Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Censorship The Internet Your Rights Online

Church of Scientology Enlisting Followers In Censorship 628

DrEnter writes "Apparently, the recent very public divorce of Katie Holmes and devout believer Tom Cruise is reflecting negatively on the Church of Scientology. Adding to this are other recent issues causing problems for 'church' leadership. In response, the 'church' has decided to encourage its followers to censor online chatter and comments about the 'church' and the divorce. This Yahoo blog post sums it up nicely. In short, they are encouraging members to complain about people posting negative comments about the 'church' as violating the Code of Conduct' in the posting venue. I can only imagine they are hoping these complaints will just be rubber-stamped and respected without investigation, but I think the campaign deserves a bit more attention."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Church of Scientology Enlisting Followers In Censorship

Comments Filter:
  • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) * on Friday July 06, 2012 @06:09PM (#40570217)

    Call all your critics liars (and wife-beaters and child molesters if possible), send private detectives and Sea Org types to follow and harass them, sue them and anyone who supports them, cry religious persecution to the cops and govt officials, rinse, wash, repeat...

    Read [] all about it, and more.

  • Re:First Thetan! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 06, 2012 @06:18PM (#40570323)

    Book 'em, Xenu!

    Please remove the above post as it violate's Slashdot's code of conduct which requires the exact phrase "Frosty Piss" to be used in all first posts.

  • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) * on Friday July 06, 2012 @06:25PM (#40570399)

    How soon we nerds forget Scientology's war [] against the internet back in the day.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 06, 2012 @06:27PM (#40570427)

    Let me say first that I find Scientology repulsive and a particularly greasy form of pyramid scheme. However, compared to the Judeo-Christian-Islamic trinity, they are responsible for much less evil and far fewer deaths.

    Because they had a late start.

  • Blog is not accurate (Score:4, Informative)

    by jklovanc ( 1603149 ) on Friday July 06, 2012 @06:29PM (#40570455)

    I am not a Scientologist and would never join a religion purported to be created on a bet.

    The blog takes quotes from the Scientology post out of context. It talkes bout clicking on the report tag and what to write but ignores the this intermediary step;

    4. Read the comment from people and pick the ones that fit the violation of the Code of Conduct.

    Where the blog post states that the Scientologists are directed to report all anti-Scientology comments they are actually directed to report only the ones that really brear the Code of Conduct.

    One final comment; Has the existence of this email been confirmed by an independent source? I would be suspect of anything reported by someone who has a bias against an organization without independent verification. That is one reason I generally don't read blogs; they have a tendency to be unverified and very biased..

  • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) * on Friday July 06, 2012 @06:32PM (#40570485)

    They've done it [] before. They were pretty successful, too.

  • by Larryish ( 1215510 ) <<larryish> <at> <>> on Friday July 06, 2012 @06:41PM (#40570605)

    From the Wikipedia link:

    Hubbard detailed his rules for attacking critics in a number of policy letters including one often quoted by critics as "the Fair Game policy." This allowed that those who had been declared enemies of the Church, called "suppressive persons" or simply "SP," "May be deprived of property or injured by any means...May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed." (taken from HCOPL Oct. 18, 1967 Issue IV, Penalties for Lower Conditions )

    Sounds kind of Masonic.

    All they need to throw in is "Admit nothing, deny everything, and make counter-accusations." and Hiram would give them all a great big hug-from-behind.

  • by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Friday July 06, 2012 @06:59PM (#40570767) Homepage Journal

    Except Scientology isn't, its a pyramid/litigious scheme passed off as one..

    At least a real religion has faith, these jokers only have cash and attorneys.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 06, 2012 @07:09PM (#40570887)

    They are, in short, very much like extremist Muslims, except without the benefit of their religion having been created far enough back that quasi-rational people might give it the benefit of the doubt as being legitimate.


    Scientology's been caught blackmailing politicians, breaking into government offices to steal records, forging papers used to indict and jail people, and sent in infiltrators [] incredibly deep in near critics to try to break them, dig up dirt, or even get them to commit suicide. They've been caught breaking into doctors' offices for private medical records, breaking into psychiatrists' offices for anything they can find against their critics or targets.

    This doesn't even deserve to be called a cult. Scientology is nothing but a mafia, a criminal enterprise. This is the Cult of Scientology [] in action, how they really operate. The BBC did an absolutely great documentary on how they still operate in 2010 [].

  • by Nadaka ( 224565 ) on Friday July 06, 2012 @07:17PM (#40570977)

    You would be wrong.

    Stalin and Mao were the gods of their religion built around a cult of personality and unwavering faith in authority and righteousness.

  • by Mal-2 ( 675116 ) on Friday July 06, 2012 @07:31PM (#40571101) Homepage Journal

    While they may harass and sue you, they don't often go with the "Kill the Infidels" if you say something nasty about their Ronnie or Tommy.

    I suppose you've never heard of Auditing Process R2-45 [].

  • Re:First Thetan! (Score:5, Informative)

    by jcr ( 53032 ) < .ta. .rcj.> on Friday July 06, 2012 @08:11PM (#40571477) Journal

    Anyone who doesn't hold that criminal enterprise in contempt is just not paying attention.


  • by LordLucless ( 582312 ) on Friday July 06, 2012 @08:57PM (#40571855)

    Between those three religions you have tens of millions slaughtered in pointless wars over minor differences in doctrine.

    Man, how many times have I seen this line trotted out? For a group of people who pride yourself on free thinking (I'm assuming you're an atheist here) you certainly seem to find it hard to come up with an original argument.

    Religion has been the sole cause of zero wars. Even if you find some way to measure the relative import of the various causes, I doubt religion is up there. It's a popular way to rabble-rouse, to create an artificial divide between "us" and "them", much the same way the U.S. used "capitalism vs communism" in the cold war, or "democracy vs tyranny" in the current terrorism debate (no, they really don't hate your freedom, they hate your politics).

    Some examples that are often given:
    Crusades: Bear in mind that during this time, the Catholic church was not only a religion, but also the most powerful political entity in the west. The Muslims (or rather, the Seljuks - like the situation in the west, they were a political entity that was also officially Muslim) were expanding, and conquering territory previously held by the Catholics (including Jerusalem, which has actually conquered 400 years prior to the first crusade). The first crusades were territorial disputes between two empires who also happened to be different religions. They were motivated by land, though, not religion. Later crusades still included territorial reasons, but they were also used for political means, either to attack people who threatened the Pope's power, or to start a foreign war to prop up a weak Pope.

    Ireland: I'm just going to quote Wikipedia here, because it says it much more clearly and succinctly than I do:

    For example, there is a common perception of The Troubles in Northern Ireland as a religious conflict, as one side (Nationalists) was predominantly composed of Catholics and the other (Unionists) of Protestants. However, the more fundamental cause is the attachment of Northern Ireland to either the Republic of Ireland or the United Kingdom and while religion played a role as a cultural marker, the conflict was in fact ethnic or nationalistic rather than religious in nature.[3] Since the native Irish were mostly Catholic and the later British-sponsored immigrants were mainly Protestant, the terms become shorthand for the two cultures, but it is inaccurate to describe the conflict as a religious one.[3]

    Palestine: Again, I'll start with a quote from wikipedia, although this is about only a particular incident, rather than the hostilities as a whole:

    The Shaw Commission found that the fundamental cause of the violence " the Arab feeling of animosity and hostility towards the Jews consequent upon the disappointment of their political and national aspirations and fear for their economic future."

    Beyond that, the U.N. created the nation of Israel by decree, and basically forced the current occupants of that to make way for Jewish immigrants. Again, while the opposing factions are both of different religions, the primary causes for conflict are territoriality and political sovereignty, not religion.

    Al Qaeda and Islamic Terrorism: This one actually has the best case for it being a religious war, as one of Al Qaeda's stated missions is the construction of a worldwide Islamic Caliphate. However, their other stated mission is the ending of foreign influence (notably American) in Islamic countries. It has been argued that without the United State's continual meddling in Middle Eastern politics, Al Qaeda might never have formed, or at least, not have attracted the influence it has. At best, this is an issue of both religion and political sovereignty.

  • Re:First Thetan! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Aighearach ( 97333 ) on Friday July 06, 2012 @09:06PM (#40571909) Homepage

    Anyone who doesn't hold that criminal enterprise in contempt is just not paying attention.

    Or is Lawful Evil

  • by Deep Esophagus ( 686515 ) on Friday July 06, 2012 @09:58PM (#40572357)


    While many churches are pretty opulent, I've never been inside one and there aren't any like that within a hundred miles of where I currently live. I've attended five churches comprising three different flavors over the past 20 years, and I never got so much as a baleful stare when I couldn't afford to contribute... and at two of them, that lack of funds lasted several years. In two of them the pastor worked a second job to pay the bills and received little or no salary from the church. In all of them the balance remained just big enough to go a couple of months paying the rent and other bills if all income suddenly stopped.

    People give to churches voluntarily because of what they expect to accomplish with their money -- feed the hungry, house the homeless, send missionaries to the remote corners of the world to spread their message, whatever. Church finances are, by law, open books so we all know exactly how much the church staff is tucking away (hint: I could never live on that little!) and how much goes to charitable causes. Any nonstandard major expense like buying a new heater to replace the one that's 40 years old, the congregation gets together to vote on it.

    Yes, places that call themselves churches misuse their status beyond belief for selfish purposes or ugly causes (I'm lookin' at YOU, Phelps) but those are individuals acting on their own initiative, vs. corporate policy as defined by the CoS.

  • by LordLucless ( 582312 ) on Friday July 06, 2012 @11:26PM (#40572963)

    Not true,, not true, not true! There were several translations of the Latin Vulgate into the vernacular. The Vulgate was the official translation, however

    It is indeed true. Pope Innocent III banned unauthorized translations of the bible in 1199 []. Yes, people still did it anyway, and yes, enforcement was patchy, but translations were officially banned, and some people (although not all) were persecuted for performing such translations. The Wycliffe version was the most widespread translation, and it too was explicitly banned in 1409. However, scribes just fudged the date whenever they produced one, so that the date of writing purported to precede the ban, and it became so widespread as to become a de facto standard.

    What kept it from being common was the great expense. Only the wealthy could afford their own copy, whether in the vernacular or in latin.

    Well, it's true they were very expensive. But even in Wycliffe's time, it wasn't so much the expense (although they were expensive) as illiteracy that kept Bibles out of the hands of individuals. Wycliffe's translation wasn't intended to increase personal Bible ownership, so much as it was to allow people to hear the Bible in their own language, the same way the apostles taught it to the Gentiles. The "personal study of the Bible" thing really gained steam a hundred years later with the Reformation.

  • Re:First Thetan! (Score:5, Informative)

    by Penguinisto ( 415985 ) on Saturday July 07, 2012 @12:08AM (#40573129) Journal

    True, but once they suck you in all Christian organisations want your money and they want it tax free.

    In almost every Christian denomination, giving is voluntary, not compulsory. As a practicing Christian, I give what I can, because I know the money goes into local charities, into keeping the lights and heat on in the church, feeds and houses the priest (giving him time to minister to the homebound, imprisoned, critically/terminally ill), etc. Most Christian denominations follow a similar pattern (note that I'm excluding the televangelists, and for obvious reasons, as most of them are blatant and obvious scam artists.)

    There is only one denomination I can think of which comes with a monetary requirement: The LDS/Mormon church, where you're required to give 10% of your income (among other requirements) in order to be considered "temple-worthy".

  • Re:First Thetan! (Score:5, Informative)

    by ZosX ( 517789 ) <> on Saturday July 07, 2012 @09:51AM (#40575209) Homepage

    They aren't considered a real, recognized religion in many countries in the world. They truly are a criminal organization. Too many people have died. They also pretty much control the town they are based in with the police completely in their pocket. No, they truly fit the definition of organized crime. If I personally thought assassinating church leadership would bring an end to the suffering they inflict, I'd probably be the first person camped out in florida with a rifle and a scope. I don't think that would put the organization out of commission though.

  • Re:First Thetan! (Score:5, Informative)

    by flyneye ( 84093 ) on Saturday July 07, 2012 @02:10PM (#40576765) Homepage

    But the Church of the Subgenius. [] does pay taxes and want to make YOU rich! Not just that but we also have a deal with YHVH1 and a group rate for the "divine excuse" that Christians have to dedicate everything to achieve. All we ever pay is $35 to Bob and we get boundless SLACK and so much else.
    Pamphlets #1 & 2
    Your Own Personal 8x11 suitable-for-framing DOBBSHEAD
    Official Dobbshead/Church Logo Metal Pin
    Dobbshead Sticker, Bumper Sticker
    The SubGenius Pledge
    The Divine Excuse (signed by "Bob"!)
    Doktorate of Forbidden Sciences
    (be a Doktor INSTANTLY. Incredible, sinister super-miniaturized fine print details all the scores of Church Ranks and Titles from which YOU can CHOOSE. Signed by... "Bob")
    Propaganda flyers to copy, Stickers
    Wallet sized, SubGenius MINISTER'S CARD
    (Without that card you have NO HOPE on July 5th!!!)
    Minister's Ordination papers and instructions.
    The STARK FIST of Removal online / SCRUBGENIUS secret forum
    (they're full of rants, art, Prescriptures, doctrine, charts, filth, comics, reviews and CHURCH NEWS & CONTACTS)

    Plus we are the ONE TRUE flying saucer RELIGION. With that in mind you can rest assured that $cientology is just a secret money making scam. We make no attempt to conceal anything!

"Mach was the greatest intellectual fraud in the last ten years." "What about X?" "I said `intellectual'." ;login, 9/1990