|
|
 |
|
Getting On : All My Politics
Scientology | from rainy - Sunday, June 22, 2008
accessed 1135 times I first heard of Scientology shortly after the raids. It was recommended to us that we work closely with the Scientologists because they had so much in common with us, and they had succeeded in becoming accepted by mainstream society. They had much to teach us. When I went to live at Greenfields in Tokyo shortly afterwards, in one of the sound-proof rooms I found piles of information about Scientology. I sat and read it all, and was heartbroken to see that the people we were supposed to identify with most in this world were so obviously crazy. Why did we always have to side with freaks?
In the past few years the Internet has been bombarded with Scientology facts by the group Anonymous, and the more I've read, the more creeped out by then I've been. The day Tom Cruise jumped like a maniac on Oprah's couch I knew he'd truly lost the plot, and I felt concerned for Katie and Suri from that point onward.
But today, I read this: http://www.coanon.org/press/?p=24
And today, for the first time, I truly identify with the Scientologist second generation. |
|
|
|
|
Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article |  from grundyESK
Tuesday, July 01, 2008 - 21:29
(Agree/Disagree?)
I am an admit at Exscientologykids.com .. I heard about this from a person on my gaming site. I will be looking to read more and encourage you to come to my site too.
We have a lot we can learn from each other.
(reply to this comment)
| | | |  From rainy
Wednesday, July 02, 2008, 01:09
(Agree/Disagree?)
Sorry, I was being facetious. Welcome, Grundy, and I'd love to find out more about what it's like being an ex scientology kid. It's like finding other life out there...(Sorry, you probably don't appreciate me alluding to aliens) Please have a look around, have a read, and tell me what the differences and similarities between us are. This will be cool.(reply to this comment) |
| | from cult news
Friday, June 27, 2008 - 10:11
(Agree/Disagree?)
http://forums.enturbulation.org/15-media/all-victims-cults-particularly-scientology-20138/
(reply to this comment)
| From summary
Friday, June 27, 2008, 10:18
(Agree/Disagree?)
The 1989 court decision quoted by Tommy is, indeed, one of the most powerful to quote against Scientology.
THE FREEDOM OF RELIGION ARGUMENT
The court judgment supports our argument that we protest against the actions of Scientology, not its beliefs, and therefore we are not suppressing their constitutional right to free religious expression.
Quote:
The subsequent cases interpreting these four words make it clear that while the free exercise clause provides absolute protection for a person's religious beliefs, it provides only limited protection for the expression of those beliefs and especially actions based on those beliefs. Freedom of belief is absolutely guaranteed; freedom of action is not.
ie. You can believe in fair game all you want - you just can't practise it!
Quote:
Despite the possibility of liability Scientologists can still believe it serves a religious purpose to impose and threaten to impose various sanctions on staff members or upper level auditors who might leave the church or cease its core religious practices. But it does place a burden on Scientologists should they act on that belief. Scientology would be subject to possible monetary loss if someone suffers severe psychological harm during auditing where that auditing is conducted under the threat of these sanctions.
FAIR GAME
The judgment shows that, even as late as 1989, 21 years after it fair game was supposedly cancelled, Scientology was arguing in the appellate court that fair game was a "religious practice" and that it was a protected practice under the US Constitution.
Also, as the court found ample evidence that Wollersheim had in fact been subjected to fair game and since:
Quote:
Wollersheim first became acquainted with Scientology in early 1969
it follows that fair game in fact occurred after it was supposedly cancelled.
In short, Scientology argued that fair game was a "religious practice", and fair game was in fact occurring, even though it was supposedly cancelled.
The court decided that "fair game" was not protected by the constitution:
Quote:
...we have no problem concluding the state has a compelling secular interest in discouraging these practices... Accordingly, we hold the freedom of religion guaranties of the United States and California Constitutions do not immunize these practices from civil liability for any injuries they cause to "targets" such as Wollersheim.
comment
if the Scilons can claim Fair Game is legal because it is a religious "rite", well then the FLDS can hide behind that, and they have tried. Radical Muslims can commit acts of terror and hide behind that because they think God commanded them to kill infidels. The Christian Right would be even worse towards homosexuals because they can use Leviticus. And all of that would be legal.
What a nasty precedent that would set, eh?
Thankfully, Wollersheim kicked their asses. He didn't get only money from this lawsuit, he made it a point to enter court documents that proved the Scientology practices Fair Game. Now it's in public record and the asthmatic shet bag can't do a damn thing about it.
___(reply to this comment) |
| | from Anonymou_s
Tuesday, June 24, 2008 - 17:48
 (Agree/Disagree?)
The scientologists have long been the "big brother" of all cults seeking legitimization etc. ...
TFI made all of their spokespersons watch videos of David Miscavage's interview(s) with the media. They pooled monies with other cults for "expert" testimony in cases, and many of the sociologists and other lakeys TFI ended up using were rerferred to them through scientologist contacts.
Their beliefs and practices are fairly similar, in that they're bizzare and . Their isolationism, abuse, seperation of children from siblings, financial and other abuse is pretty much on par with TFI. They just have more money, better lawyers, and have established themselves as a profitable business for years.
In my view "Anonymous" group has done an amazing job in bringing these abuses to the forefront and shedding light on the scientologists practices etc. ... The ABC show on them is very good.
We should get masks with the drawn-on faces of some victims from the Family's pubs and picket FCF / other family locations.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | from cheeks
Tuesday, June 24, 2008 - 10:00
 (Agree/Disagree?)
I think when he jumped on the couch it was fantastic. He said something to the effect of I think every man should celebrate their woman. What a different world we would live in if we all celebrated the wonderful thing that we loved in each other. Can you honestly say you don't want a man or a woman to be so thrilled they are with you that they literally jump for joy. I think Katie lucked out, she has someone who loves everything about her,how many of us can say that?
(reply to this comment)
| | | | From rainy
Wednesday, June 25, 2008, 01:12
(Agree/Disagree?)
I didn't think it was fantastic. I thought it was that same deranged fanatical happiness culties and fundies are so fond of losing themselves to. It's that created mass euphoria that keeps them in.
I worry for Katie and I hope she can get out of there with Suri. It will be very hard. Even Nicole only gets to see the kids (Isabella and Connor) during school holidays.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Randi
Thursday, June 26, 2008, 05:37
(Agree/Disagree?)
A few comments:
Cults in general, have the potential of being dangerous. In fact I think that the more "accepted" or "in" ones that might appear "safe" on the outside, or trendy because they have some famous people joining their club... might be even more dangerous, destructive and subversive than the seemingly more obviously wacked ones. Its the intelligent cults (intelligent abusers) that know how to put up a good front..how to attract the "right" people etc...how to hide their dark motives and the subsequent bruises best... That doesn't make them any safer or healthier than the more obviously freaky cult..It just makes them that much harder to monitor or do something about.
I don't know about Tom and Katie.. but I think it's interesting that Scientology seems to think that Tom is a "great face"for them, while the rest of us are not too sure... ??
Where did you hear that Nicole only sees her kids on school holidays? There's always tones of stories about celebs... most of them are a load of crap. The media is far to quick to decide who's the victim and who's the bully etc.. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From Still,
Thursday, June 26, 2008, 07:47
(Agree/Disagree?)
Katie is old enough to be held accountable for her decisions. And no, I was not implying the same for Suri. My point is, I’d be more worried about people who do not have the same resources as some of these celebs. Don’t you think katie would have it easier leaving (if she chose to do so) then say, the average member?
(reply to this comment) |
| | From rainy
Thursday, June 26, 2008, 15:05
(Agree/Disagree?)
No I don't think so. Number one, she has a child. The more powerful the father the harder to get away with your baby. It is Tom's only biological daughter and he has a lot of money and connections. I imagine she couldn't bear to leave without her baby. I think leaving Tom would be very dangerous and difficult, but if she wants to try to get Suri away from Scientology, that will probably be next to impossible.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | From cheeks
Tuesday, June 24, 2008, 15:13
(Agree/Disagree?)
I think people are entitled to their beliefs however odd they may be, as long as they don't actually harm people or their beliefs leads them to live their lives in seclusion, which harms their children. I also think Scientology is less damaging than many of the churches they have here in the states. Take Obama's church for example. But once again they are entitled to their beliefs.
I think people took the Tom Cruise is crazy ball, and ran with it for all it was worth. He may have issues but he is far from crazy. I think he loves Katie and Suri, and they are certainly not in danger in any way. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | From cheeks
Tuesday, June 24, 2008, 21:03
(Agree/Disagree?)
Once again they are entitled to their beliefs. Did you guys not read anything that I wrote? I think that the Baptist Churches and Evangelical churches pose just about the same risk as Scientology. Only they are more mainstream and accepted. What about Rev. Al Sharpton who in my opinion is doing far more harm than good in this country. What about his cult, and his following? My point is simply that people have the right to believe what they wish to believe in this country with out people calling them crazy and saying their loved ones are in danger.
We certainly can go through the main religions in this world and find fault, and the damage they have done for generations. Christianity is at the top of the list and I am a Christian. I can't feel sorry for people who joined the Family, it was their choice to join. Just like I cannot feel sorry for people who joined or gave money to Scientology, that was their choice. I think there are a lot more powerful evils out there other than Scientology. (reply to this comment) |
| | From Randi
Friday, June 27, 2008, 02:00
(Agree/Disagree?)
When one joins a cult, they usually don't know what they are getting into. They don't join the cult at face value. The cult lures people in. It starts out nice, offering to fulfill some deep desire and fill some inner void etc.. then slowly they start adding more and more control, bondage and perhaps abuse.
Much like an abusive relationship. The woman doesn't usually fall in love with a man that beats her...it happens afterwards and its often a slow process that eventually brain washes the individual till she doesn't even know who she is anymore. Like the difference between putting a frog in a hot frying pan as opposed to a pot with cold water and then slowly heating it up. The frog won't jump out, it won't even notice that slowly but surely, he's getting boiled to death.
I don't think it fair to not have any compassion for people who join cults. Tom for instance, he didn't grow up with a father, Scientology may have appealed to his need for a father figure for example. In regards to Katie... I think it's very hard to maintain a relationship with someone who is highly religious without either leaving them or joining them so it would seem that she had 2 unspoken choices. Love and a child would of course complicate that decision.
There are a lot more powerful evils out there, but I think that its important to scrutinize and criticise religious movements and cults... and not just accept them because they're less evil than the next wierd group. (reply to this comment) |
| | From Randi
Friday, June 27, 2008, 02:18
(Agree/Disagree?)
Also Cheeks, I like what you had to say about Christianity.. you made a good point there. I have my serious questions about the genesis of Christianity: I think that Christs' measage of love, grace and forgiveness is beautiful etc, but it seems like Christianity as a religion has caused so much pain and torture and destruction... I know this is probably evil to say, but I wonder if Christianity was just another cult... it fits the description of what we consider to be a cult today... so I don't know. I've often thought it strange that Jesus asked people to leave their families and possesions behind etc to follow him... their kids and wives etc... he also said that "they who do the will of God are my brothers and sisters and family etc" and the bible also says "he that forsaketh houses and brethren and mother and father....etc... shall recieve a 100 fold and inheret everlasting life." Today that would be a dangerous and highly irrisponsible concept... cultish really. Why do you think our parents left us to serve the lord? It's in the Bible(reply to this comment) |
| | From steam
Friday, June 27, 2008, 18:23
(Agree/Disagree?)
Randi don't worry if what you are saying is evil to say (at least not the mild musings you offered). The context of the culture time and period were different so whether or not Jesus was a cult leader would be hard to answer without serious research and consideration of many angles. But interesting thoughts nonetheless.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From steam
Monday, June 30, 2008, 11:44
(Agree/Disagree?)
Do you agree then that the group is evil, but you just feel that Tom is a good guy who should be left alone? You first seemed to defend the cult making it supposedly all about right to ones beliefs, then when this was exposed as faulty reasoning you only commented that Tom is not likely to do "those things". Please explain if you now see the points being made about scientology.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From steam
Monday, June 30, 2008, 12:27
(Agree/Disagree?)
I did. Your first comment implies that a church like the one Obama went to, (where the pastor says some crazy stuff, but does not seem to be into controling the lives of the individual members in isolation from society and sending kids of to intense abusive indoctrination camps, and putting price lists on his teachings, and encouraging retalition against any who disagree with him,) is worse than Scientology. It seems almost as if you think that a belief system that in your opinion is "crazier" is worse than a wholesale plot to control others with horrible actions. Were you aware when you first posted just how much Scientology does? If so how could you try the old cult line "worse things exist"? Have you since realised that you may have been giving them more leeway than they deserve? No cop outs now.(reply to this comment) |
| | From cheeks
Tuesday, July 01, 2008, 14:11
(Agree/Disagree?)
So let me clarify my stand on Scientology. Frankly I know little about them and don't really care what they believe. I think it has something to do with aliens. I do not think they pose a huge threat to the population at large. As I quoted in my first comment.
"I think people are entitled to their beliefs however odd they may be, as long as they don't actually harm people or their beliefs leads them to live their lives in seclusion, which harms their children." Clearly Scientology fits into that profile.
I still think the Churches in general have a more damaging influence here in the States than Scientology ever will. Most Churches still hold to the belief that all gay people are damned. Abortion is a sin. Many Churches preach a message of hate and damnation. All Churches want you to pay for the truth they call it a tithe. Obama's Church is no exception to the rule. It is not an old man who preached an odd sermon. These go on in thousands of churches across America. Scientology will never have the power that the Church does here. Just like the Family will never be the end-time witnesses no matter how odd their doctrines may be. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From GoldenMic
Tuesday, June 24, 2008, 16:00
(Agree/Disagree?)
I am surprised that anyone here could define Scientology as less cult-like or more mild than TF. Clearly, one has not read the story, or one would know that L. Ron's Hubbard's cult has a history that horribly echoes the every detail of story of TF; a mad leader obsessed with power, a group that left the US to escape accountability, and even setting up a cult on the high seas... what could be more similar to TF's story? The only real variation is NOT that they didn't abuse, neglect, and isolate their children (since they too had a mirror-image "victory camp" model for recalcitrant teens), not the blatant exploitation and abuse of the followers, and not the insanity and perversions of the leader (who screwed every child in sight)... the only real difference is in the lack of an official policy supporting sex with children and having much greater funding available to clean up and present the show-case homes and operations, while the people, and their children, were sucked dry. Anyway, I am not criticizing an opinion that suggests they are rather benign, but suggesting that exTF'ers might be the most likely to look under the outward presentation and realize that this is as bad as it gets. The teen camps, in particular, have created numerically even more stories from Scinetology than from TF. Anyway, I just felt that they should not be dismissed so lightly.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | From rainy
Friday, July 04, 2008, 06:26
(Agree/Disagree?)
I went to join their forum and to register it asks you what 5+2 is. For a moment I doubted your "better educated" assertion, but then I thought perhaps it's something only ex scientologist kids would know, like when someone here made a survey that asked all those Family-specific questions to make sure the right people were taking the survey...I wonder what the 2+5 thing is about.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From sar
Sunday, June 29, 2008, 04:36
(Agree/Disagree?)
I know. But we do have a good excuse. It seems that most kids that were brought up by scientologists did go to school. In any case, I think the majority of visitors to this site that are not exfam SGAs come across as considerably more stupid than the lot of us. I don't think we're thick. I think it generally takes a bit brains to leave a cult. I was just suprised by and was remarking on their eloquence/intelligence. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | from fragiletiger
Monday, June 23, 2008 - 23:19
(Agree/Disagree?)
I saw this lot on TV this morning, and it was the first time I'd identified, with another set of freaks.
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2008/20080623_bcf/interviews.htm
(reply to this comment)
|
|
|
|
|
]
[About the Trailer Park] [Who Links Here]