there is a fundamental definitional difference between religions and organisations whose existence is for the sole or principal purpose of swindling funds out of people.
If I may be so blunt, a religion is a kind of answer to fundamental spiritual "why' and "how" questions giving those needing answers to such questions a kind of holdfast. A kind of filter between them and hard reality. I do not have any problem with people seeking answers for themselves and finding such as they can live with.
Such "organisations" as are meant here (specific Scientology in this thread) have nothing whatsoever to do with such a definition of religion, they are simply the lowest crime clad in the outer garments of religion to ensnare the susceptible. That governments seem unable or unwilling to do much against them is a crime in itself.
Clearly, the foundation of Islam, Roman Catholic Christianity, Hinduism and such like was not for the sole or principal purpose of swindling funds out of people
A nasty minded person might now ask: "do you mean
Protestant Christianity was? (All italics mine). Something I do trust you did not nor do wish to say!
If I recall correctly, one reason Luther stood up agains the Pope's church was it's utter corruption at that time.
True, most religions were not started with any fund-raising intend. However, du moment most religions became institutionalisted, they started needing funding. In itself still no problem. However, if one sees the mechanics behind quite a bit of that fund-raising one cannot help but start to worry. I grew up (still live ) in a rather very much orthodox fundamentalist protestand part of The Netherlands, so I've seen a few things here and there...
and the fact that these religions do receive monies from their respective followers is necessarily indicative neither of coercion or of having no other purpose or intent
Indeed so, just as long as there are no mechanics of coercion. The more fundamentalist a religious group, the more coercion there usually is (of the kind "the more you give, the higher your seat in Heaven will be" and "if you do not give more/enough, you will go straight to Hell"), upto and including handing over one entire posessions (as is the
goal in criminal groups such as Scientology and Moon, to name but two of the criminal sort)
On the other hand, the so-called Church of Scientology appears to be predicated almost entirely upon extyracting funds from the unsuspecting
I think the last word should be "brainwashed". I've done some reading up on the techniques of such groups....
and its adoption of the word "Church" in its name is, of course illustrative of its conscious and deliberate hoodwinking process.
If only because USA law says churches are exempt of paying taxes. And governments are usually very scary of attacking anything smelling of religion...
Furthermore, "Scientology" is an absurd tautologism, the term "science" and the suffix "-ology" conveying the same meaning.
The Simpsons once had an episode on this, only here the "Church" was called "The Movementarians".
Scientology is not just an absurd
tautology, I fear. If it were just that, the harm would not be that big.
Well said Sir.
Thank you Thal! But his is the second time you agree so with me, I hope you're not starting a cult here!
All best,
gep
Topic: scientology