Numbers Do Not An Argument Make: Homophobia In The 21st Century.

Cross posted  @ the Atheist Oasis

If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. – Anatole France

(Hat tip to Godlessliberals.com for this one)

Crazy Christians are consistent, if not logical. They lead with their indignation and their imagined righteousness. And when people shrug off their ridiculous rage, they immediately go to bully mode. Case in point:

Ellen DeGeneres responds to group opposing her new JC Penney job

Ellen DeGeneres publicly responded to One Million Moms, the self-described “conservative, pro-family” group who opposes her new role as JC Penney spokeswoman, on the day that California’s ban on same-sex marriage, Proposition 8, was ruled unconstitutional.

On an episode of “The Ellen DeGeneres Show,” taped Tuesday and airing Wednesday, the host said, “Normally I try not to pay attention to my haters, but this time I’d like to talk about it ’cause my haters are motivators.”

“This organization doesn’t think that I should be the spokesperson because I’m gay. For those of you are just tuning in for the first time, it’s true. I’m gay. I hope you were sitting down,” DeGeneres joked.

In a statement on its Web site, One Million Moms, who have previously objected to Chaz Bono’s inclusion on “DWTS” and Ben & Jerry’s Schweddy Balls ice cream, said, “By jumping on the pro-gay bandwagon, JC Penney is attempting to gain a new target market and in the process will lose customers with traditional values that have been faithful to them over all these years.”

DeGeneres responded, “Being gay or pro-gay isn’t a bandwagon. You don’t get a free ride anywhere. There’s no music. ... Occasionally we’ll sing ‘We Are Family,’ but that’s about it.”

As the comedienne pointed out, she had received an outpouring of support in the comments section on the One Million Moms’s Facebook page. DeGeneres was also defended by JC Penney, wh4ch said in a statement they “stand behind [the] partnership,” and by Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly, who called the boycott “a witch hunt.”

Holy shit – when Bill O’Reilly is the voice of reason, you know the other side should be titled ‘a million maniacs’.

What sets my nape hairs on end, is that there are actually only 40,000 of these ‘million’ nutters (as Ellen points out in her succinct and classy video) – and while she is more forgiving than is necessary, the non-surprise is that these busybody old biddies tacked on an extra 60,000 (give or take) in numbers, boils down to an odious, outright LIE. And that they use some millennial  magical merde to back up their alleged ‘traditional values’ (yeah, right, like lying is a ‘traditional value’ – oh wait, if you’re religious, it is).

This sort of thing gets right up my nose. While this dates back to February, it’s still fresh enough to dive-bomb their discriminatory Facebook page, and let them know just how the atheist segment feels about it.

Because obviously they prayed real hard, and nothing happened. So they likely went and started a tempest in a teapot. Chances are strong they’ll begin to whinge on about how they’re the persecuted people, if track records are any indication.

So go give them a holler, and give ‘em a little hell (pun intended). They don’t deserve any courtesy, for their homophobic ways.

Here’s the video response as per the article:

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

Allegories Gone Wild – More Xenubites In The News, And Some Good News Sprinkled In With Some Rogue Clambake

Cross posted @ God Is 4 Suckers!

We all Wiki to some extent, do we not? (Personally, my favorite is Answers.com – it provides far more multiple cross-references to different sources than the wiki version, and besides, it provides some pretty nifty tools to add to your browser and right-click menu.) Now it can’t be considered a primary source, mostly due to the fact that anyone can go in and edit sections. (Hey, I’ve done it myself on occasion, mostly to correct egregious errors, like an old Wiki page for the Negative Proof fallacy that claimed that believers and atheists shared the burden of proof.) The honor system principle is much like the concept of communism – they’d both work well if people understood the concept of sharing.

So the latest news is that the Xenubites have officially been excommunicated from the Wiki site. I (of course) don’t agree with the author’s article for the most part – Scientology is a vicious viral meme, and should be treated with iron fists, no velvet gloves allowed. There’s  rumors that they’ll try to start their own Wiki (think Conservapedia, only a lot crazier with the martyr complex), but we’ll see.

Norway is considering prosecuting Scientology for fraud. Another smart nation, France, is also following suit (pun intended)

An online opinion survey released by the White House this week ranks legalizing pot, playing online poker and cracking down on Scientologists as far more important issues.

And (no surprise here) Axiom 10 productions is actually policing the wimps at YouTube, demanding that any videos unfairly persecuting providing incriminating evidence against their religion cult be removed.

And in other news (not necessarily good), there are now schisms in the cult, and there are actually splinter sects known as Free Zones (and the folks that belong to these are called…you guessed it, Free Zoners). So now I’m guessing it won’t be long before there’ll be a ‘No True Scientologist’™ fallacy making the rounds.

On a different note, there is now a Freethought Pedia – definitely worth a look see.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

Scientology Vs. Psychiatry: What's Big Dispute, Anyways?

Cross posted @ God is for Suckers!

I trust it's no secret that I detest Scientology. As religions go, it lacks a great deal in cohesiveness, critical thinking, and I think it safe to say, the practitioners of it are pretty much close to rabid dogs.

One of the main staples of the Xenuphiles is the anti-psychiatry movement. In fact, they even accuse psychiatry of having induced the 9/11 attack. Oh yeah, they blame Hitler on psychiatry too. In fact, the woes of the world entire can be laid squarely to rest at the feet of psychiatry.

Is it me, or is this sounding...eerily familiar?

I chanced across a copy of Freedom a couple of weeks ago, and began reading it, not noticing the 'published by the church of Scientology' header in small print in the upper right-hand corner.

(On a side note, if you read one of their 'articles' on the website, you'll notice that any citations that come at the end of it, are just pointers to the article you just read. Religious folks sure have a thing for repetitive circularity, don't they?)

So, here's the skinny, the poop, the scoop, on why these Xenubites loath this profession:

Maw Confederation

The Maw Confederation are from "the Sixty-third Galaxy", says Hubbard in Aberration and The Sixth Dynamic, and they practiced "total psychiatric control" by pushing people's faces into supercooled sheets of glass. Hubbard claims this so-called "method of brainwashing" was developed about five billion years ago by a "whole-track psychiatrist". (Hubbard, Aberration and The Sixth Dynamic, catalog #5611C13 15ACC-22)

And these people want to be taken seriously?

For more general hilarity:

Aliens in ancient Egypt. Hubbard maintained that ancient Egypt was "a battleground between two space groups" who infiltrated humanity and become integral to Egyptian culture. (What is Knowable to the PC, 1961) In Responsibility and the State of OT, he claimed that the biblical Moses had a "disintegrator pistol", and also said:

"Ancient Egypt, if you care to look it up on the track, was a combination of Earth and space opera all mixed up as one. As the high Pharaoh stands on the side of the pyramid and blesses the multitude, he has to be careful that his cloak doesn't blow aside and reveal his ray gun."

Wow - so who knew that Hubbard actually had an original idea that resulted in a so-so space opera TV show?

The other fact under consideration, is that Hubbard actually lifted the techniques of psychiatry in order to found his ugly little cult. (True, the article linked to has spelling errors, and a little too much anti-communism fervor, but it makes a solid point.)

For those of you with investigative interests, here's two anti-Scamatologist websites to peruse at your leisure.

A vivid imagination is a healthy thing, as long as it doesn't dictate to you or others how to live.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

What Price, Vendetta?

Cross posted @ God Is For Suckers!

It is perhaps, no shock to anyone who knows me, that of all the religious hooey that alternately shocks, dismays, or provokes outrage from me, Scientology is in the top three.

I live in Mountain View, and right there on Castro Street, is one of their 'illustrious' churches. Usually, there's a very quiet member passing out literature in front of it, and there has been more than one occasion where Anonymous members donning Vendetta masks have protested it right across the street.

This is a sterling example of how religion gets a free pass in our society. Call yourself a religion, don the mask of 'religious persecution', and reap the perks.

(Having a cadre of lawyers as members probably helps, I might add.)

Now, I disagree with Michael Shermer's take on this particular ballyhoo. These people are dangerous - more so than most of the other fundies we deal with (regionally speaking of course: no doubt there's a few 'good ole boys' in various states who'd pronounce "JEBUS LUVS U!" while booting you in the ribs).

A core precept is Fair Game - put forth by the Mighty Profit Enron Hubbard:

In 1965 Hubbard formulated the "Fair Game Law", which states how to deal with people who interfere with Scientology's activities. These problematic people, called suppressive persons, could be considered "fair game" for retaliation:

A Suppressive Person or Group becomes fair game. By FAIR GAME is meant, may not be further protected by the codes and disciplines or the rights of a Scientologist.

Later in December of that year, Hubbard reissued the Fair Game policy with additional clarifications to define the scope of Fair Game. He made it clear that the policy applied to non-Scientologists as well. He declared:

The homes, property, places and abodes of persons who have been active in attempting to: suppress Scientology or Scientologists are all beyond any protection of Scientology Ethics, unless absolved by later Ethics or an amnesty ... this Policy Letter extends to suppressive non-Scientology wives and husbands and parents, or other family members or hostile groups or even close friends.

Hubbard made it clear elsewhere in his writings that the policy would be applied to external organizations, including governments, that were guilty of having interfered with Scientology's activities. He told Scientologists:

If the Internal Revenue Service (in refusing the FCDC [Founding Church of Scientology, Washington DC] non-profit status) continues to act up or if the FDA does sue we can of course Comm Ev [Committee of Evidence] them and if found guilty, label and publish them as a Suppressive Group and fair game ... [N]one is fair game until he or she declares against us.

The policy was further extended in an October 1967 Policy Letter (HCOPL 18 Oct 67 Issue IV, Penalties for Lower Conditions), where Hubbard defined the "penalties" for an individual deemed to be in a "Condition of Enemy":

ENEMY — SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.

When a man named Peter Goodwin in Hampshire, England purchased a high-level Scientology course for £250 and resold it to friends for £50, Hubbard personally issued an Ethics order which "withdrew any future help from Goodwin and his associates, (presumably for eternity), and threatened the most dire retaliations."

If you read further down the link, you will find that Hubbard back-pedaled a bit, changing stances as circumstances warranted. But I've no doubt there's more than a few Scienmythologists who'd have any SP's head on a plate if they could.

ABC News has this report:

Over the past few months, Anonymous has picketed and protested at Scientology centers around the world from Australia and Atlanta to Brussels and Boston. They've also hacked into the church's Web site, posted numerous videos on YouTube criticizing the church and have been accused of harassing church officials.

Now the church is fighting back with its own public relations onslaught, releasing a recent video titled "Anonymous Exposed," which identifies individual it said were members of the group and accuses them of being accessories to criminal acts that include death threats and destruction of property.

"We wanted people who were unaware of what's going on to know about the criminal acts permitted by their leaders," church spokeswoman Karin Pouw told ABCNEWS.com, adding that the church is working with federal and local law enforcement. "[The video] summarizes our position."

Anonymous (members), of course, deny many of these allegations:

"Anonymous contains all kinds of individuals, academics, college students, members of law enforcement, media professionals and blue collar workers," a 25-year-old member of Anonymous with a computer science background told ABCNEWS.com in an e-mail, on the condition that he remain unidentified. "We are united by a mind-set, not by a membership card… We have no leaders and adhere to the true definition of a collective."

Responding to claims made in the church's video and statements from Church of Scientology leaders equating Anonymous with domestic terrorists, the Anonymous member wrote:

"Anonymous does not support, encourage or condone threats of violence in our campaign against Scientology. The 'bomb threat' video was reported to the FBI and to the media as soon as it was seen on YouTube. They were both told that this video was not produced by Anonymous."

So of course, Hubbardologists have made the usual spurious claims. Cries of 'persecution!', etc. Denial-of-service attacks launched at their websites. Then again, cry me a frelling river. Weren't these the same assholes who launched a 24 year attack on the IRS, using 'terrorist' tactics until they became tax-exempt? Yes, they were.

Boo-fucking-hoo, then. Turnabout's fair play, as the saying goes.

Once again, some UFOologists dive under that ridiculous umbrella of protection that is provided via government sanction, proclaiming an argumentum ad numerum as sufficient grounds to protect them against criticism no matter how rightful that critique might be, giving them a degree of cart blanch that non-religious aren't allowed to have.

In short, the nutters among us get more privilege. More protection. More say.

It is to cringe.

Till the next post, then.

 

Read More...

Summary only...

PEOPLE I'VE CHALLENGED THUS FAR...

So I make a conscientious effort to notify people that they're being challenged. Fair is fair. Come defend yourself. I realize that I'm small fry - and my guess is that most folks in the public eye probably view blogs as beneath them, or are far too busy to respond. I'm not in the news, newspapers, or on the boob tube. Or perhaps my critiques aren't quite as trenchant or piercing as I'd hoped.

The AFA, here, back in November.

Professor Campos, here - I'll give him a few months, see what's what.

Karen Hunter, here - got a snarky email response worthy of a 12 year old child.

Chuck Norris, here - I sent an email to his fanmail base, and posted on the WMD thread (Twice! Big surprise: neither showed up).

Marshall Hall, here - no response

Goro Adachi, here - interestingly enough, he emailed me back, not really interested.

T. Chase, here - de nada.

Tim Todd, here - still waiting.

Frank Turek, here - again, zilch.

Notified on comments form - for this post - got a response some months later (posted on their comments in September - got a response in February. Guess the Mother Ship dropped that clown off recently).

I shipped off an email to the Raelians recently, in regards my critique in my post here.

Stephen Quayle, here.

Value Voters, here.

These folks all got an email, and the link was provided.

I responded to an anonymous person at Aaron Kinney's Kill the Afterlife, after said person waxed on and on about one Samael Au Wor - it became quite heated, and crossed blogs (here) back and forth, and said 'spiritual' adherent went bipolar on occasion, alternately hinting at astral sex and calling me a coward and a 'mutha sucker'. What a joy that was. Not really cogent here, but felt like sharing.

The following people weren't challenged:

Mike Janitch, I criticized his 'left wing conspiracy' theory here - but I didn't bother to drop anything off on his site. Idiots like that don't listen anyways.

Ron Rhodes - I poked fun at his 'Cloned Christ' web page here.

And so here I wait, hiding in plain sight.

Read More...

Summary only...

HALLELUJAH: IT’S THE SECOND COMING…OR THE FIRST COMING…OR MAYBE THESE IDIOTS NEED TO VISIT LAKE ‘WOO-BEGONE’

This is getting really frakkin’ old…

I have, on more than one occasion, taken blasts at Scienmythology, but now? More Messianic delusions in the pop culture (thanks to elliejay at the NGB for this piece of poppycock):

Cruise 'is Christ' of Scientology

“TOM Cruise is the new “Christ” of Scientology, according to leaders of the cult-like religion.

The Mission: Impossible star has been told he has been “chosen” to spread the word of his faith throughout the world.

And leader David Miscavige believes that in future, Cruise, 44, will be worshipped like Jesus for his work to raise awareness of the religion.

A source close to the actor, who has risen to one of the church’s top levels, said: “Tom has been told he is Scientology’s Christ-like figure.

“Like Christ, he’s been criticised for his views. But future generations will realise he was right.”

Cruise joined the Church of Scientology in the ’80s. Leader L Ron Hubbard claimed humans bear traces of an ancient alien civilisation.”

Holy crap. At least the article said ‘cult-like’. Cult is definitely more like it.

I suppose it’s time for me to pull out my copy of Dianetics, and start hunting around for some obscure allegorical wording that, if (im) properly juxtaposed, could validate this pop-culture i-clown as the actual 2^nd (1^st? 3^rd?) coming.

Next thing you know, we’ll have Cruise-tian churches, and old Tommy-boy will be ‘cruise-ified’.

Hopefully, the America public will wake up, and smell the coffee. He’s an actor (he’s actually not too bad at it), a fanatic, and an idiot.

And of course, all my polemics are simply ‘Xenu whispering evil into my ear’.

Will blunders never cease?

Read More...

Summary only...

THOSE THETAN THUGS - OF CLAMBAKES, CONSPIRACY WACKOS, AND COERCION

I have discussed this before, but it bears repeating.

We have a far worse enemy that walks amongst us. Their modus operandi is 'attack, take no criticism'. They use every legal ploy possible to squelch dissent, or the hard word, instituting frivolous lawsuits.

Here's a great point-counterpoint -Arnie Lema, former Scientologist (who was with them for a decade) who now speaks out against the cult. Their alleged 'Religious Freedom Watch' of course slanders him as an anti-Semite and a Nazi extremist. Scienmythology cams have shot videos of their inner teachings, which were broadcast on Youtube, but have since been taken off.

Read this: "A policy letter by L. Ron Hubbard, distributed in early 1966, admonishes:

This is correct procedure:

(1) Spot who is attacking us.

(2) Start investigating them promptly for FELONIES or worse using own professionals, not outside agencies.

(3) Double curve our reply by saying we welcome an investigation of them.

(4) Start feeding lurid, blood sex crime actual evidence on the attackers to the press.

Don't ever tamely submit to an investigation of us. Make it rough, rough on attackers all the way."

Read Hubbard's 'Fair Game policy' here:

"Fair Game was a status assigned to those whom the Church of Scientology had officially declared to be Suppressive Persons or SPs. "Suppressive Persons" are those whose actions are deemed to "suppress or damage Scientology or a Scientologist." Often, this means they have been overtly critical of the church. The term "Fair Game" has also often been used to refer to a set of tactics used against perceived enemies of Scientology."

They also have their fingers in the proverbial pie, vis-a-vis anti-psychiatry:

"Scientology and psychiatry have often come into conflict since the foundation of Scientology in 1952. Scientology is publicly, and often vehemently, opposed to both psychiatry and psychology. It offers itself as an alternative to psychiatry, which Scientologists believe to be a barbaric and corrupt profession. [1] . According to the Church of Scientology, this opposition is focused on psychiatry's practices:

What the Church opposes are brutal, inhumane psychiatric treatments. It does so for three principal reasons: 1) procedures such as electro-shock, drugs and lobotomy injure, maim and destroy people in the guise of help; 2) psychiatry is not a science and has no proven methods to justify the billions of dollars of government funds that are poured into it; and 3) psychiatric theories that man is a mere animal have been used to rationalize, for example, the wholesale slaughter of human beings in World Wars I and II. [2]

They abuse the legal system:

• "Alleged copyright infringements. Scientology’s religious documents are copyrighted, and many are available only to members who pay for higher levels of courses and auditing.

• Alleged libel and slander, as in the $400 million lawsuit filed against Time Magazine in 1991, which the church lost.

• Claims of religious discrimination. The church has brought several cases before the European Court of Human Rights challenging refusals to recognize local Scientology groups as religious organizations^[1]. "

As with most cults, they fight tooth and nail, claiming their way is the only true way. And fear is their club: they thrive on argumentum ad baculum, argumentum ad hominem. They've been know to accuse a critic of foul crimes, such as pedophilia (which, in our culture, is tantamount to ruin).

And they have these Hollyweird dweebs backing their play:

"In 2005, Elfman appeared at the Church of Scientology's controversial "Psychiatry: An Industry of Death" Museum, which puts forth a conspiracy theory connecting Adolf Hitler to the psychiatric profession. [1] In June 2006, Elfman and Bodhi Elfman reportedly approached independent film director John Roecker on a street in Los Feliz, California because of a shirt Roecker was wearing that ridiculed Scientology and Scientologists Tom Cruise and John Travolta (The front of the shirt had a picture of Tom Cruise. The caption read "Scientology Is Gay." The back of the shirt had a picture of John Travolta. The caption on the back read "Very Gay.") Jenna Elfman loudly asked Roecker what crimes he had committed and was so agitated that she continued, "Have you raped a baby?" [2]. This is a well-known scientology tactic, of confronting critics with demands that they confess whatever crimes the scientologist insists they have committed."

Female or not, I'd be hard put not to slug someone for an accusation like that. These freakshows are more than just the occasional tinfoil hat conspirators: they have a whole millinery shop that assembles New Age madness from the wreckage of old tired memes. That clueless conman Hubbard simply substituted Xenu instead of Satan, with a piss-poor tale of an evil alien emperor whose character is more suited to a farcical burlesque villain, and a plotline that a ten-year-old could cobble up. Read his biography on answers.com - it's readily apparent, to anyone with a lick of sense that this clown was not only a liar, but a poor one at that.

So again, I tell you all: search these people out. Tell them their epistemology is null and void. I am no advocate of suppression: but this cult pushes the envelope. It cannot stand under criticism. It is, like any other religion, a house of cards. Like any other religion, it deserves scant respect. All are entitled to their beliefs: but no one is entitled to an exemption from criticism.

So go forth, my children, be judgmental, and multiply the critiques, deluge them with condemnation, trounce them with the truth, derail them with details: they, as anyone else, are entitled to believe whatever hogwash. But no more mollycoddling madness.

Here is a good starting point.

It's time to hold the 'clam' to the fire - it's time to 'roast' some shellfish.

In the meantime, here's a video for your viewing pleasure.

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...

SCIENTOLOGY: OF CACOPHONY, CULTS, AND COGNITIVE DISSONANCE

Sure, it's a South Park clip. The funny part of this clip is that it actually portrays what scientologists believe. The sad part? The same thing.

Be forewarned: there's some footage in this next clip that is not for the weak of stomach, or the faint of heart.



This next one is less graphic, but not less shocking:



And people wonder why I have a problem with religion.
The scientologists have taken lives, ruined lives, squelched dissent or criticism, invaded the government no less, in short, these people are fucking nutjobs.

They need to be shouted down. They need to take their bloody religion, and keep it to themselves. We need to get up in their faces, and TELL them they're a quart low.

Because this is AMERICA, folks, and whoever squelches dissent ain't an American in my book. These little nutjobs go running to their lawyers at the drop of a bleedin' hat. Why? Because their 'belief system' holds no water.

You don't like people cwiticizing your wittwe wewigion? That's just tough shit.
Start your own country, or repeal the First Amendment.

Let's give the thetans some beatin's. Drop by their forums. Play the troll. Mock, slander, let's go AFTER these clowns. Marginalize, trivialize, brutalize.

I'm all for freedom to believe as you like, but this carte blanche crap is for the birds. What do I always say? NO FREE PASSES.

Only cowards go to lawyers when the facts speak for themselves: Res Ipsa Loquitor.

Now let's go clean some clocks, shall we?

Till the next post, then.

Read More...

Summary only...