Religion Black and White

Queenmab321

Patron Meritorious
Whatever people are getting out of the thread, it is a troll thread so the op can get some sort of jollies.
Our hands are all moist and slippery with all the assistance we have given.

If someone comes along and presents an argument that forces me to reevaluate my thinking on a given issue, especially one that I feel strongly about, I view that person as having done me a favor. At the end of the day, if I'm honest with myself, I will better understand the issue, whether or not I'm ultimately persuaded by the argument.

I think the idea that the people reading this thread are vulnerable little children capable of being led by the nose down the garden path is insulting. You sound like cult members, anxious lest you be corrupted by the Internet.
 

Churchill

Gold Meritorious Patron
:overanalyser:

This is the person who runs Scientology Inc.

miscavige-crop.jpg


Scientology Inc. claims to be a "religious institution."


___________​




RELIGIOUS CLOAKING

7. Based on years of work in the senior most legal bodies of organized scientology as covered above I have dealt with directly or supervised the handling of hundreds of legal matters involving the organizations of scientology which directly or indirectly had to do with using religious cloaking...

8. It was determined that the only way to handle many of the legal matters in front of us and still apply Hubbard’s policies that had to do with staff, ethics, sales of services, money, delivery of services and the like was to develop and use a religious cloaking saying scientology was a religion, its services religious, its staff members of religious orders and the like. I can state without doubt that the overwhelming main reason that organized scientology developed and pushed its religious cloaking was to avoid a myriad of real or potential legal problems that would exist by following Hubbard’s policies if it were not considered a religion. By developing this religious cloaking for organized scientology it was hoped to avoid legal requirements around the world that might otherwise have to be followed that would make it impossible to follow Hubbard’s policies. In developing the religious cloaking for organized scientology, the following were considered a few of the “benefits” so that Hubbard policies could be applied. There are countless examples but the below are listed simply as a few of them:

(i) minimum wages would not have to be paid;

(ii) staff could be sent to different parts of the world and be able to stay locally as religious workers;

(iii) standard employee rights, such as those found in laws like the Fair Labor Standards Act, could be discarded and thus Hubbard policies involving such things as ethics conditions, the Rehabilitation Project Force and the like could be applied without outside interference;

(iv) less scrutiny would be allowed on the controls of the funds of scientology and the intermingling of funds between the corporations and other legal fictions of organized scientology;

(v) it was hoped that the treatment of public scientologists and the use of their funds would be considered outside the purview of governmental bodies;

(vi) couching the demand for and flow of monies within organized scientology using “religious” terms (such as by saying that clear cut mandatory payments for services were “fixed donations” and were mandated by the scripture of “exchange”) was hoped to cut off attempts by governments and others to look into them further...


11. Two of the things that organized scientology felt were of the most importance in order to avoid compliance with many laws that were contrary to Hubbard policy were the religious cloaking as covered above and a corporate restructuring to make it very difficult if not impossible for outsiders to ever get to the main assets of organized scientology and to ensure that the real leaders of organized scientology could be insulated from legal liability by hiding their real controls behind a myriad of corporate and other legal veils. It was considered both a defensive and offensive strategy to have such cloaking (religious and corporate) in place.

Defensively it makes it very difficult for individuals or even governments to force legal compliance of the many types of laws as covered above. It also makes it almost impossible to hold those that really control organized scientology responsible legally or to get to the financial assets of organized scientology spread out around the world. Offensively, it gives organized scientology a “safe base” from which to attack critics and/or anyone it feels is its enemy. Hiding behind religious cloaking and corporate veils it can act as a victim when people point out its crimes and injustices calling them “religious bigots” and even scaring governments, many of whom are not supposed to get involved with “religious matters”. By calling policies by Hubbard or Miscavige that are otherwise abusive or contrary to law “religious scripture” it was hoped to avoid legal scrutiny of same.

Excellent post.
I said it before, and it bears repeating: Scientology is to religion what child pornography is to art.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
At Stalag [STRIKE]17[/STRIKE] $cientology, indoctrination is common place.

[video=youtube;jEi5PAFkiNI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEi5PAFkiNI[/video]​
 

Alle G

Patron with Honors
What about tone scale? Did people believe in it?

How did they explain to themselves needing bodies, owning bodies, worshipping bodies etc, stuff below body death? Did they suspect they are accepting a religious belief or they thought it was based on Hubbard’s scientific research too?

Or did they perceive the tone scale as something natural and obvious, not requiring any special beliefs?

I guess my question is: did people accept the bottom part of the tone scale as easily as the top one?
 

Queenmab321

Patron Meritorious
1. I joined staff for a few reasons. I thought I could go up the bridge and get "cleared" and at the same time I would be helping an organization that is also "clearing" others. This is what I read in the Policy Letters that was supposed to happen. Hubbard promised these two things in his Policy Letters. I didn't join staff for some religious experience, that was never in my thoughts.

2. Of course I thought it was important to raise money for the organization. The organization was set-up that way. It was set-up so that staff would be paid a wage to survive on, all based on how many people are sold into doing services of auditing and training. This is no different then any business. I would have not gone on staff as a free working volunteer.

Korzybski said "the map is not the territory". How true that is with scientology.

The map for being on staff is all the policy letters written by hubbard, these are called the OEC's. And for all of scientology it is called the OEC/FEBC's. Those are the maps on how to run a scientology organization.

Now, I can tell you the territory is completely different from the map. But, you'll never know as you where never on staff to experience it.

But there is one way for you to experience it. All these Policy Letters have been implemented for 30 years now, and now go out and look at the scientology organizations, and you will find they are in the same set of confusions as from 30 years ago. In other words, no expansion, just false stats and lies about expansion.


I guess what I'm trying to understand is what you mean when you say you were a "true believer." Your actual experience on staff didn't square up with the ideals you found expressed on paper. No doubt, just one more intentional bait and switch built right into the system by Hubbard to lure people in. And, you never thought of the peculiar beliefs you had begun to embrace or the manner in which those beliefs were held by the group as in any way religious. I get that. What I'm suggesting, and I certainly could be wrong, is that one may, without realizing it, fall into a pattern of behavior and belief that is characteristically religious. When I say it functions like a religion, I'm not referring to the day to day routine of the staff. I'm referring to how it functions psychologically for the individual and sociologically for the group. I'm talking about a community with its own shared reality that provides for its members existential certainty, a feeling of special, superior identity, the promise of salvation (clear, OT), a more or less exhaustive and dogmatic account of human origins and of humanity's place in the universe, hope for the future, a moral code, a common struggle, and an answer to the question, "What will happen to me when I die"? If Scientology does this, then, it seems to me, it's functioning just like any other religion, whether or not its adherents are consciously aware of it. I certainly think Hubbard was aware of it. He said the best way to make a million dollars is to start a religion, and I believe that's exactly what he set out to do.
 
Last edited:

Gib

Crusader
I guess what I'm trying to understand is what you mean when you say you were a "true believer." Your actual experience on staff didn't square up with the ideals you found expressed on paper. No doubt, just one more intentional bait and switch built right into the system by Hubbard to lure people in. And, you never thought of the peculiar beliefs you had begun to embrace or the manner in which those beliefs were held by the group as in any way religious. I get that. What I'm suggesting, and I certainly could be wrong, is that one may, without realizing it, fall into a pattern of behavior and belief that is characteristically religious. When I say it functions like a religion, I'm not referring to the day to day routine of the staff. I'm referring to how it functions psychologically for the individual and sociologically for the group. I'm talking about a community with its own shared reality that provides for its members existential certainty, a feeling of special, superior identity, the promise of salvation (clear, OT), a more or less exhaustive and dogmatic account of human origins and of humanity's place in the universe, hope for the future, a moral code, a common struggle, and an answer to the question, "What will happen to me when I die"? If Scientology does this, then, it seems to me, it's functioning just like any other religion, whether or not its adherents are consciously aware of it. I certainly think Hubbard was aware of it. He said the best way to make a million dollars is to start a religion, and I believe that's exactly what he set out to do.

You are being way too significant for me.

Here's my simple story.

A young man read dianetics and then wanted to go "clear", all to lead a better life for himself & his family & friends. Then somehow after only reading all of hubbards books & listening to a whole bunch of lectures,

(this young man did not read anything else to compare what he read by hubbard vs some other authors)

why 26 years later the young man is now middle aged, and woke-up and found he was duped.

This next comment is not directed at you but, in addition to my simple story, fuk the religion aspect of it, I was never seeking a spiritual path and I am still now not seeking a spiritual path, so I don't give a hoot about the so called religion of it.

There is nothing more to understand about me. Anything I post on this board is based on my experiences and opinions of what I saw & learned.
 

Queenmab321

Patron Meritorious
You are being way too significant for me.

Here's my simple story.

A young man read dianetics and then wanted to go "clear", all to lead a better life for himself & his family & friends. Then somehow after only reading all of hubbards books & listening to a whole bunch of lectures,

(this young man did not read anything else to compare what he read by hubbard vs some other authors)

why 26 years later the young man is now middle aged, and woke-up and found he was duped.

This next comment is not directed at you but, in addition to my simple story, fuk the religion aspect of it, I was never seeking a spiritual path and I am still now not seeking a spiritual path, so I don't give a hoot about the so called religion of it.

There is nothing more to understand about me. Anything I post on this board is based on my experiences and opinions of what I saw & learned.

Setting aside the whole IRS, Religious Status issue which I think muddies the water quite a bit, I guess I just find it really odd to discover ex-Scientologists who don't see their experience in the cult, at least in retrospect, as having been religious. When I and my Wog friends see Tom Criuse, Juliette Lewis or Kirstie Alley, it's like, yeah, batshit crazy, religious zeolots. Obviously. Zoltan!
 

Gib

Crusader
Setting aside the whole IRS, Religious Status issue which I think muddies the water quite a bit, I guess I just find it really odd to discover ex-Scientologists who don't see their experience in the cult, at least in retrospect, as having been religious. When I and my Wog friends see Tom Criuse, Juliette Lewis or Kirstie Alley, it's like, yeah, batshit crazy, religious zeolots. Obviously. Zoltan!

understood. I grew up in a non religious family. We never talked about it. I view life more from the practical side, as in engineering.

I always had one foot in and out of scientology when I was in, probably because of the religious aspect being pushed which I kept out of my mind. When ever I tried to talk to another about it, I always talked in terms that the training was like school, a academy. And the auditing just gave one insights to his life. I hated going to events, I just wanted them to be social events to shoot the shit. Hated clapping at the stupid picture, just went along with it.

Whenever I see TV Evangelist on TV, I just want to puke. Same at events and everybody is going "oh, how so theta". And when I saw the latest IAS video with people singing, I :puke:. I just ain't that guy, and I'm never going to be.

Let's all hold hands now & sing. :puke:
 

Veda

Sponsor
david-miscavige-new-years-speech-2000.jpg


-snip-

The entire purpose of the op of this thread is to lead others down a path to where they agree with the assertion, "Scientology is a religion."

With ample doubletalk and verbal shenanigans by its originator, it has never veered from that objective.

It's rather peculiar watching it play out.

Setting aside the whole IRS, Religious Status issue which I think muddies the water quite a bit, I guess I just find it really odd to discover ex-Scientologists who don't see their experience in the cult, at least in retrospect, as having been religious. When I and my Wog friends see Tom Criuse, Juliette Lewis or Kirstie Alley, it's like, yeah, batshit crazy, religious zeolots. Obviously. Zoltan!

Well, you're quite the manipulator, Qeeenmab.


understood. I grew up in a non religious family. We never talked about it. I view life more from the practical side, as in engineering.

I always had one foot in and out of scientology when I was in, probably because of the religious aspect being pushed which I kept out of my mind. When ever I tried to talk to another about it, I always talked in terms that the training was like school, a academy. And the auditing just gave one insights to his life. I hated going to events, I just wanted them to be social events to shoot the shit. Hated clapping at the stupid picture, just went along with it.

Whenever I see TV Evangelist on TV, I just want to puke. Same at events and everybody is going "oh, how so theta". And when I saw the latest IAS video with people singing, I :puke:. I just ain't that guy, and I'm never going to be.

Let's all hold hands now & sing. :puke:

So, Queenmab, you got what you wanted: someone, in essence, saying he left Scientology because it was a religion.

Take that as a "win" and let this thread rest in peace.
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
I guess what I'm trying to understand is what you mean when you say you were a "true believer." Your actual experience on staff didn't square up with the ideals you found expressed on paper. No doubt, just one more intentional bait and switch built right into the system by Hubbard to lure people in. And, you never thought of the peculiar beliefs you had begun to embrace or the manner in which those beliefs were held by the group as in any way religious. I get that. What I'm suggesting, and I certainly could be wrong, is that one may, without realizing it, fall into a pattern of behavior and belief that is characteristically religious. When I say it functions like a religion, I'm not referring to the day to day routine of the staff. I'm referring to how it functions psychologically for the individual and sociologically for the group. I'm talking about a community with its own shared reality that provides for its members existential certainty, a feeling of special, superior identity, the promise of salvation (clear, OT), a more or less exhaustive and dogmatic account of human origins and of humanity's place in the universe, hope for the future, a moral code, a common struggle, and an answer to the question, "What will happen to me when I die"? If Scientology does this, then, it seems to me, it's functioning just like any other religion, whether or not its adherents are consciously aware of it. I certainly think Hubbard was aware of it. He said the best way to make a million dollars is to start a religion, and I believe that's exactly what he set out to do.




:yes:


While in the cult and if remaining undeclared mattered, after it suddenly morphed into a 'religion' we all had to play the silly make believe game ... (when with other scientologists) so yes, by then it was functioning like a religion.

There are a million reasons why it wasn't and isn't one but yes. it functions like one to this day.


 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Veda
-snip-
The entire purpose of the op of this thread is to lead others down a path to where they agree with the assertion, "Scientology is a religion."

With ample doubletalk and verbal shenanigans by its originator, it has never veered from that objective.

It's rather peculiar watching it play out.


quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Queenmab321
Setting aside the whole IRS, Religious Status issue which I think muddies the water quite a bit, I guess I just find it really odd to discover ex-Scientologists who don't see their experience in the cult, at least in retrospect, as having been religious. When I and my Wog friends see Tom Criuse, Juliette Lewis or Kirstie Alley, it's like, yeah, batshit crazy, religious zeolots. Obviously. Zoltan!


Posted by Veda
Well, you're quite the manipulator, Queeenmab.


Aside from the fact that I find Queenmab's posts generally unreadable by reason of the fact that they are so dizzily non-responsive and densely populated with passively aggressive, turgid DoubleSpeak, I think the posting style is remarkable in the sense that the wall-of-words, faux scholarship thrown up to foil peoples' troll detector seems to be better than the average troll's.

Cue handwringers to now post in Queenmab's defense against those awful meanies like Veda and Hoax.
:giggle:
 

Gadfly

Crusader
Aside from the fact that I find Queenmab's posts generally unreadable by reason of the fact that they are so dizzily non-responsive and densely populated with passively aggressive, turgid DoubleSpeak, I think the posting style is remarkable in the sense that the wall-of-words, faux scholarship thrown up to foil peoples' troll detector seems to be better than the average troll's.

Cue handwringers to now post in Queenmab's defense against those awful meanies like Veda and Hoax.
:giggle:

Well, he's got me hooked. :confused2:

But so what? Even though I agree with most of what he says, it doesn't change a THING about what I think about Hubbard & Scientology.

And, yes you two (Veda and Hoaxie) ARE very very bad meanies! :coolwink:

Personally, I don't see the "problem" that you two [STRIKE]hallucinate and exaggerate[/STRIKE], oooops, I mean "see". :nervous:
 

Gib

Crusader
Aside from the fact that I find Queenmab's posts generally unreadable by reason of the fact that they are so dizzily non-responsive and densely populated with passively aggressive, turgid DoubleSpeak, I think the posting style is remarkable in the sense that the wall-of-words, faux scholarship thrown up to foil peoples' troll detector seems to be better than the average troll's.

Cue handwringers to now post in Queenmab's defense against those awful meanies like Veda and Hoax.
:giggle:

oh, I don't mind. I'm a furyan. And nobody is going to take my soul.
 

Queenmab321

Patron Meritorious
Aside from the fact that I find Queenmab's posts generally unreadable by reason of the fact that they are so dizzily non-responsive and densely populated with passively aggressive, turgid DoubleSpeak, I think the posting style is remarkable in the sense that the wall-of-words, faux scholarship thrown up to foil peoples' troll detector seems to be better than the average troll's.

Cue handwringers to now post in Queenmab's defense against those awful meanies like Veda and Hoax.
:giggle:

"The truth to the average man is indistinguishable from a bad headache."
-H.L. Mencken
 

Queenmab321

Patron Meritorious
Well, you're quite the manipulator, Qeeenmab.


Alright, you've just assumed the voice of James Mason in my head. Congratulations. I hope you're happy.




So, Queenmab, you got what you wanted: someone, in essence, saying he left Scientology because it was a religion.


Take that as a "win" and let this thread rest in peace.


First of all, Veda, I don't have a secret agenda. I'm just engaging in a conversation. I'm expressing my understanding of things as best I can by my own lights and in good faith. I don't have anything to gain from "winning" an argument. In fact, if anything, the opposite is true. I can really only ever gain a better understanding of the world from dialogue with intelligent, articulate people who possess information I haven't seen and/or a point of view different from my own. Furthermore, no one is "supposed" to be concerned with anything I post. What I write either makes sense and is compelling or it doesn't and isn't (turgid? maybe a little?).


Secondly, you're right. I'm not terribly close to the issues we're discussing. I've never been a Scientologist. I haven't given over years of my life to a cult. I've never been cut off from family members or friends because of my beliefs (I was excommunicated by the Presbyterians, but they're not very strict about such things). Other than being told at age five that I would burn alive forever if I didn't trust Jesus to save me, I'm not burdened with the effects of years of bizarre, psychological conditioning. But, this doesn't mean I don't care. It doesn't mean I support COS, and it doesn't mean I'm callously jerking you all around for my own amusement. I'm just trying to get at the truth.


I'm sorry to lecture, but the ability to tolerate uncertainty, the ability to withhold assent, the ability to withstand contradiction and recognize the merit of opposing views -- all of this without lapsing into skepticism or relativism isn't "double speak," it's just intellectual maturity. The intellectually immature, by contrast, bristle when their pieties and subjective certainties are called into question because their need for dogmatic security trumps their need to inquire into the truth.


p.s., for HH, if you think it's faux (turgid? maybe just a little?) scholarship, then look it the fuck up, bitch, and call me on it! Damn!
 
Last edited:

lost

Patron with Honors
Lets include Reverend Devon Newman of The Church of Scientology in the discussion shall we?
Lots of reverends from lots of religions team up with known criminals to practice spiritually beneficial
practices like planning a kidnap of a random cop and offing him. You know i can see how that is really
science cloaked as religion with the Good Lady Reverend actually being a truly religious practioner. So
thats settled it for me. Scientology is a religion. I'll just stay here or a few more months bouncing
that around. There are many other Church of Scientology Reverends who we could compare to see
which one is the most despicable. Some of them even councel parishioners in the flock to off themselves.
I guess that for the Reverends thats a religious thing. I guess that is somehing they have faith in. I wonder
if thats real faith or if they are not eally concious if it being faith or not. I wonder if Reverend Devon had faith in her crim partner.i wonder if that makes him and she a religious duo. There is a lot to think about. Or nothing that needs thinking about, to be thought about a lot.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
p.s., for HH, if you think it's faux (turgid? maybe just a little?) scholarship, then look it the fuck up, bitch, and call me on it! Damn!


LOLOL…it's refreshing to see you saying what's really on your mind for a change.

There is no need to do anything further because:

1) You were never in Scn and obviously don't know what you are talking about.
2) Your DoubleSpeak doesn't go anywhere or lead to any improved understanding of Scn--quite the opposite in fact.​

Good luck with your sermonizing ex-scientologists on a subject that you either haven't researched or understood in any meaningful way.
 

Queenmab321

Patron Meritorious
Lets include Reverend Devon Newman of The Church of Scientology in the discussion shall we?
Lots of reverends from lots of religions team up with known criminals to practice spiritually beneficial
practices like planning a kidnap of a random cop and offing him. You know i can see how that is really
science cloaked as religion with the Good Lady Reverend actually being a truly religious practioner. So
thats settled it for me. Scientology is a religion. I'll just stay here or a few more months bouncing
that around. There are many other Church of Scientology Reverends who we could compare to see
which one is the most despicable. Some of them even councel parishioners in the flock to off themselves.
I guess that for the Reverends thats a religious thing. I guess that is somehing they have faith in. I wonder if thats real faith or if they are not eally concious if it being faith or not. I wonder if Reverend Devon had faith in her crim partner.i wonder if that makes him and she a religious duo. There is a lot to think about. Or nothing that needs thinking about, to be thought about a lot.

Yes! Exactly! Just as burning people alive was a religious thing for the Inquisitors. There is nothing inherently good or redeeming or virtuous about religious faith in itself.

"But 'tis that same religion oftener far
Hath bred the foul impieties of men."


That's from a poem I wrote called "De Rerum Natura." I like to attribute it to the 1st century, B.C., Epicurean philosopher, Lucretius, you know, for shits and giggles.
 
Last edited:

Queenmab321

Patron Meritorious
LOLOL…it's refreshing to see you saying what's really on your mind for a change.


Yeah, that's what I thought.

There is no need to do anything further because:
1) You were never in Scn and obviously don't know what you are talking about.
2) Your DoubleSpeak doesn't go anywhere or lead to any improved understanding of Scn--quite the opposite in fact.​


How odd that must be! to make peremptory statements without the slightest pretense of offering an argument in support of one's assertions. It's almost as if you were unaware that such an argument is called for. Should I give you the benefit of the doubt, HH, and just assume you're bull baiting?

Good luck with your sermonizing ex-scientologists on a subject that you either haven't researched or understood in any meaningful way.

Because a child is unable to understand sound argument, he is incapable of being persuaded by it. So, as George Eliot observes: "In all private quarrels the duller nature is triumphant by reason of dullness."
 
Last edited:
Top