You have the right to remain silent
A teenager is facing prosecution for using the word “cult” to describe the Church of Scientology. The unnamed 15-year-old was served the summons by City of London police…Officers confiscated a placard with the word “cult” on it from the youth, who is under 18, and a case file has been sent to the Crown Prosecution Service.
Uh – right. Because that’s obviously a crime. Saying Scientology is a cult is self-evidently a crime. Uh…what? In what universe?
Demonstrators from the anti-Scientology group, Anonymous, who were outside the church’s £23m headquarters near St Paul’s cathedral, were banned by police from describing Scientology as a cult by police because it was “abusive and insulting”…A policewoman later read him section five of the Public Order Act and “strongly advised” him to remove the sign. The section prohibits signs which have representations or words which are threatening, abusive or insulting.
Which covers, if the police so choose, pretty much all words. Except maybe ‘nice’ – maybe the sign would have been permitted if it had said ‘Scientology is nice.’ Or maybe not, in case it was sarcastic.
The teenager refused to back down, quoting a 1984 high court ruling from Mr Justice Latey, in which he described the Church of Scientology as a “cult” which was “corrupt, sinister and dangerous”. After the exchange, a policewoman handed him a court summons and removed his sign.
Justice me no justices, Teenager; public order requires that things not be said on signs no matter how many justices have said them beforehand. Public order is a very fragile thing. All of London could be reduced to screaming anarchy and bloody warfare in a heartbeat if a sign were allowed to call Scientology a cult – so hand it over, and here’s your summons.
Liberty director, Shami Chakrabarti, said: “This barmy prosecution makes a mockery of Britain’s free speech traditions. “After criminalising the use of the word ‘cult’, perhaps the next step is to ban the words ‘war’ and ‘tax’ from peaceful demonstrations?”
Might as well. Best not to risk it.
It is well known that the Metropolitan Police are in the pocket of the scientologists.
This is no surprise, but it is dispiriting nevertheless.
I didnt know that, I lways thought they were controled by the M.C.B.
It’s not the Met, it’s City of London police, read the article.
Dave, you’re right of course. Makes no difference though.
See here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6171948.stm
and here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/nov/22/freedomofinformation.religion
Isn’t cult being too nice?
Wouldn’t sect be more appropriate?
Or money-grabbing group of vampires?
Or “Unscientologicless”?
Sociologists have standard definitions of what is meant by the term ‘cult’. Scientology is a cult. From Ellway 2005 (http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/religion/overview.php)
Churches—conventional organizations which claim a monopoly of religious truth
Denominations—conventional organizations which do not claim a monopoly of religious truth
Sects—deviant organizations which, however, follow an established religion and claim a monopoly of religious truth
Cults—deviant organizations which feature religious innovation and do not claim a monopoly of religious truth
I do unfortunately not remember the person who should be duely acknowledged for stating something like:
Scientology, the cult that has enshrined litigation as a sacrament.
Cassanders
In Cod we trust
Scientology is neither a religion nor a cult. It is an international organized crime ring masquerading as a cult.
@dzd,
At one level I tend to agree. On the other hand, I do find it meaningful to consider scientology as a “religion in the making”.
I can in fact perceive that L.Ron Hubbard, a pompous fraud extraordinaire, sometimes in the future could be considered a real prophet or equivalent. Just look at what status Joseph Smith have aquired.
Leave out the litigation etc, I think there are ANATOMICAL details of the Scientology “belief system” that are similar to many other religions.
Cassanders
In Cod we trust
All religion is international organized crime posing as charity.
Case just dismissed by the CPS, let’s hope there’ll be “lessons learned” at the CLP, but probably not…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/may/23/religion
I read on “blog washington post offbeat 2007 bbc scientology” that “scientologists can’t stand being called cult members,”
Hell hath no fury like that of cultists scorned.
If London police regard ‘cult’ as an offensive term shouldn’t they raid the Cult Information Centre, which many regard as a very respectable and useful UK charity and who give advice on escaping cults – including Scientology?
As CIC’s sponsors include the C of E, Baptist Union and Evangelical Alliance it’s not as if their analysis and policy is one drawn up by ‘militant atheists’.
the UK is violating European Union and European Union and European Council law if its doing this because the UK signed treaties that among other things protect freedom of the press and freedom of speech, which such an arrest would clearly violate.
Nor is this a valid case of defamation because defamation would require that a small group of people of a single person be defamed, and also that the statement not be true. In the case of scientology, they really are a cult…I would imagine that he will use truth as a defense if they are charging him with a version of criminal defamation.
Common sense prevails at last
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/may/23/religion
“
Police said they had “strongly advised” him to stop displaying the sign but he refused, citing a high court judgment from 1984 in which the organisation was described as a cult.”
Quite some kid! I suspect I would have quietly and grumpily just done what the police told me when I was 15
JoB,
“All religion is international organized crime posing as charity.”
I wasn’t going to bother to ask, but care to back up that statement?
@DFG
If religions may make non-empirically verifiable claims and deal highly rhetorical comments, why can’t JoB? Why should the “burden of proof” be higher for JoB than for those who are the targets of the comment?
Back to the topic of OB’s post, yet another shocker from the British police, who really are running around like headless chickens with broken moral compasses.
Gee, Roger, I wonder why…
@DFG.
Nah. Give ’em a taste of their own medicine :)