“Going Clear:” Scientology’s coverup efforts against the HBO documentary

[hrmjustin]

Laura Turner

Going Clear is full of moments like this; moments culled from past interviews (because no one from within Scientology would agree to sit down with these filmmakers) that make you realize just how insular Scientology is. Several ex-Scientologists were interviewed and they all, without exception, had friends and family members still in the Church who had to “disconnect” from them once they left. One particularly harrowing story followed a mother whose decision to leave Scientology has left her without a relationship with her daughter and grandchild.

One of the defining characteristics of a cult is its inability to ask critical questions of itself. For all its flaws, evangelical Christianity–my tradition–can at least admit to wrongdoings and have honest conversations about where we have failed. That ability does not exist with Scientology, a religion founded in the 1950s by L. Ron Hubbard, a science fiction writer who thought founding a tax-exempt religion would be the best way to make a bunch of money fast. He was right–the Church’s assets are now approaching $3 billion, even at a time when its number of adherents is at an all-time low. The Church of Scientology claims to have about 10 million members, but according to Mike Rinder–a former Church senior executive featured in the documentary–the figure is around 30,000. They’re investing their money in real estate around the world and hedging their poorly-spun defenses with walls of secrecy built by unlimited financial resources. All of this is reinforced by their strategy of appealing through “self-help” to celebrities and wealthy folks who will keep the Church’s doors open with repeated and generous donations.
http://lauraturner.religionnews.com/2015/03/16/going-clear-scientologys-coverup-efforts-hbo-documentary/


I don't normally post ops in this room but it seemed the most appropriate forum and I was suprised no one else posted something about the documentary.

I watched it and it was one of HBO's finest Documentaries.

[cbayer]

1. I want to see it...

will have to wait until May when I go to the states.

Anything that gets them this upset is on the right track, imo.

[hrmjustin]

3. It was the most in dept documentary I ever saw on them.

The first 40 minutes were devoted to their beliefs and the rest was dedicated to the abuses of the organization.

[cbayer]

5. No one has dared to do this previously

and they did everything they could to stop it.

[hrmjustin]

6. It shows the cowardice of the IRS, FBI, and prosecutors in this nation.

This is a cult and not a religion Imho.

[PassingFair]

53. Is this a cult?

[hrmjustin]

54. From a picture? I can't make a judgement.

Not a fan of their dresses.

[cbayer]

55. What definition of cult are you using?

[PassingFair]

62. I wasn't the one making the assertion, justin was.

"This is a cult and not a religion Imho."

He apparently thinks they should be locked up or disbanded.

From Wiki:


The word "cult" was originally used not to describe a group of religionists, but for the act of worship or religious ceremony. It was first used in the early 17th century, borrowed via the French culte, from Latin cultus (worship). This, in turn, was derived from the adjective cultus (inhabited, cultivated, worshiped), based on the verb colere (care, cultivate).[9] The word "culture" is also derived from the Latin words cultura and cultus, which in general terms refers to the customary beliefs, social forms and material traits of a racial, religious or social group.[10] Most of the Romance languages currently use various spellings of the word "cult" (such as "culto&quot to refer to worship or sometimes to a ritual without any pejorative meaning at all, resulting in a class of false friends.[citation needed]

While the literal sense of the word in English is still in use, a derived sense of "excessive devotion" arose in the 19th century. The terms cult and cultist came to be used in medical literature in the United States in the 1930s for what would now be termed faith healing, especially for the US Holiness movement. This experienced a surge of popularity at the time, but extended to other forms of alternative medicine as well.[11]

[cbayer]

64. As your wiki past shows, the word cult has had many iterations and

can be used to mean lots of different things. The group you pictured could be considered a cult using some definitions but not one using other definitions.

Same could be said for scientology. Many people see a significant difference between scientology and mainstream religions, but others see no difference at all.

Do you think the group you picture and scientology have more in common than differences, and, if so, in what way?

[PassingFair]

65. Was I even talking to YOU? Justin said that Scientology was a cult, but not a religion.

I'd like to know what HE thinks the difference is, because he is advocating jail time and
disbanding for practitioners of another religion.

I think that if I HAD to define "Cult" it would be more towards groups that live together
in "excessive devotion" to a god or cause.

Like nuns, monks, religious compounds like kibbutzes, polygamist groups, Amish,
any and all who cast away society in favor of total worship.

Scientology would not qualify.

[hrmjustin]

66. No i am advocating that the abuses be investigated and prosecuted.

I am arguing the irs take away their tax exempt status.

[PassingFair]

72. Should this same standard be applied to all religions?

Church by church?

Congregation by congregation?

[hrmjustin]

74. If there are allegations yes.

[cbayer]

77. Absolutely. The IRS has been flagrantly asleep at the wheel in terms of

their responsibility to make sure that those groups with religious exemptions are actually following the rules.

They fought hard to keep scientology from getting the status, but were seriously out-lawyered and out-moneyed and eventually gave in.

They haven't put up a fight against any religious groups since then, as far as I know, and they need to get on it.

The abuses are widespread and flagrant.

Why they don't even try is something I just don't understand.

[samsingh]

95. you are right Justin.

[hrmjustin]

96. Thanks.

[cbayer]

67. By your definition, the women you picture would be a cult.

What if we use these definitions.


1) A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.

2) A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease.


For each of these, would scientology be a cult? Would the women you picture?

[PassingFair]

70. The women in the pic would probably still qualify.

Some Scientologists might qualify.

[cbayer]

75. Do you think the women would qualify for both definitions?

Do you think there is a difference between cults and religions, or not difference?

[okasha]

168. Only by your private definition.

People who speak standard English would call the women members of a major religion.

[samsingh]

84. in cults members are not allowed to freely leave - either through force or shunning.

[PassingFair]

97. So...Jehovah's Witnesses and groups like the Amish are cults? nt

[samsingh]

109. POSSIBLY

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

157. A group that makes people work for 40 cents an hour for movie starts, a group that

puts people in confined and torturous situations for YEARS and said people LOVE it and ask for more!

Yeah, there are cult like patterns here.

All religions are scams, nonsense, dont deserve tax exempt status etc.

Some behave worse than others like the Jeffries guy, the Mormon deal, multiple wives and whatnot.


No need to get hung up on words like cult, the IRS needs to yank their tax exempt status (all religions as far as I am concerned) but especially those who exhibit this type of behavour, and the FBI needs to arrest those responsible for slave labor and physical abuse.

[stone space]

78. Who are they? Are we supposed to make such judgements based solely on appearance?

Is this a cult?

That would seem a wee bit superficial and stereotypical, wouldn't it?

[cbayer]

80. I looked them up, but I agree that just posting their picture and asking if they

are a cult is an interesting approach.

Is this a cult:

[NYC_SKP]

167. "Blue Cloister Cult"

[samsingh]

83. i don't know. what do they believe in?

[Starboard Tack]

172. Is that the knitting club?

Nah, they look way too happy.

[AtheistCrusader]

25. Is there a predictable criteria by which one might reliably interpret whether hostile material about

a religion will be cheered or chastised by you? Some principle/mechanism by which you decide if something is a good or bad example?

You're a little bit all over the place. Obviously scientology isn't in favor with you, as you have openly mocked it before. In a manner in which you will not sit by and passively tolerate for things you deem 'real' religions.

I don't see the mechanism by which you discriminate between the two.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

2. I posted about it in entertainment, I dont like to post in religion.

Have a friend who worked in Scientology, who isnt active now but STILL defends the basics of the self help part of it
and he is an intelligent man, attorney and atheist.

Go figure

and liberal, BTW

After watching the movie I now will NEVER watch another Tom Cruise movie

He supports slave labor and, well you saw it

Obviously they have something on Travolta but mad at him too

That they still have tax exempt status is infuriating...

but then no church should

[hrmjustin]

4. Boycotting his movies is a good idea.

[AtheistCrusader]

26. I'll watch a Tom Cruise movie the day he stands next to a female lead without standing on a crate.

I can't stand fakery for the sake of 'social norms'.

[bvf]

28. I'll watch "Eyes Wide Shut"

every once in a while, if only because I'm aware of the wringer Kubrick put him through.

Call me a sadist.

[cbayer]

7. They got their non-profit designation through sheer bullying.

The IRS just finally backed down.

As to other churches, do you think that all non-profits should loose their exempt tax status or just churches?

[Lordquinton]

99. And here's the straw man!

Not Cbayer, we think churches should loose their status and then re-apply as non-profits.

You can't claim they're doing good because their books are hidden from review, so we don't know what they are doing with their money (except when we do, like the Catholic church buying up churches in the name of harming women, or defending pedophiles)

[cbayer]

101. The churches have already gained their status by applying as non-profits.

They file as 501.c.3's just like any other non-profit.

The IRS needs to audit them if there is any concern that they aren't following the rules.

I have no idea what you are calling a straw man or who this "we" is that wants something that is already the case. You may want to learn a little more about this whole thing before you start attacking me for my position (which is basically completely in line with what you suggest).

[Lordquinton]

104. Yes, they file as 501 as a religious orginization

Now, why should a religious exemption exist for non-profit groups?

[cbayer]

107. The only "religious exemption" is in their needing to regularly file, and

I support a change that would impose that requirement on them. They also have a parsonage exemption, which I think should be eliminated. They still have to apply as a 501 just like any other non-profit. They do not automatically get the exemption because they are religious. They have to initially meet the other criteria.

I think they should be treated just like every other non-profit and be subject to auditing at any time.

[pinto]

103. Religious organizations are tax-exempt as charitable orgs under IRS 501(c)3 regulations.

One problem is with IRS oversight of those exemptions. The IRS has been lax, to say the least, in reviewing activities that are claimed as tax exempt operations. Takes two to tango in this legal dance.

[bvf]

8. Scientology is a religion like any other.

It obviously makes some people feel better about their lives. Why should you have a problem with that?

[hrmjustin]

9. The fact that they regularly abuse their members physically and emotionally.

It was a gimick imho to make money.

[bvf]

10. Do you donate money to your church?

[hrmjustin]

11. Yes. I have to pledge to be a voting member.

[bvf]

13. I see.

[hrmjustin]

14. Although to be fair there is an option not to give money if you can't afford to.

To be a voting member means you vote at parish elections once a year and you are eligible to run for office and represent the parish at diocesan convention if asked.

[bvf]

18. Wonderful.

But they'll gladly take your money if you have it to give, right?

[hrmjustin]

19. Of course. We do a lot of outreach to the neighborhood.

[bvf]

27. Which obviously you would be unable to do

in the absence of your church, correct?

[hrmjustin]

29. No. We have secular agencies that do great work here.

[bvf]

30. Good. So I assume 100% of your donations

to your church are given over to these secular agencies then.

[hrmjustin]

31. No. My donations to my church go to upkeep, salaries, outreach, and grants.

[bvf]

33. Wouldn't it be a more efficient use

your money if you were to give it directly to these secular agencies, then? After all, you're the one touting the benefit they provide.

[hrmjustin]

34. You are assuming I don't give money to them.

And the fact is my church gives a lot to the community. They more than deserve my money.

[bvf]

36. I'm assuming no such thing,

any more than I assume people who buy into scientology don't also find other causes to contribute to.

What are you assuming here?

[hrmjustin]

37. your points are not clear to me.

My point is that my church does a lot of good. Secular organizations do as well.

[bvf]

41. But you specifically mentioned

Last edited Mon Mar 30, 2015, 10:42 PM - Edit history (1)

secular agencies upthread when I asked about the utility of donating to your church, instead of to those agencies.

I suppose to whom you give your money is really none of my business, any more than how scientology operates as a religion is any of yours, or anyone else's, for that matter.

Scientology makes some people feel better about themselves, and that's what really matters, right?

[hrmjustin]

42. Ok.

[okasha]

169. Does your parish vote on the annual budget, Justin?

Mine did. Members knew exactly where their donations were going.and why they were going there.

[hrmjustin]

173. Yes. the vestry approves the budget and it is published for all to see.

[cbayer]

38. Who do you donate money to? You don't have to answer that because ...

it's absolutely none of my business and it would be rather rude of me to ask you such a question, let alone grill you on it.

[bvf]

39. Asking a question is rude?

I would be perfectly fine with an answer along the lines of, "none of your business," but the question wasn't directed to you.

So you can either presume to speak for others, or just butt out, thank you.

[cbayer]

40. Ok, so who do you donate your money to? I'd like to look into whatever organizations

those might be and make sure that they meet might very strict criteria for donations.

[bvf]

43. That's none of your business.

Rude question, don't you think?

[cbayer]

46. My apologies. It is indeed none of my business.

[PassingFair]

56. All religions have pockets of "abuse"...it comes with POWER

"The fact that they regularly abuse their members physically and emotionally."

Do I really have to aggregate stories about the Magdalene Laundries, Mormans, Jehovah's Witnesses, Amish Shunning,
female circumcision, witch burning, exorcism, etc, etc, etc?


Where you have power, you will find abuses.

You can find abuses of power in all religions, not just Scientology.

But you know that.

Funny to see you religious believers (and apologists) attack another religion.

[hrmjustin]

57. It is not a religion in my view.

[PassingFair]

58. It is in the minds of the adherents...

and the federal government.

[hrmjustin]

61. Not in my mind.

[hrmjustin]

90. Yes I understand that.

[bvf]

88. Then why did you post this in the Religion group?

[hrmjustin]

91. Because some do consider it a religion.

I was not going to put this in interfaith.

[cbayer]

92. We discuss cults and non-religious groups here all the time.

The mere fact that some see it as a religion and others don't makes it more than passable for this group.

Where would you have posted it?

[bvf]

93. Right here, because it's a religion.

I'm not the one claiming it's not, you see.

Can Church of the SubGenius articles go here too?

How about Church of Daisy, the Nine-eyed Goat?

[cbayer]

94. Sure all of those could be posted here, unless someone alerted and the host said no.

There is a thread here right now about the Church of Marijuana. There is another about a guy who does a series on being "Super-Spritual" (which is really hilarious by the way).

Since when do we say that every thread has to be about a mainstream religion?

[cbayer]

59. "Where you have power, you will find abuses. "

All organizations that confer power to individuals have pockets of abuse.

Some are worse than others.

You can find abuses of power in all organizations, not just religious ones.

Do I really have to aggregate stories of non-religious groups that have engaged in horribly abusive behavior?

Funny to see a religious non-believer only noting when it happens in religious groups.

[PassingFair]

60. Oops. Sorry, I thought I was posting in the Religious Group.

My bad.

[cbayer]

63. You were and the ability to discern the differences between

different forms of religion is something one can learn from this group.

One can also learn how there are problems associated with religion that are inherent in many kinds of groups.

[Warren Stupidity]

98. "Funny to see a religious non-believer only noting when it happens in religious groups."

You of course have proof that this person who you have oddly labeled a "religious non-believer" never discusses abuse when it happens in non religious groups, right?

Otherwise your accusation is really unacceptable. Eagerly awaiting your evidence.

[gcomeau]

115. Excuse me while I fight the impulse...

To post the almost *unending* series of links to incidents of physical abuse by Catholic priests and such. Or the details of the massive bank balances of said organization.

[hrmjustin]

117. Go ahead. Why would you think that would bother me?

[gcomeau]

118. Well, unless you also claim Catholicism isn't a religion...

...based on the *exact same criteria* you just applied to Scientology, a stark illustration of hypocrisy might bother some people. But quite right, I really don't know if you care about that or not. Maybe it wouldn't bother you at all. I find religious believers tend to have an astonishing mental capacity to ignore that kind of thing.

[hrmjustin]

119. I will apply any standard I want.

[gcomeau]

122. Yes, clearly. And as inconsistently as you want too. -eom

[hrmjustin]

123. Thank you for your permission.

[gcomeau]

124. Oh it wasn't permission.

Just an acknowledgement of an unfortunate reality I can't really do anything about.

I can't *make* you apply your arguments and standards in anything resembling a logically consistent manner after all. If you insist on maintaining a double standard for religions you approve of and religions you do not there's really nothing I can do about besides point it out and hold out the faint hope that you might actually care that you're being irrational and do something about it.

Very, very faint hope... considering your response to it has been to basically declare you'll be inconsistent in your arguments if you wanna, so there!

[hrmjustin]

125. Nothing has been shown to me that this is nothing but a money making gimmick.

[gcomeau]

126. Well I certainly won't be the one to do that...

...seeing as I consider all religions to be gimmicks. But then I apply my judgement criteria equally and consistently.

[hrmjustin]

127. There are certainly other gimmicks out there.

[AtheistCrusader]

129. You realize the Catholic Church is the single most valuable private entity on the planet right?

Boeing corporation shits out planes between 50 and 160 million dollars each.
It has a book value around ~9.6bn, and a market cap of ~109bn.
They made the first probes that orbited and scanned the moon. They make and sell just about every damn thing you can imagine, and hold patents on things you couldn't even guess they'd be involved in.

And they are insignificant next to the total value of the Catholic church. The RCC likes to hurf blurf about their cash flow (And minimize the public impression of it), and transparency, but at the end of the day, the total value of the church is in the trillions of euros, and cannot be accurately totaled up.

If the RCC isn't a highly profitable scam, they've somehow at least exceeded the wildest dreams of avarice of most scams/cults. Totally a coincidence though.

But they could sure use a few bucks from you, for the poor, right?

[hrmjustin]

130. There is no question that the finances of the ch6rch deserves more scrutiny.

[AtheistCrusader]

131. But my point was more around clarifying

what suggests, if not condemns, an organization like that as a 'cult'? I certainly view scientology as a scam. Even if hubbard sort of maybe suggested he could make up a religion, rather than explicitly stating he would do so, still; scam-tastic. I think we're all on the same page there.

But what sets the RCC apart from the same label? I don't see a mechanism by which to discriminate between the two.

[hrmjustin]

133. i think the RCC has problems but the religion itself is not a scam.

There maybe scams going on in the church but the religion itself is not a scam.

Scientology requires you to give more and more money. The RCC doesn't require money to join.

[cbayer]

12. Have you seen the movie?

[bvf]

15. Wouldn't waste my time.

I'm sure it demonstrates what absolutely evil bullshit Scientology is.

But it's still a religion and makes some people feel better about their lives.

[cbayer]

20. OK, I thought you had seen the movie and were basing your comments on that.

But I see now that you are not.

[bvf]

24. No, I'm not. Don't have to.

I'm sure I correctly distilled the essence of it with my previous post.

But Scientology is nonetheless a comfort to some people and makes them feel better about their lives. What's wrong with that?

[angryvet]

16. I never understood

why anyone would believe that nonsense about the planet xenu and the frozen bodies thrown into volcanoes...but now I find out you don't learn that till you are in so deep...100's of thousands of dollars till they let you in on that bit of nonsense. I have known this for years, doesn't anyone do any research before they join a cult?

[hrmjustin]

17. I don't think they are allowed to check out non-approved news sources.

[cbayer]

22. They have tremendous expertise on identifying and preying on their targets.

They groom them just like child molesters.

In LA, if you go in their main building, they quickly assess your finances. If you don't got it, they don't want you.

Reminds me of EST on steroids.

[Warren Stupidity]

21. just another religion, no more idiotic or venal than the norm for the genre. nt.

[hrmjustin]

23. They don't beat me in my church or send me to a hole.

They don't make me give them money. They don't tell me who to associate with or what I can or can not watch.

[Warren Stupidity]

32. yes well scientology doesn't have a rep for pederasty either

so the form of venality varies from one cult to another, but various forms of abuse, mental, physical and sexual are not uncommon. I like the us Episcopalians, they seem like good people to me. I did not say all religions are horrible, I said scientology was not outside the norm.

[hrmjustin]

35. I tend to think they are out of the norm and not a religion.

[Warren Stupidity]

44. yeah well how marvelously tolerant of you.

Which other religions would you like to drum out of religion?

[hrmjustin]

45. Spare me Warren! Spare me your judgements!

[Warren Stupidity]

47. Cool. You just judged all the believers in scientology as not religious but you don't wish to be

judged yourself.

Interesting.

How do you determine what is a true religion?

[hrmjustin]

48. I have a problem with secretive and abusive belief sysems.

[Act_of_Reparation]

49. Like the Vatican?

[hrmjustin]

50. I have many issues with the vatican.

[Warren Stupidity]

51. So the RCC is also not a religion?

[hrmjustin]

52. No they are a religion.

[Warren Stupidity]

68. well that is quite magnanimous of you

since we've ruled out abuse as a determinating factor in your judgement of what is or is not a religion, what is it about scientology that makes it not a religion?

[hrmjustin]

69. It was a gimmick by Hubbard.

[Warren Stupidity]

71. Christianity was a gimmick by Paul.

Really Justin? You know which religions are "gimmicks" and which aren't?

[hrmjustin]

73. Warren I use my common sense.

[Warren Stupidity]

76. So you should self delete your op and repost it in GD.

As scientology is not a religion, your op is off topic for this group.

[hrmjustin]

82. You're funny.

[AtheistCrusader]

132. It was actually very funny, but, like the best of all humor

it's built upon a foundation of truth.

Is there a technical reason his suggestion is wrong? I don't see the reason. Help us see.

[hrmjustin]

134. use your imagination.

[AtheistCrusader]

135. Assume I don't have one.

what does yours tell you?

[hrmjustin]

137. You have one.

[AtheistCrusader]

139. I do, but it has so far not led me to anything that seems to satisfy the question.

[hrmjustin]

140. restate your question.

[Alittleliberal]

79. This begs the question

What's the difference between a religion and a cult other then the amount of followers?

[hrmjustin]

85. All a matter of opinion. there are cults in mainstream religions.

Is religion itself a cult. I tend to think not.

It is something hard to define but you know it when you see it.

[Act_of_Reparation]

87. "you know it when you see it."

It may surprise you to learn sociologists have been working on hashing out the qualitative differences between religious sects and cults since at least the 1960's.

[hrmjustin]

89. No it doesn't surprise me.

[Act_of_Reparation]

105. Then perhaps it is worth pointing out that "you know it when you see it"...

...is not a method of discernment held in high regard by those who study this topic professionally.

[hrmjustin]

106. And I care why?

[Act_of_Reparation]

110. Why should you care what learned people think of the subject at hand?

Color me perplexed.

[hrmjustin]

111. thats nice.

[AlbertCat]

112. Is religion itself a cult.

Christianity started out as a Jewish cult. At what point did it become a "religion"?

[hrmjustin]

113. When i say cult I mean in the negative tone.

There are cults inside Christianity today.

[AlbertCat]

114. Cults have tones?

Y'know Justin, declaring Scientology.... no matter how awful it is, not a religion is exactly like some Christian declaring Buddhism a cult (have been there when that happened...several times). It's bigoted. I don't see that Scientology's intent is any different from Christianity's....or any other religion. Who knows? It may be the largest religion on the planet in 2000 years.

All this "my god is better than yours" is a major divisive catalyst and a huge problem today.


That's why it's best to find peace and tranquility within yourself and stop looking for someone else or some group to supply it for you. (Oops! it's that Buddhist cult again!)

[hrmjustin]

116. Everyone has an o9inion.

[AlbertCat]

120. Everyone has an o9inion.

Everyone has a what? an onion???


OK OK I know you typo-ed "opinion".....

Yes, everyone does have an opinion. But not all opinions are equal. Some are not worth being taken seriously.... unless supported by something other than just another opinion. (or at least a more logical , informed one).

I don't see that Scientology is any more or less ridiculous, controlling, dangerous, abusive than any other religion. How is your criticism of Scientology different from atheists' criticism of religion which you find so outrageous?

[hrmjustin]

121. I don't find criticism outrageous.

I don't know where you got that.

[okasha]

170. It started off as a Jewish sect,

on the same footing as the Pharisees and Sadducees. Until the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE, it was very much a part of the mainstream religion of its time and place.

[cleanhippie]

136. OMG! The outrage!

[hrmjustin]

138. Enjoy you holiday weekend Cleanhippie!

[cleanhippie]

141. Thanks, I will. I've que'd every zombie movie and show I can find on Netflix to watch.

Thats how I mark the celebration of the dead coming back to life.

What will you be doing?

[hrmjustin]

142. Church tonight, tomorrow, Saturday, and Sunday.

Cooking and plenty of drinking.

Thank God it is only once a year.

[cleanhippie]

143. That sounds like loads of fun. Do you participate in any zombie festivities?

Sunday is International Zombie Day, surely you're marking the occasion in some way?

[hrmjustin]

144. I going to your house to eat your brains.

[cleanhippie]

145. Careful now, that's powerful medicine.

Eat my brains with caution. You may experience severe bouts of rationality, logic, and skepticism. It's not for everyone.

I prefer a more formal education method, but whatever floats your boat.

[hrmjustin]

146. I will chew slowly.

[cleanhippie]

147. Is there any other way to eat brains but slowly?

I know you're just kidding though. You're gonna be busy with your own Zombie Day rituals. Wont you be eating crackers and wine that turn into flesh and blood this Sunday?

[hrmjustin]

148. We will be turning Jesus into a cocktail.

And they are not a cracker but wafers. Very soft.

[cleanhippie]

149. That's a twist; the living eating the dead.

Someone should make a movie.

[hrmjustin]

150. We don't believe he is dead.

[cleanhippie]

151. Well, zombies aren't really dead.

Reanimated is a better description.

Either way, eating the dead or eating the living, seems a bit creepy to me. YMMV.

Gotta run. Have a great Zombie Day!

[hrmjustin]

161. Have a great Sunday!

[hrmjustin]

162. Enjoy!

[samsingh]

81. scientologies rebuttal is cruel, stupid and classic attempts at diversion from the truth

no where do they refute a statement that I can find - they keep saying they refute

they raise nasty rumors about people with no proof - isn't this libelous and what scientologists claim is happening to them?

their responses to the documentary are completely laughable. they say it's boring. Really? then why have they been responding to it.

and try to actually refute the claims in the film. showing a well decorated room to us - empty of all people - does not mean other dungeons don't exist and the empty room may not be available to the rank and file.

they have nothing to say that can refute this film.

[cbayer]

86. What do you think the longer term effect might be?

[LostOne4Ever]

100. 100'th post!

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]Yes I am in a silly mood today[/font]

[hrmjustin]

102. lol.

[cbayer]

108. It's probably an omen.

[stone space]

128. That's risky, though.

Somebody could have snuck a post in while you were typing, and then you'd have been #101.

[TM99]

152. One more time for those not paying attention.

Scientology meets the requirements of a religion.

They are not a cult in the strictest sense of the term as they are not a subset of another established religion.

Here is a nice list that summarizes various rubrics of cults now defined by psycho-social characteristics independent of any religious/mystical/spiritual issues over the last 50 or 60 years. You will notice that not all of them agree on all points.

http://abuse.wikia.com/wiki/Cult_checklist

According to many of these, Scientology does meet many requirements of a cult but not all of them.

Because of this, there is still debate about how to handle Scientology in various cultures. Germany strictly forbids them due to their own history with Nazism. The United States allows them because of our very open 1st Amendment free speech and freedom of religion constitutional history.

This documentary is exceptional as it does shine more light on their practices and may get authorities here to act against these practices as they violate the very constitutional protections Scientology itself enjoys.

[cbayer]

153. I find the whole cult vs. religion debate to be pretty useless.

Some people say all religions are cults. Some say that religions they don't like are cults. And the jury seems to be split when it comes to Scientology.

The definitions are all over the place, from very simplistic (a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object) and applicable to pretty much all religions to very complex, like your link.

I find scientology pretty frightening and object to many of their practices. Whether it is a cult or not makes no difference to me. If they are harming people, that does cause me concern.

I look forward to seeing the documentary.

[TM99]

154. But that's the thing.

Outside of this weird Religion forum echo chamber, there really is not debate.

Strictly speaking cults are subsets of religion when discussing religions. Modern cults are not about religion, though it is a convenient way to manipulate people, but rather about psycho-social control. Nazism is cult but is not a religion.

Scientology when studied by religious scholars meets requirements to be considered a new religious movement. It does, however, meet many but not all requirements of social psychologists of exhibiting cult-like behavior with regards to its membership and culture.

It does not matter if some people say all religions are cults. They are wrong.

It does not matter if some people say that religions they don't like are cults. They are wrong too.

Personal opinion fueled by emotional certainty does not make that opinion always right.

[cbayer]

155. I think there actually is debate outside this group.

I see people use the term "cult" to describe things in a negative way, including mainstream religions and things that have nothing to do with religion. I don't think there is general agreement at all and an internet search confirms that the discussion is all over the place. And I don't think there is general agreement about scientology either. Again, an internet search shows that religious scholars have vastly different answers to that question.

Personally, I think the issue is so convoluted that the term should be abandoned and other language be used to describe what groups do and don't do. Your definition is not, well, definitive.

[TM99]

156. I disagree.

But I won't waste more time debating about this.

[Humanist_Activist]

158. Isn't saying that Scientology meets some of the requirements of a Cult, as defined today...

a rather meaningless statement? I followed your link, and it seems that most religions meet some of the requirements of a cult as defined in the link.

From Eileen Barker's list.

1. A movement that separates itself from society, either geographically or socially;

This one, I would say, requires some clarification, for example, back in the 1950s or so, it was strongly frowned upon, in the Catholic Church, to mingle with Protestants, nowadays the rules are relaxed, but would this be an example of "separating yourself from society"? How strong does the pressure have to be to make this more cult-like? I could also mention many of the social practices of conservative Evangelical, Mormon, Catholic, Seventh Day Adventist and Jehovah Witness denominations serve to isolate there members from society or, at least, discourages them from social links to those outside their faith. This is exempting professional relationships, etc.

2. Adherents who become increasingly dependent on the movement for their view on reality;

Many religions and denominations claim that their view of reality is correct, though some, like the Catholic Church, do at least claim that your own reason can be valid, but only within limits.

3. Important decisions in the lives of the adherents are made by others;

Again, this is one of those, how much pressure seems to be the dividing line between cult and religion, if such a line exists. Many religions discourage many practices and attempt to influence people's decisions in accordance with their dogma.

4. Making sharp distinctions between us and them, divine and Satanic, good and evil, etc. that are not open for discussion;

This seems like a common tactic among many different types of religious groups.

5. Leaders who claim divine authority for their deeds and for their orders to their followers;

Uhm, the Mormon Prophet anyone? He's the leader of the Mormon Church, and supposedly has a line to God, the Pope also, to a lesser extent.

6. Leaders and movements who are unequivocally focused on achieving a certain goal.

Pro-Life movement, NOM, etc. are lead by certain churches and religions, catually, to be honest, I don't see how number 6 is even relevant, to be honest. Many leaders and movements are focused on single goals.

Shirley Harrison also has her own list of traits of "destructive cults"

A powerful leader who claims divinity or a special mission entrusted to him/her from above;

Pope, many pastors of many protestant denominations, Mormon Prophet, etc.

Revealed scriptures or doctrine;

The Bible, Koran, Torah, etc.

Deceptive recruitment;

OK, this one I'm not sure how useful it is, deceptive in what way? The nature of the beliefs, or lying about what is involved in membership? Also, does the deception have to be conscious?

Totalitarianism and alienation of members from their families and/or friends;

Generally speaking, this one seems most common among smaller sects, Jehovah's Witnesses spring to mind.

The use of indoctrination, by sophisticated mind-control techniques, based on the concept that once you can make a person behave the way you want, then you can make him/her believe what you want;

I'm not sure why this author had to specify "by sophisticated mind-control techniques," that seems unnecessary, particularly since many religious leaders who do exhibit cult like control over member's aren't really that sophisticated, and those advanced techniques may be nothing more than to know what type of people are susceptible to your message, force of personality, charisma, and patience. People are surprisingly pliable, mind control techniques, which is a misnomer and I would say a gross oversimplification, are simply not necessary.

Slave labour - that is, the use of members on fundraising or missionary activities for little or no pay to line the leader's pockets;

Many church leaders have been caught doing this, and define "lining the leader's pockets", does it have to be direct, I refer, again, to the Mormon church, its practice of 10% tithe and required missionary work.

Misuse of funds and the accumulation of wealth for personal or political purposes at the expense of members; and

This seems to be either a corruption and/or lobbying, political action issue. The Catholic Church has been guilty of this one for how many centuries?

Exclusivity - "we are right and everyone else is wrong".

Uhm, every Abrahamic religion and their offshoots fit this one, they are even explicit about it.

Now, am I saying all religions are cults? No, of course not, but all religions, to varying degrees, do share cult like traits.

Of course, I have problems with the use of the word cult in modern usage in general, I find it inexact and clumsy. I prefer it to be used to describe things historically, for example offshoots of religions that focus on certain deities or practices and aren't necessarily destructive or violent. Cult of Isis, for example.

[TM99]

159. No, and here is why.

That list was to give you and others an idea of how much different scholars/psychologists overlap or disagree in how they define a cult.

But, and this is why I don't like encyclopedia's, the context is missing.

Those in the field of psychology whether cultural/social, clinical, or organizations for example use different diagnostic tools. In the field we are taught to look at pervasive patterns that entail a certain percentage of positive hits on these lists as opposed to diagnosing and labeling someone or something as being a condition, pathology, or in this case a cult by only a few positive hits.

Someone may for example demonstrate several traits of a narcissist in a given time and circumstance. Is that person automatically diagnosed and labeled an Axis II Narcissistic Personality Disorder? No. They have to meet other criteria - 5 or more traits versus 3, a pervasive pattern of behavior over a longer period of time, etc.

Now let's look at some of your examples. Exclusivity? Yes, all Abrahamic religions say they are right and others are wrong. So do atheists. So do Democrats, Republicans, Feminists, Keynesian economists as well as Austrian economists. Are you familiar with EST? This is a human trait. Powerful leaders? The only people who attempt to compare the pope to Jim Jones are those who are anti-religion and have emotional investiture in being against the Catholic church. They may have legitimate reasons for their hurt & rage such as being gay, but that does not make their opinions on the topic of cults correct.

So as you can see, most every system created by us humans can have some traits that might be labeled cult-like but that does not mean the criterion of actually labelling them a cult always exists.

Scientology is an interesting case study. It meets requirements for being a new religious movement. But its actions can border very strongly on those of a cult. And like anyone in the fields of psychology there is disagreement, based on such lists as I provided, whether it is or isn't a cult. I have had some experience with them, their current members, and some former members. They are a religion, and I personally see them as a cult. But I acknowledge that it is an opinion and may not be yet factual.

The social sciences are like all sciences, we do work towards consensus when describing things, labelling things, diagnosing things. Second & third assessments are important to insure accuracy. A young woman recently was in my care who had been diagnosed and labelled a Borderline Personality Disorder by two different psychiatrists. I noticed things that just didn't fit with that diagnosis. She was under my care longer and I saw her for longer periods of time. Long story short, working with another psychiatrist, we correctly diagnosed her as paranoid schizophrenic, got her on the right drug protocol for her, and now she is once again quite high functioning. She was not a Borderline.

So we can agree given your last paragraph that the modern usage of cults is often inexact and clumsy. Modern social sciences are all like that at times. Hard sciences do not suffer from the problem because carbon and pi are far more simple than human beings. I would prefer to use the term as I learned it in my graduate studies of religion like a Cult of Isis. But if it is going to be used, no it can not be incorrectly used to call all religions that simply because certain people, aspects, sects, or denominations meet a few but not all the social psychology criteria set forth by numerous researchers who don't even all agree on what a modern definition of a cult should yet be.

[AlbertCat]

160. Neil deGrasse Tyson: If you believe in the Christian story of Jesus,

... you can’t call Scientology ‘crazy’

In the wake of HBO’s devastating documentary on Scientology entitled “Going Clear: Scientology and the Prison of Belief,” astrophysicist and cosmologist Neil deGrasse Tyson came out in defense of the controversial church – kinda.

In an interview with The Daily Beast, Tyson refused to join the chorus of people bashing the church, which is alleged to have abused members and harassed critics, saying that people have the right to believe whatever they want.

“So, you have people who are certain that a man in a robe transforms a cracker into the literal body of Jesus saying that what goes on in Scientology is crazy? Let’s realize this. What matters is not who says who’s crazy, what matters is we live in a free country. You can believe whatever you want, otherwise it’s not a free country—it’s something else. If we start controlling what people think and why they think it, we have case studies where that became the norm. I don’t care what the tenets are of Scientology. They don’t distract me. I don’t judge them, and I don’t criticize them.”

In regards to the church’s tax-exempt status, Tyson was then asked what he thought about Scientology critics who say the organization should not be considered a religion.

(more)

http://deadstate.org/neil-degrasse-tyson-if-you-believe-in-the-christian-story-of-jesus-you-cant-call-scientology-crazy/

[cbayer]

163. He's really making the case for people being able to believe whatever they want.

He doesn't judge people based on what they believe and supports the freedom to adhere to whatever you want.

In terms of the tax status, my objection is that it does not appear that scientology meets the criteria of a true non-profit. Whether they are a religion or not makes no difference to me.

Oh, and he hasn't seen the documentary.

[beam me up scottie]

165. Oh, come on.

He clearly mocked the belief that a man in a robe transforms a cracker into the literal body of Jesus.

He's comparing one ridiculous belief to another.

You just want him to be all kumbaya because otherwise he'd be one of those offensive militant atheist types.

[mnhtnbb]

164. I just watched the documentary.

First, I used to drive by the headquarters on Fountain Ave in Hollywood--that was formerly
the old Cedars of Lebanon Hospital--when I worked at Childrens in the 1970's. I would usually
see some rather strangely dressed folks--in uniforms--that after seeing the documentary I realize
were Sea Org people. Weird.

Second, my husband is a UCLA trained psychiatrist--from the late 60's, early 70's--and he has some pretty good
stories about how the Scientologists and their animosity toward organized mental health, particularly psychiatrists
and psychologists.

Third, it just reinforced to me that the IRS needs to remove religious exemptions. Every organization--including
corporations that are now trying to be recognized as having religious preferences (Hobby Lobby!)--need
to be taxed in the same way. Enough. They are all about making money.

[cbayer]

166. I agree that many religious organizations, including scientology, need to be audited

and should lose their tax exempt status. However, I think it's important to note that religious groups file as non-profits and do not automatically get this status because they are religious.

I agree that those that truly function as non-profits should be taxed exactly like other non-profits and those that are clearly for profit should be taxed as such.

The anti-psychiatry position is a loud and clear bell to me that they are doing something that bears more intense scrutiny. I've also been by their headquarters and it is very unsettling.

I am looking forward to seeing the film.