Tom Cruise & Katie Holmes

[Lady Pi Phi]

Originally posted by FSUZeta
has anyone else commented on katie holmes escort on the european tour who is a scientology member? reminds me of old shows where someone falls prey to a cult and then the victim is always under the watchful eye of cult members. creepy!!

Yep! I mentioned that earlier in this thread. Tom has hired a full time female minder for Katie.

Definitely creepy.

I still want to see War of the Worlds, but that's because I am a Spielberg fan. I could care less that Tom Cruise is in it.

I'd love to boycott all things starring Scietology members, but that means I can't watch any of my shows anymore like "That '70s show" and "Fat Actress".

[starryeyed]

Originally posted by ariesrising
Tom Cruise is a total joke. An arrogant, pompous ass, and I hope his career tanks and L. Ron Hubbard runs off with all his money.

I LOVE IT!

[moe.ron]

L. Ron Hubbard is with the aliens now.

[33girl]

Originally posted by Lady Pi Phi
I'd love to boycott all things starring Scietology members, but that means I can't watch any of my shows anymore like "That '70s show" and "Fat Actress".

Who in That 70's Show is a Scientologist?

Oh and the LM Presley thing is so not true. I stole Nicolas Cage from her.

[midwesterngirl]

Originally posted by 33girl
Who in That 70's Show is a Scientologist?

Oh and the LM Presley thing is so not true. I stole Nicolas Cage from her.

Its Danny Masterson (Hyde).

[sigmadiva]

I think on the Today show tomorrow they are going to show Matt Lauer and Tom going at each other over the use of medication to treat psychological disorders. I've seen a clip of it and Tom looks tired and strung out.

[midwesterngirl]

Originally posted by sigmadiva
I think on the Today show tomorrow they are going to show Matt Lauer and Tom going at each other over the use of medication to treat psychological disorders. I've seen a clip of it and Tom looks tired and strung out.

I read a transcript and I could not believe it. To see that ignorant little moronic high school dropout pontificating to Matt about the use of anti depressants drugs just turned my stomach. If there were someone in need of said drugs it is certainly Tom.

[AOIIBrandi]

Originally posted by AOII_LB93

Scientology is odd. My mom used to work with them back when she was in the computer biz and sold them tons of computer equipment. She said they were very secretive and there were places in their compound type thing that you needed high security clearance to get in and access.

Funny, My husband is in the shipping business and when we lived in Tampa he had to send a driver out to the Scientology Center in Clearwater. He said that when the driver came back he told my husband that he would NEVER do another delivery there again (very creepy, but don't have all the details).

[Lady Pi Phi]

The rumour in the paper this morning is that they are planning to start a family.

[MysticCat]

Originally posted by sugar and spice
Not to mention that almost every religion, if not every religion, has been created or co-opted for the purposes of some greedy (or lustful, or power-hungry, et cetera) leader on some level or another. Joseph Smith?* Come on now. No religion is pure.

I certainly think there many things wrong with Scientology, a motivated-by-money factor being one of them -- but as Rob implied, if we're going to define Scientology as a "cult" than you have to put the LDS church in the "cult" category as well, along with a number of smaller sects of Christianity (and come to think of it, larger ones as well).

Certainly argeed that all religions can produce their loons and their exploiters.

Much depends on how one is using the word cult. Originally, it simply meant a religious practice, like the cult of Apollo. Today (according to Wikipedia, and I think it is probably on point here): In religion and sociology, a cult is a group of people (often a new religious movement) devoted to beliefs and goals which may be contradictory to those held by the majority of society. Its marginal status may come about either due to its novel belief system or due to idiosyncratic practices that cause the surrounding culture to regard it as far outside the mainstream.

Some use a more restrictive definition, however. Again, per Wikipedia: In English-speaking countries since about the 1960s, especially in North America, the term cult has taken on a pejorative and sometimes offensive connotation. This largely originated with highly publicized cults which purportedly exploited their members psychologically and financially, or which allegedly utilized group-based persuasion and conversion techniques. These techniques may include "brainwashing," "thought reform," "love bombing," and "mind control" . . . . Due to the usually pejorative connotation of the word "cult", new religious movements (NRMs) and other purported cults often find the word highly offensive. Some purported cults have been known to insist that other similar groups are cults but that they themselves are not. On the other hand, some skeptics have questioned the distinction between a cult and a mainstream religion. They say that the only difference between a cult and a religion is that the latter is older and has more followers and, therefore, seems less controversial because society has become used to it.

By this second definition (involving emotional, intellectual or financial expoitation of members), I don't think the LDS Church can properly be called a cult. Scientology can.

In any event, "cult" is a loaded word that must be used carefully.

[Rudey]

Didn't Christianity start as a cult?

-Rudey

Originally posted by MysticCat81
Certainly argeed that all religions can produce their loons and their exploiters.

Much depends on how one is using the word cult. Originally, it simply meant a religious practice, like the cult of Apollo. Today (according to Wikipedia, and I think it is probably on point here): In religion and sociology, a cult is a group of people (often a new religious movement) devoted to beliefs and goals which may be contradictory to those held by the majority of society. Its marginal status may come about either due to its novel belief system or due to idiosyncratic practices that cause the surrounding culture to regard it as far outside the mainstream.

Some use a more restrictive definition, however. Again, per Wikipedia: In English-speaking countries since about the 1960s, especially in North America, the term cult has taken on a pejorative and sometimes offensive connotation. This largely originated with highly publicized cults which purportedly exploited their members psychologically and financially, or which allegedly utilized group-based persuasion and conversion techniques. These techniques may include "brainwashing," "thought reform," "love bombing," and "mind control" . . . . Due to the usually pejorative connotation of the word "cult", new religious movements (NRMs) and other purported cults often find the word highly offensive. Some purported cults have been known to insist that other similar groups are cults but that they themselves are not. On the other hand, some skeptics have questioned the distinction between a cult and a mainstream religion. They say that the only difference between a cult and a religion is that the latter is older and has more followers and, therefore, seems less controversial because society has become used to it.

By this second definition (involving emotional, intellectual or financial expoitation of members), I don't think the LDS Church can properly be called a cult. Scientology can.

In any event, "cult" is a loaded word that must be used carefully.

[MysticCat]

Originally posted by Rudey
Didn't Christianity start as a cult?

Using the "classical" definition, Christianity certainly was a cult -- the cult of Christ (just as Judaism was the cult of YHWH). But classically speaking, cult and religion are basically synonymous.

Using the sociological definition I provided above, Christianity certainly could be called a cult in its first century -- "a group of people (often a new religious movement) devoted to beliefs and goals which may be contradictory to those held by the majority of society. Its marginal status may come about either due to its novel belief system or due to idiosyncratic practices that cause the surrounding culture to regard it as far outside the mainstream." Using this definition, Rome would have considered both Christianity and Judaism as cults.

I know of no evidence that would make the use of the third definition (the narrow, perjorative definition sometimes used in North America that implies brainwashing and emotional or financial exploitation) appropriate with regard to early Christianity.

Again, "cult" has become a loaded word. It needs to be used carefully, and probably with some explanation of the meaning intended.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by MysticCat81
Using the "classical" definition, Christianity certainly was a cult -- the cult of Christ (just as Judaism was the cult of YHWH). But classically speaking, cult and religion are basically synonymous.

Using the sociological definition I provided above, Christianity certainly could be called a cult in its first century -- "a group of people (often a new religious movement) devoted to beliefs and goals which may be contradictory to those held by the majority of society. Its marginal status may come about either due to its novel belief system or due to idiosyncratic practices that cause the surrounding culture to regard it as far outside the mainstream." Using this definition, Rome would have considered both Christianity and Judaism as cults.

I know of no evidence that would make the use of the third definition (the narrow, perjorative definition sometimes used in North America that implies brainwashing and emotional or financial exploitation) appropriate with regard to early Christianity.

Again, "cult" has become a loaded word. It needs to be used carefully, and probably with some explanation of the meaning intended.

What time period is early Christianity?

I mean listen, if the majority of people were scientologists and scientology existed before other religions, there wouldn't even be a discussion of people saying they were a cult.

And religion defies logic and reasoning often. It is about faith.

I don't understand the Christians that go around healing people by touch and profiting strongly just as I don't understand how Scientologists believe there is an alien attached to every human guiding him. Y'all can believe whatever you want but religion is about faith and all too often, the exploitation of the masses and the opiate of the mind.

-Rudey

[33girl]

Originally posted by Rudey
I don't understand the Christians that go around healing people by touch and profiting strongly

I don't consider those people Christians, I consider them charlatans (Benny Hinn et al).

[Rudey]

Originally posted by 33girl
I don't consider those people Christians, I consider them charlatans (Benny Hinn et al).

Christian evangelists have one of the most booming "entertainment" industries. Everything from their own television programming to movies and more. This isn't a small sliver of the community.

That's not saying that anyone is a charlatan. It's saying that the money is there and boy, oh boy, is business booming.

-Rudey

[MysticCat]

Originally posted by Rudey
What time period is early Christianity?

I think probably anytime up to somwhere between 313 (the Edict of Milan) to around 382 (Theodotius' decree making Christianity the official, favored religion of the Roman Empire) would be considered the early Christianity.

I mean listen, if the majority of people were scientologists and scientology existed before other religions, there wouldn't even be a discussion of people saying they were a cult.

And religion defies logic and reasoning often. It is about faith.

Without question, very true.

This is one reason I have tried to avoid characterizing Scientology based on its beliefs and have instead focused on some of its practices, which do bear some hallmarks of a "cult," as used in the very narrow sense -- particularly, the degree of control it seems to exercise over its adherants and the methods used to instill and maintain that control.

[ZTAngel]

Funny quote from Jimmy Kimmel:

Tom and Katie got engaged on Friday and, once again, the media somehow found out about it. If we promise to go see 'War of the Worlds,' will you please make this stop?

[damasa]

Originally posted by 33girl
I don't consider those people Christians, I consider them charlatans (Benny Hinn et al).

What's the name of the other guy that sells his "Holy Water" on the early morning religious infomercial? I think it's the same channel as Benny Hinn but I'm not sure. I just know I usually rise from bed to see some freak "healing people with the power of god" when he smashes them in the face and throws them to the ground!


I should try that, smash someone in the face and throw them to the ground and proclaim that I am healing them. Would it work?

[Lady Pi Phi]

Originally posted by damasa
...I should try that, smash someone in the face and throw them to the ground and proclaim that I am healing them. Would it work?

It might, but you might want to find a few people to stand around and watch you do this. This way you can really claim you are a religious group and these people are your followers.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by MysticCat81
I think probably anytime up to somwhere between 313 (the Edict of Milan) to around 382 (Theodotius' decree making Christianity the official, favored religion of the Roman Empire) would be considered the early Christianity.

Without question, very true.

This is one reason I have tried to avoid characterizing Scientology based on its beliefs and have instead focused on some of its practices, which do bear some hallmarks of a "cult," as used in the very narrow sense -- particularly, the degree of control it seems to exercise over its adherants and the methods used to instill and maintain that control.

Was questioning of religion and its leaders encouraged and allowed in Christianity?

-Rudey

[MysticCat]

Originally posted by Rudey
Was questioning of religion and its leaders encouraged and allowed in Christianity?

Only to a certain point, to be sure. There was quite a bit of debate over all kinds of teachings in the early years, with excommunications being the result when the line was crossed.

And yes, Christianity has had more than it's fair share of forced conversions and burnings of heretics -- the roots of these acts often being as much political as religious.

I'm not sure what you're point is. I've agreed that at least general definitions of "cult" would apply to early Christianity and that a group should not be pejoritively labeled a "cult" just because its beliefs are out of the mainstream. Beyond that, I simply submit that using the very narrow definition of "cult" sometimes employed today -- with implications of brainwashing, extreme control, financial and emotional exploitation, etc. -- there is evidence that that definition can be accurately applied to Scientology.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by MysticCat81
Only to a certain point, to be sure. There was quite a bit of debate over all kinds of teachings in the early years, with excommunications being the result when the line was crossed.

And yes, Christianity has had more than it's fair share of forced conversions and burnings of heretics -- the roots of these acts often being as much political as religious.

I'm not sure what you're point is. I've agreed that at least general definitions of "cult" would apply to early Christianity and that a group should not be pejoritively labeled a "cult" just because its beliefs are out of the mainstream. Beyond that, I simply submit that using the very narrow definition of "cult" sometimes employed today -- with implications of brainwashing, extreme control, financial and emotional exploitation, etc. -- there is evidence that that definition can be accurately applied to Scientology.

And I believe that brainwashing, extreme control, financial and emotional exploitation can be used in any religion and Christianity right now has its fair share of it.

-Rudey

-Rudey

[The Truth]

Their hair and eye color is too similar. How do they both have dark blue eyes with hazel specks? I think they are fraternal twins.

[MysticCat]

Originally posted by Rudey
And I believe that brainwashing, extreme control, financial and emotional exploitation can be used in any religion and Christianity right now has its fair share of it.

I would agree with the first part of that statement (and I think I already have), but not the second, at least not without some qualification.

Some segments of Christianity (or at least some groups or figures that call themselved Christian) may indeed employ brainwashing, extreme control, and financial and emotional exploitation, but Christianity as a religion hardly teaches such things. If and where employed, they are a perversion of Christianity. (And, yes, I would include televangelists who employ methods of emotional and financial exploitation among those who are offering a perverted form of Christianity.)

Moreover, I know of no Christian "authority" that would sanction such tactics. From what I have seen -- which admittedly may not be the full and accurate picture -- the Church of Scientology does sanction such tactics at the highest levels. Are you saying that is not the case?

[Rudey]

Originally posted by MysticCat81
I would agree with the first part of that statement (and I think I already have), but not the second, at least not without some qualification.

Some segments of Christianity (or at least some groups or figures that call themselved Christian) may indeed employ brainwashing, extreme control, and financial and emotional exploitation, but Christianity as a religion hardly teaches such things. If and where employed, they are a perversion of Christianity. (And, yes, I would include televangelists who employ methods of emotional and financial exploitation among those who are offering a perverted form of Christianity.)

Moreover, I know of no Christian "authority" that would sanction such tactics. From what I have seen -- which admittedly may not be the full and accurate picture -- the Church of Scientology does sanction such tactics at the highest levels. Are you saying that is not the case?

In your second paragraph, you employ examples readily so I don't need to.

As far as whether it is a perversion or not, I don't care because I don't think you can prove it in any way. Religion is faith-based and thus quite a bit of it is up for interpretation. The question then becomes how often does this happen, and it seems often by very "devout" individuals. Religion is a booming business. If you want to make money, figure a way to invest in it.

As for what scientology does and doesn't sanction, I'm not speaking specifically of that sect. I invoked parallels between Christianity and Scientology only to show that many faiths share the same problems.

-Rudey

[LeslieAGD]

http://tcruiseko.ytmnd.com/

Soooo Funny!

[ASUADPi]

Originally posted by LeslieAGD
http://tcruiseko.ytmnd.com/

Soooo Funny!

Love the music!!!!! (FYI the music is Duel of the Fates from episode 1)

[PsychTau2]

Originally posted by 33girl
Tom's first wife, Mimi Rogers, has said that part of the reason they broke up was that he didn't want to have sex.

Is that why he and Nicole adopted their two children? Because I've heard both Nicole (who mentioned her bio clock ticking) and Tom talk about wanting more children in their future. Nicole made it sound like she was able to biologically have children....not so sure about Tom.

And I'm also wondering if Tom is wanting to somehow "move up" in the Scientology leadership or something and part of that requires being in a marriage....I don't know, I'm speculating.

Either way, I feel as though there is a hidden agenda somewhere in all of this. Time will tell.

I REALLY hope Katie doesn't become pregnant very quickly. I would hate for her to be a single mom (no disrespect to single moms...but can you really see this one being a solid relationship right off the bat?)

ETA: I just saw stuff about the prenup, so the single mom thing might not be an issue.

PsychTau

[PsychTau2]

Another thing....aren't John Travolta and Kelly Preston Scientologists?

I wonder what their take on all of this is? Kudos to them, they've remained quiet and has not offered up any defense of Tom, etc.

PsychTau

[Honeykiss1974]

Originally posted by PsychTau2
Another thing....aren't John Travolta and Kelly Preston Scientologists?

Yep, so is Kristie Alley, hence her and John's string of "Look Who's Talking" movies.