Comments on: PMs Pets: Neglect Law, No Church Of Scientology And Chris Kamara MBE

By: bodger

bodger — Fri, 16 May 2008 17:12:44 +0000

its a registerd company how can it be a church at the same time

By: Shane Moore

Shane Moore — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 00:13:23 +0000

In the UK this company trades under the name of the Church of Scientology (England & Wales).

Lets break this name down a little. Starting with the word “Church”. Derived from the Greek word kuriakon (The Lords House), the Cambridge Dictionary defines a church as “a building for Christian religious activities” or “an official Christian religious organisation”. We all know that this company is not a Christian organisation and it’s offices are not used as a Christian place of worship, so why is it allowed to mislead the public into thinking otherwise?

As a Christian I find this very offensive as a company is using words, phrases and symbols of a well know and trusted RELIGION to try and gain a more credability.
I would ask any members of other faiths here, Muslims/Jews for example to comment on how you would feel if this company called its offices Mosques or Synagoges?

It is my aim to have the Secretary of State for Trade & Industry or the Prime Minister, rename the so-called ‘Church’ of Scientology legally under section 32 of the Companies Act, for misleading the public about the main nature of it’s tradings.

As a proud Englishman it pains me to admit that yet again the Scottish Parliament has got it right by banning the company from using the word “church” in it’s name. It is known as the Hubbard Institute of Dianetics. (correct me please if I am incorrect)
THIS IS A TRADING NAME WHICH IS MORE FITTING TO ITS MAIN NATURE OF BUSINESS!

THIS is why I was protesting in February and this is why I will be there again In March raising this issue to as many members of the public as possible.

On a personal note. I feel that Dianetics is nothing more than a self help method (many claim a very sucessful one) and as a method of self help should not be regarded as any different than Paul McKenna’s latest one “Change your life in seven days”. Or should we give Paul tax exempt status and claim him a saviour?

dr:01.03:04.38

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:41:08 +0000

Anonymous encourages people to research for themselves.

Scientologists insist on only referencing scientology literature and websites.

Religion or not, if Scientology wants to be high-profile (courting celebrities and such), it will have to face the scrutiny that ALL high-profile entities face under the microscope of the public’s eye.
The CoS is not holding up well under scrutiny at all and people are not happy with it. The CoS is DESPERATE to discredit the critics, and that’s just angering people even more. People have become more and more familiar with policies for handling SPs and are seeing more and more evidence of it with every attack they make.
People don’t like being handled, and more than anything, they are not liking the reputation of the CoS.

By: Bob

Bob — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 12:37:47 +0000

Scientology is a religion, it is my religion and I love it.

By: Terryeo

Terryeo — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 03:52:21 +0000

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister …We demand that the Prime Minister … In the first place those two adjacent sentences create an oxymoron. But what would you expect of people who insist that obvious falsehoods are the TRUTH (trademark).

By: Anonymous3

Anonymous3 — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 01:21:09 +0000

Scientology, backed up by countless learned scholars, HA don’t make me laugh!
Perhaps you should educate yourself about Scientology before sprouting this kind of bs.
Care to explain how come Scientology is charging so much money for it’s courses?
Also it’s pretty funny that you would compare Anononymous’ actions against Scientology with the Third Reich, since you know Anonymous is blaiming Scientology for economical/social problems and are calling for their extermination…

By: Nanonymous

Nanonymous — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 19:48:36 +0000

On September 11, 2001, thousands of Americans were murdered in a series of terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center. Before a death toll could even be attempted, French anti-religious extremist, Roger Gonnet, was busy exploiting this cowardly terrorist act to spread messages of hatred using the Internet.

Although government and religious leaders throughout the world appealed for a calm, reasoned response to this tragedy, Roger Gonnet seized the opportunity to forward his own fanatic agenda, posting messages laced with anti-religious and anti-American sentiment to a newsgroup frequented by some violent extremists

By: Anonymous2

Anonymous2 — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:52:27 +0000

You are very very mistaken. There is no doubt that Scientology, backed up by countless learned scholars, is a religion in it’s own right and has it’s no. 1 goal “A civilization without insanity, without crimminals, without war, and where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights and where man is free to rise to greater heights”. Please be carefull to check your facts by reading some Scientology first hand so as not to embarass your self by bigoted close minded uneducated statements. Remember, it is still within recent history that similiar comments as you are making by similiar self righteous individuals that lead to the death of 6 million Jewish people.

By: Arnie Lerma

Arnie Lerma — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 18:33:09 +0000

Re renaming scientology, thank you, this needs to be done
everything in scientology is choreographed to deceive the uninformed
see my website link for more reasons to support this

By: firestar

firestar — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:09:21 +0000

well that’ll be a great law for everyone that can’t afford a nanny, and can’t afford to not work.

can’t see it bothering many doctors though.

By: roger gonnet

roger gonnet — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 07:22:26 +0000

There is not the least doubt that scientology is not a religion, despite the repetition of crosses, religious and church terms everywhere (to the nausea).
Why? Because it is a faked form of psychology and faked medicine trying to destroy anything not in agreement with its “scriptures” - a pseudo-religious term too, term hiding the many esoterico-psychology theories from its founder, the sci-fi author Hubbard.
Even the apparently “charities” from that cult are profitable scams or profitable attempts to get a better image in the world and more clients for the “mother cult”. Indeed, it asks much money to its members to pay for advertisement DVDs and other pieces of hubbardian crap.
relaw0719

By: JuneJohnson

JuneJohnson — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 23:17:47 +0000

Affordable child care would be an answer. In the past relatives used to mind young chilren, but the close family is usually more dispersed now than in the past.

Of course people have differing reasons for being unable to look after their children 24/7,unable as opposed to can’t be arsed.

By: May

May — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 21:54:03 +0000

What a difficult debate. I was a latch key kid at 9 and my brother 6, in the 1940s. There seemed no option when the remaining parent had to work. Not ideal then, and far more hazzardous today.
After school care is very expensive for people on a low income, yet parents are encouraged to work to set a good example to their kids.
If the law can be constructed to ensure that children are not left to their own devices for say, longer than an hour and a half, with the minium age of the younger child being 10, I am willing to sign the petition. It’s not ideal, but we don’t live in an ideal world.

By: truth

truth — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 21:16:13 +0000

PLEASE INVESTIGATE THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY!!!