Quote:
Originally Posted by Tully Mars
Every church survives on separating their followers from their cash, don't they? So with Scientology it's the methods they use to gather capital and the fact they're less then up front with potential followers from the beginning?
|
I'd say they are way more than 'less than up front'...they have an active litigation arm to systematically attempt to enforce bogus copyright claims over the core of their religious beiefs. From a purely academic standpoint, I supposed you could call it a religion, in the sense that it is a set of beliefs. That is a rather narrow rule of thumb, however, and applies to sham religious cults just as easily.
Quote:
|
[Hubbard] explained his twelve point "Governing Policy" for finance. Points A and J were the same: "MAKE MONEY." Point K was "MAKE MORE MONEY." And the last point, L, was "MAKE OTHER PEOPLE PRODUCE SO AS TO MAKE MONEY." At last, an honest admission of this major plank of Hubbard's philosophy
|
From
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/S...tack/bs4-5.htm which footnotes the claim to a book,
Management Series 1970-1974 written by Hubbard himself.
If I started an organization founded on the principle that I was the supreme Banker God of the universe, and that the only way to secure your wealth in the afterlife was to give it to me in this one, and I would deposit it for you in your Celestial Account, would you be defending my organization as a religion?