Scientology Kills

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

I think Aristole's point is....if you have such a problem with Scientlogy, which you have every right to, and you are going to make it a point to create this thread and expose Scientolgym, then why not do this with every other religion that has done the same or worse?

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Do you two have a contest going to see which one of you can misinterpret things more egregiously? I'm saying the problem is so much larger than scientology. You solve nothing by solving the scientology problem.

And they'll continue to fail miserably until they realize that we don't live in a system that accomodates the kind of humanity they, and I, wish to see. Our system encourages the worst in humanity.

Paraphrased. What can I say? "How can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate?"

I knew it was something along those lines

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Only watch this is you can resist being brainwashed

 

[Zenien]

He has an awesome shirt. O_O

I think Aristole's point is....if you have such a problem with Scientlogy, which you have every right to, and you are going to make it a point to create this thread and expose Scientolgym, then why not do this with every other religion that has done the same or worse?

Unlike Scientology, which is a very concentrated and centralized group on top of it all, the failures of the major Religions are all well known issues in our modern society. I encourage people to go out and bring attention to issues that they feel aren't getting enough attention. GO, have some fun and do some good. How Does he know I wasn't at a Tibeit protest? Who is he to place demads on how exactly I choose to be an activist in something or anything? Frankly the Anonymous/Scientology thing is a real world issue that uses the internet as an important tool in its conflict. It makes sense and it's easy to keep a thread going on such a non static issue that reflects to pace at which our modern lives go.

I actually tried making a Tibeit thread BTW, but it bombed.

(Poor Tibeit).

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

The thing is Zenien, which I am sure you know already.

People....just don't care.

 

[Zenien]

About Tibeit or issues in General?

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

In general, people just don't care. Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of people that do care.

But there are a few differences.

People that care and do little or nothing at all about it. They just feel bad.

People that care and do something about it, but so very few of these people actually have the power or influence to make a difference or major impact.

Then there are the people that do have the power and influence to make major changes but do not. We call these people politicians.

 

[Zenien]

Well said.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

 

[Aristotle]

Actually you'd solve the Scientology problem if you solved the Scientology problem.

Scientology is no more the problem than Christianity is the problem. They are both symptoms. This is how humanity behaves.

Which sort of takes us back to this bit about you saying that only the biggest shark deserves any attention.

Oh, look, another thing I didn't say!

Look it's obvious that you have a grander vision of societal issues that you're itching to get at here, so you could just outline your viewpoint right now instead of hinting at it.

I've been clear about the aspects of it that pertain to this discussion.

Hence why I brought up an experience were a friend (Stupidly) died because of Religous pressures of a mainstream religion. I guess it never made me as bitter as someone like Willhem who seems to have a long unfortuante past with Major Religions.

So why do you continue to act as if scientology is the only religion that creates situations in which people are likely to die?

Of course not. It's Historical failings. Historical. Failings.

Historical.

I see you subscribe to the childish philosophy that what happened in the past doesn't count.

You'll have to forgive me as you language sounded right out of another person I talk to who believes in the Space Lizards.

No, you were just reaching for a quick way to ridicule an unfamiliar argument which confounded your black-and-white mind.

Even so, far reaching shadow governments that may or may not exist still fall under the same umbrella as Space Lizards, for the purpose of what I was talking about anyway. That they may or may not exist and are Boogiemen.

No. Space Lizards and Boogiemen are undocumented. Shadow governments are very well-documented by some of the world's leading media organizations, sociologists, political scientists, and analysts. Except here in the US, where people like you dismiss them as crackpots.

So Scientologists aren't war profiteers? Ok. While I see what you've been getting at since your first reply, it's a pretty flawed argument. Last time I checked we don't omit focus of focus of a smaller trespasser of moral standards simply because there's a war profiteer and a Shadow Government. Ideally, people will bring attention to both of them, or they should, at least. Putting focus on one thing doesn't mean that a person is excluding focus from another. For Instance right now there are worldwide protests against the oppression of Tibiet.

You just don't get it, do you? Putting pressure on scientologists means nothing when much larger oppressions are taking place. Ours is a society of deception and oppression. The same people being preyed upon by scientology will be preyed upon by someone else.

Didn't we just go over how ridicule and hyperbole are among the last refuges of the failed arguer?

Your argument is that L. Ron Hubbard's religion is sinister and dangerously destroying lives.

The heart of this issue is that this is a very concentrated and centralized group who's trespasses, not only are supporting slave labor (Search up STAFF and Seaorg) in the first world, but many other things that abuse and break the laws of our countries. This is group that people ARE relatively ignorant about. This is a group that has manipulated a threatened the IRS so that Scientology receives more benefits than any Religion in under the US legal system, a violation of the American Constitution. Thus this is a corrupt group that should have attention brought upon just like ANY trespass.

And if you think this is any different than the Catholic Church and all the other major religious organizations in this world, you're one naive individual.

That's not what I meant, you should know that.

Then say what you mean.

You're tying a lot of things that you personally hold to a worse opinion as a supposedly rational justification for ignoring this one. That is just flat out wrong in my opinion.

These are not my personal opinions. These are well-documented. This is the world we live in. And I'm not saying "ignore scientology," I'm saying "shift the system."

It sort of spits in the face of the people who have been hurt by Scientology (even though that might not be your intent), which flagrantly ignores the issues like Scientology being responsible for the largest known infiltration of the US Government in its short history, and many other abuses and examples of questionable ethics. All in favor of what you deem to be more important issues, as if everything is an either or proposition.

The Christians have infiltrated the government far more totally than scientologists ever could have. So have the neoconservatives. Like I say, there are much scarier threats to this democracy and to this world.

Like the LA Times, Coroner reports, State Police Documents, Court files, and countless personal testimonies from Ex Scientologists as well and Scientology documents seized during the raid on their headquarters following Operation Snow White (and plenty of which were actually stolen from the IRS in the first place). The sites I've linked just compile this stuff, I've checked the sources myself for a lot of it.

The credible sources only demonstrate that scientologists died. The personal testimonies are just not very reliable, because of the inherent bias.

I doubt you'll find the same level of... organization in the pursuits and trespasses of the Revivalist movement like you do in Scientology. Heck to even phrase it like that is almost unfair to the Revivalist movement though they certainly are no angels.

They're just smarter about it. I mean, after all--they've certainly managed to make you all but forget about them. By reacting to miniscule, phantom threats like scientology, you play right into the hands of the really dangerous mother****ers running the world into the ground right in front of our faces.

the failures of the major Religions are all well known issues in our modern society.

They're really not. In a nation of only 20% college graduates, most of these things are still basically ignored and unknown. You've got a very rosy view of this country that isn't borne out by reality.

How Does he know I wasn't at a Tibeit protest?

Protests are useless. They are no longer effective. Money is what changes the world now.

Who is he to place demads on how exactly I choose to be an activist in something or anything?

I've demanded nothing. I just think your excessive hatred for scientologists is absurd.

Frankly the Anonymous/Scientology thing is a real world issue that uses the internet as an important tool in its conflict.

And Anonymous is a hate group which has actually wrecked a lot of people's lives, people who weren't even associated with Scientology, just for the fun of it. Anonymous are vicious, evil criminals of the worst degree: the kind driven not by desperation, not even by self-interest, but by pure, simple cruelty.

About Tibeit or issues in General?

Issues in general. Look at how many threads in this forum are related to anything of substance, and how many are about what kind of pizza you're eating right now. People are ****ing idiots. I love them, but they're stupid.

 

[Zenien]

Scientology is no more the problem than Christianity is the problem. They are both symptoms. This is how humanity behaves.

There is no "The" problem in this scenario. The root of all problems are very well the human condition and creations of social interact and society, yes. However that doesn't mean that you can be high end mighty about it and say "There's no food shortage problem! The actual problem is human nature, us not preserving the environment is just a symptom of that." (as a lower level example to be more direct)

So unless you a have grand plan that involves turning people into Cyborgs that don't do ill, on top of any plans for a sweeping cultural revolution- I'll get to that in a bit.

Scientology has problems and as you put it, one could call it the 'Scientology problem' as a generalizing short hand reference which I used in my response to fit with your language choice.

You're making an ultimate useless semantics debate.

Oh, look, another thing I didn't say!

You've been actively arguing to this point by rationalizing that there are larger religions and bigger problems in the world than Scientology, as a means of discrediting the idea of focusing on Scientology. So yes, you have basically said as such. Although perhaps amending that to say "bigger" instead of "Big" might suit your disposition.

I've been clear about the aspects of it that pertain to this discussion.

If you want to make a thread about it that would be cool. Or if you'd like to outline your high level theory in this thread even. But don't make insubstantial allusions to it as a crutch of your argument than refuse to extrapolate.

So why do you continue to act as if Scientology is the only religion that creates situations in which people are likely to die?

I don't, despite what you erroneously assumed coming in. You've been dropping a lot of your asertations on the heels of my responses. You might as well add this one. The argument about other issues in one that has happened long before you decided to show up. I have never 'acted like Scientology is the only one that commits trespasses'. Maybe you're talking a single thread on the internet and wrongly assuming as such, in fact that's what you're doing exactly.

I see you subscribe to the childish philosophy that what happened in the past doesn't count.

"Oh look something I never said!"

Of course it 'counts', but this isn't a black and white scenario, or a wet and dry scenario. The real world is much more complicated than that. For someone who's trying to claim that things are confounding my "little head" or "Black and white mind" you are really outstripping me when it comes to not being able to keep up.

No, you were just reaching for a quick way to ridicule an unfamiliar argument which confounded your black-and-white mind.

You can believe that if you want. Wrong as it may be. However I assure you, any misinterpretation on my part was due to coincidental past experience with your wording and your own initial failure to properly clarify your meaning in that scenario.

No. Space Lizards and Boogiemen are undocumented. Shadow governments are very well-documented by some of the world's leading media organizations, sociologists, political scientists, and analysts. Except here in the US, where people like you dismiss them as crackpots.

You'd be surprised. (and I'm not American). However there is not definitive proof of a Shadow Government, that I've seen personally. If you'd like to make a thread on that go ahead.

You just don't get it, do you? Putting pressure on scientologists means nothing when much larger oppressions are taking place.
Ours is a society of deception and oppression. The same people being preyed upon by scientology will be preyed upon by someone else.

[/quote]

That's rich.
So it means nothing if public awareness is raised of Scientology and that potential helps some people who would otherwise joined and/or been effected by it in a negative way. Because something else will prey on them regardless, and you know this for a fact. So therefor anything short of a sweeping cultural revolution is a waste of time, essentially.

So if you've got all the answers, figuratively speaking, why not come out and say them in a new thread. I'd love to read it.

Your argument is that L. Ron Hubbard's religion is sinister and dangerously destroying lives.

Sure, and that's proven. You don't seem to get it.

And if you think this is any different than the Catholic Church and all the other major religious organizations in this world, you're one naive individual.

Heh, sorry to say but there are some up front well documented differences.

Then say what you mean.

One step ahead of you, now we just need to work on getting you to understand what you've read.

These are not my personal opinions. These are well-documented. This is the world we live in. And I'm not saying "ignore scientology," I'm saying "shift the system."

If you really are sincere in that, make a new thread with your ideas outlined and I'll gladly read it. But it still falls back to my previous comments on the matter.

The Christians have infiltrated the government far more totally than scientologists ever could have. So have the neoconservatives. Like I say, there are much scarier threats to this democracy and to this world.

There is a difference between 'Infiltrated' and 'Taking part in through mostly public and legally opposable avenues that are relatively honest or easily transparent in their motivations in our current day society'.

The credible sources only demonstrate that scientologists died. The personal testimonies are just not very reliable, because of the inherent bias.

Court documents and files seized from Scientology Headquarters, as well as the overwhelming similar accounts from former Scientologists.

They're just smarter about it. I mean, after all--they've certainly managed to make you all but forget about them. By reacting to miniscule, phantom threats like scientology, you play right into the hands of the really dangerous mother****ers running the world into the ground right in front of our faces.

So enlighten us oh savior, for we are the sheep who beckon your guidance.

So wait, you just literally said: "The people in the Revivalist movement are just smarter about it". Sure I know what you really meant, but either way, than attention should be brought upon those people's and groups. No argument there.

They're really not. In a nation of only 20% college graduates, most of these things are still basically ignored and unknown. You've got a very rosy view of this country that isn't borne out by reality.

Really? So i couldn't go to virtually any area in the world asnd ask a random person if they know about the child abuses inside the Catholic Church? Now they might not know the particular details of a cover up, or the instructions to ask for forgiveness instead of alerting the authorities, but you do not need a college education to know the cliff notes. The finner, grittier details should have more attention brought to them, sure.

Protests are useless. They are no longer effective. Money is what changes the world now.

but guess what? They're still the most practical legal means available in our society today. Secondly, money is the driving factor of much of our society, and it just so happens to be money that Scientology is getting less of and money that these protests are helping to drive away from Scientology (COS is downstate by more than 50 percent compared to 2004).

I've demanded nothing. I just think your excessive hatred for scientologists is absurd.

First of all, hatred, wouldn't be what I feel for the organiation and practices of Scientology.

Second, it is impossible for me to have displayed excessive hatred for this group as I do not feel any hatred towards them. Any assumptions as such are your own mistakes.

And Anonymous is a hate group which has actually wrecked a lot of people's lives, people who weren't even associated with Scientology, just for the fun of it. Anonymous are vicious, evil criminals of the worst degree: the kind driven not by desperation, not even by self-interest, but by pure, simple cruelty.

Anonymous is a 'Stand Alone Complex'.The only things you can hold Anonymous responsible for are what its directives explicitly were at the time. If someone is going around performing acts against the directives of Anonymous, saying "I'm Anonymous" They are not actually Anonymous because they have ceased to operate within the instructions of what it means to be Anonymous. Anonymous is only accountable for its own directives, not the act of an individual. This group has no official membership.

Do you have illegal acts like DDOS attacks? yes? Do you have cases of them leaking a persons personal information on the net? Sure. Ironically those cases pall in comparison to even the acts of Scientology, and are typically against those who deliberately ask for it, knowing the consequences of swatting the sleeping bear, or deserved it.

Let's review so you can stay brushed up:

- They Shut down Habbu Hotel, and now do it yearly. Habbo hotel is a GUI chat based system run by some racists who had been banning people based on skin color.


- They trolled some daytime TV talk show that I can't remember the name of that was very sleazy and outlandish.

- They got Hal Turner, a racist radio commentator, taken off the radio waves.

- They trolled Tom Greens late nigh call in show.

- They declared war on Mudkips

- The called in fake bomb threats (didn't have much support at all on this one) which ended in a guy going to jail.

- They declared war on Scientology

Now Partyvan is down so I can't source all of this and I might have forgotten a chapter, but as you can see, "hate group" is a bit sensational. And it's clear that your actually understanding of what exactly it is doesn't measure up with reality. Some people use it as an excuse when doing something but they are not actually a part of it unless they conform to the directives. I don't approve of the bomb threats, but that had very little support, I do approve of the Scientology thing, Habbu Hotel, taking out Hal Turner, etc. Anonymous actually has a history of acting against racism, and each project is on a mutually exclusive basis more or less, garnering it's own individuals on a case by case basis.

Look at how many threads in this forum are related to anything of substance, and how many are about what kind of pizza you're eating right now. People are ****ing idiots. I love them, but they're stupid.

You can't expect high level discussion to dominate a message board devoted to comic books.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Scientology is no more the problem than Christianity is the problem. They are both symptoms. This is how humanity behaves.

Oh, look, another thing I didn't say!

I've been clear about the aspects of it that pertain to this discussion.

So why do you continue to act as if scientology is the only religion that creates situations in which people are likely to die?

I see you subscribe to the childish philosophy that what happened in the past doesn't count.

No, you were just reaching for a quick way to ridicule an unfamiliar argument which confounded your black-and-white mind.

No. Space Lizards and Boogiemen are undocumented. Shadow governments are very well-documented by some of the world's leading media organizations, sociologists, political scientists, and analysts. Except here in the US, where people like you dismiss them as crackpots.

You just don't get it, do you? Putting pressure on scientologists means nothing when much larger oppressions are taking place. Ours is a society of deception and oppression. The same people being preyed upon by scientology will be preyed upon by someone else.

Your argument is that L. Ron Hubbard's religion is sinister and dangerously destroying lives.

And if you think this is any different than the Catholic Church and all the other major religious organizations in this world, you're one naive individual.

Then say what you mean.

These are not my personal opinions. These are well-documented. This is the world we live in. And I'm not saying "ignore scientology," I'm saying "shift the system."

The Christians have infiltrated the government far more totally than scientologists ever could have. So have the neoconservatives. Like I say, there are much scarier threats to this democracy and to this world.

The credible sources only demonstrate that scientologists died. The personal testimonies are just not very reliable, because of the inherent bias.

They're just smarter about it. I mean, after all--they've certainly managed to make you all but forget about them. By reacting to miniscule, phantom threats like scientology, you play right into the hands of the really dangerous mother****ers running the world into the ground right in front of our faces.

They're really not. In a nation of only 20% college graduates, most of these things are still basically ignored and unknown. You've got a very rosy view of this country that isn't borne out by reality.

Protests are useless. They are no longer effective. Money is what changes the world now.

I've demanded nothing. I just think your excessive hatred for scientologists is absurd.

And Anonymous is a hate group which has actually wrecked a lot of people's lives, people who weren't even associated with Scientology, just for the fun of it. Anonymous are vicious, evil criminals of the worst degree: the kind driven not by desperation, not even by self-interest, but by pure, simple cruelty.

Issues in general. Look at how many threads in this forum are related to anything of substance, and how many are about what kind of pizza you're eating right now. People are ****ing idiots. I love them, but they're stupid.

I wouldn't say protest are useless. Dingleberrys are useless. But sadly money is the driving factor for anything to change now a days.



Yeah people as a whole are stupid, but then again there is a reason why that is and that is an entirely different topic.

 

[claydogg]

The thing is scientology is a cult!!
not a religion.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

The thing is scientology is a cult!!
not a religion.

Ummmm....you could say religion is a cult too.

 

[Gerald Root]

Paraphrased. What can I say? "How can you be so obtuse? Is it deliberate?"

You know what's even funnier? It was YOU that questioned me on what I said about the Pope, and after it was backed up you kinda just ignored whatever else I said. You asked for a reason, it was given, you ignored it and called me obtuse. That's gold.

 

[Danalys]

the only difference between cults and religions is how accepted they are in the mainstream. that's by definition.

 

[Zenien]

You what's even funnier? It was YOU that questioned me on what I said about the Pope, and after it was backed up you kinda just ignored whatever else I said. You asked for a reason, it was given, you ignored it and called me obtuse. That's gold.

The Irony is strong in that one.

"Okay, just now Mark Bunker said in a live radio show that the reason his account went down was that it contained a short clip of the Colbert Report, and that Youtube won't put him up again until Viacom gives them the ok. He said that Stephen Colbert getting involved himself is his best chance."

THough that story doesn't add up because apparently that clip was only ever in his first account. Seems like Youtube is playing a game to stave off a faulty lawsuit from Scientology.

 

[Sloth7d]

the only difference between cults and religions is how accepted they are in the mainstream. that's by definition.

I always veiwed cults as religions where the main persons in charge preach the stuff, but don't actually believe in it themselves, personally. Which, with the way it's been exposed that many founders of the scientology religion have been using the religion as a cover to steal money, it makes me think those in charge don't. Otherwise, I really wouldn't care who they worshipped. As a catholic, I must respect the veiws of others, even if they don't match my own.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

I'd like to relate that in my lifetime, I have witnessed the accepted definition for "cult" change in every dictionary.

The definition was always, "a sect/group of people united by a common belief who have their own distinctive customs and procedures and protocols for dealing with major life events...such as marriage, or death...usually based around religious belief."...something like that.

( I know this because I'd always be debating Evangelical Christians, bring up that Mormonism should be just as valid as their religion, they'd say, "No, Mormonism is a cult.", and then, *b00m*, I'd show them several dictionary definitions of "cult", to explain that Christianity is a cult also.)

The fact is, all religions are cults...and there was a major press after the late 60's/70's cult scare, (brought on by Manson and Jim Jones, the Hare Krishnas, the Moonies, etc.), to change the meaning of the word, because Christians, Jews and Muslims (the cults that are actually in P.O.W.E.R., and the ones that people should really be working against), were offended.

Christianity, Islam...cults. They're just such successful cults that they can stop the media from telling the truth.
If Branch Davidianism had taken off globally, it would no longer be considered a "cult".
The same applies to any of these backwards, destructive, hogwash religions.

It's just like the difference between "Terrorists" and "Freedom Fighters" (which side you're on)

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

 

[Aristotle]

Zenien, my argument with you has gone in all the circles it can possibly go in. Suffice it to say, I believe you're focusing on far too small a problem, when there are much more dangerous threats to our well-being out there than Scientologists.

Christianity, Islam...cults. They're just such successful cults that they can stop the media from telling the truth.
If Branch Davidianism had taken off globally, it would no longer be considered a "cult".
The same applies to any of these backwards, destructive, hogwash religions.

Since you never responded the first time I posted it, here it is again:

That's quite simplistic. On the other hand, we probably owe modern civilization to religion. If you like modern civilization (which, on the whole, I don't) that's one debt you owe to organized religion. Worship provided a quick and easy way to organize early societies, and allowed them to become much more efficient. The agrarian revolution, which spawned civilization, was made much more possible by religion. The other key aspect of modern civilization that is probably derived from religion is the prevalent Western moral system. It probably comes from some of the earliest attempts by shamans at organizing and controlling societies.

Secular society gave us British colonialism, and religion gave us Gandhi. Secular society gave us Jim Crow, and religion gave us Martin Luther King, Medgar Evers, and Malcolm X. Secular society gave us greedy rich bastards and extreme poverty, and religion gave us social work.

To say that religion causes suffering and death is ludicrous. Religion has only ever been a pretext for those things. Humankind is to blame for its own failings. We are all the bad guys, not just the priests and shamans. Indeed, in the end, it's much more the fault of scientific progress than religion. Science has no moral compass, and it never has. Scientists deluded themselves a long time ago into thinking that discovery is its own reward, all the while inventing new technologies and theories that would inevitably all be used for war and oppression. Science was the method of the madness; religion was just the pretext for using it.

As for abusing and brainwashing children, I'll point you in the direction of Anabaptist Christians, who refuse to allow their children to join the church until they are of the age of reason. Anabaptist sects are pacifists. They believe in nonviolent resistance of governments. Many of them are on the run in Canada because they refused to pay war taxes. Many others are working actively and sustainably for peace and prosperity in third world countries. This is just one corner of Christianity, but it is Christianity nonetheless.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Zenien, my argument with you has gone in all the circles it can possibly go in. Suffice it to say, I believe you're focusing on far too small a problem, when there are much more dangerous threats to our well-being out there than Scientologists.

Since you never responded the first time I posted it, here it is again:

That's quite simplistic. On the other hand, we probably owe modern civilization to religion. If you like modern civilization (which, on the whole, I don't) that's one debt you owe to organized religion. Worship provided a quick and easy way to organize early societies, and allowed them to become much more efficient. The agrarian revolution, which spawned civilization, was made much more possible by religion. The other key aspect of modern civilization that is probably derived from religion is the prevalent Western moral system. It probably comes from some of the earliest attempts by shamans at organizing and controlling societies.

Secular society gave us British colonialism, and religion gave us Gandhi. Secular society gave us Jim Crow, and religion gave us Martin Luther King, Medgar Evers, and Malcolm X. Secular society gave us greedy rich bastards and extreme poverty, and religion gave us social work.

To say that religion causes suffering and death is ludicrous. Religion has only ever been a pretext for those things. Humankind is to blame for its own failings. We are all the bad guys, not just the priests and shamans. Indeed, in the end, it's much more the fault of scientific progress than religion. Science has no moral compass, and it never has. Scientists deluded themselves a long time ago into thinking that discovery is its own reward, all the while inventing new technologies and theories that would inevitably all be used for war and oppression. Science was the method of the madness; religion was just the pretext for using it.

As for abusing and brainwashing children, I'll point you in the direction of Anabaptist Christians, who refuse to allow their children to join the church until they are of the age of reason. Anabaptist sects are pacifists. They believe in nonviolent resistance of governments. Many of them are on the run in Canada because they refused to pay war taxes. Many others are working actively and sustainably for peace and prosperity in third world countries. This is just one corner of Christianity, but it is Christianity nonetheless.

It didn't warrant a response. It's all completely irrelevant to what I was talking about.
You're acting like, if John Wayne Gacy donated a million dollars to Unicef, it cancels out the 30 corpses of little boys he raped that are in his attic.
Completely irrelevant...a nice display of one facet of your grasp on history, having nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

The only part where it comes close is where you talk about religion being a pretext/justification as opposed to a cause...and again, that doesn't negate all of the times it was a cause, where evil WAS motivated by honest belief.


And the reason I said something "simplistic", was because I was talking about something simple.
Nowhere did I claim to describe every single aspect and attribute of religion itself.
I was talking about the bad aspects...not the good ones.


This is just as nonsensical as when you acted as if I thought the LBJ photo was substantive when I went OUT OF MY WAY to begin with the disclaimer, about how I know that it proved nothing.

It's obvious that you're raring for internet conflict, but maybe, you should take a breath and think before diving right in.

 

[Aristotle]

It didn't warrant a response. It's all completely irrelevant to what I was talking about.
You're acting like, if John Wayne Gacy donated a million dollars to Unicef, it cancels out the 30 corpses of little boys he raped that are in his attic.
Completely irrelevant...a nice display of one facet of your grasp on history, having nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

It's unfortunate that you can only respond in analogy, rather than with actual argumentation, but not unexpected. First of all, your analogy breaks down because we're talking about massive sociological constructs and entire societies and cultures, vs. one guy. Secondly, Anabaptism is only one example. You ignore the other set of examples I give, to which I could add a very lengthy list of positive religious figures and movements. They don't get time in the history books because violence is more exciting, and this is where your lack of historical learning becomes evident. Your history comes from the History Channel and textbooks. Mine comes from actually studying history, which reveals far more.

The only part where it comes close is where you talk about religion being a pretext/justification as opposed to a cause...and again, that doesn't negate all of the times it was a cause, where evil WAS motivated by honest belief.

No. It was never a cause. Certainly, many followers have been deluded into thinking it was, but the masterminds of the Crusades weren't thinking about conversions. They were thinking about conquests and imperialism and all kinds of European political machinations that I won't go into because I frankly haven't studied enough of that time period to be able to speak about them in-depth. The Inquisition, likewise, was much more about scapegoating and solidifying the rule of the current monarch than it was about Christianity and Judaism. The Holocaust, of course, was more of the same. Even the conflict in Israel is more about past crimes and transgressions and actual racism than about any kind of religious hatred; Muslims are taught to respect Jews, and Jews are taught to respect "the other" in their land. There really is almost* no conflict or genocide or event in history that can be pointed to in which religion was actually the cause. It's almost always been the pretext, but that doesn't make religion the cause. And if there hadn't been religion, there would have been another pretext.

I was talking about the bad aspects...not the good ones.

You were talking as if the bad aspects were the only ones that existed. You were advocating the end of religion.

I went OUT OF MY WAY to begin with the disclaimer, about how I know that it proved nothing.

Let's keep our conversations separate, shall we? I've responded to your "disclaimer" in the other thread. Where was the disclaimer here? You've unabashedly argued in favor of the end of religion.

*I say "almost" because I really can't be sure I'm not forgetting one. And even if there are one or two such events that were truly caused by religion, over the timespan of tens of thousands of years, I don't think your point is valid.

 

[Sloth7d]

I'd like to relate that in my lifetime, I have witnessed the accepted definition for "cult" change in every dictionary.

The definition was always, "a sect/group of people united by a common belief who have their own distinctive customs and procedures and protocols for dealing with major life events...such as marriage, or death...usually based around religious belief."...something like that.

( I know this because I'd always be debating Evangelical Christians, bring up that Mormonism should be just as valid as their religion, they'd say, "No, Mormonism is a cult.", and then, *b00m*, I'd show them several dictionary definitions of "cult", to explain that Christianity is a cult also.)

The fact is, all religions are cults...and there was a major press after the late 60's/70's cult scare, (brought on by Manson and Jim Jones, the Hare Krishnas, the Moonies, etc.), to change the meaning of the word, because Christians, Jews and Muslims (the cults that are actually in P.O.W.E.R., and the ones that people should really be working against), were offended.

Christianity, Islam...cults. They're just such successful cults that they can stop the media from telling the truth.
If Branch Davidianism had taken off globally, it would no longer be considered a "cult".
The same applies to any of these backwards, destructive, hogwash religions.

It's just like the difference between "Terrorists" and "Freedom Fighters" (which side you're on)

Yeah, I know what the text book definition is. I'm just pointing out the way I see it.

 

[Darthphere]

( I know this because I'd always be debating Evangelical Christians, bring up that Mormonism should be just as valid as their religion, they'd say, "No, Mormonism is a cult.", and then, *b00m*, I'd show them several dictionary definitions of "cult", to explain that Christianity is a cult also.)

You have them printed on a business card or something?