Author Topic: Scientology Discussion  (Read 36468 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Plank of Wood

  • Final Fighter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8427
  • Ka-Boom!
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #90 on: February 09, 2008, 01:25:31 pm »
Are you really, really, sure about that? Say that to any Christian on the internet and 80% of the time they will get mad and throw a hissy fit.

Every religion has extremists that will go comepletly ape**** should you say one word against their religion. And don't throw the old Buddhist Card: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoko_Asahara
the real saviour of this forum

Offline Dr. Croccer

  • Vanguard Venturer
  • *****
  • Posts: 1112
  • Ceci n'est pas un gueu
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #91 on: February 09, 2008, 01:33:07 pm »
Asahara is a really ****ty example, as are most cults like in Waco who claim that they are part of a religion but they aren't. Same with Scientology, which calls itself a religion.

Offline Daxx

  • Golden Axe Battler
  • *****
  • Posts: 8612
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #92 on: February 09, 2008, 01:44:49 pm »
If Scientology was the main religion all the way back to WhateverBC, and some guy proposed Christianity, we'd all think he was a nut, wouldn't we?

Probably not in comparison, because on the whole a religion which doesn't necessarily demand specifics (or at least not the fundamentalist branches) leaves a lot more open to interpretation than the Scientologist mythos. Much less the fact that the details of Scientology's philosophy would not have been developed in the same manner in that time period.

Especially when you consider that Christianity is largely based on historical (arguing this is largely irrelevant to my point, since the mere premise alters the fundamental nature of the religion regardless of its veracity) evidence and sightings, testimony considered credulous at the time. Compare that to Scientology which is much more "I saw this all in a dream", and you've got a very different beast.

Not that this is an endorsement of Christianity as a whole, but in terms of a scale of credulity, Scientology is waaaay further off the end than most contemporary mainstream religions.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2008, 01:48:54 pm by Daxx »

Offline Dr. Croccer

  • Vanguard Venturer
  • *****
  • Posts: 1112
  • Ceci n'est pas un gueu
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #93 on: February 09, 2008, 02:00:28 pm »
Scientology is based on nothing really. On the word of fat SCI-FI writer who died as a refugee with money from the ''church'' and that only. Like Daxx said, most religions are based on somewhat historical characters, their stories, morality and of course, God(s).

Offline Plank of Wood

  • Final Fighter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8427
  • Ka-Boom!
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #94 on: February 09, 2008, 02:02:08 pm »
I said the basic idea was okay, not the sidedishes.
the real saviour of this forum

Offline Dr. Croccer

  • Vanguard Venturer
  • *****
  • Posts: 1112
  • Ceci n'est pas un gueu
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #95 on: February 09, 2008, 02:12:37 pm »
I said the basic idea was okay, not the sidedishes.
Yeah, and the basic idea of Communism is good too. If you ignore the sidedishes that it relies too much on the good of man, is easily corrupted and goes against human nature. The basic idea of National-Socialism is good too. If you forget the minor details of hatred of anything that isn't it and it's resource-consuming habits. What's your point?

Offline Plank of Wood

  • Final Fighter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8427
  • Ka-Boom!
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #96 on: February 09, 2008, 02:33:42 pm »
I said the basic idea was okay, not the sidedishes.
Yeah, and the basic idea of Communism is good too. If you ignore the sidedishes that it relies too much on the good of man, is easily corrupted and goes against human nature. The basic idea of National-Socialism is good too. If you forget the minor details of hatred of anything that isn't it and it's resource-consuming habits. What's your point?

You just said it :P
the real saviour of this forum

Offline SBD

  • Duck Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
  • It stands for Ship-Borne Dive bomber, people.
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #97 on: February 09, 2008, 10:24:29 pm »
I wonder how many Scientology Inc spy satellites are pointing at Steve's house right now.

Offline Krakow Sam

  • Moderator
  • Dungeon Sieger
  • *****
  • Posts: 24427
  • Stern dissaproval
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #98 on: February 10, 2008, 03:28:55 am »
Oh, I'd say somewhere in the region of NONE AT ALL.  ::)
Sam is basically right, he's just cranky.

Offline Plank of Wood

  • Final Fighter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8427
  • Ka-Boom!
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #99 on: February 10, 2008, 03:31:44 am »
Sceintology have satellites? Holy Crap!
the real saviour of this forum

Offline Luminar

  • Gyromite Gyro
  • *****
  • Posts: 4332
  • i'm losin' it
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #100 on: February 10, 2008, 03:38:57 am »
I heard Anon was planning to protest in Clearwater. Holy balls, it' s suicide. Scientology practically owns the entire town.

Offline Plank of Wood

  • Final Fighter
  • *****
  • Posts: 8427
  • Ka-Boom!
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #101 on: February 10, 2008, 03:40:16 am »
Plus, they wouldn't be anonomous anymore   :o
the real saviour of this forum

Offline happydan20

  • Venture Conqueror
  • ****
  • Posts: 775
  • Discovered the "everything syndrome."
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #102 on: February 10, 2008, 07:25:28 am »
I want to be clear that i dont have a problem with the beliefs scientologists have, just some of the decision made to "protect" the information.  There is a group of people who practice the beliefs without the cult like activities and theyre called freezoners.

I also dont get the comparisons of scientology to fundamentalists.  Fundamentalists have strict rules, if you dont meet them youre out.  Scientology doesnt let poeple out willingly.

I understand all the comments about how all religions are weird so this one shouldnt get attention. 

But think about any other religion you want and ask yourself one question:  What happens to you when you decide to leave?
I survived the flood of 2008 and all I got was this crappy homelessness.

Offline aname

  • Starcross Space Cadet
  • *****
  • Posts: 1995
  • The name's Mario, Mario Mario.
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #103 on: February 10, 2008, 09:49:04 pm »
Anyone seen any of the stuff on the raid on Scientology?

I'm kind of confused, Anonymous actually did something... and people are congratulating them, not incredibly evil people at that.
Back in black, with a gray dry brush and a red stiple effect.

Offline Doctor Z

  • Space Harrier
  • *****
  • Posts: 4072
    • View Profile
Re: Scientology discussion
« Reply #104 on: February 11, 2008, 04:58:32 am »
That's because in most peoples minds, Anon. is the lesser of two evils.