Anti-cultists call "cult apologists" those who defend the religious and civil rights of minority religions. For anti-cultists, unable to make appropriate distinctions, this amounts to defend the crimes they accuse the cuts of engaging into. Rather than address the issue, anti-cultists engage in numerous ad hominem attacks against the "cult apologists". Here are my comments on the answer by Patrick McKinnion to Joe Harrington who accuses Melton Gordon to be "full of shit". At least Patrick McKinnion has a taste of anti-cult bigotry, being a critic who himself is part of a minority religion, and knows of the good work "apologists" like Melton do to promote tolerance and an approach based on facts and reason rather than hysterical activism.
7 Dec 97
>>"Rev" Melton is full of shit. I've read his endorsements. He obviously is not privy to the core doctrines of Scientology and their hidden agenda and religious bigotry.
> No, he may not be.
Of course he is not full of shit. He is part of those scholars who study religious movements and their counter-movements in an independent way. They are hated by anti-cultists who impugn upon them all kinds of hidden motives and call them "cult-apologists", and who consistently forget to point to any references to their work.
>Personally, I serious doubt he is aware of their hidden agenda.
I believe he is very well aware of the accusations made by anti-Scientologists. He also see them for what they are.
>And like I said, I don't agree with his views on $cientology. However, I am not going to discount all of his writings based upon that - since he's often times the only "mainstream" voice willing to stick up for minority religions. And as a member of a minority faith, this is important to me. However, while I respect the man's writing on other matters, I tend to believe he got fed a line by the Co$.
He is not more "fed" a line by the CoS as he is for any other religions or minority religion.
> Side note: out of curiousity, I looked up the entry for the Co$ in the "Religious Requirements and Practices of Certain Selected Groups - A Handbook for Chaplains".
What is this book?
>It lists the source material for the entry as being the following:
> Hubbard, L. Ron: Dianetics (of course) " " Science of Survival, Predictions of Human Behavior. " " Self Analysis "What is Scientology", CofS of California.
> Which means there is no outside sources used for the DoD approved information manual.
What means DoD?
>However, I did find this gem on page 184, under "Basic Beliefs":
> "And we of the Church believe that the laws of God forbid Man: To destroy his own kind. To destroy the sanity of another. To destroy or enslave another's soul. To destroy or reduce the survival of one's companions or one's group."
> Appearantly not destroying one's own kind doesn't apply to people like Lisa McPherson.
Do you believe the scienos had the *intention* to destroy Lisa McPherson?
>Appearantly not destroying the sanity of another doesn't apply to wogs targeted in "operation freakout".
That's my complain against them. Personally I am, however, more interested in the mindset that brings this about. As far as I am concerned, this mindset is the same as the one displayed by most critics - which makes their "fight" absurd and useless.
>And appearantly not destroying or enslaving another's soul doesn't apply to Sea Org, or the rank and file Cof$ members.
The CoS doesn't "destroy or enslave another's soul" other than in the delude mind of "critics". Can you give examples of
> Sigh.....I think I'll stick to being a Psychology/Religious studies student.
I heartedly encourages you to study the whole field uncovered by the "cult-apologists" like Gordon, Schupe, Anthony, and many others. I started to put some material on my web site (http://uc2.unicall.be/bernie/home.htm) but unfortunately had no
time to keep on developing it so far.
Other links you may be interested in:
http://www.cnn.com/US/9711/24/cyberhate.web.site.ap/ (site not responding anymore, redirected to home page)
Return to Bernie's Posts Page
Return to alt.religion.scientology Page
Random Quote :
|This web site is NOT created by a Scientologist. It is created by a Scientology EX-MEMBER who is critical of Scientology. However, this ex-member is ALSO critical of the anti-Scientology movement. This does not make him a Scientologist, nor a defender of Scientology.|
Quick Map :