STAND media harassment campaign fail


Silver Meritorious Patron
PJ Media
Scientologists Blast Accusations That They're a Cult
By John Ellis August 7, 2018

Under the title "PJ Media Told: Religions Must Join Force, Not Attack Brethren," Scientologists Taking Action Against Discrimination) (STAND) wrote me an open letter denouncing this article about the purported growth of Scientology. Loving a good squabble, I have decided to wade back into the fray and explain how STAND's open letter to me is based on the inaccurate premise that we are "brethren." Theological purity is important.
The open letter begins with a sharp rebuke and a not-so-subtle accusation that my character is lacking:

Mr. Ellis,
It amazes me that you are staff at your church and yet find time to speak ill of people of another religion and in highly bigoted and uninformed terms. That you speak so disparagingly of others of faith I believe reflects worse on you than on those you malign.

Having reread my article (which, frankly, I had forgotten I had even written until I accidentally stumbled upon the letter), I'm assuming that STAND's ire was stoked by my comparison of their beloved religion with pyramid schemes like Amway. Rereading what I assume is the offending paragraph, I freely and happily admit that it drips with snark and offense. However, I stand by my snark and offense that oozes out of these words:
To be clear, I'm not convinced that Scientology should be classified a religion and not a cult. I've always thought of it as a pyramid scheme with eternal rewards in place of a pink Cadillac. How it could be growing is beyond me. I mean, I know that I immediately lock the doors, pull the shades, and turn off the lights whenever I see a neighbor approaching with an Amway flipchart. However, since movie stars seem especially susceptible to Scientology, the religious cult has taken on an aura of glamour for some people. Never underestimate the selling ability of a pretty face, I guess.

While I'm willing to double-down on the appropriateness of the above paragraph, STAND disagrees, obviously.

[email protected] or listen to audio of article here