Comments

1
the article was actually pretty generous to the church.
2
That ad would look great on a Blade Runner blimp.
3
> Even when they're trying really hard to not look crazy, they look crazy.

Wait, what? I mean, I ain't gonna fall for it, but that was a really good ad. If I didn't know anything about 'em the only thing I would have looked slightly askance at would be the "psychiatric abuse" bit. I guess I would have wondered why they were trying so hard not to look crazy . . .
4
@3: I agree. Of all of the batshit crazy shit this organization has pulled, this ad is the one of the few normal-sounding things I've seen them publish. Music choice was a bit over-the-top, I suppose. :P
5
They neglected to mention how much money they make off of those millions of people they are helping.
6
The ad was actually great, which is what I would expect from an institution overflowing with cash and with a membership strong in hollywood people. It didn't make them look crazy at all. It made them seem like a charity organization. It's all lies of course, but very well produced lies.

The amazing irony of them saying that they teach "the truth about psychiatric abuse" is one hell of a facepalm moment though.
7
the "truth" about drugs huh?

durrrrrrrrrr
8
I'm w/ you guys: that ad is nothing crazier than something from any other religion. Sure, that's not saying much, but there's nothing there to get excited over.
9
Wait wait wait: The ad is great? What yardstick do you use to measure bullshit?

"85% more likely to be respected and listened to"? Honestly? You buy that number? What does that even mean? How would you know that?

This is poppycock "info viz" worth precisely 1,000,000 tin foil hats and a soul-cleansing enema.
10
Purely talking about presentation, not content.
11
@10: Yeah, I see most people tempered their comments more than I did. Whoops.
12
Numbers! I like numbers! I think I'll join up!
13
Religious intolerance is disgusting, especially coming from such a "liberal" paper.
14
@13: Good to see you back, Baconcat.

I looked it up. Apparently, their drug-rehab program gives out faulty information on drug abuse, and their prison-rehab program is used to recruit new suckers and bash psychiatrists.
15
Curses, foiled again
16
The New Yorker article was a good read. It exposed some real abusive practices, singled out a couple individuals for being the psychos they are, and told it like it is about the "church" being what it is. It also pointed out that there were quite a few people who did get help straightening out their lives through Scientology, but that in the process it also enslaved children and took a lot of money from those believers.
I suppose you could say the same thing about Catholicism, fundamentalist Islam, and a few other religions in their not too distant past, but the kicker here is that we know that the basis of this religion's faith is pure fiction (It was written by a science fiction writer in the 1950's after all.) It's a little harder to discredit prophets of 2,000 years ago.
It sounds like if you took away the religion of Scientology, the bizarre hatred of psychiatry, the financial cost, the abuse and the child slavery, and you might have the beginnings of a decent self help book. Then again you can just go to the bookstore and browse the self help section without being subjected to a brainwashing cult.
17
Whose rear end did they pull all of those numbers out of? A "moral" person is 77% more likely to have a successful marriage? What does that even mean? Who defined what was moral and what was successful? Are there any unmarried moral people? This is sheer, unadulterated bullshit from beginning to end.

Yeah, slick production values, though.
18
Interesting, too, that the New Yorker article was apparently written next Monday...
19
@18, the New Yorker distinguishes between its print and web-only content. That's the date of the hard copy magazine in which the article will be printed.
21
#19, Thanks for clarifying. I didn't actually think it was written next Monday :)
22
@21, I was all excited and hopeful to read your comment - there's nothing so thrilling to a nerd than catching the New Yorker in an error - I wondered if you'd earned the prize!
23
Most surprising fact in the article: there's only maybe 25,000 of them in the US.

And the Scientologists' awful grammar is a hoot.
24
It's more than just that, it's about scamming scads of cash from their public. Takes over 300k to reach OT 3. A lot more to reach the top levels where you get absolutely nothing for all that wasted money. Promised they can fly, have perfect health, perfect eyesight, and other nonsensical BS.
25
60% of the time, it works every time.
26
@15: I can out-troll you any week of the month, Baconcat.

@20: I'll see your Operation Snow White and raise you Project Chanology.
27
Good video

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.