blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 28, 2024, 04:42:53 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2272608 Posts in 66755 Topics by 16946 Members
Latest Member: KobeTaylor
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Community Forums
| |-+  The Lounge
| | |-+  The Secrets of Scientology
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Go Down Print
Author Topic: The Secrets of Scientology  (Read 4018 times)
GreekStein
Hero Member
Hero Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 20912



View Profile
« Reply #15 on: September 29, 2010, 02:35:00 PM »

So when I go out, not only do I have to worry about guns and knives and gangs and drugs etc but I now have scientology to watch out for. ffs
Logged

@GreekStein on twitter.

Retired Policeman, Part time troll.
gatso
Ninja Mod
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16222


Let's go round again


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: September 29, 2010, 02:37:46 PM »

what`s that list supposed to show? that 10 people with some link to scientology have died in the last 28 years? presumably there`s more to it but I`m missing it
Logged

If you get to the yeasty clunge you've gone too far
Claw75
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28413



View Profile
« Reply #17 on: September 29, 2010, 02:39:39 PM »

Recorded it.  Not only are scientologists mad, they're also extremely dangerous.

How exactly are they dangerous?

you could start here and follow the links forever. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deaths_related_to_Scientology

Erm. Can't exactly say that's got me running for the hills.

A few suicides, a few fairly standard murders and what appears to be an electrocution caused by lack of H&S signs hardly constitute dangerous.

I'd say Christianity has caused far more deaths than this lot. Obviously there's more of them but I'm going to hazard a guess that it's proportionally more.



denying people that clearly need it psychiatric help because it's considered 'dangerous' is surely dangerous in itself?  Of course there have been far more deaths in the name of Christianity, but that's not what's under discussion here. There are plenty of other stories about suspicious deaths of people whilst within the confines of properties belonging to scientology if you do a quick google, and that's not to mention all of the other crazy stuff.  Getting involved with scientology is dangerous on a personal level in so many ways, but I guess that also depends on your definition of dangerous.  I doubt you, personally, have got anything to run for the hills about.
Logged

"Arguing with idiots is like playing chess with a pigeon....no matter how good you are the bird is going to shit on the board and strut around like it won anyway"
Bongo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8827



View Profile
« Reply #18 on: September 29, 2010, 02:47:56 PM »

Someone wrote a book about the scientolgist ninjas but it was banned in the UK:
http://counterknowledge.com/2008/11/church-of-scientology-forces-amazon-uk-to-withdraw-expose-from-sale/
Logged

Do you think it's dangerous to have Busby Berkeley dreams?
EvilPie
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14253



View Profile
« Reply #19 on: September 29, 2010, 02:57:39 PM »

Recorded it.  Not only are scientologists mad, they're also extremely dangerous.

How exactly are they dangerous?

you could start here and follow the links forever. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deaths_related_to_Scientology

Erm. Can't exactly say that's got me running for the hills.

A few suicides, a few fairly standard murders and what appears to be an electrocution caused by lack of H&S signs hardly constitute dangerous.

I'd say Christianity has caused far more deaths than this lot. Obviously there's more of them but I'm going to hazard a guess that it's proportionally more.



denying people that clearly need it psychiatric help because it's considered 'dangerous' is surely dangerous in itself?  Of course there have been far more deaths in the name of Christianity, but that's not what's under discussion here. There are plenty of other stories about suspicious deaths of people whilst within the confines of properties belonging to scientology if you do a quick google, and that's not to mention all of the other crazy stuff.  Getting involved with scientology is dangerous on a personal level in so many ways, but I guess that also depends on your definition of dangerous.  I doubt you, personally, have got anything to run for the hills about.

What's under discussion from my point of view is Dan's statement that Scientologists are "extremely dangerous".

It's such a sweeping statement and I'll be honest I really don't like it without some backing up.

Obviously some of them have attributes which make them dangerous to some people whilst at the same time being totally harmless to everybody else. This could be said for pretty much the entire population of the planet.

Are Christians dangerous because of the wars that have happened in the name of Christianity?

Are catholics dangerous because of a few who have done terrible things to children?

Are scientists dangerous because of how many have been killed by nuclear explosions?

Saying "scientologists are dangerous" (assuming he genuinely means it) is ridiculous imo.
Logged

Motivational speeches at their best:

"Because thats what living is, the 6 inches in front of your face......" - Patrick Leonard - 10th May 2015
Claw75
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28413



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: September 29, 2010, 03:02:05 PM »


Saying "scientologists are dangerous" (assuming he genuinely means it) is ridiculous imo.

fair point.  I skimmed and presumed he'd said 'scientology is dangerous' - don't think you can say all scientologists are dangerous in their own right - a lot of them are victims.  so i don't have a clue what he meant by it.
Logged

"Arguing with idiots is like playing chess with a pigeon....no matter how good you are the bird is going to shit on the board and strut around like it won anyway"
EvilPie
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14253



View Profile
« Reply #21 on: September 29, 2010, 03:14:14 PM »


Saying "scientologists are dangerous" (assuming he genuinely means it) is ridiculous imo.

fair point.  I skimmed and presumed he'd said 'scientology is dangerous' - don't think you can say all scientologists are dangerous in their own right - a lot of them are victims.  so i don't have a clue what he meant by it.

That wasn't my point Claire. I wasn't just trying to pick on Dan's wording where he states that scientologists are dangerous. You can't really say scientology as a religion / cult / whatever it is is dangerous either can you?

I accept it may be dangerous for some people with mental problems but I'm pretty certain it wasn't dangerous for L. Ron Hubbard. It's probably not too dangerous for Tom Cruise or John Travolta either.

We read about the extremes of scientology in the same way that we read about the extremes of pretty much everything else. It's these extremes which make things appear dangerous when they are probably no more dangerous than anything else.

I can quite happily say nuclear fallout is dangerous. I can't say that scientology is though.
Logged

Motivational speeches at their best:

"Because thats what living is, the 6 inches in front of your face......" - Patrick Leonard - 10th May 2015
TightPaulFolds
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 898


Not a moderator in any fashion whatsoever


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: September 29, 2010, 03:20:54 PM »

one thing that was vaguely interesting in last night's programme actually.  we all know that scientologists that have paid there way up to the higher echelons of the religion have always publicly denied the ideas of Xenu and incident II.  I often wondered to myself why people, when faced with that 'knowledge' didn't finally realise what a crock of shit the whole thing is and continued to support scientology whilst keeping the 'secret'.  Presumed it was mainly down to embarrassment, but the guy they were talking to last night said that those trusted with the knowledge believed that if it was imparted to people before they had completed the necessary steps to be ready for it that it would send them crazy or kill them.  I've known about it for in excess of ten years, and I can't say it's petrified me yet.

I guess once they accept the basic premise, they'll accept any embellishment.
It's a bit like Christianity, once they accept the whole snake/apple/garden scenario (foundational to Christianity), sneaking the odd Ascension/Tongues of Fire/Bleeding Statue story past them ain't gonna be too hard.



Logged
Bongo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8827



View Profile
« Reply #23 on: September 29, 2010, 03:21:12 PM »

I'm sure there are some things that nuclear fallout is good for so I think you should retract your statement Wink
Logged

Do you think it's dangerous to have Busby Berkeley dreams?
Woodsey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15846



View Profile
« Reply #24 on: September 29, 2010, 03:42:48 PM »

I thought the programme was a reasonable watch tbh............
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.251 seconds with 21 queries.