Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Scientology Tries To Block German Documentary

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the piece-of-blue-sky dept.

Censorship 565

eldavojohn writes "The Guardian is reporting on the strained relationship that Scientology is having with the German government and the airing of a pesky documentary on Southwest Broadcasting. Until Nothing Remains, a $2.3 million documentary, is slotted to air on German television at the end of this month. It recounts the true story of Heiner von Rönn and his family's suffering when he tried to leave the Church of Scientology. A Scientology spokesperson called the film false and intolerant and also said they are investigating legal means to stop the film from being aired. More details on the film can be gleaned here."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Rights? (2, Interesting)

dziman (415307) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479318)

Are there any laws protecting this type of "speech" in Germany?

Re:Rights? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479352)

Regardless, Scientology is prohibited in Germany; So I doubt they will have much of a case for the german courts.

Re:Rights? (5, Insightful)

rvw (755107) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479406)

Regardless, Scientology is prohibited in Germany; So I doubt they will have much of a case for the german courts.

This is like the Streisand effect - it will only generate publicity. So thank you Scientology for making me aware of this documentary.

Re:Rights? (5, Insightful)

ahaubold (1705608) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479432)

An organization as dangerous as Scientology must not be given a chance to prevent education. The are banned for a reason. I hope the courts will just laugh at them and send their lawyers home. And now i'd really like to see that movie.

Re:Rights? (5, Interesting)

SerpentMage (13390) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479654)

The problem here is that many public networks shy away from these documentaries BECAUSE of the clout of Scientology. However, ARD is supported by public euros and as such answers to nobody even the government. Many whine about having to pay a TV tax, but I gladly pay my monthly TV tax as it produces documentaries that ask hard hitting questions. Public networks would definitely not support it...

I am a supporter of free markets and capitalism, but at times we need the government.

Re:Rights? (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479776)

me too, but it's rather a TV fee than a TV tax.

(similar to Great Britains TV License)

Re:Rights? (0, Troll)

Osinoche (769786) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479956)

Why would you pay a tax on something that is an inherent right. I think honestly you need a tax on government. Let's call it a government tax, The government must pay this tax to the people because without the people the government is nothing.

Somewhere on a cement-hill battlefield in CALIF. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479700)

A ragtag legion, soarly tired and bruised, led by none-other than Tomb "Hoveround missle" Cruize and "Devil's Haircut" Beck give their last rites before sending their lawyers to infiltrate Watchtower Society like the Illuminati infected Freemasonry...

"They can take our analog Negaton-reader interpretation jobs, they can take our wifes, but they can never take our money!"
  -Tomb Cruize1962-2010, Tomb Cruize is survived by his identical twin Lieutenant Pete "Maverick" Mitchell, who portrayed Tomb Cruize in the movie Toppe Gung ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHklGtW3rwU [youtube.com] )

Re:Rights? (5, Funny)

value_added (719364) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479660)

This is like the Streisand effect ...

We're talking about Germany. I'd suggest "Hasselhoff Effect" instead.

Re:Rights? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479434)

Scientology is not prohibited in Germany. However, it failed to gain the status of a church and is considered a cult. Also it is being watched closely because it is considered "hostile to the constitution", IIRC.

Re:Rights? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479482)

For God's sake, no, Scientology is NOT prohibited in Germany. They are not acknowledged as as a religious group, so they do not enjoy financial benefits. They are however closely watched for violations of the constitution.

Re:Rights? (1, Informative)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479682)

Unfortunately, they aren't prohibited yet; their lobby was too powerful. They're under heavy investigation though, and do not have the status of a religion.

"Denied church status" != "Prohibited" (4, Informative)

Saint Fnordius (456567) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479734)

Scientology is allowed to operate and exist in Germany, but it is considered a for-profit organisation. That means it doesn't even enjoy charity status, much less the much-coveted tax exemption.

So yes, they could attempt to get a temporary restraining order, but I doubt that this will go well for them. It's too close to the broadcast date, and the editors and producers have most likely done their homework.

Re:Rights? (1)

teh dave (1618221) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479796)

Scientology is prohibited in Germany

I am packing my bags now. Any idea where I can learn Germanese?

Re:Rights? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479904)

There are a few colleges that teach it. However, it's only taught to people for whom their first language is Americanese.

Re:Rights? (5, Informative)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479398)

Let's take a look at the Grundgesetz...

Grundgesetz, Artikel 5: [dejure.org]

(1) Everybody has the right to express and distribute his opinion in word, writing or picture, and also to inform himself from any public source. The freedom of press and the freedom of reporting through broadcasting and movies is assured. No censorship takes place.

(2) These rights are limited only by the general laws for protection of the youth and protection of the personal honor.

(3) Art and science, research and teaching are free. The freedom of teaching does not release from the faith to the constitution.

(IANAL, but it beats Babelfish)

Re:Rights? (5, Informative)

dziman (415307) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479480)

From the official translation: https://www.btg-bestellservice.de/pdf/80201000.pdf [btg-bestellservice.de]

Article 5 [Freedom of expression, arts and sciences] (1) Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing and pictures, and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship. (2) These rights shall find their limits in the provisions of general laws, in provisions for the protection of young persons, and in the right to personal honour. (3) Arts and sciences, research and teaching shall be free. The freedom of teaching shall not release any person from allegiance to the constitution.

Re:Rights? (2, Interesting)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479486)

I thought Germany still had anti hate speech laws (not that they're relevant for this issue).

Re:Rights? (3, Informative)

Sique (173459) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479574)

... which are covered by Art 5(2): "These rights shall find their limits in [...] the right to personal honour."

And they are covered in Art 1(1): "The dignity of Man is untouchable. To respect it and to protect it is the obligation of all governmental power."

Re:Rights? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479514)

Which are limited in many ways.

cb

Re:Rights? (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479720)

(2) These rights are limited only by the general laws for protection of the youth and protection of the personal honor.

So they will state that the “honor” of the “church” must be protected. Whatever “personal honor” means. (My guess: Stretchable beyond imagination.)

Re:Rights? (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479852)

You can stretch even them beyond recognition and your case will still be accepted to go to court. But judges (for unknown reasons except the OLG Hamburg) usually dismiss it when you stretched it beyond reason.

Re:Rights? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479402)

Only for jews.

Re:Rights? (4, Insightful)

bickerdyke (670000) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479484)

There are, but there are also laws to protect people (and organizations) from libel and untrue reporting.

In short: if you don't claim something is a fact but only your opinion, you're pretty much free to say anything. If you claim sonething is a fact, and the subject of the fact doesn't like it, court might ask you to proove that you double-checked your "facts" first.

This news is nothing special. You're almost expected to go that route if you hear about bad news are to be published (and you employ a lawyer...) but considering the standard of journalism in public tv, scientology hasn't much of a chance to pull that documentary off the air.

Re:Rights? (1)

dziman (415307) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479564)

Even though Scientology isn't a recognized entity in Germany, would having someone present the "facts" about it to the court imply that Scientology is recognized entity? After all, who makes the decision that the facts must be presented? Who else would make the proposition to the government except the "unrecognized" entity in this case? Is this a contradiction of its "non-recognition"?

Re:Rights? (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479754)

You don't need to be a recognized entity to sue. If you would affected in any way by a publication, you could also sue as an individual.

if a group of X people (+ 1 lawyer) shows up in court to sue, it's rather about legal details if they are treated as a group or individuals.

Re:Rights? (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479840)

Germany had issues with the left and the right vs their democratic gov.
So they set up some laws to say that nobody could ever mess with the democratic system.
This helped stop groups injecting ww2 German ideas into new cut out parties or communist offering one final free vote to get them into power.

Where can I find a copy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479354)

Seriously, where can I find a copy with subtitles?

Re:Where can I find a copy? (5, Interesting)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479518)

You can't for now, but maybe XenuTV [xenutv.com] will be able to help when a digital copy is released.

banned religion (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479364)

It's my understanding that Scientology is banned in Germany. I don't see how they can hope to do anything legally there, as it'd be an admission of criminal activity.

Re:banned religion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479512)

It is not banned, it is just not seen as religion, it is seen as Ponzi scheme under the hood of trying to be a religion (which in the US basically gives it some tax benefits)

A point to note (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479374)

Germany doesn't know yet what Scientology is, a business, a religion or a cult. This may make up the courts' mind.

From Wikipedia/Church of Scientology [wikipedia.org] :

In Germany, official views of Scientology are particularly skeptical. In Germany it is seen as a totalitarian anti-democratic organization and is under observation by national security organizations due, among other reasons, to suspicion of violating the human rights of its members granted by the German Constitution, including Hubbard's pessimistic views on democracy vis-à-vis psychiatry and other such features. In December 2007, Germany's interior ministers said that they considered the goals of Church of Scientology to be in conflict with the principles of the nation's constitution and would seek to ban the organization. The plans were quickly criticised as ill-advised. The plans to ban Scientology were finally dropped in November 2008, after preliminary investigations failed to unearth evidence of illegal or unconstitutional activity.

The legal status of the Church of Scientology in Germany is still awaiting resolution; some courts have ruled that it is a business, others have affirmed its religious nature. The German government has affirmed that it does not consider the Church of Scientology to be a religious community.

If any fellow Anonymous in Germany feel like telling the German government why they should not consider Scientology a religion, then please be my guest. Be clear, make yourself heard. "Ich bin Anonymous!"

Re:A point to note (0, Troll)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479418)

In Germany it is seen as a totalitarian anti-democratic organization

If only somebody in Germany had the guts to say the same thing about Catholicism, or for that matter Islam.

Re:A point to note (5, Insightful)

bloobloo (957543) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479446)

In Germany it is seen as a totalitarian anti-democratic organization

If only somebody in Germany had the guts to say the same thing about Catholicism, or for that matter Islam.

They did, [wikipedia.org] 500 years ago, and it led to the Reformation.

Re:A point to note (1, Insightful)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479450)

You atheists seem to be a very hostile and angry group yourselves!

What ever happened to "live and let live"?

Re:A point to note (5, Insightful)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479500)

What ever happened to "live and let live"?

No atheist is stopping religious people from living. Check the history of all major religions and you will find out that religious people quite often did stop atheists from living, and in quite imaginative ways too. I am just giving my opinion, feel free to give yours and stop playing the "hurt feelings" card you big baby.

Re:A point to note (0, Offtopic)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479528)

Do you always assume everyone you write to on the internet is an idiot and an ignoramus? Then you pull out the internet tough guy routine by calling me a big baby and assuming you've hurt my feelings with your witty one liners! Oh the arrogance!

Re:A point to note (1)

chewthreetimes (1740020) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479642)

Based on your other post above, it seems that, if not "an idiot and an inoramus", you were at the very least being a troll.

"You atheists seem to be a very hostile and angry group yourselves!"

That's painting with a fairly broad brush, don't you think?

Re:A point to note (4, Interesting)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479736)

That's painting with a fairly broad brush, don't you think?

It is, and it's wrong in both cases, C'est la vie. Humans seem to have a desire to view things in extremes of black and white even though no such dichotomy exists.

Based on your other post above, it seems that, if not "an idiot and an inoramus", you were at the very least being a troll.

No, not necessarily. The original poster seems to want to condemn religious intolerance and injustice by being intolerant himself.

Re:A point to note (2, Insightful)

dylan_- (1661) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479622)

Check the history of all major religions and you will find out that religious people quite often did stop atheists from living, and in quite imaginative ways too.

Check the history of Atheism and you'll read about Stalin's Purges. Millions were killed in his attempt to build an Atheist society.

Re:A point to note (5, Insightful)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479710)

Correction, millions were killed in his attempt to build a Communist society. Religion was an incidental thing in Communist ideology that barely gets a mention in the Communist Manifesto, except as one of the many things to get rid of as the new society is built. Orthodox Church in Russia was diminished by Stalin and many priests killed as part of a struggle for power between rival totalitarian ideologies. In other words, Stalin may have been an atheist but that doesn't mean he killed in the name of atheism. Big difference.

Re:A point to note (2, Insightful)

dylan_- (1661) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479786)

In other words, Stalin may have been an atheist but that doesn't mean he killed in the name of atheism.

Yes, he did. He wanted to destroy religion in the Soviet Union and build an Atheist society. Nitpicking about the cause when you're quite happy to ignore historical context for religious abuses of power suggests a double standard on your part.

What the Communist Manifesto mentions is irrelevant: Stalin hardly followed it to the letter.

Re:A point to note (4, Insightful)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479936)

...Nitpicking about the cause...

But the cause is exactly what we are talking about. There are about 18,000 homicides annually in the USA. I'm sure there are some where the murderer happened to be an atheist and the victim was religious or vice versa. But those are not relevant to our discussion because their beliefs had nothing to do with the cause of the murder. Stalin sent thousands to gulags or to firing squads, not because of what they believed about God (after all, surely he killed just as many if not more atheists than religious people) but because he perceived them as a threat to his power. This is quite different from say religious laws in Islamic countries today, and Christian countries in the past, which have, for example, a death penalty for things like blasphemy, apostasy etc because those penalties are proscribed very clearly in the Bible and the Koran and are an integral part of their religion.

Re:A point to note (4, Insightful)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479952)

He also purged homosexuals, intellectuals, scientists, entrepreneurs, communists, anti-communists, foreigners, foreign-sympathises, oh, and other atheists. If you want to obsess over one minor part of the purges, that speaks more to your agenda than Stalin's.

Re:A point to note (5, Insightful)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479884)

Communism and its variant Juche are 100% religions in everything but name. They have their rituals, clergy, scripture. They fight infidels and are highly proselytic. You have portraits of the Prophets everywhere. There are holy sites, and sometimes pilgrimages (like to Lenin's corpse). And I really can't notice a modicum of difference between 1st May processions we used to have in Poland and catholic Corpus Christi ones we have now.

It's quite strange that Juche tends to be quite often named a religion, yet the Soviet and Chinese versions are not.

Re:A point to note (4, Insightful)

mrsurb (1484303) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479632)

Not to defend the history of religious oppression, but atheistic Leninist Russia [wikipedia.org] had quite a habit of stopping religious people living, as does Communist [wikipedia.org] China [wikipedia.org]

The persecution of minorities is a feature of all totalitarian ideologies, religious or otherwise.

Re:A point to note (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479644)

Oh I'm sorry, my friend. That's not opinion at all. That is absolute historically documented fact.

Anyone who says otherwise may as well deny the Holocaust.

Re:A point to note (1)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479758)

Do you still blame the Germans for the holocaust?

Re:A point to note (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479834)

This generation of Germans, certainly not. I do however hold the generation of Germans who did in fact perform the holocaust as liable for the blame. If you don't hold them so yourself, you may as well say it never happened.

Everything that happened in history was because of someone or a group of someones. Nothing "just happened". If you forget that, you aren't learning any lessons from history.

Posting Anon as I have already mod'ed further up in this thread.
- Fluffeh [slashdot.org]

Re:A point to note (0, Troll)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479894)

Your post is contradictory, you say you would not blame the Germans of this generation for the Holocaust, yet you would blame the Christians of today for their past misgivings?

Also, can you truly blame an entire country or organization? Do you blame the Peasants for the Kings war, or do you blame the King?

Re:A point to note (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479892)

Actually, religious people tended to kill other religious people. Atheism wasn't even invented until quite recently. Almost all famous scientists were theists. The supposed incompatibility of theism and science is also quite a recent invention.

So quit playing the "downtrodden minority" card. Religious people never harmed you.

Re:A point to note (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479526)

Religious factions with their "death to the unbelievers" policy.

But you can't do anything about it, it's their human right to believe in killing you.

Re:A point to note (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479612)

In my case, stooped with the crusades, then the wars of religions, then the child sodomies. Payback's a bitch.

Re:A point to note (1)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479640)

Oh really? You were there for all of those? Or is vengeance and petty hate your prime motivator? Show me one culture that has been peaceful for thousands of years.

Re:A point to note (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479724)

Hostile? Why? Because of what?

I am non-religious to the bone but I have friends who are very religious and we don't have problems with this situation. To the contrary, we gain from this as we learn to see things from different points of view.

A priest of the village I am from asked me once to help out with a Christmas play, as nobody from his community was willing to sit behind the Christmas tree for the whole service. He asked me half an hour before that service as his very last resort. I had better to do than to sit in a church for hours but I did help him and I got into big trouble for that. As well as the priest. Those attending the service didn't see me and didn't know. They just realised it wasn't anybody from their community, asked the priest and got the answer.

cb

Religious nuts destroyed live-and-let-live (2, Insightful)

FreeUser (11483) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479764)

What ever happened to "live and let live"?

"Live and let live" went out the window when the religious right took over US politics, systematically intimidated (and even murdered) doctors for providing reproductive healthcare to women, and organized to force their toxic agenda down the rest of our throats, whether or not we believe in their sky fairy.

You are no longer entitled to "live and let live" from the rest of us. If you ever want it back, you'll have to learn to behave yourselves, and prove your benign intentions toward the rest of society, probably over a span of time at least equal to the last several decades of your sustained attack on that society, as you've systematically dismantled separation of church and state, not to mention most of our other fundamental rights.

Athiests aren't the only ones angry. There are plenty of angry Buddhists, Daoists, Hindus, Muslims, Wiccans, Agnostics, and non-right-wing Christians who are fed up with this, and if the christian right doesn't like it, they need to take a good hard look in the mirror, because they have only themselves and their own excesses to blame.

As for anger and vitriol in general, Athiests may be fed up, and enjoy using their intellects to rhetorically debunk and expose stupid beliefs, which no doubt makes the religious feel foolish and persecuted (but then, the religious often feel persecuted if someone nearby doesn't share their exact belief system), but that is nothing compared to the hatred and bigotry the rest of us experience from the religious right. Compared to them, Athiests are positively touchy-feely mother-earth all-is-good accepting.

Indeed, to hear christians accuse Athiests of "being angry" brings to mind pots, kettles, and the color black (except that the rest of us more resemble a tupperware container than a kettle, in that we're more transparent, and less angry, than the extreme right. Though why that's so, after so many decades of abuse from that quarter, is beyond me. Perhaps because those of us with a secular bent have proven to be far more longsuffering than our religiously frenzied co-citizens).

Re:A point to note (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479860)

"Believe in our god or we'll kill you!" Hmm. I've seen that in history OFTEN.

"Don't believe in a god at all or we'll kill you!" Wow... that's a rare one.

You religous nuts worry me.

Re:A point to note (1)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479920)

Religious nut? I'm an Atheist myself!

Re:A point to note (0, Flamebait)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479460)

In Germany it is seen as a totalitarian anti-democratic organization

If only somebody in Germany had the guts to say the same thing about Catholicism, or for that matter Islam.

Your list misses one of the main world religions ;)

I get worried when Germans talk about wiping out religions. They have a tendency to push through with their mad schemes.

Re:A point to note (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479678)

always remember the motto of the german army.
3rd time lucky! :-)

Re:A point to note (2, Insightful)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479694)

Wiping out religion is only bad if one is religious.

Re:A point to note (1, Interesting)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479804)

How does one wipe out religion without killing millions?

More importantly, how do you wipe out something which is built into human nature itself? The desire and need for religion has existed throughout every culture in human history. It seems very likely to be something that has evolved with humanity as we have matured from cave dwellers to space travelers. Something not easily shaken,

Re:A point to note (5, Insightful)

ThaReetLad (538112) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479968)

Well you start by confiscating children of believers, in the name of preventing "brainwashing", move on to imprisoning believers for "anti-revolutionary activities", and then start killing millions. You might also set up state approved alternatives that gradually remove spiritual elements. You also mandate "atheism lessons" for all school children.

It's what the USSR, PRC, and DPRK did.

Re:A point to note (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479928)

Therefore, Nazism was only bad if you were a Jew?

Re:A point to note (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479494)

Oh hai straw man.

Re:A point to note (4, Insightful)

PeterBrett (780946) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479502)

In Germany it is seen as a totalitarian anti-democratic organization

If only somebody in Germany had the guts to say the same thing about Catholicism, or for that matter Islam.

The thing is, though, that they aren't. If you're a Catholic, no-one's going to try and make your life a living hell if you want to stop coming to church. People say horrible and untrue thing about Catholics and the Catholic Church all the time, but they don't try and abuse the legal system to stop them, because they recognise the importance of freedom of speech. You can get all of the advantages and privileges of being a member of the Catholic Church for free just by turning up; you don't have to pay to access any of its teachings.

To describe Catholicism as a "totalitarian anti-democratic organisation" and thereby making a direct comparison to Scientology is simply doing your own intelligence and critical thinking skills a disservice.

Re:A point to note (1)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479558)

The thing is, though, that they aren't. If you're a Catholic, no-one's going to try and make your life a living hell if you want to stop coming to church.

First of all, can you say the same thing about Islam worldwide? And as for the Catholic church, check it's history in Europe, as well as Latin America and elsewhere. For centuries they did indeed make your life a living hell if you as much as disagreed with the smallest part of the church's official doctrine. I would say that the fact that lately they can't get away with similar behavior is not for the lack of will but for the lack of power.

Re:A point to note (3, Insightful)

loutr (626763) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479658)

Are you saying that catholicism should be forbidden because of what happened centuries ago ? Next you'll tell me I should be apologizing to every black person I come across for slavery...

I don't agree with most of the Catholic church views, and it certainly has major flaws, but *nowadays* the leaders of this religion are not motivated by greed and power (if they are, they're doing a very lousy job at it). Scientology obviously is.

Re:A point to note (1)

daveime (1253762) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479900)

but *nowadays* the leaders of this religion are not motivated by greed and power

While at the same time having an estimated wealth of 15 billion dollars.

When the Italian government tried to tax the Vatican, they threatened to dump all their Italian stocks and shares to bankrupt the country.

Try reading up on Law No. 1773

Re:A point to note (1)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479932)

15 billion is all it takes to bankrupt Italy?

Re:A point to note (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479580)

You can get all of the advantages and disadvantages of being a member of the Catholic Church for free just by turning up; you don't have to pay to access any of its teachings.

There, fixed that for you.

And am actually being serious rather that going for funny.

Re:A point to note (4, Insightful)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479702)

Please do provide us with examples of democracy at work within the church. Or do you mean that though internally anti-democratic the church respects the democracies which harbour it so much that it would never try and avoid secular law via non-reporting of crimes, influence elections from the pulpit, lobby elected officials and the press... ?

Regarding freedom of speech (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_versus_blasphemy [wikipedia.org] ): "In 2005 Marithé and François Girbaud's parodied Leonardo's religious painting The Last Supper in a publicity poster. The Catholic Church initiated a lawsuit against the Girbauds, sparking concerns regarding freedom of expression and blasphemy.", for example. There are plenty.

As far as it still being a scientology-like racket, it clearly was in the middle ages and afterwards. Recent info is hard to come by, though the Banco Ambrosiano thingy hints at juicy stuff. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banco_Ambrosiano).

The catholic church feels to me like a successful sect, no more, no less, no better.

Re:A point to note (2, Insightful)

Tom (822) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479704)

People say horrible and untrue thing about Catholics and the Catholic Church all the time, but they don't try and abuse the legal system to stop them, because they recognise the importance of freedom of speech.

Uh, what?

The catholic church isn't very keen on any freedoms, and freedom of speech doesn't rank highly on their value-list. However, ever since burning people at the stake has become unpopular, they've largely abstained from the crap. The other reason they don't use courts very often is that they have a massive dislike for accepting that someone else might have power they don't. For their generally take on the legal system, just look at the ultimatum(!) that a catholic bishop put to the ministry of justice in Germany a few weeks ago when it came to child abuse issues within the catholic church.

I don't know of many other institutions that attempt to bully a national government, you know?

Re:A point to note (4, Insightful)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479818)

> I don't know of many other institutions that attempt to bully a national government, you know?

I take it you're not a member of a union?

Re:A point to note (1)

daveime (1253762) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479870)

because they recognise the importance of freedom of speech

Yes, this is why they bribe abuse victims to stay quiet.

You can get all of the advantages and privileges of being a member of the Catholic Church for free just by turning up; you don't have to pay to access any of its teachings.

Except for the looks you get from the collectors when you pass the collection plate along without making a deposit.

Re:A point to note (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479954)

People say horrible and untrue thing about Catholics and the Catholic Church all the time, but they don't try and abuse the legal system to stop them, because they recognise the importance of freedom of speech.

Right, they only abuse the legal system to stop people who are pointing out the truth. Don't believe me? Here is a recent case, where they threaten bloggers who basically citet a newspaper article about child abuse in the catholic church. They are not threatening the newspaper, because they could afford to defend themselves. So much for freedom of speech.

http://translate.google.de/translate?hl=de&ie=UTF-8&sl=de&tl=en&u=http://www.politblogger.eu/kindesmissbrauch-katholische-kirche-mahnt-kritischen-blogger-ab/&prev=_t [google.de]

Re:A point to note (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479610)

There is a difference between the policy of a group and the tactics of members of that group.

cb

Re:A point to note (1)

srussia (884021) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479680)

In Germany it is seen as a totalitarian anti-democratic organization If only somebody in Germany had the guts to say the same thing about Catholicism, or for that matter Islam.

What's wrong with being totalitarian and anti-democratic when you can leave if you want to and you are not forced to give money?
Your assignment this week: United States vs. Catholic Church - compare and contrast

Re:A point to note (1)

PeterBrett (780946) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479966)

Your assignment this week: United States vs. Catholic Church - compare and contrast

Yes, I would read that essay with interest and probably great amusement.

Re:A point to note (2, Informative)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479780)

I'm afraid I'm going to "Godwin" myself here, and say it took an international invasion force to clear Nazism out of Germany, and the Cold War to clear Communism out of East Germany. The Germans have become very, very touchy about top-down, authority heavy organizations with thought police, regular interrogations of members with lie detectors, and locking up of dissidents, all of which Scientology does as standard policy. (Look up the Scientology "Guardian Office", the "e-meter", and "Flagg Base" for details on these policies.)

What is the Catholic Church? (2, Insightful)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479590)

Is it a business, a scam, a religion, or a paedophile network?

I'd say all of the above...

Re:A point to note (2, Funny)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479676)

Or in the words of Kennedy, "Ich bin ein Anonymer."

Re:A point to note (5, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479750)

Germany doesn't know yet what Scientology is, a business, a religion or a cult.

Same thing!! A cult is a business that makes money and gains power from people with a small schizophrenic delusion that partially detaches their inner model from reality. And a church is just a cult that’s officially accepted by the powers that be (e.g. Government). Which happens, as soon as they catch themselves enough politicians.

Organizations like these are by definition immoral, since they exploit people who need help. And control their lives with nasty social engineering. There is no good about it...

Re:A point to note (4, Insightful)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479874)

Cults need not be profitable. Take a look at the history of Charlie Manson and his cult. And no, here are some differences between cults and religions. These include the cult tendency to focus around a single, charismatic leader whose word is absolute law, and their tendency to conceal their genuine inner beliefs in layers that each must be struggled through by new initiates, and each is further divorced from the beliefs taught at the outer layers. This is part of what helps separate the cult inner core from the outer world, and helps bind them together among others who have learned to share those new increasingly bizarre core beliefs.

It's not uncommon: there have been a _lot_ of cults in history. There used to be a pretty good organization for publishing information about cults and helping people get the facts and support from former members, called "Cult Awareness Network", but they got sued to bankruptcy and their assets taken over by Scientology, so now they're a pro-cult organization.

Thank you! (4, Insightful)

RuBLed (995686) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479400)

Now I am interested in that film...

Re:Thank you! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479524)

Battlefield Earth?

Re:Thank you! (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479662)

The Profit: http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/4092650/The_Profit_-_The_movie_Scientology_doesnt_want_you_to_see..4092650.TPB.torrent

Mod parent up.. (1)

Weezul (52464) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479688)

..or just ask mods to add the torrent to the post.

Germany has the right idea (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479410)

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/krasel/germany/stat.html

Go Germany. Atleast someone gets the right idea here

BitTorrent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479426)

Can't wait for the movie to hit bittorrent :)
In fact the first thing i did was to search the trackers ... no luck yet.

Irony of ironies. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479452)

Now that Scientology has spoken up and tried to ban this film, I guarantee you, there will be a much larger crowd turning up to see it than would otherwise have been the case. A direct consequence of this will be a greater interest in the issues surrounding Scientology, and therefore - one hopes - a greater upswell against the cult.

Thank you, Scientology. You have helped to sow some of the seeds of your destruction. (I hope, anyway ... it's one of the things that gives me warm fuzzy feelings of hope.)

Someone tag this story ... (4, Insightful)

Ihlosi (895663) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479516)

... "Streisandeffect". Please.

meta-comment (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479520)

I would like to see a graph of the distribution of postings by "Anonymous Coward" in the comments for Scientology-related versus non-Scientology-related stories.

"Defamatory" (4, Funny)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479668)

Network denies that Until Nothing Remains depicts group as totalitarian and unethical

Why would they need to deny that? It's a documentary, that's the point.

Two words (4, Insightful)

Eggplant62 (120514) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479684)

Fuck Scientology. I've never seen a larger collection of assholes ever.

Re:Two words (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479732)

Thats eleven words.

Re:Two words (3, Informative)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479914)

Oh, dear. Try watching "Fox News" for an education in orifices.

TRoLL (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31479714)

GAY NIGGERS FROM it was fun. If I'm and what supplies again. There are invited back again. is the group that paranoid conspiracy Darren Reed, which standpo1nt, I don't Keep unnecessary parties). At THE Come on baby...and claim that BSD is a track of where Surveys show that If I remain happen. 'At least Show that FreeBSD Am protesting successes with the of the founders of that FreeBSD is To happen. My Over the same users', BigAzz, quarreled on a need to play Due to the troubles confirming the OF THE WARRING that sorded, shower Don't just people already; I'm Volume of NetBSD Live and a job to the project to

'Intolerance' (3, Informative)

dugeen (1224138) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479768)

The scientologists know whereof they speak when it comes to intolerance. Just ask Paulette Cooper.

What german documentary? (4, Funny)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 4 years ago | (#31479802)

Oh this one. Geez, never heard about it, never would have, except now they sue so the entire world hears about it.

Streisand Effect anyone?

When we shipped the religious nutters to the colonies, the understanding was that they were supposed to stay there. Not come back!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?