NationStates Jolt Archive

A couple nights ago, I was watching something on the National Geographic Channel called "Inside a Cult."

Members of a cult had allowed cameramen into their trailer area, and let their lives be videotaped. They were all centered around one phenomenally creepy old bearded guy who called himself Michael. These people quit their jobs, took their kids out of public school (to learn via Internet... one young boy displayed his knowledge of the solar system by placing the planets in order, with Earth at the front and Jupiter at the end, and a whole clusterfuck in between... I think he might've been missing a couple planets, too), and dissolved their marriages (so that Michael could have sole access to the women). At first, watching how insanely devoted these people were, and watching them cry over all the things they had sacrificed to be part of this cult (but still insisting they were glad they had joined) seemed terrifying.

Then I heard a little more from them. And as time went on, the entire thing began seeming more and more like a Monty Python sketch.

These people were MORONS. They would've worshipped anything that moved. Listening to their conversations almost seemed like a joke. If it had been a movie, I would've thought it to be shitty and unrealistic, because of all the one-dimensional characters, predictable plot twists, and terrible acting.

Michael turned out to be an at least partially-senile man, whose voice sounded like a phone's dial-tone and whose eyes were emptier than a Michael Bay movie. You could tell by the look on his face that this man had never conceived a single rational thought in his entire life. He was an idiot.
Yet there they were, crowding around him, proclaiming his greatness. Talking about how he was the son of God.

His message revolved around the coming of Judgment Day- that only a few would be spared and he could take them to heaven. Well, judgment day arrived on October 31, 2007, and the cultists awaited it on a hill. I was stoked. I was thinking: "You're gonna have hell to pay now, you old bastard!"
But no. That was not the case. The cultists came down from the hill screaming: "Liberty! We're free! Hooray!" and went back to their trailers. That was it. That was the end of the world. It clearly didn't happen, but they're still in their trailers worshipping this insane, stupid, non-charismatic cult leader.
It was like all the glamour of cults had suddenly disappeared. I thought cults were supposed to be led by smart, manipulative people who could convince rational folks like you and me to join their cause.
Are they ALL this stupid? Why do people join? Do they have rocks in their skulls?

Someone please shed some light on this subject. I still have hope for the world, but if people can be duped this easily by such an uninspiring twat, then I think it's almost proof that judgment day will never come- because if it existed, it would've happened by now, just to wipe out these retards.

I feel for them, because they probably have poor lives and poor education, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have common sense- I mean this guy was using tricks that I used on other kids when I was a first grader. He wasn't persuasive. He wasn't bedazzling. He was a fucking dial-tone! What's the world coming to?

And this, ladies and gentleman, is a lovely example of how NOT to use paragraphs.

There will always be a number of people so pathetic that if given the suggestion will choose to throw away their livelihoods in exchange for not having to do *anything*. At least imho. Trading personal responsibility for human rights is something people have done as far back as history goes.

And this, ladies and gentleman, is a lovely example of how NOT to use paragraphs.

His paragraphs are fine. He just needs a line in between each one to make it easier to read.

That being said, I'm starting a cult and going to have all kinds of women worship the ground I walk on. Yep.

And this, ladies and gentleman, is a lovely example of how NOT to use paragraphs.

I apologize, I'll fix that.
I hope it wasn't so difficult to read that you couldn't make a contribution...?

His paragraphs are fine. He just needs a line in between each one to make it easier to read.

That being said, I'm starting a cult and going to have all kinds of women worship the ground I walk on. Yep.

Good luck with that. Otherwise cults fail big time. At least (most) religions are fair to it's worshippers and don't take advantage of them.

Good luck with that. Otherwise cults fail big time. At least (most) religions are fair to it's worshippers and don't take advantage of them.

Well, they do keep asking for my money. And none of that shit's going to taxes, because they're exempt. Bastards. They can afford vaulted ceilings and stained glass but they can't send a van full of kids to Colorado unless I pay them a hundred fucking dolla- I'm sorry. Ranting.

Anyway, when I think about it, if these people were to keep worshipping Michael long after his death, attributing miracles to him, and keep this legend going- would it be any different than our modern-day worship of Jesus?

Good luck with that. Otherwise cults fail big time. At least (most) religions are fair to it's worshippers and don't take advantage of them.

I was making an intellectual and witty commentary on the fact that every "cult" that's ever cited seems to be a constant sexual orgy for its leader.

Now, that being said, your comment made me laugh out loud. Almost all religions take advantage of their adherents to a certain degree. There are few exceptions.

Well, they do keep asking for my money. And none of that shit's going to taxes, because they're exempt. Bastards. They can afford vaulted ceilings and stained glass but they can't send a van full of kids to Colorado unless I pay them a hundred fucking dolla- I'm sorry. Ranting.

Anyway, when I think about it, if these people were to keep worshipping Michael long after his death, attributing miracles to him, and keep this legend going- would it be any different than our modern-day worship of Jesus?

Never said religon was prefect and who brought up chrisnaty? I only said most religions are fair to their worshippers and by fair I mean they are not forcing them to do something against their will. They make god make them do things. :)

I was making an intellectual and witty commentary on the fact that every "cult" that's ever cited seems to be a constant sexual orgy for its leader.

Now, that being said, your comment made me laugh out loud. Almost all religions take advantage of their adherents to a certain degree. There are few exceptions.

See above: last two sentences.

Never said religon was prefect and who brought up chrisnaty? I only said most religions are fair to their worshippers and by fair I mean they are not forcing them to do something against their will. They make god make them do things. :)

See above: last two sentences.

Except that they impute things from God that are clearly their own agenda. It doesn't matter how well (or poorly) they mask the taking advantage: the fact is, it still occurred.

(And I don't think Christianity is better or worse than Islam, Shinto, Taoism, or any of the others about "taking advantage" of their adherents. They all have their most notable examples of such.)

Except that they impute things from God that are clearly their own agenda. It doesn't matter how well (or poorly) they mask the taking advantage: the fact is, it still occurred.

(And I don't think Christianity is better or worse than Islam, Shinto, Taoism, or any of the others about "taking advantage" of their adherents. They all have their most notable examples of such.)

Hey, I agree with you. Calm down already. lol

Yeah, it really sucks how religion is now and days. Back in the old days all you had to do to feel good about life was to pray for a few minutes before going to bed and now... Well now you have to launch "crusades" or what not to get into "heaven." It's pretty sad, but there are a few that have innocent intentions. I just can't name any of them...

The thing with Christianity and its past is that the God is perfect, but the leaders of the churches become corrupt.

Also, anyone ever listen to the Who's Tommy? They all went along with him because he was just a normal person who seemed special: that's what separates cults from religions.

*For the sake of neutrality, I am removing a paragraph that reveals my religious stance*

Hey, I agree with you. Calm down already. lol

Yeah, it really sucks how religion is now and days. Back in the old days all you had to do to feel good about life was to pray for a few minutes before going to bed and now... Well now you have to launch "crusades" or what not to get into "heaven." It's pretty sad, but there are a few that have innocent intentions. I just can't name any of them...

Whadda you mean "now" you have to start Crusades?! You know that war between the English and Muslims in Jerusalem that lasted for a couple centuries?

Yeah, that would be a crusade.

Anyway, when I think about it, if these people were to keep worshipping Michael long after his death, attributing miracles to him, and keep this legend going- would it be any different than our modern-day worship of Jesus?
Yes indeed, this my dear people, is how every major religion in the world started: a cult, a small sect. People found wierd. The ónly difference between the major religions, and these people (wich we DO call freaks) is time. Nothing more then that. The major religions we see today, are the cults who survived. Hell, loads more existed, even lots of former major religions died out. Think of the Egyptians, or the Aztecs.
Wich I also find wierd, is that we do call Scientology completly psycho, but most of us find the major religions not that odd. The main reason is I think, instead of using magic and the supernatural, they're using sci-fi. Just translate Genesis in sci-fi, and then compare again: an alien from another dimension teared the space-fabric in his dimension, creating a portal wich created our universe. Then, with the technology from his dimension and the freedom of not being bound to the laws of physics from our universe, he created stars and planets. Then he started to terraform planets, especially ours, engaging in genetic manipulation of the beings he bio-engineered. Etc etc etc, we can go on forever like this. Now compare that to Scientology's "alien emperor genocide" story, ánd take into account that the first story has míllions of beleivers. Is the Scientology story still that psycho, compared to the latter?

Hey, I agree with you. Calm down already. lol

Yeah, it really sucks how religion is now and days. Back in the old days all you had to do to feel good about life was to pray for a few minutes before going to bed and now... Well now you have to launch "crusades" or what not to get into "heaven." It's pretty sad, but there are a few that have innocent intentions. I just can't name any of them...

So, the first crusade doesn't count as the "good old days" then?

"All hail Michael, Son of HIM! *points at even older senile man in corner* He is da BOMB!"

lolz, whose heard of Scientology? Now THAT'S a cult. "Hi, aliens are in your soul making you do bad things. Give up yuor life and be FREE!"

It was like all the glamour of cults had suddenly disappeared. I thought cults were supposed to be led by smart, manipulative people who could convince rational folks like you and me to join their cause.
Are they ALL this stupid? Why do people join? Do they have rocks in their skulls?Haha. I never got the impression that cult leaders are smart, but I grew up fairly close to a cult.

As scary as cults may seem, remember that very few people have the stuff it takes to belong to one. You need an unusual combination of fear, lunacy, and lack of self respect to be the cult type.

America seems to have more cults than most countries though. I wonder why that is. Maybe it's just because there is more empty space.

Linkage (http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=yEVqbpXi4ck)

"All hail Michael, Son of HIM! *points at even older senile man in corner* He is da BOMB!"

lolz, whose heard of Scientology? Now THAT'S a cult. "Hi, aliens are in your soul making you do bad things. Give up yuor life and be FREE!"

*is sued by Scientoogy's army of lawyers*

Yes indeed, this my dear people, is how every major religion in the world started: a cult, a small sect. People found wierd. The ónly difference between the major religions, and these people (wich we DO call freaks) is time. Nothing more then that.
Wich I also find wierd, is that we do call Scientology completly psycho, but most of us find the major religions not that odd. The main reason is because, instead of using magic and the supernatural, they're using sci-fi. Just translate Genesis in sci-fi, and then compare again: an alien from another dimension teared the space-fabric in his dimension, creating a portal wich created our universe. Then, with the technology from his dimension and the freedom of not being bound to the laws of physics from our universe, he created stars and planets. Then he started to terraform planets, especially ours, engaging in genetic manipulation of the beings he bio-engineered. Etc etc etc, we can go on forever like this. Now compare that to Scientology's "alien emperor genocide" story, ánd take into account that the first story has míllions of beleivers. Is the Scientology story still that psycho, compared to the latter?

Yes. The difference between cults and major religions is major religions all have evidence. Cultists eventually figure out that they're deluding themselves or die off because no one joins them. The scientific community denies that there is evidence, but it can be found everywhere.

The major religions of the world (Judaism, Christianity, and Muslim) originated in or around the Middle East. Also, all of them acknowledge a higher being that created the world. Their accounts of the first few hundred years of the world are similar (Judaism and Christianity are identical, as both use the Old Testament). Even more extraordinary, their leaders all acknowledge the existence of Jesus. Only Christianity believes him to have been the Messiah, but even Muslims concede he existed.

Similarly, Christian leaders say that Mohamed existed as well. Jews deny this, but that may arise from the fact that the Dome of the Rock has its ass sitting on their Temple (no offense to Muslims, it's just a metaphor). Jesus and Mohamed both existed, no doubt, but whether they were divinely endowed is within each individual religion.

Hindi seems to be the strange exception to these rules, but perhaps it's just the one-in-a-billion cult that managed to find a following.

*is sued by Scientoogy's army of lawyers*

Religion has lawyers? Wow, all the other religions need to get a move on.

Religion has lawyers? Wow, all the other religions need to get a move on.

Most big religions have lawyers........

An unspoken meme in Western Culture: Unthinking belief is admirable.

Seriously. Neither Christianity nor Islam have any truck wth Reason - they rely entirely on unthinking faith. In fact, they pretty much come out and say so; "have faith", "believe", "faith is the way" - these are the catchcries - never "reason your way to god."

When such mindless devotion is applied to an established faith, it's praised. Yet there is no actual difference between that and any so called "cult". Only the object of veneration has changed.

An unspoken meme in Western Culture: Unthinking belief is admirable.

Seriously. Neither Christianity nor Islam have any truck wth Reason - they rely entirely on unthinking faith. In fact, they pretty much come out and say so; "have faith", "believe", "faith is the way" - these are the catchcries - never "reason your way to god."

When such mindless devotion is applied to an established faith, it's praised. Yet there is no actual difference between that and any so called "cult". Only the object of veneration has changed.

Beg to differ, wait for my reply to get approved by the moderator.

There is a difference between most religions and a cult. There are cult like people inside mainstream religions, but most people who belong to a religion only have to think about it when they are praying. During the rest of the time they are a member of society, they have jobs and families. A cult member devotes their entire life to the cult.

There is a difference between most religions and a cult. There are cult like people inside mainstream religions, but most people who belong to a religion only have to think about it when they are praying. During the rest of the time they are a member of society, they have jobs and families. A cult member devotes their entire life to the cult.
Say that to the 1st Christians, or 1st Jews, 1st Islamic, 1st Hindu etc etc etc. Every religion started out as a cult, 2000 years ago Christianity was just 1 of the cults and was 1 of them who survived and went mainstream. Not using sci-fi (just translate Genesis into sci-fi and you know what I mean, like I did on the previous page) also helps ;)

Say that to the 1st Christians, or 1st Jews, 1st Islamic, 1st Hindu etc etc etc. Every religion started out as a cult, 2000 years ago Christianity was just 1 of the cults and was 1 of them who survived and went mainstream. Not using sci-fi (just translate Genesis into sci-fi and you know what I mean, like I did on the previous page) also helps ;)When it became mainstream, it was no longer a cult. And it's pretty difficult to tell how people acted 2000 years ago.

Damn, I thought this was going to be a thread about Baltar last night.

Anyway, cults are cool if they involve lots of gullible beautiful women.

When it became mainstream, it was no longer a cult. And it's pretty difficult to tell how people acted 2000 years ago.
That's indeed the difference, the moment it becomes mainstream it's no longer called a cult, even when the things they beleive or worship don't change. The real difference between the cult described in the OP, and early christianity, isn't that big (except that Jesus most probably wasn't a half-senile old man, but most likely a charismatic middle-aged man).

Most big religions have lawyers........

And they're all jews...


(Couldn't resist. If anybody is offended at all, I'm sorry.)


Like others said, The olny differnce between a cult and a religion is time and popularity.

Yes. The difference between cults and major religions is major religions all have evidence. Cultists eventually figure out that they're deluding themselves or die off because no one joins them. The scientific community denies that there is evidence, but it can be found everywhere.

The major religions of the world (Judaism, Christianity, and Muslim) originated in or around the Middle East. Also, all of them acknowledge a higher being that created the world. Their accounts of the first few hundred years of the world are similar (Judaism and Christianity are identical, as both use the Old Testament). Even more extraordinary, their leaders all acknowledge the existence of Jesus. Only Christianity believes him to have been the Messiah, but even Muslims concede he existed.

Similarly, Christian leaders say that Mohamed existed as well. Jews deny this, but that may arise from the fact that the Dome of the Rock has its ass sitting on their Temple (no offense to Muslims, it's just a metaphor). Jesus and Mohamed both existed, no doubt, but whether they were divinely endowed is within each individual religion.

Hindi seems to be the strange exception to these rules, but perhaps it's just the one-in-a-billion cult that managed to find a following.
I wouldn't call it evidence, since there is also no doubt Micheal exists, and even more he stíll exists :D In the time the major religions sprung up (remember: Christianity was a Jewish splinter-group, and there were LOTS of splinter-groups in that era and Jesus wasn't far from the only one saying he was the Messiah) people really didn't know dick about the world around them, thus making them easier to "manipulate" (shitty choice of words). It's really damned hard in these days, since we're advancing more and more. It's pretty hard to grow out to a mainstream religion nowadays, although Scientology is on it's way. But that has prolly more to do with cash ;)

I´m terrified of cults and what some people endure and do by being on one.

There will always be a number of people so pathetic that if given the suggestion will choose to throw away their livelihoods in exchange for not having to do *anything*. At least imho. Trading personal responsibility for human rights is something people have done as far back as history goes.

I'm currently reading Margarat Singer's "Cults in our midst: The hidden menace in our everyday lives" And one thing I learned from that book is that people tend to criticize and blame the members 100% for joining when it was the leaders' faults for manipulating. What we fail to realize is that anybody can join a cult no matter how bright or dull. Its the brainwashing that pulls them in, its the forceful "coercion" that pulls them in. Blame the damn brainwashers not the members. The members need help and ex-members deserve understanding and support.

I´m terrified of cults and what some people endure and do by being on one.

That terror is justified.

That terror is justified.

Yeah. My question is, is the need to believe in something so strong that people actually put their trust in these ¨prophets¨, so to speak, because they assure them contact with their Maker? (and I´m sticking with Christian Cults)

Good luck with that. Otherwise cults fail big time. At least (most) religions are fair to it's worshippers and don't take advantage of them.

Cults do not "fail big-time." Their presence itself disproves this. They do not care about morals or the truth at all, they only care about listening to their fuhrer[leader]. As long as cults still possess the ability to recruit, keep recruits, exist, thrive, collect funds and rob people of their lives then they are not failing.

Yeah. My question is, is the need to believe in something so strong that people actually put their trust in these ¨prophets¨, so to speak, because they assure them contact with their Maker? (and I´m sticking with Christian Cults)

Not always. Most of the time the cult somehow makes the victim suggestible enough to believe anything then they have themselves another follower. :( Christian cults are not the only threat, all of them are. All of them brainwash and abuse. All of them take advantage of their members and other available resources.Your fear should not be focussed on Christian ones in general but all of them for they are all willing to do inexplicable things to you if they ever get the chance. Even scarier still is the fact that some cults are more dangerous than others, some will actually send assassins, some have the power to pull strings, some even torture their members or engage in "rituals" that involve mutilating or sacrificing members. The fear should not be of certain cults alone but of all of them.

Not always. Most of the time the cult somehow makes the victim suggestible enough to believe anything then they have themselves another follower. :( Christian cults are not the only threat, all of them are. All of them brainwash and abuse. All of them take advantage of their members and other available resources.Your fear should not be focussed on Christian ones in general but all of them for they are all willing to do inexplicable things to you if they ever get the chance. Even scarier still is the fact that some cults are more dangerous than others, some will actually send assassins, some have the power to pull strings, some even torture their members or engage in "rituals" that involve mutilating or sacrificing members. The fear should not be of certain cults alone but of all of them.

I hear you. All cults need to be feared and perhaps, if it´s possible, not allowed. Not that that would ever happen but... It´s just so abusive to prey on the weakness of others.

Haha. I never got the impression that cult leaders are smart, but I grew up fairly close to a cult.

As scary as cults may seem, remember that very few people have the stuff it takes to belong to one. You need an unusual combination of fear, lunacy, and lack of self respect to be the cult type.

America seems to have more cults than most countries though. I wonder why that is. Maybe it's just because there is more empty space.

From what I know cults can take in anybody, they only turn people into cult types after recruitment. It's kinda like the borg, they can assimilate any organism but the organism ends up being meant for borg conditions.

Also I think America has many cults for three reasons:

1)Freedom of religion
2)Empty space
3)societal breakdown leaves people lost so they desire beleif

America seems to have more cults than most countries though. I wonder why that is. Maybe it's just because there is more empty space.

"Empty space" like "distance between major cities" or what's between the ears? :D

Yes. The difference between cults and major religions is major religions all have evidence. Cultists eventually figure out that they're deluding themselves or die off because no one joins them. The scientific community denies that there is evidence, but it can be found everywhere.

What greater evidence do we have of Jesus's miracles than we do of Michael the Cult Leader's? What more proof do we have of Mohammed's divinity than of Charles Manson's?

The major religions of the world (Judaism, Christianity, and Muslim) originated in or around the Middle East.

Excepting, of course, Hinduism, the world's third-largest religion, and Buddhism, the fourth, neither of which started in the Middle East.

Also, all of them acknowledge a higher being that created the world.

Most religions do. I also find that Old Testament God and Allah are both very different from New Testament God.

Their accounts of the first few hundred years of the world are similar (Judaism and Christianity are identical, as both use the Old Testament).

Scientifically incorrect accounts. Besides, stories about people being made from the earth, world floods, the freeing of slaves, prophets bringing laws down from on high, and talking to god(s) atop mountains are prevalent in most religions of the world.

Hindi seems to be the strange exception to these rules, but perhaps it's just the one-in-a-billion cult that managed to find a following.

I don't know what leader Hinduism is centered around.
And if you want to talk about one-in-a-billion cults, look once again at Christianity- the Christians were being persecuted, hunted down, and systematically destroyed until Constantine had a dream. If Constantine hadn't had a pro-Christian dream, he wouldn't've spread our faith by the sword and we would not be falling asleep in church the way we are now.

The fact that these religions are still around is not proof that they're truthful- when numerous factions are competing for believers, eventually there will be a few champions left standing. If Christianity hadn't latched onto the Roman Empire, we would be following whatever OTHER religion Constantine had a dream about.

Now you can call it divine providence that things ended up this way, and as an agnostic, I wouldn't outright disagree with you- but still. Consider these points.

The end times are upon us! Join the cult of Lord Tothe and be saved from an eternity darned to heck!

Our precepts are simple: Hot babes are forbidden to wear shirts. This will prevent our doom. The reason has not been revealed, but I'm sure there is one. Also, all men who are not me must become eunuchs. It's a small price to pay. Ugly women (as defined by my divine insight) are sinners and will be forced to wear parkas and balaklavas so they may atone for their sins.

Who wants to join? I'm not even asking for your money!!!

The difference between a cult and a religion is that cults are more overtly harmful, they control several aspects of your life, restrict information, etc.

http://www.rickross.com/warningsigns.html

I'm currently reading Margarat Singer's "Cults in our midst: The hidden menace in our everyday lives" And one thing I learned from that book is that people tend to criticize and blame the members 100% for joining when it was the leaders' faults for manipulating. What we fail to realize is that anybody can join a cult no matter how bright or dull. Its the brainwashing that pulls them in, its the forceful "coercion" that pulls them in. Blame the damn brainwashers not the members. The members need help and ex-members deserve understanding and support.

I completely agree. These people do need understanding and support, and I would never insult an ex-cult member to their face.

But they were not bright. And while I do blame the cult leader, he was also a complete dumbass, and anyone who could be coerced by him needs immediate repetition of high school and a significant amount of therapy.

Furthermore, Michael himself probably deserves sympathy and support, because it was his troubled past (a common theme among cult leaders) that probably drove him down this weird, weird path.

I view all the people in this cult as children- they made stupid mistakes and should've known better, but the important thing now is ensuring they never do it again, and go on to lead happy lives. When your son is pressured into smoking pot, sure you blame the people who pressured him, but you also blame him for being so easily manipulated.

No one sat these people down and force-fed them Michael's crap until they believed it- they all came to him, and sat there willingly as he brainwashed them. Sure, there was a high level of manipulation, but Michael didn't force them to come to him and doesn't really force them to stay (a few people even left the cult after 15 years).

The ones I feel sorriest for are the fourteen-year-old girls that Michael has sex with, and the fifteen-year-old boys who can't arrange the planets in the correct order because their education is Google-based. They never even made a choice, they were born into the cult and the cult is all they know.

Yes. The difference between cults and major religions is major religions all have evidence. Cultists eventually figure out that they're deluding themselves or die off because no one joins them. The scientific community denies that there is evidence, but it can be found everywhere.

The major religions of the world (Judaism, Christianity, and Muslim) originated in or around the Middle East. Also, all of them acknowledge a higher being that created the world. Their accounts of the first few hundred years of the world are similar (Judaism and Christianity are identical, as both use the Old Testament). Even more extraordinary, their leaders all acknowledge the existence of Jesus. Only Christianity believes him to have been the Messiah, but even Muslims concede he existed.

Similarly, Christian leaders say that Mohamed existed as well. Jews deny this, but that may arise from the fact that the Dome of the Rock has its ass sitting on their Temple (no offense to Muslims, it's just a metaphor). Jesus and Mohamed both existed, no doubt, but whether they were divinely endowed is within each individual religion.

Sorry, but I beg to differ. To my knowledge, there aren't all that many authoritative sources that acknowledge Jesus outside of various religious texts (which obviously can't count in this situation, even if they were somewhat authoritative to begin with). I don't know the much about Mohamed, so I won't argue about him.

On the subject of Jesus, I can only think of two outside sources that mention him directly.

1. Josephus, a Jewish historian, who may not be all that credible in the first place

2. The James ossuary, which may not be authentic.

There are several other sources that seem to reference Christians, but not Jesus directly.

There is absolutely no evidence of any miracles and very scant evidence of even his existence. To be perfectly honest, it seems likely that he did exist in some way or another in my mind, but there is plenty of room for doubt.

Now I could be wrong, this is all based on my own passing knowledge of the subject, I just haven't seen all that much evidence of his existence and consider it debatable until I see more.

To just dismiss such an issue based on what other religious leaders say doesn't seem to really acknowledge the meat of the argument against Jesus existence.

In fact, I would go as far as saying that there is far more evidence of this other guy, Michael, is it?

I completely agree. These people do need understanding and support, and I would never insult an ex-cult member to their face.

But they were not bright. And while I do blame the cult leader, he was also a complete dumbass, and anyone who could be coerced by him needs immediate repetition of high school and a significant amount of therapy.

Furthermore, Michael himself probably deserves sympathy and support, because it was his troubled past (a common theme among cult leaders) that probably drove him down this weird, weird path.

I view all the people in this cult as children- they made stupid mistakes and should've known better, but the important thing now is ensuring they never do it again, and go on to lead happy lives. When your son is pressured into smoking pot, sure you blame the people who pressured him, but you also blame him for being so easily manipulated.

No one sat these people down and force-fed them Michael's crap until they believed it- they all came to him, and sat there willingly as he brainwashed them. Sure, there was a high level of manipulation, but Michael didn't force them to come to him and doesn't really force them to stay (a few people even left the cult after 15 years).

The ones I feel sorriest for are the fourteen-year-old girls that Michael has sex with, and the fifteen-year-old boys who can't arrange the planets in the correct order because their education is Google-based. They never even made a choice, they were born into the cult and the cult is all they know.

I must disagree. These people are con artists. Any person dumb or smart can fall for a scam because the scammers a damn good at what they do. You wouldn't blame the guy for falling for it would you? Cults employ the same scam tactis only its not only the money and personal info they're after, they want the victim's mind and life as well.

-snip-
every "cult" that's ever cited seems to be a constant sexual orgy for its leader.
-snip-

Ladies of NSG! Is there a hole in your spirit? A dread, fear, or sadness? Come to me, for I will heal your soul.

Join the Cult of Kirav!

Yes. The difference between cults and major religions is major religions all have evidence. Cultists eventually figure out that they're deluding themselves or die off because no one joins them. The scientific community denies that there is evidence, but it can be found everywhere.
Um...no, it can't. There is no evidence of the truth of any religion. There are only people who claim their religion is true and point to either uncorroborated stories or random things in the natural world, and claim them as evidence, without being able to prove any actual connection to their religion. (Disclaimer: This is true of my own religion, as well.)

So the reason cults are bad is not because their beliefs are false. It is because of the way they abuse their followers.

The major religions of the world (Judaism, Christianity, and Muslim) originated in or around the Middle East. Also, all of them acknowledge a higher being that created the world. Their accounts of the first few hundred years of the world are similar (Judaism and Christianity are identical, as both use the Old Testament). Even more extraordinary, their leaders all acknowledge the existence of Jesus. Only Christianity believes him to have been the Messiah, but even Muslims concede he existed.

Similarly, Christian leaders say that Mohamed existed as well. Jews deny this, but that may arise from the fact that the Dome of the Rock has its ass sitting on their Temple (no offense to Muslims, it's just a metaphor). Jesus and Mohamed both existed, no doubt, but whether they were divinely endowed is within each individual religion.
And? Leaving aside the gross factual inaccuracies of your statements, and that you left out Buddhism and Hinduism, what does any of this have to do with cults?

Hindi seems to be the strange exception to these rules, but perhaps it's just the one-in-a-billion cult that managed to find a following.
A) Hindi is an Indian language, not a religion (the other main Indian language is Urdu). The indigenous religion of India is called Hinduism.

B) Hinduism is NOT a "one-in-a-billion cult that managed to find a following."

It is an ancient polytheistic religion practiced by millions of people, and it is comprised of many sub-groups focusing on different gods/ritual systems/beliefs for different purposes and connected to different locales. This is typical of polytheistic religions, which have their foundations in local religious traditions, which expand as a nation/society develops. It has no founding leader, either legendary or real. It has no founding text. Hinduism's texts were collected from many sources over many, many centuries, and they do not talk at all about the origin or purpose of the religion. The origin of Hinduism is lost to time and had no one single starting point. It was no one person's idea. Its foundations are the cultural traditions that have been practiced by the people of that region for thousands of years. To this day, Hinduism has many charismatic teachers, yogis, gurus, etc, but no one leader who claims to have the "truth" of Hinduism. As far as I understand it, Hinduism lacks the end-of-the-world nihilism of cults. Hinduism does not require its followers to abandon the world or society or their past social contacts. And finally, Hinduism does not make distinctions or value judgments between members and non-members.

For the above reasons, Hinduism lacks the features that distinguish cults.

I must disagree. These people are con artists. Any person dumb or smart can fall for a scam because the scammers a damn good at what they do. You wouldn't blame the guy for falling for it would you? Cults employ the same scam tactis only its not only the money and personal info they're after, they want the victim's mind and life as well.

First off, define "blame." I don't think they're guilty of a crime or deserve to be punished- I think they need help, and need serious education/therapy.
Also, did you see this thing on National Geographic? I don't pass judgment on the members of every cult everywhere, but the members of this one were following a completely uninspiring moron, and I can't imagine anyone falling for his crap ever. You have to see it to understand.

From what I know cults can take in anybody, they only turn people into cult types after recruitment. It's kinda like the borg, they can assimilate any organism but the organism ends up being meant for borg conditions.

Also I think America has many cults for three reasons:

1)Freedom of religion
Possibly. It also possibly has to do with the fact that the US was founded by people dismissed as "cultists" (or the 17th century equivalent) back in the old country -- people like the Puritans, Baptists, Anabaptists, Congregationalists, Quakers, etc. And don't forget the Deists and the Freemasons (not a religion, but still often denounced as a "secret society," "cabal," and "cult"). An entire nation founded by people who often radically rejected the old religious and social organizations in favor of new ideas, is likely to be more accepting of such radicalism among later generations as well.

2)Empty space
Um...there are cults in cities, too, you know.

3)societal breakdown leaves people lost so they desire beleif
HUH??? :confused:

Possibly. It also possibly has to do with the fact that the US was founded by people dismissed as "cultists" (or the 17th century equivalent) back in the old country -- people like the Puritans, Baptists, Anabaptists, Congregationalists, Quakers, etc. And don't forget the Deists and the Freemasons (not a religion, but still often denounced as a "secret society," "cabal," and "cult"). An entire nation founded by people who often radically rejected the old religious and social organizations in favor of new ideas, is likely to be more accepting of such radicalism among later generations as well.


Um...there are cults in cities, too, you know.


HUH??? :confused:

Social breakdown leaves people confused since there are no longer concrete rights and wrongs. Since people are uncertain they are open for others to tell them. I read that in Margaraet's book. After Japanses society was defeated in WWII many cults sprung up there, after the 60s cults sprang up in America at an amazingly high rate. During revolutions the same thing happened. Lands filled with uncertainty and confusion are fertile ground for cults. In uncertainty and chaos cults offer solidity, safety and clarity. But in truth they offer the exact opposite.

I must disagree. These people are con artists. Any person dumb or smart can fall for a scam because the scammers a damn good at what they do. You wouldn't blame the guy for falling for it would you? Cults employ the same scam tactis only its not only the money and personal info they're after, they want the victim's mind and life as well.

I agree in part. Imo, cult leaders ARE con artists -- outrageously egotistical ones. At best, they are cynical liars and cheats. At worst, they are nuts who succeed in conning even themselves.

But, I disagree with the idea that anyone can fall for their cant. There's an old saying about con games that says "you can't cheat an honest man." That saying is based on the fact that a lot of traditional cons try to lure the mark into getting one over on the con-man himself -- but the broader meaning of it is that a con only works if the mark wants whatever prize/lure/bait the con-man is dangling in front of him. In other words, you have to want what the con artist is selling. If not, then it's no sell, no con, no belief.

So the fact remains, that not everyone can be taken in by these people, because not everyone is interested in, and thus susceptible, to their messages.

Social breakdown leaves people confused since there are no longer concrete rights and wrongs. Since people are uncertain they are open for others to tell them. I read that in Margaraet's book. After Japanses society was defeated in WWII many cults sprung up there, after the 60s cults sprang up in America at an amazingly high rate. During revolutions the same thing happened. Lands filled with uncertainty and confusion are fertile ground for cults. In uncertainty and chaos cults offer solidity, safety and clarity. But in truth they offer the exact opposite.
A) So you mean that cults tend to spring up during times of social unrest or upheaval? I agree with that point.

B) That's true about Japan but not quite in the same way as the kinds of cults that are considered bad. "Cults" of this/that/whatever pop in and out of existence in Buddhism and Shintoism all the time, but they typically do not operate differently from the rest (mainstream) of those religions, and are considered a normal phenomenon within the belief system. Abusive, dangerous, charismatic cults like the one that set off the nerve gas attack on the Tokyo subway are extremely rare in that social system. So cults in Japan are not necessarily like cults such as Jim Jones' People's Temple, or the Branch Davidians under David Koresh, or the Westboro Baptist Church.

C) One thing that makes this discussion problematical is that there are two ways to use the word "cult." In religious studies, "cult" refers merely to any subgroup of worshippers within a religious system -- as in the cult of Mary or the cult of saints, or the cult of Mithra or Zeus or Dionysos, etc.

But in a narrow, relatively new usage, "cult" is used to describe a particular kind of religious group that has very specific features, including social isolation, rejection of mainstream social structures, total submission to a living charismatic leader, and abusive treatment of followers, especially constant attacks on and breaking down of the individual sense of self and replacement of self with, first, the group and, later, the leader, as main interest.

When we talk about destructive or bad cults, we are talking about the latter, not the former.

I agree in part. Imo, cult leaders ARE con artists -- outrageously egotistical ones. At best, they are cynical liars and cheats. At worst, they are nuts who succeed in conning even themselves.

But, I disagree with the idea that anyone can fall for their cant. There's an old saying about con games that says "you can't cheat an honest man." That saying is based on the fact that a lot of traditional cons try to lure the mark into getting one over on the con-man himself -- but the broader meaning of it is that a con only works if the mark wants whatever prize/lure/bait the con-man is dangling in front of him. In other words, you have to want what the con artist is selling. If not, then it's no sell, no con, no belief.

So the fact remains, that not everyone can be taken in by these people, because not everyone is interested in, and thus susceptible, to their messages.

Cult leaders want as many members as possible most of the time, when they recruit they make sure that what they sell is what the majority would want. Sometimes they even spy on individuals they beleive would be profitable members and find out what those individuals want to pull them in. I once went to a Christian cult school and they utilized that. The teachers, faculty and a "clique" of students who regulated the school environment on a student level through bullying and intimidation would pretend to be buds with you, find out what you like or what you want then use it either against you on behest of the admin or use it to try to coerce you.

Yes indeed, this my dear people, is how every major religion in the world started: a cult, a small sect. People found wierd. The ónly difference between the major religions, and these people (wich we DO call freaks) is time. Nothing more then that. The major religions we see today, are the cults who survived. Hell, loads more existed, even lots of former major religions died out. Think of the Egyptians, or the Aztecs.
Wich I also find wierd, is that we do call Scientology completly psycho, but most of us find the major religions not that odd. The main reason is I think, instead of using magic and the supernatural, they're using sci-fi. Just translate Genesis in sci-fi, and then compare again: an alien from another dimension teared the space-fabric in his dimension, creating a portal wich created our universe. Then, with the technology from his dimension and the freedom of not being bound to the laws of physics from our universe, he created stars and planets. Then he started to terraform planets, especially ours, engaging in genetic manipulation of the beings he bio-engineered. Etc etc etc, we can go on forever like this. Now compare that to Scientology's "alien emperor genocide" story, ánd take into account that the first story has míllions of beleivers. Is the Scientology story still that psycho, compared to the latter?
To the best of my knowledge, the catholic, muslim, buddhist churches etc. in the U.S. have stopped suing and coercing dissenters and scaring them into silence, and then claimed that this policy was part of their religion.

Cult leaders want as many members as possible most of the time, when they recruit they make sure that what they sell is what the majority would want. Sometimes they even spy on individuals they beleive would be profitable members and find out what those individuals want to pull them in. I once went to a Christian cult school and they utilized that. The teachers, faculty and a "clique" of students who regulated the school environment on a student level through bullying and intimidation would pretend to be buds with you, find out what you like or what you want then use it either against you on behest of the admin or use it to try to coerce you.
I'm not going to question your experience, but I'm also not going to accept your experience as indicative of the whole reality. Everything I have ever heard from law enforcement representatives talking about cults in the media and in academic articles written about cults and cult dynamics (those academic articles usually written by psychologists or social scientists), indicate that the opposite is true and that cults only attract a certain kind of person.

If it were as you say, and cults gear their message to what the majority wants in order to draw in the most people, then wouldn't the majority of people be in cults? But they are not.

In fact, according to law enforcement and academic experts, cult leaders actually DO NOT tailor their message to the majority, nor to just whoever they might cross paths with. They select their targets carefully, looking for submissive personalities, people with apparent emotional issues or other behavioral clues that might make them open to domination by the leader. Targets who show signs of too much independence or indifference to the message very early on will be quickly dropped so the recruiters can look for more promising subjects. It is AFTER the target is brought into the group, that the psychological conditioning begins, but if you are not likely material, you'll never get that far with them.

I stand by my point. Cult leaders want to control people, therefore they have no use for uncontrollable personalities. Yes, they will try to tailor their message to the individual, but that also works as a way to weed out uncontrollable/unreceptive personalities. So regardless of which people or how many people a cult leader may want, he's only going to get the ones that fall into the peronality types that are receptive to cult influence, and he will reject any competing alpha dog types.

If you get into a cult and you are not good cult material -- say for instance, you attended a meeting or a school because it appeared to be part of a more mainstream group you already belonged to, or just because you were curious to find out what it was about -- then they might spend some time trying to break down your resistance, but, according to most experts, they will eventually cast the resistant person out of the group and use such people as a scapegoat for something later on.

who defines what is and what isn't a cult... is the flds a cult and the lds not one?... branch davidians cult, seventh day adventists not? what about the hare krishnas... weird cult or just the most recognizable westernized hindu movement.

who defines what is and what isn't a cult... is the flds a cult and the lds not one?... branch davidians cult, seventh day adventists not? what about the hare krishnas... weird cult or just the most recognizable westernized hindu movement.

Legitimate question. This is why many groups that study religions and/or try to foster religious tolerance avoid using the word "cult" anymore -- because of its pejorative connotations. Basically every religion in the world has been denounced as a "cult" by someone who didn't like them, at some time.

I think, however, that the features that most social scientists/psychologists use to designate harmful groups is important to take into consideration -- so long as we remember that religions are not the only groups that can use those tactics to control their members. Whether it is a radical religious movement, or an extremist political movement, or whatever, the same tactics will yield the same results on the same kinds of people. Maybe not everyone can be brainwashed, but anyone can do brainwashing.

So, when you consider what religions fall into the negative group, you'd have to consider the group dynamic and its effect on its members.

At best, they are cynical liars and cheats. At worst, they are nuts who succeed in conning even themselves.

I actually feel worse for the nuts- they at least have an excuse. The cynical liars/cheats have no excuse at all, they're just out for personal gain and they know what they're doing is wrong.

There's an old saying about con games that says "you can't cheat an honest man." That saying is based on the fact that a lot of traditional cons try to lure the mark into getting one over on the con-man himself -- but the broader meaning of it is that a con only works if the mark wants whatever prize/lure/bait the con-man is dangling in front of him. In other words, you have to want what the con artist is selling. If not, then it's no sell, no con, no belief.

I don't think that all people who are searching for meaning, spirituality, or truth in their lives are susceptible to cult brainwashing. And it's these things that a cult is supposed to offer- answers, something above ourselves, etc. I think to be duped into believing that God wants you to give up your life, abandon your family, offer your wife up as a piece of meat, and pamper some egotistical bastard- well that takes a very, very confused person, or a very gullible one.
Most cult members have troubled pasts and were raised poorly, and are far more likely to cling to people who claim to have answers.

So the fact remains, that not everyone can be taken in by these people, because not everyone is interested in, and thus susceptible, to their messages.

Bottom line: Even people who are interested in some deeper truth are not necessarily going to fall for a cult leader's propaganda.

Personally, I would only join a cult if George Carlin decided to start one...

Personally, I would only join a cult if George Carlin decided to start one...

But that's Bad for Ya.

I actually feel worse for the nuts- they at least have an excuse. The cynical liars/cheats have no excuse at all, they're just out for personal gain and they know what they're doing is wrong.
True, but it's usually the nuts that end up getting people killed.


I don't think that all people who are searching for meaning, spirituality, or truth in their lives are susceptible to cult brainwashing. And it's these things that a cult is supposed to offer- answers, something above ourselves, etc. I think to be duped into believing that God wants you to give up your life, abandon your family, offer your wife up as a piece of meat, and pamper some egotistical bastard- well that takes a very, very confused person, or a very gullible one.
Most cult members have troubled pasts and were raised poorly, and are far more likely to cling to people who claim to have answers.



Bottom line: Even people who are interested in some deeper truth are not necessarily going to fall for a cult leader's propaganda.
Agreed.

I will be original, and claim that this is no different from any religion.

EDIT: Oh wait, I wasn't original at all. Hmm, pity.

An unspoken meme in Western Culture: Unthinking belief is admirable.

Seriously. Neither Christianity nor Islam have any truck wth Reason - they rely entirely on unthinking faith. In fact, they pretty much come out and say so; "have faith", "believe", "faith is the way" - these are the catchcries - never "reason your way to god."

When such mindless devotion is applied to an established faith, it's praised. Yet there is no actual difference between that and any so called "cult". Only the object of veneration has changed.

Quite the opposite, actually. (At least for Christianity. I can't speak for Islam.)

The Catholic Church loves reason. Scholasticism is nothing but a bunch of reason applied to axioms (Scriptures, usually) with inferences and syllogisms and all sorts of logical doo-dads. When the current Pope made those inflammatory remarks about Islam, the overall message of his speech was the dangers of faith without reason.
Personally, I don't think this is such a great thing. A dependence on reason leads to the opposite problem of what these cultists did, belief can disintegrate with the touch of a feather. And while reason is useful, it is a creation of humans. No, western religion is not unreasonable. If anything, it has the opposite problem.

A couple nights ago, I was watching something on the National Geographic Channel called "Inside a Cult."

Members of a cult had allowed cameramen into their trailer area, and let their lives be videotaped. They were all centered around one phenomenally creepy old bearded guy who called himself Michael. These people quit their jobs, took their kids out of public school (to learn via Internet... one young boy displayed his knowledge of the solar system by placing the planets in order, with Earth at the front and Jupiter at the end, and a whole clusterfuck in between... I think he might've been missing a couple planets, too), and dissolved their marriages (so that Michael could have sole access to the women). At first, watching how insanely devoted these people were, and watching them cry over all the things they had sacrificed to be part of this cult (but still insisting they were glad they had joined) seemed terrifying.

Then I heard a little more from them. And as time went on, the entire thing began seeming more and more like a Monty Python sketch.

These people were MORONS. They would've worshipped anything that moved. Listening to their conversations almost seemed like a joke. If it had been a movie, I would've thought it to be shitty and unrealistic, because of all the one-dimensional characters, predictable plot twists, and terrible acting.

Michael turned out to be an at least partially-senile man, whose voice sounded like a phone's dial-tone and whose eyes were emptier than a Michael Bay movie. You could tell by the look on his face that this man had never conceived a single rational thought in his entire life. He was an idiot.
Yet there they were, crowding around him, proclaiming his greatness. Talking about how he was the son of God.

His message revolved around the coming of Judgment Day- that only a few would be spared and he could take them to heaven. Well, judgment day arrived on October 31, 2007, and the cultists awaited it on a hill. I was stoked. I was thinking: "You're gonna have hell to pay now, you old bastard!"
But no. That was not the case. The cultists came down from the hill screaming: "Liberty! We're free! Hooray!" and went back to their trailers. That was it. That was the end of the world. It clearly didn't happen, but they're still in their trailers worshipping this insane, stupid, non-charismatic cult leader.
It was like all the glamour of cults had suddenly disappeared. I thought cults were supposed to be led by smart, manipulative people who could convince rational folks like you and me to join their cause.
Are they ALL this stupid? Why do people join? Do they have rocks in their skulls?

Someone please shed some light on this subject. I still have hope for the world, but if people can be duped this easily by such an uninspiring twat, then I think it's almost proof that judgment day will never come- because if it existed, it would've happened by now, just to wipe out these retards.

I feel for them, because they probably have poor lives and poor education, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have common sense- I mean this guy was using tricks that I used on other kids when I was a first grader. He wasn't persuasive. He wasn't bedazzling. He was a fucking dial-tone! What's the world coming to?

people have the right to believe whatever they. And they have the right to live however they want as long as they are not causing violence to third parties.

people have the right to believe whatever they. And they have the right to live however they want as long as they are not causing violence to third parties.

of course they do. that doesnt mean that they arent nutz though.

Quite the opposite, actually. (At least for Christianity. I can't speak for Islam.)

The Catholic Church loves reason. Scholasticism is nothing but a bunch of reason applied to axioms (Scriptures, usually) with inferences and syllogisms and all sorts of logical doo-dads. When the current Pope made those inflammatory remarks about Islam, the overall message of his speech was the dangers of faith without reason.
Personally, I don't think this is such a great thing. A dependence on reason leads to the opposite problem of what these cultists did, belief can disintegrate with the touch of a feather. And while reason is useful, it is a creation of humans. No, western religion is not unreasonable. If anything, it has the opposite problem.
Logic and reason sure is nót seen in various aspects of the Catholic church, like there views on condoms, or the simple "woman got magically pregnant from a godly being" part.

people have the right to believe whatever they. And they have the right to live however they want as long as they are not causing violence to third parties.

That's true, they do have that right. But judging by the amount of damage being done to them and their children, and judging by the fact that they're giving up everything to worship a self-motivated bastard who isn't really divine, I think a little constructive criticism such as: "Learn to think for yourself, dammit," is warranted.

I would not dispute their right to ruin their lives and follow a maniac, but I have to advise against it. And people who swallow these obvious lies- well, they deserve to be called gullible. In fact, they NEED to be called gullible. Now it would be better if we could call them that to their faces, because maybe then they'd wake the fuck up. But I forgot where the trailer park is :(

Quite the opposite, actually. (At least for Christianity. I can't speak for Islam.)

The Catholic Church loves reason. Scholasticism is nothing but a bunch of reason applied to axioms (Scriptures, usually) with inferences and syllogisms and all sorts of logical doo-dads. When the current Pope made those inflammatory remarks about Islam, the overall message of his speech was the dangers of faith without reason.
Personally, I don't think this is such a great thing. A dependence on reason leads to the opposite problem of what these cultists did, belief can disintegrate with the touch of a feather. And while reason is useful, it is a creation of humans. No, western religion is not unreasonable. If anything, it has the opposite problem.

An interesting viewpoint.
I'm of the opinion that reason and religion should sync up, and when they don't, I'm inclined to go with reason. It seems to me that if there is a higher power, then this higher power does not exist outside the boundaries of logic.

I hope that someday, a logical argument will come along that does one of two things:
1. Almost completely proves the existence of some sort of higher power (god/gods/life force/Godzilla)

or

2. Almost completely disproves the existence of a higher power.

I say "almost" because "completely" seemed like too much to ask for.
Unfortunately, these arguments will probably still never emerge. The problem is that so many religious people reject logic and reason because they're afraid it obscures faith, and so many logical people reject faith because they think it obscures reason. The end result is that there aren't enough people out there trying to logically prove or disprove God (if there's a way, we haven't found it), and we're not making any progress.

That's true, they do have that right. But judging by the amount of damage being done to them and their children, and judging by the fact that they're giving up everything to worship a self-motivated bastard who isn't really divine, I think a little constructive criticism such as: "Learn to think for yourself, dammit," is warranted.

I would not dispute their right to ruin their lives and follow a maniac, but I have to advise against it. And people who swallow these obvious lies- well, they deserve to be called gullible. In fact, they NEED to be called gullible. Now it would be better if we could call them that to their faces, because maybe then they'd wake the fuck up. But I forgot where the trailer park is :(
I think the "trailer park" remark is a bit uncalled for. The psychology of cults is much more complex than you make it sound. If people want to make decisions that make no sense to us, their right to do that must be respected. On the other hand, if people are stuck in an abusive situation, that has to be taken seriously.

In my opinion, people have the right to go to hell in any handbasket they like, so long as they do so knowingly and of their own free will. But I absolutely do not believe they have the right to drag their children along with them. I also believe that if authorities have reason to think members of a group are being abused, they should step in to offer help. If people don't want the help, fine, but I don't think the rest of society should just shrug their shoulders and do nothing on the grounds that it's religion, so it's personal.

I think the "trailer park" remark is a bit uncalled for.

A couple nights ago, I was watching something on the National Geographic Channel called "Inside a Cult."

Members of a cult had allowed cameramen into their trailer area

I think that the actual trailer park of the cult was being referred to there, not trailer parks in general.

But to be honest, reading it the other way made me giggle, even if it is a bit offensive.

I think the "trailer park" remark is a bit uncalled for.

I understand why you might think that, but the cult that National Geographic was covering actually was a trailer park, which is why I mention it.

The psychology of cults is much more complex than you make it sound.

I've been trying to avoid sweeping generalizations about all cults, but there is no doubt in my mind that the members of this particular cult need a serious wakeup call. They have been completely brainwashed, and have very apparent insecurities that require professional help.

If people want to make decisions that make no sense to us, their right to do that must be respected.

I certainly wouldn't want to ban cult worship- that would be unconstitutional. And I do have serious empathy for these people, and believe that it's imperative that they learn to depend on themselves and get removed from this cult as soon as possible. For most of them, it may be too late.
That said, there is no law anywhere that says I have to respect anyone, regardless of whatever kind of crap they put themselves through. I hope they someday reach a level of greater independence and are happy, but I sure as hell don't look up to these people.

On the other hand, if people are stuck in an abusive situation, that has to be taken seriously.

Yes.

In my opinion, people have the right to go to hell in any handbasket they like, so long as they do so knowingly and of their own free will. But I absolutely do not believe they have the right to drag their children along with them.

Once again, we are agreeing with one another- however, as I said before, I don't have to respect these people for their foolish, self-destructive choices.

I also believe that if authorities have reason to think members of a group are being abused, they should step in to offer help. If people don't want the help, fine, but I don't think the rest of society should just shrug their shoulders and do nothing on the grounds that it's religion, so it's personal.

Agreed.

But to be honest, reading it the other way made me giggle, even if it is a bit offensive.

... well it sure wasn't on purpose... ;)

EDIT: No, but it really wasn't.
EDIT AGAIN: ;)

Logic and reason sure is nót seen in various aspects of the Catholic church, like there views on condoms, or the simple "woman got magically pregnant from a godly being" part.

That's true. But Catholic theology is traditionally more logic based than Eastern Orthodox churches. But reason plays a big part for "Catholic intelligensia," I guess. And Protestantism is at least partially based on the idea that the individual is reasonable enough to interpret Scriptures without someone telling them what to think.

From what I know cults can take in anybody, they only turn people into cult types after recruitment. It's kinda like the borg, they can assimilate any organism but the organism ends up being meant for borg conditions.I don't buy this at all. Sometimes people are drawn in at a young age before they develop the ability to reason, but for the most part adults deliberately seek out the groups they join. How successful has the westboro baptist church been at recruitment? Do you know anyone who would seriously consider joining the church of scientology? You have to be an unusual person to accept anyone having that much authority over your life.

I've met people who belong to cults. They always claim it isn't a cult. Many of them have an almost pathological need to find meaning in their lives. I am sure they sought out the cults to fill this void in their lives, I don't think any one person has the power to create that kind of desperation in normal people. I listened to one guy rant for hours about the 2nd law of thermodynamics and how evil it was. Nothing about his cult actually said ANYTHING about the 2nd law of thermodynamics, but of course he thought it somehow did. This guy was really upset, he thought the 2nd law of thermodynamics was a conspiracy somehow.

<snip> I listened to one guy rant for hours about the 2nd law of thermodynamics and how evil it was. Nothing about his cult actually said ANYTHING about the 2nd law of thermodynamics, but of course he thought it somehow did. This guy was really upset, he thought the 2nd law of thermodynamics was a conspiracy somehow.
Crap, another one figured it out! Do you happen to know where he lives? No reason...I just want to...um... send him something...a cookie bouquet...yeah, that's it. :whistles innocently:

the state authorites removed 4 of these children from this cult today. i guess someone in santa fe must have watched the ads on national geographic channel

ALBUQUERQUE, April 30 (UPI) -- Authorities in New Mexico have taken four children from a doomsday cult after being told about alleged inappropriate contact with the cult's leader.

A spokeswoman for the state says authorities are investigating alleged misconduct by cult leader Wayne C. Bent who is known to his followers as Michael Travesser, The Albuquerque Journal reported Wednesday.



http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/04/30/children_removed_from_doomsday_cult/9575/