kate8024
-deleted-
Most creationists I have met haven't smoked any "green herb", which might be the actual issue.
Religion Black and White
- Thread starter Queenmab321
- Start date
Most creationists I have met haven't smoked any "green herb", which might be the actual issue.
Lermanet_com
Gold Meritorious Patron
But don't confuse Biblical based creationism, with Intelligent Design
Worth watching: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
[video=youtube;V5EPymcWp-g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5EPymcWp-g[/video]
"Questions which arn't properly answered, don't go away"
Last edited:
Lermanet_com
Gold Meritorious Patron
And ONLY for those who actually watched the previous video:
"Leading Nazis, and early 1900 influential German biologists, revealed in their writings that Darwin’s theory and publications had a major influence upon Nazi race policies. Hitler believed that the human gene pool could be improved by using selective breeding similar to how farmers breed superior cattle strains. In the formulation of their racial policies, Hitler’s government relied heavily upon Darwinism, especially the elaborations by Spencer and Haeckel. As a result, a central policy of Hitler’s administration was the development and implementation of policies designed to protect the ‘superior race’. This required at the very least preventing the ‘inferior races’ from mixing with those judged superior, in order to reduce contamination of the latter’s gene pool. The ‘superior race’ belief was based on the theory of group inequality within each species, a major presumption and requirement of Darwin’s original ‘survival of the fittest’ theory. This philosophy culminated in the ‘final solution’, the extermination of approximately six million Jews and four million other people who belonged to what German scientists judged as ‘inferior races’."
LINK
Darwinism, "Survival of the fittest", was not only a cornerstone of Nazi dogma of a supreme race, but IS the cornerstone of the modern Eugenics movement.
LINK
"Leading Nazis, and early 1900 influential German biologists, revealed in their writings that Darwin’s theory and publications had a major influence upon Nazi race policies. Hitler believed that the human gene pool could be improved by using selective breeding similar to how farmers breed superior cattle strains. In the formulation of their racial policies, Hitler’s government relied heavily upon Darwinism, especially the elaborations by Spencer and Haeckel. As a result, a central policy of Hitler’s administration was the development and implementation of policies designed to protect the ‘superior race’. This required at the very least preventing the ‘inferior races’ from mixing with those judged superior, in order to reduce contamination of the latter’s gene pool. The ‘superior race’ belief was based on the theory of group inequality within each species, a major presumption and requirement of Darwin’s original ‘survival of the fittest’ theory. This philosophy culminated in the ‘final solution’, the extermination of approximately six million Jews and four million other people who belonged to what German scientists judged as ‘inferior races’."
LINK
Darwinism, "Survival of the fittest", was not only a cornerstone of Nazi dogma of a supreme race, but IS the cornerstone of the modern Eugenics movement.
LINK
Most uneducated people don't know the difference. Actually, I've never met a Christian who holds with "creationism" as described in the posts above.
Originally Posted by Queenmab321
Hi Bill
Do you agree with Queenmab because scientology is unique?
OR Do you disagree with Queenmab because scientology is unique?
OR Do you agree with Queenmab because scientology is not unique?
OR Do you disagree with Queenmab because scientology is not unique?
Yeah, I can list hundreds of "religions" that claim to be scientific, promise this lifetime miraculous results from their "exact, precise technology" and that have "scientific, precise equipment" like the e-meter as part of their "technology".
Yeah, Scientology is just another religion like all those.
Bill
Hi Bill
Do you agree with Queenmab because scientology is unique?
OR Do you disagree with Queenmab because scientology is unique?
OR Do you agree with Queenmab because scientology is not unique?
OR Do you disagree with Queenmab because scientology is not unique?
Last edited:
Queenmab321
Patron Meritorious
Yeah, I can list hundreds of "religions" that claim to be scientific, promise this lifetime miraculous results from their "exact, precise technology" and that have "scientific, precise equipment" like the e-meter as part of their "technology".
Yeah, Scientology is just another religion like all those.
Bill
As I've said, I believe Scientology is a religion cloaked in science, and whereas this aspect of Scientology may be fairly unique, I don't think it's what sets it apart. Scientology is different from most religions, and much more sinister, because it belongs to a class of religious movements that employ tactics that are extremely manipulative, whereby "induced psychological dysfunctioning of the brain is achieved by systematically controlled environments engendering heightened receptivity to new ideas through such techniques as guilt manipulation, forced confessions, food deprivation, self denigration and information control."
For the narcissist Hubbard fraud is truth. The false façade is erected and maintained by whatever means to hide the decomposing creature inside. The false façade is based on lies and exaggerations, with a few truths sprinkled here and there to hold the whole structure together.
The narcissist exists by sucking energy (in the form of money, admiration, fanaticism or pain) from the others. Whatever brings narcissistic supply is the truth.
It is only non-narcissists concern themselves with such strange matters as fraud and have a cognitive dissonance of Orwellian type.
Last edited:
Lermanet_com
Gold Meritorious Patron
He knew it was "just hypnosis" in the late 60's, up until he began to lose it from too many dead brain cells (Google Hubbard + Pinks and Greys)
Last edited:
Bill
Gold Meritorious Patron
Yes.Hi Bill
Do you agree with Queenmab because scientology is unique?
OR Do you disagree with Queenmab because scientology is unique?
OR Do you agree with Queenmab because scientology is not unique?
OR Do you disagree with Queenmab because scientology is not unique?
Queenmab321
Patron Meritorious
Im afraid not. It's from Romeo and Juliet, Act 1, Scene 4.
Most people don’t have well defined religious beliefs. They are not sure if they have an immortal soul or what will happen after death. They admit they God may exist but maybe not a male god sitting on a cloud and threatening mankind.
Even within the same church people may have surprisingly different interpretations of their religious doctrine. Also the degree of faith varies from a non-believer to a fanatic with most people in between, that is believe but have doubts.
So I have two questions
1. How identical is the belief system of scientologists? Do they all believe in exactly the same things (Axioms, Factors, thetan, whole track, ethics etc)? Or do they differ in their interpretations?
2. To what extent do they believe? Are there doubters or half-believers? For example believe in ‘thetans’ but not in ‘body thetans’? Or believe in ‘reactive mind’ but not in ‘implants’ or the Van Allen Belt episode?
Even within the same church people may have surprisingly different interpretations of their religious doctrine. Also the degree of faith varies from a non-believer to a fanatic with most people in between, that is believe but have doubts.
So I have two questions
1. How identical is the belief system of scientologists? Do they all believe in exactly the same things (Axioms, Factors, thetan, whole track, ethics etc)? Or do they differ in their interpretations?
2. To what extent do they believe? Are there doubters or half-believers? For example believe in ‘thetans’ but not in ‘body thetans’? Or believe in ‘reactive mind’ but not in ‘implants’ or the Van Allen Belt episode?
Queenmab321
Patron Meritorious
In my experience with Protestant Christianity, I've observed a continuum, with intensity and dogmatism at one end of the spectrum and a more open, contempletive culture on the other. These attitudes vary between denominations as well as from one congregation to the next. Conservative groups tend to be very suspicious and more or less intolerate of dissenting points of view. I don't know exactly how this corresponds, if at all, to Scientology, but the presence of esoteric doctrines along with policies such as KSW and disconnection lead me to believe that COS lies far to the right on such a spectrum and that individual members are caught up in a milieu that is far more controlling than all but the most radically fundamentalist Christian sects.
Those questions might be harder to answer in reference to scientologists.
That's because people can only report what they have been told by scientologists and scientologists
would have been careful not to say if they did not believe some of hubbards lies.
OTs who are already under confidentiality demands, even with each other need to watch what they say if it seems to cast any doubt on accepted lies and bs.
Even for lower level culties people are probably careful not to 'invalidate' others 'reality' by announcing
That they DO NOT BELIEVE certain things and they do have to be careful of Ethics. Sometimes people
might say something like 'past lives are not real to me'....but there will most likely be cult-ural assumptons
made, and most likely voiced, like 'oh it will probably become more real to you as you do more auditing'.
I am not just trying to sabotage your questions..your post made me think about how people in the cult
are very censored and don't necessarily know what others really think, and that applies moreso to which things people do NOT believe.
Gadfly
Crusader
Yes, most definitely, Scientology (as the Church of Scientology) exists far on the "right" side of things - fundamentalism, extremely conservative, and very intolerant of any dissenting views from the extant party line. There is an entire range of terms for people and views that differ from the "standard KSW" attitude, such as "squirrel", "altering Scientology", "degrades", SPs, DBs, out-ethics and so forth.
With people in the Free Zone who toss out some or most of the ethics and admin nonsense, they lose some of the aspect of fundamentalism. Though, those who still carry the torch for KSW remain stuck in the more common stricter version.
Gadfly
Crusader
Regarding the first question, I have commented on some of this before. It is very difficult to ever know the similarity of beliefs with Scientologists, because of the strict rules about "no verbal data". For the most part Scientology members rarely discuss or compare notes because they have been brutally trained within an inch of their lives to ONLY discuss definitions, meanings and understandings in the context of a course room, auditing room or Qual.
I remember standing outside a course room somewhere back in around 1980. I was talking with another student about some finer detail of ARC. The Qual Sec heard us, he ran over, and he SCREAMED with that brutal Tone 40 KSW gleam in his eyes, "Knock Off the Verbal Data NOW"! Scientologists are very much indoctrinated to ONLY discuss such things with word clearers. The notion of freely discussing concepts and ideas of Scientology is alien to Scientology. Hubbard set it up that way. I have a theory about this.
For example, take a phrase such as "clearing the planet" or "salvaging this sector of the universe". These are such vague and actually UNCLEAR phrases. They don't have any specific meanings, not outside of any individual person's IMAGINATION. I am sure that if you could get 100 Scientologists to honestly write down what each of these meant to them, you would find a great difference in responses. In fact, since these phrases don't actually have any real life correspondences, the meaning is self-created by each person who thinks with the nonsensical notions. But, Scientologists never become aware of how differently they actually consider many of the basic ideas because they can NEVER freely talk about such things!
For example, when a person does a clay demo of "making the world safe for Scientology", he or she NEVER discusses it. Somebody just looks at the demo and says "pass". The truth is that there can be and probably are many great differences in understandings amongst Scientologists about all sorts of things related to Scientology. Since so many of the ideas are make-believe, exaggerated or vague, each person must DUB-IN extensive amounts of meaning and significance. I don't doubt that Hubbard set it up this way.
It is a common idea that one is to study the materials, be there alone with Ron, with NO vias, intermediaries or additives, and grasp the material through the exact use of study tech. It is highly frowned upon to discuss Scientology with others as a way to come to understand Scientology. In fact, giving "verbal data" is a suppressive act. The ONLY correct behavior is to open an LRH reference, and have the other person read it - with NO discussion.
Each person is kept isolated in terms of his or her unqiue understanding of it all.
What is common is the emotional hyper-enthusiasm and nutty glee that runs throughout participants.
Scientology depends on SLOGANS. And, just as anybody knows who works with slogans, they are mostly used to elicit emotional reactions in the target audience. Use of slogans does NOT address the rational, thinking conceptual mind. Much of Scientology functions to bypass the rational conceptual mind. Hubbard knew what he was doing.
In corporate Scientology the view is that EVERYTHING is correct as Hubbard wrote it. The view is that if one has any confusion or disagreement then he or she is the problem. He or she has MUs, out-ethics, false data or some other explanation why he or she doesn't enthusiastically embrace the materials. There is no tolerance for differing beliefs about anything written or said by Hubbard. THAT is a key part of KSW.
And, while some might entertain differing beliefs, they learn to NEVER speak about such things out in the open, since they would be KR'ed and sent to ethics fast! All learn to suppress any differing views, and this creates the apparency of high agreement with all things LRH. It is part of the illusion.
Last edited:
Churchill
Gold Meritorious Patron
You're allowing yourself to be led down the garden path into agreeing that Scientology Inc. is a religion, and, as a religion, deserves all the perks and privileges of a religion.
This discussion leads to one place and one place only: To the conclusion that Scientology Inc. should have a special status that will ensure that it can continue to defraud and harm people.
The other day, the person who started this thread posted a link to a Scientology Inc. OSA site, and it seemed completely sensible to this person to do so, and why not? since the person agrees with the content of the Scientology OSA site.
The same person's account of how Scientology Inc. received tax exempt status ignored all the relevant facts of that occurrence, and presented an explanation that could have been lifted from a Scientology Inc. OSA handbook.
_________
Video on Religious cloaking - the affidavit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZvqeGrbILw
The complete document:
http://www.lermanet.com/reference/brennan-dec.pdf
___________
Quoted posts by others from Ex Scientologist Message Board are in sienna (brown).
By Rmack:
I just had to vent a little about a pet peeve I have. People who, even though critical of this cult, still call it a church.
It's well documented that the whole church facade was taken on by Laffy for the benefits it bestowed, like potential tax exemption, the e-meter being protected as a 'religious artifact' to avoid being prosecuted for using it to treat medical conditions, etc. They went from being a clinic with 'doctors' to a religion with 'ministers', but the practices stayed pretty much the same.
Scientology is a money making fraudulent cult, not a church.
I like the adage attributed to Abraham Lincoln that goes 'How many legs does a dog have, if you call the tail a leg? Answer; four. Calling the tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.'
__________
Tax exempt status had been sought by Hubbard since he first launched his "religion angle," complete with ministers in clerical collars, crosses on "Churches," and the accompanying benign-sounding 'Creed of the Church of Scientology', meant to invite agreement from "wogs," as they were "gradiently" led into agreement with the idea that Scientology is a "religion."
It's the religion angle and religious cloaking that allow Scientology to get away with so much fraudulent and abusive behavior.
___________
Video about the IRS deal with Scientology:
[video=youtube;ewQ8bgMMqnQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ewQ8bgMMqnQ[/video]
__________
From Hubbard Communication Office Policy Letter of October 1962, 'Religion':
"Scientology 1970 is being planned on a religious organization basis throughout the world. This will not upset in any way the usual activities of any organizations. It is entirely a matter for accountants and solicitors."
This man was convicted of "interfering with a religion," for picketing outside Scientology's heavily armed, razor-wire enclosed, base outside Hemet, California. He was sent to jail.
Here's the law on the case: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/2001-May/002573.html (Thanks, Teanntas.)
__________
From Dulloldfart:
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Scientology_organizations
Principal Organizations
Religious Technology Center (RTC)
Church of Spiritual Technology (CST)
Church of Scientology International (CSI)
Church of Scientology of California (CSC)
Trademark Service Organizations
Inspector General Network (IGN)
IGN International AB
Dianetics Centers International (DCI)
Dianetics Foundation International (DFI)
Hubbard Dianetics Foundation (HDF)
WISE, Inc.
Financial Trusts
Author's Family Trust
Church of Scientology Religious Trust (CSRT)
Scientology International Reserves Trust (SIRT)
Trust for Scientologists
United States Parishioners Trust
Flag Ship Trust (FST)
International Publications Trust
Scientology Defense Trust
Financial Service Organizations
SOR Services Ltd.
Nesta Investments Ltd.
FSO Oklahoma Investments Corporation
Theta Management Ltd. (TML)
Publishing Houses & Publication Organizations
Golden Era Productions
Author Services Inc. (ASI)
Bridge Publications Inc. (BPI)
New Era Publications ApS
Scientology Publications Ltd.
Secular & Social Management Entities
Association for Better Living and Education International (ABLE)
Applied Scholastics Inc.
Citizens Commission on Human Rights International (CCHR)
Criminon International
Narconon International
Way to Happiness Foundation International
World Institute of Scientology Enterprises International (WISE)
Other Management Organizations
Church of Scientology Celebrity Centre International (CC Int.)
International Hubbard Ecclesiastical League of Pastors (IHELP)
Scientology Missions International (SMI)
Service Organizations
<snip mostly Church names>
Membership Organizations
Unincorporated Associations
International Association of Scientologists (IAS)
Hubbard Association of Scientologists International (HASI)
Membership Service Organizations
International Association of Scientologists Administrations, N.V. (IASA)
Membership Services Administrations (UK) Ltd. (MSA)
There are 41 names there, only 5 of which include the C-word. Local service orgs in the US and other religion-favouring countries usually include the C-word, and in countries that don't favour religions they don't. Expediency reigns supreme.
Question for any residents of the "non" countries: when the cult hits the news there, is the main organization ever referred to, or is it just the name of the local branch? For example, does the media in Russia ever refer to CSI spokeperson Karin Pouw by name and title?
Paul
__________
Scientology has a decades long history of using the "religion angle" and "religious cloaking" to gain advantage, and to exempt itself from inspection and from laws.
Scientology is a for-profit blackmail-collecting global scam masquerading as a religion.
Prof. Steven Kent on 'Is Scientology a Religion?':
http://www.bible.ca/scientology-not-religion-kent.htm
Those who dislike religion, and think they're criticizing Scientology by criticizing religion, are being tricked by Hubbard's religion angle, and Scientology's religious cloaking, every bit as much as those who like religion and defer to Scientology because it's a "religion."
It's rare to encounter a Scientologist who knows what Scientology is, not because they're stupid, but because Scientology discourages its followers from finding out what it actually is and, ultimately, places them in a state of mind where they don't want to know even when they have the opportunity.
A few bus loads of people such as this are useful for Public Relation purposes, especially when they are wearing big yellow Scientology is my religion buttons.
These are the well-intentioned dupes, and are an essential component of the Scientology charade.
Responding to the assertion by another poster that Scientology's status as a (tax exempt, and exempt from various laws) "Church" is a "done deal":
_________
From Div6:
I'm with Veda on this. Only in the US is it anywhere near "a done deal". In mexico it is a "philosophical society."
___________
From Senator Nick Xenophon:
"What we are seeing is a worldwide pattern of abuse and criminality... On the body of evidence, this is not happening by accident; it is happening by design.
In 1955, L. Ron Hubbard secretly authored this booklet http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?2697-Table-of-Contents-Psychopolitics-revisited to be used as a black propaganda vehicle for attacking his critics, by identifying them with Russian Communism. Some years later, the booklet slowly faded into obscurity. It was no longer useful as a propaganda vehicle. During the period of the Vietnam war, Hubbard had decided that "Nazi," not "Communist," was a more effective "button" to push, to influence public opinion to Scientology's advantage. Another reason for this booklet fading into obscurity was that Hubbard was now using many of its ideas and methods on his own followers, and on others. Hubbard had been doing this for many years prior, but it was now intensified. These ideas and methods are interwoven into Scientology doctrine, and integral to that doctrine.
Senator Nick Xenophon continued:
Scientology is not a religious organisation. It is a criminal organisation that hides behind its so-called religious beliefs."
It's noteworthy that the first official body to recognize Hubbard's use of this booklet's ideas and methods was from Australia in the 1960s and, now, another Australian official is continuing the tradition of insightful and courageous truth-telling regarding the secretive cult of Scientology.
__________
From Free to shine:
Why not just call it scientology???
I have never called it a church and I never will. I don't even use a capital S unless it's the start of a sentence. I was there when it was decided that it should be a religion, and I know what a farce it was.
I think it's only those who feel the need to be politically correct who use the word "Church", in the media and so on to avoid getting dogpiled for 'religious discrimination'.
_________
From Lermanet:
In 1994, one of the used (Im not saying correct, just one of methods used) ways to guess who was either OSA or duped by osa or too dumb to be of any worth to the expose scientology movement anyway, was to see if they could say "XENU"...
Ten years later, the rule of thumb *I* use, on all except for the very-newest-escapees, to determine this is DO THEY CALL IT A CHURCH or refer to it as a RELIGION. I feel it works for me, you're mileage may vary.
Thoroughly understanding the materials collected on my RELIGIOUS CLOAKING PAGE leads to the inescapable conclusion that $cientology is an elaborate hypnotic FRAUD that has been CLOAKED using RELIGIOUS CLOAKING.
This point is not lost on their own lawyers, and thorough application of such comprehensions demonstrated here.. in the last time $cientology tried to depose me in 1997 at the Law Offices of Mr Sinclair in Alexandria Virginia, a camera had been set up to video this, if you want proof ask OSA to post this video:
DEPOSITION STARTS
Clam lawyer Rosen asked: Mr Lerma, why do you continue to say bad things about the Church of Scientology???
Lerma: Mr Rosen, in your question, are you referring to the international psychopolitical terrorist organization running a rapidly shrinking but still brisk fraud upon innocent citizens worldwide dba scientology and related entities and front groups???
Rosen (Face gets red) said (acting angry) (waving arms around) : Mr. Lerma, you can't describe the CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY that way.
Lerma: Mr Rosen are trying to trick me into committing perjury on your behalf?
Rosen: This deposition is OVER.
THE END.
__________
"Because it's protected as a religion... it's able to get away with a lot of things."
Lawrence Wright, 2013
__________
"Scientology 1970 is being planned on a religious organization basis throughout the world. This will not upset in any way the usual activities of any organization. It is entirely a matter for accountants and solicitors."
L. Ron Hubbard, 1962
__________
Hard Sell, a.k.a. Crush Sell, has been part of Scientology since the 1960s. I witnessed Hard Sell tech being used in the early 1970s. The idea, as I recall Hubbard explaining it in the Hard Sell pack, is that people ("wogs," "Homo Saps," "Raw meat" and, apparently, even Scientologists) are naturally in a sort of hypnotic daze, and will respond to being told what to do, if that telling is done effectively. Trickery is also part of Hard Sell tech, as is "ruthlessness," after all, look at what's at stake, the eternity of every Man, Woman, and Child on this planet and your own endless agonized trillions and, besides, successful Scientology sales people lived very well. They were "up stats" and were rewarded.
__________
"Make money. Make more money. Make other people produce so as to make more money." L. Ron Hubbard, 1972
__________
Hubbard's "religion angle" and "religious cloaking" were aimed largely at achieving tax exempt status. When this occurred in the USA in 1993, the kind of pure-money-sucking that's now done in Scientology became realistic. Donations to Scientology are tax exempt, and those donating can make deductions on their income tax returns. In effect, the United Sates government is supporting the Scientology cult, just as Hubbard had envisioned.
However, even before the Scientology money-sucking vacuum cleaner engine was turned on full, Hard Sell was going strong in the "Church" of Scientology.
__________
"He [Hubbard] stated [that] coming ashore would be profitable, because we could get so many more people to the Flag Land Base, as it was to be called, for auditing and training, and he wanted to concentrate on getting professionals to the Land Base because, of course, they had more accessible money. They had pension funds. They had children's education funds, and some of these he named, that were accessible."
Hana Eltringham, from the 'Secret Lives' BBC program:
See 3:20: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhULw6qarW4
"What worried me was that I saw some things he did and statements he made that showed his intentions were different from what they appeared to be...
"He [Hubbard] told me he was obsessed with an insatiable lust for power and money. He said it very emphatically. He thought it wasn't possible to get enough. He didn't say it as if it was a fault, just his frustration that he couldn't get enough."
David Mayo, 1986, from an interview with author Russell Miller
_________
Scientology is a cult operating as a business masquerading as a religion.
Compare the explanation in the preceding post with that of Lawrence Wright, made during an interview from last year, regarding the IRS's sudden about face, changing the position it had held for decades:
In 1993, the "Church" owed a billion dollars in back taxes. They had decided not to pay taxes, and desperately needed a tax exemption or they would go out of business. We would not be talking about the "Church of Scientology" if they had not gotten an IRS tax exemption.
David Miscavige [had] launched 2,300 lawsuits against the IRS, and individual agents, hired private investigators to follow individual agents around, and part of the deal, whatever the merits of the case, was that the IRS would give the "Church" tax exemption, forgive the billion dollars, and the "Church" would call off the private investigators, and drop the lawsuits...
When the IRS made that determination, then the protections of the first amendment, freedom of religion clause, came into play, and those are vast protections, and it's because of those protections that the "Church" is able to operate today...
One of those followed around by private investigators was the IRS Commissioner, and the topic of the possible blackmailing of the IRS Commissioner, is another disturbing area.
This is one of the BEST, HONEST, posts I have been fortunate to read!
IMHO Scientology is to religion what child pornography is to art.
One missed point. Under the US Const. The IRS doesn't get to decide what is or isn't a religion. Not even Congress has that power...
Claire Swazey
Spokeshole, fence sitter
Slight derail- for the faery queen among us
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Mab
(begin portion/fair use quote)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Mab
(begin portion/fair use quote)
Veda
Sponsor
One missed point. Under the US Const. The IRS doesn't get to decide what is or isn't a religion. Not even Congress has that power...
It's remarkable that you seem to believe that others are not aware of that.
While I'm not going to search for it, IIRC, on this thread I've stated that the IRS has no such authority. Don't you think that folks such as Lawrence Wright and Denise Brennan know that also?
Scientology obtained its tax exempt status, by way of Fair Game tactics, which was, then, dishonestly parlayed into "government recognition of Scientology as a religion."
The effects of that have been felt, nationally and internationally, to Scientology Inc.'s advantage.
The two issues, Scientology's 501c status, and Scientology's pose as a "religion," unfortunately, have become intertwined and, largely, this a PR and psychological trick, or slight of hand.
One influences the other.
This shouldn't occur, but it does.
Similar threads
