Well actually, Scientology is one of the most dangerous sects existing and in fact there are several human beings being killed by or through Scientology. Above all, you just have to take a look at their rules about medicine (they do not even allow blood transfusions or cesarean sections) or their relation to food and eating habits. As a matter of fact a transfusion can save your live, and if you are a member of Scientology you are not allowed to get a transfusion because they believe that someone's blood (if he or she is not a member of the cult) is abominable and contaminates your body.
Along everything else, the cult with Scientology is definitely weird and dangerous, even because of what they believe in, it is completely ridiculous. And as a matter of fact there are a lot of people that had to face early death because of this sect.

st.louis:

I have never heard that Scientology doesn't allow blood transfusion or cesarean sections.

Please cite a specific source for such information.

I thought it was the Jehova's Witnesees that didn't allow blood transfusions?

Scientology has an irrational fear/hatred of psychiatrists, and any mental health help for it's members. Therefore many Scientologists have committed suicide or had psychotic episodes that would not have occured had they had the proper treatment.

Scientology also has a long history of 'removing' critics through whatever means possible as part of their 'fair game' doctrine.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/04/2009 08:51PM by Emma C.

Quote
Oerlikon

Quote
eaglecage
I haven't yet read the new information you have given me, Oerlikon, nor have I read all of the older information either. But I know enough to know that Scientology is a crock as well as being dangerous. It would not surprise me if they put hits out on people.

However, I am not sure what you want me to do, other than read more information.

What is it that you think I should do?

--eaglecage

To what end? That depends on what your goal is.

Friend, I do not want you to do anything per se. I am also not going to presume to tell you what you "should" do or what you "ought" to do, as this kind of terminology puts my standards of thought within a kind of ethical framework and prescribes behavior for you, as based on those standards of mine.

Cultic standards and beliefs often continue to influence behavior in the form of such should, ought to, must, or have to statements or ideas.

The emotional consequence of such "should" and "ought" statements is guilt, and the result is feeling pressured and resentful.

I am here neither to pressure anybody into anything, nor to proscribe nor prescribe any kind of behavior or attitude on your part.

Those links I posted above are for the benefit of all reading these boards, including yourself.

However, I do encourage you, if you are seriously interested in these matters relating to cults, abusive and controlling groups and relationships, NRMs, and related matters, to educate and inform yourself about the issues surrounding them, by reading as you possibly can about them and, if you feel comfortable doing so, even meeting and speaking with present and former members of such groups.

The recommended reading list here is a good place to start.

[www.culteducation.com]

Sorry for taking a while to respond. I was away. Oerlikon, my goal is not to destroy Scientology, or even to find out more about it. My opinion of it is that it is completely absurd, and dangerous as well.

Due to my past experiences, I am interested in matters relating to cults, abuse, and many things such as these.

But it's not the cults that really bother me. It's the churches that appear to be normal and yet are abusive and controlling that I feel are the real problem. I suppose that maybe more people are hurt by cults as compared to regular churches....but without knowing actual statistics, the reverse may be true. Seemingly normal churches can hurt people too.

For example, there are cults which sexually abuse children as a matter of their normative practice and theology. Even so, there is probably more (overall) sexual abuse going on in normal Catholic and Protestant churches than in cults.

--eaglecage

eaglecage:

The topic of this thread is Scientology.

Please stay on topic.

Also, as you say, there are cults that specifically teach what amounts to abuse through their theology.

This is quite different than churches that include abusive clergy.

There is a section at this Web site about "Clergy Abuse."

See [www.culteducation.com]

But that is a different topic.

Again, start another thread, if you wish to discuss another topic.

If you want to understand Scientology and the man who created it, then I recommend highly that you read A Piece of Blue Sky by Atack.

From said book:

[www.xenu.net]

Certain tenets are essential to Scientology. The first is the assumption that Man is basically good (although this does not extend to critics of Scientology, even those who helped to create and sustain the movement. Those who criticize Scientology are irrevocably evil). Scientology aims to raise the Emotional Tone Level of the individual to Enthusiasm and beyond. Scientologists believe that any problem, whether physical or mental, exists because there is some distortion in their perception of it (the lie or "alter-is-ness" which brings about persistence). They are positive thinkers, believing that their "postulates" will come true, and seeing their failures in life as simply failures to postulate with sufficient conviction. To paraphrase Hubbard: considerations are senior to the mechanics of matter, energy, space and time. So the Scientologist sees all problems, including his own, as essentially mental, and self-generated. Scientologists have an optimistic persistence, allied to acute gullibility. OTs have died of cancer believing they could postulate it away, avoiding proper medical action.

Quote
Oerlikon

Quote
eaglecage
I haven't yet read the new information you have given me, Oerlikon, nor have I read all of the older information either. But I know enough to know that Scientology is a crock as well as being dangerous. It would not surprise me if they put hits out on people.

However, I am not sure what you want me to do, other than read more information.

What is it that you think I should do?

--eaglecage

To what end? That depends on what your goal is.

Friend, I do not want you to do anything per se. I am also not going to presume to tell you what you "should" do or what you "ought" to do, as this kind of terminology puts my standards of thought within a kind of ethical framework and prescribes behavior for you, as based on those standards of mine.

Cultic standards and beliefs often continue to influence behavior in the form of such should, ought to, must, or have to statements or ideas.

The emotional consequence of such "should" and "ought" statements is guilt, and the result is feeling pressured and resentful.

I am here neither to pressure anybody into anything, nor to proscribe nor prescribe any kind of behavior or attitude on your part.

Those links I posted above are for the benefit of all reading these boards, including yourself.

However, I do encourage you, if you are seriously interested in these matters relating to cults, abusive and controlling groups and relationships, NRMs, and related matters, to educate and inform yourself about the issues surrounding them, by reading as you possibly can about them and, if you feel comfortable doing so, even meeting and speaking with present and former members of such groups.

The recommended reading list here is a good place to start.

[www.culteducation.com]

I would this is good advice about the "shoulds" and "oughts", but perhaps don't take it too far. Should is a common word used in every day language and every day people can use it light way to suggest their opinion. I personally don't think it best to assume every time "should" or "ought" is used that the person is trying to guilt or brainwash you. Use of such words is common due to social conditioning as there are things society thinks you "shouldn't do". Such as you shouldn't murder other people and you shouldn't drink and drive.

You don't need to treat every use of such words with paranoia.

On topic about scientology, I have not seen anything healthy come from participation in such groups. What's worse than the way they treat members and ex-members but those who challenge the "church" of scientology. They abuse the legal system, they harrass, they undoubtably kill, and do whatever they can destroy dissent. They will bring up false legal allegations (I want to say I recall a story from like Arizona where scientology members created flase allegations of child abuse against someone who stood up against them) and will try to sue you into the ground. They will spend any amount of money to drive you bankrupt.

Education is always a great tool, but scientology is one of those things that just educating people won't be enough to stop it. However to take on scientology almost requires a commitment of "total war" against them because they most certainly use the same doctrine. If you really want to read up on something interesting read up on the battle between anonymous and scientology.

APA Learns to Deal with Scientology Campaign Against Psychiatry

[www.medpagetoday.com]

"In this exclusive *MedPage Today* video report, APA President NadaStotland, M.D., explains what it's like for a medical society that has, as she put it, its own dedicated hate group -- the impact on practicing psychiatrists, and how the group has responded."

The trial against Scientology -- on charges of fraud, of course -- is set tobegin:

[cli.gs]

Whenever the cult runs into a problem, it advertises the fact by flooding press release services -- many of which find their output picked up byGoogle News -- with, well, press releases in which the quacks pat themselves on the back for this, that, or the other thing. It's virtually the only positive press they get.

Since Scientology is 'recycling' its press releases, some of the cult's critics are joining the fun:

[cli.gs]

The result looks like this:[news.google.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/25/2009 07:50AM by Oerlikon.

Quote
Oerlikon
The trial against Scientology -- on charges of fraud, of course -- is set to begin:

[cli.gs]

Whenever the cult runs into a problem, it advertises the fact by flooding press release services -- many of which find their output picked up byGoogle News -- with, well, press releases in which the quacks pat themselves on the back for this, that, or the other thing. It's virtually the only positive press they get.

Since Scientology is 'recycling' its press releases, some of the cult's critics are joining the fun:

[cli.gs]

The result looks like this:[news.google.com]

I just saw the press releases and the news on Google News. I saw a story on the trial against Scientology, on the front page of CNN. It must be a big enough deal, to get on the front page like that. Even more so, because the trial is in France, and CNN stories rarely report on foreign justice, unless America is involved (or unless the Middle East is involved).

It's good to know that there must be some Scientology haters at CNN.

I was reading more at Google News (with the link Oerlikon provided) and there was scary stuff about religious cults infiltrating the United Nations, and also a piece on Scientology helping out people in Uganda.

A lot of groups appear to do good things, for African children, or saving the planet in some way, but it's just a front. Their corruption is hidden within.

I agree with poster Samael that it isn't enough just to be educated about Scientology. But neither can I commit to total war. Scientology is not something that has great personal relevance to me, but I do care enough such that, if I were in a position at CNN to put a story on the front page, I would definitely do that.

--eaglecage