Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Philosophy/religion

Join our Philosophy forum to discuss religion and spirituality.

Flip

1 2 3

Original poster

Anyone know anything about Scientology?

59 replies

JuniperDewdrop · 19/09/2004 10:04

I'm not thinking of changing religion or anything it's just since seeing Tom Cruise on Parky and how strongly he defended it has made me curious. I thought Parky was very rude to him to be honest, would he get away with saying such things about any other religion?

OP posts:

suzywong · 19/09/2004 10:10

Ok here's what I know

L. Ron Hubbard the founder of Scientology found the US tax laws which exempt taxes from organised religions very useful particularly as it can cost 5 or 6 thousand pounds to work one's way through the personality improving programmes Scientology offers. He is believed to have faked his war decorations and he ran off with the mother of my BF's ex boyfriend.

Check out the turkey Battlefield Earth with John Travolta on video, it is Hubbards' parable of the fight between good and evil, and guess what, for a fee Scientology can give you all the answers

Of course I am prepared have to come back on this thread and placate any Scientologist Mners, however you did ask and I think that because Scientological Education and salvation does come with a price and it was founded by a man of, frankly dubious, credentials that Parkinson and others feel the need to understand it's attraction for the otherwise sensible.

rosies · 19/09/2004 10:10

i didnt see the interview and i wished i had.

i do know a little about scientology... one of my dearest friends was very heavily involved.

what did you want to know? as a philosophy, i'd say it had some good common sense ideas but no more than any other philosophy has, as i have now discovered by spending time on a few inter faith forums and asking and listening.

i dabbled with scn and decided it was not for me. do a search on the net and unfortunately their are no unbiased sites, for or against. the cons are very active in their blackening, it has to be said, and there are some pretty hairy tales out there.

i'm afraid i dont go much for any organised religion... i think they all have bad sides to them. i've become very eclectic... bit of a cop out really!

rosies · 19/09/2004 10:12

suzywong, our posts crossed!

i have to say, your post was a little harsh... do you have scientology experiences that have prompted that?

suzywong · 19/09/2004 10:16

rosie

I feel that any religion that offers direct debit facilites for the privelige of finding out more about it's philosphy is more business than religion.

Original poster

JuniperDewdrop · 19/09/2004 10:19

cheers for that.

My mum says they don't believe in general practise and prefer to use 'natural' ways of healing? She remembers someone famous years ago who died because of this?

OP posts:

suzywong · 19/09/2004 10:22

I think that is the seventh day adventists, but I could be wrong

Original poster

JuniperDewdrop · 19/09/2004 10:23

thanks suzywong, I did wonder.

OP posts:

Forestfly · 19/09/2004 10:26

I don't know anything about it but automatically very dubious as it leaves out a big chunk of society, those on a low income or living in poverty,
is it only the rich that will be redeemed?

rosies · 19/09/2004 10:27

suzy,

most religions indulge in tything or collecting money.

i understand what you are saying and i tend to agree, but before being so critical, one should find out what they critisising... there is still a philosophy to it.

juniper,

i think you'll also find many religions prefer a natural approach... but it should never be to the exclusion of alopathic medicine. imo, thats wrong.

having said that, i went to a mosque recently where they had a huge homeopathic dispensary.

Original poster

JuniperDewdrop · 19/09/2004 10:35

I usually go to my homeopath first too but I still use my GP.
I may get a booklet on it as I'm curious. I have a book on other religions but it doesn't list it. don't fancy giving my bank details to them, not that I would anyway!

OP posts:

suzywong · 19/09/2004 10:38

Basically I am criticising a man who set upa religion based on science fiction of his own authoring and then asked people to pay for it

I found this in the Guardian archives about Tom Cruise and Scientology

Original poster

JuniperDewdrop · 19/09/2004 11:02

Some interview!! thanks a lot suzywong, I enjoyed reading it. Feel a bit sorry for wife no.3 (never thought I'd hear myself saying that) when she comes along as he seems very intense.

OP posts:

rosies · 19/09/2004 12:57

juniper,

the best way is of course, to find out for yourself. scientology have a huge website, very gushy, but look around it as many of the materials are there to download.

personally, i wouldnt call and ask for anything to be sent because they do tend to follow up!

suzy,

unless you have studied scientology, i am guessing you havent, you are only repeating what you have heard. yes, hubbard is a dubious character but, if people find what they want from scientology and dianetcs, it is not for you to slam ones chosen path. i happen to find some LDS, JW, 7th day adventists etc etc teachings, odd, but it is their path, not mine.

regards
rosie

suzywong · 19/09/2004 13:01

yes I am repeating what I have heard and read but the core of my criticism is that I do not hold in high esteem a man who set upa religion based on science fiction of his own authoring and then asked people to pay for it .

And I would be grateful if you could indicate to me just how I have slammed anyone's chosen path.

Juniper was curious, I offered my point of view so what is the problem rosies?

rosies · 19/09/2004 13:09

you view is very critical and is biased. its not offering juniper any information on scientology/ dianetics as a philosophy... rather you are just stating what you have heard regarding hubbard.

have you studied it at all?

suzywong · 19/09/2004 13:13

Can you explain to me how giving a link to a newspaper article about the very subject she queried shows bias? I did that to balance my personal opinon.

I think you will find that personal opinions are the seed of the best discussions here on MN and, correct me if I am wrong, this is a discussion.

rosies · 19/09/2004 13:24

i wasnt thinking about the news article link as such, more the rest of the content.

i agree, we are having a discussion, i didnt say we werent. i was just politely pointing out that one needs to be careful when giving their opinion of a subject they know little about... apart from the founder being dubious (which we agree on).

if juniper (sorry to talk of you in the 3rd person, juniper) wants to know more, she should go to the scientology website .

if you put scientology into google, you will also get links to the major critics site. there is even a whole newsgroup on usenet, but its a fairly unsavoury place and i wouldnt recommend it to anyone.

i think any religion can prey on the weak and vulnerable. its in times of need that one tends to look for answers from religion... and sometimes, i think they are all as bad as each other. what i would say though (although again, not advocating) dianetics (the philosophy side to scientology) does have practical exercises one can apply. but then so does buddhism, taoism, and certainly they do not cost inless one wants to give.

suzywong · 19/09/2004 14:00

You said I was people's chosen ways, rosies.

Apart from not being rude or directly insulting, I disagree that one needs to be careful when giving their opinion of a subject they know little about. The question was, and is, does anyone know anything about Scientology? and that is what I know. I am not offering advice nor attempting to direct people's practises or change behaviour nor am I insulting anyone on these boards.

I was attempting to shed some light on JuniperDewdrop's question about why people give Scientologists less respect than followers of other religions, I offered my opinion; that contentious issues and a degree of suspicion arise not from the ethos and philosophy of Scientology but from the business principles and personal credentials of its founder. L. Ron Hubbard is well within many people's living memory and his flaws and foibles as a human can be easily be recalled. Scientology is, therefore, unprotected by the magic effects of history, mysticism and the sense of the sacred that the major religions possess.

Shall we leave the semantics to one side and let this thread flourish with knowledge and enlightenment from our peers?

MarmaladeSun · 19/09/2004 14:32

All I know about scientology is that apparently they believe that a woman should give birth in silence! I think I'm right in saying that, I think I read it somewhere. It may well be on the link that was posted on here but I haven't read it yet.

rosies · 19/09/2004 14:38

suzy,

to be honest, i dont know how to respond to that.

the title of the thread is anyone know anything about scientology. i have at least offered some info on that as well as the url for the scientology homepage.

another thing i do know about scientology is that discussions often go the way of this one... talking about hubbard rather than the philosophy and then getting heated!

having dipped my toe into dianetics/ scn, i do speak with some knowledge and it would be nice to have other opinions on it.

btw, i see this as a slam
Basically I am criticising a man who set upa religion based on science fiction of his own authoring and then asked people to pay for it .

rosies · 19/09/2004 14:44

marmaladesun,

from what i know, this is correct and just one of the things that makes me question it. the idea behind this is that even in the womb, the feotus can hear and get impressions/ imprints, if you like, to the reactive mind.

so when mum is giving birth and saying things like OMG... GET IT OUT. ITS HURTING ME the baby's subconscious hears this and will react in later life to stimulus that maybe brings that to the fore.

operations should also be in silence... same reason. the unconscious mind is still recording events even though you may not be aware of it, at the time.

now i dont think i go along with this altogether but certainly we do know that many physical ailments come from emotional causes/ blockages, so maybe there is a little something in it.

Original poster

JuniperDewdrop · 19/09/2004 21:07

I don't know what to say? Sorry my Q caused a debate I was just curious. Thanks for the info though and the links.
I can't see how they expect women to have their babies in silence? Do they mean not swear etc.. I was fairly quiet with DS2 but still groaned. I wonder if a man made this rule/suggestion? Hubbard perhaps? I can't imagine that it'd come from a woman.

OP posts:

MarmaladeSun · 19/09/2004 21:25

Juniper, I believe it means complete silence, not just swearing etc. Having been told my my two older children that I did a mean Tarzan impression whilst giving birth to my daughter recently, I cannot believe that any woman can do it in silence. [shodk]

MarmaladeSun · 19/09/2004 21:25

oops. I meant

Original poster

JuniperDewdrop · 19/09/2004 21:29

So your children were present, how lovely

OP posts:

Flip

1 2 3