oh it's from 2002. I did find it weird that Isaac Hayes would still be playing South Park's songs.

edit: Oh wait. he's actually dead. Wow. My first statement is now highly ironic. I guess he went to the big Xenu in the sky.

I would argue it doesn't mean the first is less stupid.

Does it really make a difference if he was told by "Xenu, the alien overlord" instead of "Yahweh , the invisible magic man in the sky"? It only seems less stupid because there is some familiarity with one over the other.

Not exactly.

Yes, an old man building a giant boat to fit every single species of animals on the planet for 40 days is completely ridiculous.
But if on top of that you add... "oh and he was told to do that by Xenu, the alien overlord". Then it's even stupider. (I know xenu has nothing to do with noah lol. I was just making a point).

Yes, the bullshit I'm used to is still bullshit. But if someone then adds another pile of crap on top of that bullshit, it becomes an even bigger pile of shit. (sorry for all the scat).

If someone is stupid enough to believe the first part, I'm sure it won't take much to believe the second part, but it doesn't mean it isn't even stupider.

>> ^Payback:

>> ^honkeytonk73:
They should look for the Jesus particle. Not only the God particle. I suppose there is also a Muhammad, a Buddha and a Xenu particle too.

Yeah, but the Xenu particle goes around talking shit about the other particles and uses embarrassing gluons it stole from well-known molecules that were edited by its brainwashed quarks.


Could very well be! Maybe the 'body thetans' stick to us via gluons after they get blown up by hydrogen bombs in volcanoes! We may just be on to something! Or.. ON SOMETHING. Yeah. Maybe that is it.

>> ^honkeytonk73:
They should look for the Jesus particle. Not only the God particle. I suppose there is also a Muhammad, a Buddha and a Xenu particle too.


Yeah, but the Xenu particle goes around talking shit about the other particles and uses embarrassing gluons it stole from well-known molecules that were edited by its brainwashed quarks.

They should look for the Jesus particle. Not only the God particle. I suppose there is also a Muhammad, a Buddha and a Xenu particle too.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

Orbs! I knew it. It's powered by the souls of the dead.


Is that where Xenu put them?

>> ^bcglorf:

^ or perhaps, stupid lady is stupid.
Scientology gets to be treated like other religions when it starts to act like one.
As long as it continues to refuse to discuss it's beliefs publicly, it deserves no protection at all.
As long as it actively refuses to allow anyone to see their 'secret documents' without paying vast sums of money first, it deserves no protection at all.
As long as it's deepest foundational beliefs still include Hubbard's Xenu alien origin of life fantasy, it deserves ridicule.
As long as it's practices continue to include things like "Fair Game", it deserves to be fought.
Fair Game, is a declaration that an opponent of scientology is 'fair game' for any and all manner of attacks and attempts to destroy their character as are needed to destroy them and their credibility. Vicky Aznaran, a formerly very high level scientologist described the effects/actions of that policy:
Because of my position and the reports which regularly crossed my desk, I know that during my entire presidency of RTC "fair game" actions against enemies were daily routine. Apart from the legal tactics described below, the "fair game" activities included break-ins, libel, upsetting the companies of the enemy, espionage, harassment, misuse of confidential communications in the folders of community members and so forth.


How is that not like "real" religions? Catholic excommunication? Execution for apostates from Islam? Calling Scientology "stupid" then going to church is ridiculous. Scientology is a frickin case study on how a bullshit idea can become a worldwide cult. The only difference between it and "real" religions is 10 or 15 centuries.

^ or perhaps, stupid lady is stupid.

Scientology gets to be treated like other religions when it starts to act like one.

As long as it continues to refuse to discuss it's beliefs publicly, it deserves no protection at all.

As long as it actively refuses to allow anyone to see their 'secret documents' without paying vast sums of money first, it deserves no protection at all.

As long as it's deepest foundational beliefs still include Hubbard's Xenu alien origin of life fantasy, it deserves ridicule.

As long as it's practices continue to include things like "Fair Game", it deserves to be fought.

Fair Game, is a declaration that an opponent of scientology is 'fair game' for any and all manner of attacks and attempts to destroy their character as are needed to destroy them and their credibility. Vicky Aznaran, a formerly very high level scientologist described the effects/actions of that policy:

Because of my position and the reports which regularly crossed my desk, I know that during my entire presidency of RTC "fair game" actions against enemies were daily routine. Apart from the legal tactics described below, the "fair game" activities included break-ins, libel, upsetting the companies of the enemy, espionage, harassment, misuse of confidential communications in the folders of community members and so forth.

Oh, Tom. It would be so easy to love you if you weren't scared about Xenu.

Allow me to answer.

When you are saying that the universe is controlled by a zombie vampire that demands cannibalize of all his worshipers on Sunday, YOU are under the burden of providing proof of such a silly explanation of how the universe works, not me.

Just as Dawkins says, why not Vishnu, why not Xenu, why not the Magic juju at the bottom of the ocean, why not the Flying Spaghetti Monster? See the problem with you "faithful" people is that you want to put the burden of proving that something by definition magical and unprovable on me the rational person.

Sorry, if you are going to believe that the tooth fairy is real, YOU have to show me the tooth fairy DNA. I don't have to WASTE my time searching for evidence in YOUR particular delusion when the world is FULL of other, funnier ones I'd rather search for if I was forced to.

As for re-inventing the wheel, I'm not saying we need to do that. If you re-read my post you'll see that I have no problem with secularizing the good teaching and removing them from all the mumbo jumbo. Be nice to each other, check. Don't kill people, check. Worship the magic doodaddie or you go to the magical pit of fire for all eternity... sorry, no check for you.

Anything else?

>> ^SDGundamX:

>> ^ponceleon:
Sure it is fair to dismiss ALL religion. Just because you are a little crazy in that you believe in magical forces controlling the universe doesn't make it ANY more legitimate.
[edit]
I do good things because it is better for all of us to be good to each other, not because some magical being threatens me if I don't do what he says. Who is a better person, the one who does good deeds because he wants to do good deeds, or the one who does them because he's afraid of the consequences if he doesn't?

I'm only going to address these two parts of your post, so sorry for the edit.
First part. Do you have any legitimate proof that magical forces aren't controlling the universe? I highly doubt it... you would have published said proof and won the Nobel prize by now.
What science has given us are facts about the world we live in, but that collection of facts can be interpreted in multiple ways. Where some people see only random chaos others see intelligent organization. Clearly, your interpretation of the facts is that there cannot possibly be any divine being or beings or any "mystical" forces. And that's fine! But surely you must realize that this is your interpretation? That other interpretations are possible? Were you to demand everyone to believe your interpretation (as Dawkins does) you would be no better than the Fundamentalists that both you and he despise.
Second part. What exactly is "doing good things?" That is precisely the question most religions strive to answer. You feel you can come up with the answers for yourself. I respect that! But others feel: why re-invent the wheel? People have been exploring this question (and many others like, "What is the meaning of life?") through religion and philosophy for centuries. They choose to look to other places for answers and they should be free to do so. In fact, I think we all should do a bit of introspection on questions like this more often and instead of blindly trying to force others to see our opinion, engage others in open and honest dialogue. Most hostility towards religion comes precisely because there are those who refuse to engage in honest dialogue, thereby giving themselves and religion in general a bad name.
In closing, I just want to say that nobody thinks unquestioning belief is a good thing. Faith is not the same thing as unquestioning belief. Faith is trust, and trust comes from experience. You yourself, ponceleon, have faith--faith in yourself and your own moral code that I'm assuming stems from your own personal experiencese. That is exactly the same way it is for the bulk of religious people (with the exception of the radicals and fundamentalists I mentioned earlier). Most religious people believe not because of some threat or because they no longer question things, but because their experiences in life have given them confidence that their interpretation of things is correct.

I was really just saying that someone always posts something along the lines of "Haha religion is poo" on all these videos. Admittedly I think that organised religion is, indeed, poo but because it matters to a lot of people I don't degrade it. Just like if my (imaginary) little sister cherished a rock I wouldn't harm it.

Re the last con: Yes, I would have said the same thing on a new age spiritualism video. I would have even said it on a scientology video because of the general term praying. But yeah, if you'd been saying "praying to Xenu" I probably wouldn't have called you on it because some religions are just bad news for everyone. Not all though - I think that's my basic defence.
>> ^chilaxe:

In reply to this comment by lampishthing:
I think that comment constitutes trolling on some level.>> ^chilaxe:
Is the prank that praying is make-believe?


I can honestly respect that sentiment. On the pro side, it could be right.

On the con side, the other above comments include an offensive racial stereotype, deliberate insensitivity to Muslims' ban on depictions of the prophet Mohammad, and the video itself might be highly offensive to some conservative Muslims.
I was religious when I was younger, and it did extract a cost on my life history, so I do make such comments based on my own experience, rather than as an outsider.
If this was a video of some new age spiritual ritual, I don't think my comment would be questioned, so I'm not sure what the difference is in the present circumstances.

That's my 2 cents on the pro and con, anyway

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Part of this has been through before:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Scientology-Leader-Can-t-Handle-the-Heat-On-Xenu-Storms-Out
I particularly enjoyed some of the commentary over there, check it out!

I saw Edge of Darkness - it was good, much better than I expected.

It's weird hearing Mel say "dude". I thought he was gonna say "you pissed on my rug, man" somewhere in there... The reporter was being an ass, but Mel should have expected that question. Chances are they had some agreement before the interview to not talk about it, and the guy asked anyway.

I think Mel Gibson is a good actor/director/etc, and I would see his movies regardless of his personal life and viewpoints. Same with Tom Cruise - controversial personal beliefs but the man has talent!

And I bought Shadow Complex

That doesn't mean that I hate Gays or Jews, or condone alcoholism or believe some Xenu bullshit.
Asshole.