The way I figure it, the Christmas season is perhaps the LAST time of year
one should be making a special public effort to be nice to people whom one
doesn't usually like very well.
I figure that one of Christ's bigger messages was that people should be good
to one another *all year.*

There's a place in the Bible--usually read during Lent (sorry, don't
remember where in the Bible)--that says something to the effect of, 'When
you fast or give alms to the poor, don't do it out in public--like the
hypocrites do--where everyone will see how good you're being and will
comment upon it.  Do it in private, where only God will know what you're up
to.'  I think the same could be said about showing special kindness during
Christmas season.

In article <67j8ob$...@snews1.zippo.com>,

  Matthew 5.

Pope Charles
SubGenius Pope Of Houston
Slack!

In article <67j8ob$...@snews1.zippo.com>,
        "Rebecca Hartong" <hart...@erols.com> wrote:

Well, I hate to disagree with Christ but did he mention an acceptable time
to start being good to one another?  Does it count if you start March 12
but not count if you begin on Dec 21st?  Do you have to wait for an entire
year of goodness before you can respond in kind?

So.... you'll be sending Russell your Secret Santa Holiday Loaf?  Are
people trying to "be good" to Russell or are they just trying to celebrate?
If you believe giving someone a Christmas present is gonna get you into
Heaven, that is your business.  If you are trying to impress G#d, that is
your business. I would just like it if critics would make the critical
latte with a little less airy froth during the holiday season.  I didn't
give this much thought until I read the whacked "You can't celebrate
Christmas" kinda responses Russell was getting. C'mon..."Perhaps we should
picket on Christmas" (paraphrase)?  Now the ARSCC is working Christmas as
well?  That'll show-em.  Picketing isn't horrible, but I wouldn't want to
do it on Christmas.

Stephen Jones

I believe Groundhog Day is the preferred day for starting to be nice to
people.

I may not like Russell, but I have no desire to kill him!  ;-)

I suppose it varies from person to person.  Some may genuinely want to be
good to him.  Some may just be willing to let a bit of "collateral cheer"
splash onto him.

Jones, you're nothing but a softy!  I suspected as much.  You lack the
killer instinct.  (Good for you.  And I really mean that.)  Maybe I'm
especially cynical this week.  I dunno...  I just can't seem to get myself
geared up for being nice to someone about whom I haven't found anything
particularly likeable.  It's not just because Russell is a Scientologist.  I
feel the same way about Barwell, for example.  Should I be nice to these
people just because it's the holiday season?  Will it really make any
difference to them?  Will it make any difference to *me?*  I guess I'm
getting jaded.

Because he's a Scientologist, right?  Yeah.. that's pretty lame reasoning in
my book, too.  I've lived next door to Jews who celebrated on Christmas.  Go
figure.

Neither would I, but why shouldn't those who are inclined to picket
Scientology on Christmas do so?  I can see how a person might interpret
opposition to Scientology as a Christian kind of thing.

I think I understand the vision of Christmas as a time when a gentle silence
falls over the earth, all anger and hostility are forgotten, and the world
is bathed in the sweet glow of love and peace.

I'm just not sure how practical that vision is.

I think you missed Rebecca's point.  The Scientologists' gratuitous
offering of a Christmas truce is very hypocritical, considering their
behavior during the rest of the year.  This point is well taken.  If you
think that their declaration of a truce means they're going to change
their behavior from now on, I wouldn't hold my breath based on their
behavior in the years past.  When I was in Scientology on the Apollo
there was often a Christmas amnesty in December for anyone in ethics
trouble.  In January it was all over and that was the notorious month
for "heavy ethics", which more than made up for any Christmas truce.  It
was back to business as usual.  I think we all know enough by now not to
be fooled by their phoney PR tactics.  This is a pattern that has been
going on with them for a very long time and based on their behavior this
past year, I see no evidence that anything has changed.

Monica Pignotti

On 19 Dec 1997 07:30:35 GMT, sassi...@aol.com (Sassie10) wrote:

A truce with the cult of liars and criminals which has recently
engaged in numerous personal attacks and pickets of private
residences?  I think not.

$cientology is experiencing its karma (or "pulling it in" as I believe
is said in clamspeak).  After decades of viscious attacks on isolated
critics around the world $cientology has met its match - the net has
connected and empowered the critical community with a resulting
synergy that is capable of, and is in fact, overwhelming $cientology's
resources.

It's much more difficult to maintain a lie than the truth Sassie.  We
have the truth on our side, and there are lots of us.  $cientology is
staggering, unable to shoulder the burden of multiple fronts.  May
this XMas season bring you some presents Sassie - newer and more
powerful fronts opening in the battle to expose the lies and crimes of
scientology.

Truce?  Why would anyone make a truce with a demon burning in its own
hell?  

Zane