Quote:
Originally Posted by fastcarsfreedom
The turn this thread has really surprised me--and that's a difficult thing to do where this Forum is concerned.
I have fairly negative views toward the Church of Scientology on the basis of it's teachings, it's peculiar exclusivity and it's 'recruitment' practices (the tactics of course are employed by several other religious groups.) Nonetheless, what I read here is purely venomous. I am a big believer in free-will--so I don't buy the argument that this organization "brainwashes" innocent people--secondly, I strongly urge everyone to take a step back and ask yourselves what the reaction would be if this were a mosque--would you be on here saying you don't want "those people" moving in? Of course we have no idea who has bought this building--so the whole discussion is likely a moot one--but I'm still taken aback.
As an aside, the Scientologists seem to be moving into urban areas across North America. In Downtown Detroit they recently closed on a prominent and historic building in the heart of the Financial District--on Jefferson Avenue facing the river--after financial services company Raymond James decided to relocate to the 'burbs.
|
My reference to brainwashing was merely facetious. Aside from that, I haven't seen any comments on here which could reasonably be characterized as "venomous". I think the widespread distrust towards Scientology is merited on the facts. Even national governments (most notably, Germany's) have expressed deep concern with the practices and conduct of the organization's leadership. There is certainly nothing wrong with airing one's skepticism about a set a beliefs, and
a forteriori, about a set of practices associated with those beliefs. This is legitimate free expression, and indeed, traditionally, the most protected form of free expression in constitutionally governed societies. The freedom to express an opinion on a religious matter, to express either agreement or disagreement with a given set of beliefs, has consistently been held to warrant the very highest degree of protection by Canadian courts, above even political expression. To automatically equate such expression with hate speech is to undermine the possibility of dialogue and debate in an open, pluralistic society.
No one has attacked Scientologists
ad hominem. I for one certainly don't hate Scientologists as such. I disagree strongly with their practices and I find some of their teachings to be ethically irresponsible and intellectually odious. I would, though, never suggest that Scientologists be legally or physically barred from setting up a "church" in Hamilton.
Further, the comparison to Islam is inapt. The very debate about whether or not Scientology is really a religion at all is a legitimate one; any such debate relating to Islam would not be. Many people find Scientology disturbing and discomforting. Pluralism isn't just about embracing unfamiliar concepts and beliefs; it is also about expressing this sense of disturbance and discomfort wherever it prevails. A society which blindly/dumbly accepts any given set of beliefs as legitimate without daring to voice concern is a hopeless one.
Aside: the concept of "free will" is certainly not logically incompatible with the notion of "brainwashing", which is essentially just subordination of free will. It does not presuppose a determinist metaphysics or epistemology.
Prev
Linear Mode
