Dressing Up Scientology’s Front Groups, or The Lipstick On The Pig
The following post was submitted to Glosslip by Number 6:
Lipstick On the Pig-Scientology’s Front Groups
The greatest trick the devil pulled off was convincing the world he didn’t exist. If the devil doesn’t exist, then no one will focus attention on him and his ugliness. And that seems to be par for the course for many cults and criminal organizations. The best PR for rotten organizations like the Church of Scientology is the set up of benevolent groups that offer services to help mankind. It’s the best way to sneak in and infiltrate all levels of society, and people should be alerted to this kind of subversive activity.
Appealing to the youth
The above video is a Public Service Announcement from the Youth For Human Rights International. Youth For Human Rights certainly seems like a good group at first glance. In an age where young people are more apathetic than ever, it’s encouraging to see youth stand up for human rights. The above PSA has a catchy beat and a very positive message, that’s a given. Why then am I including this video as an example of the devil’s age-old trick? Because this human rights group is a front group for the Church of Scientology. Its founder, Mary Shuttleworth, is a Scientologist and the organization is mostly staffed by Scientologists. Many people catch on to the fact that YHRI is a front group, but they don’t find out until it’s too late.
Many non-Scientologist youth join YHRI not knowing it is a front group for Scientology. Their good intentions to make the world a better place are misused by people who intend to push the “technology” of a raving lunatic into all levels of society. In fact, YHRI is set up to draw many young people into Scientology, which is what most Scientology front groups are designed to do.
July 10, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Fortunately, Glosslip is only a tawdry celeb-gossip column and no one takes it even remotely seriously, except bloggers who unquestioningly regurgitate the site owner’s increasingly bizarre tirades.
July 10, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Can’t help but your decision to, yet again, solely use ad-hominem and insults rather than actual arguments. Is it because you know you don’t have any real arguments?
July 10, 2008 at 5:46 pm
I could write a long boring dissertation explaining what my definition of a “tawdry celeb-gossip column” is, and waste time dissecting why Glosslip fits that description, but what’s the point? I’m not here to “argue” because that implies I care about trying to change your opinion. I don’t.
You attack Scientology in an ad-hominem manner daily on this blog, and/or you support those who do. Even your blog’s very name, “Temple of Xenu”, is intended to ridicule and inflame. So don’t try to get all semantically superior on me. This isn’t the Harvard debate team, this is just a blog.
July 11, 2008 at 9:40 am
In other words, yet again, you’re making sweeping statements to back up your own point (or in this case, explain why you’re not even bothering to address the article itself) without giving any kind of grounds for them. Then dismissing any request for actual evidence with “this is just the internet!” This may be a blog, but I wasn’t aware that meant the usual rules of debate no longer apply.
In my experience, people who constantly make statements and refuse to back them up know deep down that they are wrong.
What you are doing is, again, trying to force the focus of debate away from the Church of Scientology and onto the people criticising it – because it’s a celebrity site, because it’s just a blog, because whatever. It’s an avoiding tactic and it’s clear as day.
July 12, 2008 at 3:23 am
This is a peculiar mental disorder of the Scientology haters – the accusation that if I don’t choose to enter into a convoluted bullshit debate with you just because you demand one, then it’s taken as “proof” that your position is right. (And yes, you’ve shown once again that you ALWAYS have to be RIGHT.)
I repeat: I’m not here to “argue” because that implies I care about trying to change your opinion. I don’t.
July 13, 2008 at 6:27 am
“This is a peculiar mental disorder of the Scientology haters – the accusation that if I don’t choose to enter into a convoluted bullshit debate with you just because you demand one, then it’s taken as “proof” that your position is right. (And yes, you’ve shown once again that you ALWAYS have to be RIGHT.)”
Where did I indicate anything remotely resembling this?
“I repeat: I’m not here to “argue” because that implies I care about trying to change your opinion. I don’t.”
Then why bother?