Since some of the materials which describe the $cientology cult could be considered to be
Since some of the materials which describe the $cientology cult could be
considered to be copywritten materials, I have censored myself and The
Skeptic Tank by deleting any and all possible text files which describes
the cult's hidden mythologies. I have elected to quote just a bit of the
questionable text according to the "Fair Use" legal findings afforded to
those who report. - Fredric L. Rice, The Skeptic Tank, 09/Sep/95
From news.interserv.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!usenet Wed Jul 19 09:29:03 1995
From: email@example.com (Diane Richardson)
Subject: Re: The Noose is Tightening on CoS (was Big Suprise - 79K) (LONG)
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 1995 05:03:00 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news.interserv.net alt.religion.scientology:75914 misc.legal:61908 misc.legal.computing:10231 misc.taxes:18792 comp.org.eff.talk:56858
"R. Urban" wrote:
>This is not intended to start a flame war, but you need to have more
>tolerance for beliefs that are different than your own, particularly
>those that are shared by minorities. (In case you are wondering, I was
>born and raised a Catholic.) And, if we don't protect the religious
>freedom of the minority, then the religious freedom of the majority will
>eventually be jeapordized.
If you had any idea of what the "Church" of Scientology[tm] has
managed to do while hiding behind the protection of "religion," you
wouldn't have written this message.
Pressuring young adults into coming up with the money to buy their
services, the "Church" has been responsible for the suicide
deaths of more than one of their "parishioners." They have also
managed to prey upon the grief of elderly widows to sign over their
entire life savings.
The "Church's" doctrine specifically forbids charitable works,
since charity rewards people who deserve the fate they've brought on
themselves. The only time charitable actions are permissible is when
they can be used as a public relations gimmick.
If you call that a "religion," you need to go back for a refresher
>Regardless of whether or not you agree with your neighbor's choice of
>religion, if you are hell bent on destroying it, sooner or later the rest
>will suffer like domino's falling.
Hardly. I didn't see any local churches around here going out of
business when Jim Bakker went off to prison or when Jimmy
Sweigart confessed his sins to the world. The true religions will
survive, in spite of the con artists who try to take advantage of the
public's yearning for spiritual comfort.
>From what I understand from history class and from relatives that were
>around during the time, the Jews were not the only ones persecuted by
>Hitler. The Catholics were also catching heat, though obviously not
>anyway near the proportions that the Jews were.
Yeah, yeah . . . so what's your point? Are you calling me a Nazi?
>If you and your gang succeed in getting the IRS to tax minority
>religions, then that makes me wonder how long it'll be before the IRS
>goes after the rest of the religions. The assets alone of the Catholic
>Church could probably pay off the national debt. I'm sure they'd love to
>get their hands on that!
Wow! Now I'm a gang member! What's our colors, guys?
Personally, I wouldn't be all that opposed to taxing religious and
other non-exempt organizations. But that's certainly not my purpose
in wishing to find out what went on when the IRS did an about face
after 40 years[!] of refusing tax-exempt status to the "Church"
of Scientology[tm] and its affliliated organizations.
Do you realize that Scientologists[tm] are allowed to deduct the
tuition they pay to take Scientology[tm] courses in communciation,
business management, study techniques, and the like as "charitable
contributions"? Try doing that with parochial school tuition or Dale
E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank