Why Scientology must be destroyed
Nov. 24th, 2006 03:23 pmI've been aware of Scientology's war against the Internet since I first got online in 1995. I've spent hours reading about the cult, and the ways that they have utterly destroyed peoples' lives.
I've been looking for a way I can explain how screwed up this cult is in simple terms, and I think I found it:
http://theunfunnytruth.ytmnd.com/
This is probably the best, and most disturbing YTMND video I have ever seen.
There is some graphic content in the above animation, but I think it should be watched anyway. It will underscore just how much these people "eat their own", as it were.
Additional reading: http://www.scientology-kills.org/
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-24 09:38 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-24 09:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-29 05:55 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-24 09:39 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-25 01:29 am (UTC)As I understand it, the celebrities tend to be sheltered from the weirdest parts of the religion, because they tend to be good public relations. So it's mostly presented to them as a self-help system, and as something that couldn't really be damaging despite what critics say. If your experience with Scientology is as what effectively amounts to a new age meditation variant, you're going to be a great public face, because you'll honestly be dismissive of critics -- stories like the MacPherson case are so far off from what you've seen over your years of involvement, they can't possibly be true, right?
Tom Cruise's recent behavior is something of a crack in this -- his rants against psychiatry made him come across as, well, somebody who could use a psychiatrist -- but in a certain sense, he's an example of how well this approach works. I know a lot of people who have a deep-seated suspicion of any and all psychotropic drugs, and even if Cruise may have come across as eccentrically overstated to them, they might well have come away with, "Okay, he was a little kooky, but he has a point. Maybe the Scientologists are on to something."
$cientology?
Date: 2006-11-25 06:41 am (UTC)As for Scientology in general, I have no problem with the beliefs themselves. Not all Scientologists are associated with the Church of Scientology; there are sects that don't charge thousands of dollars for their services.
Trickster
Re: $cientology?
Date: 2006-11-25 05:44 pm (UTC)Um, so it's okay with you that those "beliefs" include, in LRH's own writings, the gradual elimination -- by death -- of people low on the "tone scale," including gays?
Re: $cientology?
Date: 2006-11-25 06:12 pm (UTC)To my knowledge, L. Ron never called for people to be exterminated. What you're talking about sounds a lot more polite than hellfire. :) And I don't think there's anything wrong with denying one's own sexuality on the basis of religion, though trying to force others to conform to your standard, or trying to force yourself to be attracted to things you aren't, are both fruitless pursuits.
Trickster
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-25 01:48 pm (UTC)She was a few weeks too later. Her mother had joined scientology who'd taken all her money and then demanded more when she got cancer, on the grounds that obviously she wasn't "Clear" enough. Naturally they also took her off her medication, until she died.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-11-29 05:56 am (UTC)What'd they show?