[www.religioustolerance.org]

What is up with this site?
They give Children Of Love a clean bill!
[www.religioustolerance.org]

Who is running this website, does anyone know?

I have no idea who's running it, but they give a LOT of organizations a clean bill:

Quote

The main faith groups which have been unjustly targeted by the ACM, CCM and oppressive governments are listed below. Please note that these are well-established new religious movements and not dangerous, doomsday cults.
The Brethren
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons)
Christian Science
Church of Scientology
Eckankar
Falun Gong/Falun Dafa
The Family, formerly called The Children of God
The "Garbage Eaters": common derogatory name for The Brethren
Hare Krishna - ISKCON
Jehovah's Witnesses
Neo-Paganism
New Age
Santeria 
Satanism
Unification Church
Vodun (Voodoo)
The Way
Wicca

Chacun a son gout.

Quote
Cosmophilospher
http://www.religioustolerance.org/

What is up with this site?
They give Children Of Love a clean bill!
[www.religioustolerance.org]

Who is running this website, does anyone know?

It is run by Scientology.

Scientology does not run the Web site cited.

Actually, the site is run by a group that calls itself the "Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance," which includes a "Wiccan/Neo Pagan," "Unitarian" and "Christian" according to their bio.

See [www.religioustolerance.org]

None is a recognized expert regarding cults or "new relgiouos movements," a scholar or formerly trained in religious studies.

The group essentially expresses its opinions through various papers its members have written and posted through the Internet.

The group that runs this Web site has repeatedly aligned itself ideologically with academics often called "cult apologists" and you will note the names of "cult apologists" such as Jeffrey Hadden, Gordon Melton, Anson Shupe and others throughout their Web site and footnotes.

For more information about cult apologists...

See [www.culteducation.com]

The "Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance" site is biased to a point of view and often defends groups called "cults," frequently ignoring their history of destructive behavior supposedly in the name of "religious tolerance."

I would not regard the site as either an objective or meaningful source of information.

I have noticed there are more and more sites of this nature, that give tacit approval, and do not report ANY problems with dangerous groups.
For example, here is their Scientology page, where they do not mention the TIME article, or anything else from what I can see, other than Scientology has been persecuted.
[www.religioustolerance.org]

They also claim here that CAN is run by a "multi-faith group", when I thought CAN was now run by Scientologists?
[www.religioustolerance.org]


I think some of these types of sites are front groups for various cults, and this is a way they believe they can counterbalance all of the legit criticism on the web.
Its a good strategy for them, actually.
Get a bunch of biased sites that look like they are run by objective 3rd parties, and then use these as a weapon against your critics.
[www.religioustolerance.org]

[www.chaplaincare.navy.mil]

Here you have an official US Gov't website, which has reprinted the uncritical and biased info from ReligiousTolerance.org written by their main guy B.A. Robinson.

I am highly suspicious of the motivations of B.A. Robinson.



[www.religioustolerance.org]
[www.religioustolerance.org]

Also, look at the way they selectively choose alleged "crazed comments" from people (which seem to be very similar, and could have been written by them), and put them against obviously scripted positive comments about their site. This is pure manipulation.
What they have done is to try and paint those who criticize cults as being full of HATE, and those who are "opened minded" as being the enlightened ones.
This is yet another tactic to try and soften up the minds of people who are still undecided. Send them to sites like that, tell them to keep an "open mind", and take it from there.

I cannot find ANY information on that site about Critical Thinking. Quite the opposite. That is an extremely dangerous site. In my view, much more dangerous than flat-out cult promotion sites.

Here is some info posted by a Scientologist on that site.
[www.religioustolerance.org]

Quote
rrmoderator
Scientology does not run the Web site cited.

Actually, the site is run by a group that calls itself the "Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance," which includes a "Wiccan/Neo Pagan," "Unitarian" and "Christian" according to their bio.

See [www.religioustolerance.org]

None is a recognized expert regarding cults or "new relgiouos movements," a scholar or formerly trained in religious studies.

The group essentially expresses its opinions through various papers its members have written and posted through the Internet.

The group that runs this Web site has repeatedly aligned itself ideologically with academics often called "cult apologists" and you will note the names of "cult apologists" such as Jeffrey Hadden, Gordon Melton, Anson Shupe and others throughout their Web site and footnotes.

For more information about cult apologists...

See [www.culteducation.com]

The "Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance" site is biased to a point of view and often defends groups called "cults," frequently ignoring their history of destructive behavior supposedly in the name of "religious tolerance."

I would not regard the site as either an objective or meaningful source of information.

Dear rrmoderator,

Yeah, I would not regard them as an objective or meaningful source of information about THEIR OWN PEDIGREE EITHER.

The fact is, that C.A.N. which is owned by Scientology refers Cult Victims to that site, and that site refers people to C.A.N.. This is the tip off. No Wiccan/Pagan, Unitarian or Christian would support C.A.N.'s unethical acquisition of that organization and it's disreputable activity of being a fox guarding the henhouse. People who value the truth, morality, and ethics do NOT refer others to such places, especially those who may be in spiritual extremis.

religioustolerance.org can say they are not owned by Scientology, the CoS, and dispense any other forked tongue statement like that, because guess what? There is no EVIDENCE or PAPERTRAIL linking them to Scientology like there was with religioustolerance.net. Unfortunately, you have to use your nose sometimes or you are gonna step in something unpleasant.

It is a current tactic of theirs to deny that they are Scientologists when they infiltrate a target group. And they have "clean" networks for this purpose. There are some organizations and countries which will not tolerate numbers of cultists embedded in their judicial system, for example, and it wouldn't do to have their agent's "outed". So they have clean networks with no traceable ties to the organization.

A Scientology Front by any other name is still Scientology. Which, along with numerous other such organizations that have their have roots in the same manure, is in the business of controlling and exploiting as many people as it can get it's raw meat hooks into. Not just for money, too, but to create an unstoppable political movement.


Love,

Os

What I find particularly disturbing about the site is the way it minimizes and/or neglects to mention well-documented sexual and physical abuse of children by such organizations as Children of God and ISKCON.

There doesn't seem to be any bias towards any particular type of religious leaning; the main theme seems to be defense of all cults which have come under public scrutiny for wrongdoings. ( I haven't spent a lot of time there, however. Maybe I missed something.)

The comments from site visitors appears to be a twisted version of RRs Hall of flames. Quite a clever (if not very subtle) attempt to discredit those who are involved in investigating the crimes committed in the name of God.

I'm curious as to the motivation of developers of this site. It's almost as if all the cults got together and pitched in to create this site. Very wierd.

I'm tolerant of religions. It's when religions instill intolerance in people and cause bad patterns of behavior that I take issue.

In the end, I think that all religions are just a band aid for the lack of faith we have in ourselves and each other, so it's much easier to believe in a God watching over us, dealing out karmic justice. But sometimes it takes wearing that band aid for a little while to realise how important it is to be true to yourself and not a group mentality.

If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything, so you may as well stand for yourself.

PS: In regards to God, before anyone gets all mad, I'd never say "there isn't a God" even though it's my right to do so. Our knowledge is limited. If there is a higher power, it hasn't shown itself to us. Therefore all we can do it put a huge "?" on the subject and leave it at that. Not every question needs an answer. But I don't want to get into a huge religious debate here so I'll shut-up now :)

And remember people, we're all just a bunch of monkeys

Quote
Dynamix
I'm tolerant of religions. It's when religions instill intolerance in people and cause bad patterns of behavior that I take issue.

Dear Dynamix,

I think it kinda defines a cult when they insist that their way is the only way, and they foster an "us and them" mentality. So in fact, many of the cults who point their fingers at folks like for being "intolerant" are actually the ones displaying intolerance.

For all it's faults, you do not see the Catholic church planting agents in this group to "get the goods" on people who talk about paedophilia and other abuses rampant in their ranks. You don't see them suing people right and left who discuss it's shortcomings. You don't see Buddhists declaring that anybody who isn't Buddhist is ___________ (put an unflattering appelation here, such as a wog, raw meat, doomed, going to hell, an enemy, a suppressive person, the spawn of satan, a sheeple, yadda yadda). Did you ever meet an Episcopalian in front of somebody's house, with a picket, handing out flyers containing malicious lies about somebody because that person quit their church or said he or she didn't like the politics therein? I don't see the Lutherans going to recruit kids at the college campuses, getting them into halucinogenic drugs and tantric sex, then hypnotizing them to believe it's their destiny to save the world, if only they obey their "spirit guide" or "guardian angel". Of course, this "mission" might involve buying and selling halucinogens to other young people, and recruiting them into the "order" but what the hey?

As for religion, I have never cared what somebody's religion is. Traditionally, our family line has laid it on the line to preserve freedom in America. I am like them. I believe passionately in freedom- except when you think you are free to engage in criminal activities. Then I think you should be stopped.

When unwitting people are taken in by a mind control operation and exploited, THEN I mind. When that operation is cloaked in "religion", I become furious. When that "religion" is cloaked in the same American Flag which is supposed to stand for freedom of religion and human rights, I go ballistic. Any religion's rights stop at the point they do damage to people- whether that damage is female circumcision, excessive tithing, destroying families, hypnotizing people without their knowledge, or dangerous spiritual practices applied to children who have no choice.

What I don't understand is why it is so hard to make criminal prosecutions against some of these people. Aside from the fact that many of these groups have members in influencial places and swarm critics like angry bees when anybody points a finger at their hive, there are still more of us than there are of them.

Love,

Os