Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Todd I. Stark) Subject: Re: The Story That Time Couldn't Tell - Article 2 -2 Message-ID: <1991Nov11.172425.27065@PA.dec.com> Summary: Know Thyself, CoS Public Relations people ... Sender: news@PA.dec.com (News) Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Date: 11 NOV 91 11:58:08 Lines: 44
In article <73f_y!=3D@engin.umich.edu>, email@example.com (David Bonnell) writes... >CHEAP SHOTS. Neither TIME nor Behar could find it within themselves to >begrudge anything or anyone associated with the Church the slightest >compliment.
This is interesting, David. Thanks for posting it. Personally, I did find the TIME article extremely biased. And I found the Church's reply appearing slightly, if any, less so. Most facts on either side of this are buried in blatant rhetorical combat. Both 'sides' seem to be relying more on ad hominem attacks on the other's sources of income than on the evidence of cases - or anything more than superficially resembling rational argument. That we are dealing with religious dogma here there can be no doubt; the question is whether we are also dealing with rampant mutual fear on all sides, and whether this can ever be overcome.
> It would of required nothing more than an acknowledgement of unassialable >fact to have reported the truth about L. Ron Hubbard the author. Even that was >more than TIME or Behar could bear.
It is notable in this regard that the writers repsonding for the Church chose also not to credit their popular opponent with much if any positive social value. Which more tactful approach of course would not have been particularly neccessary if both combatants had stayed with statements of objective fact instead of mutual mudslinging.
But I guess that makes for poor press, eh ?
Plus, the Church has made it quite clear that they view all members of humanity as either with them or against them (those who 'can help' in their determination, vs. those who cannot). This cannot help but lead to the kind of extreme polarization of views that makes intelligent discussion and resolution of even minor differences all but impossible.
Any comments appreciated. If possible, please also send them by mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to ensure that I will be able to get to them in case I can't get to the newsgroup for a while.
--=====================_907962803==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"