it has done and continues to do bad. I agree with D, if the bad stops I dont care if they are in my town of CLearwater. Thing is though, the Sea Org members downtown are afraid of the public. The church wants to not be in the public (why our beach access bridge no longer goes through downtown.) Believe what you want, practice what you want, but why are your members afraid of what is not scientology. Not making a blanket statement for all Co$ members, but I’ve seen it on the street with my own eyes in some.
Also, you do nice things, there is the easter egg thing coming up in coachman park Co$ does every year. Yay for the kids. Anons, I know the recordings of Hubbard about Christ dont bring em up. I also know other religions that do easter egg hunts, Yay for the kids. What is the difference between the hunts though?
The Co$ egg hunt passes out pamplets, they have the ever fun stress test tent, and you can even buy Dianetics.
The other egg hunts (ones Ive been to) don’t do this. Catholic egg hunts arent handing out crosses and rosearies. Why? because they know its about the kids! Dont need propoganda. Thats the difference. Give back to the community without using it as a way of pushing your religion. Your good deeds should be enough to make people think well of you.
Get rid of the hidden propoganda at your events PLEASE! I think this little step would help greatly.
So like I said, you do good sure, like the egg hunt, but then spoil it, the bad, with pushing your beliefs at it.
Comment by On the Bridge — March 20, 2008 @ 11:10 am
Until OSA and the RPF is dismantled, Miscavige is unseated, the harassment from private investigators ends, “Fair Game” (or whatever they’re calling it these days) is really brought to an end and criminal charges are brought against the people responsible for the undue influence they visited upon countless Church members, I have to think that this tactic is cosmetic at best. The largest change I’ve seen is that Scientology is now spending vast amounts of money to advertise their new video channel on the very sites that criticise it.
I hate to pull the Nazi card, but the 1936 Olympics were a beautiful, well organised celebration of sportsmanship- but it didn’t change the evil that existed within the regime.
Comment by Nameless (but not anonymous) — March 20, 2008 @ 11:17 am
One of the many problems are that Scientology has been caught in their lies. And about simple things too. Since the begining in the 50’s they got caught on a few things and rather than just saying, ok we admit this and it will not happen again, they just pretend like they don’t know what your talking about and then go on the full attack. For example, they’re is an old video where Hubbard is being interviewed and they ask if he was ever legally married to two women at the same time. And he flatly said no. A lot of OT’s who have been around awhile know for a fact that he was . And its not even that big of a deal so why lie so strongly? Why not come out and say, yes, Hubbard messed up. And then there’s the gay thing. Its a fact that all Sci ties believe that gay people are all 1.1 on the tone scale and would destroy anything and anyone. And they have tried to make gays straight in auditing. But then when asked in a public forum, they say, no we don’t have any problem with gay people. No Sci tie’s I’ve ever seen are friendly with gay people unless its work related or something like that. Are there gays in the Sea Org? No. And then the operation freakout thing. That was serious lies that most public Sci ties DO NOT know about. Its remained covered up. And they blame it on the ones who were caught and say they didn’t know anything about it. Come on! So what I’m trying to get at is no critic is ever going to believe a word from Johnny Scientologist until there is straight proof. So sci ties shouldn’t get so angry that they aren’t being understood by Anonymous. There’s way too many lies underneath most of what they say and they don’t even know it. They just say, oh, my church said that was debunked, which is a really bizzare tactic. How do you know when a Scientologist is lying??? There mouth is moving.
Comment by Anonymous — March 20, 2008 @ 11:56 am
My real point isn’t so much whether I agree or disagree that Dianetics works for some people, it has more to do with the fact that Anonymous has demanded change within the church to reform itself. If they take even a small step (and again, I haven’t really looked over the whole website to see what’s there and what has changed) to set the record straight on who they are, what they stand for and explain some of the soundbites people hear in the media, then that is a move in the right direction.
In NO way am I saying that Anon or CoS critics should stop demanding Scientology reform itself, but the critical community at large should at least check out any signs that maybe all this pressure is having some kind of positive effect and doing some good.
People don’t willingly decide to change things for the better by being dragged kicking and screaming, it takes baby steps to overhaul a group as corrupt as Scientology.
And those people trapped in the Church deserve some consideration. Many really believe in what the CoS teaches. All I am suggesting is being open and compassionate to what maybe an internal shift.
Really, I feel like no one understands what I am saying, and that is depressing. Maybe this just isn’t my week or something.
Comment by D — March 20, 2008 @ 2:01 pm
I think I understand what you’re saying, D. And you’re right that this website change might be a sign of progress within the CoS. I just think the website change in and of itself isn’t any of the change so many people have been trying to get.
Looking at your work this week, I’d say you’ve had a pretty good week. Have a great Easter weekend!
Comment by Narcissus — March 20, 2008 @ 2:08 pm
We all understand, D. Some may not agree, but that doesn’t mean your point has gotten across. For some, this is a sign of change. For others, it’s just way too little. I personally think it’s just a way for them to promote their new video channel (as I see they’ve bought some Glosslip ad space on more than a few articles) and to possibly get some of the heat off of them. Although, is it really becoming more transparent if what they reveal is still not the truth? In fact, if you click the “Scientology home page” link in the upper-left corner it takes you back to the same old Scientology.org that has always been there. All this is is a redirect to their video channel…which is chock full of videos explaining away all the allegations and testimonies that Scientology and it’s various facets “really works”. Interesting to note, while I didn’t dig too deep as I’m working, CCHR isn’t linked at the bottom of the console. Applied Scholastics and Narconon are mentioned. Human rights is mentioned but I didn’t see anything explicitly named Citizens Commission on Human Rights. Perhaps they’re trying to separate themselves from them in light of the recent LEAF leaks. ??
Comment by Anon, Anon, My Boyfriend's Back! — March 20, 2008 @ 2:46 pm
*hasn’t gotten across
Damnit…
Comment by Anon, Anon, My Boyfriend's Back! — March 20, 2008 @ 2:47 pm
ARGGG!!! *Upper right hand corner
Comment by Anon, Anon, My Boyfriend's Back! — March 20, 2008 @ 2:48 pm
Complete side note: Are the Scn ads throughout the blog there on purpose, or are they part of a more general advertising system? It just seems like an odd combination.
I guess they can’t use the attack that you’re receiving mad ducats from Big Pharmaâ„¢ and the Psyches®.
NYCanonNYC
Comment by NYCanonNYC — March 20, 2008 @ 3:14 pm
The ads are search word generated. It just means that the CoS paid for Google to pimp them out. I wish I could control it, but I can’t. It’s googlejuicified.
Comment by D — March 20, 2008 @ 3:21 pm
Gotcha. I figured it was something along those lines…
NYCanonNYC
Comment by NYCanonNYC — March 20, 2008 @ 3:51 pm
Wow. Great comments all. D I agree any step in the right direction is at least progress. Time will tell if it is sincere. To the sci folks who appear to be new thank you for your comments. They are actually more civil than what I’m used to seeing and I hope you are listening and reading. As for Dianetics working I am sure it is working for people but it doesn’t mean it’s actually the tech that’s working. The power of suggestion and the ability of people to want to believe something will work can result in positive results that have nothing to do with the product. How many of you bought all those fancy gadgets or tried those fail proof diets and got exactly what you were promised? Remember the Q Ray bracelets? The power of the mind can never be discounted. Someone posted the following somewhere and I find it very educational to explain why the tech does work. It is also entertaining as these are 2 of my favorite people. Enjoy.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=MzjoKhBklYg
Comment by Mitsu Too — March 20, 2008 @ 4:15 pm
L. Ron Hubbard wrote the books of Scientology. Over the many years of his life, he had the books reprinted many times, often with minor corrections and modifications. Years after his death, in the 1990’s, David Miscavige had all the books revised and reprinted to “bring them back to source,” requiring all Scientologists replace their libraries. Then, in 2007, Miscavige once again had all the books revised, this time radically, and required, once again, that all Scientologists replace their libraries at great cost. Are we supposed to believe that Ron, through all those years, through all his own re-readings and all those reprints, never noticed that his books were completely wrong?
Doesn’t that make you wonder?
Do you know that “L. Ron Hubbard” is no longer, officially, the author of the books on Scientology? Did you know that the name “Hubbard” no longer shows up on the front page of the main Church of Scientology web site? Have you noticed that Ron’s name and photos are disappearing from the events and from the publications? Instead, you see Miscavige’s name and photos.
Doesn’t that make you wonder?
When Ron was alive, he was very satisfied with his tech. In fact, he wrote “Keeping Scientology Working” in which he said it was complete and shouldn’t be altered in any way. To alter any of his technology was the work of an enemy of Scientology.
And yet, years after Ron’s death, his technology was radically changed. Everyone who had been trained before that time had their certs canceled and they were required to re-train under the new technology, even those who were trained personally by Ron!
Doesn’t that make you wonder?
But, anyone who complains that Ron’s “Keeping Scientology Working” policy explicitly forbids exactly that sort of alteration, has been immediately declared Suppressive. Most of those who knew Ron, worked with Ron, trained under Ron, have been declared and kicked out.
Doesn’t that make you wonder?
As you know, the lavish events put on by David Miscavige are flashy and impressive. The news announced in these events is extraordinary: The Church of Scientology’s expansion and impact on the world is amazing.
And yet, outside of those events and the church’s own press releases, evidence of all those amazing things is missing. Every day there are news stories about Scientology, some positive, some negative, but lacking in all the news stories is any mention of those big wins announced in the events. You look at your local church and you see the place is virtually empty and the staff is struggling. Your local church has been that way as long as you can remember. If you know of an “Ideal Org”, did you notice that, after all the fuss and bother, the church went back to almost empty and struggling? You look at Flag and you see it is much emptier than it was years ago, and the staff is struggling. Ron says a well run course fills up and a poorly run course will empty.
Doesn’t that make you wonder?
Have you noticed that your circle of Scientology friends has been shrinking? Some Scientologists have been “declared”. Others have moved away and quietly disappeared. Some are still around somewhere but they are no longer active or interested. It keeps happening. Do you see that Scientologists you know, who are good people, doing good work, have suddenly found themselves in serious trouble with the church? Do you see Scientologists, maybe even yourself, struggling for years to try to make progress, but not making it?
Doesn’t that make you wonder?
And if you wonder about any of this, do you get the strong feeling that you’d better not ask any questions? Do you get the feeling that you’d better be careful or you’ll be next?
And doesn’t that make you wonder?
Comment by I am a Scientologist — March 20, 2008 @ 4:26 pm
#29, Hubbard’s image being removed was one of the first things I’d noticed. This re-brand had been rumored for a while now, with the intention if disassociating from Hubbard, whose actual personal history can no longer go unproven due to the amount of information and legal documentation easily available to all of us. This rumor, has come to pass – but it’s not over yet.
Another part to that rumor, which we NEED to keep an eye out for, is that there would be more of a business or corporate focus to their marketing. They want companies and corporate execs to be applying scientology tech to their practices – all without knowing (at first) that it is scientology based. They will likely be looking to recruit influential leaders of the financial world, so this is something that really needs to be watched closely.
That aside, I can say that from the scientology materials I’ve read (dianetics, new slant, and misc. literature), there are indeed some interesting insights and theories. However, NONE of that (or any number of “touch assists”) is justification for the injustices of the “church.”
The CoS is harmful to the reputation of Scientology. If the CoS doesn’t make the necessary adjustments to improve it’s public reputation and relations (and sorry, but a website re-design just doesn’t cut it), it will continue to be detrimental to any potential good Scientology may offer to the world. Sorry, but a website re-design just doesn’t cut it.
Comment by liz — March 20, 2008 @ 4:27 pm
Sorry, didn’t mean to repeat myself in my last paragraph, but then from the Scientology materials I just mentioned, it seems that LRH really felt that repetition works.
Repetition works. < See how “useful” scientology teachings can be?
Comment by liz — March 20, 2008 @ 4:34 pm
I’ve had tremendous gains from Scientology auditing and training — I believe it has improved my ability to take life’s challenges in stride and I believe it has increased my IQ. Placebo? Maybe, but I really don’t think so. I’ve tried lots of other approaches and I did not get the benefits I had hoped for.
In the past two years, I’ve seen things in the workings of the Church that have made me question the leadership, but I know better than to say anything out loud. All I can do is ponder what it might mean. I’m talking about actions that are contrary to LRH Policy Letters and Bulletins, actions that are definitely off-policy or out-tech. In one case, using bulk mail to advertise services, I wrote several letters to RTC requesting they get the appropriate policy followed. They acknowledged that they received my letter, but nothing was ever done. And I realized later that nothing was done because it would have crashed the statistics if they done the mailings the way they’re supposed to. Also, LRH put very high stock in good letter registrars, but I know of no Scientology Org that has a letter registrar posted. There are actually way too many examples of how the Church is not run according to the policies and bulletins of LRH. Any Scientologist who hasn’t noticed any of these outnesses has to be blind or very new.
I want to say that I think David Miscavige is hurting us, hurting our Church, making us look really truly evil to the rest of the world. We’re not. We’re good people who want to help others have a better life. We want others to be happy. Yes, L. Ron Hubbard had his flaws, but a great deal of what he put together and called Scientology is good and came from his heart.
Comment by I am a Scientologist — March 20, 2008 @ 4:51 pm
I know there may be those who have had too personal of experiences within the Church or been mistreated by the Church to ever forgive them of their transgressions. This is a sad reality and must be taken into account when discussing what the best way is in moving forward for Scientology.
I also know there are people who just want something to fight against and want a cause to fight for, and for them, CoS provides a great outlet — not only because the CoS is powerful AND corrupt, but because of the nature of their organization and its history, not to mention the fact it is based in the US, therefore subject to US laws. This is a unique opportunity for a mass movement to do something good.
But as Anonymous and many other who protest the CoS have stated, rank and file members need to be treated with consideration and respect. These are people who have beliefs that mean something to them.
If after the veil of secrecy has been lifted, restrictions lessened and destructive policies have been outlawed, Scientologists wish to pursue their beliefs freely, then by all means we should let them.
If the CCHR wants to enlighten the public to the dangers of pharmaceutical drugs and provide alternatives for mental health, then they should have to seek FDA and medical approval and guidelines for their tech and then once approved and certified, this tech should be available to those who wish to use it.
If Narconon can prove it is an effective tool by going through clincical trials approved by governing bodies which control drug treatment facilities, then let them.
If Criminon can show it helps criminals lead productive lives and reduce recidivism rates and is approved and endorsed (without bribery or extortion) by our legislative and penal system, then great.
If Dianetics can be offered without fixed donations to anyone who wishes to use it, regardless of their tithing contributions, I say go for it.
But if Scientology, without its disguises, deception and illegal activities proves to be nothing more than the work of snake oil salesmen, then it must go away, never to be heard from again.
And above all, David Miscavige must be held accountable for any crimes committed by the Church which he is responsible for, including child labor violations, RPF abuses, extortion, blackmail and any deaths he may have ordered.
Also, thank you “I am a Scientologist” for your candid, heartfelt, open-minded dialogue. It is people like you who I wish to help most.
Comment by D — March 20, 2008 @ 5:38 pm
I’ve been seeing a change in tactics reflecting in scientologist’s responses on different comment boards the past few days. I am happy, (more like cautiously optimistic) about what seems to be a trend towards what seems to be open dialog, and some are even trying to address some of the issues.
“I am a Scientologist,” I have heard many people say that the practice of scientology has improved their lives in one way or another, but why doesn’t anyone ever mention specifics? Why is everybody always so vague?
For example, when people say it helped them with communication, does that mean it made them less shy and less afraid of public speaking? Is it about an increase in vocabulary, or ability to steer a conversation towards topics you prefer? Is it about eye contact and body language?
Also, when you say you believe the practice has improved your IQ, is this something you feel, or was this tested? If it was tested, who was it tested by? Is there something in the practice specifically that you feel contributed to the increase of your intellectual quotient, or is it the over-all practice?
Comment by liz — March 20, 2008 @ 6:19 pm
Because i believe in “Fair play” NOT “Fair game”, because i believe in Freedom of speech NOT lies hidden in jargon and inuendo, because i believe most people have good in them and want to live in a world without war and crime, i am prepared to believe most Scientologists are decent people.I do believe this because many of the Scientologists i met as a child back in the 60s were decent people.
However,Hubbard was a liar and a plagiarist and he was a Science fiction writer,not a Messiah.He fooled a lot of people and he made a lot of money fooling a lot of people.He wrote a lot of policies,these policies were used to run the organization of Scientology and to keep people in line.The best way to control people is to lie to them see http//:Lermanet.com and http//:xenu.net.
Because so many lives have been ruined through Scientology, reforming a website and showing a few happy faces does nothing to make these children
http://www.exscientologykids.com
or these families and friends feel any better
http://www.scientologydisconnection.com/
or the many sad stories and accounts of people on the
http//:forum.exscn.netindex.php
You really are going to have to do better than that Mr. Miscavige.Its all well and good to show pictures of Scientology volunteer ministers helping people in third world countries,but not if Scientologys’ own children are suffering.
Comment by Sharone Stainforth — March 20, 2008 @ 8:18 pm
D,
I think you are being misled. If there was Joe Scientologist that just happened to be reading the internet and your website, and they were honestly posting their account…. well, isn’t it possible that person can look at other places on the internet and would have found many, many, many stories about the evils CoS has committed.
If you think a real, non-OSA, non-disinformation type Scientologist would read your website AND comment like that and read these comments. They just wouldn’t. Your site would immediately register as entheta and they are conditioned to immediately think this site is evil and wouldn’t try and post their Scientology story.
It is not heartfelt, it is not honest. It is a concerted effort by Scientology’s dis-information branch. You can probably tell by the IP addresses, etc. But the OSA or whomever is in charge on monitoring and posting pro-Scientology comments really believe (and are getting stat or whatever) by posting one pro-comment somehow people will latch on to their positive message and magically forget about all the critical comments.
Normal people read everything and sadly the refusal to examine any critical aspects of CoS makes them look insane and unwilling to listen or respond to any critism.
Comment by DangerMouse — March 20, 2008 @ 8:33 pm
DangerMouse; I think you’re ringing a wrongful alarm because of the “I am a Scientologist” post. He didn’t exactly reply to any of the comments that were posted here, nor even to much of what D’s written. It was just a vague, general post. They did talk about how they had perceived bad things happening though; perhaps they’re trying to reach out so someone’ll listen?
Also, to IAAS: If you really want to help people, why not do it out of another organization, one that is based on the principles of helping people (and not self-help/religion/world super-heroes)? You can go to your local hospital and get classes, or join a local crime-watch group. There’re a lot of things you can do that don’t have anything to do with Scientology.
Comment by Anoynymause — March 20, 2008 @ 8:43 pm
“After many, many attempts to reason with critics, I found that they are unwilling to admit that the Church of Scientology does any good for anyone anyplace – even in the face of overwhelming testimonials from people that Scientology has helped.”
Theta2008, not so long ago there was a product on the market, named something like Theta Water or Penta Water or Health2O or some such thing. It, too, was advertised with “overwhelming testimonials” from the people that it had supposedly helped. There was just one problem. The product was nothing but plain, ordinary water. People drank the water; they had the subjective impression that they were better; they submitted glowing testimonials which were all based on their false assumption that the water which came from a fancy bottle was doing something for them that the water from out of their tap would not have done.
The perceptual system of human beings is flawed: if they already hold a belief, they will tend to notice evidence which fits with their belief, and tend to not notice or to explain away evidence which doesn’t fit the belief. There are numerous “optical illusions” which can fool the eye; there are as many if not more “perceptual illusions” which can easily make people testify “Wow, A-B-C is doing wonders for me!” when in reality A-B-C is doing nothing for them (or even harming them.) So mere testimonials are no test of actual value.
Theta2008, do you remember the story of “The Emperor’s New Clothes”? You probably do, but just in case — the story was about two clever swindlers who came to the court of the Emperor. They claimed they could make him the finest suit of clothes anywhere, made of a magical cloth that was so special that only those who were highly intelligent could see or feel it, and to everyone else it would look invisible and feel intangible, like air.
Of course, the truth is that it was air. The swindlers counted on the fact that when the Emperor saw them miming gestures as if they were holding up the fabulous suit, but did not see the suit itself — he was afraid to admit it. So instead, he oohed and aahed over a suit of clothes that didn’t exist, and so did all his subjects, who had already been told that if you didn’t see the Emperor’s fabulous new clothes, it meant you were dull and stupid. And this lasted until one little boy finally pointed out the obvious: the Emperor wasn’t wearing the finest suit of clothes in the land; he was just naked.
Now, what does this have to do with “overwhelming testimonials from people that Scientology has helped”?
Consider this: not being helped by Scientology was identified by Hubbard to be one of the characteristics of a Suppressive Person.
In the fairy tale, the consequences of saying “I don’t see the clothes” to a person who believed the clothes were real were merely that you would mark yourself, in that person’s eyes, as being unintelligent.
In the real world, the consequences of saying “Scientology didn’t do much for me” to a person who believes Hubbard’s dictums about Scientology’s 100% effectiveness when correctly applied and how only an SP makes no case gain on correct Scientology … are far, far more serious. Hubbard advocated putting the SPs in concentration camps, or merely “deleting” them, “disposing” of them “quietly and without sorrow”. Sure, there are plenty of testimonials saying “Gosh, Scientology helped me!” What else would one expect, when those whom Scientology did not help are menaced if they dare to admit it?
Comment by AF — March 20, 2008 @ 10:43 pm
You may wish to know that at least one of the videos on Scientology’s new website has been proven to be fraudulent, and French authorities suggest they may take further action. The video in question has a testimonial from an unnamed “member of the cabinet of the mayor of Marseille” Municipal staff were contacted and after some investigation concluded “this document is a forgery that we have to transmit to the office of mayor with a view to possible action on our part.”
A testimonial in the video supposedly from the Council of European Communities, Brussels has similarly been proven to be fraudulent.
The original French article may be accessed here: http://www.bakchich.info/article3073.html
An imperfect Google translation accessible here: http://www.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bakchich.info%2Farticle3073.html&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8
Comment by SingLikeABird — March 21, 2008 @ 4:45 am
Great comment AF. I agree with the problem of perception. For that matter Faith is based on this irregardless of which religion it is. I believe it’s true therefore it must be true. Unfortunately that same mind set makes one close their minds to the even the remote possibility that with all the criticism and stories from their ex followers, media reports, court documents, etc. some of it may even have some merit. They cannot accept that L Ron or Miscabbage or the tech are fallible because if they are then that shakes up their core faith values. Remember to the CoS the tech is perfect. If you are not advancing you must be using the tech wrong or you are SP. That’s why we must leave the door open to any Scientologist ( even you OSA plants) as they may need our help. Followers are not the problem, thir leadership and corporate structure are.
Comment by Mitsu Too — March 21, 2008 @ 7:24 am
I can see their are may opinions on this subject. Other religions get attacked as well, look at the Museums that are being killed by the American Army, thanks to the Bush administration. It’s just another attack on religion with the media propaganda and fool’s that follow it’s message of lies so to hate. Sure you have Dick-Heads in all groups but that’s not the whole group or the religion they believe and practice. Some people get fooled very easily by the bull Sh_t the media puts out. Stop being manipulated and get the facts before you start putting anything down. I also know that not every one will take this
advice as we still have Dick-Heads around.
My opinion to you.
Cheers JP
Comment by Jack — March 21, 2008 @ 8:53 am
“Museums being kiled by the American Army”? That damn Bush now our museums are in danger. Quick hide your exhibits, paintings and artifacts! And Jack once again you prove the point of many of the people who posts comments here, the reporters, the critics and all those who have not suspended their ability to think critically. “Stick and Stones may break our bones but words will never harm us”. Take your own advice: “Stop being manipulated and get the facts before you start putting anything down”.
Thank you and have a nice day….dick head!
Comment by Mitsu Too — March 21, 2008 @ 10:00 am
@Jack #59
You obviously haven’t been reading the comments here for you to say “Sure you have Dick-Heads in all groups but that’s not the whole group or the religion they believe and practice”.
We aren’t after the rank and file members. Hell, we aren’t even after the staff. We’re after the leadership and the structure of the Church itself. Even the first Anonymous video said “dismantle the Church in it’s CURRENT form”.
Read the comments. That is, if you’re allowed to. NO ONE IS AFTER YOU! We aren’t against your beliefs. I personally think it’s a scam and all hypnosis and brainwash but that is just MY PERSONAL OPINION and it’s your choice if you want to get caught up in it. However, the Church and it’s checklist of human rights abuses and complete disregard for law (the real law, not CoS defined law) cannot go unanswered. And don’t say I’m attacking your religion. Sure, I think it’s hogwash, but it’s no more “out there” than most religions mythos. But to say I attack it because I have a negative opinion of it is a dangerous exaggeration. You cannot control opinion. At least outside of the Churches walls.
Comment by Anon, Anon, My Boyfriend's Back! — March 21, 2008 @ 10:04 am
55: DangerMouse. That is well-spotted. The posts by “I am a Scientologist” are probably NOT from a current Scientologist. It is too reasoned and reasonable.
However, it is obviously NOT a post by OSA. The OSA trolls are not clever and are not creative. They have a very strict script that they must follow. Actually ADMITTING that Miscavige is harming the Church of Scientology is simply not in their script. Let’s face it, criticize Miscavige and they’d be off to the RPF so fast they’d leave scorch marks on their keyboards.
Instead, “I am a Scientologist” is very probably an ex-Scientologist, who is hoping that current Scientologists will have this kind of awareness.
Can’t fool the Internet.
Comment by Peter — March 21, 2008 @ 10:21 am
Everyone here can debate all day about freedom of religion, or whether the new website is a sign of positive change. It doesn’t matter. It’s a cosmetic makeover and the basic flaws, very big ones, are still there. I will not lie and say my only issue is with the management of CoS, because it goes deeper than that in my opinion.
In a cost/benefit analysis, Scientology does far more harm than good, and what few benefits it may provide are easily available elsewhere in other, less dangerous forms.
I have researched and read L. Ron Hubbard’s writings, and believe this “religion” is a grave danger to all of society because of its fundamental beliefs, and the fact that they are swallowed and practiced wholesale by adherents.
Scientology is NOT a “cafe” religion. You either buy into all of it, or none of it, because rejecting any of it is enough to make you “entheta” “out-tech” “out-ethics” and get a K/R written up to have you sent to the RPF.
Briefly, for those who haven’t read it, Scientology has this trap in it:
1. The “tech” and policies of LRH are infallible.
2. Only an SP is not helped by this “tech.”
3. SP’s are to have no rights within society. Speaking critically of Scientology makes you an automatic SP.
4. It is “low tone” to have compassion, love, empathy, sadness, or grief. It is “low tone” to be homosexual or have mental illness.
5. Those low on the tone scale are to be “disposed of quietly and without sorrow.”
6. Scientology cares only about helping “the able become more able” but dismisses the unable as useless and a drain on society.
7. If one becomes ill while using LRH “tech”, Scientology dictates that he or someone near him is at fault and must be blamed. The uselessness of the tech in addressing physical and mental illness is never considered, and access to any more than rudimentary medical care is denied.
8. Victims are blamed in most situations, and punished for speaking “entheta” or “making another wrong” when they make valid complaints.
There are many, many other instances of (for lack of a better word) evil and inhumane policies from L. Ron Hubbard within his own writings. If Scientology were to achieve widespread status, it would lead to a master race and genocide of any who resist.
That is why I — a very tolerant, curious, and open-minded person who enjoys learning about other belief systems — find the writings of L. Ron Hubbard to be a dangerous “religion” to follow. I oppose it, and will not support it as a religion within my society. It is not an ideology that should be permitted to operate under the auspices of a religion or charitable institution and enjoy the benefits that follow, because it does not respect the dignity, rights and humanity of those who resist it.
I DO support the right of others to believe it if they wish, because there is no such thing as a “thought crime”. But I oppose the legitimacy that recognition as a religion confers upon the harmful system that is Scientology.
Comment by Lulubelle — March 21, 2008 @ 10:53 am
BTW guys, very important info here for you. Regarding the “greed” accusations, those who make these accusations need to know that the average Scientologist donates $1,000 a year to their church. Please compare that amount to the average Catholic, Christian, etc., parishioner who donates via Tithing, Sunday basket passing, etc.. It is by no means out of the ordinary.
Comment by Michael — March 21, 2008 @ 11:45 am
Yeah, Michael, whatever. The Catholic church doesn’t make people pay for “secrets” protected by intellectual property laws. Catholics can pursue enlightenment as much as they want without paying $300,000-plus to reach the highest level of “enightenment”.
And I’m skeptical about that $1,000 average. Did the Co$ arrive at that by tallying what everyone who stepped into a Co$ shop paid, including those who came in and got free “personality tests” and then were never heard from again?
I imagine that’s the case.
Lies, damn lies and statistics.
Comment by Narcissus — March 21, 2008 @ 12:18 pm
@ Michael #65
“the average Scientologist donates $1,000 a year to their church.”
That’s most definitely NOT counting the “fixed donations” for courses, auditing, books and audio materials. Of course, if we are talking averages, and explicitly of unsolicited donations, you may mean that the millions of dollars in celebrity donations devided by the so-called 8 million parishoners comes to about a grand per year, you may be right…in your world…where there are 8 million active churchgoing Scientologist. But then, what’s true for you, is what is true for you, right? With that perspective, it’s easy deny the criticism when what’s true for you happens to be lies.
“Please compare that amount to the average Catholic, Christian, etc., parishioner who donates via Tithing, Sunday basket passing, etc.. It is by no means out of the ordinary.”
Uhm, I went to a non-denominational Christian church for a better part of 16 years growing up and, while, yes, there was a collection plate, by no means did the average member donate $1000/year. If you do the math, that’s around $20/week. My grandparents, who are wealthy and who go twice a week, average(d) about $5 per pass of the plate. That’s $10/week between the 2 of them. So, being two separate members, they averaged a quarter of what you say is ordinary for other faiths. Most drop a buck at most in the collection plate and, regardless, isn’t it wonderful that they can choose how much to donate? I think so.
My girlfriend, who has been Catholic all her life and an avid churchgoer, has never, to my knowledge, paid a tithe. Read the main Wikipedia entry for “tithe”. Tithing is USAULLY voluntary.
All of that aside, the money tithed or donated to other faiths typically isn’t spent on celebrity center upkeeps, hiring PIs, and suing the bejesus out of anyone who publicly speaks out against them.
Besides, at an average of $20/week in donations, how do any Sea Org members have any money since that’s about what they get paid? No wonder they’re so dedicated, they can’t afford to do anything else with their time. Besides, who knows, maybe with a lot of hard work, maybe they can one day take vacations with famous a-listers all year long, right?
Comment by Anon, Anon, My Boyfriend's Back! — March 21, 2008 @ 12:31 pm
Why do Scientologists want to compare themselves to Muslims and Christians all the time? I think it must be part of their script. They are nothing like the traditional religions. Imagine the Pope taking Genesis completely out of the bible. Genesis is where most Christians get their creation theory or the Adam and Eve story which is basically where the human race began. Ok, imagine this church leader not allowing his flock to read this text of creation until they have paid thousands and thousands of dollars to the church in memberships, counselling, and practicing to finally know how life was born. Imagine going to confession and seeing the Priest write everything you say down and put it in their file on you. Imagine never being allowed to leave, or talk to anyone who left or disagrees, even if it’s your Mom and you really need her. The church says no, and you must comply. No emotion. They then call critics nazi’s and compare themselves to the Jews and the Holocust for public sympathy. I swear, these people rape you spiritually and financially. The only way they can be compared to Christians is when some of the Priests got caught molesting young children. Except Scientology molests young minds….
Comment by Anonymous — March 21, 2008 @ 3:40 pm
-takes out his mind and molests it for amusement- Hey, this is fun, you ought to try it sometime. Start with the idea that you can think anything and no one can stop you. Then decide to think a thought, and think that thought. Wheeee!
Comment by Terryeo — March 21, 2008 @ 4:00 pm
This would be more encouraging if they hadn’t had someone follow me home after the protests (waiting while I ate dinner for two hours!) and then follow me very aggressively when I was leaving my house three days later, just to let me know they knew who I was.
If it’s just a final attempt to see if a modified version of their old intimidation tactics can work when applied in small doses against a large number of people, that’s fine, because it will clearly fail, and they’ll realize they have to reform or become more of a laughingstock than they already are.
Comment by Anonymous — March 21, 2008 @ 8:23 pm
“Start with the idea that you can think anything and no one can stop you. Then decide to think a thought, and think that thought. Wheeee!”
You know, I wonder: if you showed this little bon mot to a stranger on the street, would they be more likely to think that it was:
* the “wisdom” of Scientology; or
* the results of smoking weed or similar substance?
I can’t decide whether it’s funny or tragic that Scientology, which claims to be so dead set against drugs, so often induces a similar state, where the babbler certainly believes that he/she has reached some sort of elevated consciousness unavailable to the blind fools who haven’t experienced Scientology/LSD, but only believes it because he/she has disabled their common sense.
Comment by AF — March 21, 2008 @ 9:44 pm
If a Scientologist commits a crime it should be reported, and if not they should be left alone.
No matter how ridiculous you think their beliefs are.
Comment by maT — March 22, 2008 @ 12:59 am
Certainly the new website is an improvement, because it explains what Scientology is. That doesn’t mean that things have changed as far as operating basis is concerned. Disconnection from family members still goes on within the Church, even if Miscavige lies about it. The practice of “shunning” is used in some other religions, too, but that doesn’t make it right. It is cruel and abusive and while milder than some of the other control mechanisms used by religions to make you think their way, it is still primitive.
While any group should have the right of exclusion, they shouldn’t have the right to enforce their members to disconnect under threat of “no more Scientology technology for you.”
Comment by thetagal — March 22, 2008 @ 6:41 am
The changes to the website are like putting lipstick on a pig. No more, no less.
Comment by tomcruiseeatsLRHsass — March 22, 2008 @ 1:58 pm
“If a Scientologist commits a crime it should be reported, and if not they should be left alone.
No matter how ridiculous you think their beliefs are.”
maT, if Scientologists were willing to leave others alone, that might be suitable. However, David Miscavige has identified “the global obliteration of psychiatry” as a key priority for Scientologists. That’s not leaving others alone; why should they be free to conduct an organized campaign of interference with others’ health choices but enjoy special protection for their own?
Comment by AF — March 22, 2008 @ 3:22 pm