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.

 

Wikipedia bans Church of Scientology

page: 2
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 12:53 AM
link   
I'm not a fan of Scientology or it's questionable practices to censor critics of their "religion", but there is a part of me that feels that even they shouldn't be necessarily singled out for censorship by Wikipedia.

Granted, Wikipedia is a private non-profit company. So, I guess that is entirely their right. (Non-profits, as private organizations, are not subject to the anti-discrimination laws which might apply to similar organizations serving the public for profit.)

However, it certainly takes away the credibility of Wikipedia. For who are they going to censor now? And by what criteria? Who gets to decide what that criteria happens to be? If they have criteria, and enforce censoring entries, doesn't that make them partial rather than non-partial?

How would people react if they were doing this to Christians?

(Granted, the claim that Scientology is a religion is tenuous at best, but they have been granted Tax Exempt Religious Status by the Federal Government, so by a technicality they are.)

If Wikipedia had been censoring and blocking Christian groups from making edits to Wikipedia entries, this ATS community would be scathing and fuming over it. ("Dey took r rites! Yah! Dem Wiki peeps took r rites!")

A part of me just recoils at the mentality of "It's okay as long as they do it to someone else." So, let me ask you this: Who is going to be left to protect your rights after they've taken away everyone elses' but your's?

It should be an issue of not being acceptable ever, no matter who they are doing it to.

But then again, since Wikipedia is a private non-profit organization it's entirely their prerogative...even if it isn't right (again, not to say that the Church of Scientology didn't have it coming).




posted on May, 29 2009 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by fraterormus
 


Oh, I can imagine how many other disinformants there are out there, trying to make sure the true word of their organizations aren't let out. I think the thing with Scientology is that they are so obvious about it, which makes them look criminal, you know?



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:11 AM
link   
Good i'm happy, co$ needs to be censored, it's false.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by allsop
 


So everything that you think is false should be censored? Don't we live in a country of free speech? Even if it's slander towards another organization, it it's true, it should be able to be published, and viewed by the public.

Your mentality is askew.

Lets say that you're following a religion where they terrorize ex-followers for falling from the tree, or disagreeing with their ideas. To the extent where people's lives are lost and people are put in debt over some ridiculous, phony tests. Wouldn't you want to know that these sort of things go on in YOUR church?

My father attended a non-denomination church in which the pastor molested his step-daughter, and then committed adultery with both a member of the church and HER daughter. I, for sure, wouldn't want THAT to be censored from me if I were attending that church.

Think about what you're saying.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 02:49 PM
link   
I have an interesting story that is related... maybe not. I was at a local mall (Burbank, CA) about 2 or 3 months ago; and right outside the huge 16 screen movie theater, were a group (maybe 10 people) wearing red t-shirts and offering "free stress tests" to the people walking around. Curiously, I looked over to see what these "stress tests" were all about. To my surprise, I see three different tables with E-meters set up, and at each table was a (more than likely unsuspecting) person participating in the "free stress test;" and by participating in the "free stress test," I mean they were getting audited. There they were each unsuspecting person holding the two tin cans connected to each E-meter with an auditor sitting there asking them questions.; and as surveyed the area even further, I noticed one more table with a big stack of books on top of it. No doubt they were books by L. Ron Hubbard teaching each unsuspecting person how to deal with their "stress." It is interesting to see what lengths Scientologist will go to in order to push their agenda... Oh by the way, there was not one single thing that was evident around the entire set up (except for the E-meters) that identified these people as Scientologist!

[edit on 29-5-2009 by MajicMan]



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Thought this was pretty funny.





This is an oil painting from Brandon Bird.

Here's the quote:




This is a picture of L. Ron Hubbard on the couch eating Funyuns and pizza. He's thinking, "Mmmm, that's a lot of pizza!


[edit on 29-5-2009 by undefy.gravity]



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by spageeths
 


OMG..........

All those people were like some brainwashed zombies..... I mean you have to be kidding me. Did you see that one short guy get up in his face? LOL..........



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by undefy.gravity
 


LOL, what is it with these people?

I honestly never researched Scientology but I am about to,lol.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   
To me Scientology should be given the same rights as any other religion.If they are banning this they should ban Christianity,Islam and every other religion as they are all on equal footing as far as im concerned.The only difference is the time in which the books were written.

Christianity=Cannot be proven to be true/false
Islam=Cannot be proven to be true/false
Scientology=Cannot be proven to be true/false

All the same,therefore should be treated the same.



[edit on 29-5-2009 by Solomons]



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:26 PM
link   
GOOD. Now I hope America and the rest of the world jumps aboard and bans them as well. They are a dangerous brainwashing cult. They are a corporation more than anything. They should have their tax exempt status stripped and be banned from their manipulative slave game they purport as religion.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 



They seem to all be pretty off the wall. They're pushy, harsh, and antagonists (lol, that's a poke at their beliefs, sorry.)

Some crazy videos are out there where they're harassing people who are against them, and some of their claims on the people protesting them are ridiculous! Just search some videos, and you'll see...



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by spageeths
reply to post by undefy.gravity
 



Yeah, I've actually watched a couple of videos with some Scientologists harassing this gentleman by the name of Mark Bunker. They make some ridiculous statements about this man, (like molesting children?
) and they don't even know him, personally. All they're doing is bashing him for not having faith in their cult.

Have a watch yourself.



That video is so scary.

That type of intimidation tactics reminds me of history lessons and The Holy Inquisition.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 



The only reason it's considered a religion is because it's not taxed by the IRS. It's a commercial BUSINESS that is ran to get money from people by conducting stress tests, and membership fees, buying books from Hubbard, etc. etc.

Last time I checked, you can get a free bible, and there are no membership fees at regular churches.

It's a cult, get over it.



[edit on 30-5-2009 by undefy.gravity]



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by undefy.gravity
 


Yes because Christian mega churches dont ask for money...or all those evangelical christian guys on tv.Religion is just a cult with political power.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sundancer
What they could do, is have a responsible person write a basic overview about what's known about Scientology and then not allow future edits from outside sources


Absolutely. Banning IP addresses doesn't do any good because an IP does not equal an ID. This is a very simple concept, one which Congress and the courts seem to not understand, owing to their lack of technical savvy.

But I digress. It would serve the "Church" of Scientology right if all current Wikipedia pages about Scientology were scoured of bias and then permanently locked to prevent future edits. Furthermore, every new Wikipedia page containing the terms "Scientology," "Dianetics," or "L. Ron Hubbard" should automatically have a big, huge, disclaimer inserted into it, warning readers that the page may have already been, or may about to be, compromised by users inappropriately making pro-Scientology edits.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by HolgerTheDane
 


This video is pretty apparent as well, to the statements I've been making. They're making statements about someone they don't even know. Verbally bashing them for disagreeing with them.

Pitiful.




posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by undefy.gravity
 


This is why my beliefs have zero to do with religion and everything to do with the universe... talk sh*t about the universe... do it...



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by flightsuitIt would serve the "Church" of Scientology right if all current Wikipedia pages about Scientology were scoured of bias and then permanently locked to prevent future edits.


Actually, upon further reflection, I should modify that. The whole point of Wikipedia is that entries can be constantly edited on an ongoing basis, to reflect new information and keep Wikipedia relevant as a current resource. Therefore, the Scientology articles should be not so much permanently frozen in time, but moderated by an unbiased committee of users who would permit new edits to appear, but not before those edits had been reviewed and checked for possible bias.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by iamjesusphish

This is why my beliefs have zero to do with religion and everything to do with the universe... talk sh*t about the universe... do it...


"The Universe," as you call it, is clearly a made-up, un-scientific fairy tale. Show me one single, solitary shred of proof that this "Universe" of yours actually exists!



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 



Oh trust me, I agree. I'm no religious person myself, but spiritual. I think that they're mostly hypocritical, all about making yourself look at what you're doing wrong, instead of looking at the positive side of life and trying to live life well and with a force of good for you, not for some 'god'.

I think that Christians, Muslims, Catholics, etc. alike all are out to disinform about their religion to increase new customers as well as keep existing ones.

All religions are out to self-serve, make money, etc. But I think this particular incident that occurred made it so entirely obvious what they were out doing. I haven't heard many Christians going into debt for finding out how to deal with their stress.

Not to say that this article hasn't been tampered with (lol), but here's a bit of information on Hubbard himself.

L. Ron Hubbard - Wikipedia

And yes, there are religious freaks on television who elude people to spend money on worthless objects, texts, etc. But they do that willingly and know what the costs are. But these people going through stress tests with the 'Church' end up with an unpredictable bill of over $20,000 dollars. For a TEST.

Sounds sketchy to me...


[edit on 30-5-2009 by undefy.gravity]




top topics



 
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join