I'm a Scientologist

[Nadir]

I didn't try to counter your point when you first made it, as I can easily see where you stand on this subject and I believed it was useless to try and talk my point through with you. You were out-right rude to me when I tried to talk to you in private and I have no desire to play it out again in public, but seeing as you took the time to say this twice in one thread, I'll give you the attention you want. For my part I will attempt a mature debate, I hope you do me the same courtesy this time round.

You believe that's tolerance, fine.

I do not see it as such.

Saying that when I defend minority religions against this sort of slander widens the cultural divide or heightens the barrier (you were mixing two metaphors) is, honestly, condescending and rude. As I have stated - I am a member of a minority religion. For me, spiritual beliefs are deeply personal, beyond body and mind. It is not something that should be laughed at or mocked. I feel intensely uncomfortable when asked to talk about it with someone I do not know.

To have someone say 'Oh, you should be able to laugh at crude jokes we make towards your lifestyle' is arrogant and seriously rubs me the wrong way. I have had people tell me I am too sensitive about my sexuality, my intelligence, my friends, my happiness when they are mocked. I see it as an attack - because that's what it is. I am not a secure person. All my life I have been told I am stupid, and I have to follow where others lead, keep my head down and not bite back. It has taken a lot - and I mean A LOT - of shit to make me dig in my heels and say no more.

These sorts of 'jokes' are effectively bullying. These people have found something that makes them happy. GOOD FOR THEM. Why people feel the need to mock them for it is disgusting. I want nothing to do with them. Happiness is so hard to find - and I'm talking more than the brief laughs you get from trying to desecrate another's joy.

I will protect my right to be happy, and anyone else's for that matter. This has nothing to do with Scientology to me and everything to do with minorities being attacked for having something that is difficult to get and harder to hang on to - mainly because of 'humour' like this.           

[Nadir]

Tolerance is not about being able to laugh about all things equally. It is also about being able to respect other people's feelings in regards to what they believe. You can be funny with out being disrespectful regardless if you think that what the other person believes is nonsense.

A cult is a religious group that centers power around one individual. I have never heard of one person controlling Scientology. Cults are generally hard to leave, being reinforced by fear. To keep control of the believers the Cults are generally grouped in one area or have several groups in many areas. Scientology has world wide followers who can choose to stop believing in Scientology when ever they choose... that is not a cult.

I have avoided this thread because discussing religion with people not of my faith has generally given me a headache or worse. I am pagan. I have had to deal with being told by my Christian parents I was going to hell... to my face. Yet I will gladly tell anyone I am happy my mother is Christian because it helps her... and I don't believe in Christianity.

this is a copy of my favorite poem written during world war 2. It signifies how important it is to protect the rights for others to believe differently than you do and to give them respect even if they believe differently from you.

First they came for the Communists,
  and I didn’t speak up,
    because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
  and I didn’t speak up,
    because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
  and I didn’t speak up,
    because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
  and by that time there was no one
    left to speak up for me.

by Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945

I watched that video in the first post of this thread. I am not a Scientologist and I didn't laugh. I found it to be not only disrespectful but offensive and not in the least funny. Though people have a right to say what they want, I really don't think it belongs here.

(edits because i really hate when i misspell or misstype words)

I love you. Seriously. I don't know you, but this was exactly what I've been trying to say. *hugs*

[GothicFires]

you're welcome *hugs*

[Jude]

You're comparing poking fun at Scientologists to what happened during Nazi Germany... really?  Godwin's law anyone?

[Nadir]

You've already said that.

[GothicFires]

i am having a difficult time trying to figure out a response that does not go outside the grounds of respectful discussion.

You're comparing poking fun at Scientologists to what happened during Nazi Germany... really?  Godwin's law anyone?

This comment either 1. shows no purpose in inputting intelligent and forwarding thought into the discussion at hand or 2. how obsessed you are with Godwin's law that you cannot see how poking fun at Scientologists relates to what happened in Nazi Germany

When you allow people to disrespect and hurt others with out standing up for them, even though you don't agree with their beliefs then you are the same as those who did the disrespect and hurting

So yes it fits

[Jude]

To be truthful I forgot my previous comments.  I'm amazed that twice on one post people have made nazi comparisons.

I'm rather surprised you can't tell the difference between respect and removing someone's ability to be something.  I'd never tell anyone they couldn't be a scientologist, or take away their rights for it.  But I will reserve the right to laugh at them.

It's pretty dangerous to go down the path of "you must accept all religions at face value and treat them with respect."  Some are not worthy of respect and/or are dangerous.  i.e. cults.

[GothicFires]

I didn't make a Nazi comparison... i used a poem written during the Nazi occupation that was about the Nazi's destroying people because they believed differently than they did. You are the one who called it a Nazi comparison... Perhaps you see a correlation?

You do not have to agree with what someone else does but as long as they are not breaking laws you SHOULD show respect for them because that his what, hopefully, you want people do for you.

It is easy to defend a joke that is not close to your heart. You are agnostic there is no loss for you to see jokes about religion which really makes me question why you are even in this conversation. What if we changed the joke to be about something you really cared about...

or what if someone said 'people who write adult material and role play on line are not worth of respect and/or dangerous' just because they do not agree with what they are doing and what they believe in so lets shut them down or make fun of them'

If a cult is not harming anyone then they should be left alone. I don't know why you are singling them out when there are many people in mainstream religions hurting others.

Religion, children, people with natural illness or disabilities should all left out of jokes.

[Jude]

More than anything I'm a skeptic, so I can see the flaws in my own beliefs.  I see the humor even in the things I do.  There is literally nothing anyone could mock that I would think of as "out of bounds."  I think trying to control the actions of other people because you're too insecure in your beliefs to allow them to be openly criticized is a small tyranny.

Opinions should never be silenced.  That's my opinion.

[GothicFires]

i'm not insecure about anything. Mockery is not criticism and tyranny is hurting other people by what you say and adding to their insecurity and affecting their rights to live and believe as they do.

So you are not sensitive to a persons religious beliefs, but that does not mean that other people aren't. If i must spell it out for you

Religious beliefs are not what we are defending... how you treat other people IS what we are defending.

[Kurzyk]

I have no organized religion or group I'm a part of. I have my own individual belief system.

This is my choice. Getting bogged down into the semantic differences of what is 'cult', what is 'religion' is meaningless to me.

Some people need community, some walk alone. Some need traditional or "popular" communities as was mentioned earlier in the thread, while others look for un-traditional and un orthodox. And as I mentioned, some are eclectic and just walk alone. Bottom line is, none of us have the answer, and there is no more or less truth in contemporary religion and/or cults than in myself.

However, in traveling the world, showing respect for other groups, whether they are text book religions, cults, or culture, is vital as we're all struggling to answer the fundamental questions.

Am I saying not to find humor in it? No. I don't believe that life should be taken seriously and questioning reality, culture and belief systems is something I feel is very important. But save the giggles for behind closed doors out of respect, for what you're laughing about brings hope and guidance to someone else.

As a note, I do respect those that publically publish intelligent pieces of critiscm and even some comedians for their comical pokes at the human race. I feel that's helpful on some level. But even that role has to come with a sense of responsibility. For simply spitting on people for their beliefs does not serve to support humanity's growth, but to undermine it.

[Serephino]

More than anything I'm a skeptic, so I can see the flaws in my own beliefs.  I see the humor even in the things I do.  There is literally nothing anyone could mock that I would think of as "out of bounds."  I think trying to control the actions of other people because you're too insecure in your beliefs to allow them to be openly criticized is a small tyranny.
Opinions should never be silenced.  That's my opinion.

So... if I were to say you're an idiot for being agnostic, and a pervert for writing adult material, that wouldn't upset you at all?

I have to agree with GothicFires and Eden here.  Making a mockery out of someone's belief system isn't tolerance, it's ignorance.  Do I think Scientology beliefs are kind of out there?  Yes.  It scares me frankly, but I don't have to believe in it.  Those that do have chosen to do so.  They have that right, and as long as they aren't hurting anyone it isn't my business.  I just roll my eyes and walk away. 

[Oniya]

The problems with any religion really tend to occur not with what you* believe, but with what you* want to make me* believe.

Just as you* have every right to swing your* arm, until it impacts my* nose.


*You, me and the associated possessives are used in the generic sense, and are not intended to refer to any specific person.  If you specifically feel that they are meant to refer to you or me, you are specifically wrong.

[Jude]

So... if I were to say you're an idiot for being agnostic, and a pervert for writing adult material, that wouldn't upset you at all?

I have to agree with GothicFires and Eden here.  Making a mockery out of someone's belief system isn't tolerance, it's ignorance.  Do I think Scientology beliefs are kind of out there?  Yes.  It scares me frankly, but I don't have to believe in it.  Those that do have chosen to do so.  They have that right, and as long as they aren't hurting anyone it isn't my business.  I just roll my eyes and walk away. 

Well, no, you have to know a fair amount to parody, so I wouldn't say ignorance really fits.

As for the rest, I'm OK enough with myself and my beliefs to not care what strangers think of how I feel about the world.

[Rhapsody]

A cult is a religious group that centers power around one individual. I have never heard of one person controlling Scientology.

Obviously, you've never heard of L. Ron Hubbard or David Miscavige. 

Cults are generally hard to leave, being reinforced by fear. To keep control of the believers the Cults are generally grouped in one area or have several groups in many areas. Scientology has world wide followers who can choose to stop believing in Scientology when ever they choose... that is not a cult.

Except for the fact that Scientology can sue you, can seek to ruin you, file frivolous and malicious lawsuits against you... Don't believe me? 

"In 1976, the Church was found legally liable for the malicious prosecution of an ex-Scientologist named L. Gene Allard who left Scientology in 1969 and was then charged with grand theft."

"In Operation Freakout, the Church of Scientology attempted to eliminate journalist and writer Paulette Cooper via having her imprisoned, killing her or pushing her to commit suicide, or having her committed to a mental institution as revenge for her publication in 1971 of a highly critical book, The Scandal of Scientology."

"In a long and contentious trial, Lawrence Wollersheim, a former Scientologist, alleged that he had been harassed and his business nearly destroyed as a result of "fair game" measures. During appeals, the Church again claimed "Fair Game" was a "core practice" of Scientology and was thus constitutionally protected "religious expression"."

"In the March 11-16, 1981, Danish court case of Jakob Anderson vs The Church Of Scientology of Denmark, ex-Guardian's Office operative Vibeke Dammon testified[25] that the Church did in fact practice Fair Game and had done so in Anderson's case, in an attempt to get Anderson committed to a psychiatric hospital."

That's from 30 seconds of skimming on the Court cases involving "Fair Game" wiki page.  Do some research; for many, it's far harder to leave Scientology than it is to join.  They take your money, they force you to write potentially damaging confessions of sins.  They can cut you off from your family and friends.  Sea Org in the 70s could demand that you have abortions, because Sea Org persons were not permitted to have children...

It's a cult, and there are many countries worldwide that denounce them as such.

[GothicFires]

I am not going to debate the cult standing of Scientology. We have a difference of opinion and they are going to stay different.

However I will stand beside a person's right to be able choose their religion with out fear of persecution and ridicule.

Scientology is not the only religion with its issues. If anyone has a problem with a religion it should be discussed with respect to all persons participating in that discussion. The method used in this video is unacceptable. The video is not funny and to accept it in this avenue opens the door to that type of behavior not only against other religions but other subject matter. I am wondering how fast this thread would have been closed if the video was a parody of gays or transsexual people.

Its not about disagreeing with how someone believes or if Scientology is even actually a religion. Its about respect due to your fellow man simply because they are human just like you are. Please note I do not use the word 'you' to single out any specific individual that has posted in this tread.

Having the freedom of speech does not alleviate a person from the responsibility of using that freedom wisely and respectfully. I think that if a discussion about the validly of Scientology continues it should probably be done in another thread so the points that people make don't get lost in the issue that some of us found the video distasteful in its method.

[Jude]

I was avoiding making a serious post, but screw it.

First of all, this idea that making fun of a religion will eventually lead to serious persecution (using the holocaust example you did in the poem) is a nice example of the slippery slope logical fallacy.  There's is nothing guaranteeing, or even suggesting, that you can't make fun of a group of people without taking away their rights and doing them harm.  Making fun of their beliefs does not always lead to lead to taking away people's rights (which I can agree is bad).

Furthermore this idea that mocking someone on the basis of their religion is the same as mocking them on the basis of their sexual orientation is a false comparison.  Religious choices are in no way comparable to biological conditions.  First of all, there's the choice aspect that makes them different.  You're choosing that religion, whereas someone is stuck with a particular biological predisposition.  But more importantly religious choices are always conflicting.  Your view of spirituality is in direct opposition to others' takes on religion.  If you're right, others are wrong; homosexuals never claim that you should be gay (and if they did, they too would be open to ridicule).

I agree that people should, unless a reason presents itself otherwise, be treated with a certain degree of dignity and respect.  But your ideas aren't a part of you.  In fact attaching yourself onto an idea to the point that you become hostile or "offended" at mockery is a great sign of close mindedness.  Religious ideology is simply a guess at truth, if you can laugh at someone for still believing the earth is flat, why can't you laugh at them for believing anything else?

And if you're so sure that you're right, why do you care what other people think?  Sure you might not like someone because they poke fun at what you believe, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't do it.  Controlling the actions of others is a serious thing, I find it absolutely ridiculous when people place the "offense card" in an attempt to silence opposition.  It's completely contrary to the idea of freedom of speech and the marketplace of ideas, which are the two most important concepts Democracies are based upon.

You pay lip service to freedom of speech, then at the same time affirm you don't actually believe in it.  Ideas, even insulting and mockery, should be allowed to compete.  You can naturally discourage people's behavior by showing that whatever has occurred bothered you, but when you start telling people what they "should" do, that's oppression of expression and ideas.  And those're two things I'll never really stand for without an argument.

[GothicFires]

you mean you were participating in this conversation the entire time with out being serious about it?

the point about the poem is not about the holocaust as you seem to be hung up on. It is about a person being regretful that he did not stand up for others because they were not only of a different faith, but a different way of life than he was... that is the point.

Making fun of other's beliefs may not always lead to the taking away of people's rights, but it is very likely to hurt their feelings and certainly, most assuredly with out a doubt make the person who is ridiculing the other person look like a jerk.

making fun of someone based on religion or sexual orientation or the way they look or the way they speak or where they live... the list can go on and on... is not a false comparison... they are all hurtful... and they are all WRONG

As for as my view on spirituality... and for many others (backed up by Eden in this thread)... I don't view other religions as wrong even if I don't believe in them. I have already stated that I am happy my mother is Christan though I do not believe in Christianity  (in case you missed or forgot that post). So your reasoning that others not believing the same way you do makes one of you wrong is not correct. And not all religions claim that you should be of their religion or even have a religion. Not that I can remember the name of it, but I watched a news cast on one religion in Iraq that does not accept converts... you have to be born into it. So that argument cannot apply to religion as a whole.   

and how can you say that your idea's aren't a part of you... if your brain didn't function with ideas you would be a vegetable in a hospital ward. Your ideas are what leads your actions. They are what defines you and makes you who you are.

I would never make fun of a person who believes the world is flat. I'm not that mean. I would show them the scientific evidence that we have that the world is not flat. Besides, speaking of false comparisons... there is tangible evidence that the world is not flat (the world itself) there is no definitive proof that any one religion is absolute.

Again you seem to ignore what is written. I do not think that people should not be able to speak against Scientology, or anything of that matter. If you don't like it by all means say so. But if a person is going to be a jerk in the manner in which they use that speech... then yes I am going to stand up and say that it is unacceptable.

why would anyone want people to think they are a jerk anyway? My problem is not the subject matter. but the way it was presented.

[Kurzyk]

Ideas, even insulting and mockery, should be allowed to compete.  You can naturally discourage people's behavior by showing that whatever has occurred bothered you, but when you start telling people what they "should" do, that's oppression of expression and ideas.  And those're two things I'll never really stand for without an argument.

Intelligent debate and discussion is different than being insulting and mocking. It's treating others with respect and having the humility in understanding that neither you nor them truly has a clue about anything in the larger scheme of things.

[consortium11]

Intelligent debate and discussion is different than being insulting and mocking. It's treating others with respect and having the humility in understanding that neither you nor them truly has a clue about anything in the larger scheme of things.

I wonder where this leaves A Modest Proposal, generally considered one of the great works and an intellectual highpoint of the debate over England's treatment of Ireland... and is entirely based around insulting and mocking its targets.

Likewise, the work of Aristophanes is infamous for being insulting and mocking... but again many of his plays (while completely ineffective at shaping popular opinion), are brilliant satires of the pro-war faction of Athens.

You can throw in 1984 and Animal Farm... both deeply insulting and mocking to those who subscribe to certain political views... and do they not facilitate intelligent debate?

It may well be that mocking and insulting with nothing else behind it aren't good forms of argument... but to dismiss all works that are mocking and insulting out of hand is to rule out great swathes of intelligent pieces on a given subject.

As for as my view on spirituality... and for many others (backed up by Eden in this thread)... I don't view other religions as wrong even if I don't believe in them. I have already stated that I am happy my mother is Christan though I do not believe in Christianity  (in case you missed or forgot that post)

Going off-topic, but isn't there a certain logical fallicy here.

If you yourself are not Christian and do not believe (whether you follow them or not) those ideas/ethos (of whatever sect), then aren't by definition you stating that those ideas are "wrong"? Otherwise you'd believe them...

You can be perfectly happy for someone while believing those ideas are wrong; imagine two very good friends who are on opposite sides of the man-made global warming debate... one may be perfectly happy for the other to believe differently (and may even actually be happy they do if because of their beliefs positive events have happened in their lives), while still thinking the other is wrong.

[Kurzyk]

I wonder where this leaves A Modest Proposal, generally considered one of the great works and an intellectual highpoint of the debate over England's treatment of Ireland... and is entirely based around insulting and mocking its targets.

Likewise, the work of Aristophanes is infamous for being insulting and mocking... but again many of his plays (while completely ineffective at shaping popular opinion), are brilliant satires of the pro-war faction of Athens.

You can throw in 1984 and Animal Farm... both deeply insulting and mocking to those who subscribe to certain political views... and do they not facilitate intelligent debate?

It may well be that mocking and insulting with nothing else behind it aren't good forms of argument... but to dismiss all works that are mocking and insulting out of hand is to rule out great swathes of intelligent pieces on a given subject.

Oh I completely agree with that and support it. Might have been a semantic misunderstanding but you summed up what I was trying to say. :) Intelligent discussion, satire or even mocking can be constructive depending on how its done. But as I said previously there's a responsibility that comes with it and should also have a respect for the general struggle of humanity trying to figure things out.

Just laughing at people without taking the time to build a constructive argument in the proper context and exercise tact can be hurtful and disrespectful.

[GothicFires]

Going off-topic, but isn't there a certain logical fallicy here.

If you yourself are not Christian and do not believe (whether you follow them or not) those ideas/ethos (of whatever sect), then aren't by definition you stating that those ideas are "wrong"? Otherwise you'd believe them...

You can be perfectly happy for someone while believing those ideas are wrong; imagine two very good friends who are on opposite sides of the man-made global warming debate... one may be perfectly happy for the other to believe differently (and may even actually be happy they do if because of their beliefs positive events have happened in their lives), while still thinking the other is wrong.

No there is no fallacy here. I had a problem in my childhood with the christian belief that if you are not christian then you are going to hell. I could not believe that a Tieben monk who wouldn't even kill a cockroach because it was god's creature would be eternally tormented because they were of a christian faith. I looked at how many other religions in the world there was and could not see how all of them where wrong and only one be right. I do not agree with all of the Christian philosophies, nor do I believe in heaven or in hell but I do believe in god and that there are many ways to see god.

So yes I do believe differently from my mother with out believing that she is wrong.

Though I am not familiar with these 'great works' as you have describe above and will admit that i have neither the time nor the inclination to go research them. But a profound discussion and intelligent debate could be accomplished with out insulting or mocking someone. Just because it has been done in the past does not mean that people should use it as a reason to insult or mock someone in the future.

[Oniya]

... I was required to read Animal Farm in high school history.  I read 1984 on my own when the year itself arrived.  Aristophanes is more familiar to those in classical studies, and 'A Modest Proposal' wasn't brought up until I studied British History in college, but the first two are probably more a part of our culture than most realize.

Heard the term 'Doublespeak'?  Or 'Thought Police'?  What about the phrase 'All ___ are equal, but some are more equal than others'?  All three come from George Orwell (the first two from 1984, the latter from Animal Farm).  It is disturbingly ironic that Orwell's works have been removed from Project Gutenberg, but I was able to find the full text saved elsewhere on the web.  The other links above are Gutenberg links.

[PeacethatPowerbrings]

Well I guess there can be a line drawn between helpful satire, and simple mockery. It is one thing to make a satire of religious beliefs, humourously exploring logical inconsistencies or oddities, see Monty Python's Meaning of Life. It encourages people to take humorously illogical, or quirky things about religion or culture, and be able to laugh about them, without simply pointing out something, and saying...."how absurd."

As in 'A Modest Proposal' one can bring to the surface real issues, and we can laugh over our own fallacies, which I believe to be a good thing, however, I believe it is only truly effective when used in a manner of self-examination. As in Meaning of Life, when the chaplain leads the students in a chant of 'Please don't boil or fry us..." etc, it is funny as a standard joke, simply out of place, but also satirical, in that someone who has experience in that particular church culture would find it a humorously true part of the film.

[Mnemaxa]

Obviously, you've never heard of L. Ron Hubbard or David Miscavige. 

Except for the fact that Scientology can sue you, can seek to ruin you, file frivolous and malicious lawsuits against you... Don't believe me? 

"In 1976, the Church was found legally liable for the malicious prosecution of an ex-Scientologist named L. Gene Allard who left Scientology in 1969 and was then charged with grand theft."

"In Operation Freakout, the Church of Scientology attempted to eliminate journalist and writer Paulette Cooper via having her imprisoned, killing her or pushing her to commit suicide, or having her committed to a mental institution as revenge for her publication in 1971 of a highly critical book, The Scandal of Scientology."

"In a long and contentious trial, Lawrence Wollersheim, a former Scientologist, alleged that he had been harassed and his business nearly destroyed as a result of "fair game" measures. During appeals, the Church again claimed "Fair Game" was a "core practice" of Scientology and was thus constitutionally protected "religious expression"."

"In the March 11-16, 1981, Danish court case of Jakob Anderson vs The Church Of Scientology of Denmark, ex-Guardian's Office operative Vibeke Dammon testified[25] that the Church did in fact practice Fair Game and had done so in Anderson's case, in an attempt to get Anderson committed to a psychiatric hospital."

That's from 30 seconds of skimming on the Court cases involving "Fair Game" wiki page.  Do some research; for many, it's far harder to leave Scientology than it is to join.  They take your money, they force you to write potentially damaging confessions of sins.  They can cut you off from your family and friends.  Sea Org in the 70s could demand that you have abortions, because Sea Org persons were not permitted to have children...

It's a cult, and there are many countries worldwide that denounce them as such.

By those definitions, that would make many groups of Jehova's Witnesses, Mormons, Islamic believers, and Christian churches cults as well.  Note that there is no 'all inclusive' statement there - but there are cases where specific groups of all of these religions have done illegal, terrible things to promote their beliefs including bombing buildings, kidnapping, brainwashing, and other acts that violate human rights. 

But try and make fun of any of those religions in the same manner as this person did with Scientology, everyone and their brother will come down on the perpetrator like a ton of bricks.