Columns

Oliver Dickie argues they should; Carlos Chambers disagrees.

Oliver:
   In no way should Scientology be recognised as a religion. It is a financial scam that uses intimidation tactics to silence critics, has complete disregard for authority, and presents serious health risks to its members. 
   It is generally accepted that most religions are dependent on donations to operate, but few actually put a price on membership. The Church of Scientology is regularly accused of being a business rather than a religion, exploiting its tax exemption status. While membership is possible without cost, members are strongly encouraged to attend classes costing from $100 to several thousand. This is required to gain status within the church, and also for an individual to ‘reconnect’ with their ‘alien soul’. This is clear exploitation of people’s fears and unfounded beliefs. On many occasions members of the church have been convicted of fraud, and even involuntary homicide, due to victims of this exploitation committing suicide due to the debt that church membership has forced them into. These activities have resulted in the church being labelled a dangerous cult by several governments around the world.
   With activities such as these, the church has its share of enemies and critics. The ‘Attack the attack’ policy is the church’s way of aggressively combating those it perceives to be its enemy. For instance, Operation Freakout aimed to get journalist Paulette Copper imprisoned or committed to a mental institution in response to her book, The Scandal of Scientology. There was also Operation Snow White, the single largest infiltration of the United States Government in history, in an attempt to destroy all unfavourable information about the church. It is these activities that strengthen its label of being a dangerous cult, and demonstrate the church’s disregard for the authorities and human rights. 
   The church encourages members to avoid conventional medical treatment, instead pressuring those who require treatment to seek it from within the church. When victims of these practices are found they appear starved and dehydrated. Due to the deaths that have resulted from such practices, the church now requires members to sign a waiver stating that the church cannot be held responsible for any injury or death resulting from religious activities, something no other moderate religion requires.
   Scientology should for no reason be recognised as a religion. Every individual has the right to choose what they believe, but when an organisation as dangerous, manipulative, and misleading as Scientology is recognised by governments it only legitimises and strengthens its ideas. 
 
   Carlos:
   Scientology is in no way different to the wide range of religions recognised by governments around the world. By refusing to recognise Scientology, governments would compromise their own values, and for many breach their constitutions and Bills of Rights. New Zealand society and those on which we model ourselves and take guidance from are societies where freedom of religion is widely recognised as a core pillar of the rights of citizens. 
   There is a central empirical point that Oliver overlooks: many governments around the world, Australia and New Zealand to name two, have already investigated the proposition and found Scientology should be recognised. In New Zealand the Dumbleton-Powles Report in 1969 investigated the perceived dangers of Scientology and recommended no legislative change to Scientology’s status. Although it is somewhat dated now, the fact remains that there have been no occurrences to justify altering this position. 
   Oliver points out that Scientology operates more as a dangerous business than a religion. While there are some instances which portray the more extreme sides of the religion, these are not unique to Scientology: they occur in all religions, from jihad suicide bombers to exorcisms and Maori rituals resulting in death. All religions contain practices which, while they may seem extreme to outsiders, are really the operation of individuals exercising their freedom of expression, conscience, and religion. One can imagine the result if governments stubbornly refused to recognise the Islamic religion. Refusing to recognise Scientology is not only the wrong answer but is immoral. 
   Scientology has a raft of positive influences on society. Examples can be seen in the recent Scientology Volunteer Ministers South Pacific Goodwill Tour or the Irish mission for a “drug-free Dublin”. These are instances of Scientology reaching out to help the community in different ways. Governments would be ludicrous to refuse to recognise a religion which impresses such useful and positive efforts on society.
   There is no justification for governments refusing to recognise Scientology as a religion. To do so would not only undermine governments’ legitimacy but would compromise freedom of expression and would alienate a religion which contributes constructively to society. If governments punish groups of people for practices simply because they do not agree with every aspect they will have only themselves to blame for the adverse consequences. 
 
   Debatable is a column written by the Otago University Debating Society. They meet every Tuesday at 7pm in Commerce 2.20.