Comments:National Church of Scientology recognized in Spain

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Latest comment: 16 years ago by Terryeo
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

  • Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
  • Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
  • You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

Nuts... Wing Nuts... Here they're trying to sue the organisation into oblivion for being criminal and in Spain they say "you're welcome". Get a grip! --Brian McNeil / talk 23:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Where is "here" for you? "Here" for me means Scientology is charitable and tax-exempt, also all sub-organizations. Misou 23:14, 5 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
Brian is referring to Belgium, where the public prosecutor is sueing Scientology (see related article). --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:30, 5 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
IT sucks, because even tho Scientology is quite an evil anti-free speech organization, it's not right to stop idiots following the religion ( any Scientologist reading don't worry im one of those evil people you should be ignoring, just like your family etc)! i think the Belgian approach is right because they're only attacking individuals who commit crimes and not the whole religion!14:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
In Belgium there is no "suing" happening, just phony announcements since 10 years and longer. No substance, no case. Just PR shit. Misou 22:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
The wheels of justice grind slowly, I'm hoping they grind Scientology into itty bitty little pieces. The celebrities who are a front for this cult do not comport themselves as normal, rational beings. The ramblings of L. Ron Hoover should be buried in soft peat and recycled as firelighters. Instead a so-called "Church" will charge you thousands of dollars to get your hands on them. Criminal organisation? You bet your ass! --Brian McNeil / talk 22:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
Yep, wheels of justice grind slowly and so on, that's why it took a couple of years for Spain to recognize Scientology as a religion. Any reason why you are so personally p***ed about Scientology? Misou 20:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
Where to start? deceptive recruitment practices? Lisa McPherson? --Brian McNeil / talk 10:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
Don't give me this brainwashed BS. What makes you swallow this trash propaganda? Having no personal clue? Misou 22:18, 11 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
Let me get this straight, you believe Lisa McPherson is a misleading Wikipedia article? Do you believe L. Ron Hubbard didn't say starting your own religion was a great way to get rich? I have access to the U.S. PACER system, so I can likely find the court documents on Lisa's case - two felony charges against the FSO. It isn't just Scientology I'm no fan of, I pretty much get unhappy at anyone who goes out of their way to try and evangelise their belief system and gain converts. However the big difference I see between Christian evangelists and Scientologists is the attitude to "sacred texts". CoS treats their documents like trade secrets and has a reputation for being extremely litigious. Christian evangelists will hand you leaflets and give away their texts because they believe they will enlighten/convert you. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:31, 13 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I know Lisa McPherson is a misleading article. Why? Because it talk about a group of millions of people all over the world and uses ONE case of wrong treatment to slander them all. Yes, Lisa M. was no treated right and should have been sent to a hospital. Yes, possible that there are a handful more cases of failed help in a 60 year history in about 150 countries. But no, this is not what Scientology is about. I read this morning that a County Sheriff in California was indicted for federal corruption charges. With your logic now it's a fact that all sheriffs are corrupt and criminals. I don't think any sane person would agree to that, no matter if the guy actually did it or not. You read the Scientology-articles on Wikipedia and you know shit about what's happening in real life. "Information" about Scientology online is going in circles, old crap and disinformation from decades ago repeated over and over. nicely kept alive by a handful of paid people. What else? You say "CoS treats their documents like trade secrets". Where did you get this nonsense from? Wikipedia again? You know, listening to people who only read "internet" about Scientology is what it must be talking to a brainwashed cult member. One-sided, fanatic, focused on "The Truth(tm)" and blind to anything else. Don't fall for it. You are better than that. Misou 17:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
So where can I find out about Scientology's beliefs without paying anything? Why has the organisation earned a reputation for litigiousness? --Brian McNeil / talk 11:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
Scientology Beliefs at Scientology Org, but there are many web pages that say nearly the same thing in different languages. Recently, the Church has placed several of its basic texts online, while beliefs and practices has been online for some while. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terryeo (talkcontribs) 07:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC)Reply
Scientology fights back. There is no humble "beat me, I am undeserving" in Scientology doctrine. Maybe this is overdone, but counting litigation I heard of, well, that's not much compared to other organizations. Maybe there are more media reports about a couple of cases and that looks "many" but is just one. Online there is a lot of rah-rah about one or two legal actions of 10 or so years ago. Sure, the same story repeated every week looks bigger than it is. Scientology texts? Do you get paid for your job? Me at least wants money for my work. And I think Scientology staff deserve that too. Most money goes in facilities and expansion (and "defense funds" or whatever it's called internally). But Scientology runs hundreds of websites, books are in libraries (donation drives every month), some books are online as PDF or HTML. Easy to find. Do you have a filter on your computer or something? Misou 07:31, 16 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
Okay Misou, you have done your job now, so please do not use this page as advertisement for Scientology stuff, thanks a lot. Jacques Divol 08:18, 16 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
Hi Mister, no intent to advertise here as you can easily see without prejudice. Ads include for example the posting of URLs, brand names, articles, book titles, phone numbers or at least an address, right? I will be happy to welcome you at my side when I next see Wikinews abused for POV pushing and wikilinking to false information. Misou 19:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
no kidding please, we are intelligent people. Jacques Divol 19:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)Reply
Your behavior does not indicate so. Sorry to say but I am sure you can take it, you starting the insult round. Misou 03:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)Reply