Kinja reply list

Read More
Quasar FunkRich Juzwiak
3/21/16 1:21pm
Almost every religion has rules and regulations regarding what you do with your genitals, what you put on your head for decoration, and whether or not you should eat bacon. The fuck?
Reply
- Read More
  caekislove-caekingitupQuasar Funk
  3/21/16 1:24pm
  My religion doesn’t have rules about that stuff AND you can eat all the bacon you want!
  
  (no hot dog buns though)
  Reply
- Read More
  sizor_sisterQuasar Funk
  3/21/16 1:26pm
  Every society has rules and regulations regarding what you do with your genitals
  Reply
Read More
Fresh Courage TakeRich Juzwiak
3/21/16 1:45pm
If churches were taxed (and they should be), much of this absurd dogma would fall by the wayside. Sadly, money controls much, but it is what it is.
Reply
- Read More
  ReburnsABurningReturnsFresh Courage Take
  3/21/16 1:51pm
  What exactly are you going to tax?
  
  Collections? I think you’re going to have a hard time making a case for taxing the post-tax earnings of individuals who are pooling money together in order to utilize two constitutional rights (assembly & religion).
  
  Sales? Sales tax is still paid by churches.
  
  The wages of the pastor? Those are already taxed.
  
  Net income? It’s hard to tax something that doesn’t accrue to anyone’s benefit.
  
  The smarter thing to do would be to put together a more robust test for whether or not a church truly meets the definition for tax exemption. It’s entirely possible that the Church of Scientology would fail such a test, given its structure.
  Reply
- Read More
  GlitterbombFartsReburnsABurningReturns
  3/21/16 2:12pm
  Eh, I’m sure we can figure out something. Churches do seem to have more gold than that dragon and subsequently the small humans with large foreheads from Lord of the Rings.
  Reply
Read More
ArdenRich Juzwiak
3/21/16 1:30pm
Why can’t these people ever join a RESPECTABLE Religion. Like the ones with a history of burning women at stakes, killing people for suggesting the Earth isn’t the center of the universe, or letting you keep a harem of sex slave-wives, several of whom are underage?
Reply
- Read More
  Cherith CutestoryArden
  3/21/16 1:50pm
  killing people for suggesting the Earth isn’t the center of the universe
  
  Who has done that?
  Reply
- Read More
  It takes a nation of millions to elect the corruptCherith Cutestory
  3/21/16 1:55pm
  Ask Giordano Bruno. Oh wait. You can’t.
  Reply
Read More
Rich JuzwiakRich Juzwiak
3/21/16 1:03pm
From Lawrence Wright’s famous Scientology expose in the New Yorker, “The Apostate”:

In previous correspondence with [Scientology spokesperson Tommy Davis], [director Paul Haggis] had demanded that the church publicly renounce Proposition 8. “I feel strongly about this for a number of reasons,” he wrote. “You and I both know there has been a hidden anti-gay sentiment in the church for a long time. I have been shocked on too many occasions to hear Scientologists make derogatory remarks about gay people, and then quote L.R.H. in their defense.” The initials stand for L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology, whose extensive writings and lectures form the church’s scripture. Haggis related a story about Katy, the youngest of three daughters from his first marriage, who lost the friendship of a fellow-Scientologist after revealing that she was gay. The friend began warning others, “Katy is ‘1.1.’ ” The number refers to a sliding Tone Scale of emotional states that Hubbard published in a 1951 book, “The Science of Survival.” A person classified “1.1” was, Hubbard said, “Covertly Hostile”—“the most dangerous and wicked level”—and he noted that people in this state engaged in such things as casual sex, sadism, and homosexual activity. Hubbard’s Tone Scale, Haggis wrote, equated “homosexuality with being a pervert.” (Such remarks don’t appear in recent editions of the book.)
Reply
- Read More
  Sluicer's ghostRich Juzwiak
  3/21/16 1:33pm
  Reading this utterly unsurprising post I find myself wondering when Trump will turn from politics to religion. First Church of Trump anyone?
  Reply
- Read More
  crouching tigerSluicer's ghost
  3/21/16 2:09pm
  Trump University (church)
  Reply
Read More
Dave Rich Juzwiak
3/21/16 1:22pm
When I want to go on a rant about the CoS and why people put up with abuse, I have to remember people sacrificed themselves and their children to sate the urges of Catholic Priests for a Looooooooong time.
Reply
- Read More
  eagercolinDSDave
  3/21/16 1:27pm
  No they didn’t.
  Reply
- Read More
  benjaminalloverDave
  3/21/16 1:27pm
  A wrong rooted in 2nd century bullshit doesn’t make a wrong rooted in 20ieth century bullshit any more right.
  Reply
Read More
ReburnsABurningReturnsRich Juzwiak
3/21/16 1:45pm
And now she is married to a man and has three children.

I’m not quite sure what to think of this close, Rich. Maybe you aren’t implying that she’s only married to a man because she’s all messed up, but that sure is what it reads like.

Thing is, if you read what she has to say about her marriage, she sounds pretty happy with it. She married another escapee and appears to love her family deeply.

Science certainly has not affirmatively decided that sexuality is fixed from birth, so if someone is not speaking under duress or for politicalor social reasons (e.g. if she was a Republican senator fervently trying to assert her heterosexuality for political reasons) and says they are happy in whatever kind of relationship they find themselves in, no matter what they’ve done in their past to the contrary, who are we to insinuate otherwise?
Reply
- Read More
  Doofenschmirtz, Inc.ReburnsABurningReturns
  3/21/16 1:52pm
  It depends on the person though. I don’t think you can make the same excuse for Caityln Jenner, for example.
  
  You don’t have 10 children and 3 wives if you’re confused about your sexuality - and if you do, you’re an ahole who doesn’t respect people or the children that result from those dalliances.
  Reply
- Read More
  ReburnsABurningReturnsDoofenschmirtz, Inc.
  3/21/16 1:53pm
  Well, in the case of Jenner, the confusion wasn’t about sexuality, it was about gender, right?
  
  I thought someone had said that she still prefers women.
  Reply
Read More
benjaminalloverRich Juzwiak
3/21/16 1:25pm
When I was released from hospital, they took me to a building and I was forced to sign a waiver that I wasn’t ever going to sue the Church, say bad things, never criticize it.

Are these NDA’s really enforceable when they’re signed under clear duress? I can’t figure out for the life of me why this bullshit should preclude a class-action lawsuit.
Reply
- Read More
  BSTrainerbenjaminallover
  3/21/16 1:44pm
  When under duress and following torture like that, I think they’re probably only marginally more enforceable than the billion year contracts Sea Org people are forced to sign.
  Reply
- Read More
  Fresh Courage Takebenjaminallover
  3/21/16 1:48pm
  No, they are 100 percent NOT enforceable.
  Reply
Read More
caekislove-caekingitupRich Juzwiak
3/21/16 1:21pm
TAX THE CHURCHES

(~~even~~ especially “churches” like the CoS)
Reply
- Read More
  Margog 'The Hammer' Shapirocaekislove-caekingitup
  3/21/16 2:00pm
  What’s the difference between “churches” and churches?
  Reply
- Read More
  caekislove-caekingitupMargog 'The Hammer' Shapiro
  3/21/16 2:06pm
  Originally formed by mystics from the bronze-age versus originally formed by con men from the 1950's, I’d say.
  Reply
Read More
BarnesAndChernobylRich Juzwiak
3/21/16 1:21pm
I’m just here for the really dumb “there’s absolutely no difference between cults and organized religion” comments.
Reply
- Read More
  More Ghosts Less StuffBarnesAndChernobyl
  3/21/16 1:45pm
  The only difference between the two are the amount of members in the congregation.
  Reply
- Read More
  ElrondHubbardBarnesAndChernobyl
  3/21/16 2:03pm
  If you have any solid info that makes the venn diagram for religion and cult something more than two concentric circles, I’d love to hear it.
  Reply
Read More
NefertittiesRich Juzwiak
3/21/16 1:28pm
It’s so odd to me that they are permitted to play gay characters. Like Laura Prepon’s OITNB character or Alanna Masterson’s Tara from Walking Dead. Maybe because it brings in the big bucks?
Reply
- Read More
  tallestdwarfNefertitties
  3/21/16 1:44pm
  It’s so odd to me that they are permitted to play gay characters. Like Laura Prepon’s OITNB character or Alanna Masterson’s Tara from Walking Dead. Maybe because it brings in the big bucks?
  
  I think that it’s because a fully-indoctrinated Scientologist is duplicitous by default. They are convinced that Scientology is above all other laws, and that if they do something in the name of the cult, it supersedes man’s (other than LRH) laws.
  
  They probably also feel that they are somehow “taking jobs away” from gay actors by pretending to be gay. Yes, that would be a motivation.
  Reply
- Read More
  Cherith CutestoryNefertitties
  3/21/16 1:45pm
  Especially weird for OITNB because a huge percent of the cast and crew is queer. Including the person she pretends to fuck for a living.
  
  It’s not just that she’s playing a role but it’s a whole queer immersion.
  Reply