From: goehring@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Scott Goehring)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Scientology: a comedy in 3 acts
Message-ID: <GOEHRING.91Nov8091951@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: 8 Nov 91 14:19:51 GMT
References: <1991Nov5.204745.23713@agora.uucp> <5818@email.sp.unisys.com>
Sender: news@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Reply-To: goehring@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Lines: 28
In-reply-to: paulr@email.sp.unisys.com's message of 7 Nov 91 20:52:45 GMT

paulr@email.sp.unisys.com (Paul Raulerson) writes:

>That's *really* funny!  I don't believe a word of it, but it is
>funny! :)

It's unfortunate that you don't believe it.  It's perfectly fitting
with other accounts I have read.

>Now I have one question to ask: Why is it in this news group, that
>the *pro* scientologist folks are being polite and trying to provide
>evidence of their cause, and the anti-scientologist folks are being
>nothing if not hostile?

"Provide evidence"?  You have no evidence; you just have pithy stock
statements that the Church has educated into believing.  The
"anti-Scientologists" have loads and loads of evidence; the testimony
of former members (Jon Atack, Bent Corydon) as well as those outsiders
who have come close to the Church (Paulette Cooper, Stewart Lamont)
speaks volumes more than the contentless spewings of its members.

>From an outside viewpoint, that speaks loads. And not in favor of the
>anti-scrientologist crowd either.

Your viewpoint is not an "outside" viewpoint.
--
"I'm Tom Bodett for Motel 6.  We'll leave the maid out for ya."
	-- Sean Patrick Ryan (fsspr@acad3.alaska.edu)