Re: Government response to petition '-Scientology'
Out_Of_The_Dark
> I received this e-mail:
>
> --
> From: "10 Downing Street" <numbe...@petitions.pm.gov.uk>Add sender to
> Contacts To: "e-petition signatories" <numbe...@petitions.pm.gov.uk>
>
> You signed a petition asking the Prime Minister to "Refuse any
> application submitted by the ‘Church’ of Scientology for recognition
> as a Religious Organisation."
>
> The Prime Minister's Office has responded to that petition and you can
> view it here:
>
> http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page15777.asp
>
> Prime Minister's Office
>
> Petition information -http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/-Scientology/
> ---------
> -scientology - epetition[sic] reply 16 June 2008
>
> We received a petition asking:
>
> "We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Refuse any
> application submitted by the 'Church' of Scientology for recognition
> as a Religious Organisation."
>
> Details of Petition:
>
> "Without compromise to freedom of thought or expression, the teachings
> and beliefs of Scientology, Dianetics and science-fiction writer L Ron
> Hubbard must never be legally be accepted as a religion - regardless
> of any recent EU decision to the contrary. We consider the 'Church' of
> Scientology is an exclusive business venture that by prohibiting
> access to scientifically-proven psychiatric therapy and medicine is
> effectively enslaving its believers."
> ----
> Read the petition
> Petitions home page
> Read the Government's responseIn our approach to religious groups, the
> Government must seek to balance its responsibility to protect
> vulnerable individuals with the UK's long held commitment to freedom
> of worship and belief.
>
> "The Government does not consider that it would be feasible or
> appropriate to introduce specific legislation or regulation of
> religious groups, their activities or their beliefs. There would be
> considerable difficulty in drawing up legislation in a way that did
> not interfere with the individual's right to choose their beliefs and
> lifestyles so long as they do no harm to others. There is also no
> obvious way in which legislation could deal with cases where adults
> participate in activities of religious organisations entirely
> voluntarily."
> ===
>
> How about this one?:
>
> "individual's right to choose their beliefs and lifestyles so long as
> they do no harm to others."
>
> Obviously they are still dumb and ignorant as hell in Downing Street.
> This was the whole reason I signed the petition........that
> scientology WAS-IS-WILL forever be harmful to others and themselves as
> well.
I guess the next step is gather and send documentation of the harm.
There is plenty of it. Affidavits, deaths, lawsuit, especially those
for Narconon, Stephen Kent stuff. Don't give up.
anothers...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
^^ This!
Another Surfer
Eldon
Now, there's an interesting omission. What about doing harm to
themselves? The usual criteria for locking someone up in a psych ward
are that the person is deemed "a danger to self OR others," at least
in the US. Isn't it the same in Britain?
Tom Newton
has been changed to "[AT]" below. This was done because of the
X-No-Archive: yes header below, which will cause his/her original
post to be deleted from the archives there.
On 2008-06-27, in <6hp864ttc3o1ao77ajh378k2n612gvkb5g[AT]4ax.com>
Duane <whoeverfor[AT]diz.com> wrote:
> Path: news.edisontel.com!nntp.eutelia.it!news.panservice.it!news.germany.com!gail.ripco.com!news.lightlink.com!news2.lightlink.com
> From: Duane <whoeverfor[AT]diz.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
> Subject: Government response to petition '-Scientology'
> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 06:18:49 +0200
> Organization: Lightlink Internet
> Lines: 66
> Message-ID: <6hp864ttc3o1ao77ajh378k2n612gvkb5g[AT]4ax.com>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.34.12
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
> X-No-Archive: yes
> X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 87.210.124.51
> X-Original-Trace: 27 Jun 2008 00:23:48 -0400, 87.210.124.51
> Xref: treeoflife.3v8l2x.net alt.religion.scientology:7071
>
> I received this e-mail:
>
> --
> From: "10 Downing Street" <number10[AT]petitions.pm.gov.uk>Add sender to
> Contacts To: "e-petition signatories" <number10[AT]petitions.pm.gov.uk>
>
> You signed a petition asking the Prime Minister to "Refuse any
> application submitted by the ‘Church’ of Scientology for recognition
> as a Religious Organisation."
>
> The Prime Minister's Office has responded to that petition and you can
> view it here:
>
> http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page15777.asp
>
> Prime Minister's Office
>
> Petition information - http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/-Scientology/
> Obviously they are still dumb and ignorant as hell in Downing Street.
> This was the whole reason I signed the petition........that
> scientology WAS-IS-WILL forever be harmful to others and themselves as
> well.
The Church of Scientology has grown into 133 countries over the last
60 years, and obviously many millions of people have benefited from
their work.
If you could support your case against them with real evidence, all
you'd have to do is take it to the Courts.
Because you have no real evidence, you have to resort to a
vicious gossip campaign that no one but fools takes seriously.
You lose.
Consider getting a life.
Tom
--
The Truth will set you free:
http://www.sethcenter.com
"Rev" Norle Enturbulata, DTS, OD
"Duane" <whoev...@diz.com> wrote in message
news:6hp864ttc3o1ao77a...@4ax.com...
>I received this e-mail:
>
> --
> Contacts To: "e-petition signatories" <numb...@petitions.pm.gov.uk>
I got the same pap from #10. Labour governments will always only pretend to
"listen and learn", as currently-non-elected PM Gordon Brown put it
recently, while they spend the taxpayers' money on their cronies and
Socialistic redistribution-of-wealth projects - to the detriment of everyone
else. Their current pastime at 10 Downing Street has been the
changling-style replacement of English Law with non-functional, draconian
European Union edicts. They probably figure that the EU will eventually get
around to Scientology but can't quite grasp the concept of individual
countries' law and rights.
Eldon
Oh, Scientology has already been in numerous courts, is involved with
several right now, and is due for a few more prosecutions and civil
suits in the near future. Hadn't you heard?
Stay tuned.
"Rev" Norle Enturbulata, DTS, OD
"Eldon" <Eldo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:caf5401f-9358-4cb9...@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
And there are still people frequenting this newsgroup who insist "Tom
Newton" is the same guy that has some reputation as a "world-class troll",
and not some Scientologist "hatted" with the task of pretending to be "him".
> If you could support your case against them with real evidence, all
> you'd have to do is take it to the Courts.
So says someone who supposedly knows nothing about Scientology, yet defends
the cult to the end! Thanks for sharing, clambot!
> Because you have no real evidence, you have to resort to a
> vicious gossip campaign that no one but fools takes seriously.
It is up to the Scientologist op using the name "Tom Newton" to supply
evidence or links that support "his" "case" regarding "no real evidence".
Isn't it sad how tightly this "Tom" (Cruise? Is that you?) adheres to the
Scieno practice of pretending that Anonymous protesters aren't on the
planet.?
> You lose.
>
> Consider getting a life.
So says the Scientologist posting from sunup to past sunset on this
newsgroup, REACTING to the truth about "his" vicious, dwindling cult.
--
SP Goodman
The Usually Right "Reverend" Norle Enturbulata DDT, DTS
*
http://www.flickr.com/photos/enturbulata
http://www.youtube.com/user/Enturbulata
http://tinyurl.com/yre7c6
http://www.xenu.net
http://www.xenutv.com
http://www.scientology-lies.com
http://www.whyaretheydead.net
http://www.scientology-kills.org
*
* " You can write that down in your book in great big letters. The only way
you can control anybody is to lie to them."
* -- L. Ron Hubbard, "Technique 88"
*
* "...Never discuss Scientology with the critic. Just discuss his or her
crimes, known and unknown. And act completely confident that those crimes
exist...."
* - L. Ron Hubbard, "Critics of Scientology", November 5, 1967
*
* "Rather than give psychotics such treatment it would be far kinder to kill
them immediately and completely..."
* - L. Ron Hubbard, "Science of Survival", p117
banchukita
earthligh...@nor-hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Duane" <whoever...@diz.com> wrote in message
>
> news:6hp864ttc3o1ao77a...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> >I received this e-mail:
>
> > --
> > Contacts To: "e-petition signatories" <numbe...@petitions.pm.gov.uk>
>
> > You signed a petition asking the Prime Minister to "Refuse any
> > application submitted by the 'Church' of Scientology for recognition
> > as a Religious Organisation."
>
> > The Prime Minister's Office has responded to that petition and you can
> > view it here:
>
> >http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page15777.asp
>
> > Prime Minister's Office
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
I'm not an attorney, thank God, but I do deal with legislative
verbosity quite a bit, and I got a different impression from the
response. I am also not familiar with UK law, so I might be totally
off base here.
But I thought the response was trying to tell you simply that the
avenue you pursued wasn't the proper one for the complaints in the
petition.
Of course it would be difficult for the legislature to make a rule
such as you suggest. It would take forever for all parties to agree on
language alone. And then there would be the fear of setting precedent
for other unpopular groups to be eliminated.
Instead of asking them to make a law saying Scientology can't exist,
which would seem to fly int he face of the very same freedoms you want
to protect, perhaps it would be more useful to ask them to start
holding Scientology, Inc. accountable for the damage it continues to
cause, and then cite specific examples.
Damage to individuals and families but also to society in general:
* "Social betterment" programs that have no scientific basis, peer
review, no measurable benefit, and do not better society, but come
with a price tag and are passed off as 'science.'
* Practicing medicine without a license [whatever happened to NOTS
34? Did DM purge that puppy in the Big Rewrite?].
* Orchestrated attempts to infiltrate and/or destroy governments,
corporations, media, and health professionals. Why is this group not
considered actively hostile?
* Wog Hate: the contempt of Scn, Inc. for All Things Wog.
*Breaking up families, driving adherents to suicide, requiring
unhealthy and potentially fatal practices, lack of financial
transparency, lack of accessible governance, ad nauseum.
England wouldn't let any other American corporation come over there
and do what Scn, Inc. has done, with the written policies and
procedures that they adhere to, unchallenged.
I really think they're just suggesting a different approach.
-maggie, human being
Eldon
earthligh...@nor-hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Eldon" <EldonB...@aol.com> wrote in message
Now, now. You are sounding more sarcastic than Roland, and you surely
know what he's likely to do if he thinks you are invading his turf.
I'd hate to see him throw you into the major Aga oven and just forget
you or something like that.
> --
> SP Goodman
> The Usually Right "Reverend" Norle Enturbulata DDT, DTS
Eldon
This is the issue that will probably go over best in Europe. They
don't let Christian Scientists get away with zip. There's a small
expat group in Paris, but they do no more than have an occasional
reunion -- or perhaps die of whatever disease they contract. The JW's
do no better with their prohibition against blood transfusions. If a
kid needs medical care, the French government is legally entitled to
take the kid to the hospital.
Now, if we want to get into "religious freedom" regarding those fundie
Mormons in Texas, it's coming down to whether "beliefs" entitle a
middle-aged man to knock up a 13-year-old concubine. I think not in
this day and age.
Jonnie Tyler
news:ba3d4cea-6050-43c4...@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
================
The UK has a LONG history of broil with Scientology. Foreign Scientologists
were even forbidden entry at some stage. If you are going to bring up any of
the above you'll have to do it in a way it wasn't done already, with
arguments they haven't seen already - and as I said, they have already seen
a lot, more maybe than the US ever saw.
feministe
>I received this e-mail:
>
> --
> Contacts To: "e-petition signatories" <numb...@petitions.pm.gov.uk>
>
> You signed a petition asking the Prime Minister to "Refuse any
> application submitted by the 'Church' of Scientology for recognition
> as a Religious Organisation."
>
> The Prime Minister's Office has responded to that petition and you can
> view it here:
>
> http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page15777.asp
>
> Prime Minister's Office
>
Interestingly, that governement is ridiculed by its own unability to define
what a religion is, while its own specialist agency, the "Charity
Commission", was very able to see through the cultic "scriptures":
Find out the Charity Cmmission documents from their website.
r
Hartley Patterson
> Obviously they are still dumb and ignorant as hell in Downing Street.
> This was the whole reason I signed the petition........that
> scientology WAS-IS-WILL forever be harmful to others and themselves as
> well.
Answering petitions is left to low level wonks who don't have a clue about
PR. Eventually some journalist will investigate and expose this total
waste of taxpayers money.
--
Hartley Patterson
http://www.newsfrombree.co.uk/index.htm
http://news-from-bree.blogspot.com
Shawn the Bastard
> In order to keep googlegroups from messing up these headers, "@"
> has been changed to "[AT]" below. This was done because of the
> X-No-Archive: yes header below, which will cause his/her original
> post to be deleted from the archives there.
>
> On 2008-06-27, in <6hp864ttc3o1ao77ajh378k2n612gvkb5g[AT]4ax.com>
>
>
>
>
>
> Duane <whoeverfor[AT]diz.com> wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
Until you can learn to participate in a conversation, I'd consider
learning some self restraint, Tom Newton.
Tom Newton
<9d6f8065-efe5-4464...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.co
m> Shawn the Bastard <ThatBast...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 27, 3:07?am, Tom Newton <t...@server.invalid> wrote:
>
> Until you can learn to participate in a conversation, I'd consider
> learning some self restraint, Tom Newton.
'Anonymous's' idea of a "conversation" is hammering people with
their naive propaganda, trying to bully them into believing
obvious nonsense.
I'll do what I want, you stupid punk.
And you'll live with it.
Guaranteed.
Shawn the Bastard
> On 2008-06-27, in
> <9d6f8065-efe5-4464-baf9-374688f7b...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.co
> m> Shawn the Bastard <ThatBastardSh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 27, 3:07?am, Tom Newton <t...@server.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Until you can learn to participate in a conversation, I'd consider
> > learning some self restraint, Tom Newton.
>
> 'Anonymous's' idea of a "conversation" is hammering people with
> their naive propaganda, trying to bully them into believing
> obvious nonsense.
>
> I'll do what I want, you stupid punk.
>
> And you'll live with it.
>
> Guaranteed.
>
> Tom
>
> --
> The Truth will set you free:http://www.sethcenter.com
I don't care if you if you follow my advise or not. I don't have to
deal with you.