Westboro Baptist Church and Scientologists - What do they have in common?

The FDA requires Black Box Warning labels on psych drug packages because psych drugs have been shown to cause suicidal urges, murderous rages and even birth defects. During the past 12 months, the FDA has issued more than 32 FDA health warnings about psych drugs. Check out www.cchr.org for specifics.

If the student files an insanity defense then his mental health information will be a matter of public record if the report gets entered into evidence. In some jurisdictions (eg Texas) anyone charged with a crime automatically has no testimonial privilege, regardless of plea.

James Lightfield makes a good point. Unfortunately for him, the good point he makes is actually the original one -- that the Scientologists and CCHR, their supposed "Citizens" Commission on Human Rights, are just another hate group like Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist Church. When normal people learn of a tragedy, their reaction is sorrow and empathy. When a hate group learns of a tragedy, they exploit it; they stage flamboyant and tasteless demonstrations trying to spread their prejudices about who 'must' be responsible. By CCHR's own admission, they don't know what medications Odgren (the alleged killer) was taking, and yet they're sure in their own minds that not only is Odgren guilty, but he must have done it because of "psych drugs" (a category, by the way, in which Scientologists count aspirin.) This is no different from the way in which an anti-Semitic bigot will assure you that all the bad things that happen (at least those which he cares about) are caused by the "Jewish conspiracies". You should Google "Our enemies are less than twelve men", by the way, if you want some fascinating insight into the conspiracy theories of Scientology and CCHR founder L. Ron Hubbard. And if you want some idea of what Hubbard really wanted to accomplish by founding the CCHR, then Google "Our war has been forced to become" and find out exactly what Hubbard viewed as the goal of his "war".

Opps! I forgot: There is no such thing as a conspiracy! Unless of course, you work for the DA's office. The Coincidence theorists of this world are going to find out the hard way that psychiatry has a subversive agenda.

In my opinion, part of the anti-psychiatry / psychology stand of Scientology is a way to prevent Scientologists reading too much about these professions from non-Scientology sources.

If they did, they would see that Scientology Auditing was simply a form of hypnosis and that the details contained in Dianetics and the past lives / alien stories are simply pre-hypnotic suggestions which elicit false memories that reinforce Hubbard?s claims.

Besides which, it is well known that L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology, had psychiatric medication in his blood at the time of his death. This was shown through means of a post-mortem blood analysis. It appears he did not believe or follow his own teachings.

Also to AF: You've been propagandized: although it's use is frowned upon among Scientologists in general because it has a tendency to dull the senses, Asperin is not considered by any means a "psychiatric" drug - holistic remedies of course are the prefered option when available. Speaking for myself, I take 5 pills a day for hypertension, and if I'm in enough pain or discomfort, I'll take an over the counter remedy (though I find that these days I resort to them far less frequently).

To bring things away from ad-hominem attacks for a bit, the most important piece of information that people forget when considering studies about psychiatric medication is that random assignment is rarely, if ever, feasible. Because of basic ethical standards, you MUST give a potentially helpful medication to someone who needs it.

In other words, if you're suicidal, and you're a participant in a study on a new drug for depression, you WILL be in the "medicine" group and not the "placebo" group. This is why every study of depression medication shows a higher rate of suicide in the drug condition... all of the suicidal subjects were intentionally placed in that condition!

Oh, there are conspiracies, Bob, there certainly are. The Church of Scientology has been behind enough of them: Operation Snow White, for instance, where Scientology operatives infiltrated more than 100 goverment agencies, stealing massive amounts of documents -- one agent alone stole 30,000 pages from the IRS in just six months. And of course, there was Operation Freakout, which was a highly detailed conspiracy to frame a journalist who had criticized Scientology with the intent of getting her "incarcerated in a mental institution or jail" (gee, what is the morality of an organization that believes that "if [psychiatrists] had the power to torture and kill everyone, they would do so" and yet deliberately tries to subject others to that fate?)

The difference between these conspiracies and the conspiracies that Hubbard was so fond of alleging is evidence. As in, we know that Scientology leaders were trying to frame Paulette Cooper for bomb threats with the intent of putting her in a mental institution or jail because that's exactly what the written plans the FBI seized from Scientology files stated. For Operation Snow White, we have even more than the written-down plans -- we have the stipulations of the eleven Scientology officials (including L. Ron Hubbard's wife) who went to federal prison for their roles in the scheme that the evidence presented in the Sentencing Memorandum is correct. In contrast, how much evidence is there for Hubbard's "twelve men" who run newspaper chains and all mental health groups and apparently all income tax? That was Hubbard's declaration in 1967, so there's been forty years to turn up some shred of evidence for this massive conspiracy -- but what are Scientologists reduced to doing when challenged to produce evidence?

Generally, they just trot out that hoary old hoax, Brain-Washing, A Synthesis of the Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics, just as the Aryan Nations member, instead of providing one shred of evidence for the dirty work he alleges is happening now, falls back on The Protocol of the Elders of Zion and alleges that, with this "proof" that the targets of his hatred are the kind of people who would do horrible things, somehow that means he never has to back up his accusations that they did do them.

"AF", I don't know about the details of what you allege are crimes committed by Scientologists. And to tell you the truth it's irrelevant to me: As a policy, the Church does not accept convicted felons or engage in criminal activity since a criminal is a liability who makes no gains or progress anyway.

All you have are nonviolent crimes from the 1950's and '60's. How many Scientologists are in jail right now? And for what? And out of how many? Though I'm not going to point the finger at any one religious group I can tell you that for every rotten apple you can hold up against Scientology, if I took my kid gloves off I could hand you a bushel. Just name any major religion - but I won't go there, and neither should you.

It is interesting to read the extensively detailed and documented articles by Evelyn Pringle regarding the profiteering angles in the American drug industry. You can read her columns on OpEd News here: http://www.opednews.com/author/author58.htmlTrditionally, medicine has been portrayed as a noble profession. Yet it also is a field that has given rise to numerous corporations that are nothing else but BIG business in size and scope. Corporations trditionally exist primarily to make a profit, and companies have been sued by stockholders because they did not pursue a profit vigorously enough. Typically, medical corporations (drug companies, etc) are NOT charities. It is not surprising that this can come to conflict with Humanitarian motives. Given the corruption that has existed in other industries, is it surprising that it could possibly exist in medicine and in the field of mental health? It is natural and human to give someone a pass because they are criticised by someone you despise or dislike. You can look at the field of politics for too many examples from all political parties.The fact remains that there are significant problems in the field of mental health, not just from profiteering at the corporate level. An article in June 2003 of Boston Magazine exposed this issue. Examing a ten year period, it was found that out of 100% of the doctors who lost their licenses due to sexual misconduct with patients, half were psychiatrists. Yet psychiatrist make up only 5% or so of all medical doctors. This is not directly relevant to the problem in Lincoln-Sudbury, but it does indicate that something is tragically wrong. There is an on-going Ethics Deficiency Disorder pandemic in the field.I am all for the respect for families who are suffering due to a tragic situation. Yet the question remains: How should someone try to bring reform to the field? How should someone bring attention to the problems to be fixed?Being attacked by scientologists is not proof of innocence. Of course you can be annoyed by them.Do not let this distract you from the larger legitimate issues.

Sickmind, I'm not sure I understand the relevance of that comparison between psychiatrists and other medical doctors.

The VAST MAJORITY of medical doctors do not see their patients more than a few times (and for a relatively short time, when they do). Some, like surgeons, barely see their patients at all, except for the time spent operating. Psychiatrists are quite different, as you know, since they are actually required to make create some sort of emotional/trusting relationship with their patients. This is a comparison of apples and oranges.

Your statistic is probably correct, but you have a few critical problems that you MUST clarify, otherwise you're potentially making a mountain out of a mole-hill:

1) How many doctors lost their licenses due to sexual misconduct? If there were TWO, and ONE of them was a psychiatrist, your statistic would still be the same. The fact that this was taken over a 10 year period is irrelevant. What we need to know is the number of times this actually happened.

2) Psychiatrists may make up only 5% of all medical doctors, but unless you're going to argue that there are fewer than 20 medical specialties (e.g. cardiology, pediatrics, oncology, dermatology, etc.), this is actually disproportionately high.

3) Returning to the first point, what percentage of Psychiatrists end up losing their licenses due to sexual misconduct? Not only do we need to know how many times it happened, we need to know how likely it is to happen for any given psychiatrist.

Percentages are ALWAYS meaningless if you don't also include base rates to put them in context.

I think this link answers the question of how frequently psychiatrists have sex with patients:

http://psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-19930501-000033.html

As far as "conspiracies" go, it's easy to dismiss Scientology members as cranks in the absence of anything specific; until you consider the use to which psychiatry was put in the former Soviet Union, South Africa, and today in Castro's Cuba. Indeed what better way to remove the rights of person of a political dissident than with a declaration of insanity? It's Kafkaesque to be sure, but I don't think it's far-fetched or delusional. I'm not certain of the veracity of 'Psychopolitics' - but it would be consistent with the tactics of the Communist and the intelligence community. Of the latter, the CIA's experiments with LSD 25 in the 1950's would be a notable case in point. What matters here is that psychiatry as an instrument of the state is a tool of oppression that will ultimately be used. The drug companies aren't necessarily promoting a Brave New World,they just put corporate profits ahead of public safety. And when their board members also sit on the FDA's board that approves a drug,what you have is a conflict of interest: I think it's at least fair to say this needs to change.

I don't want to get into a big argument here, but I have to take issue with the gloom-and-doom characterization of drug companies. There's a popular (and accurate) saying in the drug industry that the first pill costs $300 million to make, and the second pill costs ten cents. There may be instances where drugs cost more than they seem to warrant, or don't do much more than a cheaper alternative, but if that's the price we have to pay to be able to treat many forms of cancer, prolong the life of someone with AIDS, or even reduce the likelihood of an elderly person getting the flu each year, I don't personally have a huge problem with it.

The notion that the drug industry is constantly flooding the market with placebos and poison is absolutely false (there IS an industry that specializes in fake drugs and placebos, but mentioning it would probably set the entire internet on fire).

Part of the problem with the FDA-board/Pharma-board thing is that there really aren't that many experts in any sufficiently specialized area of medicine. Want to do pain research? Go to the University of Pittsburgh, where nearly all of the big names are. Want to develop a new type of pain medicine? They're probably the ones to talk to. Want to decide whether a medication actually is worth putting into production? Guess who.

I guess my issue is that there's an overall feeling that science and medicine have become very sinister places in the last 10-20 years. While there may be a bunch of rotten apples, it really is safe to say that the vast majority of the people who work to make you better are actually pretty nice.

A psychiatrist answers to no one in some matters. There is no overseeing body for psychiatry, no organization equivalent to the American Medical Association for Medical Doctors. A psychiatrist might, through some wrong character in a perscription, or through some other means, might make a mistake. No organization oversees him in some matters. His mistake, especially when combined with other prescriptions, might cause unexpected effects. A psychitrist can prescribe medications he sees fit, he is not accountable to any organization in some matters. Someone is at last pointing out the situation. GOOD ! The question would certainly arise in a trial.

Sorry to tell you, Bob, but failing to confront crimes like Operation Snow White and Operation Freakout doesn't make them "alleged". Your organization's policy against engaging in criminal behavior doesn't mean a thing if they don't follow it, and that's exactly what the evidence showed: Mary Sue Hubbard herself was one of the eleven who went to federal prison for Operation Snow White. As for the crimes being "from the 50s and 60s" (really 60s and 70s) are you claiming that the organization didn't have any policy against committing crimes for those two decades? No? Then the group had such a written policy against committing crimes but obviously it didn't make any actual difference since they committed them anyways. As for "nonviolent", I will remind you of the hypocrisy of condemning psychiatrists as "torturers" and "killers" and then trying to put someone in their clutches through a cold, calculated frame-up.

Oh, and Terry? Psychiatrists are medical doctors.

Ok. So what next AF? Should I wring my hands, bow my head in silence and admit to being some sort of boogie man because I support a group whose good deeds far outweigh the bad? What was the context of the times? What do you think about the raid on Church of Scientology in Washington by the FDA where they actually raided a church at gunpoint and took a sledgehammer to every E-meter in sight? Are those the actions of trustworthy public officials discharging their sworn duties or overzealous law enforcement? I feel zero guilt about being a Scientologist - take a look at the body count every other religion has given us from the Middle East to ground zero, to the Spanish Inguisition, to the Crusades. It seems like the goody two shoes white glove test you want Scientology to pass couldn't be passed by your religion or anyone else's either - so I'm not losing any sleep over it.

"I'm not certain of the veracity of 'Psychopolitics' - but it would be consistent with the tactics of the Communist and the intelligence community."

That might be true. And in just the same vein, the anti-Semite might say "I'm not certain of the veracity of The Protocol of the Elders of Zion - but it would be consistent with the tactics of shadowy master manipulators engaged in a conspiracy to control the world." That too is true -- and irrelevant. An argument with a weak link cannot be bolstered by pointing to some other link and arguing how strong it is.

Neither does it mean much to say "consider the use to which psychiatry was put in the former Soviet Union, South Africa, and today in Castro's Cuba." Consider the use to which ordinary police forces were and are put in those regimes and a dozen more. Does that constitute an argument against police forces in general? Hardly. Neither does the fact that oppressive regimes included psychiatry as just one of many things they corrupted to serve the ends of the regime make much of an argument against psychiatry itself.

Mr. "AF", It's transparent to me that you want to juxtapose the ideological slant of Scientology vis a vis Psychiatry with "conspiracies" vis a vis Jews, to impute that somehow I and others like me are really just crypto Anti-Semites: In other words, kiss the third rail. That's merely a construct of your own to seize the moral high ground. The fact remains I know dozens of Jewish Scientologists who are still practicing Jews, disagree with you and disagree with psychiatry. My position is that what psychiatry has are stopgap measures. I suppose if you were about to jump off a building and I shot you with a Tazer gun, you could consider that a successful action if I avert your suicide. The medical profession BTW, leads the world in suicide: so either their technology is at fault or their ethics is (in not using it): In either case, they've dropped the ball. Show me one good thing psychiatry has done for civilization. I see that they've destroyed everything good and decent they could possibly get their hands on. To me that's the smoking gun that they are up to no good and that the products they unleash upon society demonstrate their incompetence. Their state of the art at best is like having Doc Holliday as a dentist.

There is neither empiric nor logical reason for "Scientology" to demonize "psychiatry" except for one thing: the most common uniting strategy used throughout history to create a bond among a group of people and to convince them to make sacrifices, sometimes even sacrificing their lives, has been to demonize whoever may be conveniently perceived to be a common enemy. In this case, Scientology has set up the field of psychiatry to be the common enemy, and thus the uniting force within its ranks.

There is no valid reason for it to be "psychiatry." It could as easily have been the Shriners, or Tongan fire dancers, or Amway sales people. It's just that "psychiatry" was convenient for Hubbard to peg at the time. Scientology IS "psychiatry," and what better way to usurp the powers of psychiatry than to neutralize it in the minds of your followers?

The success of Scientology DEPENDS on its followers believing that Hubbard is the great, all knowing wizard. He had to neutralize the field of psychiatry in order for his methods to be perceived as unique and solely effective for achieving spiritual awareness.

But witness:

The word 'Science' is derived from the present participle of the Latin 'scire' which is "to know."

The word 'logos' is a word with various meanings, most often translated into English as Word, thought, speech, meaning, or reason.

The word 'psychiatry' is derived from the Greek for "healer of the spirit".

Now, watch how Hubbard completely reinvents the word "Scientology" to ultimately mean THE SAME THING as psychiatry: "The word 'Scientology' comes from the Latin 'scio' which means 'know' or 'distinguish,' and from the Greek word 'logos' which means 'reason itself' or 'inward thought.' Thus it means the study of wisdom or knowledge. It means knowing how to know. Scientology, however, is defined as the study and handling of the spirit in relationship to itself, universes and other life. (This quote is taken directly from the official Scientology website.)

There is no point arguing the evils of psychiatry with a hardcore Scientologist. As illustrated above, Scientologists are not just taught to "know how to know." They are taught to know WHAT to know.

Sorry but James doesn't make a good point at all. He does how every prove with his own words that the system in place works. There was a problem with a med, it was reported. New warnings were placed and the problem was solved.

Not every med works for every person and the best doctor useing the best med can't save everyone. Instead of James and other members of scientology beating us over the head yelling about these meds causeing kids to kill........

Maybe he should ask himself how many people these meds are helping these kids from killing other people. The studies and facts are clear. These meds work when used right.

Well now Bob,

If you were about to jump and I shot you with a taser and it stopped you from jumping then yes, I did save your life even if only for a short time.
Remember its not only the doctor and meds here, there is a therpist you have to see also in most cases.
As for you being the boggie man, most the members of scientology I have come across have been good people as far as I could tell. They tend to mirrow any other group. Even as far as getting in trouble. There are some in prison, some on trial. Even Hubbard was on the lam from a prison cell at the time of his death.
However it is your fault that you promote this with blinders on. Its not that you can't see the bad in scientology, its that you refuse to see. There are very good sites that have copies of court records and video's of scienology in action.
Every group has bad people and does bad things just as you said. scientology is one of those groups also. But on this board right now we are talking about scientology. So of course thats what the focus will be on.

Now BOB,

Of course they had wepons when they raided the building. Most police do and yes they have to be ready just in case. Can you tell us why they destroyed the e meters? A judge must have told them to for some reason.

And yes psychiatry helps many people who have been hurt in ways they just can't cope with. Like child abuse and rape victims. Like our people coming home from Iraq. And people coming out of cults.

If more doctors kill themselfs ( and I would love your sorce on that) its easy to see why. Look at what they deal with day in and day out. Could you handle it? How brave they must be and how cool they do what they do.

The APA and the AMA oversee them. The FDA keeps track of how much they proscribe and will come a calling if its over what it should be.

You write about police raiding scientology yet you complain when AF brings up things scientology has done many years ago.

Yes psychiatry has been used by bad goverments in the past to do vast harm. So have surgeons, your point is?

What does scientology intend to replace doctors and meds with? Will you treat thses mentally ill people? Can you prove or are you even willing to try to prove your way works better? Like it or not at this point in time this is the proven system that works.

Or can you at least be brave enough and have enough faith in what you belive here to tell everyone the truth?

That scienotlogy flat out says mental illness is fake. That there is not such thing as mentall illness.

"Should I wring my hands, bow my head in silence and admit to being some sort of boogie man because I support a group whose good deeds far outweigh the bad?" Bob, I have no doubt that your belief that Scientology's "good deeds far outweigh the bad" is sincere. However, "sincere" does not equal "valid" or "sound".

First, when the subject of Operation Snow White and Operation Freakout came up, you clearly didn't know much about them -- referred to them as "what you allege are crimes committed by Scientologists" -- so how can you, knowing so little about the bad, be so certain that it's outweighed?

Second of all, a lot of the "good deeds" I see Scientology patting itself on the back for are also quite questionable. For instance, Scientology often crows about the supposedly high success rate that Narconon has, and cites the "Swedish study" as "evidence" that Narconon has the "technology" to get people "drug-free permanently". I fully agree that if Narconon was as successfully at getting people off drugs as it claims, that would be a very good deed indeed. However, when you look closer at that Swedish study, you start to notice some troubling things. Namely, that people who by their own admission went back to doing drugs after their "graduation" from Narconon were counted as "drug-free permanently". It would make any observer wonder what definition of "permanently" Narconon could possibly be using. Certainly not one shared by the rest of the world.

Finally, you claim that "It seems like the goody two shoes white glove test you want Scientology to pass couldn't be passed by your religion or anyone else's either". Aside from that being a fallacious tu quoque argument -- it's also false. I would not stay with my religion if it didn't pass my test. That test is neither "to never have done anything bad" nor "to have good deeds far outweigh the bad" but "to not treat good deeds as justification or permission to do bad." How many reprehensible deeds -- how many frauds, how many lies, how many betrayals, how many blackmails -- have been justified by their perpetrators with "It's a good thing for Scientology -- therefore it must be a good thing"?

AF, just take a look at the excesses and yes, CRIMES committed by members of ALL the major faiths. Obviously multiple wrongs don't make a right - but if that's your answer to me, you're missing my point: You certainly don't hold the congregants of other religions to the same standard when their clergy are in the news or a major swindle hits the front page. But then you insist that based on illegal actions 30+ years ago by other Scientologists, I and every member who are guilty of no wrongdoing should a) feel guilty, and b) jump ship. I have never been exhorted to do anything illegal by any Scientologist, and only if that ever happens will I agree with you - In two decades it hasn't and so I don't. And I haven't yet seen a Scientologist with a copy of Dianetics in one hand and a rocket in the other. The bellicosity that you ascribe to Scientology is a reflection of your own prejudice embellished by your obvious hate for what you don't understand.

PS - A poem I think worth quoting:

"There's so much bad in the best of us
and so much good in the worst of us;
It ill-behooves any of us
to talk about the rest of us."

I'll leave it at that.

just a note bob... I'm sure AF holds all religions to the same standard... but we're talking about scientology in this case.

Hi Bob,

You kind of skipped over my post and questions. But thats ok, I do read yours.

No you shouldn't wring your hands and hang you head low because some in scientology are not behaving. You should stand up tall and yell at the top of your lungs that it MUST STOP NOW!!! As a member you have the power to bring change.

We are not just talking about stuff 30 years old here. Its still going on to this day. Familes are being torn apart, mentally ill people are being talked out of taking their meds.
Scientology's drug program is ripping off families. No insurance will pay the 25 thousand dollar cost and there are at least two cases where kids were dropped off in cheep hotels with 10 dollars after they question the scientology part of the program. Yet you don't tell the connection up front when they pay.

Again, what proven program does scientology have to replace the proven system in place now?

TO BOB AND EVERYONE,

It seems the focus of this board has been shifted. Lets remember the story was about the protest. I would like to ask Bob and the other members of scientology and cchr here if they think the protest was ok and why?

Bob, you claim that I "insist" you should "a) feel guilty, and b) jump ship." However, if you actually read what I wrote, you'll find that nowhere did I instruct you to do anything at all... let alone "insist" that you do.

Funny. I drew the same comparison in this DailyKOS blog the same day you did!
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/1/25/95648/5705

Scientology really knows how to make friends wherever it or its front groups go!

haha.. I'm glad you came to the same conclusions! I've had some interesting anti-science (specifically psychiatry) people on here recently.

I was thinking of going to get my thetans or whatever they're called checked at the local scientology store (why are they always in strip malls and houses?)