The Tom Cruise Scientology Indoctrination Video surfaces online

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
That's all well and good... until you say that all people who believe in anything are "crazy". Then you lose any right to say that you are being objective and "don't claim to know". :lecture

Irish I am just shocked you haven't named drop your good friend Jesus Christ.
BuddyChrist-775668.jpg
 
Irish I am just shocked you haven't named drop your good friend Jesus Christ.
BuddyChrist-775668.jpg

:lol :lol :lol :lol

I probably would if I were a Fundy. :rotfl

But, alas, I have yet to meet "JC". (I did meet Jim Caviezel on the campus at Notre Dame once, though) :cool:

So you've got me to namedrop JC afterall! :lol :lol :lol
 
I would just like to point out that this is not surprising coming from a religion that was born of a hangover -induced BET. Though they vigorously deny it, the genesis of Scientology began at a World Science Fiction Convention after-party in the late 60's. I had the great pleasure of talking to Issac Azimov at a con in Syracuse in the late 80's, and I asked him about it. He was THERE, and described the whole sad event in hilarious detail. Apparently, several writer-guests were sitting around at said after-party,feeling the after-effects of several days of serious partying(ah, don't you miss the 60's?) and discussing the impact of religion on society and history, when old L.Ron made the comment that any intelligent writer could probably come up with a more sensible and socially acceptable religion if he put his mind to it. Though Issac wouldn't admit to the culprit, he said"one of the other writers then challenged Ron to put his money where his mouth was" and bet him $500 that he couldn't do it(apparently Hubbard was not very well liked by his peers). After several minutes of "spirited discussion", Hubbard accepted the bet. The rest, sadly, is history. Issac implied that the un-named author regretted his rash challenge"to this very day". There are lessons to be learned here, most notably to be wary of hung over writers...PS

Here's another version (not mine):
I took a class with Joe Haldeman back at Tech and got the story first-hand.
Several sci-fi writers, including Joe and L. Ron, were sitting around
drinking at a Con. Someone mentioned that any science fiction writer worthhis/her salt should be able to create a religion that people would followen masse. Much drunken raving ensued, the upshot of which was that if L. Ron hadn't made one million dollars within ten years, he'd pay Joe
$10. In fact it only took around three years.
 
That's all well and good... until you say that all people who believe in anything are "crazy". Then you lose any right to say that you are being objective and "don't claim to know". :lecture

Well some of those religions are so far out there in the way they claim to know all this stuff in detail like.Who our maker is? Let alone know that there is one.With all their claims of what happens when you die and eloberate stories.You gotta wonder if these people ARE crazy to actually beleive any of it.It's not like a god came down and told them all this stuff himself,but the leaders of these religions will have you believe that a god did.So I have every right to critisize these religions,because I'm not the one that claims to know all this made up nonsense.And what is a god anyway? A being that has more knowledge and technology than you.Does that mean I have to bow down and worship it.I think not.I bow down to know one.
 
Faith says "I can't prove it, but I am open to the possibility."

You're telling me that in the context of religion, faith doesn't mean to believe in something regardless, if not inspite of, the facts? Not belief in the possiblity, mind you, but in the actual thing itself.
 
Believers don't need to prove anything because they already believe. This goes for people who believe that there is a God and those who believe there isn't. They are indistinguishable except the religious admit that their belief is faith based.
Open mindedness would be to accept ALL possibilities including spacemen with H-Bombs, God, Satan, the Easter Bunny and logical women.

In the end we aren't as smart as we think we are, and we are far less important than we think we are.

Humility and moral decency should be what we aspire to. But there's Tom Cruise Special Scientologist Agent who can cure psychosis with push ups and administer life saving aid at a car crash because he's great.
 
My only point is that to have faith in the religious sense is to close your mind to the possibilities that you're wrong; it means to close your ears when presented with facts and evidence that seems to refute one's beliefs. It is to be closed minded.

Meanwhile, open mindedness does indeed mean to be open to all possibilities -- but it does not mean to surrender one's ability to reject that which is deemed absurd.

Thank you Anzik Hayes for mentioning the Easter Bunny!

An open minded person should reject the notion of an Easter Bunny not because of conflicting doctrine, but because (after consideration) the facts don't support the existance of such a being -- which is how atheists feel about the existance of a god. Atheists don't have any special belief (or faith) that there is no such being other than the same level of belief that there is no Easter Bunny.

Does someone who rejects the notion of the Easter Bunny require any feat of faith or special belief system to do so? Does someone who rejects the existance of the Easter Bunny show the same level of faith as someone who believes in the Easter Bunny's existance? Clearly not. The believer has to carry the burden of proof or else the faith to believe without proof. Atheism is no more a religion than rejecting-a-belief-in-the-Easter-Bunny is a religion.
 
Last edited:
You know, I... er... when you, when you know you just... know.. hahahahaha... Because there's those who, er, but then the others, the others... and I need to be an other, you know? Hahahahahahaha! When I read the, erm, the , erm, the B.O.L.L.O.C.K.S. it spoke to me, it really, I mean, voices... voices in my, erm, HAHAHAHAHA, my head, you know? I know, I just know, you know? Do youn know what I know? I know you know I know you should know what needs to ne known, y'know? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
 
There are three topics that can tear apart and completely destroy a message board:

1. Religion

2. Politics

3. Medicom VS. Sideshow

although scientology doesn't fall into any of those categories. do you have a 'bad science fiction' category? :lol
 
Back
Top