Religious Cults

Just curious, you understand, but can anyone explain how the media decides what is a 'cult' and what is a 'religion'? I mean somewhere there must be a book of rules for this sort of thing (other examples of course being 'terrorist' and 'freedom fighter', or 'democracy' and 'dictatorship'). So come on, where does the line get drawn? One side of the line has strange beliefs, messianic leaders, death as a prelude to heaven, brainwashing of young children, sex with followers, exploitation of the poor and uneducated, a complete suspension of normal human scepticism, a hatred of all non-believers ... um, so does the other side. So I can't pick it.

Does it involve numbers of true believers? Whether or not there is a celebrity or two involved, whether a presidential candidate is seen going through the door of the church during a campaign, how much money they make? Ah, that last one might be a clue.

I mean, I ask you, think of David Koresh, the Jonestown experience, the poor devils who thought there was a spaceship behind a comet, the Solar Temple, astrology, witches. They all get described as cults and are therefore worthy of contempt, but anyone care to try defining the differences between them and the ones that get described as religions and worthy of respect?

No, I didn't think so.

The best test for the validity of religion is this - it is impossible to distinguish between 'fake religions' and 'real religions'.

So, how does the media manage it? Well, in the same way that they arbitrarily decide who is a terrorist, and which countries are democracies. The decision is based on the ideology of the neoconservatives, and suits the purposes of the ruling elites.