11h-tml> The Skeptic Tank: Alt.Religion.Scientology Archive Message - 1995
Archive Message - 1995
---

Since some of the materials which describe the $cientology cult could be considered to be copywritten materials, I have censored myself and The Skeptic Tank by deleting any and all possible text files which describes the cult's hidden mythologies. I have elected to quote just a bit of the questionable text according to the "Fair Use" legal findings afforded to those who report. - Fredric L. Rice, The Skeptic Tank, 09/Sep/95 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- From news.interserv.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!castlsys.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail Wed Jul 19 09:29:02 1995 Path: news.interserv.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!castlsys.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail From: stevea@castlsys.demon.co.uk (Steve) Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,misc.legal.computing,misc.taxes,comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: The Noose is Tightening on CoS (was Big Suprise - 79K) (LONG) Followup-To: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,misc.legal.computing,misc.taxes,comp.org.eff.talk Date: 15 Jul 1995 14:10:04 +0100 Organization: Castle Systems Ltd: systems designers to the gentry Lines: 85 Distribution: inet Message-ID: <3u8enc$e34@castlsys.demon.co.uk> References: <3u4mk8$n09@utopia.hacktic.nl> <noringDBpqJz.M72@netcom.com> <DBq3nJ.DwK@ceco.ceco.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.demon.co.uk X-NNTP-Posting-Host: castlsys.demon.co.uk X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Xref: news.interserv.net alt.religion.scientology:75822 misc.legal:61829 misc.legal.computing:10224 misc.taxes:18774 comp.org.eff.talk:56797 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- R. Urban (a#urban@ccmail.ceco.com) wrote: > noring@netcom.com (Jon Noring) wrote: > (sniP) > This is not intended to start a flame war, but you need to have more > tolerance for beliefs that are different than your own, particularly > those that are shared by minorities. (In case you are wondering, I was > born and raised a Catholic.) And, if we don't protect the religious > freedom of the minority, then the religious freedom of the majority will > eventually be jeapordized. Every so often, someone will delurk and blind us with the brilliance of his insight, gleaned from, ooh, *minutes* of careful study of the discussion on a.r.s. My postings to a.r.s. are not designed to enlighten the clams: I know that the mind control practiced by their cult is too good to make it likely that my simple prose will cause them to "have a cognition". No, I write for the benefit of newbies and lurkers, who might have strayed into a.r.s. as a result of some of the adverse publicity the cult has been receiving recently. When I discover, as from reading this post, that my efforts, and those of the others here who are interested in exposing the vicious excesses of this evil cult for all to see, it makes me wonder whether it's really worth bothering with. Let's put it another way: CAN YOU NOT BLOODY UNDERSTAND PROPER ENGLISH???? It is said, repeatedly and at length, by the vast majority of critics that THEY ARE NOT ATTACKING THE "RELIGION". This battle is NOT about religious freedom, irrespective of how the evil cult chooses to characterise it: it is about a cult which uses all sorts of smokescreens, including that of religious freedom, from behind which they can launch amoral and vicious attacks on anyone who dare question one jot of their practices, which include brainwashing, child abuse, lying, bait and switch tactics, fraud, murder, abuse of the legal system - the list is very long. The space opera cosmology of the cult of Scientology is not something that most of us take particular issue with - FreeZoners (ex-Scienos who just practice the "tech") get an easy ride here. That having been said, much of what Scientology practices as "scripture" is so ludicrous as to be irresistible target practice for the rapier wits of some of the critics here. Just as Christianity, Islam and Buddhism - indeed, any public figure or entity - must be prepared to accept criticism, so should Scientologists be prepared to accept that there are others who find their beliefs comical. We are not talking about persecution here, either, but criticism. That is reasonable: persecution would not be. Given your evident lack of understanding of the issues being aired here, I don't suppose that you noticed the discussions on boycotting of Scientologist-run businesses, where the consensus tended towards NOT *persecuting* people running businesses who happen to be Scienos, but simply advertising the Scn connection. Scientology "front groups" are a completely different kettle of fish, though. We are not here to persecute Scientology: we are here to expose the unreasonable and irresponsible activities of an organisation whose goal is to totally suppress any commentary or criticism on or of its activities. I leave it to you to ponder on why they might be so keen to hide their nature. Steve - -- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Support Dennis Erlich! Send cheques (any currency) labelled DENNIS ERLICH DEFENCE FUND to: Carla Oakley/Katie Walsh, MORRISON & FOERSTER, 345 California St, San Francisco CA 94104-2675 Tel (415) 677-7700 - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi, ronartistr - sent in your cheque yet? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQBVAgUBMAe+KfsT8zz+lqiRAQE+7gH/Vx7bYWMkaaIex2yU5h/+d4WmTnTFpl3s XC/71A4QysDbnAYDLn+Xi2hC0Z9yfSppwpb14iwAFiXyQx7rwYfoCA== =vPyI -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---

Return to The Skeptic Tank Alt.Religion.Scientology Archives Master List
Go to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank