h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

A teenager is being prosecuted for calling Scientology a cult. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/may/20/1

Is it, or isn't it? When does a cult become a religion? Can a cult also be a religion? When did "cult" become an offensive term requiring arrest & prosecution?

Is this part of the report worrying? -

"The City of London police came under fire two years ago when it emerged that more than 20 officers, ranging from constable to chief superintendent, had accepted gifts worth thousands of pounds from the Church of Scientology.

The City of London Chief Superintendent, Kevin Hurley, praised Scientology for "raising the spiritual wealth of society" during the opening
of its headquarters in 2006.

Last year a video praising Scientology emerged featuring Ken Stewart, another of the City of London's chief superintendents, although he is not a member of the group."

Seems as soon as you call anything "religion" or "spiritual" it can't be critisised. It's horrifying that the general intelligence and common sense have sunken this low.

Scientologists are well known brain washers and it's horrendous that they are infiltrating the law and enforcement.

I was under the impression that Scientology IS considered a cult and not a legitimate church in the UK...

Evidently I thought wrong.

Out of interest, when does a church/religious group of organisation no longer *also* count as a cult?
Are they mutually exclusive?

Can't imagine this young man will have much of a problem even in the incredibly unlikely event that the CPS are dumb enough to prosecute:

"cult:–noun

1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies."

Seems fair enough.

"2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers: e.g the physical fitness cult.
3. the object of such devotion.
4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5. Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
6. a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader."

And there's your problem, definition number 6. "Considered to be false". By whom? It's very much a minority religion, which rather implies that the vast majority of society considers it to be false. Which, whether they like the word or not, makes them a cult.

"7. the members of such a religion or sect.
8. any system for treating human sickness that originated by a person usually claiming to have sole insight into the nature of disease, and that employs methods regarded as unorthodox or unscientific.
–adjective 9. of or pertaining to a cult.
10. of, for, or attracting a small group of devotees: a cult movie."

All that would be achieved by prosecuting this young person would be to further demonstrate to the public that Scientology IS indeed a dangerous, sinister cult, and all that has been achieved by arresting him and confiscating his sign is to float the suggestion in the public mind that the City of London police force is in some way improperly influenced by them.

SoRB

Aren't all religions a bunch of cults?

RF

Maybe the young man mis-spelled cult?

Scientology is just... totally weird... n h

"a religion or sect considered to be false"

Considered false by everyone who believes something different.

"Aren't all religions a bunch of cults?"

Well if you take the point from definition 6 in that not everyone believes the same thing, but still I wouldn't say they're *all* cults.

Surely there's a difference between something that's endured for centuries and some small group that's closed off and dies out in a few years?

I guess it could be argued that there are three main differences between "religions" and "cults".

Cults are generally totalitarian in the sense that they tend to demand that the cult becomes their whole life, and seek to control in ways that other mainstream religions typically do not (resources, friends, job, home). It might be argued that Monks and Nuns fall into this category, but you don't have to be a Monk or Nun to be a Christian.

Secondly, religions generally don't threaten apostates (those who give up the faith) with earthly vengeance or with disowning, although there are some exceptions in fundamentalist Islam and possibly elsewhere.

Thirdly, and crucially in relation to Scientology, religions do not charge for access to their truth. It's true that the three Abrahamic religions have a notion of a tithe - paying 10% of income to charity or to the Church - but you don't formally have to pay for admittance to religious ceremonies, and Holy Books are on sale for sums relative to the real cost of production.

Now granted there are places where mainstream religions veer close to cults, but in general I think this is a good rough rule of thumb.

Great points. Think you've got good definitions there. And cults don't seem to like "outsiders" asking questions, where I think (or at least in my own experience) the major religions are open to and even encourage you to ask them questions.

I've heard stories of people who've left cults and have had to leave family members in the place and have been threatened afterwards. Doesn't sound very nice. Surely if you believe you're right, threatening other will turn them away rather than bring them to your cause.

Quote from article: Demonstrators from the anti-Scientology group, Anonymous, who were outside the church's £23m headquarters near St Paul's cathedral, were banned by police from describing Scientology as a cult by police because it was "abusive and insulting".

Since when has being abusive and insulting been against the law?

TRiG.

And surely it gives them a chance to fill everyone in on what exactly they're all about and "well this is why we're not a cult....." sort of stuff. Maybe change people's minds etc.

Know people have refered to my church as almost cult-ish just because it's not "a traditional church". It'as not an insult to me, it's just a lack of understanding.

BTW, I'm not a Scientologist and don't want to be. Do think they're some form of cult.

Since the Public Order Act came into effect. Hang on, I'll have a rummage and see if I can dig out some cases of it being used.

Don't tell me there'll be a case of Joe Bloggs versus some weird cult and the cult won coz Joe called them names!!

Might be interesting if we end up with a court ruling that scientology *is* a cult though

Would be interesting. Wonder if it would have an effect on those who are members. Would they walk away or stand firm in defense of their religion?

well according to that article there is already a high court ruling saying scientology is a cult. That being the teenager's defence.

oh dear, poor scientology!

Nope, it isn't joe bloggs and some cult, it's a member of the BNP and Islam...

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2003/1564.html&query=2003+and+ewhc+and+1564&method=boolean

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2004/69.html&query=title+(+hammond+)&method=boolean

Another important case (for the opposing view) is DPP v Orum, which appears to have been removed from bailii. A Google search for orum 1988 3 all er 449, or orum 1989 1 wlr 88 may provide results though.

Oops, the second link is to a religeous mans right to display a placard re homosexuality. (He's not allowed to show his sign as it happens).