Question about Scientology

[Cold one]

In regards to the "Fair Game" policy.
Would a scientologist be able to site religious right in defense of killing someone who is an enemy of the church?
The reason I am asking is because if it continues to grow this could actually become a major concern, we may be witnessing a new "nazi" organization emerging.

[FM21.105]

The fair game policy stop (allegedly) in the 1960's, but L Ron Hubbard was the one to say that so we can take that one with a grain of salt. I think it's only stopped in name only.

Also, dispite what they want to believe, their Fair Game policy doesn't abide by the law, nor would it hold up in courts. I think once they commit violence, they'd probably be hearing from some officers.

[JWideman]

Sure, that's why nobody tries to arrest terrorists when they kill infidels.

[this charming man]

The 1st Amendment to the US Constitution is not absolute.

The classic example is the one may not shout "FIRE!" in a crowed theater, as this would cause panic and possible injury.

In addition, one cannot incite a riot, slander, and/or libel another person or organization.

Likewise, one cannot kill another simply because there is a difference of opinion.

(eta: I suppose one could do those things; however, it would be against the law.)

[Btodd]

The worst I've heard from the fair game policy were some people's pets being killed. Violence appears to be reserved for David Miscavige only (who has been accused of beating his underlings MANY times).....critics can expect major personal harrassment, but violence is too obvious and attracts police. Better to simply tell everyone in your neighborhood that you're a child molester or get you fired from your job.

Harrassment is hard to prove, and every effective. Just ask the many critics who, after years of working against the cult, signed impromptu agreements to stop speaking against the church, to the shock of their peers. (See Bob Minton, Michael Flynn, Ron DeWolf and more). Most people can only take so much, and the cult has silenced many people over the years.

[Wildy]

That's why he "rescinded" the order. In reality all he was doing was removing the parts that could be considered assault or murder.

I don't think it would stop more determined Scientologists from trying.

[Cold one]

I understand and have considered all of the above.
I was actually thinking in a more future view, as in using the original idea of "fair game" to slowly push the boundaries outward. The more used to the idea we get of say the cult members following and simply using scare tactics the more they can get away with.

[Nogbad]

That's why he "rescinded" the order. In reality all he was doing was removing the parts that could be considered assault or murder.

I don't think it would stop more determined Scientologists from trying.

It is an inherent problem associated with intense religions that they attract intense people who often can't see that they have overstepped the mark (by a mile or two).

[Wildy]

Which is why it can cause more problems for the cult itself instead of striking fear into their critics.

By claiming to have rescinded the "Fair Game" policy they can easily turn on the cultist by saying "we don't approve of that".

[Deus Ex Machina]

That's why he "rescinded" the order. In reality all he was doing was removing the parts that could be considered assault or murder.

I don't think it would stop more determined Scientologists from trying.

Hubbard didn't cancel treating people as "Fair Game" he canceled using that label.

[fuelair]

It is an inherent problem associated with intense religions that they attract intense people who often can't see that they have overstepped the mark (by a mile or two).
Which is why, in another thread on the COS... rectums, Vigilantism on their butts is part of the discussion.

[Nogbad]

Which is why, in another thread on the COS... rectums, Vigilantism on their butts is part of the discussion.

It is also true that teenagers tend to see shades of grey as either black or white. B/ against Scientology is a horrible combination ....but has considerable car crash value. Having read rather more about Scientology in the last few days than I ever intended to in my whole life I can't say I feel much sympathy for them though.

[Leicontis]

The worst I've heard from the fair game policy were some people's pets being killed. Violence appears to be reserved for David Miscavige only (who has been accused of beating his underlings MANY times).....critics can expect major personal harrassment, but violence is too obvious and attracts police. Better to simply tell everyone in your neighborhood that you're a child molester or get you fired from your job.

Harrassment is hard to prove, and every effective. Just ask the many critics who, after years of working against the cult, signed impromptu agreements to stop speaking against the church, to the shock of their peers. (See Bob Minton, Michael Flynn, Ron DeWolf and more). Most people can only take so much, and the cult has silenced many people over the years.
Read up on Paulette Cooper (http://www.lermanet.com/paulette-cooper/). There was one overt attempt on her life (it could have failed intentionally, to just scare her, or her cousin could just be incredibly lucky), and a series of likely (but subtler) attempts.

[Wildy]

Hubbard didn't cancel treating people as "Fair Game" he canceled using that label.

I thought I made that clear with the inverted commas.

[Btodd]

Read up on Paulette Cooper (http://www.lermanet.com/paulette-cooper/). There was one overt attempt on her life (it could have failed intentionally, to just scare her, or her cousin could just be incredibly lucky), and a series of likely (but subtler) attempts.

I'm aware of the supposed attempts, but I think they were attempts to scare her more than anything. I seem to recall a story about a Private Investigator appearing at her door with a handgun that was unloaded, and pulling the trigger. Scott Mayer had an interesting story about his car being blown up, also....so it's possible.

Don't get me wrong; there's not much I would put past the CO$, but murder would bring out the authorities, while harassment is very hard to prove or put a stop to, and works very well.