Talk:Scientology

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search
! This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Religion-related articles on Conservapedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Conservlogo.png

Contents

Archives

Archive 1 Archive2


Typos

This article has a couple typos in the first paragraph. "Psychology" should not be capitalized the first time, and the second time it is misspelled and again inappropriately capitalized. HelpJazz 13:09, 29 December 2007 (EST)

Thanks HelpJazz 13:33, 29 December 2007 (EST)

Hackers?

C'mon now, must we call them hackers? And if we must, can we possibly say "Hackers on steroids", add a reference to "Secret Websites", and possibly put in a few pictures of an exploding yellow van? Barikada 16:49, 24 January 2008 (EST)

Do you have anything serious to add, or just obscure jokes? If you want to improve the wording please be my guest; I'm only as good as my sources. HelpJazz 16:55, 24 January 2008 (EST)
It's not a joke. Hacker carries some unnessecarily dark connotations. The quotes above are from a video from Fox News on this very subject. I can find it for you, if you wish. Barikada 17:02, 24 January 2008 (EST)
A link's not necessary, but a straightforward response is always appreciated. What's wrong with the word hacker, what's a better word, and why can't you just change it yourself? The article called them a "hacking group" and I had no reason to call them anything else. HelpJazz 17:12, 24 January 2008 (EST)
Because pretty much any time I try to change something that might be even slightly controversial, I get banned.
The word hacker, thanks to the MSM, brings up images of people sabotaging networks/stealing information from the government/what have you. Where I come from, at least.
Could simply refer to them as "a group" instead of "a hacking group." Barikada 18:44, 24 January 2008 (EST)
Well if anyone is confused, they can see hacker, which is wikilinked within the article, and which doesn't bring up images of people sabotaging networks or stealing information. HelpJazz 19:39, 24 January 2008 (EST)
Alright. Barikada 19:41, 24 January 2008 (EST)

I've removed the reference to hackers. Barikada's complaint was legitimate, and although the link to hacker should mitigate that if it was necessary to mention it, I couldn't see that there was any real need to mention it. The YouTube video doesn't refer to them as hackers, nor even mention anything to do with computers. Their tactics, just going by the video, seem to lie in other areas. Yes, the other link does refer to hackers, so in that sense the use of the term was justifiable, but it still wasn't necessary. Philip J. Rayment 04:10, 25 January 2008 (EST)

I've never understood people's deal with the word hacker, but I also didn't watch many movies in the late 80's ;-) Is there a better word than simply "group", though, because it's more than just a group of people, right? It's people who are highly skilled in a certain area (namely using computers to illegally and skillfully disrupt other people's computers) and I don't know what word covers that. HelpJazz 10:00, 25 January 2008 (EST)
No need to specify computers, given that many Anons are handing out flyers in reality. Barikada 15:44, 25 January 2008 (EST)
Err... but flyers don't perfom DoS attacks. HelpJazz 22:01, 25 January 2008 (EST)
Indeed. Which is why I attempted to imply that not all of the activities perpetrated by Anonymous are internet-based. Barikada 22:04, 25 January 2008 (EST)
I'll say again, I'm only as good as my sources. I found a source that says they are hackers (and I still don't see why it's inaccurate), and it said nothing about handing out flyers. At any rate, just because they do more than computer-based attacks doesn't change their core purpose or definition. Nobody's been able to come up with any better word than "group of people". What's so wrong with using descriptive language? HelpJazz 22:12, 25 January 2008 (EST)
"Hackers" is a bit like "Fundamentalists". The origin of the word is good, but it's been appropriated by the media to mean someone bad.
As far as the legitimacy of its use in this article is concerned, the primary evidence, the video, made no reference to hackers and no reference to computer attacks. The secondary reference, quoting a third source, referred to them as hackers and said that the group had already launched denial of service attacks, but apart from that being their only documented tactic so far, there's no evidence that computer-based tactics are going to be their main mode of attack. In other words, they could be planning on using several approaches, and the denial of service attack just happens to be the first one. Actually, the video seemed to be indicating that a tactic would be infiltration.
Philip J. Rayment 02:48, 26 January 2008 (EST)

A chance?

This might be a chance worth making use of. Christianity and Scientology are certinly in opposition, and Scientology has a known way of destroying families by ordering new converts to sever all contact. They will be in the headlines for a time now, and they have a lot of skeletons in their cupboard which until now have been consigned to websites hardly ever seen. Why waste such a chance to spread the truth around, discredit the church, slow its growth, and score one for the real true religion. Im not entirely sure what that is, but its certinly not Scientology looniness. - Suricou Raven, Jan 24th.

Is it your opinion that Christianity and Scientology are in opposition? Whose opinion is it? The reason I ask is, opposition is not widely stated by Christian Churches. A few even use Scientology methods (it has been in the news). If it is certain, it certainly isn't obvious. Also, the Scientology website claims it is compatible. Whose opinion is that? TerryO 00:59, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

Scientology is incompatible with virtually evrey religion in existence in the $cientology book the history of man L Ron states that man evolved from lower life forms. (gasp!) but how they evolved has absolutely no basis in either science or religion. according to Hubbard humans evolved form clams (the sources of our jaw pain and the now disproved Piltdown man. Also im many of his lectures and books he makes his disdain for Jesus Christianity and just about every other major religion. The final blow to the "you can be a Cristian and a $cientoligist" notion. Is the revelation one you spend 200000$ to get to 0t3 is that the memory of Jesus and all the old religions were implanted into the dead alien souls that now inhabit your body by The evil Galactic Lord Xenu. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Craan (talk)

Meow

Needs a cat. Can a sysop add one? -Foxtrot 13:23, 1 September 2008 (EDT)

Cat problem

Scientology is a religion, not a science. JY23 17:17, 22 December 2008 (EST)

Agreed. The category should be changed to "Religion." Funny, whoever put "Pseudoscience," but completely inappropriate for an encyclopedic resource. -Ilikecake 22:49, 25 December 2008 (EST)
It's not a religion - it's an evil cult that destroys lives, and we should say so. Marcdaniels 16:34, 2 February 2009 (EST)
  • For purposes of this encyclopedia, "Scientology" (no matter what our personal opinions are) is categorized by most major governments as a religion, including the Government of the United States. CP is an American wiki. End of discussion. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:37, 23 February 2009 (EST)

Missing Parenthesis

There is a missing parenthesis, and I have bolded where I believe it was meant to be in the following - "Later Hubbard refined his ideas and moved toward a structured system of belief involving the human soul, or "thetan" (each person's spiritual self, and the origins of life and the universe.) Luminite2 12:32, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

Fair Game

Can this article include information on Scientology's Fair Game policy, stating that enemies of the church are "fair game" for being "deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed." -Birry 07:78, 14 May 2009 (EST)

I second the motion to include.--Jpatt 20:09, 14 May 2009 (EDT)
I support this as well. We need to show the facts about Scientology. TheRealMattJohnson 21:29, 14 May 2009 (EDT)
I agree with them. JY23 21:33, 14 May 2009 (EDT)
  • Editors can post their suggestions to change here, but I do not support any changes to what we have here, as it opens up Pandora's Box once again. Scientology is a very minor "religion", and without its celebrity members, would never be noticed by anyone. The fact that two socks of previously blocked instigators made accounts to support revisiting this doesn't exactly inspire confidence. --₮K/Admin/Talk 22:20, 14 May 2009 (EDT)

Hate to say it

...but Scientology is no religion! Hubbard made many many comments to the effect of "the easiest way to make money would be to start a religion." This is a proven fact! Religions like Christianity and Judaism have a history of faith capital, if you will. People have died for these beliefs, struggled for them, lived ascetic lifestyles to prove their faith. Scientology, as far as I've ever read of it, is just a religion for famous people like Kabbalah. A majority of them tend to have what my dad calls "Hollywood views", too. AliceCurtis 10:28, 4 July 2009 (EDT)

Beliefs

Something should be stated concerning their beliefs, the following is an example. Scientologists believe that they have thetans, which are comparable to a soul, on or iside them (sometimes they have more than one according to scientology). When they die their souls are taken to Venus where they are brainwashed about their past life, then are loaded into capsules (they are first given new bodies). They are the dropped into the ocean somewhere off of the coast of california. There they either drown or make it to land, Where they have a chance to start a new life in of californias big cities. Although this story is ridiculous it is affirmed by scientlogist doctrine, you ca look elsewhere to affirm this. I just hope people can see how ridiculous this religion is (all i said about their beliefs is true!). Semper Vigilo (Baronvonbob 19:00, 3 October 2009 (EDT))

Controversy

Why the hands off? An article on an organization that has so often manifested itself as a religious mafia (Operation_Snow_White, etc.) should at least have section that provides more detail, or sources thereto, about the controversy (to put it mildly) that Scientology has stirred. Even though CP would face intimidation for it. Such an org with does not further the cause of truth, honestly, and righteousness, and is in fact anti-Christ.

"Show me any person who is critical of us and I'll show you crimes and intended crimes that would stand a magistrate's hair on end." - L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Bulletin, 4 April 1965

"Somebody some day will say 'this is illegal.' By then be sure the orgs [Scientology organizations] say what is legal or not."- L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 4 January 1966, "LRH Relationship to Orgs"

"If attacked on some vulnerable point by anyone or anything or any organization, always find or manufacture enough threat against them to cause them to sue for peace." - L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 15 August 1960, Dept. of Govt. Affairs

"The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than to win. The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly."- L. Ron Hubbard, A MANUAL ON THE DISSEMINATION OF MATERIAL, 1955

Federal Indictment against Scientology for Conspiracy against the Federal Government of the United States:

“The crime committed by these defendants is of a breadth and scope previously unheard of. No building, office, desk, or file was safe from their snooping and prying. No individual or organization was free from their despicable conspiratorial minds. The tools of their trade were miniature transmitters, lock picks, secret codes, forged credentials and any other device they found necessary to carry out their conspiratorial schemes.” –Federal prosecutor’s memorandum to the judge urging stiff jail sentences for 9 top leaders of Scientology who had pleaded guilty to criminal charges

The court record is] replete with evidence [that Scientology] is nothing in reality but a vast enterprise to extract the maximum amount of money from its adepts by pseudo scientific theories… and to exercise a kind of blackmail against persons who do not wish to continue with their sect…. The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder, L.Ron Hubbard.” – Judge Breckenridge, Los Angeles Superior Court

Here is more on them: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] Daniel1212 00:36, 29 October 2009 (EDT)

I could help you add this information to the main text, just write it edited. --Joaquín Martínez 08:30, 29 October 2009 (EDT)

In lieu of a more comprehensive entry, may the below suffice for now.

Controversy and criticism

Both the status of Scientology as a religion[1] and its beliefs as well as its practices and manner of operation have been a subject of condemnation by both religious and secular sources.[2][3][4][5] [6]

Christian apologist Craig Branch of Watchman Fellowship begins a documented examination of Scientology by stating,

Controversy continues to rage around Scientology, due mostly to the totalitarian and abusive nature of its practices. The evolution and history of Scientology raises serious and fundamental questions about freedoms and protections of religion and even what or who defines a religion. Scientology is an anomaly on even a diverse religious landscape. It does, in fact, involve religious belief (in what most outsiders would regard as science fiction). But that belief appears to have been built chiefly as a cover for exploitive commercial operations...Scientology's history of terror and abuse appears to be the result of its founder's delusion and paranoia. [7]

Such charges are due in part to the tendency of Scientology to engage in intimidation and unethical or unlawful practices against those who have criticized or publicly opposed it, from former members, to national publications, to the United States government. This has resulted in Scientology being termed a "religious mafia", and "a commercial enterprise that masquerades as a religion."[8][9] In response to journalist Paulette Cooper's 1972 book, The Scandal of Scientology,[10] Scientology launched filed 19 lawsuits against her,[11] contrived a false bomb threat made in her name, and planned and implemented various other attempts over the course of almost 15 years. A strategy called Operation Freakout sought "To get P.C incarcerated in a mental institution or jail, or at least to hit her so hard that she drops her attacks."[12][13]

This plan was prevented from full implementation when a 1977 FBI raid on Scientology headquarters revealed the Scientology plot, among 48,000 documents detailing strategies against critics of the church. Comprehensive evidence revealed the theft of government documents by Scientology, spies planted in the Justice Department and Internal Revenue Service, and the planting of listening devices, as part of Operation Snow White.

The raid finally resulted in the conviction of Mary Sue Hubbard, wife of the Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard, and 10 more Scientologists. All received prison terms, though all are now free.[14][15][16]

The original objective of Operation Snow White was to expose and expunge "all false and secret files of the nations of operating areas", and included plans to use blackmail, and to infiltrate and steal potentially damaging classified files on Scientology activities in various countries, from Algeria to the United States.[17] These ranged from Operation Project DIG (AUDITION) in Australia, which called for giving compromising information on Conservative politicians to the Australian Labor Party so that the latter "could give the Federal Labor something to smear Victorian Conservatives with", to Project GRUMPY in Germany, which upheld obtaining files "by any means" from police, Interpol and immigration authorities.[18]

In 1991 Time magazine wrote a major exposé of Scientology, describing it as The Cult of Greed, being
a hugely profitable, global racket that survives by intimidating members and critics in a Mafia-like manner. Scientology is quite likely the most ruthless, the most classically terroristic, the most litigious, and the most lucrative cult the country has ever seen. [19]

Scientology unsuccessfully sued Time magazine over the revelatory story.[20]

Numerous other authors and publication have been additional targets of Scientology retaliation.[21] In 1995, The American Jurist Magazine published, Dangerous Science: The Church of Scientology's Holy War against Critics, which notes,
It is typical of the Church of Scientology to use lawsuits -- very many of which are dismissed as frivolous -- to intimidate, harass and quell its critics and defectors into silence. This scheme is even written into the church's doctrine.[22]

Many other authorities have voiced concurring opinions,[23] and or provided documented examples.[24][25][26]

In 1996, the popular Cult Awareness Network, abbreviated as CAN, a primary Scientology critic, was forced into bankruptcy by Scientology. An undercover Scientologist had infiltrated CAN, then 50 Scientologists filed suit against it, many containing almost identical language, after having sought to join the organization almost simultaneously and being denied. CAN's link to cult deprogramming enabled Scientology to file a lawsuit which resulted in a massive fine which added to CAN's legal debt, forcing bankruptcy. Legal maneuvering resulted in Scientology having control of the name and equipment, etc. and files of the old CAN, through Scientology associates. The files were then turned over to the Foundation for Religious Freedom,[27] one of many which serve as a "front" group for Scientology, or which are inordinately favorable to them.[28][29][30]

An addition source of controversy has been the death of 36 year old Lisa McPherson at Scientology's Clearwater headquarters, which she was undergoing "care".[31]

Doctrinally Scientology is non-Christian (Hubbard even denied there was a Christ[32]), and is seen to be manifesting a form of New Age belief.[33] One researcher concludes that it is "an oversimplified form of regular psychotherapy mixed with hypnosis."[34]

It is also pointed out that Satanist Aleister Crowley, was Hubbard's mentor and he lived with Crowley protege John Parsons, engaging in sex magic at their black magic mansion hospice (Los Angeles Times, 24 June 1990, p. A1).[35] [36]

Liberal religious cult apologist[37] J. Gordon Melton dismisses the charge that Scientology is a cult, as he does in regard to certain other dangerous groups.[38][39]

Negative quotes

Quotes from Scientology and other material[40] [41][42] are often published in support of the critical position.

If attacked on some vulnerable point by anyone or anything or any organization, always find or manufacture enough threat against them to cause them to sue for peace." - L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 15 August 1960, Dept. of Govt. Affairs
The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage rather than to win. The law can be used very easily to harass, and enough harassment on somebody who is simply on the thin edge anyway, well knowing that he is not authorized, will generally be sufficient to cause his professional decease. If possible, of course, ruin him utterly. - L. Ron Hubbard, A Manual on the dissemination of material.
So we listen. We add up associations of people with people. When a push against Scientology starts somewhere, we go over the people involved and weed them out. Push vanishes." - L. Ron Hubbard, Manual of justice, 1959
A truly Suppressive Person or group has no rights of any kind and actions taken against them are not punishable.- L. Ron Hubbard, Hubbard Communications Office Policy Letter, 1 March 1965, HCO (Division 1) Ethics, Suppressive Acts, Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists
[The court record is] replete with evidence [that Scientology] is nothing in reality but a vast enterprise to extract the maximum amount of money from its adepts by pseudo scientific theories… and to exercise a kind of blackmail against persons who do not wish to continue with their sect…. The organization clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder, L.Ron Hubbard.” – Judge Breckenridge, Los Angeles Superior Court
Scientology is evil; its techniques are evil; its practice is a serious threat to the community, medically, morally, and socially; and its adherents are sadly deluded and often mentally ill… (Scientology is) the world’s largest organization of unqualified persons engaged in the practice of dangerous techniques which masquerade as mental therapy.” – Justice Anderson, Supreme Court of Victoria, Australia
Scientology is quite likely the most ruthless, the most classically terroristic, the most litigious and the most lucrative cult the country has ever seen. No cult extracts more money from its members." - Cynthia Kisser, the network's Chicago-based executive director, as quoted in Time, 5/6/91


This article needs a warning

Having dealt personally with these people, I can assure everyone that this is a very dangerous and manipulative cult. Given that there are so many young people who read this site, I wonder if a warning at the top advising people to stay away from these guys would be appropriate. What do people think? --DamianJohn 17:04, 14 April 2012 (EDT)

Further reading

References

  1. http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/scirelg.htm
  2. http://www.watchman.org/profile/sientpro.htm]
  3. http://www.watchman.org/sci/historyofterror.htm
  4. http://www.believersweb.org/view.cfm?ID=607
  5. http://www.apologeticsindex.org/cpoint7
  6. http://www.clambake.org
  7. http://www.watchman.org/Sci/scientologymafia.htm
  8. http://www.apologeticsindex.org/s04.html
  9. cf. Scientology: the Sickness Spreads," Reader's Digest, September, l981, reprint, p.2
  10. http://www.clambake.org/archive/books/tsos/sos.html
  11. http://www.paulettecooper.com/scandal.htm
  12. http://www.shipbrook.com/jeff/CoS/docs/pcof1.html
  13. http://www.holysmoke.org/pc/freako.htm
  14. Robert W. Welkos and Joel Sappell, 'Burglaries and Lies Paved a Path to Prison The Los Angeles Times, June 24, 1990
  15. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-scientologysidec062490,0,111873,print.story
  16. The Watchman Expositor (Vol. 14, No. 5)
  17. http://xenu.net/archive/go/ops/go732/go732.htm
  18. http://xenu.net/archive/go/ops/go732/go732p.htm
  19. Time, The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power pp. 32-33
  20. http://www.watchman.org/sci/historyofterror.htm
  21. http://www.lermanet.com/scientologynews/index.html
  22. The American Jurist, November 1995
  23. http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/crtquot.htm
  24. http://www.lermanet.com/scientologyscandals/criminal.htm
  25. [http://www.solitarytrees.net/pickets/sp944.htm Church of Scientology probes Herald reporter - Investigation follows pattern of harassment. The Boston Herald, March 19, 1998
  26. http://www.scientology-lies.com
  27. http://www.apologeticsindex.org/c19.html
  28. http://www.apologeticsindex.org/f00.html#ffrf
  29. http://www.xenu.net/archive/IRS/#VIII
  30. http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/cult-front-groups-latest.htm
  31. http://www.watchman.org/sci/mcpherson.htm
  32. http://www.lermanet2.com/cos/nochrist.html
  33. http://www.watchman.org/sci/hubrel03.htm
  34. Russell Miller,Bare Faced Messiah, Chapter 9
  35. http://www.watchman.org/profile/sientpro.htm
  36. http://www.clambake.org/archive/books/tsos/sos.html
  37. http://www.rickross.com/apologist.html
  38. http://www.apologeticsindex.org/m06.html
  39. http://www.apologeticsindex.org/c31.html
  40. http://www.xenu.net/archive/judge_quotes.html
  41. http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/shortquotes.htm
  42. http://www.factnet.org/Scientology/sciequot.htm

I never thought I'd say this...

but this is actually pretty close to encyclopedia quality, unlike the psuedo-scientific hate speech, and yes, some of it is hate speech, that I've seen on here in the past. Now, if only I didn't need to create an account. Poiuytrewq 23:40, 29 October 2012 (EDT)

Personal tools