View Full Version : Shock! Horror! Keith Code = teh Scientologist!?!?
Jamezo
18th January 2005, 00:01
http://www.scientology-kills.org/celebrities/code.htm
Our own beloved Keith Code, has been brainwashed into believing our bodies are inhabited by the ghosts of aliens murdered trillions of years ago on earth. He would have paid many thousands of dollars for the priviledge of being indoctrinated in this fashion.
STOP TEH MADNESS! :disapint: :unsure:
ching_ching
18th January 2005, 06:22
Go Keith, my man!! :headbang:
750Y
18th January 2005, 08:06
sounds like he musta 'got on the gas WAY too early'
Coyote
18th January 2005, 08:11
Scientology :spudwhat:
MSTRS
18th January 2005, 08:16
Hmmmm...can't be all bad if it got the man off drugs. Me, I'll stick to scootering
SPORK
18th January 2005, 08:18
Scientology :spudwhat:
A made up "religion" by L. Ron Hubbard. Utter load of shit. If I say so myself.
erik
18th January 2005, 08:25
A made up "religion"...
Aren't they all? :whistle:
Coyote
18th January 2005, 08:37
Aren't they all? :whistle:
:gob: Sacrilege!!!!
:lol:
MikeL
18th January 2005, 08:42
Aren't they all? :whistle:
Hmm...
But the story of Scientology does shed some useful light on the nature of organised religions, and should be carefully studied by anyone who wants to comment on the differentiation of divine authority and human error, deviousness and gullibility...
jrandom
18th January 2005, 09:10
But the story of Scientology does shed some useful light on the nature of organised religions...
I always thought it was the result of a bet between L.R.H. and Bob Heinlein.
Equating organised religion with charlatanry is fallacious. A statistical analysis, however, would probably indicate that while equality might not be provable, it has a high likelihood in the general case...
Hoon
18th January 2005, 09:38
It doesn't suprise me....reading through his books he does have a heavy philisophical/religious/Zen type approach to Riding.
vtec
18th January 2005, 11:51
Aren't they all? [made up] :whistle:
Yep that about sums up religion. :shake:
Jamezo
18th January 2005, 12:32
It is entirely accurate to say Scientology is completely made up, as opposed to 'mainstream' religions, ie. Judaism, Christianity, which have a relatively solid basis in recorded history.
Scientology is based completely on the writings of a science fiction author, of which even a cursory examination will reveal are complete bullshit. The 'religion', it's teachings lacking merit or sanity, resorts to lying, manipulation, litigation, brainwashing and other abhorrent tactics, in an effort to gain more members and thus cash.
It places zero value on critical thinking, and I have zero respect for anybody so utterly gullible and foolish to be taken for a ride by it, which sadly includes Keith.
I found it out looking for information on Tom Cruise, after I watched an interview with him on E! (I don't normally watch E! !!!), and he was talking about helping kids with some "Study Technology" (Scientology calls it's doctrines 'Technology'....) and blabbering about drug use. This set off my spidey-senses, so yesterday I looked it up, and sure enough, he's a Scientologist too, bolstering the ranks with the likes of John Travolta. He was just recently awarded the "Freedom Medal of Valor", yep. a big honkin' gold and diamond Scientology medal. it's alright, he's still in the black, he has paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to the cult.
"The way to make a million dollars is to start a religion." - L. Ron Hubbard, before he invented Scientology...
jrandom
18th January 2005, 12:35
It is entirely accurate to say Scientology is completely made up, as opposed to 'mainstream' religions, ie. Judaism, Christianity, which...
... were made up, but a long long time ago, thereby lending them an aura of respectability?
Coyote
18th January 2005, 12:43
Remember on Holmes a while back, there was that religion that was based on that funny alien that came down and spoke to some dude. What was that about? I remember laughing at them but I forgot most of what they said
Biff
18th January 2005, 13:25
Erm - aren't 95% of religions "made up". The only main difference with Scientology is that you have to pay good money to join.
I say the Aztecs had it right. The love the earth and the earth will love you back approach works for me, far better than some guy and his wife that built a boat, collected a male and female of all living animals etc and went off on a cruise.
.........I wonder how long it will be beofre this thread will turn into an extension of the religious thread currently showing on the other channel?
Jamezo
18th January 2005, 14:39
... were made up, but a long long time ago, thereby lending them an aura of respectability?
I'm not defending those religions, rather using them as a way of showing how, they, even with the benefit of thousands of years of history, and even limited archaeological evidence, are still commonly refuted, thus; Scientology with absolutely NO evidence of the religion being anything more credible than the bizarre writings of one man (and indeed, all scientific evidence completely contradicts Scientology), would require an immense level of foolishness to have such blind faith in it.
jrandom
18th January 2005, 14:55
I'm not defending those religions...
Why not? What's wrong with 'em?
archaeological evidence...
What, of God's existence?
Scientology with absolutely NO evidence of the religion being anything more credible than the bizarre writings of one man...
Phew. Good thing all the Proper Religions (tm) aren't based on such a shaky foundation.
Blakamin
18th January 2005, 15:52
Scientology with absolutely NO evidence of the religion being anything more credible than the bizarre writings of one man
as opposed to the bizarre writings of a coupla blokes????
[edit] sorry JR, didnt see your post to the same effect :doh:
Amarzzata
18th January 2005, 16:32
Remember on Holmes a while back, there was that religion that was based on that funny alien that came down and spoke to some dude. What was that about? I remember laughing at them but I forgot most of what they said
if i'm right, what you're talking about is some dude called Rael... but dont remember the religion tho...but i know he is the founder and that he raced a ferrari (or was it a lambo ??) to some high levels !! With the cash of his beloved religious folks...
Religions are ALL bulshit to make money...how do you think they paid for all the cathedrals, all the BIG churches and all this shit ? The Vatican hasnt a gold plated roof ?? And i know a church in dominican Republic which has solid gold entrance doors !!!
I'd be for religions if we didnt have to pay anything and if they gave us all a brand new bike upon inscription :headbang:
jrandom
18th January 2005, 16:34
if i'm right, what you're talking about is some dude called Rael... but dont remember the religion tho...
Er, funnily enough, they call themselves 'Raelians'...
Hitcher
18th January 2005, 17:13
It is entirely accurate to say Scientology is completely made up, as opposed to 'mainstream' religions, ie. Judaism, Christianity, which have a relatively solid basis in recorded history.
Some may argue that they were just "made up" earlier. Passage of time should not be taken as a measure of credibility. Look at me. I'm an old fart. What the fuck do I know??
Anyway, shouldn't this discussion be being had on the Scottish thread?
mangell6
18th January 2005, 18:33
It is entirely accurate to say Scientology is completely made up, as opposed to 'mainstream' religions, ie. Judaism, Christianity, which have a relatively solid basis in recorded history.<snip>
The 'religion', it's teachings lacking merit or sanity, resorts to lying, manipulation, litigation, brainwashing and other abhorrent tactics, in an effort to gain more members and thus cash.
Hmm, if I recall my vague history, from another life, the 25th celebrates is it a Roman god, the Winter Solstice, or the birth of some dude who wasn't actually born on that date.
And then we have another that falls around a celestial event, which includes rabbits and eggs. I think that these were 'borrowed' from some other 'religion' . . . .
Remember there are 'facts' and there are 'facts', it was scientifically proven that man could not fly, reach the moon (oh that is an interesting one) and that if you drove faster than ??mph that the skin would be torn off your face.
And then of course there is the 'winners' right history. :msn-wink:
I wonder if this group of people help him with his riding???
Mike
MikeL
18th January 2005, 21:08
Passage of time should not be taken as a measure of credibility. Look at me. I'm an old fart. What the fuck do I know??
Anyway, shouldn't this discussion be being had on the Scottish thread?
Quite right.
Jamezo
18th January 2005, 22:02
Some may argue that they were just "made up" earlier. Passage of time should not be taken as a measure of credibility. Look at me. I'm an old fart. What the fuck do I know??
Anyway, shouldn't this discussion be being had on the Scottish thread?
possibly due to my own failings, I have failed to make my point clear enough, so let's try again.
Christianity/Judaism: holy texts recorded by people living at or at least near the time that events, however supposedly, happened. time passed since then nonwithstanding, they basically called it as they saw it. (though somebody here could probably argue against that)
Scientology: texts written by a science fiction author, about events supposedly happening millions of years ago, that he has absolutely no chance of personally witnessing. (I am not going to entertain notions of some kind of 'astral projection' either, though I've never even heard of LRH gaining his writings in this way anyway)
there is a reasonable possiblity that the writings of the old & new testament of the bible were based at least partially on real events, just because they were in fact there, written by real people. I think it's fairly unreasonable to claim that the authors of what we know as the christian bible somehow colluded to produce a work that would be used to dupe people out of there money (that's the churches job anyway).
LRH's material came completely out of his arse. there is not a shred of reality even tangentially connected to it, it is a complete work of fiction designed to part the easily manipulated with their money.
thus supporting my original point, that anybody who falls for such an atrocious piece of fiction is a fool of magnamimous proportions.
Blakamin
18th January 2005, 22:16
there is a reasonable possiblity that the writings of the old & new testament of the bible were based at least partially on real events, just because they were in fact there, written by real people.
cool, time to write something saying, f'rinstance, Jim2 is god... after all, I saw him on a mountain top (pie-cock hill) and he spoke to me of such goodness as "Ducati" etc...
:unsure: I was there, I oughta know!!!
SPORK
18th January 2005, 23:14
Really, stop trying to make a fight out of this.
There is no possible way that L. Ron Hubbard was doing anything else apart from making an imaginary religion to get some money.
Alien Ghosts? Please. Come on. Last time I checked I wasn't posessed by any of those. We all know that he is full of *expletive deleted*, so let's leave it there.
This thread was more of a notice that someone had fallen to the dark side, rather than someone gearing up for a "Religious Ravings Part II: Ellron"
Why can't we all just get along? Well, that would be boring... So instead, why can't we just put this to rest?
vtec
19th January 2005, 23:14
Anybody who still has even a smidgen of "faith" (read: nonsensical desperate hope for the existence of a higher being to make you feel important/purposeful than you really are) left this website should straighten you out pretty quick. www.religionisbullshit.com
Just checked the website, and its down for the moment, but should be back up soon. Makes a really good read, I love the feedback and answers to feedback page.
Coyote
20th January 2005, 08:22
Religion is bullshit
So is evolution
There, eveyones a loser
Smokey
20th January 2005, 20:10
Scientology :spudwhat:
www.xenu.net
Scientology is pretty cult like and greedy. "L" Rob Hubbard was quoted as saying "The best way to make money is to start a religion". A tradition proudly carried on by nzs own "sponsered by Mobil Oil" Br*an Tamaki...though he steals bits from others rather than creates his own :finger:
NordieBoy
20th January 2005, 21:37
Scientology may be cult like and greedy but it worked for Keith...
If anyone wants to throw out any of Keiths books in disgust I can take them off your hands.
No no, don't thank me.
avgas
20th January 2005, 21:44
Erm - aren't 95% of religions "made up". The only main difference with Scientology is that you have to pay good money to join.
I say the Aztecs had it right. The love the earth and the earth will love you back approach works for me, far better than some guy and his wife that built a boat, collected a male and female of all living animals etc and went off on a cruise.
.........I wonder how long it will be beofre this thread will turn into an extension of the religious thread currently showing on the other channel?
Brilliant, finally a true - "Religeous Ravings" forum, not a bible bash
avgas
20th January 2005, 21:49
one note to every one, you will never be what you deny.
Religeon it self is not a bad thing (even scinetology has a good point), but people are just evil.
If everyone went around assuming that religeon is bad, then what about motorcycles? arent they the root of all evil on the roads?
I feel that acting on ones religeon, is just domb though - its like riding a bike cos it has to be riddin, not cos you want to ride it.
Jamezo
20th January 2005, 22:28
Scientology may be cult like and greedy but it worked for Keith...
If anyone wants to throw out any of Keiths books in disgust I can take them off your hands.
No no, don't thank me.
eh, I wouldn't be so sure, during the course of their indoctrination, scientologists are conned into believing they all have drug problems. if you pay enough money, you get to undergo therapy to rid yourself of the effects of drugs you have taken in past lives. (yes, all 74 trillion years of your existence). all scientologists think that before they were 'audited', they were all mental and had drug problems. scientology is at war with the psychiatric and psychological professions. (LRH claimed psychiatrists were sent to earth by Xenu...), mainly because they are instrumental in deprogramming cult members.
the drug line is commonly trotted out to make it seem like scientology has any kind of beneficial effect on people's lives. it doesn't.
scumdog
21st January 2005, 01:04
A made up "religion" by L. Ron Hubbard. Utter load of shit. If I say so myself.
Too right!! I remember this crap in the '60,s and even then thought Noddy and Big Ears made more sense!!
The only saving grace it may have is if it keeps you from frying your mind on druges or alcahol - but even that's a deperate measure!!!
SPORK
21st January 2005, 09:15
Too right!! I remember this crap in the '60,s and even then thought Noddy and Big Ears made more sense!!
The only saving grace it may have is if it keeps you from frying your mind on druges or alcahol - but even that's a deperate measure!!!
Ugghh, I'd rather fry my mind on drugs than on indoctrination by an evil mastermind science fiction writer. At least the drug way I can have trippy hallucinations.
Coyote
21st January 2005, 09:23
Religeon it self is not a bad thing...
Damn right. Who knows where modern society would be if religion weren’t there to begin with. Of course, there’s the chance that if there was no such thing as religion in the past, we may be better off now, but then again, it could be a hell of a lot worse. Possibly, fewer people would have compassion, and we would all be killing each other.
Quite funny on the Simpsons once, it showed how contradicting religion was. Ned, who in this story was Noah, was letting two of each animal onto the ark, but he would only allow 2 male animals so there wouldn't be any 'hanky panky'.
SPORK
21st January 2005, 09:45
Quite funny on the Simpsons once, it showed how contradicting religion was. Ned, who in this story was Noah, was letting two of each animal onto the ark, but he would only allow 2 male animals so there wouldn't be any 'hanky panky'.
Which brings us straight to the RR thread. Tiresome, aint it?
Coyote
21st January 2005, 09:49
Which brings us straight to the RR thread. Tiresome, aint it?
Oh sorry, shall I delete that post and move it to the RR thread oh gracious one?
SPORK
21st January 2005, 09:55
No, I was just showing how this is slowly turning into a baby RR thread...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.