The Tom Cruise Scientology Indoctrination Video surfaces online

[Bannister]

Yup, hookers will be the corner stone to our religion

"We will do all we can to save them."

 

[King Darkness]

 

[Darth Caedus]

We should start the relgion of Sideshowology, it shall be great

https://www.otoons.com/eso/Start_Your_Own_Religion.htm

 

[gdb]

Atheism is also a religion. Since nothing can be proven or disproved, one must BELIEVE in their opinion.
Just in the case of Scientology, the founder said beforehand he wanted to get rich with his own religion.

Actually the burden of proof falls on the shoulders of the believers in something not in the people who reject those beliefs. Just as all us pre-Clears (someone who is not a Scientologist) don't need to prove any of the Scientolgist's beliefs are untrue to reject them as absurd, atheists don't have to believe any doctrine or dogma to reject all forms of religion as being equally absurd. Atheism is the opposite of religion. It's open mindedness.

 

[tomandshell]

I would think that a form of universalism would seem like the ultimate open mindedness, because in that case everyone is right and nobody is wrong. Atheists are making absolute truth claims just like Christians--they have just come to opposite conclusions. Both sides would say that the other side is wrong and would therefore fall into the closed minded camp to some extent.

Someone who is 100% convinced that there is no God has closed their mind to the possibility that they could be wrong, just as someone who is 100% convinced that there is a God has done the same thing in reverse. 100% certainty, either for or against something, by definition seems to prohibit open mindedness. Once your mind is made up and you have settled the matter in your mind, you no longer consider the alternatives, and your mind is "closed." An atheist who can admit that maybe there is a God, or a Christian who can admit that maybe there isn't--that's being open minded.

I think that's why there are so many agnostics. It's easier to say that if there's a God, I don't care about him, than it is to make a definitive claim that God does not exist, which cannot be proven or disproven. On the other hand, no one can argue with someone who says, "I don't care either way."

 

[OSCORP]

An atheist who can admit that maybe there is a God, or a Christian who can admit that maybe there isn't--that's being open minded.

 

[gdb]

Atheists are making absolute truth claims just like Christians--they have just come to opposite conclusions. Both sides would say that the other side is wrong and would therefore fall into the closed minded camp to some extent.

I think that's an old arguement based on a semantic loophool.

I think people who identify with being atheists today feel that religions fail to prove the existance of a god or gods. Period.

Perhaps the biggest difference though is that I've always been told that Faith played a large role in a person's faith. In fact I thought it was necessary in order to subscribe to a religion. (And isn't Faith a form of closed mindedness -- in fact isn't Faith the real difference between been a believer and a non-believer?)

Now I could be wrong, as there's no doctrine, no dogma to subscribe to and no ritual one needs to go through to belong, but I don't believe Faith (with a capital F) plays a part in an atheist's decision as to whether Gods of any religion seem to exist or not. Further, if confronted with evidence (hard evidence that need not be substantiated by Faith) that some sort of diety does exist, I don't think an athesist would rely on his or her Faith to discount it.

 

[tomandshell]

Some people believe that there is life on other planets. Some do not. If I say there is no alien life, I don't have to prove it. You have to prove it to me before I believe. Believer can't prove there is, doubter can't prove there isn't--but the burden of proof lies upon those who think there is alien life. BUT, until it is disproven, it remains a theoretical possibility.

I think that's an old arguement based on a semantic loophool.

I think people who identify with being atheists today feel that religions fail to prove the existance of a god or gods.

Since there's no newsletter to sign up for and no ritual to go through in order to belong, I think the assumption that 100% of atheists believe 100% that there is no god of any sort is an unreasonable one.

Also don't Christians rely on Faith in order to believe what they do? Isn't Faith a form of closed mindedness? I don't believe Faith (with a capital F) plays a part in an atheist's decision whether Gods of any religion seem to exist or not.

I think it's important to distinguish between the rejection of God and the rejection of religion. I also think that it's unreasonable to assume that all people of faith believe with 100% certainty, or that all theists subscribe to a particular religion or set of beliefs. And I think that people of faith would argue that faith itself is an open mindedness and ability to step out and accept or believe something without absolute certainty. Faith says "I can't prove it, but I am open to the possibility." Although I certainly wouldn't presume to speak for people of faith! If I had everything figured out I would write a book and sell the movie rights.

 

[IrishJedi]

Folks need to listen to tomandshell!

 

[tomandshell]

I'm not so sure about that...

(There's a definitive statement for you.)

 

[IrishJedi]

"Only Sith deal in absolutes" (he said absolutely)

 

[wax murderer]

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

 

[tomandshell]

There are three topics that can tear apart and completely destroy a message board:

1. Religion

2. Politics

3. Medicom VS. Sideshow

 

[The Chaver]

I would think that a form of universalism would seem like the ultimate open mindedness, because in that case everyone is right and nobody is wrong. Atheists are making absolute truth claims just like Christians--they have just come to opposite conclusions. Both sides would say that the other side is wrong and would therefore fall into the closed minded camp to some extent.

Someone who is 100% convinced that there is no God has closed their mind to the possibility that they could be wrong, just as someone who is 100% convinced that there is a God has done the same thing in reverse. 100% certainty, either for or against something, by definition seems to prohibit open mindedness. Once your mind is made up and you have settled the matter in your mind, you no longer consider the alternatives, and your mind is "closed." An atheist who can admit that maybe there is a God, or a Christian who can admit that maybe there isn't--that's being open minded.

I think that's why there are so many agnostics. It's easier to say that if there's a God, I don't care about him, than it is to make a definitive claim that God does not exist, which cannot be proven or disproven. On the other hand, no one can argue with someone who says, "I don't care either way."

Being an athiest just means you don't know what the hell is going on.That you don't know what's going to happen when you die.Or in other words,you dont know and don't claim to know,as all religions including Tom's does.

 

[King Darkness]

I just tell people I worship Satan, they are so turned off I never have to defend my beliefs.

 

[IrishJedi]

There are three topics that can tear apart and completely destroy a message board:

1. Religion

2. Politics

3. Medicom VS. Sideshow

And what do all three of those have in common? Myopia.

 

[Captain Faramir]

I don't see faith as closed-mindedness, in fact if it is to be blamed for anything, it's being too open-minded. To believe in something so grand and incomprehensible as a Divine Creator who has planned out all the Universe and everything within it is a pretty astonishing perspective. To call that close-minded, even narrow-minded, seems to be a backwards point of view. To refute the existence of God simply because it's too big to understand is limiting, thus a closed or narrow mindset. To allow for the possibility of a greater design and purpose, and a person who directs that--that's a very liberal perspective in comparison, or very openly minded. I think too many people reverse the terminology.

 

[OSCORP]

There are three topics that can tear apart and completely destroy a message board:

1. Religion

2. Politics

3. Medicom VS. Sideshow

True dat!!

1. I believe in some sort of a creator


2. ventura 08'

3. I prefer medicom to SS just by a tad.


/runs and hides.

 

[Captain Faramir]

There are three topics that can tear apart and completely destroy a message board:

1. Religion

2. Politics

3. Medicom VS. Sideshow

Tom is wise and powerful. Hearken unto him!

 

[IrishJedi]

Being an athiest just means you don't know what the hell is going on.That you don't know what's going to happen when you die.Or in other words,you dont know and don't claim to know.

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".