If Scientology is banned in France, it will only go underground and proclaim its martyrdom. It might even get stronger.
Nothing good can come of that.
Can’t say that I blame you for being so perspicacious, in fact it’s a trait I’ve always admired in you. But enough with the praise. Yeah, let’s do that.
I see that my old pal, the wacky yet always entertaining, mswas, is here.
Tell you what bud, how’s about us two make a deal? See apropo of this thread I figured we could reach some sort of understanding whereby you sell me sort of like a script of all the loony stuff you believe in and I’ll pitch it to the masses in hopes of becoming a new-fangled L. Ron Hubbard. Or else we could form a partnership, where you provide the content and I’ll finally use that broadcasting degree that I’ve got shelved somewhere…plus half the start-up costs.
What say you? Because I smell P-r-o-f-i-t, man!
I wasn’t talking about social status or esotericism. Scientology teachings are not esoteric, they’re for sale.
What do you think WOULD disqualify an organization from being able to credibly call itself a religion?
As has been shown, Scientology only presents itself as a religion when it’s convenient for tax exempt staus, and as a secular business when that’s more convenient.
This is it right here. No one has shown that the French state gives a shit what the COS’s specific beliefs are, that they’re trying to supress any doctrines, or that they’re trying to harrass anybody for believing them.
There is, or there was. If he’s still around, surely no one better than the erudite Frenchman in Paris, clairobscur.
I’ll search and see if he is still active after I get back from the gym. If he is, I agree, it’d be great to have his perspective from the ground.
I believe the source of the ban comes from the 1995 Parliamentary Commission on Cults in France. The report of this commission included as cults the Church of Scientology, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Hare Krishnas, the Rosicrucians, among many others. A later report in 1999 reaffirmed these official cult findings. The 1999 report also investigated a group called “Anthroposophie,” which might be the source of the inclusion of “Satanism.”
The effect of this ban seems akin to the mischief perpetrated when sodomy was a crime, and therefore, gay men and lesbians were accordingly criminals or at least criminally inclined. The Jehovah’s Witnesses discovered it in a case where they sought to avail themselves of French tax law’s religious-based tax exemption.
From the link above:
Some of these donations, which will be taxed at a confiscatory 60% rate without the exemption, included money dedicated for a humanitarian relief effort in Rwanda, according to the JW’s.
Thus, no one goes to jail for rococo beliefs about Xenu. However, there is considerable interference with the practice of the religion and the ability to form intentional communities around religious worship for disfavored religions. It is important to recognize that the freedom of belief extends to these very intimately related rights of free exercise and expressive association (to use the American jurisprudential terminology). And that a government which permits mere belief, but not its companions, has violated its citizens’ religious liberties.
This is probably just a typo, but just in case it isn’t: [nitpick]à propos, or àpropos, or apropos[/nitpick]
Yes sir Captain ASSertion sir.
I lol’d when you were offended by my agreeing with you. 
Yep, overall not a very useful tangent. People should be more quick to just accept when someone uses and idiosyncratic usage of something as long as they understand the point being made. Rather than useless, “How dare you compare Scientologists to the suffering of the Jews?”, hyperbole.
Actually I had a little cult for a period of time. I stopped when I couldn’t get over the guilt of having fucked a virgin.
Though how this became about my beliefs I don’t know why. You just wanted to suck me off a little? Mighty nice of you. Since you’re not a virgin I can let you do that without guilt.
Money is the main form of social status transaction in a capitalist society. Trying to extract business from a modern religion just doesn’t make any sense. Religions are defined somewhat by the culture in which they arise. All I am saying is that using money as a mediator of the process does not qualify or disqualify something from being a religion.
I don’t know, it’s an interesting question.
Can you give me an example of it presenting itself as a business when that was more convenient? That’s not a challenge, I really don’t know.
So now organizations need to prove they are not criminal cartels? I thought the burden of proof was on the affirmative. Maybe not in France.
Mswas, I just would like to point out the “quote-plus” button at the bottom of each post. You might find it useful.
I use it sometimes. I was replying as I read the thread. Sorry if it annoys people.
Look at Maeglin’s cite (post #109) regarding Scientology’s activities in Israel.
I don’t know how you’re getting this from anything I said. As far as I know, the burden to prove the COS is a criminal enterprise rests with the French state. It’s a fairly easy burden to meet.
You replied in agreement with Sailor that it was incumbent upon the defenders of Scientology to prove that they are not a criminal organization.
No. Asshole. I never said such thing. Only your retarded brain would think so. I have said that in this thread the French government is being accused of religious persecution without any evidence of such thing. If you want to support that view you can present your evidence.
No, I agreed that no one had shown any evidence that any actions taken against the COS were motivated by the content of their beliefs, or that anyone was being persecuted just for being a Scientologist.
Correction: Miller wrote post #109. Maeglin’s post with the cite about $cientology calling themselves a secular business in Israel is #139.