Scientology IS a religion

Post Reply New Topic

There is no "true" or "fake" religion, in my opnion they're all BS and manipulate its believers into following them. Including christianity, no actually they're probably one of the most notorious.
But scientology is probably the most f****d up of all religious groups, they are my number one hated (I just dislike the others, except for paganism.)

The world is flat! All of you who think otherwise are just sheeple.

So? Mainstream religions prey on very young children who haven't developed many of their critical faculties and many "faith-based initiatives" have the aim of attracting people in the homeless underclass with a host of psychiatrical problems (like personality-disorders or schizophrenia) to the congregation. As a matter of fact, schizophrenics are some of the most pious out there.

Heck, one could make a case that Jesus - who embodies Christian ideals - was insane.

I don't really get the point of your post. Are you saying it's bad to argue for a given point of view and then ask others if they're persuaded - giving them an exhaustive listing of all alternatives?

Mmm interesting ideology Master_Pedant. I dislike most religions as I agree that they are only succesful due to the fact that they sway peoples' philosophies of existance, etc, but I hate Scientology as they are an actual threat to the safety of people.

Various Christian extremists and (in centuries in the past) mainstream followers have threatened the safety of people. Up until recently the organization of the Roman Catholic Church threatened young children and adolescents and still spreads misery throughout the developing world due to its stance on contraception. The Roman Catholic Church's vicious socially conservative ideology and influence also hurts the psychosocial well-being of many gay and lesbian people in the world.

Evangelical Christianity is ravaging Sub-Saharan Africa due to it's agreement with Roman Catholicism's doctrine on effective contraceptives. Christianity is fueling with-hunts and giving cover to various vicious civil warriors in Africa - most notoriously the Lord's Resistance Army, which actually captures and indoctrinates Children. And let's not forget the harm it causes when combined with expansionist Islamic fundamentalism at the borders of Saharan and Sub-Saharan Africa.

Let's not forget the physicians and women murdered by anti-abortion extremists in the US, as well.

And let's not forget the countless attrocities power-hungry Christian establishments and factions have on their rap sheet.

True, there's a lot of good works the various competing "Christianities" have accomplished, but there's also a lot of bad. Will there be a net "goodness to the world" after you subtract off all the various Christianities vices from their good deeds? Perhaps. But rest assured, Scientology will NEVER have a rap sheet as bad a the various branches of Christianity have. Will the "good deeds sheet" be as good as Christianities? Probably not, but with less depravity in the world springing from Scientology than Christianity throughout the history, it doesn't need to redeem itself as much.

Damn, and I thought I disliked religion a lot... clearly I am just a rookie when it comes to criticizing various religious groups.
And yea, I definitely despise many religions' dislike for gays and lesbians. I see nothing wrong with gays and lesbians, and I definitely see nothing wrong with a woman's right to choose.

The reason I dislike religion is because one of my family members is strongly religious, and she said I can cure Asperger's Syndrome and its' related comorbid psychiatric conditions by praying to God - it never worked. The only thing that worked for me for my various conditions, particularly OCD and Panic Disorder is medical science, more specifically Zoloft.

Now that I feel much more mentally healthy, I am proceeding with majoring in biology and physics, and I am realizing, as my scientific knowledge increases, that the existance of God is very unlikely. Since when can blue sky and clouds take on the complex functions of a central nervous system while having the power to create the universe? It just seems silly...

Hopefully I don't offend some people in here that are religious...

A religion is a cult that has outlived its founder.

ruveyn

As a Christian I personally don't have anything against homosexual. I certainly would not support same-sex marriage; but that has more to do with my view on the family unit being central to society.



I have an issue with abortion because a woman's right to choose does not surpass a child's right to live. Though this does not have a good deal to do with my religious beliefs. It has more to do with the fact that science has no consensus on what actually makes us sentient and at what point this occurs in our development and therefor setting legal definitions that don't fit the science is inconsistent.



The position held by this person is silly and certainly does not fit with any view of Christianity that I hold. I would say you have a fantastic case for disliking that persons opinion but I am not sure what about her view makes me as a religious person somehow worth of the same disdain.



I am not sure I understand the logic of this position. I will however accept that you probably have a more complicated reason than this for believing the existence of God is unlikely. When I was an atheist I would have agreed with you but I can say with personal certainty that this not the case and that God does indeed exist.

As a disclaimer, I am not attempting to provoke a flame war on these subjects, I simply felt the need to put forward my own opinion.

That's your opinion, I have to respect it. Like I said, I am not trying to offend any religious people who use this site. I am glad that I'm not being outright bashed for my opinion, as has occured in the past. Thanks for being respectful.

Oh yea, perhaps I should be more specific in my criticisms. I am criticizing extremists like Carl Paladino and Christine O'Donnell. Perhaps my mistake is that I am applying this criticism to many religious people, although the problem is that the family member is a lot like these extremists. Luckily the family member is a continent away.

that made me Lol

How does selectively worrying about same-sex marriage undermining the family unit while ignoring the much larger threats (as same-sex marriage really doesn't break down existing family units or even prevent the development of new families - see artificial insemination or same-sex couples adopting ) of the legalization of divorce or childless couples indicate anything other than homophobia? In fact, the fear that gays and lesbians being free to marry will somehow destroy the family unit can only be unrealistic fear-induced prejudice.



It's developed far enough to tell us that zygotes don't have functional brains.



Historically and scripturally, Christianity has adopted the "demon-possessed soul" model of poor mental health much more than the "neurological dysfunction" model prefered by physicalistic neuroscience. Scripturally, those fanatics have much more credibility then you.

Master Pendant

DW and I went about sharing our views in a manner that was respectful other the others opinion. The matter in my view was closed with his response. You have now taken it upon yourself to attack my position in a way manner far beyond the spirit that DW I had set for our own exchange. I for one acknowledged that he probably had more reasons than those listed for his position. You have not extended me the same courtesy and have now attacked my position, I assume that it is because you want me to respond so that we can have an argument.

Why would you assume that my position on same-sex marriage would be my exclusive worry in relation to the family unit? I made no such claim. Personally, I believe that society has fundamentally undermined the place of the family in modern society and yes I do have an issue with the number of divorces that take place. The reason I have a problem with same-sex marriage is because its on the agenda for making the problem worse.

It was also very interesting to me that you bought up the issue of same-sex adoption and access to artificial insemination. You have done my argument a great service here. Usually social progressives who advocate same-sex marriage tend to separate the issues out, despite my best efforts to combine them. There is no scientific consensus on whether same-sex couples provide an equal capability to raise children so once again society places the needs of adults ahead of those of the children.



I love your choice of language there, especially the word 'zygotes', its very telling. This is the sort of sophistry you get when you want to justify killing. In order to kill one must first dehumanize 'its not human its a zygote'. We all know what government it was that killed people using similar logic. Your argument also does not make any case however as to the legal definition of life, which is clearly set much later on.

What is true in the case of a zygote is that you still have to stop it developing into a functioning member of society. Your action must take the potential of that child away.

This all goes towards my world-view that children are disposed of in the womb and second class priorities in life; with truly catastrophic consequences.

It's great that you guys can discuss your differences, and I feel privileged that I could throw in my opinion without being attacked (as has happened in the past on YouTube), but please don't let it come to an argument. Whether one believes in God and follows some or all of the rules correlated with various religions for moral reasons (e.g. anti vs. pro-abortion) or someone such as myself that denies for the most part the existance of a God as there is difficulty explaining such a presense with regards to the physical sciences, we all have opinions. When it comes to science vs. religion, there will always be a debate, and a difference in opinions such as between myself and 91, and obviously between you guys (91 and Master Pedant).

To put it shortly, this isn't the YouTube comments section. Lets keep some composure here, even if we all clearly have different opinions regarding religion and science.

Scientology is the bridge between psychology and religion. Not exactly the good kind of bridge, though. More like the kind an invading army would set up to crush their enemies more effectively. Their attacks on legitimate scientific study of the workings of the mind both in the abstract (psychology) and the concrete (psychopharmacology) can easily end up forming the basis for a much larger attack of religion against psychology.