Google Groups Home
Help | Sign in
Message from discussion What's wrong with you people?
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
LRonsScam  
View profile
 More options Nov 25 1998, 3:00 am
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: lronss...@aol.commmie (LRonsScam)
Date: 1998/11/25
Subject: Re: What's wrong with you people?

>From: "stephen robinson" <sterobin @globalnet.co.uk>
>Speaking as an ex-Scientologist myself,

Please tell us more. Why did you get in and why did you leave? It helps with
credibility.

 I have recently found this

>newsgroup and am amazed by the bitterness which is found here.

I guess you have missed my posts havn't you?

>Why are you all carrying so many grudges?

Most people here are not ex scientologist. So your insinuation that people here
have a grudge against Scientology is wrong. And most ex's have a right to have
a grudge. If Scientology were up front about ALL of their beliefs I would have
never joined. I am here to make sure that anyone who wants inquires about
Scientology beliefs will get the full story. I don't find anything wrong with
that do you?

  Surely, there are much bloodier

>and nastier things to start a crusade about, the murders and genocide in
>East Timor/Iraq for example, or the continuing starvation of the children in
>Africa.

This isn't my issue; I really can't do anything about those incidents except
give money and Scientology is actually more dangerous to my health and
democratic welfare than all of the above. I also believe that Scientology is a
great menace to free thinking people.

>But no, here you all are slagging off Scientology.  So, why don't you all do
>like I did....go out and get yourselves a life.  You will feel much better
>for it.

Geee, well that is why you are so ignorant of the facts.

>It is the "dangerousness" of Scientology that most of you seem to have an
>issue about.  Well, as far as new religions go, its record is not really all
>that bad.

Scientology isn't a new religion. Scientology is a global business/ racket that
preys on people's weaknesses. As far as a business goes, Scientology has set
many precedents.

FYI, Scientology has been banned in Greece and is criminally convicted in
Canada and they are about to be criminally convicted in the USA. They are being
watched by the German  gov. and are considered a business there. Is it beyond
your scope of reasoning that there is something wrong here? This NG isn't some
kind of fantasy role play game you know. If it weren't for ARS I bet
Scientology would be trotting right along as usual and not many people the
wiser of their activities. Ignorance will get you no where.

 Christianity, for example, has its foundations on the millions of

>people killed "in the name of Christ", either through wars or at the hands
>of self-serving and sadistic priests.

If the internet were around back then then there would be an NG about it.

 Yet no-one these days says

>Christianity is evil

You are wrong there my friend.

.  Also, if you think Scientology is the first religion

>based on money, then think again.

Scientology is based on money. Scientology was declared by the Supreme Court
that it is a business and all religions are based on money. That isn't the real
issue. What the real issue is is what Scientology does with that money. All the
PI's that are hired and all the law suits are an incredible stretch of the term
'charitable organization'.

  Take a look in the history books for

>Henry 8th and the reformation of the monasteries.  Or the mormons with their
>10% of income.

The mormorns are considered a cult. Just because you have set a precedent here,
much like the same examples that Scientologists use, doesn't mean squat.

Scientology's use of  saleseman's terms and their use of credit cards does not
justify their actions as charitable.

 The Jewish and moslem faiths are also based on people

>handing over large amounts of cash.

so is all religion.

>So come on you guys.  Make a move towards a more positive future.

Yes, one that will include not listening to posts that have nothing to do with
the facts.

 Don't

>hang on to all those rusty old chains from your past. It's not worth it.
>Honest.

******
Having two faiths is controversial. Scntlgy is one that claims compatibility
with all beliefs. You most certainly can be a faithful Scngist and a Christian
but you can not be a faithful Christian and a Scngist. Scngsts faith is rooted
in money.

    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.

Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2008 Google