Can a Religion Be Banned?

[The Esotericist]

The fallacy: Appeal to Tradition

Ok hot shot, EXPLAIN to me how my example uses the appeal to tradition as a fallacios argument. I gave CONCRETE examples as to how it differs. I did NOT just cite the religions and say, "since these religions have been around longer, they are legitimate and Scientology is not" THAT would have made it an Appeal to Tradition fallacy.

That is NOT what I did though, IS IT?! Don't try to Bullshit a person that debated for four years in high school and was on a BIG TEN debate team at MSU for a year. I know what fallacies are and when to call them.

Scientology is equally a valid superstition as Catholicism and Islam.
Scientologists give to charity anyway.

I've refuted this, this is the most clearly preposterous thing anyone has attempted to claim concerning religion or religious studies. I will admit to you one thing however. . . I did study the ORIGINS of Scientology. I was impressed with the founder and his life. I didn't research any of the controversy around him personally. I'm not really aware of much of that. He did seem like an increadibly intelligent and gifted man, who was not out to screw people up or build a pyramid scheme, or, indeed, from what I read, even a "religion." It's what was made of it AFTER he died.

I wonder: If Scientology were to donate all the building materials to make and maintain School's of Xenu where the kids sit and recite L Ron Hubbard like they do in the Madrases of Pakistan out of the Qur'an ... would you really see this as charity? Or more as institutionalized brainwashing of poor people in 3rd world countries?

Why wonder it? It would never happen. Scientologists are only interested in people that have money or will be able to make them money, they are not interested in the sick, the poor, the destitute, orphans, or the community at large. Not in the sense that the major religions that like to make up the back bone of the community when nothing else is there.


I still really don't think you get it though. The world's major religions are not in operation to "dupe" people out of their money. They are exist to "save soul's." (Equally dubious in my book.) What's the difference? You will see missionaries from the world's major religions talking to and converting the poorest members of society, you will find them represented in prisons, consoling prisoners on death row, you will find them on the front lines in the battle fields of wars, setting up and running hospitals, hospices & graveyards, sitting with the dying, etc . . .

Yet :bugeye: YOU STILL JUST DON'T GET IT You think they are some malevolent force to be reckoned with, that they have some ulterior motive and they don't have people's best interests in mind?

That's it in a nutshell. The world's major religions are here to serve the people. Scientology, as an organization, is here to serve itself. It is more concerned with the organization than with the well being of humanity or the plight of individual humans. This is not the case with other religions. If you don't agree, you are in the minority, let's agree to disagree, and leave it at that.

 

[The Esotericist]

From what I have read & noticed, most of the standard religions seem to have sincere people at the local level running a church, mosque, or synagogue. The rotten apples are exceptions rather than the rule at the lowest level.

The further up you go from the local level, the worse it seems to get. At the higher levels, power, money, & prestige seem to be more important than religion. This is best shown by those in the Catholic church who covered up pedophilia, sending priests new churches to prey on new victims when their actions were discovered.

The electronic church is another example of abuse. Jimmy Swaggart & others are only interested in collecting large amounts of money, often from people who cannot afford to donate as much as they do.

Scientology seems to be money oriented at the lowest levels of their hierarchy, which makes them fundamentally different fom the other religions.

This is not only true of religion, but true of any organizational bureaucracy, including government. Your neighborhood or block government is the cleanest, least corrupt; followed on down the line by your township, village, town, city, state, nation, federal, multi-national . . . the UN, the CFR, the bilderburger, the tri-lateral commission, the world court, IMF, WHO, etc. are all rotten to the core.

 

[Michael]

Ok hot shot,

Ad hominem

Don't try to Bullshit a person that debated for four years in high school and was on a BIG TEN debate team at MSU for a year.

Appeal to authority



OK, I apologist IF I misspoke and honestly, I was a bit hasty.

How’s that?

I've refuted this, this is the most clearly preposterous thing anyone has attempted to claim concerning religion or religious studies. I will admit to you one thing however. . . I did study the ORIGINS of Scientology. I was impressed with the founder and his life. I didn't research any of the controversy around him personally. I'm not really aware of much of that. He did seem like an increadibly intelligent and gifted man, who was not out to screw people up or build a pyramid scheme, or, indeed, from what I read, even a "religion." It's what was made of it AFTER he died.

This does seem to be the case with most of these sorts of things huh?

Why wonder it? It would never happen. Scientologists are only interested in people that have money or will be able to make them money, they are not interested in the sick, the poor, the destitute, orphans, or the community at large. Not in the sense that the major religions that like to make up the back bone of the community when nothing else is there.

One of the atheists here joined Scientology to see what it was all about and said the CoS she went to was mainly about family and community and that’s the reason people joined. Plus they thought it made more sense. So it was really no different. And really, if it’s made up of people in Kentucky, then probably it’ll reflect their values. If it’s made up of people in Hollywood – well, yeah, it’s all about money.


I think many religions are tools used to serve unscrupulous people. Some religions teach people the world must all be their belief for their God to be happy. I think that this sort of ideology is ill-conceived and dangerous.

A person doesn't need to join a religion to do good. If they do so to curry favor with their Goddess or God, well, that's not really doing it out of the kindness of their heart is it? I mean, they can do the good just to be good. Right?

 

[The Esotericist]

Ad hominem

lol ouch, touche' guilty as charged.

Appeal to authority

OK, I apologist IF I misspoke and honestly, I was a bit hasty.
How’s that?

lol. Appealing to my own authority huh? lol That's a new use for that call. Thanks, I got a kick outta that one. I dig it.

This does seem to be the case with most of these sorts of things huh?

Agreed. I have studied the New testament academically a bit. Many of the things I have learned have been rather startling. Among the claims that people don't really put together are really quite simple. . . . the gospels are written by his disciples, yes? Those disciples (at least the canonical gospels) were fishermen. How does it come about that fishermen are literate in that era?

Accordingly, the only gospel that is by a disciple that should have been literate is by the one that is "claimed" to have been the one to betray him? Hmmm. . . . things are beginning to look a bit mysterious now, aren't they? Looks like someone wants somebodies side of the story discredited, maybe?

Added to that, one has to look at the construction of what books are cannon, and which ones aren't. Most Christians don't even ask this question. You ask them about the First Council of Nicea and you get a blank stare. Then ask them would they accept a bible written by the Department of Homeland Security? Most would be incredulous! I ask you, is there any difference? Hell, Rome crucifies Christ, and then several hundred years later decides what the official "word of god" is?!? What the bloody hell? And this is accepted by ALL denominations of Christians. From your run of the mill Catholic, to your bible thumping hell fire and Brim stone Baptist. (Of course, with them, you have an added layer of politics, Good King James)
No, you are correct, it is time humanity grew up, and shed religion from it's spirituality. Bureaucracy and politics are no longer necessary in the quest to discover the truths of ones higher nature.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHZrTR4jyts

One of the atheists here joined Scientology to see what it was all about and said the CoS she went to was mainly about family and community and that’s the reason people joined. Plus they thought it made more sense. So it was really no different. And really, if it’s made up of people in Kentucky, then probably it’ll reflect their values. If it’s made up of people in Hollywood – well, yeah, it’s all about money.

Fair enough. In this context then, I don't think it is necessarily their religion people are defending so vehemently, but their community. A physical sense of community is so important to the isolated individual human in today's world.

I think many religions are tools used to serve unscrupulous people. Some religions teach people the world must all be their belief for their God to be happy. I think that this sort of ideology is ill-conceived and dangerous.

It's interesting how religions have these huge tombs that are interpreted by so many people in so many different ways, isn't it? I think, when it comes right down to it, it is same as always, it is the PEOPLE that are to blame. Not the religion. They just use it as a tool. No body can be used, duped, or made to feel something without their consent. There are no victims in the world.

A person doesn't need to join a religion to do good. If they do so to curry favor with their Goddess or God, well, that's not really doing it out of the kindness of their heart is it? I mean, they can do the good just to be good. Right?

This is true. But again, I think the major reason they do join is for community. You can practice any religion alone. You needn't go to a place of worship for any of them. It's the community and sense of belonging that people are after, that's what I truly believe. If it's just about spirituality? Then most of those type of people are perfectly content to practice in private, and "do good" as you say on their own.

 

[Michael]

Added to that, one has to look at the construction of what books are cannon, and which ones aren't. Most Christians don't even ask this question. You ask them about the First Council of Nicea and you get a blank stare. Then ask them would they accept a bible written by the Department of Homeland Security? Most would be incredulous! I ask you, is there any difference? Hell, Rome crucifies Christ, and then several hundred years later decides what the official "word of god" is?!? What the bloody hell? And this is accepted by ALL denominations of Christians.

Interesting metaphor.

I never thought of the Nicean council in this manner but it does make sense. I mean, the Emperor called it and his duty was not to propagate doctrine but to protect the Empire ... or at least hold it together.