Scientology

[technodad]

So, the Supreme Court have said that Scientology is a real religion and you can legally get married in a church.

uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKBRE9BA0CQ20131211?irpc=932

So, what do people think about this?

Plus, I do have to point out that whereas we do know, or think we know, about the motivations of the founders of Scientology and Mormonism, we have less than no clue about the motivation about the founders of Christianity.

It was a long time ago and the records are not great.....

All we know is what the Christians say. They are not likely to say it was corrupt. The Mormons and scientologists don't say that either.

It depends upon your beliefs though. You are bound to say there is no difference if you're an atheist because you don't believe in any God but Christians would say the basis of Christianity was formed in the scripture which is considered by them to be sacred. The doctrines are also very different from those of Scientology.

Lottie, of course.

But Christians would also say that Hindus believe something that is not contained in their scripture, and is very very different. But they would recognise Hinduism as a faith.

Yet they would probably not recognise the ancient Greek and Roman faiths as valid, though they were followed faithfully by many people for a long time.

There's a difference between saying, "that is a faith but its not my faith" and "that is not a faith."

Atheists will think any religion is a load of rubbish. Fair enough, but for someone to follow any religion they will have decided to put their faith in it for whatever reason.

But that's not the basis of this discussion. What we are asking is, can we find any feature of Scientology which means that it can't be described as a faith?

And I would say, leaving aside the natural loyalty of each poster to their own position, I don't think there is anything you can point to.

Some Christians are pretty intolerant of any other religions at all - I experienced examples of this among fundamentalist Christians I encountered at university. They were not very nice people. I found their behaviour ironic. Meanwhile they were smugly assured of their own salvation.

Fair enough, but for someone to follow any religion they will have decided to put their faith in it for whatever reason.

Not necessarily. Most will have had it foisted upon them by their parents, school and community. It is not until much later (if ever) that they start to question it and come to the conclusion, as I did, that it is all arrant nonsense.

Even if they were intolerant, did they think Hinduism was a faith? Or was it a cult to them? That would be an interesting position. The One True Faith, and all that.

Not the point, Lottie. I will stop thinking any religion is rubbish the very moment they provide evidence that it's not.

Putiing "faith" in something is not a legitimate defence - it simply means, "I have decided to believe this no matter what". And society gives this position credibility it doesn't deserve by insisting that we all "respect" it.

lottie, if someone had to make 2 lists, one of religions and one of cults, how would you advise them to do it.

It's exactly the point Hetti because people who believe in religions don't require the kind of proof you would want to see to believe the same thing. Some people believe there is a spiritual world out there which you cannot see much in the same way you cannot see radio waves for example.

Not all people think the same way you do but that doesn't make anyone more right than anyone else necessarily.

I can see why from an atheists point of view there would be little to choose between Christianity and Scientology. I am not sure scientologists even believe in a god though?

No, but lottie, even if someone believes in their own faith, we are not asking about that here.

We are saying, how would you distinguish between a cult and a rival faith that you don't hold?

If people want to have faith in something you don't believe in why should you even care?

Lottie, from a Christian viewpoint, what is the difference between Hinduism and Scientology?

I don't know enough about either religion to comment, sorry. I have heard things about Scientology that would concern me but that doesn't mean that oppressive and abusive forms of other religions don't exist.

Recently I read that Wicca is now considered a religion.

It's a very interesting discussion (if we can do it without people feeling attacked for their beliefs, that's not what I am trying to do :) ).

The UK legal definition used to include things like group worship, but even that got challenged, I think by Sikhs. When you start to say, "OK, there are other faiths than my own and I will respect them" you very quickly have to confront this problem of definition. Maybe the only logical position is to say that "my faith is the only true one". But clearly that approach is long outdated in the UK where we have many faiths.

I think we may have to remove the advantages that Christianity enjoys in UK society. Other faith groups rightly claim it's unfair. And it does look as if we can't really draw the line anywhere.

Oppressive and abusive faiths- lets discuss very old, obsolete faiths :) - there were some awful archaic faiths involving human sacrifice and all sorts. But I don't think that meant they weren't religions. They were just horrible religions....

But I think the definition of what a religion is and what a cult is depends entirely on what you believe. From one person's point of view it is different from another's. I don't think Scientology sees itself as something just anyone can join if they want to though - it seems to have more of an air of exclusivity to it although that is just my perception.

The other thing to consider is that not all Christians even think the same way. On my children's forms if it asks for religion I put 'C of E' but I expect there are plenty of fundamentalist Christians who would say I was not a Christian.

I care, Lottie because that faith that supposedly prompts Christians in this country to run food banks is the same "faith" that hangs gay people from trees in Ghana and gets abortion doctors shot in America.

And encouraging people to believe wholeheartedly what they are told, without asking for evidence, is keeping the homeopathy & psychic hotline industries afloat.

Just because religion is largely under control in this country now doesn't mean that therefore we shouldn't give a shit about it's effects elsewhere.

The question is not why do I care - but why don't you?

Radio waves is as bad an example as gravity, by the way.

Attacking a belief is a world away from attacking people for a belief. Don't muddle to two up.

But we can't base the law of the land- which is what this case was about- on what individuals happen to believe. Apart from any other considerations, there are too many different people who believe different things, so you would need lots of different laws. We need a workable consensus about what we can exclude from our list of religions, for the purposes of legal structures.

And you can go two ways. You can either have a rigid list, based on what is currently culturally the norm. Or you can let anything qualify but reduce the advantages to being a religion, so it doesn't matter how wooo the new ones are.

It looks as if the first approach just isn't tenable and the UK, will need to move towards the second.

Not all Christians are homophobic bigots you know Hetti and I'm as appalled as you at the ones that are.

I don't think that when it comes to religion it's just a matter of what people have been told and believing it. Perhaps some people do follow their parents. Others have personal reasons and experiences that lead them there. What suits one person does not suit another. A lot of people rely on gut feelings as well as logical thought processes when they make decisions about a range of issues.

We are never all going to think the same way as with political positions.

Beast - what does that law say about how a religion is defined? I've never read about it.