Scientology. The name is a travesty of science. The reality is a burlesque of religion.
Following the lead of the Saint Petersburg Times, where my late friend Steve Marquez once reported on the same church, the New York Times recently published tales of abuse told by Scientology "defectors." The term seems apt, since the harsh treatment former insiders describe brings to mind totalitarian states like North Korea.
Beatings, fleecings, and exploitation of teen labor - these are just some of the garish allegations limned in the accounts that you can read for yourself. What is important here, I think, is not how bizarre the Church of Scientology is but the ways in which it is ordinary.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not implying a moral equivalence between the alleged maltreatment of Scientology members and, say, your neighborhood Church of the Holy Redeemer's collection plate. What I am saying is that the allegations against Church of Scientology leadership suggest the hallmarks of human vulnerability to nonsense on the one hand and the intoxication of power on the other.
What distinguishes Scientology from most other theologies is that it was developed in plain sight by a science fiction writer who claimed (so far as I am aware) no special revelation, just a handy way with imagination and words. Actually, not so handy with words as you might expect of a writer.
The Scientology Creed begins with a blatant plagiarism of Thomas Jefferson's immortal lines in the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." In Hubbard's hands, this succinct ode to liberty becomes a laundry list of "God-given" rights (for men only), including the "right to sanity." If only!
That so many people come to believe quite literally in Scientology's extravagant tales of aliens, billion-year lifespans, and whatnot says a lot, I think, about the human need for meaning at almost any cost. The philosopher Daniel Dennett calls it "epistemological hunger." Davy, the mischievous little boy in Anne of Green Gables stories, puts it more simply. When scolded for asking questions about God, he responds, "I just wanna know."
This hunger may be nourished with fruits gathered through exploration and seasoned with humility and doubt - or it may be stifled with junk food.
Whatever religious beliefs you may hold, you must surely agree that some religions spring up to exploit that hunger for meaning. Over and over again, we have seen that for certain personalities religion is the shortest route to absolute power. And we've seen that absolute power, as Lord Acton so rightly observed, corrupts absolutely. Some who hold sway over their flocks are undoubtedly sincere, others undoubtedly hucksters. I make no judgment about Hubbard in saying this. It really doesn't matter. The point is not whether a person sincerely believes that they bear tablets (or copper plates, or whatever) inscribed by God, so to speak. What counts is what happens to them them once they come down from the mountain and taste power.
From Rev. Jim Jones, who led his flock to "Jonestown" in the jungle and got them to commit suicide by drinking bad Kool-Aid, to Shoko Asahara the blind Buddhist guru who founded Shin Aumrikyo and persuaded his followers to release nerve gas in the Tokyo subways, to Ayatollah Khomeini, who after coming to power in Iran decreed death by hanging for girls as young as nine for alleged religious improprieties, the record of religious tyrants is rife with abuse. So it should come as no shock to learn that the inheritor of Hubbard's mantle, David Miscavige, stands accused by former lieutenants of slapping, beating, and worse.
Scientology is instructive because, obsessively secretive though it may be, so much of its malevolence is in plain view. That the church aggressively recruits followers and persuades them to transfer wealth and independence in return for promises of eternal (or near-eternal) life is indisputable. Ever heard of such a thing?
Of course you have. It's the practice of many religious entities. It simply goes unexamined once it has the patent of antiquity. My point here is not to condemn all religion as exploitation. I deny that. However, now that we know about the human vulnerability to religious exploitation, we have a duty to inoculate one another against it.
Protection begins with critical thinking. You don't have to earn a doctorate in philosophy to recognize that anyone who claims to have all the answers is a fraud. Sincere or sham, they are frauds. If they offer you truth, happiness, or eternal life in return for your obedience, turn around and run for the hills. If you are already in such a religion, challenge the dogma!
For in the end what really matters is not answers. Answers are words, and words are mere shadows of the truth. It's the questions we ask, and how we each choose to respond to them. That's what makes us human. Individually, we lead brief, flickering lives. Together, we are eternal explorers.
Follow Clay Farris Naff on Twitter: www.twitter.com/claynaff
Harmon Leon: Scientology: A History of Violence and Apologizes for Battlefield Earth
Menachem Wecker: Scientology and the Arts
Many writers say that they believe that Scientology is a fraud. I believe Scientology is a fraud... so what? I also believe any religion that claims to be "The one & only path to God" is a fraud; I believe that anyone who teaches that every word of the Bible is the "literal, absolute and only truth and God's Word," is a fraud. Again... so what? When it comes to religion in civil society, what you or anyone else believes is none of my business. You are free to believe what I fervently believe to be nonsense, because you are free. That freedom is more precious to me, than my right to repress other people's belief in preposterous nonsense, because I cherish my own right to believe nonsense without your intrusion. This is the essence of Freedom of Religion, each citizen is free to live according to what he or she believes... even if that includes Scientology.
If we make it a crime to preach theological absurdity. we must first establish what is orthodox and what is heretical; then become a theocracy. I recommend a study of the Inquisition to see if this is advisable. Soon after that we'd have to build a whole new batch of prisons. I don't know about you but I'd prefer to let Scientology and Pat Robertson preach insanity.
One of the first data encountered in Scientology is that one is expected to test for himself (or herself) any datum offered as truth. Since Scientology is based on observation, this is pretty easy to do for anyone who doesn't have an ax to grind. Because Scientology adds precision and results to what has been a nebulous field, -the spirit- it can be misunderstood.
For instance, did you know you can measure spiritual phenomena with simple electronic devices? There are many data that might seem incredible at first, but an honest look will give anyone a better grasp of the important factors of life. And the better one understands life, the better one can make it for all of us.
No. You can't.
There's only 25,000 or so members of this mind control cult left in the U.S., and it is shrinking rapidly.
Some members go into massive debt for their brainwashing addiction to Scientology. This was brought to light in the trials in France, and the suicide of a soldier in Australia named Ed McBride in 2007.
Scientology wants to freely float from operating as an extortion racket, a therapy, a health regimen (sauna and vitamins), a business which has the answers to everything, all under the cover of a "religion."
When the Catholic Church formed a Cult Awareness Network, they could not define 'cult 'in any way that clearly excluded the Catholic Church.
I found the following definitions for the word "Cult" on the Web. I ask you to name one world religion that has not fit each element of these definitions of "cult" at some point or points in its history.
- a relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister
- followers of an exclusive system of religious beliefs and practices
- followers of an unorthodox, extremist, or false religion or sect who often live outside of conventional society often under the direction of a charismatic leader
- a religion or sect that is generally considered to be unorthodox, extremist, or "false"
Every great religion of the world claims love to be the highest expression a human can have. I'm not saying that they all practice it, but at least it is an ideal.
To my way of thinking, this statement of Hubbard's disqualifies it from being a true religion. They don't even try to be loving....persecuting anyone who disagrees with them is encouraged.
It's something...a major business, a self-help organization, perhaps, but it certainly isn't a religion..
Your words seems to imply that some religions are better than others. I'm not sure how you can pick one out as a bad apple, while ignoring similar issues found in most of the others.
"If they offer you truth, happiness, or eternal life in return for your obedience, turn around and run for the hills. If you are already in such a religion, challenge the dogma!"
Is that not a veiled blow against Judeo/Christian/Islamic beliefs? They certainly meets the criteria.
While your thoughts hold merit, I think you have chosen the easy and safe route to make your point by casting stones at the easy target.
Now I'm curious why you think Scientology is an easy target?
IMHO, that is a very strange and artificial sounding point of view.
It also utilizes other psychological tricks. The moving up in ranks is similar to the addictive qualities of MMORPGs... and since they require extreme financial contribution, the member will be more attached to a successful outcome.
But what's truly bad is that it is both fundamentalist and evangelical in character... much like the kind of cult we all recognize as dangerous.
Whereas Christian groups tend to be one or the other- either extremely exclusive and less interested in converting nonbelievers than gaining loyalty of believers (Pat Robertson) or extremely inclusive and seeking converts through outreach (Billy Graham)- Scientologists use mechanisms for separating members and also have mechanisms for aggressively seeking converts (like internet personality tests that require you to head to a church in order to get the answers)... They run religion like a telecom business!
And I agree... the scary part is that this is all out in the open.
Jerry
total-anonymity.us.tc
On the surface, Scientology seems reasonable. The insane content is only revealed after the member has been "cleared" and made more susceptible. They practice a variety of brain-washing and mind-control techniques on weak-minded people. Its aim is to enslave them to further its wicked ends.
The writings of their founder are incontrovertible testimony to this wickedness.
Revelations from God are not transmitted through con men.
What's the difference between a religion and a cult? Nothing
A cult is a religion with no political power. Thomas Wolfe
The difference between a cult and an established religion is sometimes about one generation. Scott McLemee
The only difference between a cult and a religion is the amount of real estate they own Frank Zappa
Jehovah's witnesses, for example, have recruited many convicted child sex offenders, and have been trying to cover up that fact whenever one such reoffends. The victims are silenced. I believe Scientology has the same policy.
And these clowns don't pay taxes.
People say that Hubbard was a science fiction writer so he can't have discovered new levels of truth. Interestingly, I don't recall hearing people saying that Einstein was a patent examiner, so he can't have discovered the theory of relativity. The truth is, Hubbard did a lot of things: he travelled to China as a teenager several times, was one of the early pilots, lead expeditions, etc. True, he financed his activities with his writing.
So why the attacks. Well there are some vested interests that would prefer for Scientology to go away. Why? As just one example, Scientologists tend to be very critical of the practice of making our children into addicts with drugs such as ritalin.
Does Scientology cost money. Well if you want the best, yes. But for many years, people have been buying the book, Dianetics, The Modern Science of Mental Health and just helping each other. Pretty cheap help.
" the story of Xenu (sometimes Xemu), introduced as the tyrant ruler of the "Galactic Confederacy." According to this story, 75 million years ago Xenu brought billions of people to Earth in spacecraft resembling Douglas DC-8 airliners, stacked them around volcanoes and detonated hydrogen bombs in the volcanoes. The thetans then clustered together, stuck to the bodies of the living, and continue to do this today. Scientologists at advanced levels place considerable emphasis on isolating body thetans and neutralizing their ill effects."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology
Really?
People will believe in whatever they want, whether it's chupacabras, angels or rabbit's feet.
Not much we can do about it.
However, the minute abuses and criminality start, it's time to step in.
In the case of the Scientologists, let them believe what they want, but let's start by sending David Miscavige to jail.
"They smell of all the baths they didn't take.
The trouble with China is, there are too many chinks
here."
From his personal journal.
http://www.solitarytrees.net/cowen/LRH-bio/chinamen.htm
They're rehab programs are just recruitment programs so I guess it's a toss up if you think that's "doing some good". I think their use of "personality tests" help them recruit susceptible average Joes by sorting out the depressed and suggestible. Sort of the way stage hypnotists interview people prior to a show to find out whose susceptible to hypnotism. There shiny facade and ever smiling sales people help too. Oh and there bogus promises.
"Protection begins with critical thinking. You don't have to earn a doctorate in philosophy to recognize that anyone who claims to have all the answers is a fraud. Sincere or sham, they are frauds. If they offer you truth, happiness, or eternal life in return for your obedience, turn around and run for the hills. If you are already in such a religion, challenge the dogma!"
Indeed.
Scientology consistently psychologically ruins its members
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/03/10/2841369.htm
and if our government allows a religious tax exemption for this behavior (to a level over and above any other US religion) then there is seriously something wrong.
(Ref Michael Sklar Supreme Court case)