If you intresting in sport Buy trenbolone and Buy testosterone enanthate you find place where you can find information about steroids
  • Resources

  • Book of the Month

  • Shopping on Amazon? Use this search box and support Dangerous Talk at the same time.
  • Blog Directories

    blog search directory Religion Top Blogs
  • AdSense

Christianity is More Dangerous than Scientology

I want to once again stress that I am not trying to defend Scientology, but I do think that Scientology performs a valuable service to our society for the moment. Right now, it serves as a comparison to show the dangers of Christianity.

In a previous blog, I talked about why I think that Christianity is wackier than Scientology. Today, I am going to talk about how in my view Christianity is far more dangerous both physically and psychologically than Scientology. My goal is to helps bring people of the Christian faith to reason when they are confronted with the comparison so that they can view the dangers of the Christian religion next to the dangers of a religion which most people view as very dangerous and show very simply which is actually more dangerous.

Let’s look at Scientology a little bit. One of the very valid criticisms of Scientology is that members are told to cut off contact with family and friends who are not Scientologists. SP’s and TPS’s are to be avoided and Scientologists ought to “disconnect” from them.

There are many different forms of Christianity, but many fundamentalist Christians view non-Christians as “heathens.” Those who are atheist activists are often viewed as “agents of Satan” or doing “the Devil’s work.” When college kids convert to fundamentalist Christians, they often hang out exclusively with their new Christian “fellowship” in meets, Bible studies, retreats, etc. until they are “strong enough in their faith.”

Scientology charges believers money for training classes so that they can advance along the “Bridge to Total Freedom.” Scientology uses brainwashing techniques to convince believers that they need this in order to be free of Thetans.

Christianity gives the Bible away and offers free Bible Studies. However there is a catch. There is always a catch. Church leaders use guilt to convince their believers to freely “donate” to the “collection plate.” How much one puts in the “collection plate” is between them and “God.” In other words, the all-powerful judge knows if you have donated properly and so believers are encouraged to donate sufficiently. God favors those who sacrifice more. The less you have the more you ought to donate. Believers are often praised for donating more than they can safely afford. Some Christians even brag about donating money they needed to pay the rent.

It is also important to note that not even counting the 2000 plus year head start Christianity has, the various Christian churches and Christian advocacy groups swindle more money a year than Scientology has swindled in their entire history.

There have been allegations that higher level Scientology members have beaten and physically abused lower level Scientology members. Those allegations are probably true. But put that next to the Inquisition, the Crusades, Catholic priests continued sexual abuse of boys, etc. etc. Scientology doesn’t even come close to being as dangerous as Christianity.

People often complain that Scientology goes after critics with an army of lawyers. This is a fair complaint, but Christianity not only has armies of lawyers, but also whole law schools and an army of legislatures who actually push to change the laws in their favor. There are huge mega-church movements why wage protest and letter-writing campaigns to private companies and legislatures.

The fact is that Scientology is newer and has not yet perfected the brainwashing techniques nor have they created the infrastructure of institutions needed to be anything close to as dangerous as Christianity. Scientology also doesn’t have the number of members to empower them to take the dangerous actions that Christianity has taken on issues like stem-cell research, abortion, contraceptive limitations, medical treatments, science education, etc. The list is nearly endless.

On every measurable level, Christianity is more dangerous than Scientology. In fact, even cult experts have been forced in to silence with regard to Christianity. Awhile back, I read off the list of “cult criteria” to a leading cult expert and asked him if Christianity fit that list. He told me no. Even though I sited example after example, reputable cult experts are afraid to put Christianity in the same category as they put Scientology which is far less dangerous and far more manipulative and self-destructive.

Bookmark and Share

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
  • Katherine Heicksen

    I agree with you that Christianity, and Islam and Judaism and all other religions I know of, have clearly demonstrated themselves as dangerous to the welfare of individuals and humanity in general, however… . .

    A cult is defined by what is accepted within society, not how dangerous it is. Cult experts are educated in religious studies and the definition of cult is the first thing they teach you there. Christianity began as a cult but has since become mainstream. Look it up.

    And since you brought it up again:
    Abortion is not a religious issue, its a humanitarian issue.
    Abortion rights are far more dangerous to fetuses (little functioning humans inside a human life support system) than an abortion prohibition is to women. The right results in the death of another. The prohibition results in a woman being uncomfortable for a few months and possibly the sad event of giving up a baby to someone that wants them.

    There is a reason, in the course of human development, why the name of the developing human changes from embryo to fetus – one is a clump of cells, the other has a functioning human brain. You really need to educate yourself on this matter and not just swallow pro-abortion propaganda without knowledge of human development and giving it some real thought. Our government supports abortion rights as a means of population control and not because it makes sense morally, philosophically or scientifically. And as far as doctors supporting it, they are not necessarily moral people. If the individual being harmed can’t sue them and they are getting paid, what do they care?

    Furthermore, I am not religious, I am a feminist and a democrat and I do not agree with unrestricted abortion rights because I am also a humanist, I have morals and I understand the course of human development. Please stop generalizing regarding the non-religious stance on this issue. There are plenty of others like me. One does not require religion to see that abortion is wrong.

    You think abortion is acceptable behavior. I think this is not because you are a bad person, but rather you are likely uneducated by anyone but abortion proponents and perhaps it is uncomfortable for you to see it otherwise. Regardless, it is your personal position. It is not the position of atheists, scientists, democrats or feminists in general. You should not speak for us on this matter because we are far from unified on the issue.

    Thanks.

    • http://myspace.com/scott888 Scott

      I wouldn’t ever consider doing abortion myself but I am against banning the practice.

      A lot of people I know at the moment get pregnant within less than ideal situations such as being a teen and not having the support of a man. In that situation, the woman gets all kinds of government benefits. The main reason is that we don’t want the child to suffer but at the same time we are rewarding irresponsibility.

      Then there is the issue of overpopulation. What happens when a good chuck of people in the majority that are being irresponsible end up being the ones that reproduce the most? Is it sustainable for so many people to have a bridge card?

      Then we have people that only vote for the pro-life candidate and ignore all the other issues and we are now in an economic crisis because of that kind of voting behavior.

      Also, I have been part of many atheist communities during the past five or so years and I have only seen 3 exceptions to the general trend that atheists are pro-choice (and that is including you as one of the exceptions).

      So, while abortion might be wrong to the fetus being aborted and perhaps to the parent, it seems that there are many benefits to society as a whole to allow this practice.

    • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

      Wow, that was a long tirade about something that has nothing to do with this article. First, this blog entry is not the appropriate place to debate abortion since the article is not about abortion at all.

      Second, the fact is that almost all of the pro-life push comes from Christians with a very small minority from non-Christians. Do you dispute that fact? Because if you don’t, that was all I said about it in this article.

      Third, “There is a reason, in the course of human development, why the name of the developing human changes from embryo to fetus.” Yes, and there is also a reason why there is a name change from fetus to baby. A baby is actually a person and a fetus is a potential person.

      And finally, “It is not the position of atheists, scientists, democrats or feminists in general. You should not speak for us on this matter because we are far from unified on the issue.” Actually, I am pretty sure it is the position of Democrats as it is in the Democratic Party Platform. Not that I said anything about any of that. But when has that stopped you, right? I also do not recall saying that I speak for all atheists. But in general, most atheists are pro-choice. And in general, most feminists are also pro-choice. But again, that has nothing to do with this article. As for scientists, I have no idea what you are even talking about since there was nothing about that in the article either. I certainly don’t speak for all scientists. In fact, I don’t even speak for any scientists. I’m a philosopher not a scientist. And before you jump on that one, no I don’t speak for all philosophers. I just speak for me.

      Do you actually have anything to say about the topic or do you just like going to blogs and posting random tirades about whatever pops into your head? Just curious.

  • PRG

    About donations, I don’t think Christians asking for church donations are any different than any other group requesting donations. Usually people are made to feel like they should donate, either with talking about how much they need money, or guilt trips, and misappropriating the money is also not unique to Christianity.

    • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

      Yeah, but most organizations asking for donations don’t have a deity watching over to make sure that you do. Remember, God decides if you have enough faith to go to Heaven. If not, you will be tortured for all eternity in Hell. And let’s not forget about the selling of indulgences that Christianity used to use to scam people from their money.

  • existential blues

    According to the rules of tithing, you piss off God when you don’t turn over party of your income and assets to the church. The minister’s shiny new car has to be paid for somehow. Other charities don’t have the force of God behind them.

    Beyond that, legitimate charities useful things with most of the money they collect.

    So no, PRG, it’s not the same thing.

  • http://www.atheistrev.com vjack

    Absolutely. The more power a religion has, the more dangerous it is going to be. Christianity is far more dangerous than Scientology and should be treated as such.

  • Katherine Heicksen

    Scott,
    You are right, abortion is bad for individuals and good for society. However, abortion is also completely unnecessary. There are more humane ways to control population and eliminate unwanted pregnancy, ways that do not involve anyone’s death.

    Staks,
    The topic of the blog was not abortion, however within it you said:
    “Scientology also doesn’t have the number of members to empower them to take the dangerous actions that Christianity has taken on issues like stem-cell research, abortion, contraceptive limitations, medical treatments, science education, etc.”

    True, it wasn’t the main point of the blog and more Christians than not are the ones who are ant-abortion. But there are just a lot of Christians in general, so of course that is true! In secular Europe, abortion isn’t even so widely accepted as it is here and there are far more legal restrictions on it. The abortion issue has nothing to do with religion and you need to stop making it sound like it does.

    I have grown tired of you, who have many readers and represent atheism to many a religious person, associating atheism with a pro-abortion stance. This is perhaps one reason that religious people will not even consider your arguments for atheism. You do the movement a disservice with this association.

    And in regards to your comment about a fetus being nothing but a potential person, what is your scientific and/or philosophical evidence for this notion? Or do you believe this because you want to? I suspect that you are no better than Christians in regards to this issue. Its a matter of faith for you, its a matter of what you want to think and nothing more. This isn’t the place to discuss this, you are right. So why don’t you write a blog that is a place to have this “dangerous talk?”

    • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

      Yes Katherine, I mentioned abortion. I didn’t deny that. What I said was that it is predominantly Christian’s who push the “pro-life” agenda. This is a FACT! This issue has become a “Culture War” issue. You are one of a small handful of non-Christians who are banging this drum. I have also met one or two non-Christians banging the anti-gay drum, but the fact still remains that the anti-gay drum and the anti-choice drum are still predominantly Christian issues.

      Second, I don’t appreciate you blog hacking the topic of Scientology with your pet issue. I blog everyday. So while I have not yet blogged here on Dangerous Talk about this issue, you can be reasonably certain that I probably will. I did as you know talk about the abortion debate a little bit on The Examiner.

      Third, I don’t represent ALL atheists. I just represent one atheist… ME. Atheism is not a religion and many atheists disagree about many issues. Still, most humanistic atheists tend to agree on many topics. Supporting the legal right for women to choose whether or not to have an abortion is one issue that most humanistic atheists agree on. There is no obligation for all atheists to agree on this however. All Christians don’t even agree on this issue. And even though the Pope is strongly anti-choice, not all Catholics even agree with their leader on this and other issues.

      Forth, Dawkins (who is not my pope) actually wrote a pretty good piece on this topic recently.

      Fifth, when I post a blog on the subject of abortion, I will address your comments. I have already given this blog-hacking more space than I should have.

      Now, what do you have to say about the topic of this particular blog entry?

  • Katherine Heicksen

    I believe I mentioned what I thought of the main topic of this blog in the beginning of my first comment.

    My “blog-hacking” was because I do not think that you should associate your stance on this issue with being an atheist. You are an atheist and you have this stance, however you do not have this stance because you are an atheist. Your blogs tend to imply otherwise.

    You cannot equate an ant-abortion stance with an anti-gay stance. People being gay and having equal rights harms no-one. If someone is opposed to this there cannot be a logical reason for it and it is certainly not out of concern for anyone’s rights or well-being. Such a stance is always irrational and selfish. My stance on abortion stems from a concern for the rights of others. My acknowledgment that they deserve such rights stems from science. I may not be in the majority among non-religious people regarding this issue, however, this does not make me wrong. I hope you do address this head on in a future blog.

    • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

      Now I think you are just making stuff up. The only thing that stems from atheism is a lack of belief in deities. However, most atheist who embrace reason and humanism tend to agree on particular issues. The freedom to choose is one such issue and while there are atheists that think differently, they are in the minority. Atheism isn’t a religion. It is simply a lack of belief in deities. My blog does not imply otherwise.

      Also, you seem to have missed the point of the comparison that I made. I did not say that being anti-gay was like being anti-choice. I said, that both positions are heavily supported by religious fundamentalists. This does not make any claims about which side is right or wrong, nor does it say that they are equal positions morally to hold. Just that both those positions are pushed predominately by fundamentalist Christians. This is a FACT and an obvious fact at that.

      Your comment on the actual blog was two short paragraphs while your rant on something that has nothing to do with this blog article was four paragraphs and several additional comments.