 |
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: "Rebecca Hartong" <hart...@erols.com>
Date: 1998/11/22
Subject: Re: "Shattered" minds
BP wrote in message <73a1g0$p0...@nnrp03.primenet.com>... Actually, no, I didn't claim either of those things. I used the "just >In article <739373$...@enews3.newsguy.com>, hart...@erols.com says... >>BP wrote in message <738cdl$gc...@nnrp02.primenet.com>... >>>No, not "just following orders". That is _your_ straw man. >>Then the responsibility still lies with the individuals, does it not? If >You are the one who claimed that I was promoting a "just following orders" following orders" analogy and you claimed that this wasn't correct because the individuals had "internalized" Scientology. So, I moved on to the analogy of militia members who have "internalized" a philosophy which teaches that killing FBI agents is a good idea. Is the "internalization" process different for Scientologists than it is for members of other groups? If so, how? And why? If it's *not* different, then it would seem that the analogy is a good one and I'd have to return to my question: Would the militia guys be somehow absolved of personal responsibility for the murder of FBI agents because they had "internalized" a violent philosophy? >The responsibility lies both with the individuals _and_ with the Hello? Hello? Isn't that what I originally wrote? If you agree with me >organization/philosophy that promulgates the values and incorrect >ideas that the individuals use to make the wrong decisions. that the individuals are at least as much to blame as the organization, what exactly is it you're arguing with me about? > As long People make wrong and immoral decisions all the time. They make these >as the recruiting/teaching/deploying organization exists, more individuals >will be taken in and make wrong and immoral decisions. decisions regardless of the organizations to which they belong. The fault is not in our stars (or our "applied religious philosophies"), but in ourselves. Eliminating Scientology isn't going to prevent wrong and immoral decisions from being made. Those who would have become vicious Scientologists will instead become vicious Amway salesmen. > The individuals I do understand that you believe Scientology makes people who would have >can be taken one by one and tried and convicted, but the wrong-doing >will continue. _That's_ the point you fail to grasp. otherwise been perfectly normal into heartless killers. I disagree. >>I'm available M-F, 9:30-5:00. ;-) Obviously, if they knew it was a And that, of course, is really the distinguishing factor. In the United stupid >>choice in advance, they probably wouldn't do it. I don't think we're >>obligated as a society or as individuals to protect every other member of >>our species from making stupid choices for themselves. Making such choices >>(I've done it myself!) and dealing with the consequences is a valuable >>learning experience. >Our society feels that it is very much in it's interest to protect people States we're permitted to make all sorts of silly choices for ourselves as long as those choices don't endanger others. The presumption is that mentally sound adults are capable of making these choices for themselves. I like it that way. >>>They were acting according to the teachings of Scientology. Their own consciences, of course. Scientologists do not live in a vacuum >>>Do you think that they sould have had some incorruptible >>>moral guide within them? That is naive. >>I don't think it's naive at all. The idea that each of us is responsible >You are not responding to what I said. The law holds individuals and neither, imo, are they brainwashed zombies who are unable to tell right from wrong. I think that almost every one of us reading a.r.s. right now--Scientologist and critic alike--could come to agreement on most of the big issues regarding right and wrong. >It is this culture/organization/value set/"church" that is ultimately the I don't believe it is naive. I think we *do* all share some core set of >dangerous enemy. You seem to be assuming that we all share some >core set of values that tells us what is right or wrong, independent of the >culture around us. That _is_ naive. values that tells us what is right or wrong. The people who frame our laws also believe this. As I indicated in my answer the first time around, the presumption that we all know the difference between right and wrong is the foundation of our entire criminal law system. It works for me, too. >>I have more empathy than you know. You'll just have to take my word for it, BP. You and I are still discussing >How could I know, when all I hear is your "valuable lesson learned" things in a relatively civil fashion, aren't we? Do you think that would be possible if I had no empathy? >>>>And, BP? He just seems to want to join a Great Moral Crusade. In this particular venue (a.r.s.) I think maybe it takes more courage to >>>No, I am IN a great moral crusade. And YOU are on the sidelines. >>I fully understand your need to believe that. That's kind of the same >No, it's self-confidence that my assessment of Scientology is correct. express *my* point of view! ;-) >So you keep right on apologizing for them and I will continue fighting them. What you see as apology, I see as fairness. You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||