Scientology in Germany.

[SlappyMcGee]

Hey.

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

What do you dudes think? Scientology is fucking batshit, but is Germany going too far? Are they at all justified to discriminate against scientology? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

[T3chno]

I don't think Germany has the same wall height as the US in the separation of church and state.

Needless to say, I don't think any religion should be banned. Frowned upon is fine.

[Luminaflare]

I don't think Germany has the same wall height as the US in the separation of church and state.

Needless to say, I don't think any religion should be banned. Frowned upon is fine.

Scientology isn't a religion, it's a cult.

[otters~1]

I don't think Germany has the same wall height as the US in the separation of church and state.

Needless to say, I don't think any religion should be banned. Frowned upon is fine.

Scientology isn't a religion, it's a cult.

As far as that goes, the two are so similar it's sometimes hard to see a difference. But arguing that a cult/religion is "unconstitutional" might be a worrisome trend for, say, the German Muslim population.

EDIT: What an eery sentence here, the German government describing Scientology as having a "totalitarian structure and methods [that] may pose a risk to Germany's democratic society".

Sound familiar? :P

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

Well, let's see... they extort their followers into excessive debt and repay them only with brainwashing, they actively infiltrate private companies, governments, and schools in order to surreptitiously add to their collective and gradually gain power, and they are responsible for killing and torturing members who have tried to leave.
Not only are they most certainly a cult, but their strategies for expansion may as well qualify them as an organized criminal group. If there was such a thing as social or societal terrorism, Scientology would be a perfect example.
While I may despise various religious groups and their means of brainwashing their own followers, I haven't heard that, say, the Catholic Church was putting Catholics of tenuous faith in forced labor camps, or that it made a concerted effort to invade and control certain government bodies.
I'm all for religious freedom, so long as it's accompanied by the right to speak freely about those religions. But Scientology is not a religion. I think Germany should set the precedent and ban Scientology entirely.

[SlappyMcGee]

Well, let's see... they extort their followers into excessive debt and repay them only with brainwashing, they actively infiltrate private companies, governments, and schools in order to surreptitiously add to their collective and gradually gain power, and they are responsible for killing and torturing members who have tried to leave.
Not only are they most certainly a cult, but their strategies for expansion may as well qualify them as an organized criminal group. If there was such a thing as social or societal terrorism, Scientology would be a perfect example.
While I may despise various religious groups and their means of brainwashing their own followers, I haven't heard that, say, the Catholic Church was putting Catholics of tenuous faith in forced labor camps, or that it made a concerted effort to invade and control certain government bodies.
I'm all for religious freedom, so long as it's accompanied by the right to speak freely about those religions. But Scientology is not a religion. I think Germany should set the precedent and ban Scientology entirely.

I back up this statement one hundred percent. Religious freedom is fine, but Scientology seems to be an organization bent on profit and illegal activity. So, the question is, should a religion lose its constitutional protection because it is a malicious organization? Would a religion devoted entirely to blowing up civilian's cars be protected? To what degree is a series of belief protected before the law has to be enforced? And on that note, can Christianity continue to discriminate against homosexuality and harass abortion clinics on the grounds of religious freedom?

[t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư]

So, the question is, should a religion lose its constitutional protection because it is a malicious organization? Would a religion devoted entirely to blowing up civilian's cars be protected? To what degree is a series of belief protected before the law has to be enforced? And on that note, can Christianity continue to discriminate against homosexuality and harass abortion clinics on the grounds of religious freedom?

It's a complicated issue. I don't think the law's focus on motivation to commit a crime should enter the picture at any point before the arrest in terms of prosecution. This is obviously necessary to avoid prosecuting thoughtcrime, although it does have the less fortunate side-effect that no legal action (aside from surveillance) can be taken against people who have openly expressed intention to, or even stated that they are about to, do something illegal.
If we're talking purely about legality, I would happily fight to protect the right to think or believe whatever one wants, including an earnest belief in a religion that orders its followers to blow up my car. I am highly in favor of the right to freedom of religious belief, but for some reason people equate that with some silly right to religious expression. (Actually, I think someone might think he has a right to religious expression because "expression" is also used in the context of speech; I obviously fully believe that one should be able to express verbally what one believes without fear of legal action against him.)
But I would also fight to protect anyone's right to speak openly and without censorship about a religion without legal repercussions. And I would probably exercise that right immediately to campaign against a religion that orders its followers to blow up my car, call them all lunatics, and yell profanities at them in the street.
I would also, of course, be completely in favor of local, state, and federal law enforcement, as well as counter-terrorism groups, surveiling the crap out of such a religious order. Incentive and stated intention shouldn't be enough to arrest someone, but it should damned well be enough to be suspicious and prepare for an arrest.

For actual religions (as opposed to Scientology), supporting certain social initiatives is definitely nothing to legally prosecute. I am completely in favor of the Church making total dicks of themselves by being openly and uncompromisingly hostile to homosexuality, because I still have some glimmer of hope in me that that will not be a popular move and allow the Church to die the death it should have centuries ago. But as soon as the Pope declares homo hunting season, he becomes the kingpin of an international terrorist organization, and he should be arrested and tried for all of the appropriate crimes should he have motivated any single Catholic to murder a homosexual person. But with the exception Islam, this kind of underhanded crap isn't official policy for today's ruling religious authorities. The Pope doesn't urge his followers to do anything illegal.
In the case of the cult of Scientology, illegal activity is standard operating procedure, and a sizable subset of its followers are encouraged to, and regularly do, highly illegal things. I would very much like to see in the news that the CIA bugged the Christ out of their stupid Sea Org boat, stormed it within a day because of the intelligence gathered, and are trying the higher-ups with crimes against humanity.

[Mute Monk]

Yeah, Slaps and Suki have pretty much said everything I was going to say, plus some more.

All I see Scientology as is a type of mafia...their actions are certainly quite parallel, with the added bonus that Scientology grows through brainwashing whereas the mafia mostly grows through familial ties.

[SkyPanda]

I don't think Germany has the same wall height as the US in the separation of church and state.

I believe that while the official separation of church and state in the USA is adequate, the church maintains a stranglehold on American society and ultimately, its legislation.


Passive religious discrimination is unavoidable given the insanities being perpetrated by various religions at any given time, and I think that's totally okay. I'd question whether banning an entire religion is preferrable to prosecuting its particular illegal activites, though it's probably fine in this case because scientology is a scam.

Living in Western Australia, i'm no stranger to governments swinging bigger and bigger hammers over time in order to take out unsavoury organisations. It doesn't work, and nothing changes, except one day you wake up and realize you have fewer civil liberties than the last time you checked.

[otters~1]

Separation of church and state is the best goddamn thing that ever happened to us. At least now when we get into wars we don't belong in and can't handle, it has very little to do with Jesus.

[blackson]

Separation of church and state is the best goddamn thing that ever happened to us. At least now when we get into wars we don't belong in and can't handle, it has very little to do with Jesus.

The church still does have influence, in that 83% of the population of the Untied States believes in Christianity. They're ruling the nation in that athesists are almost never elected for public office. At least 90% of Governmental officials believe in God, and well, rule accordingly.

[otters~1]

Separation of church and state is the best goddamn thing that ever happened to us. At least now when we get into wars we don't belong in and can't handle, it has very little to do with Jesus.

The church still does have influence, in that 83% of the population of the Untied States believes in Christianity. They're ruling the nation in that athesists are almost never elected for public office. At least 90% of Governmental officials believe in God, and well, rule accordingly.

1. I don't believe that 90% of public officials believe in God. Seriously, that is.
2. 83% of the country's population may follow Christianity, but that's mostly through habit; America was founded a Christian country, but belief is beginning to taper off.
3. The goddamn woman sitting next to me at the public library refuses to fucking move her fucking plastic bag that's draped over my fucking mouse. Get manners or gtfo, bitch.

EDIT: She just moved it slightly! Even more in my way!

[SlappyMcGee]

Separation of church and state is the best goddamn thing that ever happened to us. At least now when we get into wars we don't belong in and can't handle, it has very little to do with Jesus.

The church still does have influence, in that 83% of the population of the Untied States believes in Christianity. They're ruling the nation in that athesists are almost never elected for public office. At least 90% of Governmental officials believe in God, and well, rule accordingly.

I thought he was being ironic.

[T3chno]

The church still does have influence, in that 83% of the population of the Untied States believes in Christianity.

Anyone else think this number is a little on the high side?


WE'LL FIND OUT AFTER THE 2010 CENSUS!

[blackson]

Separation of church and state is the best goddamn thing that ever happened to us. At least now when we get into wars we don't belong in and can't handle, it has very little to do with Jesus.

The church still does have influence, in that 83% of the population of the Untied States believes in Christianity. They're ruling the nation in that athesists are almost never elected for public office. At least 90% of Governmental officials believe in God, and well, rule accordingly.

I thought he was being ironic.

/me re-reads.

/me headdesks.

[SkyPanda]

1. I don't believe that 90% of public officials believe in God. Seriously, that is.

Which leads to the question: which is worse, your government being entirely comprised of Christians, or your government being entirely comprised of people who feel they need to pretend to be Christians for whatever reason. Both seem bad.

[SlappyMcGee]

1. I don't believe that 90% of public officials believe in God. Seriously, that is.

Which leads to the question: which is worse, your government being entirely comprised of Christians, or your government being entirely comprised of people who feel they need to pretend to be Christians for whatever reason. Both seem bad.

Yeah, America fucking sucks!

[blackson]

1. I don't believe that 90% of public officials believe in God. Seriously, that is.

Hmm, I think it's my fault with this one. 90% of public officials publicly are Christian*. I'm sure a ton of them are closet atheists, but had to hide it to get elected.

2. 83% of the country's population may follow Christianity, but that's mostly through habit; America was founded a Christian country, but belief is beginning to taper off.

Pretty much every single average Christian is a casual one, but when provoked they get defensive and abide by all the "correct" morals a Christian should. I don't know if it's tapering off or not; we'll find out once the 2010 census is out.

[SkyPanda]

Yeah, America fucking sucks!

No way wow spill the goss

[jean-luc]

First: It's very important to note that the action Germany has taken is not against scientology as a religion, but against the Religious Technology Center (of which Scientology is a subsidiary) as a corporation. The difference is very important to note, because this is fundamentally a matter of criminal and corporate law, and not a matter of religion.

Second: It should be remembered that the separation of church and state is not, in fact, a part of our nations founding governmental system. It was first mentioned in relation to the United States in private letters written by Jefferson. The Supreme Court has since ruled in general accordance with this concept, but has refrained from setting a precedent as to the "wall of separation" that Jefferson discussed in a general sense. Although I personally believe that this separation should be a legal structure, at present it is not.

Finally: Many of the prominent debaters here are very directly anti-religion, to the point of close mindedness. As I read through several threads here, I see sweeping generalizations made about religion by all. Please remember that there is a majority, albeit a silent one, that is both religious and perfectly normal. It is unfortunate that the extremists speak loudest, because it truly makes it very hard to be a normal religious person, much less a religious liberal.

That will be all.

[otters~1]

It is unfortunate that the extremists speak loudest...

This is quite true when it comes to atheists as well, perhaps even more so. Militants like Hitchens do just as much as cross-wielding Christians* to stereotype us.


*Oops

[beethoveN]

when was the last time a christian (not mormon, or catholic) went up to you and steriotyped you?

[blackson]

when was the last time a christian (not mormon, or catholic) went up to you and steriotyped you?

Please tell me you're being sarcastic.

[jean-luc]

It is unfortunate that the extremists speak loudest...

This is quite true when it comes to atheists as well, perhaps even more so. Militants like Hitchens do just as much as cross-wielding Christians* to stereotype us.


*Oops

Perhaps I was not blunt enough on this point, but I was suggesting that it's the extremists of the other side that primarily populate this discussion forum.

[SlappyMcGee]

It is unfortunate that the extremists speak loudest...

This is quite true when it comes to atheists as well, perhaps even more so. Militants like Hitchens do just as much as cross-wielding Christians* to stereotype us.


*Oops

Perhaps I was not blunt enough on this point, but I was suggesting that it's the extremists of the other side that primarily populate this discussion forum.

TheRealN forums? Really? Are you sure you haven't forgotten to update your bookmarks and you're still on forumer? We're open-minded hard-working religious folk, here.

I kid, of course, because RELIGION IS BULLSHIT.

:P