# The Cult of Scientology: Always Attack, Never Defend **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 22, 2006, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579 "2006-07-22T05:22:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/121 "2006-07-25T06:00:03Z")
Merci beaucoup for the answers to my question. After posting my question I’d been wondering if maybe you’d been talking about witchhunts - guess it’s more along the lines of “when your aunt put her unborn’s life higher than her own, refusing to get cancer treatment until he’d developed enough for a Cesarean, that was Christianity’s fault” (which it was, yes, and they’re both fine over 20 years later). Cool, you can get answers in the Pit! ---
**Author:** ![Equipoise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/equipoise/32/151_2.png) [@Equipoise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Equipoise)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/122 "2006-07-25T06:03:41Z")
Nah, if CM were Xenu, he’d know how to spell his own name. I would think. But, in the “you never know” department, CM, if you’re Xenu, why did you pick earth (excuse me, Teegeeack)? Is it because we had a surfeit of volcanos? There weren’t any other planets nearer to where you lived that had volcanos? And what do you think of all that Body Thetan business? Aren’t you pissed off that all those guys that you brought here across the universe didn’t actually die, but got kabloomed into a xillion, bazillion pieces, to surround the earth like a fine mist, settling down onto every newborn (they go through walls…bad news) to cause all the bad things to happen in the world? That must really bite. L. Ron Hubbard considered you an enemy, but do you feel the same way about him? After all, his “tech” (snort) is supposedly trying to get rid of all those body thetans (in this and all the past lives of the members). I’d think you’d be good buddies (assuming you could find him after he ratscammed and disappeared with an indictment hanging over his head, living on his boat with scantily-clad young girls at his, ahem, beck and call). Finally, what do you really look like? All the likenesses (like the guy in the hammock) are just too silly to be believed. Are you more like John Travolta in Battlefield Earth, or more like the Flying Spaghetti Monster? If you’re not Xenu, never mind. It never hurts to ask. ---
**Author:** ![Equipoise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/equipoise/32/151_2.png) [@Equipoise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Equipoise)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/123 "2006-07-25T06:06:20Z")
That was in answer to duffer, sorry. I should have quoted. ---
**Author:** ![duffer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duffer/32/1026_2.png) [@duffer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/duffer)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 6:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/124 "2006-07-25T06:15:01Z")
[QUOTE=Equipoise] That was in answer to duffer, sorry. I should have quoted. [/QUOTE] Oh, good Christ, the last thing this board needs is more of my words posted. You’ve inadvertantly fought ingnorance. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 6:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/125 "2006-07-25T06:32:55Z")
Get thee behind me, Thetan! ---
**Author:** ![duffer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duffer/32/1026_2.png) [@duffer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/duffer)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 6:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/126 "2006-07-25T06:51:36Z")
[QUOTE=Equipoise] That was in answer to duffer, sorry. I should have quoted. [/QUOTE] My response at first was obviously too fast. I read your post 3 times, trying to determine which medication I missed. Then I realized you’re just nuts. But a great storyteller. 😛 Thetans. Heh, it’s almost sounds like a real word. ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 8:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/127 "2006-07-25T08:36:36Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] Get thee behind me, Thetan! [/QUOTE] ::does the fish-slapping thing:: ---
**Author:** ![Constipated\_Mathematician](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5fc32e/32.png) [@Constipated\_Mathematician](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Constipated_Mathematician)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 12:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/128 "2006-07-25T12:21:24Z")
[QUOTE=E-Sabbath] CM, I don’t especially care if you are or not a Scientologist. I gathered from this thread you might be, and, as I happened to read the threads relatively ‘together’, I stated as much, attempting to explain what I saw as your odd behavior… I still see it as odd, mind you… in a way that might give you some better answers. Honestly, I think you’re lying about something, playing stupider than you are. Not much stupider, though. “Someone/thing named Xena” indeed. That said, I accepted your protest in that thread at face value. And might I ask as to the sort of mathematician you are? [/QUOTE] If you accepted my protest “at face value” in that thread, why was it brought up in the first place? Your ability to “weed out” CoS members may be sharp, but that was out of line. To even bring it into discussion in a GD thread seems to me that you are searching on my name, checking out what I’m posting about, and seeing how it applies to the wretched CoS. It doesn’t matter what I tell you or what I say. You believe what you want. I misspelled Xenu. Oh, the humanity! If you are parsing words to look for things like that to hang your theory of what I am or what I believe, I dare say you are obsessed to the point of distraction. How could you possibly gather that I might be a scientolgist based on what I posted? I take medicine. I go to doctors. I don’t understand the Xenu story. I’ve never seen “Battlefield Earth”. Xena, Xenu… does it really make a difference? (My apologies to anyone named Xena out there. No insult intended.) You haven’t answered any one of my questions, as far as I can tell. To wit: 1. Is the CoS a recognized church by the US Goverment? 2. Does the CoS receive a tax exempt, non-profit status from the IRS? 3. How can this be possible if it is indeed a cult? 4. Is a ruling from the IRS forever binding? Could they not revoke the non-profit status from the CoS if they were indeed a cult, and not a religious organization? 5. How big is the CoS (rough numbers if you have them) 6. How can they be doing the things that are alleged (murder, practicing medicine, brain washing, etc.) with impunity? All I’ve seen in this thread are links to articles and webpages that are very anti-CoS. That makes sense, since your are trying to prove your point about the CoS. But it doesn’t mean that everything written on the internet is true, either. In post 57, **E-Sabbath** links to a half-dozen articles in trying to demonstrate the outrage perpetrated by the CoS on Sept. 11 (which, by the way I never heard about. So, from that standpoint, it was interesting and worth reading). Believe it or not, I read them all. The most interesting one was [this one](http://www.xenu.net/archive/events/20010911-tragedy/), which claims to have snippets from actual e-mail messages. In fact, they are all titled\*\* Intercepted Scientology email\*\*: Now, this board seems to pride itself on asking for cites to back up claims, but would this one pass the smell test in any other topic? Why, for instance, are the email authors not identified? How can you “intercept” emails, but have no writer, distribution list, or any other information that would identify these people? How was the email intercepted in the first place? The only name that is in the article is quoted in this line, introducing the emails. This can be read to imply that Simon Hare was the author of these emails, but I think it actually means that the emails were written by some unknown author to “promote” the “parasitic behavior” by “Lt.” Simon Hare. > [@](#): > > Below are a few excerpts from these emails, sent out to Scientologists to promote this parasitic behavior by “Lt.” Simon Hare, CO, I HELP Canada (in NY). That’s the sum total of evidence in that article. Now, it’s on the [xenu.net](http://xenu.net) website, which is brought to you by Operation Clambake, but that hardly qualifies as investigative journalism. And the dopers usually shred this kind of cite. Is it your contention that the author of this article (Barbara Graham) is afraid of printing names of CoS members that wrote these email messages? I find that hard to believe. Has her life been turned into a living hell? What about the operators of the [xenu.net](http://xenu.net) website? If the CoS is all-powerful, how does the website stay up? If I were to link to a webpage that quoted unnamed, intercepted e-mails that were sent to warn Jewish people to stay home from work that day (remember that “theory”? If not, I think there is an article on [snopes.com](http://snopes.com)), wouldn’t you expect more than just some quoted intercepted email messages? Wouldn’t you want (and demand) the author and recipients of the email to be identified? If the CoS did what is stated in those cites, I agree that it was outrageous behavior. There is no defense. But what seems to anger many here is that they (CoS) don’t believe in psychiatry or the mental health profession. However, I don’t believe they are the only people that hold this opinion. Unlike Tom Cruise (who told Matt Lauer that he \*does \* know), I do not know the history of psychiatry in this country. But a lot of people question the profession… however, questioning the merits of psychiatry doesn’t mean 1. the questioners are CoS members, or; 2. Psychiatry is not a legitimate field in the health profession. I’m not sure what their “purification rundown” is (I skimmed the linked article), but from [this site](http://www.cultnews.com/archives/000619.html): > [@](#): > > Scientologists use something called the “purification rundown,” which is most often associated with their Narconon program for drug rehabilitation. > > This process supposedly eliminates toxins from the body. It includes saunas and large doses of niacin, that some say may actually be a health risk. > > One medical expert said, “There is no documentation to show that the Hubbard method of detoxification… conforms to scientific standards and medical experience.” And he added, “The risks and side effects of the treatment method have also not been evaluated in a serious way.” > > However, the New York City Firefighters Union apparently sees no problem with the treatment. I read this, and then read it again. The process “supposedly” eliminates toxins from the body. Well, does it, or doesn’t it? It says “One medical expert said.” (who for some reason is left unidentified… how did they fact-check this article?) “There is no documentation to show that the Hubbard method of detoxification… conforms to scientific standards and medical experience.” And he added, “The risks and side effects of the treatment method have also not been evaluated in a serious way.” It also says that large doses of niacin “may actually be a health risk.” Again, is it or isn’t it? Now, that’s a pretty damning article. But is there any documentation that shows that it actually works or doesn’t work? “The risks and side effects of the treatment have also not been evaluated in a serious way.” Why not? If there is a treatment with risks and side effects, why hasn’t the FDA stepped in? Is it because they aren’t using drugs? And why didn’t the NYC Firefighters Union see any problem with the treatment? Again, if they are practicing medicine, why can’t they be stopped? Why can’t the government (federal, state or local) step in and stop this? What part of the story am I missing? The implication is that they are so powerful, that they have the ability to buy off judges, derail legal proceedings, and make your life a living hell. Perhaps this is true. Just how big is this church, and what kind of money/political influence do they have? As far as Spielberg and Cruise, (thanks Guin, for that info.), it seems his objection was not that Cruise was/is a CoS member, but that he wasn’t promoting the film. Spielberg certainly has enough money to battle these folks. Why doesn’t he and other Hollywood elite pony up the money to fight these parasites in court? I’m guessing because if Cruise was promoting the film, and Spielberg was making his millions, he couldn’t care less if Cruise was a member of the CoS. There are other implications in this pit thread that give me pause. One theory offered was that LRH made this up as a joke, and it got out of control. Someone else chimed in that this may have also been the case with Joseph Smith and the LDS. Really? :dubious: Personally, I don’t find it a stretch to think that LRH made all of this stuff up. Reading about the “levels” and all, perhaps it was his best work of science fiction. I am not interested in defending the CoS. However, I \*am \* interested in why there seems to be no way for our legal system to slow this train down. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Swan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a87d85/32.png) [@The\_Swan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Swan)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/129 "2006-07-25T13:05:41Z")
[QUOTE=Constipated Mathematician] If you accepted my protest “at face value” in that thread, why was it brought up in the first place? Your ability to “weed out” CoS members may be sharp, but that was out of line. To even bring it into discussion in a GD thread seems to me that you are searching on my name, checking out what I’m posting about, and seeing how it applies to the wretched CoS. It doesn’t matter what I tell you or what I say. You believe what you want. I misspelled Xenu. Oh, the humanity! If you are parsing words to look for things like that to hang your theory of what I am or what I believe, I dare say you are obsessed to the point of distraction. How could you possibly gather that I might be a scientolgist based on what I posted? I take medicine. I go to doctors. I don’t understand the Xenu story. I’ve never seen “Battlefield Earth”. Xena, Xenu… does it really make a difference? (My apologies to anyone named Xena out there. No insult intended.) You haven’t answered any one of my questions, as far as I can tell. To wit: 1. Is the CoS a recognized church by the US Goverment? 2. Does the CoS receive a tax exempt, non-profit status from the IRS? 3. How can this be possible if it is indeed a cult? 4. Is a ruling from the IRS forever binding? Could they not revoke the non-profit status from the CoS if they were indeed a cult, and not a religious organization? 5. How big is the CoS (rough numbers if you have them) 6. How can they be doing the things that are alleged (murder, practicing medicine, brain washing, etc.) with impunity? All I’ve seen in this thread are links to articles and webpages that are very anti-CoS. That makes sense, since your are trying to prove your point about the CoS. But it doesn’t mean that everything written on the internet is true, either. In post 57, **E-Sabbath** links to a half-dozen articles in trying to demonstrate the outrage perpetrated by the CoS on Sept. 11 (which, by the way I never heard about. So, from that standpoint, it was interesting and worth reading). Believe it or not, I read them all. The most interesting one was [this one](http://www.xenu.net/archive/events/20010911-tragedy/), which claims to have snippets from actual e-mail messages. In fact, they are all titled\*\* Intercepted Scientology email\*\*: Now, this board seems to pride itself on asking for cites to back up claims, but would this one pass the smell test in any other topic? Why, for instance, are the email authors not identified? How can you “intercept” emails, but have no writer, distribution list, or any other information that would identify these people? How was the email intercepted in the first place? The only name that is in the article is quoted in this line, introducing the emails. This can be read to imply that Simon Hare was the author of these emails, but I think it actually means that the emails were written by some unknown author to “promote” the “parasitic behavior” by “Lt.” Simon Hare. That’s the sum total of evidence in that article. Now, it’s on the [xenu.net](http://xenu.net) website, which is brought to you by Operation Clambake, but that hardly qualifies as investigative journalism. And the dopers usually shred this kind of cite. Is it your contention that the author of this article (Barbara Graham) is afraid of printing names of CoS members that wrote these email messages? I find that hard to believe. Has her life been turned into a living hell? What about the operators of the [xenu.net](http://xenu.net) website? If the CoS is all-powerful, how does the website stay up? If I were to link to a webpage that quoted unnamed, intercepted e-mails that were sent to warn Jewish people to stay home from work that day (remember that “theory”? If not, I think there is an article on [snopes.com](http://snopes.com)), wouldn’t you expect more than just some quoted intercepted email messages? Wouldn’t you want (and demand) the author and recipients of the email to be identified? If the CoS did what is stated in those cites, I agree that it was outrageous behavior. There is no defense. But what seems to anger many here is that they (CoS) don’t believe in psychiatry or the mental health profession. However, I don’t believe they are the only people that hold this opinion. Unlike Tom Cruise (who told Matt Lauer that he \*does \* know), I do not know the history of psychiatry in this country. But a lot of people question the profession… however, questioning the merits of psychiatry doesn’t mean 1. the questioners are CoS members, or; 2. Psychiatry is not a legitimate field in the health profession. I’m not sure what their “purification rundown” is (I skimmed the linked article), but from [this site](http://www.cultnews.com/archives/000619.html): I read this, and then read it again. The process “supposedly” eliminates toxins from the body. Well, does it, or doesn’t it? It says “One medical expert said.” (who for some reason is left unidentified… how did they fact-check this article?) “There is no documentation to show that the Hubbard method of detoxification… conforms to scientific standards and medical experience.” And he added, “The risks and side effects of the treatment method have also not been evaluated in a serious way.” It also says that large doses of niacin “may actually be a health risk.” Again, is it or isn’t it? Now, that’s a pretty damning article. But is there any documentation that shows that it actually works or doesn’t work? “The risks and side effects of the treatment have also not been evaluated in a serious way.” Why not? If there is a treatment with risks and side effects, why hasn’t the FDA stepped in? Is it because they aren’t using drugs? And why didn’t the NYC Firefighters Union see any problem with the treatment? Again, if they are practicing medicine, why can’t they be stopped? Why can’t the government (federal, state or local) step in and stop this? What part of the story am I missing? The implication is that they are so powerful, that they have the ability to buy off judges, derail legal proceedings, and make your life a living hell. Perhaps this is true. Just how big is this church, and what kind of money/political influence do they have? As far as Spielberg and Cruise, (thanks Guin, for that info.), it seems his objection was not that Cruise was/is a CoS member, but that he wasn’t promoting the film. Spielberg certainly has enough money to battle these folks. Why doesn’t he and other Hollywood elite pony up the money to fight these parasites in court? I’m guessing because if Cruise was promoting the film, and Spielberg was making his millions, he couldn’t care less if Cruise was a member of the CoS. There are other implications in this pit thread that give me pause. One theory offered was that LRH made this up as a joke, and it got out of control. Someone else chimed in that this may have also been the case with Joseph Smith and the LDS. Really? :dubious: Personally, I don’t find it a stretch to think that LRH made all of this stuff up. Reading about the “levels” and all, perhaps it was his best work of science fiction. I am not interested in defending the CoS. However, I \*am \* interested in why there seems to be no way for our legal system to slow this train down. [/QUOTE] For someone who thinks its amazing how one person could read so much, you sure did lay down an epic post there. ---
**Author:** ![fluiddruid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fluiddruid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fluiddruid)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/130 "2006-07-25T13:17:00Z")
Let me step in to add a bit of information. I never knew what Scientology was until some of the freedom of speech on the Internet issues came up. I started reading and I was shocked about Scientology. I highly recommend reading some of the skeptical websites, particularly [Operation Clambake](http://www.xenu.net/), to get an idea of why we are all so critical of Scientology. [QUOTE=Constipated Mathematician] 1. Is the CoS a recognized church by the US Goverment? [/quote] The IRS does not recognize churches, it recognizes non-profit organizations. > [@](#): > > 1. Does the CoS receive a tax exempt, non-profit status from the IRS? Yes. > [@](#): > > 1. How can this be possible if it is indeed a cult? They lost their non-profit status and gained it back after a long legal battle in 1993. This decision was hotly debated by critics. [Cite](http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Cowen/essays/nytimes.html), [cite](http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Cowen/essays/battle.html), [cite](http://www.lisamcpherson.org/irs/jeff-irs.htm), [cite](http://www.scientology-lies.com/action/irs-regs.html) for just a few discussions of the topic. The CoS is incredibly litigative in order to forward its own goals and harass its enemies. > [@](#): > > 1. Is a ruling from the IRS forever binding? Could they not revoke the non-profit status from the CoS if they were indeed a cult, and not a religious organization? Indeed this is possible, and one that CoS critics are pushing for. The criteria for religious exempt status are [here](http://www.irs.gov/irm/part7/ch10s04.html), where you can read some of the reasons from the IRS’ own mouth why the CoS lost their status to begin with. > [@](#): > > 1. How big is the CoS (rough numbers if you have them) This too is a matter of some debate, as the CoS advertises itself as the “fastest growing religion” with some 8 million members. According to [this skeptical site](http://www.lermanet.com/howmany.htm), there are about 55,000 Scientologists in the US. > [@](#): > > 1. How can they be doing the things that are alleged (murder, practicing medicine, brain washing, etc.) with impunity? Most of the deaths associated with Scientology are from neglect and resistance to real medical care (in the famous case of [Lisa McPherson](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_mcpherson), for example, a particularly disturbing example) or from suicides of those who were financially ruined. Criminal charges were brought, but the case ended up being dropped for a variety of reasons. Due to the CoS defining critics as [Suppressive Persons](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppressive_Person) or, formerly, [Fair Game](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_%28Scientology%29), they are incredibly hostile. It is simple to find cases of Scientology critics or ex-Scientologists harassed, accused of sexual or violent crimes, sued, and so on. Go out and read. You will see countless examples of this. This is in large part why they are becoming difficult to prosecute in questionable cases. Those involved must be prepared to be harassed personally with lawsuits and accusations. The CoS claims that those who are critical of its religion are not only “anti-religious extremists” (as they have posted, through shell organization Religious Freedom Watch, see [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andreas_Heldal-Lund) and the organization’s own website [here](http://www.parishioners.org/extremists/index.html)). In fact, the RFW [lists the Cult Awareness Network as a hate group](http://www.parishioners.org/hategroups/index.html), and note that [nearly all of the “extremists” are critics of CoS](http://www.parishioners.org/extremists/index.html). They will attempt to have critical websites shut down for “violation of copyright” (as they consider their religious views and actions as copyrighted and “trade secret”). A scientologist attacked a documentarian critical of CoS, then mysterious posters accusting the documentarian of [sex crimes](http://www.prweb.com/releases/2006/7/prweb415500.htm) started popping up around the neighborhood. Simply put, Scientology is aggressive and devious in its attempts to silence its critics and glean money from its followers. Go forth and read. I think you’ll see what we’re talking about. ---
**Author:** ![Constipated\_Mathematician](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5fc32e/32.png) [@Constipated\_Mathematician](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Constipated_Mathematician)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/131 "2006-07-25T13:50:31Z")
[QUOTE=The Swan] For someone who thinks its amazing how one person could read so much, you sure did lay down an epic post there. [/QUOTE] Excellent point! 🙂 I guess I wanted to demonstrate that I have read some of the links provided for information purposes by some of the other posters. I don’t begrudge those that have strong feelings about the CoS. And I figured if they took the time to search those links out, the least I could do was read a few. I’ve read enough about the CoS in the last few days to last me a lifetime. Perhaps the best approach is to take my leave of this thread. As I said to the OP, my intend wasn’t to derail his/her pit rant. ---
**Author:** ![Constipated\_Mathematician](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5fc32e/32.png) [@Constipated\_Mathematician](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Constipated_Mathematician)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/132 "2006-07-25T13:55:36Z")
**fluiddruid** , thanks for the informative post. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/133 "2006-07-25T13:57:39Z")
[QUOTE=fluiddruid] …Most of the deaths associated with Scientology are from neglect and resistance to real medical care (in the famous case of [Lisa McPherson](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_mcpherson), for example, a particularly disturbing example) or from suicides of those who were financially ruined. Criminal charges were brought, but the case ended up being dropped for a variety of reasons… [/QUOTE] > [@](#): > > [The Lisa McPherson Clause](http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Scientology/ReleaseForms/Introspection.html) > Lisa clause or Lisa McPherson clause: an adhesion clause to insulate one party from all damages, including personal injury or death, from known and unknown conduct of commission or omission of the party so released. An “adhesion clause” is a recognized legal term which means “take it or leave it”, i.e., that the party signing the agreement has no bargaining power and therefore no alternative but to include the clause in the agreement. > > A new Scientology [release form](http://www.xs4all.nl/~jeta/scn/scans/Introspection-Release.html) has surfaced that gives the cult the right to hold its members in isolation indefinitely, and absolves it of any responsibility for a member’s injury or death as a result – the “Lisa McPherson clause”. (Thanks to Scientology PR spokesperson Linda Simmons Hight for [confirming the document’s authenticity](http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Scientology/ReleaseForms/archive/foxnews-2003-09-03.html) to Fox News.)… > …Now this new document has surfaced: a release form for the Introspection Rundown. Parishioners seeking services at Flag – the place Scientology advertises as the “Mecca of Technical Perfection” – must sign a contract promising not to sue if they are harmed. And they are not given a copy to take home with them. A scanned copy of this new form is reproduced below; the HTML version is available here. Some choice quotes: > If circumstances should ever arise in which government, medical or psychiatric officials or personnel or family members or friends attempt to compel or coerce or commit me for psychiatric evaluation, treatment or hospitalization, I fully desire and expect that the Church or Scientologists will intercede on my behalf to oppose such efforts and/or extricate me from that predicament… > > I understand that the Introspection Rundown … includes being isolated from … family members, friends or others with whom I might normally interact… The Case Supervisor will determine the time period in which I will remain isolated, according to the beliefs and practices of the Scientology religion. I further specifically acknowledge that the duration of any such isolation is uncertain, determined only by my spiritual condition, but that such duration will be completely at the discretion of the Case Supervisor. > > I accept and assume all known and unknown risks of injury, loss, or damage resulting from my decision to participate in the Introspection Rundown and specifically absolve all persons and entities from all liabilities of any kind, without limitation, associated with my participation or their participation in my Introspection Rundown… Where is Zenu when Teegeeack needs him most? Hmmm, WWZD. HAIL, XENU! CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Helen_s_Eidolon)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/134 "2006-07-25T15:15:55Z")
Especially since **Constipated Mathematician** is a guest, I feel the need to express this. **E-Sabbath** : you are crazy. Or an asshole. Or both. From his posts in THIS THREAD you determined he was a Scientologist and felt the need to ‘out’ him in a completely unrelated thread? Chill the hell out, paranoid guy. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/135 "2006-07-25T16:04:14Z")
[QUOTE=Constipated Mathematician] If you accepted my protest “at face value” in that thread, why was it brought up in the first place? Your ability to “weed out” CoS members may be sharp, but that was out of line. To even bring it into discussion in a GD thread seems to me that you are searching on my name, checking out what I’m posting about, and seeing how it applies to the wretched CoS. It doesn’t matter what I tell you or what I say. You believe what you want. I misspelled Xenu. Oh, the humanity! If you are parsing words to look for things like that to hang your theory of what I am or what I believe, I dare say you are obsessed to the point of distraction. How could you possibly gather that I might be a scientolgist based on what I posted? I take medicine. I go to doctors. I don’t understand the Xenu story. I’ve never seen “Battlefield Earth”. Xena, Xenu… does it really make a difference? (My apologies to anyone named Xena out there. No insult intended.) You haven’t answered any one of my questions, as far as I can tell. To wit: 1. Is the CoS a recognized church by the US Goverment? 2. Does the CoS receive a tax exempt, non-profit status from the IRS? 3. How can this be possible if it is indeed a cult? 4. Is a ruling from the IRS forever binding? Could they not revoke the non-profit status from the CoS if they were indeed a cult, and not a religious organization? 5. How big is the CoS (rough numbers if you have them) 6. How can they be doing the things that are alleged (murder, practicing medicine, brain washing, etc.) with impunity? All I’ve seen in this thread are links to articles and webpages that are very anti-CoS. That makes sense, since your are trying to prove your point about the CoS. But it doesn’t mean that everything written on the internet is true, either. In post 57, **E-Sabbath** links to a half-dozen articles in trying to demonstrate the outrage perpetrated by the CoS on Sept. 11 (which, by the way I never heard about. So, from that standpoint, it was interesting and worth reading). Believe it or not, I read them all. The most interesting one was [this one](http://www.xenu.net/archive/events/20010911-tragedy/), which claims to have snippets from actual e-mail messages. In fact, they are all titled\*\* Intercepted Scientology email\*\*: Now, this board seems to pride itself on asking for cites to back up claims, but would this one pass the smell test in any other topic? Why, for instance, are the email authors not identified? How can you “intercept” emails, but have no writer, distribution list, or any other information that would identify these people? How was the email intercepted in the first place? The only name that is in the article is quoted in this line, introducing the emails. This can be read to imply that Simon Hare was the author of these emails, but I think it actually means that the emails were written by some unknown author to “promote” the “parasitic behavior” by “Lt.” Simon Hare. That’s the sum total of evidence in that article. Now, it’s on the [xenu.net](http://xenu.net) website, which is brought to you by Operation Clambake, but that hardly qualifies as investigative journalism. And the dopers usually shred this kind of cite. Is it your contention that the author of this article (Barbara Graham) is afraid of printing names of CoS members that wrote these email messages? I find that hard to believe. Has her life been turned into a living hell? What about the operators of the [xenu.net](http://xenu.net) website? If the CoS is all-powerful, how does the website stay up? If I were to link to a webpage that quoted unnamed, intercepted e-mails that were sent to warn Jewish people to stay home from work that day (remember that “theory”? If not, I think there is an article on [snopes.com](http://snopes.com)), wouldn’t you expect more than just some quoted intercepted email messages? Wouldn’t you want (and demand) the author and recipients of the email to be identified? If the CoS did what is stated in those cites, I agree that it was outrageous behavior. There is no defense. But what seems to anger many here is that they (CoS) don’t believe in psychiatry or the mental health profession. However, I don’t believe they are the only people that hold this opinion. Unlike Tom Cruise (who told Matt Lauer that he \*does \* know), I do not know the history of psychiatry in this country. But a lot of people question the profession… however, questioning the merits of psychiatry doesn’t mean 1. the questioners are CoS members, or; 2. Psychiatry is not a legitimate field in the health profession. I’m not sure what their “purification rundown” is (I skimmed the linked article), but from [this site](http://www.cultnews.com/archives/000619.html): I read this, and then read it again. The process “supposedly” eliminates toxins from the body. Well, does it, or doesn’t it? It says “One medical expert said.” (who for some reason is left unidentified… how did they fact-check this article?) “There is no documentation to show that the Hubbard method of detoxification… conforms to scientific standards and medical experience.” And he added, “The risks and side effects of the treatment method have also not been evaluated in a serious way.” It also says that large doses of niacin “may actually be a health risk.” Again, is it or isn’t it? Now, that’s a pretty damning article. But is there any documentation that shows that it actually works or doesn’t work? “The risks and side effects of the treatment have also not been evaluated in a serious way.” Why not? If there is a treatment with risks and side effects, why hasn’t the FDA stepped in? Is it because they aren’t using drugs? And why didn’t the NYC Firefighters Union see any problem with the treatment? Again, if they are practicing medicine, why can’t they be stopped? Why can’t the government (federal, state or local) step in and stop this? What part of the story am I missing? The implication is that they are so powerful, that they have the ability to buy off judges, derail legal proceedings, and make your life a living hell. Perhaps this is true. Just how big is this church, and what kind of money/political influence do they have? As far as Spielberg and Cruise, (thanks Guin, for that info.), it seems his objection was not that Cruise was/is a CoS member, but that he wasn’t promoting the film. Spielberg certainly has enough money to battle these folks. Why doesn’t he and other Hollywood elite pony up the money to fight these parasites in court? I’m guessing because if Cruise was promoting the film, and Spielberg was making his millions, he couldn’t care less if Cruise was a member of the CoS. There are other implications in this pit thread that give me pause. One theory offered was that LRH made this up as a joke, and it got out of control. Someone else chimed in that this may have also been the case with Joseph Smith and the LDS. Really? :dubious: Personally, I don’t find it a stretch to think that LRH made all of this stuff up. Reading about the “levels” and all, perhaps it was his best work of science fiction. I am not interested in defending the CoS. However, I \*am \* interested in why there seems to be no way for our legal system to slow this train down. [/QUOTE] CM, this was an excellent post. The correct spirit in which others should take it is as a call spurring them on to better anti-CoS arguments. I hope they don’t take it in… the _other_ way they might take it… if you know what I mean. :dubious: -FrL- ---
**Author:** ![look\_ninjas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/b2d939/32.png) [@look\_ninjas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/look_ninjas)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/136 "2006-07-25T16:31:08Z")
[QUOTE=Constipated Mathematician] It also says that large doses of niacin “may actually be a health risk.” Again, is it or isn’t it? [/QUOTE] [This](http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Narconon/detox.htm) has information on the vitamins used during the Purification Rundown, if you scroll down a bit. The link at the bottom, however, no longer works, and I couldn’t find the research on the Institute of Medicine’s new site. So I did a little digging. [Here](http://www.ianrpubs.unl.edu/epublic/pages/publicationD.jsp?publicationId=295) is a big list of nutritional supplements, how much is safe to take, and what the effects can be. As the anti-Narconon site above claimed, niacin carries a risk of liver damage in high doses. So how much do you take during the Purification Rundown? [This](http://drugrehab.lronhubbard.org/page37.htm) page, (apparently very very very much pro-Scientology) states that Hubbard had experimented with dosages of niacin, ranging from 200 to 2,000 mg, as part of an experiment involving niacin and radiation. It [later](http://drugrehab.lronhubbard.org/page39.htm) says that most addicts can be cured with less than 5,000 milligrams of niacin. When you consider that the UL according to earlier sites is 50 mg… not exactly comforting. I can’t seem to find an exact citation for the amount of niacin taken during the Purification Rundown, though, which isn’t exactly a surprise. If the info was readily available on their own websites, people could just go jogging, sit in a sauna, and take the vitamins recommended without ever having to go through Narconon or the CoS. My computer is getting slow, so I’m not going to look for information on FDA regulations regarding vitamins and health claims right now - if no one else does it, I’ll start hunting around when things speed up again. IIRC, however, vitamins are in the same legal area as herbal supplements - they aren’t really regulated. This may change due to the whole ephedra controversy, but right now, they’re not considered drugs, so they aren’t subject to FDA control. That’s just my memory of the situation, though, and I’ll have to look it up when I can. Also, (and again, I can’t provide cites on this yet, and I’m admitting I could be wrong), it seems that certain claims of medical benefit are allowed. Lots of spas offer “purification” programs that include things like liquid fasting and high colonics, and promise to “flush” your system. They don’t seem to be getting shut down either. It seems like there must be something more to the claims for legal action to be taken. (Oddly enough, another Scientology website claims that “Right now, the most widely prescribed antidepressant, Prozac, is also the hottest kid on the block in the illegal street drug market.” I find this a bit hard to believe, as fluoxetine is not exactly a fun-time happy pill. Something else to look into when my computer isn’t being wonky.) ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2006, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/137 "2006-07-25T17:31:12Z")
I didn’t intend to ‘out him.’ And I apologize for doing so. I just felt that if he was, it might explain the odd perspective he was placing on things. That said, I still feel that he’s far too cute to not be up to something. But that’s just a personal opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2006, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/138 "2006-07-26T01:31:52Z")
[QUOTE=Guinastasia] I was pointing out your comparison of Smith to Hubbard was absurd. I’m not LDS, quite frankly, I think a lot of it is hokey (Sorry, **Monty** , but I do), but there’s no fucking way it’s at all in the same league as Scientology. [/QUOTE] No worries, Guin. Of course there’s no way that Smith’s view of religion is in the same league as Hubbard’s. Whether Smith was correct or not has no bearing on his acceptance of his view. Perhaps he was deluded, but that by no means proves that he was the kind of person Hubbard and his religious heirs was and are. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2006, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/139 "2006-07-26T01:41:44Z")
[QUOTE=Cemetery Savior] I don’t want to put words into Frylock’s mouth, but I wonder if he wasn’t referring to the LDS extremists in northern AZ and southern UT (do I have my directions straight?). [/quote] First off, they’re not “LDS Extremists.” The LDS church excommunicates those who teach what the polygamist and other fanatical groups preach. > [@](#): > > If you go and read Jon Krakauer’s book (Under the Banner of Heaven), you’ll see that the LDS (at least _that_ section) does indeed lay claim to some of the harsher CoS-type components. I haven’t read that book yet; however, I intend to in the coming weeks. There aren’t that many copies of it arond here and I certainly have no intention of spending my money on it. The next time it’s available at the military library, I’ll check it out. I have read [these responses to it on my church’s website](http://www.lds.org/newsroom/mistakes/0,15331,3885-1-17125,00.html), though. It looks to me so far that it’s not a history and to assign historical or factual claims to his book is a mistake. > [@](#): > > Also, when I was reading the statements about Christianity and lack-of-meds, I was struck by the absence of any mention of Christian Science. No cites, but I believe there are multiple cases of children dying from lack of meds (I think I remember an asthma issue), and the parents being held liable. Am I incorrect? I believe you’re correct and I also wondered why nobody had yet mentioned Christian Science. You beat me to it. > [@](#): > > As far as CoS goes, I think it’s a very, very good example of marketing to the masses. Seriously…if you can get a bunch of ego-obsessed (I’ve read the Enquirer, therefore I know!) celebrities to join _anything_…the American masses will follow. That’s one of the sadder points. I’d love to see an experiment where 5-6 celebrities tout somethign totally worthless (sliced rubber bands, dryer lint), and then track purchases. I believe the purchases would be huge in scope. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if celebrities could sell their dryer lint. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2006, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579/140 "2006-07-26T02:14:14Z")
[QUOTE=The Swan] He is clearly not a moron, and his posts were not stupid. [/quote] I disagree. I think he really is quite stupid, with no real ability to understand or employ simple logic. One of the dumber posters I’ve come across recently, actually. > [@](#): > > I could see how you might think them of little value, but I still can’t figure out why you felt the need to act like the SDMB’s version of Billy Bad-Ass over something so trivial. Because I can only stand so much stupidity before I start to get angry. > [@](#): > > Again, he kept it civil, and you showed yourself to be nothing of the sort. I can live with that. Civility is not the be-all and end-all. Especially in the Pit. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-cult-of-scientology-always-attack-never-defend/365579.md?page=8)