It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

German Official Wants nation wide Scientology Ban

page: 9
9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 01:11 AM
link   
reply to post by gigaplex
 



How do you expect to regulate a discussion with all these standards, but you don't expect the same from the religion in which you regulate your life with?


• RELATED FACTS KNOWN. (All relevant facts known.)
• EVENTS IN CORRECT SEQUENCE. (Events in actual sequence.) TIME NOTED. (Time is properly noted.)
• DATA PROVEN FACTUAL. (Data must be factual, which is to say, true and valid.)


Not being facetious or anything...........

[edit on 6-12-2007 by DeadFlagBlues]




posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 02:27 AM
link   
I am not a moderator, I do not regulate the board. I was pointing out some technology that would be absurd to ban. That's all. Nothing to get uptight about.

Also, the way I approach scientology is like this: I'll read something and if I like it, I might try it out, if it works consistently, then that is proof to me that it works consistently. There is no need to blindly believe anything. It is not a belief system.


Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
reply to post by gigaplex
 



How do you expect to regulate a discussion with all these standards, but you don't expect the same from the religion in which you regulate your life with?


• RELATED FACTS KNOWN. (All relevant facts known.)
• EVENTS IN CORRECT SEQUENCE. (Events in actual sequence.) TIME NOTED. (Time is properly noted.)
• DATA PROVEN FACTUAL. (Data must be factual, which is to say, true and valid.)


Not being facetious or anything...........

[edit on 6-12-2007 by DeadFlagBlues]



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 02:30 AM
link   
reply to post by gigaplex
 


Okay, well my question still stands. What about the so called "history" of our existence? Prove to me that Xenu or any other wild detail about your "religion" is true. It would clear up a lot of common misconceptions those may have about your faith.



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 02:50 AM
link   
How would I do that when I don't know myself whether it is true or not? I don't happen to recall the event and I'm not just going to automatically believe it. I've never been on that level.

But let me see if I can get to the core of the issue here...

Do you find the idea of people being spirits (i.e. thetans) absurd?

Do you find the idea of past lives absurd?

Do you find the idea that there may have been civilizations before this one absurd?

Do you find the idea that one being could influence another through nonphysical means absurd?




Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
reply to post by gigaplex
 


Okay, well my question still stands. What about the so called "history" of our existence? Prove to me that Xenu or any other wild detail about your "religion" is true. It would clear up a lot of common misconceptions those may have about your faith.



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 02:54 AM
link   
reply to post by gigaplex
 



Do you find the idea of people being spirits (i.e. thetans) absurd?


Yes.


Do you find the idea of past lives absurd?


Yes.


Do you find the idea that there may have been civilizations before this one absurd?


For this planet, highly improbable. Yes.


Do you find the idea that one being could influence another through nonphysical means absurd?


Yes.


[edit on 6-12-2007 by DeadFlagBlues]



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 03:06 AM
link   
Okay, now the conversation gets interesting
Each one of these could probably be a thread.

If you walked into a room where someone was in deep sadness but they were around the corner so you couldn't see them, would you be able to feel that emotion? Some people do. It would be especially evident if you walked in in a really good mood and felt this. It wouldn't be anything really strange. You'd just all of a sudden feel sadnesses and might think, why am I sad all of a sudden, I was in a good mood. It is extremely common for people to be able to actually feel other people's emotions. That is an example of a being influencing another through nonphysical means.



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by gigaplex
 


I know for a fact people play on each other's emotions, but how would you be aware of it if you didn't know anybody was in the house? You could hypothetically any situation until the cows come home, but how would this bring the conversation into accordance with what we're talking about here? We've derailed the thread, and may I remind you, we're talking about the basis of Scientology, and your alien who has enslaved and destroyed all souls in the galaxy, only for them to reunite with ourselves in the present.

What does any of that have to do with feeling sad?

[edit on 6-12-2007 by DeadFlagBlues]



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 03:26 AM
link   
Now the rest of them pretty much depend on the first one.

When I talk about a person being a spirit, I am not talking about something totally mysterious like a lot of other religions. There's no need for the extra layer of mystery in scientology.

So let me simplify the idea and show you how it is presented in scientology:

AXIOM 1. LIFE IS BASICALLY A STATIC.
Definition: a Life Static has no mass, no motion, no wavelength, no location in space or in time. It has the ability to postulate and to perceive.
AXIOM 2. THE STATIC IS CAPABLE OF CONSIDERATIONS, POSTULATES, AND OPINIONS.
AXIOM 3. SPACE, ENERGY, OBJECTS, FORM AND TIME ARE THE RESULT OF CONSIDERATIONS MADE AND/OR AGREED UPON OR NOT BY THE STATIC, AND ARE PERCEIVED SOLELY BECAUSE THE STATIC CONSIDERS THAT IT CAN PERCEIVE THEM.
AXIOM 4. SPACE IS A VIEWPOINT OF DIMENSION.
AXIOM 5. ENERGY CONSISTS OF POSTULATED PARTICLES IN SPACE.
AXIOM 6. OBJECTS CONSIST OF GROUPED PARTICLES AND SOLIDS.
AXIOM 7. TIME IS BASICALLY A POSTULATE THAT SPACE AND PARTICLES WILL PERSIST.
AXIOM 8. THE APPARENCY OF TIME IS THE CHANGE OF POSITION OF PARTICLES IN SPACE.
AXIOM 9. CHANGE IS THE PRIMARY MANIFESTATION OF TIME.

So that is basically how it is laid out. I am not really far enough into it that I have completely proved all of this to myself without a doubt but I think that the explanation above is the most likely explanation for how we got here.

Going with the idea that we are just meat bodies - If you look at the actual odds of what it would take to randomly create humans, it is way, way out there. Enough so that it probably didn't happen that way. It is just far too unlikely and that is why I do not subscribe to that belief system like you do. In fact, I don't subscribe to any belief system, I just think that the axioms above are the most logical explanation.



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 03:34 AM
link   
In the example, the other person in the room was sad and the person walking in felt it without seeing them. That was key to understanding the example. The reason I mentioned it is because I was curious if you've ever had the experience. A lot of people have. It could be with any emotion of course, I've just heard more examples of that emotion - possibly because of the way it contrasts with other emotions, making it easier to spot.

Anyway, I do agree this is getting a bit off topic. I just didn't want to ignore the questions you asked.


Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
reply to post by gigaplex
 


What does any of that have to do with feeling sad?

[edit on 6-12-2007 by DeadFlagBlues]



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by gigaplex
 


I wouldn't go that far.

All probability of life is entirely relative to the circumstances given. An atmosphere was created out of naturally occurring gases, giving a chance for random particles to work their own evolutionary magic, moving onto bigger and better things for a few million years, and here we are 7 million years after the first humanoid developed, discussing whether or not our "souls" were chosen for us. We're one species out of millions that have the evolutionary catalyst called "self awareness." That same self awareness is exactly the reason you and I are having this conversation.

These "meat bodies" are the twisted, poorly engineered result of the evolutionary process. This is the highest form of intelligent life the earth has granted itself so far. If you take into consideration just how large the universe is speculated to be, there should be many more species of sentient beings out there. Also, with the enormity of space in mind, there would be more a probability that life should exist, rather than it not existing at all. Come to terms with that, and I'm sure you won't be duped into believing any religion.

I wish I could answer your question or at least make a rebuttal, but I truly have no idea what you're trying to say in response.

Give me a little more insight into what you're trying to convey.



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 04:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
.... there should be many more species of sentient beings out there.


There are plenty of sentient species/beings right here on earth - sentience is fairly commonplace throughout the animal kingdom, not just in humans, most mammals can feel which is all that sentience really means....what we should be enquiring of is whether there are any other Sapient beings 'out there'.

en.wikipedia.org...

Splitting hairs true, but imo a fundemental distinction.



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 04:39 AM
link   
reply to post by KilgoreTrout
 


Splitting hairs or not, it's knowledge. Thanks for clearing that up.



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 04:47 AM
link   
Religion is a personal way of making sense in this world and once "they" demand money or restrict your way of life in forms of rules and bans, it's not a religion anymore; it's a dictatorship.



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 06:21 AM
link   
I've come to this thread a bit late, and I didn't expect this to be my first post on ATS, but I do feel bound to chip in with my twopence worth.

I'm an ex-Scientologist. I was a member of the Sea Organisation, a 24/7 bona fide church member, until I left in 1991. I 'blew' (left without consent) so I am certain to be one of those the church labels a 'Suppressive Person'.

Having read this far, you'd probably expect me to roundly condemn the CofS but I won't. Nor do I promote it.

My experience in Scientology was somewhat at odds with what I read about it on the Net and in newspapers. However, the money side of things does taint some pretty decent ideas. I saw plenty of people do well using Scientology and a saw a few who were neglected and poorly treated because they were staff members who weren't paying for services.

What I read that L. Ron Hubbard said was at variance with the way things were run and I expect that the CofS, like governments and large organisations, loves its statistics more than its purpose. Oddly enough, this is covered in Scientology Policy but tends to be ignored.

Anyway, most of what outsiders say about Scientology is hysterical nonsense and no small part of that is due to people substituting what they've read for their own personal knowledge or experience.

Much of the Scientology technology and policy I was exposed to works and makes sense. I never did OT III so I can't comment on the Xenu stuff but given the power that implanting and psychological techniques are said to have, any illusion is possible. And that could be an argument for or against the Xenu thing.

Contrary to what was posted earlier in this thread, I think that Scientology is about as close to Zen Buddhism as you could be without being a Zen Buddhist. Of course there's the money thing but then there's the money thing in Christianity too; look at their real estate.

Banning religions and schools of thought, the right of free speech and other human rights is an utter no-no for me. That it should be a German trying to ban a religion is an unfortunate echo of recent history and I hope it doesn't reflect the views of Germans in general.

For the record, I think that we are spiritual, that we do reincarnate and there were civilisations before this one (but not on this planet).

If you're interested, I left Scientology because of reasons mentioned above; current practice seems to be at odds with the original idea.



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 12:37 PM
link   
The earth is ONLY 4.5 billion years old. Take a look at what SCIENCE has showed us about how long a mutation takes to happen. Do you have any idea how many mutations it takes to get from mud to this? It is an astronomical number (not just millions or billions).

Even if the earth was old enough to satisfy the mathematical requirements of this scenario, that STILL wouldn't be proof. Just because you consider no other reasonable explanation exists doesn't mean that the explanation you have is then automatically proven. It would just mean that it is unknown.

The idea that we evolved from mud to this in 4.5 billion years is a leap of faith just like the Christian beliefs are a leap of faith. There's nothing wrong with it but don't go around saying everyone else is a retard just because you believe your BELIEFS are the best. That's just rude.



Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
reply to post by gigaplex
 


I wouldn't go that far.

All probability of life is entirely relative to the circumstances given. An atmosphere was created out of naturally occurring gases, giving a chance for random particles to work their own evolutionary magic, moving onto bigger and better things for a few million years, and here we are 7 million years after the first humanoid developed, discussing whether or not our "souls" were chosen for us.

snip...




posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 12:52 PM
link   
I was not discussing whether our "souls" were chosen for us or not. It is an interesting topic though. I happen to think that our souls were not chosen for us. I don't believe there is a god either. To this point, I think we would probably agree.



Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
reply to post by gigaplex
 

(snip)

...and here we are 7 million years after the first humanoid developed, discussing whether or not our "souls" were chosen for us.

(snip)



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 01:02 PM
link   
That is an interesting perspective, tayga. You're right. The whole thing could just be an illusion. LRH talked about other implanted illusions in his lectures as well.

It is interesting that everyone thinks scientologists just sit around all day talking about Xenu. The truth is the conversations scientologists have are usually about things like communication cycles, the overt withhold mechanism, the tone scale, this form, that form, this procedure, that list, best practices, wins, things like that.


Originally posted by tayga

Much of the Scientology technology and policy I was exposed to works and makes sense. I never did OT III so I can't comment on the Xenu stuff but given the power that implanting and psychological techniques are said to have, any illusion is possible. And that could be an argument for or against the Xenu thing.




posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 07:52 PM
link   
I don't think any religions should be banned, but any illegal practices of any religion should be, the FCC for example caused all Scientology "E-meter" devices to have a warning label attached reading: "By itself this meter does nothing... etc", because to this day an e-meter has been scientifically proven to do nothing except maybe waste electricity.

Sure Scientology preys upon the weak but it can be contended that every religion on the earth does the same thing, there will be weak minded followers of every religion no matter how true or false it is based upon the system of doing what your parents raised you to believe.

I'm not surprised by this move by the Germans after they announced Cruise couldn't film his movie there because of his religion, and I in no way condone scientology but it's not hard to see Cruise was being persecuted for his religion and the scientologists will probably in the long run only gain more attention and fame and people wanting to join it in Germany based on this persecution.

The whole argument is not weather Scientology is a scam created by a science fiction writer but if it is technically a religion or not, just because it's much different from the more popular religions doesn't make it a non-religion, and anyone hoping a religion should be banned because they don't agree with it is probably headed in the communist direction, the main purpose the U.S. exists with freedom today is because of the belief of freedom of religion.



posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by gigaplex
 


This "mud" containing all sorts of new and alien chemicals, elements, and organic compounds. I don't see why it would be so hard for some sort of mutation. Especially within a 4.2 billion year time frame.


I guess there is a chance that Xenu had destroyed the universe with hydrogen bombs (obsolete technology) and our souls are remnants of alien souls that once were. Sounds more than logical.




posted on Dec, 6 2007 @ 09:58 PM
link   
If you were to thoroughly shuffle ten flash cards numbered one-to-ten and laid them out, the odds of them lining up in order is one in 3,628,800. The probability rapidly decreases the more variables you add – if you were to have one hundred cards numbered in order and performed the same experiment the odds would be one in 10E158. That means 10 with 158 zeros behind it. And that's just 100 cards. Wouldn't you agree that an organism is a bit more complex than just arranging 100 things in the correct order?

Just to get some perspective here, astronomers tell us there are no more than 10E87 particles in the universe. Assuming the universe is no more than thirty billion years old (10E18 seconds) and each particle can participate in a thousand billion (10E12) different reactions every second, the maximum number of reactions occurring would be 10E117.

100 cards in order: 10E158
maximum number of reactions in entire universe since beginning of time: 10E117

Do you see a problem here? 10E158 is 100 duodecillion times 10E117 (i.e. a lot).

If the mud to man theory has the same probability as laying out 100 cards in order (it doesn't, it is faaar less) then your theory would have a 1 in 100 duodecillion chance of happening (i.e. fat chance).

It seems that basic mathematics have PROVEN your Belief wrong and yet I imagine you will still believe it because you have faith - it is your religion. That's fine, you can have your religious beliefs but you're not superior to everyone else on the planet because you have a blind belief that you are right.

Might I remind you that it is dangerous to blindly believe things. It's cultish behavior.



Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
reply to post by gigaplex
 


This "mud" containing all sorts of new and alien chemicals, elements, and organic compounds. I don't see why it would be so hard for some sort of mutation. Especially within a 4.2 billion year time frame.


I guess there is a chance that Xenu had destroyed the universe with hydrogen bombs (obsolete technology) and our souls are remnants of alien souls that once were. Sounds more than logical.



[edit on 6-12-2007 by gigaplex]



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join