Print

[Rockyj]

http://www.xs4all.nl/~fishman/fable.htm

Okay why isn't this getting attention by the far right Christians? This is real creepy shit!
Why hasn't the far right conservatives (wackos) like Sarah Palin haven't taken this creepy stuff on?
I believe some very informative people need to let her know (if she doesn't already).   

[wynot]

It seems to me that the far right Christian types, like fanatics of any faith, are already scared witless of everybody on earth who isn't them. They may not have time to fret over what they likely perceive as a small problem among all their other paranoias...

'til later;
wynot

[Rockyj]

LOL, TRUE! 

[Lorelei]

Though there are definitely links between Hubbard and Crowley and Parsons (the latter two being deep into "black magic," etc.), there are so many things that the cult is doing right now that take precedence over digging into the origins of the cult. That's my guess.

The following is my opinion as someone only peripherally involved with ARS (I read it fairly regularly but never posted, and temporarily stopped reading when the cancelbunnies and sporgeries were making it difficult to get info from.) Even saying "involved with" far overstates any role I had, as I really HAD no role to speak of. Perhaps "casual observer of events" is the better description. So, perhaps someone who DID have an active role can speak to this much better than I.

Whereas Steve Fishman had a lot of useful things to say, including comments about the links to Satanism (IIRC, mind, and I may be confusing him with another critic!), he also was royally damaged by the cult, and the useful things are mixed in with his delusions of being the Messiah (etc.) while he was "in", so it is easy for some people to dismiss what is true from what was something he believed due to his damages. His personal issues were magnified, not ameliorated, by his involvement with the cult.

I THINK he is much better now, but the cult really did a number on the poor man at the time. Also, he did far more good than not: his affadavit managed to get a lot of Sci materials, including OT materials, released into the wild, and from thence onto the Internet. Even if you dismiss his PERSONAL accounts, the documents were invaluable for critics.

He isn't the only one to make the connection between Scientology and Satanism. Again, the origins of the cult, while eye-opening for those who examine such, tend to pale in importance to most when the cult, right now, is interfering with a woman's right to choose to abort or not, imprisoning people in the RPF, using child labourers, shipping people all over the world without valid papers and often keeping their legal documents like passports away from them, disconnecting cultists from their loved ones, interfering in cultists' medical or psychological treatments and care in favour of imposing Sci "tech" on them, attacking critics with frivolous lawsuits or with fists or other nasty tricks, and so on.

Wynot also has a point: Christians are often too busy in-fighting or trying to interfere in politics to worry about taking on a cult like Scientology with accusations of Satanic roots. Also, the "Satanic scare" in the 80s has burned a lot of people when most if not all of those claims were discovered to be unfounded, even though many people's lives were ruined. At the time, the most expensive court case in US history was one that intended to prove a particular daycare / preschool was run by Satanists who abused the children. The children were coached by well-meaning adults and their stories were then shaped by these outraged parties who truly believed something terrible had been going on; some of the claims the children were coached to say were easily proved unfounded as well, and easily disproved (e.g., there were secret tunnels under the building; examination of the foundation proved this to be impossible), and internally inconsistent when investigated thoroughly. The daycare owners were jailed for long periods of time only on the basis of these claims of Satanic cult activity, though eventually acquitted.

Nowadays, claiming something is Satanic or has Satanic roots probably tends to remind many people of the "satanic cults witch hunts" in the 80s, and they shy away from any in-depth discussion of same, lest their claims be dismissed as too fantastic to be true.

The ties between many Satanic / "black magic" philosophies and Hubbard's earliest writings are there, however.

[Rockyj]

Excellent point re: the 80's. I remember it well and all the books that came out. A lot of people made a lot of money off this false claims.

"In fact, the two black magicians never met, and Crowley expressed a very low opinion of the man who he saw had tricked his disciple Jack Parsons." Though Hubbard referred to Crowely as his friend. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPMMlXmuZcw

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/j/occult.html
 

[ethercat]

http://www.xs4all.nl/~fishman/fable.htm

Okay why isn't this getting attention by the far right Christians? This is real creepy shit!
Why hasn't the far right conservatives (wackos) like Sarah Palin haven't taken this creepy stuff on?
I believe some very informative people need to let her know (if she doesn't already).   

The link above, although the URL has "fishman" in it, isn't something by Steve Fishman, it's part of a book by Jerry Staton.  I can't speak to the veracity of the book, but there are a lot of writings on the web about Hubbard and his fascination with Satanism, some by better-known and better-respected critics. 

In my limited experience, religious people (leaders mostly, I'm speaking of) are generally pretty well educated about scientology.  I don't know that speaking out publicly is their thing, but I have heard several times of ministers/preachers/rabbis/etc. informing their audiences about what scientology is, in no uncertain terms.  They may not be on the streets with signs, they may not be in the media, but if they are educating people in their own way, that's good enough for me.  People counter scientology in different ways.

That's not to say any religious people shouldn't be contacted and informed, but just don't be surprised if they are already aware.

[Ultrapoet]

In my limited experience, religious people (leaders mostly, I'm speaking of) are generally pretty well educated about scientology.  I don't know that speaking out publicly is their thing, but I have heard several times of ministers/preachers/rabbis/etc. informing their audiences about what scientology is, in no uncertain terms.  They may not be on the streets with signs, they may not be in the media, but if they are educating people in their own way, that's good enough for me.  People counter scientology in different ways.

That's not to say any religious people shouldn't be contacted and informed, but just don't be surprised if they are already aware.

One of my neighbors mentioned a talk 'warning' about Scientology at a Baptist church; I respectfully declined to attend, since it's a safe bet that the arguments would rely on a Biblical interpretation that I have more than a few issues with.  So, yes, other religions are indeed aware and wary.

[Hartley]

The occult phase of Hubbard's colorful life before Scientology certainly influenced him, sufficiently for it to be of concern to those Christians who are concerned about Satanism. To those who are embarrassed by it, it probably has the reverse effect!

Ethercat has it about right. For all kinds of reasons Christians won't more to oppose the cult than the average Joe. They have for the most part other priorities.

There are some who speak up, and if you haven't seen them I'd reccomend the articles by Randy Sly in Catholic Online such as:
http://www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=33664

And from the other side Craig Branch of Watchman Fellowship was condemning Scientology long before others had noticed it:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/september4/8.93.html

And I'd like to put in a good word for Bonnie Wood's Church, which valiantly supported her in her long legal battle againt the cult.

Mrs Palin? You jest. Mrs Palin's one and only priority is Mrs Palin.

[ethercat]

And from the other side Craig Branch of Watchman Fellowship was condemning Scientology long before others had noticed it:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/september4/8.93.html

And here: http://www.watchman.org/sci/index.htm

[fisherman]

My first post!  Great to have a new board with fresh opinions!

Here is an article on "Scientology, Satanism, Left-Hand-Path"

http://wiki.whyweprotest.net/Scientology,_Satanism,_Left-Hand-Path

This article is based on Caroline Letkeman and Gerry Armstrong's work.  If anyone has suggestions (or gentle criticsim) for improving this 'wiki' article, they will be appreciated.

Those of us working on the "Operation Press Pack" 'wiki' would appreciate additional essay submissions.  We started "Operation Press Pack" for use as a 'PDF' hand-out to Australian Senators, Legislators and their respective staff.  We also hope it will be distributed to media outlets, or wherever it might prove helpful. 

We still have topics that need to be addressed, such as Scientology staff working conditions, pay, berthing, and others.  Please join in if you're so inclined!

 http://wiki.whyweprotest.net/Operation_press_pack

Tx, fisherman

[ethercat]

Welcome, fisherman!  I've seen you around.  It's good to have you here.

[Hartley]

Here is an article on "Scientology, Satanism, Left-Hand-Path"

http://wiki.whyweprotest.net/Scientology,_Satanism,_Left-Hand-Path

Glad you found Caroline's work on this, it's rather 'not invented here' for forums and consequently ignored. Yes, it's one of the internal contradictions that has been eating away at the heart of Scientology, in their terms a 1st Dynamic philosophy advocated by a 3rd Dynamic obsessed organisation.