No one is saying that angel-human hybrids should be rounded up and killed.
– “WayWord“
From Fundies Say The Darndest Things. Another fundy saying some very darned things over the fold . . .
Namely Tom Cruise. He apparently made a for-the-eyes-of-the-extremely-credulous-only video that found its way onto YouTube, only to be yanked from that site by the Church of Scientology which has since issued cease-and-desist orders to other websites and blogs featuring the video. Brad Willis at Rapid Eye Reality has been kind enough to transcribe it for us. See if you can make head or tail of this:
Here is a quick glossary to help you through the transcript:KSW: Keeping Scientology Working
SP: Suppressive Person
Org: Presumbly synoymous with Sea Org, as described on the Scientology web site as “religious order for the Scientology religion and is composed of the most dedicated Scientologists in the world�individuals who have dedicated their lives to the service of their religion”
David Miscavige: Chairman of the Board of Religious Technology Center (RTC), a non-profit organization formed in 1982 to preserve, maintain and protect the Scientology religion. (From Scientology web site)
Out-Ethics: The opposite of Scientology’s version of Ethics, the main tool used in practice of Scientology.
LRH: L. Ron Hubbard, Founder of Church of Scientology
Tech: A form of written instruction/courses provided to Scientology followers
IAS: International Association of Scientologists, the official membership organization of Scientology
—
(Music)Announcer: Tom Cruise on Tom Cruise Scientologist
Cruise: I think it�s a privilege to call yourself a Scientologist and it is something that you have to earn, and�because a Scientologist does. He, or she has the ability to create new and better realities and improve conditions. Uh, being a Scientologist, you look at somebody and you know absolutely that you can help them. (cut)
So, for me, it really is KSW, and it�s just like, it�s something that, uh, I don�t mince words with that. You know, with anything (unintelligible), but that policy to me has really has gone , boy, there�s a time I went through and I said, �You know what�� When I read it, I just went (noise that sounds like poof), �This is it. That�s exactly it.� (cut)
Being a Scientologist, when you drive past an accident, it�s not like anyone else. As you drive past, you know you have to do something about it, because you know you�re the only one that can really help. (cut)
That�s�that�s what drives me, is that I know we have an opportunity, and uh, to really help for the first time effectively change people�s lives, and uh, I�m dedicated to that. I�m gonna, I�m absolutely, uncompromisingly dedicated to that. (cut)
Org are there to help, okay, but we as (unintelligible) the public, we have a responsibility. It�s not just the Orgs, it�s not just David Miscavige, you know, it�s not just me. It�s you, it�s everyone out there, kinds re-reading KSW and looking at what needs to be done and saying, �Okay! Am I going to do it or am I not going to do it?� Period. Am I going to look at that guy or am I too afraid because I have my own out-ethics, put in someone else�s ethics. That�s all it comes down to. (cut)
And I won�t hesitate to put ethics in someone else, because I put it ruthlessly in myself. And I think that I�uh�I respect that, you know, in others. And, you know, I�m there to help, and we�re here to help, and my opinion is is that, look, either you�re on board or you�re not on board. Okay, it�s just, if you�re on board, you�re on board just like the rest of us. Period. (cut)
We are the authorities in getting people off drugs. We are the authorities on the mind. We are the authorities on improving conditions. Criminals, we can rehabilitate criminals. Way to happiness, we can bring peace and unite cultures, uh, that once you know these tools and you know that they work, it�s not good enough that I�m just (doing okay?)
Traveling around the world and meeting the people that I�ve met. Talking with these leaders in various fields, they want help, and they are depending on people who know, and who can be effective and do it, and that�s us, that is our responsibility to do that. (cut)
It is the time now. Now is the time, okay? It is, being a Scientologist, people are turning to you, so you better know it. You better know it, and if you don�t, you know, go (sound deleted, appears to be �fucking�) learn it. (Laughs) You know? But don�t pretend you know it and, or whatever. It�s like, we�re here to help. (cut)
If you�re a Scientologist, you see life, you see things the way that they are. In all its glory, you know, all of its complexity. Uh, the more you know as a Scientologist, you don�t become overwhelmed by it. (cut)
(Laughs) And uh, they said, �So, have you been an SP� (big laugh) I looked at them and I thought, �What a beautiful thing,� because maybe one day it will be like that, you know? You know what I�m saying. Maybe one day it will be that �Wow, SP, they just read about those in the history books.� You know? (cut)
I just got through that tech, and it�s literally�it�s not how to run from an SP. It�s (acronym of some sort), how to shatter suppression, confront and shatter suppression. You apply it, and it�s like, boom. (cut)
Because, they don�t come up to be and do that. They don�t do it to me. Not to my face, or anywhere in my vicinity where they feel they can confronted, you know. They just don�t do it. (cut)
I wish the world was a different place. I�d like to go on vacation and go and romp and play and just do that. You know what I mean? I mean, that�s what I want it to be. That�s how, there�s times I want to do that but I can�t because I know. I know. So, you know I have to do something about it. It�s not, you know you can sit here wish it was different and then you look at it and you go �Okay, this is it.� You know, I have to do something, don�t I? I have to do it, because I can�t live with myself if I don�t. That really is it. (cut)
I don�t care if someone thinks it�s hard or easy. You�re either helping and contributing everything you can or you�re not, okay? Because I�m carrying my load, okay? And as much as I�m carrying, I still feel like I have to do more. Alright? There is still a thing of, let�s go. (cut)
You can just see the look in their eyes, you know the ones that are doing it and you know the spectators, the ones who are going, �Well, it�s easy for you� or �What am I doing� and it�s just, that thing is, I�ve canceled that in my area (laughs). It�s like, man, you�re either in or you�re out. That�s spectatorism, and it�s something that we have no time for right now. (cut)
So, it�s our responsibility to educate, create the new reality. We have that responsibility to say, �Hey, this is the way it should be done, because we do it this way and people are actually getting better.� (cut)
And let�s get it done. Let�s really get it done. Have enough love, compassion, and toughness that you�re going to do it and, uh, do it right. (cut)
And I have to tell you something. I really, it is, it�s rough and tumble. It�s wild and wooly. It�s a blast. It�s a blast. It really is fun, because damn it there is nothing better than going out there and fighting the fight and suddenly you see things are better. (cut)
I want to know that I�ve can everything I could everyday and I think about those people out there who depending on us. And I think about that. And it does make me feel like, (laughs) we�ve got more work. I need more help. Get those spectators�you�re in the playing field or out of the arena. (Laughs) You know, really, that�s how I feel about it. (cut)
I do what I can and I do it the way I do everything (laughs). There�s nothing part of the way for me (laughs).
Music: Mission Impossible
Announcer: A Scientologist can be defined by a single question: Would you want others to achieve the knowledge you now have. In answering that question, Tom Cruise has introduced LRH technology to over one billion people on earth, and that�s only the first wave he�s unleashed. Which is why the story of Tom Cruise Scientologist has only just begun.
Graphic: Tom Cruise, IAS, Freedom Medal of Valor, Winner
My StumbleUpon Page
I know that as a priest of another tradition I should be the last to comment. But I hope I am a bit more demythologised than Cruise.
What disturbs me about Cruise and Scientology is the fact that it seems to me to not be about genuine spirituality but rather about power and status. Which is of course what everyone who is against religion says it is about.
So maybe I should not complain!
Personally I think that spirituality is about humility and vulnerability rather than your child being the reincarnation of a strange old man!
Romp and play?
They are all about power and status. He’s just not pretending.
Can’t resist it…I can hardly call being crucified “all about power and status”!
You sidestep the statement. Christians aren’t being crucified.
Yes, TWoP, but I don’t think he has to address the statement.
Firstly, inferring that Christians (either universally or just a single Christian) are “all about power and status” requires a bit more than just an assertion to demand Stephen’s attention.
Secondly, the “pretending” part disturbingly reminds me of the role of the concept of “denial” in psychoanalysis to avoid the falsifiability of the theory. Popper raised the example of incorrigible psychoanalysis where the patient is diagnosed as gay (one has to ask why homosexuality is a something to be diagnosed, but I digress) to which they protest along the lines of “but I’m not attracted to members of the same sex!” The head-shrinker simply says “you are buttressing your denial”.
Psychoanalysis therefore (if you assume falsifiability as a demarcation criterion) isn’t a science, nor with in its terms does it give the opportunity for the patient to rebut the claim being made about them. One could similarly argue that a patient is a carrot with delusions of humanity.
I think Stephen is put in a similarly unfair position by your statement; no matter what he opines in response, you can assert that he is pretending. Hence, I don’t think he has to address the statement.
Thanks Bruce, I agree. I don’t mind defending my position even though I know that others will (perhaps violently) disagree…certainly.
WOP says Christians aren’t being crucified, I just think that’s not true. We actually seem to be living at a point in history when political correctness demands that you should affirm everyone’s right to believe what ever they like…except a Christian.
I have some sympathy with the viewpoint in regard to fundies…but nevertheless either you allow freedom of speech to all or you don’t have freedom of speech, you have trendy bigotry.
I think I happen to be reasonably thoughtful, I also happen to be religiously orthodox. I am liberal in politics, and social thought. I am affirming of inclusive society. I am like this because my religious orthodoxy demands it of me. This is what sends the good religious folk to the Cross!
Popper raised the example of incorrigible psychoanalysis where the patient is diagnosed as gay (one has to ask why homosexuality is a something to be diagnosed, but I digress) to which they protest along the lines of “but I’m not attracted to members of the same sex!” The head-shrinker simply says “you are buttressing your denial”.
Sorry . . . I can’t resist:
“Homer: Eh, somebody had to take the babysitter home. Then I noticed she was sitting on – her sweet – can – so I grabbed her – sweet can – Oh, just thinking about – her – can – I just wish I – had – her – sweet – sweet – s-s-sweet – can.
Jones: So, Mr. Simpson: you admit you grabbed her can. What do you have to say in your defense?
[Cut to a paused shot of Homer drooling.]
Jones: Mr. Simpson, your silence will only incriminate you further.
[The paused shot of Homer grows larger, indicating that he is moving closer.]
Jones: No, Mr. Simpson, don’t take your anger out on me. Get back! Get back! Mist…Mr. Simpson…NOOOOO!
Announcer: [quickly] Dramatization. May not have happened.”
WOP says Christians aren’t being crucified, I just think that’s not true. We actually seem to be living at a point in history when political correctness demands that you should affirm everyone’s right to believe what ever they like…except a Christian.
I really can’t let this pass without comment. How are Christians being denied their right to believe, exactly? Indeed–how do you deny someone the right to believe something?
Indeed–how do you deny someone the right to believe something?
Extensive proselytism, discrimination and the forced breaking down of institutions, possibly with some book burning. Or even executions.
While I’m prepared to admit I maybe just rattled the comment off..it’s a blog for goodness sake not a treatise, I also didn’t say that Christians were being denied the right to believe…I said that there was an affirmation that everyone could believe what they like but when it came to Christians they were particularly being picked on
I don’t have a problem with this, (being a big boy who can stand up for myself) but let’s not pretend that this blog doesn’t critique Christian viewpoints more than Jewish or Hindu or Moslem or Buddhist.
where for example is the affirmation of good Christian practice, like extensive charitable work…I don’t mind exposing the bad crap, (Hillsong, creation science and so on…) but Christianity is not by definition malevolent. It is much more diverse, and we all need to do better (with anything) than just caricature something and then condemn the caricature.
I don’t have a problem with this, (being a big boy who can stand up for myself) but let’s not pretend that this blog doesn’t critique Christian viewpoints more than Jewish or Hindu or Moslem or Buddhist.
This blog is written from the perspective of an agnostic atheist who is deeply concerned about the health of our liberal democracy, and the importance of maintaining a strict separation between church and state as a means of keeping that liberal democracy healthy. To this end, it has critiqued the viewpoints and actions of Christians, Muslims, Jews, Scientologists, and sometimes even self-described “fundamentalist atheists.” And if it has critiqued Christians more than others, that is simply because Christianity is the majority religious affiliation in our country, and therefore it is from that quarter that attacks on church-state separation are most likely to hail.
But make no mistake about it, Stephen. I have never argued that Christianity is “by definition malevolent,” nor have I denied its diversity. (It really is beneath you to perpetuate such a strawman, and then complain about “caricature” in the same breath.) Those Christians (and Muslims and Jews, etc) who don’t pose a threat to our secular liberal democracy, who don’t seek to undermine the integrity of our education system, who don’t seek to have certain social groups (e.g. GLBTs) treated as second-class citizens or outlaws, who don’t seek to have their faith-based moral code enshrined in law and forced upon everyone else, and who don’t favour magical/wooly thinking over critical thinking, are not my concern, and I don’t feel inclined or obliged to blog about them. (Except when these so-called moderates spend more time waxing rhetorical about the evils of atheism and secularism than they do on their “good Christian practice.”) If you don’t like the light in which Christianity is cast by its fundamentalist/creationist/ultraconservative wing, blame the fundamentalists, creationists and ultraconservatives. Don’t blame me.
I said that there was an affirmation that everyone could believe what they like but when it came to Christians they were particularly being picked on
If you were a Muslim Australian, I doubt you would share this view. And unlike atheists, at least Christians can be open and public about their beliefs without it affecting their employability or employment status (e.g. teaching in independent schools).
So christians are the victims now? What was I just saying about pretending? Stephen re: I know that as a priest of another tradition I should be the last to comment. But I hope I am a bit more demythologised than Cruise.That seems a forlorn hope after your crucifiction reply.
Bruce, you went on at some length to obscure that fact that Stephen gave a nonsensical answer. Even Stephen seemed a little embarrassed.
AV i am frequently having a long wait to load some of these pages. Not sure if it’s me, satan or another daemon.
Don’t know what happened with that bolding. Also meant to submit as TWOP.
Stephen appears to have removed me from his blogroll, I suppose because of this discussion. (I can’t see any other reason.)
Bruce, you went on at some length to obscure that fact that Stephen gave a nonsensical answer.
No. I went on at some length to demonstrate how you asked a nonsensical question. I’m not trying to hide the quality of Stephen’s reply at all but rather to point out that he was being steered by the nature of the question.
In court they call it leading the witness and even though the witness may become embarrassed if they respond, their response is still supposed to be disregarded.
Stephen appears to have removed me from his blogroll, I suppose because of this discussion. (I can’t see any other reason.)
I hope that’s not why. I was getting something out of his participation in discussion. It’s not like anyone has blown-up in the same way as in the recent episode of acrimony that occurred on my blog.
I hope this pans out with a happier ending. I think Stephen’s just got the wrong end of the stick.