| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Fredric L. Rice" |
| Date: |
05 Jul 2005 10:05:59 PM |
| Object: |
Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
http://www.useless-knowledge.com/1234/june/article434.html
Tom Cruise Goes Bonkers, Again
By Robert Paul Reyes
June 27, 2005
See Tom Cruise jump on Oprah Winfrey's couch. See Tom go bonkers
when he's sprayed with a water gun. See Tom slobber all over his
child bride.
Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin. He needs to take a
mega dose of Ritalin or a nice hit on a bong. I believe in better
living through chemistry and Tom definitely needs the aid of
pharmaceuticals. Tom Cruise went crazy at Matt Lauer when
questioned about Scientology and prescription drugs, even
rejecting claims that drugs such as Ritalin help people as "glib."
Those parents who have witnessed Ritalin work miracles in calming
their hyperactive children don't think it's "glib." Sure Ritalin
is over prescribed, but let's not throw out the baby with the bath
water.
What's glib is Tom Cruise thinking that he is superior to everyone
else because he is a movie star with a free pass to the
Scientology library.
What's glib is Tom Cruise criticizing Brooke Shields for taking
medication to combat her post-natal depression.
What's glib is a movie star dismissing science and preaching his
pseudo science malarkey.
Mr. Tom Cruise, "You can't handle the truth", but the truth is
that you could use a little medication. I suggest that you go to a
non-Scientology psychiatrist for treatment.
------------
About the author: Robert Paul Reyes is a columnist for the
Lynchburg Ledger.
Email: rreyes4966 @ aol . com
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
Scientology crooks: http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://PerkinsTragedy.org http://www.rightard.org/
End Republican race hatred: http://www.thedarkwind.org/
.
|
|
| User: "Misleart Chuff" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
15 Jul 2005 03:21:08 PM |
|
|
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11cmj8b6dk70c21@corp.supernews.com...
: http://www.useless-knowledge.com/1234/june/article434.html
:
: Tom Cruise Goes Bonkers, Again
:
: By Robert Paul Reyes
: June 27, 2005
:
: See Tom Cruise jump on Oprah Winfrey's couch. See Tom go bonkers
: when he's sprayed with a water gun. See Tom slobber all over his
: child bride.
:
: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin. He needs to take a
: mega dose of Ritalin or a nice hit on a bong. I believe in better
: living through chemistry and Tom definitely needs the aid of
: pharmaceuticals. Tom Cruise went crazy at Matt Lauer when
: questioned about Scientology and prescription drugs, even
: rejecting claims that drugs such as Ritalin help people as "glib."
:
:
: Those parents who have witnessed Ritalin work miracles in calming
: their hyperactive children don't think it's "glib." Sure Ritalin
: is over prescribed, but let's not throw out the baby with the bath
: water.
Mr. Reyes is a bit kooky, if he thinks Ritalin is a miracle drug. I'm
not saying that there aren't a few kids who need medication (and not
necessarily Ritalin, either) to keep them straight. I'm saying that
the Ritalin's primary use in the USA is for mind control, rather than
solving a medical problem. This, I know from personal experience...my
son's school tried to convince us that he needed Ritalin (and
specifically Ritalin), based on nothing more than the fact that they
didn't understand how to do deal with a highly intelligent kid that
had been taught to think for himself. No doctors, or qualified
experts of any kind. Can you guess who I feel is more in need of
medication?
[snip]
: Mr. Tom Cruise, "You can't handle the truth", but the truth is
: that you could use a little medication. I suggest that you go to a
: non-Scientology psychiatrist for treatment.
As much as I enjoy good drugs, I doubt that medication would be much
help in his case...at least, until the real source of his problems is
removed - the "Church" of $cientology.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
06 Jul 2005 09:50:01 AM |
|
|
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote in news:11cmj8b6dk70c21
@corp.supernews.com:
http://www.useless-knowledge.com/1234/june/article434.html
Tom Cruise Goes Bonkers, Again
By Robert Paul Reyes
June 27, 2005
See Tom Cruise jump on Oprah Winfrey's couch. See Tom go bonkers
when he's sprayed with a water gun. See Tom slobber all over his
child bride.
Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin. He needs to take a
mega dose of Ritalin or a nice hit on a bong.
Ah, another fucking ***** shows his ignorance of 'drugs'.
How the ***** can you compare Ritalin to 'Pot' ?
Dumb twat !
--
Jez, MBA.,
Country Dancing and Advanced Astrology, UBS.
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nivlem" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
06 Jul 2005 09:35:51 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 09:50:01 -0500, Jez
<iced_spear@NODAMNSPAMdsl.pipex.com> wrote:
FRice@SkepticTank.ORG (Fredric L. Rice) wrote in news:11cmj8b6dk70c21
@corp.supernews.com:
http://www.useless-knowledge.com/1234/june/article434.html
Tom Cruise Goes Bonkers, Again
By Robert Paul Reyes
June 27, 2005
See Tom Cruise jump on Oprah Winfrey's couch. See Tom go bonkers
when he's sprayed with a water gun. See Tom slobber all over his
child bride.
Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin. He needs to take a
mega dose of Ritalin or a nice hit on a bong.
Ah, another fucking ***** shows his ignorance of 'drugs'.
How the ***** can you compare Ritalin to 'Pot' ?
Dumb twat !
If you actually have the central nervous system disorder
Ritalin is used to treat, both will slow you down reasonably
well. Pot will have more debilitating side effects, though.
If you don't actually have ADHD, a stiff dose of Ritalin
makes you bounce off the walls. All drugs have plusses and
minuses. I see no reason not to compare Ritalin to weed in
the above context. You once again demonstrate that you're
one of the least rational atheists who post here, and at
least as ignorant as the poster you were complaining about.
Oh, and also that you fit the strawman caricature of the
humorless ultra-leftwinger that people like Rush Limbaugh
like to dump on.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
07 Jul 2005 04:52:29 PM |
|
|
Nivlem <mlml@svn.net> wrote in news:p54pc1dsior59tp0ocritht3dk0fcpv1v8@
4ax.com:
On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 09:50:01 -0500, Jez
<iced_spear@NODAMNSPAMdsl.pipex.com> wrote:
FRice@SkepticTank.ORG (Fredric L. Rice) wrote in news:11cmj8b6dk70c21
@corp.supernews.com:
http://www.useless-knowledge.com/1234/june/article434.html
Tom Cruise Goes Bonkers, Again
By Robert Paul Reyes
June 27, 2005
See Tom Cruise jump on Oprah Winfrey's couch. See Tom go bonkers
when he's sprayed with a water gun. See Tom slobber all over his
child bride.
Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin. He needs to take a
mega dose of Ritalin or a nice hit on a bong.
Ah, another fucking ***** shows his ignorance of 'drugs'.
How the ***** can you compare Ritalin to 'Pot' ?
Dumb twat !
If you actually have the central nervous system disorder
Ritalin is used to treat, both will slow you down reasonably
well.
Actually, no, they uswe Ritalin to keep children quiet.
ADHD is another of those ways the drug companies and psychatrists keep
the money train a rolling !
Pot will have more debilitating side effects, though.
And yet you go on later to call me ignorant !
Sorry dude you know nothing about 'Pot'. (Actually it's name is Cannabis,
but if you prefer street slang, so be it.)
If you don't actually have ADHD, a stiff dose of Ritalin
makes you bounce off the walls.
And you know that how ?
All drugs have plusses and
minuses.
Cannabis is a herb, not a drug.
I see no reason not to compare Ritalin to weed in
the above context.
Because they are two totally different substances.
With totally different effects.
You once again demonstrate that you're
one of the least rational atheists who post here, and at
least as ignorant as the poster you were complaining about.
As if your opinion means anything to me !
Oh, and also that you fit the strawman caricature of the
humorless ultra-leftwinger that people like Rush Limbaugh
like to dump on.
Gawd, is that the best insult you can come up with !
I'm deeply hurt that you couldn't at least make SOME effort !
--
Jez, MBA.,
Country Dancing and Advanced Astrology, UBS.
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'-
Howard Zinn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Smol" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
13 Jul 2005 04:35:29 AM |
|
|
Jez wrote:
Nivlem <mlml@svn.net> wrote in news:p54pc1dsior59tp0ocritht3dk0fcpv1v8@
4ax.com:
If you actually have the central nervous system disorder
Ritalin is used to treat, both will slow you down reasonably
well.
Actually, no, they uswe Ritalin to keep children quiet.
Ritalin is actually a stimulant (methylphenidate), whereas
the working ingredient in marihuana is tetrahydrocannabinol,
which has quite the reverse effect. In children (and adults)
who do have ADHD, it will help stimulate their ability to focus
and thus be less chaotic. In children who don't have ADHD,
Ritalin will make them run up the walls.
To say it's simply a scam is simply not true. It is over-prescribed,
but people with ADHD really can benefit from it for organizing
their lives.
RS
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Midjis" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
06 Jul 2005 05:26:05 AM |
|
|
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
See Tom go bonkers
when he's sprayed with a water gun.
Actually, while I thoroughly disapprove of the Church of Scientology, I
have to stick up for Tom here.
He did NOT 'go bonkers' when he was sprayed with the water gun. In fact,
in my opinion he was remarkably restrained. He confronted the puerile TV
crew and repeatedly asked them "why would you do that" - essentially
lectured them like a parent with unruly kids. And his relatively calm
response visibly confused the TV crew, since they had obviously *expected*
some sort of tantrum (this clearly being the point of their well-worn
programme format).
Yes, he did conclude by calling the TV man a 'jerk' - but constrast this
with Sharon Osborne's response to same situation (shouting and throwing a
bucket of water over the crew - thus giving them exactly what they wanted)
and I don't think you can really say he 'went bonkers'.
Like I said, I'm anti-Scientology, and I don't agree with Tom's stance on
'psychs' - but if we're going to criticise him let's do it fairly, yes?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kevin" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
05 Jul 2005 10:32:19 PM |
|
|
In article <11cmj8b6dk70c21@corp.supernews.com>,
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
http://www.useless-knowledge.com/1234/june/article434.html
Tom Cruise Goes Bonkers, Again
By Robert Paul Reyes
June 27, 2005
See Tom Cruise jump on Oprah Winfrey's couch. See Tom go bonkers
when he's sprayed with a water gun. See Tom slobber all over his
child bride.
Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin. He needs to take a
mega dose of Ritalin or a nice hit on a bong. I believe in better
living through chemistry and Tom definitely needs the aid of
pharmaceuticals. Tom Cruise went crazy at Matt Lauer when
questioned about Scientology and prescription drugs, even
rejecting claims that drugs such as Ritalin help people as "glib."
Those parents who have witnessed Ritalin work miracles in calming
their hyperactive children don't think it's "glib." Sure Ritalin
is over prescribed, but let's not throw out the baby with the bath
water.
What's glib is Tom Cruise thinking that he is superior to everyone
else because he is a movie star with a free pass to the
Scientology library.
What's glib is Tom Cruise criticizing Brooke Shields for taking
medication to combat her post-natal depression.
What's glib is a movie star dismissing science and preaching his
pseudo science malarkey.
Mr. Tom Cruise, "You can't handle the truth", but the truth is
that you could use a little medication. I suggest that you go to a
non-Scientology psychiatrist for treatment.
------------
About the author: Robert Paul Reyes is a columnist for the
Lynchburg Ledger.
Email: rreyes4966 @ aol . com
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
Scientology crooks: http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://PerkinsTragedy.org http://www.rightard.org/
End Republican race hatred: http://www.thedarkwind.org/
It's not nice to make fun of kids that have to take Ritalin.
While tom is a dork. His problems stems from Scientology.
--
Beware of Barbara Schwarz She is a known Usenet WACKO
http://www.ahbl.org/notices/barbschwarz.php
Her picture
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Secrets/barbara_schwarz_files/8d.jpg
.
|
|
|
| User: "george" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
06 Jul 2005 12:09:20 AM |
|
|
Kevin wrote:
In article <11cmj8b6dk70c21@corp.supernews.com>,
FRice@SkepticTank.ORG (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
http://www.useless-knowledge.com/1234/june/article434.html
Tom Cruise Goes Bonkers, Again
By Robert Paul Reyes
June 27, 2005
See Tom Cruise jump on Oprah Winfrey's couch. See Tom go bonkers
when he's sprayed with a water gun. See Tom slobber all over his
child bride.
Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin. He needs to take a
mega dose of Ritalin or a nice hit on a bong. I believe in better
living through chemistry and Tom definitely needs the aid of
pharmaceuticals. Tom Cruise went crazy at Matt Lauer when
questioned about Scientology and prescription drugs, even
rejecting claims that drugs such as Ritalin help people as "glib."
Those parents who have witnessed Ritalin work miracles in calming
their hyperactive children don't think it's "glib." Sure Ritalin
is over prescribed, but let's not throw out the baby with the bath
water.
What's glib is Tom Cruise thinking that he is superior to everyone
else because he is a movie star with a free pass to the
Scientology library.
What's glib is Tom Cruise criticizing Brooke Shields for taking
medication to combat her post-natal depression.
What's glib is a movie star dismissing science and preaching his
pseudo science malarkey.
Mr. Tom Cruise, "You can't handle the truth", but the truth is
that you could use a little medication. I suggest that you go to a
non-Scientology psychiatrist for treatment.
------------
About the author: Robert Paul Reyes is a columnist for the
Lynchburg Ledger.
Email: rreyes4966 @ aol . com
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
Scientology crooks: http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://PerkinsTragedy.org http://www.rightard.org/
End Republican race hatred: http://www.thedarkwind.org/
It's not nice to make fun of kids that have to take Ritalin.
While tom is a dork. His problems stems from Scientology.
If he's thick enough to believe the scientology fantasy his problems
are deeper than scientology.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Midjis" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
06 Jul 2005 05:47:45 AM |
|
|
"george" <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:
If he's thick enough to believe the scientology fantasy his problems
are deeper than scientology.
Like all organised religions, Scientology takes advantage of the fact that
most people want order. They want to follow. They want someone else to
make the decisions for them, like when they were kids. People feeling a
lack of order will turn to all sorts of things to compensate. And if a
religion appears at the time and says "I can show you the way", then
there's every chance they'll turn to that religion. Christianity and
Scientology teach different stories, but they both work in the same way:
they both promise to simplify the world for their followers; they both
promise order and a way through the confusion of life. Scientology
promises a reward in this life: you'll become an Operating Thetan - a
super-human. Evidence: none. Christianity promises a reward in the next
life: you'll be with God in a happy place. Evidence: none.
Nevertheless, it is overly simplistic to assume that anyone who has faith
in either of these possibilities is 'thick'. Outside of religion, people
believe many things that are equally without foundation. Look at politics,
for example. Yet we do not call THEM 'thick'.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
06 Jul 2005 09:00:36 PM |
|
|
Midjis <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
"george" <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:
If he's thick enough to believe the scientology fantasy his problems
are deeper than scientology.
Like all organised religions, Scientology takes advantage of the fact that
most people want order.
Scientology isn't a religion.
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
Scientology crooks: http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://PerkinsTragedy.org http://www.rightard.org/
End Republican race hatred: http://www.thedarkwind.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Midjis" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
07 Jul 2005 04:51:30 AM |
|
|
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Scientology isn't a religion.
You are presumably referring to the fact that many national governments
have rejected Scientology's claim that it is a religion. However, this
rejection is based on a desire to avoid having to grant tax relief and
the protection of diversity laws to Scientology. In the case of
Scientology, that is reasonable. However, many of those governments
clearly do see it as such. Germany, for example - the country perhaps
most deeply opposed to Scientology and which refuses to accept it as a
religion - refers to it as a 'sect'. A 'sect' is a branch of a religious
or philosophical group, as Christianity was originally a sect of Judaism.
Other countries, however, do recognise the religious nature of
Scientology.
For myself, I DO consider Scientology a religion. It relies entirely on
the faith of its adherants for its success. Every part of the
Scientology/Dianetics 'system' depends on faith. It requires belief that
humanity is fundamentally flawed, that we are capable of much more, and
that certain rituals (auditing) will allow us to reach our true
potential. It requires belief in engrams - a mechanism that has been
invented by Hubbard and placed before his followers on a 'this is true
because I say it is' basis. It requires belief in Body Thetans -
otherwise known as evil spirits - although there is absolutely no
evidence for their existence. It requires acceptance of and faith in
Hubbard as Scientology's Moses - the one who knows the laws, knows how
things work, and who will lead the Scientologists to the Promised Land.
And his knowledge comes not from research and investigation - he knows
these things because he knows them. Just as Moses knew what God wanted
because God told him so. Nothing could be checked, nothing could be
tested. The comparisons are many. Many comparisons to religion, many
comparisons to business, many comparisons to various con tricks.
Absolutely NO comparisons to science.
But critics are afraid that calling it a religion will validate it. Will
make it 'good'. Will it? No. I am, as I've said a number of times,
fiercely opposed to any and all forms of organised, restricted and
enforced religion - the binding of divinity in laws of human design.
This in itself seems wrong in my mind. I believe Scientology is a scam,
and I believe that calling it a scam and an organised religion simply
makes it twice as bad. That Hubbard called it a church only because he
sought tax relief is meaningless now. The fact is that to its faithful,
Scientology IS a religion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Misleart Chuff" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
15 Jul 2005 03:37:36 PM |
|
|
"Midjis" <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns968C6E7507E2EZRHGRGGNVWLDRAVKW@213.123.26.234...
: (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
:
: > Scientology isn't a religion.
:
: You are presumably referring to the fact that many national
governments
: have rejected Scientology's claim that it is a religion. However,
this
: rejection is based on a desire to avoid having to grant tax relief
and
: the protection of diversity laws to Scientology.
[snip]
Yer fullashit.
: For myself, I DO consider Scientology a religion. It relies
entirely on
: the faith of its adherants for its success. Every part of the
: Scientology/Dianetics 'system' depends on faith.
[snip]
Yer stillfullshit. The con artist depends entirely upon the faith of
his marks for the success of his scam. Does that mean that the conman
has founded a religion? Damn, boy, go look up the history of Co$, it
oughta open your eyes.
: But critics are afraid that calling it a religion will validate it.
Will
: make it 'good'.
You keep on like this, you'll turn into Bowwow Schwarz, or DianuhC, or
something. Look at yourself. This crap is all in _your_ head.
Will it? No. I am, as I've said a number of times,
: fiercely opposed to any and all forms of organised, restricted and
: enforced religion - the binding of divinity in laws of human design.
: This in itself seems wrong in my mind. I believe Scientology is a
scam,
: and I believe that calling it a scam and an organised religion
simply
: makes it twice as bad. That Hubbard called it a church only because
he
: sought tax relief is meaningless now. The fact is that to its
faithful,
: Scientology IS a religion.
No son, it isn't meaningless. It is still an organization created and
run purely for profit & power. Religions aren't. This, of course,
isn't to say that religions have any excuse for existing, or anything.
It's just that they _aren't_ the same thing as the cold-blooded,
systematic rape that Co$ is.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Midjis" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
15 Jul 2005 05:57:35 PM |
|
|
"Misleart Chuff" <misleart@ameritech.net> wrote:
Yer fullashit.
Thank you for that scholarly appraisal.
Yer stillfullshit. The con artist depends entirely upon the faith of
his marks for the success of his scam. Does that mean that the conman
has founded a religion?
If his marks believe they are following a religion, yes, it does.
Like Fredric, you appear to suffering from the curious delusion that a
religion cannot be intrinsically dishonest, and that labelling something
like Scientology a religion automatically proofs it against attack or
challenge.
Damn, boy, go look up the history of Co$, it
oughta open your eyes.
Boy?
: But critics are afraid that calling it a religion will validate it.
Will
: make it 'good'.
You keep on like this, you'll turn into Bowwow Schwarz, or DianuhC, or
something. Look at yourself. This crap is all in _your_ head.
Okay - so you disagree with my comment as I've pasted it here. So, if
that's the case, then what's your beef with calling Scientology a
religion, if we can also call it a con trick? Which is it to be?
No son, it isn't meaningless. It is still an organization created and
run purely for profit & power. Religions aren't.
Could I perhaps draw your attention to the Catholic Church, which ruled
Europe with an iron fist throughout much of the last two thousand years,
and whose hierarchy still enjoy an opulent and bejewelled lifestyle
today?
These are the people who purport to be followers of a humble carpenter,
who consistently challenged the rich and powerful.
It's just that they _aren't_ the same thing as the cold-blooded,
systematic rape that Co$ is.
Tell that to the people who died during the witch hunts, or the Crusades.
Tell that the people who suffer and die because some self-proclaimed
cleric misunderstood the concept of 'jihad'.
The vast majority of Christians and Muslims, though, are honest and
decent people. As are the vast majority of Scientologists. The fact
that they might well be misguided, to a greater or lesser degree, does
not make them ALL guilty of the same cynical exploitation as those who
control their respective congregations - who claim to speak for their
gods.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Freeman" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
15 Jul 2005 06:17:53 PM |
|
|
"Midjis" <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns9694F3A7727ZRHGRGGNVWLDRAVKW@213.123.26.234...
"Misleart Chuff" <misleart@ameritech.net> wrote:
Yer fullashit.
Thank you for that scholarly appraisal.
Yer stillfullshit. The con artist depends entirely upon the faith of
his marks for the success of his scam. Does that mean that the conman
has founded a religion?
If his marks believe they are following a religion, yes, it does.
Like Fredric, you appear to suffering from the curious delusion that a
religion cannot be intrinsically dishonest, and that labelling something
like Scientology a religion automatically proofs it against attack or
challenge.
Is there even a universal legal definition of religion? Popular definition
usually insists, as a minimum requirement, on of the belief in one or more
deities, and if we follow that definition where is Scientology's? Or is
that one of those secrets they hold on you until you cough up the big
bucks.. er ..charitable contribution.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Midjis" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
15 Jul 2005 08:23:51 PM |
|
|
"Don Freeman" <freemand@sonic.net> wrote:
Popular definition
usually insists, as a minimum requirement, on of the belief in one or
more deities, and if we follow that definition where is Scientology's?
While that's a reasonable way to look at it, the trouble is that that IS
"the popular definition". In other words, it's how OTHER PEOPLE assess the
question; how OTHER PEOPLE judge the belief system in question.
Those of us outside Scientology know full well that Hubbard called it a
religion because it would benefit him to do so. But nevertheless, while
each of us are within our rights to say "I don't believe it", that doesn't
really make a difference in the long run. Scientologists believe they are
following a religion, therefore they are following a religion. That it is
a corrupt and deceptive one makes no difference.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
07 Jul 2005 10:18:20 PM |
|
|
Midjis <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
FRice@SkepticTank.ORG (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Scientology isn't a religion.
You are presumably referring to the fact that many national governments
have rejected Scientology's claim that it is a religion.
No, I'm pointing out that Scientology isn't a religion.
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
Scientology crooks: http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://PerkinsTragedy.org http://www.rightard.org/
End Republican race hatred: http://www.thedarkwind.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Midjis" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
07 Jul 2005 11:37:25 PM |
|
|
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
No, I'm pointing out that Scientology isn't a religion.
And are you willing to provide your own reasoning, as I have provided mine?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
08 Jul 2005 09:25:07 AM |
|
|
Midjis <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
FRice@SkepticTank.ORG (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
No, I'm pointing out that Scientology isn't a religion.
And are you willing to provide your own reasoning, as I have provided mine?
Does one need to "provide reasoning" to note that Amway is
not a religion, ya fucking moron?
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
Scientology crooks: http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://PerkinsTragedy.org http://www.rightard.org/
End Republican race hatred: http://www.thedarkwind.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Midjis" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
08 Jul 2005 11:40:54 AM |
|
|
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Does one need to "provide reasoning" to note that Amway is
not a religion, ya fucking moron?
No. But then Amway does not claim to be, and those involved in it do not
claim it to be. I am surprised you cannot see the difference.
However, since all you appear to have to offer is abuse, I see no reason to
concern myself with your opinion any further. If you think of anything
grown-up to add, please feel free.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
08 Jul 2005 08:01:51 PM |
|
|
Midjis <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
FRice@SkepticTank.ORG (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Does one need to "provide reasoning" to note that Amway is
not a religion, ya fucking moron?
No. But then Amway does not claim to be,
Irrelevant. A business is a business regardless of whatever it claims.
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
Scientology crooks: http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://PerkinsTragedy.org http://www.rightard.org/
End Republican race hatred: http://www.thedarkwind.org/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Sophist" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
07 Jul 2005 11:10:38 PM |
|
|
Fredric L. Rice wrote:
Midjis <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
FRice@SkepticTank.ORG (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Scientology isn't a religion.
You are presumably referring to the fact that many national governments
have rejected Scientology's claim that it is a religion.
No, I'm pointing out that Scientology isn't a religion.
Hmmm. I'm inclined to consider "religion" to likely be one of those
family resemblance terms Wittgenstein talked about, like "game". And
Scientology seems to have quite a lot of points of resemblance to quite
a lot of religions. What do you think disqualifies it?
--
Aaron Boyden
"I may have done this and that for sufferers; but always I seemed to
have done better when I learned to feel better joys."
-Thus spoke Zarathustra
.
|
|
|
| User: "Desertphile" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
08 Jul 2005 05:08:16 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 00:10:38 -0400, The Sophist <sophist@brown.edu>
wrote:
Fredric L. Rice wrote:
No, I'm pointing out that Scientology isn't a religion.
Hmmm. I'm inclined to consider "religion" to likely be one of those
family resemblance terms Wittgenstein talked about, like "game". And
Scientology seems to have quite a lot of points of resemblance to quite
a lot of religions. What do you think disqualifies it?
I will not answer for Fredric, but I'll answer. :-)
Well, for one thing Scientology claims, as a discovery of SCIENCE, that
all religions are the result of space alien manipulation of human
beings. Hubbard insisted that Scientology was not a religion nor a
philosophy, but a technology that has nothing to do with faith or
belief. Hubbard only started calling his sinister business a "religion"
after the USA, United Kingdom, Spain, Rhodesia, and other countries
started prosecution proceedings against him for various crimes.
(http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/religion-angle.htm) In the USA, for
example, one is allowed to practice medicine without a license if one
claims to do so as a "spiritual remedy."
Scientologists are not allowed to have religions, nor allowed to
believe in God or Gods or Goddess or Goddeses. Any customer or staff or
salesperson who still clings to the belief of a divine being are told
they have "misunderstood the tech" and are required to pay for more
auditing and more courses until they "understand" and abandon their
belief in the deity.
For another thing, Scientology Inc. has a price list for all of their
"services," some of which run into the hundreds of thousands of
dollars. Those "services" all revolve around training oneself to be
better at making money, manipulating people, gaining super-human powers
and abilities, and competing against others in business. There is
nothing in Scientology that mentions god, spirituality, one's
relaationship with the devine, etc.
And another thing, when Hubbard issued a HCOPL making all of his stores
"churches," he ordered the store managers to go out and purchase Roman
Catholic priest garb--- which the managers and salespeople got a big
laugh out of. Hubbard also ordered them to clean out a brook closet and
call the closet a "chapel," which also caused much mirth.
Yet another reason: for 32 years the United State's IRS studied
Scientology and Scientology Inc. and determined that Scientology is a
business, not a religion. Over fifty million dollars in income, and
taxation on that income, was at stake. As the Wall Street Journal
pointed out, the crime syndicate had THOUSANDS of law suits going
against the IRS and IRS agents. The The New York Times investigate the
extortion of the IRS commissioner are wrote:
"the (tax) exemption followed a series of unusual internal IRS
actions that came after an extraordinary campaign orchestrated by
Scientology against the agency and people who work there. Among
the findings were these: Scientology's lawyers hired private
investigators to dig into the private lives of IRS officials and
to conduct surveillance operations to uncover potential
vulnerabilities."
They concluded by urging the FBI to investigate the blackmailing of the
IRS commissioner.
And yet more reasons: court judges in the USA, Canada, Australia,
United Kingdom, Spain, France, Germany, Switzerland, Sweeden, Rhodesia,
and elsewhere have all concluded that Scientology is nothing more than
a money-making scam that pretends to be a religion.
http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/what-judges-say-about-scientology3.htm
--
Aaron Boyden
"I may have done this and that for sufferers; but always I seemed to
have done better when I learned to feel better joys."
-Thus spoke Zarathustra
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
08 Jul 2005 09:24:41 AM |
|
|
The Sophist <sophist@brown.edu> wrote:
Fredric L. Rice wrote:
Midjis <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
FRice@SkepticTank.ORG (Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Scientology isn't a religion.
You are presumably referring to the fact that many national governments
have rejected Scientology's claim that it is a religion.
No, I'm pointing out that Scientology isn't a religion.
Hmmm. I'm inclined to consider "religion" to likely be one of those
family resemblance terms Wittgenstein talked about, like "game". And
Scientology seems to have quite a lot of points of resemblance to quite
a lot of religions. What do you think disqualifies it?
Scientology is a corporation much like Amway, it sells what it sells
and L. Ron Hubbard's letters and his personal biographer Gerry Armstrong
have noted that Hubbard and one of his wives started tacking on the
guise of religion as a tax dodge. Armstrong notes that when Hubbard
informed his ringleaders they were trying "a religion angle," as he
called it, "for accountants and tax collectors and so forth," they all
laughed about how next they would start brining in stained glass windows.
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
Scientology crooks: http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://PerkinsTragedy.org http://www.rightard.org/
End Republican race hatred: http://www.thedarkwind.org/
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Hatunen" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
08 Jul 2005 12:51:13 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 03:18:20 GMT, (Fredric
L. Rice) wrote:
Midjis <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Scientology isn't a religion.
You are presumably referring to the fact that many national governments
have rejected Scientology's claim that it is a religion.
No, I'm pointing out that Scientology isn't a religion.
The US federal government says it is.
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
.
|
|
|
| User: "John" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
08 Jul 2005 01:09:11 AM |
|
|
"Hatunen" <hatuunen@cox.net> wrote in message
news:n15sc19e22sge1eflkjl5n5aevtfohd49s@4ax.com...
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 03:18:20 GMT, (Fredric
L. Rice) wrote:
Midjis <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Scientology isn't a religion.
You are presumably referring to the fact that many national governments
have rejected Scientology's claim that it is a religion.
No, I'm pointing out that Scientology isn't a religion.
The US federal government says it is.
the IRS has accepted the church of scientology as a religion because the
church spent years launching expensive legal campaigns against them to force
the IRS' hand.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hatunen" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
09 Jul 2005 02:11:27 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 16:09:11 +1000, "John" <junk@junk.com> wrote:
"Hatunen" <hatuunen@cox.net> wrote in message
news:n15sc19e22sge1eflkjl5n5aevtfohd49s@4ax.com...
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 03:18:20 GMT, (Fredric
L. Rice) wrote:
Midjis <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Scientology isn't a religion.
You are presumably referring to the fact that many national governments
have rejected Scientology's claim that it is a religion.
No, I'm pointing out that Scientology isn't a religion.
The US federal government says it is.
the IRS has accepted the church of scientology as a religion because the
church spent years launching expensive legal campaigns against them to force
the IRS' hand.
Surely you're not arguing that the US government is weaker than
the German.
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
.
|
|
|
| User: "John" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
10 Jul 2005 08:13:20 PM |
|
|
"Hatunen" <hatuunen@cox.net> wrote in message
news:9a80d11sdqt6nq7vu4tju0bbmungng0hcc@4ax.com...
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 16:09:11 +1000, "John" <junk@junk.com> wrote:
"Hatunen" <hatuunen@cox.net> wrote in message
news:n15sc19e22sge1eflkjl5n5aevtfohd49s@4ax.com...
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 03:18:20 GMT, (Fredric
L. Rice) wrote:
Midjis <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Scientology isn't a religion.
You are presumably referring to the fact that many national governments
have rejected Scientology's claim that it is a religion.
No, I'm pointing out that Scientology isn't a religion.
The US federal government says it is.
the IRS has accepted the church of scientology as a religion because the
church spent years launching expensive legal campaigns against them to
force
the IRS' hand.
Surely you're not arguing that the US government is weaker than
the German.
I'm not arguing anything. I'm stating what happened.
I think arguing the issue of what defines a religion is pointless. Some of
the adherents of scientology certainly believe it is a religion. The
question is, why does being a religion allow such protection from both
paying taxes and from prosecution from abuse of members and critics?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hatunen" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
11 Jul 2005 06:20:43 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:13:20 +1000, "John" <junk@junk.com> wrote:
"Hatunen" <hatuunen@cox.net> wrote in message
news:9a80d11sdqt6nq7vu4tju0bbmungng0hcc@4ax.com...
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 16:09:11 +1000, "John" <junk@junk.com> wrote:
"Hatunen" <hatuunen@cox.net> wrote in message
news:n15sc19e22sge1eflkjl5n5aevtfohd49s@4ax.com...
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 03:18:20 GMT, (Fredric
L. Rice) wrote:
Midjis <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Scientology isn't a religion.
You are presumably referring to the fact that many national governments
have rejected Scientology's claim that it is a religion.
No, I'm pointing out that Scientology isn't a religion.
The US federal government says it is.
the IRS has accepted the church of scientology as a religion because the
church spent years launching expensive legal campaigns against them to
force
the IRS' hand.
Surely you're not arguing that the US government is weaker than
the German.
I'm not arguing anything. I'm stating what happened.
I think arguing the issue of what defines a religion is pointless. Some of
the adherents of scientology certainly believe it is a religion. The
question is, why does being a religion allow such protection from both
paying taxes
Take that up with the ACLU or your congressscrittters.
and from prosecution from abuse of members and critics?
What makes you think it does?
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
.
|
|
|
| User: "John" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
11 Jul 2005 05:55:47 PM |
|
|
"Hatunen" <hatuunen@cox.net> wrote in message
news:nkv5d1p1leiss8dem0sjkavhqb2g79uvlc@4ax.com...
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:13:20 +1000, "John" <junk@junk.com> wrote:
"Hatunen" <hatuunen@cox.net> wrote in message
news:9a80d11sdqt6nq7vu4tju0bbmungng0hcc@4ax.com...
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 16:09:11 +1000, "John" <junk@junk.com> wrote:
"Hatunen" <hatuunen@cox.net> wrote in message
news:n15sc19e22sge1eflkjl5n5aevtfohd49s@4ax.com...
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 03:18:20 GMT, (Fredric
L. Rice) wrote:
Midjis <midwinter_m@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
(Fredric L. Rice) wrote:
Scientology isn't a religion.
You are presumably referring to the fact that many national
governments
have rejected Scientology's claim that it is a religion.
No, I'm pointing out that Scientology isn't a religion.
The US federal government says it is.
the IRS has accepted the church of scientology as a religion because the
church spent years launching expensive legal campaigns against them to
force
the IRS' hand.
Surely you're not arguing that the US government is weaker than
the German.
I'm not arguing anything. I'm stating what happened.
I think arguing the issue of what defines a religion is pointless. Some of
the adherents of scientology certainly believe it is a religion. The
question is, why does being a religion allow such protection from both
paying taxes
Take that up with the ACLU or your congressscrittters.
Are you familiar with the CoS's secret deal with the IRS?
and from prosecution from abuse of members and critics?
What makes you think it does?
The church of scientology certainly think it does. They've argued in court
that their Fair Game doctrine is a religious belief and so they should not
be prosecuted for following it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Desertphile" |
|
| Title: Re: Tom Cruise is the poster child for Ritalin |
11 Jul 2005 10:34:29 PM |
|
|
***** Google News is not allowing me to quote what I am replying to,
even when I paste it!
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 08:55:47 +1000, "John" <junk@junk.com> wrote:
"Hatunen" <hatuunen@cox.net> wrote in message
news:nkv5d1p1leiss8dem0sjkavhqb2g79uvlc@4ax.com...
and from prosecution from abuse of members and critics?
What makes you think it does?
The church [sic] of scientology certainly think it does.
They've argued in court that their Fair Game doctrine is
a religious belief and so they should not be prosecuted
for following it.
The crime syndicate also insisted that holding a person against her
will and torturing her to death was protected under the "Religious
Freedom Restoration Act" (http://holysmoke.org/lm/19.htm) and the crime
syndicate claimed that the dope they forced down her throat with a
turkey baster was a "spiritual substance."
To the horror of everyone watching the homicide case, the prosecutors
granted immunity from prosecution to the perpetrators in exchange for
testimony; when it came time to indict the criminals for the homicide,
the DA discovered he had "accidently" granted immunity from prosecution
to everyone the crime syndicate claimed was responsible for Ms.
PcPherson's death.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
