View Full Version : Do you think it's bigoted to mock Scientologists?
Kid Presentable
03-17-2008, 10:02 PM
And are we mocking scientologists when we laugh at how big of an idiot Tom Cruise is?
People seem to be getting off on mocking scientologists. I'm not making an empirical argument, I just seem to encounter a lot of folk who are rubbishing the belief. I encounter a lot of racists and misogynists in my working day though, as well.
TurdBerglar
03-17-2008, 10:11 PM
i mock anyone religious
hitmonlee
03-17-2008, 11:22 PM
i mock anyone religious
same. and if it makes me a bigot, so be it.
icy manipulator
03-17-2008, 11:42 PM
if someone knocked on my door wanting to talk about jesus, jehovah, allah, whatever, i'd politely say 'thanks but no thanks'
if someone knocked on my door wanting to talk about L Ron Hubbard i'd chase them down the street with a cricket bat
funk63
03-18-2008, 12:10 AM
i'd agree that most religious types can suck a chode. but i really dont know enough about scientology to mock it. i heard tom cruise stopped and helped someone whos car had broken down. good stuff. i like ppl like that. whys he crazy again?
Auton
03-18-2008, 01:42 AM
i mock bigots.
if tom cruise really believes in that stuff, good for him. everyone's personal beliefs are ridiculous to someone else.
roosta
03-18-2008, 04:25 AM
i mock anyone religious
same. and if it makes me a bigot, so be it.
that's so ignorant its unbelievable. to say you mock ANYONE who can be placed under the blanket of "religious" is ridiculous. its such a wider ranging term and encompasses so many different people/beliefs.
and it does make you a bigot.
Auton
03-18-2008, 05:14 AM
yeah, seriously.
If anything I'd blame the press, they've chastised the religion and catagorised it as a cult.
I'm not really religious, I've never been baptised or ever been to a church. Religion is a scary concept to me but I'm open to peoples beliefs and happy that people find solice and peace of mind within religion.
The way I see it is that if someone chooses to mock a religion because it is based on scientific foundations, be it alien races or whatever then they are just following suit with the masses. Science and Science Fiction as concepts (in the the grand scheme of time) is relatively new. No one was thinking about alien races 2000 or so years ago. The same people that mock scientology are the same people that believe there was a white guy living in the middle east who could turn water in to wine or put 'Jedi'in the religion section of a national census. Now I'm not picking at Christianity (just using it as an example) but I'm sure that 'magic' was the most fantastical premise in those times as is 'science' today. It's almost as if it's fine to belive something that has thousands of years history behind it but not something that only has 50 or so (I don't know the exact time scientology was founded).
To each his own.
Yetra Flam
03-18-2008, 06:41 AM
yeah i don't accept scientology as a legitimate religion. it's too culty. and they hunt down anyone who speaks out against them. fucking scary ass shit.
It's hardly like the crusades though.
fucktopgirl
03-18-2008, 07:50 AM
I just came across that article and i though it was fitting in the discussion.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7302609.stm
'' Religious people are better able to cope with shocks such as losing a job or divorce, claims the study presented to a Royal Economic Society conference.''
'' They had higher levels of life satisfaction".
:D I think this is a freaking biased study and full of crap. Satisfaction with life come with your degree of resilience and instinct of survival.
And scientology is a cult and we must mock this shit!!
CULT - Any group which has a pyramid type authoritarian
leadership structure with all teaching and guidance coming
from the person/persons at the top. The group will claim to be
the only way to God; Nirvana; Paradise; Ultimate Reality; Full
Potential, Way to Happiness etc, and will use thought reform
or mind control techniques to gain control and keep their
members.
That pretty much sums up Scientology.
...and you know this by fact or by what the papers say?
Kid Presentable
03-18-2008, 08:14 AM
I just came across that article and i though it was fitting in the discussion.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7302609.stm
'' Religious people are better able to cope with shocks such as losing a job or divorce, claims the study presented to a Royal Economic Society conference.''
'' They had higher levels of life satisfaction".
:D I think this is a freaking biased study and full of crap. Satisfaction with life come with your degree of resilience and instinct of survival.
And scientology is a cult and we must mock this shit!!
I'd believe the findings.
Auton
03-18-2008, 08:46 AM
I just came across that article and i though it was fitting in the discussion.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7302609.stm
'' Religious people are better able to cope with shocks such as losing a job or divorce, claims the study presented to a Royal Economic Society conference.''
'' They had higher levels of life satisfaction".
:D I think this is a freaking biased study and full of crap. Satisfaction with life come with your degree of resilience and instinct of survival.
And scientology is a cult and we must mock this shit!!
ah yes, i was wondering what the voice of reason thought on the subject. :rolleyes:
fucktopgirl
03-18-2008, 08:51 AM
ah yes, i was wondering what the voice of reason thought on the subject. :rolleyes:
And now you know!!:D
MC Moot
03-18-2008, 08:57 AM
Never mind the scientologists!...it's the Free Masons who warrant your persecution...pay attention!
ScarySquirrel
03-18-2008, 10:29 AM
I stopped to talk to some of them once on Hollywood Blvd. They kind of really weirded me out... but I was curious about that stress test thing, even though I betcha a million dollars they'd tell me I was too stressed out and Scientology was the only way out or something.
TurdBerglar
03-18-2008, 10:30 AM
i have a very hard time taking anyone seriously that takes a bunch of fables and stories to heart and as truth. how can you trust someone's thought process that believes that there's some mighty being dictating everything that happens in the world? that's just slightly insane. having beliefs that were just pulled out of the air by someone else and are used to tell people what to do and how to think and what is right and what is wrong is entirely back wards to me. i'd like to make my own decisions whenever i can.
no one needs to follow beliefs or religion to help them. it limits you. it structuralizes your life to a set way.
religion is just used to trick people into living life a certain way. a way that whatever religion it is thinks is appropriate. maybe that's a good thing for people that fuck shit up for everyone else and need to be tricked and manipulated. but not for able minded people.
religion may have started off as sweet and innocent but it isn't today.
Fact
Meaning you've been to a gathering or whatever they do?
abcdefz
03-18-2008, 10:46 AM
I don't think it's bigoted to mock; I think it's bigoted to hate.
cookiepuss
03-18-2008, 11:03 AM
And are we mocking scientologists when we laugh at how big of an idiot Tom Cruise is?
Well, if you think that Tom represents ALL Scientologists, then the answer would be yes. However, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I at least hope ALL Scientologist are not like Tom Cruise and therefore we can make fun of him without making fun of scinetology as a whole.
nnnnaaaahhhh....wait a minute. Scientology is rediculous. if you know anything about it, you know it's some loony shit. So lets mock them. and the really fun thing about it is they get so worked up about being mocked...I mean we wouldn't bother to mock them if we didn't get such a great reaction from them. but man they freak out. so fuck em. mock, mock, mock!(y)
cookiepuss
03-18-2008, 11:11 AM
^ I don't dissagree.
Moses was on drugs, mkay?
hpdrifter
03-18-2008, 11:13 AM
CULT - Any group which has a pyramid type authoritarian
leadership structure with all teaching and guidance coming
from the person/persons at the top. The group will claim to be
the only way to God; Nirvana; Paradise; Ultimate Reality; Full
Potential, Way to Happiness etc, and will use thought reform
or mind control techniques to gain control and keep their
members.
That pretty much sums up Scientology.
Sounds a lot like Catholicism too.
There's nothing ridiculous about scientology when compared with other religions.
I'm with you on that one
its fun to mock any1. But if they are rich and more successful than you - its even more fun :)
b i o n i c
03-18-2008, 04:26 PM
making fun of any religion is equal to anti-semetism i think
mathcart
03-18-2008, 05:36 PM
People seem to be getting off on mocking scientologists. I'm not making an empirical argument, I just seem to encounter a lot of folk who are rubbishing the belief. I encounter a lot of racists and misogynists in my working day though, as well.
Empirical:
"Concepts that are empirical, or empirically based, are dependent on evidence or consequences that are observable by the senses. Empirical data is data that is produced by experiment or observation."
I just mock people who misuse empirical in sentences.
:rolleyes:
I think that it's unfair to mock scientologists.
One thing people choose to ignore is that most scientologists have no knowledge of the crazy theories mocked on South Park etc. The upper level deep thetan stories are generally not something talked about or referenced in the "religion" of the average scientologist.
I think that the "religious" experience of most scientologists can mostly be attributed to common sense self-help techniques that Scientology claims as LRH Tech. Personal reflection and evaluation as per the e-meter sessions may not measure thetans, but having someone tell you that you need to take time to inspect your own life and think about what you're doing is no doubt beneficial.
I believe scientology is a bogus self-help regimen that extorts its members for money, and its status as a religion is primarily for the tax-exempt status that comes with it. Mocking people who are in it, their personal experiences with any of the self-help techniques, or the "religion" itself is different from disagreeing with a cult-like organization that you think is genuinely harmful to it's members.
russhie
03-18-2008, 07:27 PM
Empirical:
"Concepts that are empirical, or empirically based, are dependent on evidence or consequences that are observable by the senses. Empirical data is data that is produced by experiment or observation."
I just mock people who misuse empirical in sentences.
:rolleyes:
Wrong side of the bed?
I'm not religious at all, I have no problem with people practicing religion though - even if their beliefs are a bit whacky. If it makes people feel happy, secure and gives them a sense of purpose, then go for it. I do however have a problem when it breeds hate, intolerance, corruption and exploitation.
I don't think that any religion should be mocked above any other.
Kid Presentable
03-18-2008, 07:38 PM
Empirical:
"Concepts that are empirical, or empirically based, are dependent on evidence or consequences that are observable by the senses. Empirical data is data that is produced by experiment or observation."
I just mock people who misuse empirical in sentences.
:rolleyes:
Nah money, you should have highlighted the experiment part. And it's a different kind of observation. The key words are experiment and data. I'm just talking about shit I encounter. You'll see that I haven't designed an experiment (and ventured a hypothesis), collected any data, or made any observations (that is, based on my findings). Good effort, though.
Kid Presentable
03-18-2008, 08:52 PM
And just so we don't get into a whole big thing, I'll concede when in my research I come across Scholarly Articles of the type: "An Empirical Study into how some bloke that works at the pub reckons people make fun of scientologists, and people are sexist and somewhat racist". Fuck it, if it's that easy, I might just go for my phd.
I'm still surprised at the famous scientologists. Apart from Tom Cruise, they don't seem any worse off for it.
WTF? .... why are they tax exempt?
Um, religious non-profit organizations get tax exemptions. L. Ron Hubbard filed to become a religion (in my opinion) for just that reason - and because they could claim religious persecution when people called them crooks.
hitmonlee
03-18-2008, 09:23 PM
that's so ignorant its unbelievable. to say you mock
ANYONE who can be placed under the blanket of "religious" is ridiculous. its such
a wider ranging term and encompasses so many different people/beliefs.
and it does make you a bigot.
it's not like i mock them to their face :rolleyes:
Videodrome
03-18-2008, 09:25 PM
for the record: i learned the meaning of empirical in this thread.
mathcart
03-18-2008, 10:44 PM
Nah money, you should have highlighted the experiment part. And it's a different kind of observation. The key words are experiment and data. I'm just talking about shit I encounter. You'll see that I haven't designed an experiment (and ventured a hypothesis), collected any data, or made any observations (that is, based on my findings). Good effort, though.
Thats my fault- I just grabbed the first wiki page that proved what I knew to be true in my head, based on what you wrote. What I meant to say was that you were not undertaking empirical data collection(the above explination), but rather you very statement was in fact an empirical argument: which
"In philosophy generally, empiricism is an epistemological concept, or a theory of knowledge, emphasizing the role of experience and evidence, especially sensory perception, in the formation of ideas, while discounting the notion of innate ideas."
And just so we don't get into a whole big thing, I'll concede when in my research I come across Scholarly Articles of the type: "An Empirical Study into how some bloke that works at the pub reckons people make fun of scientologists, and people are sexist and somewhat racist". Fuck it, if it's that easy, I might just go for my phd.
I'm still surprised at the famous scientologists. Apart from Tom Cruise, they don't seem any worse off for it.
See above explination.
Whats wrong with big things?
I would be very interested in reading your dissertation!
:rolleyes:
Kid Presentable
03-18-2008, 11:27 PM
If you posted the wrong definition (which you grabbed from wikipedia) in the first place, why should I defend myself? You're a fucking kook. Of course I wasn't speaking philosphically. You can present an argument (isn't it known as positing a theorem? It's still an argument) statistically, you know. Roll your eyes all the way down to my ass, so you can get a clear view of what you must kiss.
Kid Presentable
03-18-2008, 11:29 PM
Red Letters: Used by knob-shiners who can't for the life of them define anything without wikipedia, and even then they're so busy breathing heavily that they grab the wrong definition.
jackrock
03-19-2008, 12:13 AM
Scientology = cult.
WE ARE LEGION.
b i o n i c
03-19-2008, 11:49 AM
making fun of any religion is equal to anti-semetism(.)
cookiepuss
03-19-2008, 12:07 PM
I believe scientology is a bogus self-help regimen that extorts its members for money, and its status as a religion is primarily for the tax-exempt status that comes with it. Mocking people who are in it, their personal experiences with any of the self-help techniques, or the "religion" itself is different from disagreeing with a cult-like organization that you think is genuinely harmful to it's members.
(y) good point
mathcart
03-19-2008, 06:15 PM
If you posted the wrong definition (which you grabbed from wikipedia) in the first place, why should I defend myself? You're a fucking kook. Of course I wasn't speaking philosphically. You can present an argument (isn't it known as positing a theorem? It's still an argument) statistically, you know. Roll your eyes all the way down to my ass, so you can get a clear view of what you must kiss.
This is a little nasty. Thought we were just talkin' here...
Red Letters: Used by knob-shiners who can't for the life of them define anything without wikipedia, and even then they're so busy breathing heavily that they grab the wrong definition.
This is just obnoxious.
You were totally making an empirical argument, wither or not you see it (despite all the evidence provided) is out of my hands, I was having fun arguing, but name calling is a little silly, so I guess I'm done with this.
Mocking people who are in it ... is different from disagreeing with a cult-like organization that you think is genuinely harmful to it's members.
No no, I think it is harmful. I'm just saying that mocking people is different from disagreeing with them. For instance, I disagree with some Catholic practices, but I don't mock them - I think that would be rude and ignorant.
Kid Presentable
03-19-2008, 08:58 PM
This is a little nasty. Thought we were just talkin' here...
This is just obnoxious.
You were totally making an empirical argument, wither or not you see it (despite all the evidence provided) is out of my hands, I was having fun arguing, but name calling is a little silly, so I guess I'm done with this.
I was just having fun, and you had to post this response and offend me. TOO FAR!!!
vBulletin® v3.6.7, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.