Jump to content
IGNORED

Panorama: Scientology and Me - Monday 8:30pm


womblingfree

Recommended Posts

So, it's not a religion because it's only been one since 1984? What kind of logic is that? Is there a gestation period for religions I don't know about.

Most religions don't start off as self-help schemes then decide they're a religion and start applying for the relevant tax exemptions, I think that's what he means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, it's not a religion because it's only been one since 1984? What kind of logic is that? Is there a gestation period for religions I don't know about.

There are many other reasons why it shouldn't be classed as a religion, although if you want to be contrary you could go about arguing that all religions contain elements of these. It's basically a commercial high street business dealing in quite dangerous psychological manipulation.

It follows exactly the same form as many commonly used confidence tricks. For example you pay money for a product and then find out that what you've been paying for is completely different when it's too late.

It's a religion in the same way that pyramid sales and the Dennis the Menace Fan Club are religions.

Scientologies doctrine is not freely available, you must pay tens of thousands of pounds for it to be drip-fed to you disguised as therapy.

L. Ron Hubbard admitted he wanted to create a religion for his own posterity after reading George Orwell.

Hubbard also helped write a book called the Brainwashing manual.

L. Ron's main doctrine of Scientology was the creation of money, in fact that was the next few doctrines as well.

It is an entirely commercial business that has taken to calling itself a religion for protection and to allow it to continue praticing unlicensed quack psychiatry at extortionate fees.

At it's core it is the worlds most expensive pulp fiction story. Watch South Park and save yourself thousands of pounds and your sanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most religions don't start off as self-help schemes then decide they're a religion and start applying for the relevant tax exemptions, I think that's what he means.

That's because most religions are a bit older than 20 years, but all religions obviously do apply for tax exemption.

I think Jesus and his disciples were a self-help scheme. He wasn't even trying to start a religion. In fact, he denied he was the son of God, saying instead that he was "The son of Man".

Most religions start up because people are either too stupid to come up with answers themselves or because of a philosopher who seems like he has hit the nail on the head with a lot of ideas creates a large following. See also: Buddism, that scene in Life Of Brian.

Serious question: Why isn't Scientology a religion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know all about Scientology, and I've been following the fun and games that South Park have been having with it with amusement.

My point is that even though it was clearly set up for profit given that L Ron was even quoted as saying "I'd like to start a religion, that's where the money is", he's clearly succeeded. It clearly is a religion. There's nothing anywhere to say that someone can't just invent a religion. If enough people are willing to follow it then you're sorted.

What I find amusing about the Scientology thing is that it makes the argument for the Flying Spaghetti Monster all the more impenetrable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most religions don't start off as self-help schemes then decide they're a religion and start applying for the relevant tax exemptions, I think that's what he means.

Actually, I would say that probably all religions evolve in more or less that way, just over a longer time period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, beyond their unpleasant legal shenanigans I've got nothing against the Scientologists. The other week I was voting at the primary school down the road, and pretty much every school in our area is heavily religious nowadays. The polling station was set up in the assembly hall, and up their above our heads was a big picture of Christ on the cross and the words JESUS DIED FOR YOU in huge block capitals. So say what you like about Scientologists, but at least they focus their efforts on grown adults with disposable incomes rather than terrifying the life out of little mites from the moment they learn to read. I'm aware Scientology is accused of all kinds of terrible child abuse depending on who you ask, but I don't think they're quite up to the standard of the Roman Catholics just yet.

And like it or not, they're damned good at what they do. Hubbard and his cronies had slash have a definite and demonstrable talent for psychological manipulation, so in Scientology we see a clear real-world example of someone using their powers for evil, which I think is bizarre enough to warrant celebration.

On top of that, it's a sci-fi religion in the here and now, which is pretty remarkable stuff. To be honest I think their existence makes the world a more interesting and surreal place; they talk complete gibberish, but look where it's got them. That's a powerful lesson about the world we're living in, and even if you eradicate Scientology we'll still be living there. That's not to say people shouldn't rally against them and expose their flaws, as obviously I prefer to have my cake and eat it where possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More like your Psychiatrist or Doctor trying to get you to join his personality cult after taking all your money under hypnosis.

Medical ethics are there for a reason.

Or like oh, I don't know The Pope announcing to the world that condoms directly give you AIDS (it's OK, God told him personally!)

Or unnecessary and dangerous female circumcision in many developing countries.

I don't understand why people are so keen to argue that Scientology isn't a religion. Surely lumping it in with the rest of the weak minded lunatics makes it much a easier target for mocking.

Actually, I would say that probably all religions evolve in more or less that way, just over a longer time period.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scientology is a religion. The only reason people make arbitrary distinctions between other religions and scientology is to stop scientologists from using its position of being a religion as a defence. But that isn't required, the things people attack (the brainwashing techniques, threats, lives ruined and charging for answers) would be attacked regardless of whether it's a religion or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scientology has cut to the chase and decided it simply wants your money in an admirably short timeframe. Obviously followers die or become bored, even followers of Scientology, so there has to be some effort at retaining members and recruiting new ones, which is where the brainwashing comes in. It's all above board and in the open as far as I can tell; they're a bunch of lunatics with a crazy story about aliens who want your money and will brainwash you to get it. So unless that sounds like the life you're after, steer clear. Of course I think that message should be spread far and wide so people can make an informed decision, which is where Scientology's love of the lawyer becomes a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dianetics was started as a kind of lay psychology, with little in the way of mysticism or supernatural elements to it. It was literally a self-help programme that didn't claim to be anything more. The religious elements came in later on, when Hubbard lost the rights to Dianetics to one of his investors and set up Scientology. This is where all the stuff about aliens' souls being attached to the body came from, along with all the stuff about past lives and Xenu and all that gubbins – all of that may have been tacked onto the core beliefs of Dianetics in order to distinguish it from Hubbard's earlier work, as he no longer owned or controlled Dianetics.

Later on, when he regained control of Dianetics, he folded that system back into the larger body of Scientology but kept the mysticism and mythology, presumably because it was useful. Hubbard appeared to fervently believe in his system of Dianetics; whether or not he actually believed any of Scientology's background at the time is anyone's guess, but he and the organisation appeared to come to believe in it later on. It's undoubtedly a religion now, even if the high-ups don't buy any of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I would say that probably all religions evolve in more or less that way, just over a longer time period.

Sure, they're usually not so blatant though. The history of scientology goes:

1) Hubbard comments on how starting a religion would be a great way to make money off people

2) Hubbard starts self help scheme

3) Hubbard makes self help scheme into a religion

4) Hubbard sets up permanent mobile base on luxury cruise liner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why people are so keen to argue that Scientology isn't a religion. Surely lumping it in with the rest of the weak minded lunatics makes it much a easier target for mocking.

Or actually gives it more credibility than it deserves and removes it from the scrutiny, accountability and legal requirements of retailers and medical practitioners.

If the Pope said that condoms were evil and was judged by the same yardstick as a therapist rather than under the guise of religion he'd lose his job and probably go to jail.

We want more accountability in society not less. Certainly not another obvious con-trick claiming divine rights to do and say anything, whos founder wrote a book called 'The Brainwashing Manual'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It can be argued that Scientology is no worse/as bad as any other religion. I'd say it's worse from a user perspective just because it's so incredibly (purposefully) impenetrable. Whilst the Catholics have cleaned up their act a bit over the past few centuries (in the developed world at least) at least you knew where you stood. I don't think it's quite so easy to buy papal indulgences these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Later on, when he regained control of Dianetics, he folded that system back into the larger body of Scientology but kept the mysticism and mythology, presumably because it was useful. Hubbard appeared to fervently believe in his system of Dianetics; whether or not he actually believed any of Scientology's background at the time is anyone's guess, but he and the organisation appeared to come to believe in it later on. It's undoubtedly a religion now, even if the high-ups don't buy any of it.

Del Close, who's a writer I greatly admired, used to hang around with Hubbard in the early days and seemingly had a lot of good to say about him. He appears several times in Close's excellent autobiographical stories in DC's Wasteland comic in the 80s, including a story related to the transition from Dianetics to Scientology. That comic really needs collecting into a book.

I've got Dianetics, naturally, great big exploding volcano on the cover, and somewhere I've got some lavishly bound Scientology books that I found on the cheap in a local second-hand shop. They were pretty interesting and no less demented than the other stuff I was reading at the time, which is to say pretty demented as it put Hubbard in the company of Austin Osman Spare and assorted Psychic TV pamphlets. But all the stuff about engrams, that was worth a read, and I've also got a fair amount written by William Burroughs on Scientology, he had a few encounters with it. I'd be a madman to adopt it as a faith, but I could say the same about any number of genuine religions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why I like the band Tool...

In May of 1993, Tool was scheduled to play the Garden Pavilion in Hollywood. The band learned at the last minute that the Garden Pavilion belonged to L. Ron Hubbard's Church of Scientology, which "betrays the band's ethics about how a person should not follow a belief system that constricts their development as a human being."[14] Maynard recalled that he "spent most of the show baa-ing like a sheep at the audience."[19]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or actually gives it more credibility than it deserves and removes it from the scrutiny, accountability and legal requirements of retailers and medical practitioners.

Which is exactly what's wrong with religion if that's the case.

If the Pope said that condoms were evil and was judged by the same yardstick as a therapist rather than under the guise of religion he'd lose his job and probably go to jail.

I think the pope has just a little more influence than a therapist, plus it was estimated that that comment cost 1000s of people their lives in African countries. Why wasn't he arrested and lose his job? Well, his job is as decendent of a disciple, appointed by God himself and he's the head of his own country, the entire population of which follow him very faithfully. Religiously in fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the pope has just a little more influence than a therapist

And yet he's answerable to no one but an invisible omnipotent deity.

it was estimated that that comment cost 1000s of people their lives in African countries. Why wasn't he arrested and lose his job? Well, his job is as decendent of a disciple, appointed by God himself and he's the head of his own country, the entire population of which follow him very faithfully. Religiously in fact.

Which is why we shouldn't go round venerating modern day cults like Scientology as new religions. Enough trouble in the world with the divine infallibility goons we already have.

Christianity basically started as a Jewish personality cult and the historical lineage of the Papacy is about as watertight as the Titanic.

Better to debunk myths than to build new ones, especially ones as transparently harmful as Scientology that we can actually do something about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is why we shouldn't go round venerating modern day cults like Scientology as new religions.

Defining something as a religion doesn't mean you're venerating it. Scientology is build on a bizarre and palpably ludicrous fantasy, which is one of the things it has in common with Roman Catholicism. But thanks to the weight of time and accumulation of power, people are more inclined to agree or recognise that Scientology is a house built on a foundation of bollocks. Nobody trusts cults except their true believers, so there's no long-term benefit in defining Scientology as a cult. Allow it to be a religion and you can maybe - maybe - get some people to think about religion in general in relation to what they can clearly identify as crazy, surreal claims passed off as the gospel truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bloody hell, that Tommy bloke needs to take a long hard look at himself and wonder why the show isn't objective. If the BBC aren't given access and the only people they can actually openly talk to are the critics, then you're only going to get one view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.