I am also highly suspicious of the main claim these types of sites are making.
You will notice that a number of them use the term "multi-faith" when describing themselves.
Since when do "multi-faiths" play well together in an organization? What happens is they start fighting within themselves, and ultimately one group takes over.

My gut feeling is that these so-called Religious Tolerance sites are generally just a format for covert Cult Apologists, as has been noted. Some of them might even have started out with good intentions, but it would be very easy for a large cult to send a couple of people in there, and take the organization over.

Even sites like Beliefnet are very credulous and naive when it comes to people who use religion as a weapon and a shield to hide behind. I did a search on their site for the word "cult" and came up with zero hits! So I guess there is no such thing as a cult? There seems to be a reluctance to admit that there are people out there who use religion as the last refuge of a scoundrel.

Lets take note that many mainstream religions are highly critical of various dangerous groups and cults.

But I do see cults using various "3rd party" websites in the manner of covert Cult Aplogists. Make them seem like they are "tolerant" when in reality they are the antithesis of critical thinking and objective.
Very diabolical.

Quote
bonnie
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.

some groups employ abuse as a systematic policy and others don't but... any group above a certain size will contain abusive or predatory members.

I have some first-hand experience of ISKCON which I would describe as patriarchal (anyone would agree) and authoriatrian however based on what little I know of the organization I really have the impression that invidual members commited the abuse rather than the abuse happening as a concerted policy. just the impression I have. I knew an ISKCON devotee really well (well, I knew two of them well, but I want to talk about one in particular here) and I feel pretty certain that he would have left had he known anything.

you could argue that authoritarian organizations encouarge that sort of behavior by their very nature and I would not argue with that, however I also consider an insitution like Bob Jones University as authoritarian, to perhaps put my statement in perspective.

Children of God, though, did (still does?) have a concerted policy of using "flirty fishing" as a way to recruit. no way to deny that one.

If you believe that the two cults I mentioned here have not as a matter of policy repeatedly engaged in abusive practices, perhaps you'll find religioustolerance.org to be to your liking.

The website is not very informative when it comes to the dangers of the religious organizations it allegedly describes.

if you read my above post carefully you will note that I didn't defend Children of God. I did say that I don't know one way or the other about whether Children of God engages in abusive practice though I do know about their past.

as far as ISKCON, I gave an educated guess, based on my own firsthand experiences. let me narrow my opinon down a bit. I seriously doubt that devotees that [i:8792911480]I personally know[/i:8792911480] would condone or stand by while abuse took place.

I don't have an emotional investment in ISKCON. actually, though I professed to have an open mind (still profess it, actually) I got pretty freaked when a close friend joined ISKCON. since then I have looked at the group objectively and while I would classify as, er, archaic as far as its social attitudes I would not consider them as systemic physical or sexual abusers of kids. again, only in my very limited experience of ISKCON in the 1990's.

not to say that I disbelieve the charges against individual members of ISKCON or that I doubt the stories of chicanery of the heads of the group as detailed in the book [i:8792911480]Monkey on a Stick[/i:8792911480] (which I haven't read). again, I have no emotional investment in believing in ISKCON as good (or, for that matter, not good)... just saying that I tend to think that ISKCON has gotten better, though I could if I wanted speak at length at what I percieve as some of its flaws.

if any scandalous stories have come out in the last couple of decades about ISKCON I do not remembering seeing any

now I know that some websites have a relativist, feel-good, everyone-get-along attitude and won't really mark off any group as dangerous. I have had posts which critical the Church of Scientology censored on Beliefnet forums by a mod even when I intentionally toned down the criticism.

finally I would like to ask you to not assume anything about me or where I come from and know and don't know.

And, as I stated earlier, I find it disturbing that [b:a050d17467]religioustolerance.org[/b:a050d17467] fails to mention the legally proven crimes of one organization that has shown themselves to be capable of disregarding the most basic rights and needs of the most vulnerable portion of the population, children.

Therefore I believe [b:a050d17467]religioustolerance.org[/b:a050d17467] to be uninterested in presenting any kind of unbiased portrait of the sects and/or cults it allegedly provides information about.

I am not interested, on this topic, in presenting my opinion of any cult or sect. I have referred to documented facts which [b:a050d17467]religioustolerance.org[/b:a050d17467] neglects to divulge, as opposed to my own opinions, when referring to any particular religious organizations.

IMO [b:a050d17467]religioustolerance.org[/b:a050d17467] is not a good source of information about cults and/or religious organizations.

Something about this has aroused my curiousity.

There's a link to "one of their sponsors" posted on this page of
religioustolerance.org.:
[www.religioustolerance.org]

There is a question posted in the middle of the page: "Is there a God?"
If you click on it it leads here:
[meaning-of-life.info]

I haven't really spent a lot of time on it, but it seems to be a website promoting catholicism.

They also post a list of sponsors on this page:
[www.religioustolerance.org]

The Church of God is at the top of the list.
[www.churchofgodonline.com]

Actually, the Religious Tolerance site is run essentially by a former Baptist turned Unitarian, along with two other people. One is referred to as simply a "Christian" and another is said to be a Wiccan.

See [www.religioustolerance.org]

This site often cites academics called "cult apologists" and has a similar position regarding groups called "cults," which they refer to as "new relgious movements."

See [www.religioustolerance.org]

The site claims that such groups as Scientology, ISKCON, the Children of God, The Bretheren and Unification Church "have been unjustly targeted."

Rather than a database of news, historical information or factual articles, the Relgious Tolerance Web site is a collection of essays featuring the opinions of authors.

They are front group.
Most likely CoS.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/acm2.htm

Trashes the old CAN and gives a glowing report of the New CAN.

Zinga:

Not a Scientology front, but more like cult apologists that essentially defend Scientology and other groups called "cults."

Bottom line, not a reliable source for information.