Well said. Yes, the contrasts with other religions are stark.

In the span of their histories, the religions seen as relatively benign today have committed horrible atrocities against others in the name of their beliefs — atrocities far worse than money-gouging (inquisitions, witch burnings, massacre of men/women/children, riots and assaults, the “greater” jihad, suicide bombings, etc.).

While the Eastern religions, like Buddhism and Hinduism, have tended to open and tolerant and inclusive, they have had their times of violence as well. Buddhism continues to strike me as the most open and tolerant of other beliefs. But Hinduism has that trait to a great extent, too.

In fact, Hindus would have been happy to include Mohammed on their list of those to be worshipped — you can imagine how far that went (even though, as someone pointed out, there are elements of Islam, its shrines, and practices that seem to have evolved directly out of Hinduism).

It took about 2,000 years for Christianity to become more moderate and accepting. If that same timeline applies to other religions, Islam may mellow out around 2600 AD and Scientology around 3950 AD. Hopefully the Internet, the open communications of the modern world, and public education will speed that mellowing process up considerably. After all, even before the Internet, Mormonism modified some of its behaviors, like polygamy, to become more socially acceptable (though it is still practiced openly in the Fundamentalist church and more privately in the main church).

More and more I ask myself, why do we need religion at all? With so many religions, sects, and cults all trying to save us (or not save us by hastening “the end times”) they will drive us all nuts. I’m reminded of the bumper sticker: Dear God, please save me from your true believers.

Actually if I came from another planet I would see that the scientology organization is very different from religions – it is just into money, a big business, unscrupulously destroying all enemies, using the term “church” to shield its criminal activities. More like a mobster or gangster organization than a church. I wouldn’t see that for the Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist. Those groups have active discussions about their beliefs, debates, articles by their own religious scholars, members with different viewpoints, actively engaged in a spiritual journey at different levels and intensities. They are religions, with belief systems, followers, expectations, etc. But they are not set up simply to extract money and attack enemies.

Some Buddhists would not consider Buddhism to be a religion. See http://www.buddhanet.net/nutshell03.htm.

If I were to objectively land on Earth as say a visitor from, oh, a planet around some star about 130 light years from here — say, Markab — and I were asked to write a report for some agents of say an IRS-like agency about the religions of Earth, I’m not sure I could distinguish Scientology’s beliefs in terms of degree, outlandishness, or non-verifiability from other major religions.

Scientology has its body thetans. Jesus cast out demons. Islam believes in Jinn (genies). They all believe in disembodied spirits of one sort or another.

Scientology believes in the second coming of the next invader voice. Christianity believes in Jesus’ return on clouds of glory to rule Earth for some 1,000 years. Islam believes in the coming of the Mahdi to signal the start of a similar era.

Some Christians believe in the power of laying on of hands. Scientologists use touch assists. Muslims have ablution and power of hands.

Scientology solicits money from its followers. So does Christianity (watch any televangelist) and Islam.

Christianity has its God and so does Islam as Allah. Scientology has its 8th Dynamic.

It seems it is not a matter of belief that sets Scientology apart. Is it belief in healing power?

No. Other religions also believe in healing of medical problems through belief. Scientology believes that auditing will handle medical problems. Christianity has its saints and shrines and miracles. Same with Islam.

Is it that Scientology is harsher and crueler than other religions?

No. While disconnection and cult mind control are horrible, I am not aware of any Scientologist suicide bombers, no actual torture, or burning at the stake, execution, and so forth that characterized earlier eras of Christianity (and still affecting some sects today), and crimes of a type committed regularly in some Muslim societies. For example, Scientology may have its enforced abortions and disconnection, but I am not aware of any “honor” killings done by Scientologists in the name of their beliefs.

Ironically, Scientology likes to lump itself in with Buddhism, and there are some parallels. But I think Scientology has more in common with fundamentalists of the monotheisms.

My two cents — and please remember that I am playing the Devil’s Advocate here. I could argue in another direction too.

• Scam
• Fraud
• Swindle (I like this one a lot, rolls off the tongue: “The Swindle Of Scientology”
• Racket
• Con
• Hustle
• Grift

Some suggestions. Can be used interchangeably for variety in one’s prose.

I assure you as a gay man this kind if thing is hard to roll with. I raised this issue here, as I recall, a year or so ago — the word in question was “faggotry” — and an Anonymous chap explained how this sort of thing works in the WWP “subculture”. Can’t bring it all back to memory but it has to do with reclaiming and desensitizing the word, et cetera. Heard a very similar exegesis some 20 years ago regarding Yale University where the term was in vogue. “Oh don’t mind Jim, he’s such a Nietzsche faggot.”

I doubt this has made it into the OED yet.

I am more offended by the over use of ‘Faggot’ in the post my anonymous. How derogatory and degrading to use such word in any context.

I’m just getting started. There’s just too damned much Underground Bunker to process by hand, so I’m going to automate it. And then turn it loose on various notable blogs like M&M’s.

As for Wikipedia, UmbraXenuWiki is aimed right at them: Anyone editing a Wikipedia article will search, get another wiki, nicely indexed, with a cite template ready to copy/paste. What to do, what to do, eh? The howling from certain quarters should be delicious. I can’t edit Scientology articles? Fine, I’ll edit the editors. The “High Insult!” on my Wikipedia page should have been a warning.

I’m not convinced that various pro-cult editors and admins who have been banned or retired are really gone. Too many new ones pop up already knowing the ropes and angles.

Crikey – you have been busy. All strength to Umbra Xenu’s mighty arm!

With my other ‘OTO phenomenon’ hat on it’s long been notable how CESNUR buggers up what would otherwise be perfectly serviceable Wikipedia articles by introducing second-level disinformation in references and links.

The Wikimoderators used to be much less sniffy, especially in disabling constant and irksome attempts by certain cults – mainly the litigious McDonaldisers of Thelema, the ‘Caliphate’ OTO – to rewrite history in their own favour.

Oh, did you know that Melton had the CESNUR USA franchise? Does it surprise you?