This doesn't appear to be the case with Scientology, however. Tommy Davis, a spokesman for the Church of Scientology, reportedly got quite upset when asked relatively straightforward and simple questions about the contents of what the Church of Scientology teaches. During an interview with KESQ news' Nathan Baca, Davis was asked directly beliefs like Xenu and he not only became defensive, but actually went so far as to claim that it is an "offensive concept" to be queried like that. How can it be "offensive" if the doctrine in question isn't horribly embarrassing?
Nathan Baca: Somebody from the Village Voice apparently said the Church of Scientology is about "ridding the body of space alien parasites." And your reaction then and now is what exactly to that claim?
Tommy Davis: You know, here's the thing. There are outrageous claims out there on the internet about what Scientologists believe. These are claims that are forwarded by anti-Scientologists. The best and easiest and most transparent way in which people learn about it is through L. Ron Hubbard's books and lectures.
NB (pulling out 650 page book of "Technical Notes of Operating Thetans"): Looking at Mr. Hubbard's own works, what seems to be in a sense curious is at least, according to L. Ron Hubbard's own words, and I quote, "the head of the galactic confederation. Seventy-six planets around larger stars visible from here..."
TD: I can stop you. I know what you're talking about. I'm familiar with the material. I think what you're getting at is the confidential scriptures of the Church.
NB: But this is about the fundamentals of-- is this not about the fundamentals of your belief, though? This goes into the sense of the soul.
TD: Right. For you to talk to me, you as somebody who is not a Scientologist to talk to me about what my beliefs are or to ask me to explain any core religious belief, that's an offensive concept. Nobody should ever be asked to do that. ...
Here we're going to the basic fundamental point that I'm trying to make. OK. What you're doing right now and what it is you're saying to me is an intent to ridicule religious beliefs. That's really what we're talking about. And you're just forwarding an agenda of hate.
Source: KESQ News (emphasis added)
In fact, if the Scientology teachings about Xenu aren't an embarrassment, why did Tommy Davis deny them in a previous interview (and if you read the beginning of the above, it sounds like he is going to deny them again, but had to stop because he didn't expect to be confronted with original source material):
Tommy Davis previously denied the Xenu story, asking CNN reporter John Roberts if it "sounded ridiculous" and saying the story was "unrecognisable" to him. The Xenu story has also been denied by actor Tom Cruise and other famous Scientologists. In that same interview with John Roberts, Davis claimed that anti-Scientology protesters known as "Anonymous" had sent death threats and bomb threats to Scientology "orgs" around the world. When Roberts revealed that the FBI had told CNN that they had no reason to believe Anonymous was responsible for the alleged threats, Mr. Davis stuttered, and claimed that the alleged threats were being investigated by local law enforcement.
Source: Scoop
Is the Xenu story true? Absolutely (in the sense that it is truly a teaching of Scientology — not that it's a factual account of anything that's really happened). Xenu is supposed to be an evil galactic overlord who, 75 million years ago, tried to execute billions of people by putting them in Earth’s volcanos and using atomic bombs to blow them all up. The souls (called "thetans") remained, however, and thousands inhabit our brains (now they get called "body thetans"). First, though, Xenu captured these souls and "brainwashed" them (you can brainwash an immaterial soul?) in massive 3-D cinemas where he indoctrinated them into lies about God, Satan, and whatnot.
All these awful body thetans with all their awful, false beliefs harm us when they inhabit our brains and we need to get them out in order to have better lives. Scientology has the answer to his: get you to pay them exorbitant amounts of money to “clear” out the detritus of these poor, brainwashed souls.
Not all of this is immediately revealed to those starting the courses, though. This information is limited only to those who have already spent a lot of money and are thus too committed, financially and psychologically, to admit how silly it all sounds. This appears to be why Scientologists are instructed to keep it secret:
A leaked recording exists of Hubbard giving a lecture on OT III, as well as a hand-written document summarizing the Xenu story written in Hubbard's own handwriting. Hubbard instructed his followers not to mention OT III to any non-Scientologist and Scientologists who themselves have not reached the level, ostensibly because Hubbard wrote that people are liable to fall victim to pneumonia and die if exposed to the Xenu story before they have completed the preparatory steps in Scientology. Scientologists pay up to $350,000 to reach OT III. Those that reach OT III are required to have a safe in their home and to transport the OT III materials in a locked briefcase.
Well, I know about Xenu and so far I haven't fallen victim to pneumonia or died. Well, to be honest I did have a form of pneumonia when I was very little, but that was long before I had even heard of Scientology so I don't think that it can be attributed to my knowledge of Xenu and all his evil doings. Since learning about Scientology, I haven't had any serious illnesses at all and I certainly haven't died.
So in the end, I don't think that Scientologists are trying to keep knowledge of Xenu secret because the knowledge is genuinely dangerous, and given how many people know about it without having died, I don't find it credibly that they are sincerely worried about others' health. No, it seems far more plausible that they simply recognize how silly the story sounds and don't want to be laughed at. Can you think of any other explanations that are more plausible — or are even a little bit plausible at all?
I think it’s actually more common than you realize for people to be embarrassed by their own religious beliefs. Intelligent Christians are often reluctant to discuss their beliefs in any explicit detail. I’ve met Christians who quite clearly believed in nonsense like eternal damnation, but who refused to discuss it with non-believers.
Christianity doesn’t have an official policy of hiding its beliefs like Scientology does, but lots of Christians are embarrassed by the beliefs and don’t like talking about them. In fact, a lot of evangelism training focuses on getting people to overcome the embarrassment of proclaiming belief in patently silly things.
I think Wes has a good point. We hear from the truly, shamelessly self-deluded all the time in the press, on the internet, in letters to the editor, from committed door to door evangelists, etc. These are the people who have somehow swallowed their beliefs without too much choking. I would say that for many of these people, constant evangelisation and affirmation are a tool used to keep the beliefs real enough to the believer-they can’t prove them, but constantly talking about them serves to make the beliefs more real in their minds.
For those who are naturally skeptical, or even just too shy to be as open, that benefit is lost. Without constant affirmation, a believer has a lot more room for honest doubt.
I remeber going to Sunday school as an adolescent. It always struck me as odd that so much time was spent just getting people to start to believe things. If the beliefs were sound, why would it take so much faith, so much effort, to believe them? Even the most credulous kids had at least a few doubts that couldn’t be satisfied with logic or evidence, but only through the endless repetition of prayers, myths, and dogma.
Altogether, I think Austin is completely correct in his assessment of scientologists-they don’t want to talk about it because any outside observer can see that their “scriptures” are clearly, obviously ridiculous. But like Wes, I don’t think that this is limited to modern cults. I’ve seen many christians act the same way; refusing to clarify any of the “mysteries” of their faith
or offer any explanation for their beliefs. “God said it, I believe it, that settles it” is a very common frame of mind for believers, mostly because deep down they know that they can’t defend the indefensible.
I don’t really see how the Scientology beliefs are really any more ridiculous than, say those of Christianity, it’s just that they are newer.
I think there is more to them arising now, though. When the “older” religious arose, superstitious belief was more common, and there wasn’t nearly as much of a scientific understanding. This amazes me more about Scientology’s beliefs than how ridiculous they are.
This discussion leads me to ask: does anyone know of a good site or source that has short succinct descriptions of all the basic theistic belief systems, but not from their point of view, but from an outsider’s or atheist’s (or even comedian’s) POV? Kind of what Bill Maher and others have done comedically. It seems so easy to show how silly the beliefs of scientology are, but if you summarized all the other belief systems in the same way, they’d all sound silly.
RE: Gerald
What makes Scientology especially ridiculous is that it was created by a science fiction writer who was quoted saying “If you want to make money, start a religion” (I’m paraphrasing, of course)
But that’s not the real issue. All the people who have a problem with Scientology don’t do so because of body thetans or Xenu, but because of the brainwashing cult that is the Church of Scientology. Look up things like the introspective rundown, sec checks, disconnection, suppressive persons and the “fair game” policy, Office of Special Affairs, Sea Org, and the Rehabilitation Project Force.
They’re also conducting a global campaign to “clear the planet”. They consider themselves the foremost authority on the mind, and that psychology and psychiatry are evil conspiracies responsible for all the evil in the universe. They refuse to admit things such as autism are legitimate medical conditions, and thus won’t properly treat those who suffer from it. It’s what killed Jett Travolta. They have a front group Volunteer Ministries that go to disaster areas like the 9/11 attack and the recent earthquake in Italy, claiming to do humanitarian aid relief, yet all they do is hand out bottled water and “Way to Happiness” booklets to take advantage of victims to get them to convert.
RE: Joseph
Ummm, OK. Not really what I asked about, but thanks.
Anyone else?
I know that, I was illustrating how saying Scientology is “just as silly as other religions” is detrimental. Like saying the Branch Davidians or the People’s Temple were just like any other sect of Christianity…
Gerald,
Are you looking for something like this?
http://www.religioustolerance.org/
The original point was that holding someone’s beliefs up for ridicule was offensive. That’s not hard to understand. Missed among the comments was the interviewer’s point of view: “I’ve read these [dangerous] scriptures; how come I’m not dead?” The term deprecation comes to mind.
A journalist is supposed to research and find his story, not come with an agenda to push.
I know it’s naive to expect professional ethics of anyone, but I call it when I see it.
By the way, the Xenu story is not fundamental Scientology. Fundamentals are all easily -and freely- found in the basic books in any good library.
A common trick of propagandists/sensationalists is to twist what they find to any desired effect. Such was the case with this interview. The things concentrated on had practically nothing to do with the purposes and activities of that church center. What are their purposes? What do they do? What are the purposes and real activities of the protesters? That would give quite a different story than what was presented.
Let’s take on a specific: the first datum of Scientology is simple: It is possible to know about the mind, spirit and life. Anyone care to make a controversy out of that? If your scope is the entire field of human thought and endeavor, the Xenu story is plainly one of many many possible stories which may be applicable or maybe not. It is simply a datum. Is it true? Well, the second point encountered in most studies of Scientology is that one should test any datum offered. Anything offered is true only if it stands up to your own observation. How could truth be otherwise?
A datum is only valuable as it can be used; what does it accurately explain or enable one to do? Well, Scientology enables immortality and total spiritual freedom. Rather than follow a derision-based media man, it would be much smarter to evaluate the actual basics for oneself and see what doors are opened.
RE: MIlo
Yeah, right.
Anyone else?
By the way, the Xenu story is not fundamental Scientology
Uh, I’d say it is. The whole purpose of Scientology is to rid yourself of “body thetans” and reach Operating Thetan (where you’re supposed to gain special powers). It was the actions of Xenu: evil galactic overlord, that caused all those nasty things to be on Earth (or Teegeeack, as Hubbard wrote) in the first place.
But I guess I have to concede on that bit about Scientology offering immortality. After all, how else could you explain those who join the Sea Org having to sign a billion-year contract? Though, it sure didn’t work out too well for Hubbard himself. Dying in some filthy camper, on the run from the FBI as a suspected co-conspirator to Operation: Snow White.
As for the “datum”, it has been tested, and those who gain the courage to leave and give their testimonials hardly give it raving reviews. Hop on over to the Ex Scientologist Message Board or ExScientologyKids.com to hear it from them.
The implication of this is that journalists are just suppose to report what they hear, not analyze or critique.
I disagree, but even if this were true it wouldn’t matter — Xenu is a Scientology teaching and it is silly.
I encourage you to demonstraete how anything in the above interview was “twisted”. That’s a serious accusation and should be supported — at least if you care about professional ethics.
So? That’s only one possible topic of discussion.
Easy: not everything that’s true can be directly observed.
Somehow, I doubt you bothered to evaluate every religion on the planet – am I right? Somehow, I suspect that you have little trouble dismissing out of hand ideas and opinions which are ridiculous on their face.
So another way is to listen to the claims made by Scientology and, if found to be ridiculous, laugh at them. It’s the responsibility of Scientologists to demonstrate that their opinions deserve respect or even serious consideration instead of derision. So far, they haven’t really managed to do that as far as I’m concerned and the person being interviewed above actually makes it worse – anyone who thinks it’s offensive to be asked about basic teachings of their religion is not someone who can present those teachings as being worthy of respect.
When/where did people get the idea that beliefs are sacrosanct?
The Constitution guarantees only that you can believe it and otherwise do what you like with your religion so long as it doesn’t break any other laws. Freedom of Speech allows me to question your beliefs. It doesn’t allow me to slander YOU personally, or incite violence against you. i can’t fire you on the basis of your religion, unless your religion causes you to become a problem at the office (a Muslim cashier who won’t ring up pork chops).
I’m of the opinion that all religions are scams to one degree or another, but Scientology takes the cake in this department. I cannot begin to imagine what might go through a person’s mind to lead up to getting suckered into this so-called religion.
But I think if I did subscribe to any silly Scientology beliefs, I too would be embarassed to talk to others about it. And I’d probably defend myself in the same way, claiming it was offensive to inquire about my beliefs. So I can almost respect this guy’s refusal to discuss what is obviously an absurd and rediculous proposition – the Xenu theory and all the other fictitious stories Mr. Hubbard has incorporated into his cult.
For a light-hearted satire on Scientology and other crackpot cults, watch The Simpsons Episode 191, “The Joy of Sect”, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Joy_of_Sect
Thank god I’m an atheist.
I am reading “50 reasons people give for believing in a god” by Guy Harrison. He says “the fastest ways to turn a believer into a nonbeliever is religious education.” “Religious ignorance is faith’s ally. Religious education is faith’s enemy.”
Maybe that Scientologist is not so much embarrassed of the religion as he is embarrassed that he can’t explain everything about the religion because he, himself, doesn’t know. He has accepted what he has been told without objective questioning coming into the mix. Then when he is asked about his beliefs, he gets defensive because he appears to be ignorant.
Probably most religious adherents cannot explain the how’s and why’s of their dogma. After all, if they could really think objectively about it all, they wouldn’t buy into any brand of theism at all.
Thanks Eric O.!
And I agree with Todd, religious beliefs lend themselves to humor and I’m under no obligation to respect beliefs that I find ridiculous. Now, I wouldn’t go out of my way and insert myself into contexts or events where you and yours are harmlessly engaging in your rituals or beliefs. But once you put them out in the public square, insist that our laws should provide you with a tax break to enjoy your silliness, or come onto an atheist website and start gettin’ all goofy on us, well then, you’re just begging to be laughed at. “Scientology enables immortality and total spiritual freedom.” HAHAHA. You crack me up!
Austin,
You should really use the term ‘body thetan’ rather than ‘thetan’. It’s a common mistake.
The thing is, ‘thetan’ is just the Scientology term for soul (the immortal spirit being that is alleged to be the true self of each person), so if low-level Scientologists read your summary, it will lack credibility. It’s ‘body thetans’ (or BTs) that show up at OTIII.
Of course Scientology, SEA, or what ever it calls it self these days, is a racket. No proof, other than the tin can auditing machines have proved the existence of Xenu, thetans, or anything else. I just require that their tax exempt status be revoked, as with all religions. Worship as you will, but keep it out of my schools, government, and face.
That’s old fashioned tolerance and it works.
If you were to ask fundy Christians about how the earth is 6000 years old or how every animal was put on a single boat and the world drowned, they will tell you about it and even build museums with models of dinosaurs with saddles on them. A Tibetan Buddhist lama may or may not totally believe in “hungry ghosts” or other wrathful deities, but wouldn’t say you were insulting him by asking.
If the Scientoligists have a story about a galactic overlord who did something to billions of people and it happened 75 million years ago, this “fact” should be part of worldwide knowledge, not hidden from view. Teach the controversy!
Of course they are trying to make sure those ’scriptures’ don’t make it out to the public. They believe in a GALACTIC OVERLORD for god’s sake. The steal money, break apart families, and kill people. They are a lying, deceiving cult.
The idea that religious beliefs can’t be ridiculed would only be valid in interactions between people of varying religious faiths, each knowing that his or her supernatural claim ultimately can’t be verified.
Why can’t Scientologists just come out and say that the Xenu story is either: A – true,
B – article of faith, C – merely an allegory?
It seems obvious to me that Hubbard knew his story was ridiculous, and he didn’t want people to know that part until they were totally brainwashed and emotionally/financially invested in Scientology to want to believe it.
I have heard of some weird religion that
believes that all of the problems in the world
today, and in the entire history of the human race , can be blamed on a talking snake
convincing a rib woman to eat an apple!
The Xenu story is offensive because it is a simply a lie. I know for a fact my Atheist friends don’t like it when the far-right parts of the media lie about their viewpoints, why shouldn’t the reaction be the same from one of us (Tom Davis) when we are constantly lied about? I’m normally pretty calm when I hear this rumour, but I don’t get it that often. Davis being who he is probably hears it more often and therefore it is probably more insulting to him.
For the record I’ve been a Scientologist for 15 years including a staff member for 5 of them. The only place I’ve seen this “xenu story” is in the media NOT within anything Hubbard’s written himself and for the record I’ve seen the so called ’secret’ – but just really ‘upper level materials’ – when I was in the Sea Org, and it ain’t there either. Sworn not to tell you what is there, but nothing says I can’t tell you what isn’t – and what isn’t there is any mention of a “Xenu” or “body thetans.”
Additionally one of the core sayings in Scientology is “If it is True for you then it is True” and the corrollary applies as well – so it is therefore perfectly acceptible to NOT believe in any particular part of Hubbard’s reasoning behind that doesn’t jib with your personal reality so long as one applies the processes/methods correctly and is otherwise an ethical person in life.
I know of at least a few Agnostics or Atheists who apply Scientology based techniques (usually secularized versions of study or business techniques) to their life and consider themselves Scientologists who don’t belief any of the whole track or past-lives stuff. I also know a few Christian ministers who have the same sort of viewpoint as well. All’s good as long as both sides tolerate each other’s different viewpoints and don’t use it to make fun of or riddicule each other it’s all good from the church’s viewpoint.
Like most humanists and atheists I know personally we believe that is is better to concentrate on using everything we have – be it our individual trades, sciences, arts, individual religious techniques, individual creative ideas, etc – to make a better world – rather than wasting the time arguing over who’s belief or non-belief system is right. Personally I believe that arguing over belief/non-belief frankly leads to nothing good – only evil like wars, distrust, intolerance and unneeded conflict.
IMHO what makes Scientology hard to understand for westerners is that most western religions the beliefs are the most important part of the religion. In Scientology (like in many of the eastern practises it is related to) the practises and techniques used to help people are MORE important, and are the CORE of Scientology not the mythos.
These sites:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/scientol1.htm (not a church site)
and
http://www.bonafidescientology.org/ (church site)
and
http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/2001/06/What-Scientologists-Believe.aspx (not a church site)
Fairly well explain what IS actually important to Scientologists.
I hope this helps you better understand Scientology as this site has helped me better understand Atheism.
Then you can show how. The evidence people use to describe the Xenu and thetan beliefs in Scientology are quite well known, so you should have no trouble finding them. If they are a lie, you should have no trouble explaining how and why they either mean something entirely different or are forgeries.
Yet you still capitalize “atheist” as if it were a proper noun — a label for an ideology, belief system, or world view.
Which was insulting: hearing it, or having the interviewer pull out the supporting documents?
Have you seen everything?
So, everyone is infallible?
The non-Scientology sites do not support your claim that Xenu is not a Scientology belief.
As a Christian, i find it offensive the way Atheists go on and on about what God or Jesus did and said. Neither of those is the *message* of Christianity.
*yawn*
Scientology, Mormonism, and Zionism are modern cults. They feed on human ambition and misery.
“Scientology, Mormonism, and Zionism are modern cults. They feed on human ambition and misery.”
What would you have us think ancient cults feed on?
Valerie wrote:”for the record I’ve seen the so called ’secret’ – but just really ‘upper level materials’ – when I was in the Sea Org, and it ain’t there either. Sworn not to tell you what is there, but nothing says I can’t tell you what isn’t – and what isn’t there is any mention of a “Xenu” or “body thetans.” ”
I just have a few questions because this cultish behavior interests me. I have read the scientology book, like 8 yrs ago, but I never got into the practices. My question is what is the Sea Org? What do you mean upper level material? What exactly do you do to get this status? Why the mystery? These might be too many questions for you perhaps I should just read the book again, I think I still have it somewhere….
Todd wrote:”As a Christian, i find it offensive the way Atheists go on and on about what God or Jesus did and said. Neither of those is the *message* of Christianity.
*yawn*”
As an atheist, I find it offensive the way Christians go on and on about what god or jesus did and said. *yawn* Neither of those messages have given me answers.
I personally don’t believe in any gods or any religions so it not just your god that I disagree with. Perhaps you have atheists “preaching” to you on street corners, handing out flyers, and trying to unconvert you.
What is the actual “message” of Christianity? Perhaps it will explain what the Christian Crusade was all about? Love thy neighbor, unless he doen’t believe in god then just kill him.
Scientology=Christianity=Hinduism=Flying Monkeys=Muslim=Judaism=Santa Claus=Pink Unicorn=Jainism=Bialoigyity=Ginrummyism
Same sh*t, different name, tax status, century followers, etc.
A Galactic warlord?…..um…..Are you serious?