BS: Isaac Hayes Quits

Subject: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: GUEST,celia
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 12:45 PM

Isaac Hayes quits over lampooning of Scientology

Double standards are a scary thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: wysiwyg
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 01:02 PM

Scientology is a money-motivated cult masquerading as a legitimate religion, that some people have been bamboozled into actually following AS a religion.

Hayes is just another confused Scientologist-- confused, because it is, inherently, not possible either to follow or to untangle its beliefs and practices without eventually running right into the reality of the cult underlying it. The cult doesn't like that-- understandably-- and makes every effort to prevent exposure. There's even a sophisticated process, taught to adherents, on how to deflect attacks on Scientology. Many who have left have been put on lists of people other adherents are invited to harass in profoundly unpleasant ways.

How do I know any of this?

I have known Scientologists who left... Scientologists who left the corrupt organization but still follow and proselytize for the belief system... people the cult tried to snag... and secular humanists who have helped counsel and de-program them. There is ample documentation for all of the above, and if you Google you will find a lot of it.

BTW, my "intolerance" of Scientology is not based on my own religion's view of it-- my denomination, as far as I know, has no view on it-- but on my outrage over the damage done to the victims of it who I have known well.

~Susan
~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 01:06 PM

God is a comedian, playing to an audience too afraid to laugh.
Voltaire

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 01:20 PM

Well that's just a shame because he was one of the best things about that show. Maybe the best thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Windsinger
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 01:58 PM

Susan,

Once (a LONG time ago) I skimmed Dianetics to see what all the fuss was about. It was worth a raised eyebrow, a "well, whatever blows your skirt up" and I put it down without much more thought.

Shortly afterwards, a really blistering exposé (I forget who did it) ran on T.V. about how the "church" routinely mounts campaigns of stalking and harrasment against any of its outspoken critics.

That was worth two raised eyebrows and a "man, y'all are LOOPY."

I mean, I can be pretty open-minded. But IMHO, that's edging a bit close to the kind of activity you'd expect from a confirmed hate-group.

Slán,

~Fionn

www.geocities.com/children_of_lir

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 01:58 PM

Hardly....

If he's this big an idiot, I hope they recast, and movie on, after making a HUGE joke of him...

Oh wait.... he's already done that himself....

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: The Shambles
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 02:01 PM

You can't go wrong with an 'ology'.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: wysiwyg
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 03:00 PM

Fionn, Dianetics (the process) is not quite the same as Scientology (the cult). The former is used as bait for the latter, but has aspects that some people find helpful. It's unfortunate that the helpful aspects are used to start the programming the latter depends upon.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Windsinger
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 03:26 PM

Right. Even destructive belief-systems have to offer "something" that seems healthy, attractive and reasonable in the beginning. Otherwise there'd BE no new members.

Well, Dostoevsky did say that the true measure of a civilized society is how it treats its prisoners. Similarly, a belief system shows its true face when it demonstrates an "oficial" stance on dealing with critics and apostates.

The track-record for Hayes' buddies is not altogether flattering.

The two South Park creators, by contrast, seem to be behaving in downright decent fashion. They could sue the bejezus out of him for breach of contract, but it sounds like they're content with letting him walk away in peace.

Slán,

~Fionn

www.geocities.com/children_of_lir

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: frogprince
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 03:38 PM

Notd sure if this is more funny or pitiful. The show has been free to portray God "himself" as a grotesque lizard. But when it takes on the "religion" Hubbard started after saying, in effect, "I think I'll start a religion, that's where the money is" ...

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: SINSULL
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 05:54 PM

Let me get this straight - I have seen satire on a Jewish Children's camp, on The Passion of the Christ, on Jesus and Satan ( he has a talk show for Christ's sake). One Christmas Special had a newborn saviour turning out to be a demonic Bambi. Another has a piece os shit called Mr. Hanky solving the discord between Jews and Christians. There was a cow cult that led to mass bovine suicide.

And Old Isaac made a bundle in these but now he has a problem with South Park ridiculing religion?

I hope there is an episode under construction for the new season explaining his absence from the series.

WYSIWYG - you do know that there are many who claim the same about Christianity, right?

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: wysiwyg
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 06:28 PM

No, Sinsull, I forgot about every anti-religion rant here at Mudcat. :~)

Excuse me, I gotta go do a hit on a lapsed Christian. ;

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 06:31 PM

"now he has a problem with South Park ridiculing religion?"

No.. he's got a problem with them ridiculing HIS religion (Like his religions isn't ridiculous enough on it's own)

He's a FKNG hypocrite

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 06:47 PM

"It all depends on whose ox is being gored"

one of the wisest sayings of all time.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 07:02 PM

I don't give a hoot about either Isaac Hayes or South Park, so you're on your own for this thread, Clinton.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: SINSULL
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 07:29 PM

I wasn't referring to Mudcatters, Susan. I know two psychiatrists who do exactly the same for people traumatized by Christianity in their childhoods. Not a criticism, an observation.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: wysiwyg
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 08:12 PM

I've known and helped people like that, too, SINS. I would offer the observation that it is not Christianity per se that has caused the trauma, but the bent view of it and/or the people forcing "belief."

I think there are some other differences between Scientology and what you reference; Christianity did not exactly start as a bamboozle-- although sometimes its ambassadors make it look like it did.

Also, Scientology (the cult) is ALL about the money, throughout its empire; Christianity in most places-- the places I know from direct experience-- is not. If it is-- I'm still waiting for mine.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: michaelr
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 08:29 PM

They promise you eternal life in heaven after you're dead.

If you buy that, I'd say you've been bamboozled.

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Amos
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 08:30 PM

Susan knows precious little about the subject, although I am sure she knows people who have been betrayed or hurt by the organization, which is a mishmash of misbegotten demi-beings. However, I suppose I could find a good number of young children who have been hurt by abuse on the part of organized Christian leaders, as well. That would hardly lead me to assert that the entire realm of Christianity is perverted, on that grounds alone.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: wysiwyg
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 08:33 PM

Yes, Amos, do tell us what you know about it. But tell us all-- don't tapdance around it.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: GUEST,Cluin
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 09:21 PM

I hear he's a complicated man and no one understands him but his woman.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: bobad
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 09:31 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Do you believe in UFOs, God, Atlantis...
From: bobad - PM
Date: 11 Mar 06 - 09:41 PM

Interesting article on scientology in Rolling Stone mag.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/9363363/inside_scientology?rnd=1142130986625&has-player=true&version=6.0.12.872

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: SINSULL
Date: 14 Mar 06 - 10:29 PM

Just saw the offending episode. Aside from Tom Cruise coming out of the closet, it wasn't even very funny.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: wysiwyg
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 09:47 AM

The programming to smear persistent "attackers" of Scientology is so deep that people who have been programmed that way just can't resist outing themselves or making themselves look silly to the non-programmed. Even when it's against their own best interests to get into it.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 10:01 AM

Ewan MacColl once said that you could tell how important money was to God by the people he gave it all to, you can tell how seriously to take scientology by all the famous wankers who joined up for it.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Windsinger
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 10:04 AM

:::snicker::: Cluin. :)

Slán,

~Fionn

www.geocities.com/children_of_lir

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: EBarnacle
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 11:31 AM

OK, it's time to learn Martian. Consider the effects on those who followed Valentine Michael Smith.
Power is a matter of understanding and, in the case of Scientology, blackmail.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: greg stephens
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 11:38 AM

Eric the Red: Ewan MacColl may have written Dirty Old Town and Shoals of Herring, but he certainly didnt come up with that money/God saying.
   Some 18th century satirist(cant remember his name) said it, referring to Francis Charteris.
Mind you, he might not have been the first to say it, either.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: greg stephens
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 11:54 AM

Further to my previous post, I've just looked up the quote I was trying to remember. It was by the Scottish humorist John Arbuthnot, writing c 1730. He was composing a magnicently insulting epitaph for Francis Charteris, a notable shitbag of the time.The relevant section reads:

"Oh! Indignant reader! Think not his life useless to mankind. Providence connived at his execrable designs, to give to after ages a conspicuous proof and example of how small estimation is exorbitant wealth in the eyes of God, by his bestowing it on the most unworthy of all mortals"

They don't write insults like that any more!

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Jeri
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 02:07 PM

One wonders how they're going to write him off the show. There certainly is more focus on the show now, and lots more people will watch those older episodes taking the piss out of other religions and the one on Scientologists. He couldn't have done more good for a show that is popular BECAUSE it pisses people off.

Now, maybe they could kill Chef, but it might be better for him to have an accident that changes his voice. What's Michael Jackson doing these days? (Bye Bye, Chocolate Salty Balls) Or maybe Chef could go through puberty a second time and come out with a James Earl Jones voice. (I don't think he can sing, though. ) Maybe they could discover he's an illegal immigrant and send him back across the border to Canada.

(SINSULL actually HAS the Mr Hankie action figure!)

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: wysiwyg
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 02:09 PM

Got my Scientology warning today via PM. Can't wait to see the smear attempt.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: bobad
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 06:05 PM

Whoever is issuing the warning may want to take a look here.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 06:10 PM

Anything can be lampooned.

Anyone can quit.

So, what's the big deal?

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 06:18 PM

I understand that the US Marines take a dim view of people leaving the cult on their own recognizance too... (They must think they own their people, body and soul, eh?)

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 06:27 PM

As to people who have been involved in Scientology: I understand that Amos was. He is one of the finest people on this whole damned site. Didn't hurt him one bit.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Greg F.
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 06:41 PM

Some a these here cults can be awful durn tetchy & teejus- lookit Pope Torquemada I - OOOPS, I mean Benedict - goin' on recently about the Eagles bein' the Devil's Music & such like.....

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: bobad
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 07:26 PM

"Anyone can quit.

So, what's the big deal?"

If you read the article I linked to you will see that there is a price to be paid for quitting.

And don't you think that people receiving warnings by PM is kind of creepy.?

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 07:30 PM

Yep. But that type of thing is not restricted to Scientology, and some posts on this thread seemed to single out Scientology as though other organizations didn't do that.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 07:58 PM

I quit the Unitarians, and someone burned a question mark on my lawn.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 08:30 PM

Was it done upside down Bill? That could be a bad sign.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Windsinger
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 08:33 PM

Or was it a lower case "t" (as in, "time" to leave)?

:P

Slán,

~Fionn

www.geocities.com/children_of_lir

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 08:35 PM

Or by someone who writes Spanish.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Anonny Mouse
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 09:31 PM

FWIW South Park harpooned, lampooned, skewered, sliced, diced, roasted, toasted and totally dissed the Mormons. Episode almost made me pee my knickers. Didn't see Donny Osmond quit the show, did we! (What's that? Donny's not ON the show....oh....nevermind).

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 10:31 PM

Now THAT one I am sorry I missed!

I have an Irish-American friend who was a Catholic priest in his 20's. He quit, after much soul-searching, because he couldn't agree with the Vatican's archaic policies. For this he was ostracized by his whole family, and his neighborhood, and literally everyone he had known in his youth. It was as if he had been excommunicated. This was in the late 60's.

Another cult in action? I'd say so.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Alba
Date: 15 Mar 06 - 11:08 PM

I have been thinking about this, not a helluva lot you understand just thinking.
I have come to the conclusion that Hayes isn't leaving because of the episode that slagged off scientology.
I think he is leaving because the South Parks Guys took so long to actually including scientology in an episode.

The Episode "Super Best Friends" covered quite a bit of turf when it came to Religion and beliefs.
It had Jesus, *Muhammed*, Krishna, Joseph Smith, Lao Tsu and Moses...The Super Best Friends. (* that got me thinking a bit actually)

So I think that Haynes and his lot are just p'd off that it took a few years before they got the nod.
Hayes didn't have any problem cashing the check for his work on the show through the years as one of it's Writers said.
So I think it is more that South Park didn't focus enough on Scientology rather than it focused on it at all:)
Hayes leaving won't change the show one bit. I think Chef will stay and someone else will do the voice...if Chef does go though it will be way OTT for sure.
They are running the Scientology episode just before the start of new Season I think...just to rub it in.

Just a thought I wanted to share with you all before my bedtime...

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: GUEST,Dave'sWife sans Cookie
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 12:00 AM

I really don't want to bring down the wrath of anyone but....(watch me do it anway!)

When I was involved in Science Fiction publishing, The publishing arm of the COS was a client of mine. I came to be extremely close friends with a number of Scientologists, some of them highly placed. I even dated one fellow in The Church for a time. It was not a big deal that I was Catholic.

Over time, a few of these people left the Church and experienced virtually none of the lengendary harrassment described here. I'm sure there is some conflict between the CoS and ex-members, but from what I've seen up close and personal, it's a little hard to believe that they have Death Squads and so on. I did see one marriage break up over the wife's choice to leave but it was a marriage that would not have stayed intact even if she stayed. The Church-member husband wanted the marriage to survive and it was the ex-member that filed for divorce. Neither spouse was obviously hassled by anyone in the CoS.

I never met L. Ron Hubbard himself because by the time I came to the account, he was older and ill. I did however, have very close and deep friendships with people who knew him from his youth right on up through the writing of Dianetics and beyond. I've read a fair amount of the books that most people describe as Cult-ish and all I see is a synthesis of a large number of world faiths into what Hubbard thought of as a unified approach.

I've stayed at The Manor Hotel, taken a course or two at the Celebrity Center, even toured the Purification Run-Down facility and found nothing evil there. I've even had an E-meter reading that was interesting even if it wasn't all that helpful. I've gone to dozens of events at Author's Services (The agency that handles Hubbards Literary estate and that administers the Writers of The Future Contest) At no time was I ever lured into Scientology or even proselytized to. The only time they ever spoke to me directly about Scientology was when I asked questions of my friends. And when I did, they answered me honestly and gave me literature if I asked for it.

I'm not defending the tenents of their faith because I don't really buy them. I'm just saying that if Scientologists were the predatory and evil organziation they are made out to be, wouldn't I have been subjected to their alleged programming techniques?

I've met Issac Hayes at some of those events and John Travolta and some of the other celebs that are supposed to be controlled by the CoSW. They were all articulate and independent artists who seemed to me to be adults practising their right to worhsip as they please. As I said above, I know a number of former Church members as well and socialized with them as they were leaving. Perhaps they were exceptions, but they were not harrassed.

If I had any criticism of my friends who are in CoS it's only that they don't choose to see a difference between legitimate medications and "Poisonous" medications or drugs. of course, I could say the same about my friend who is a Christian Scientist.

Of course all of this is only my own experience. Still, I believe in terms of actual social contact with Church members, I've had more than most people. I just find it hard to believe that all the 'normal' scientologists I've met are the exception and not the rule. Every Church has it's screwier members and loose cannons. I'd guess Tom Cruise is one of their screwier members.

Heck, when I was growing up, my Mum dragged me around the lunatic fringe of Catholicism- healing masses, speaking in tongues, prophetic messages about the end of the world, Marion apparitions in Bayside Queens, and so on. If all anyone ever read about Catholicism were exposes on Audrey Santo's mother, The Sex Scandal, The Blue Army and their Sede-Vacantsists - they'd assume all Catholics were nutcases and "programmed" to believe weird stuff.

The one thing the Anti-Cult movement seems to assert over and over is that none of us can be trusted, even in adulthood, to decide for ourselves whatever we want to believe if it differs from what our parents, family or close friends believe. If we change our beliefs from those we were raised with, we were 'duped' or 'programmed.' The movement was begun by parents appalled at their adult childrens' choices. In some cases, their alarm was understandable. Sadly, the movement adopted questionable methods (Kidnapping AKA Deprogramming) and after some convictions, lost all credibility. I say sadly because I do believe that there are grifters out there masquerading as Gurus and it would have been nice for there to still be a place for troubled families to get help.

All you have to do is look at Rick Ross's Anti-Cult site to see what I mean. To Ross, anything that's not Christian and Protestant is a cult or a dangerous cult. He labels so many legitimate churches as cults you migth want to check to see if you too are a cult victim. unbeknownst to you!

The way I look at the US Constitution, you are free to worship as you please (or not worship) even if it freaks some people (and your parents) out.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Amos
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 12:26 AM

Actually, Susan is talking about a PM I sent her, where I told her I thought her ill-informed remarks about the nature of Scientology were beneath her, and asked her to keep the peace and knock it off. It was not a warning. I have no warnings to send anyone who wants to shoot their mouth off.   But she chose to re-frame it that way for reasons of her own. Like Dave's wife, I have known many members of Scientology, as Old Guy will be glad to point out, and they were mostly among the most decent folks you could want to know, much like Mudcat.   

But the organization does have a history of being extremely litigious and, in my own opinion, not living up to the merits of their subject, which is a very different thing than their reputation for money-hunger and enemy-bashing would indicate. Oddly enough, much like Buddhism, it is a body of observations that requires no "worship". Anyway, that is neither here nor there. I concur completely with Dave's wife's last sentence.   

A

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 02:30 AM

Here we go, the ' apologists ' are turning out now.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 05:17 AM

L Ron Hubbard's ship 'The Scotsman' was kicked out of Hull dock would you believe, and then also Gibraltar. Where you serving serving on it at that time Amos?

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Alba
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 08:22 AM

Just a wee aside here, I read a long time ago about The ship Ted mentions. Being drawn to her name..**BG**. She was to be part of Hubbard's 'Sea ORG Fleet' and was, when purchased by Hubbard, registered as 'The Royal Scotsman'. A former Irish Channel Cattle Ferry.
Due to, shall we say, difficulties obtaining permission for her to sail they reregistered a bit too quickly and her name was misspelled and so she became 'The Royal Scotman'!
I think she ran aground somewhere! I can't remember and I don't think that Issac Hayes ever sailed on her either:)
(Notice my pathetic attempt to return to topic..*small grin*

As I have said before somewhere or other, maybe here on the Mudcat, or maybe I said it somewhere else. Anyway, I know I have said at one time because it is what I feel, what ever makes YOUR Boat float when it comes to what YOU believe, don't Believe, Worship or don't Worship because it is none of MY Business
I will however retain my right to read about and investigate various Ideologies/Religions and their claims and arrive at my own conclusions regarding what I read and if I feel the urge, I will also exercise my right to verbally air my own conclusions regarding said Ideologies/Religions and their claims. Then again I don't often feel the need or urge to discuss my opinions of other people's choosen paths. .but that's just me.

My best to all as always
Jude

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Amos
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 10:09 AM

It was never kicked out of Hull, Ted; it was bought in Hull, refitted in Southampton, and then sailed off to its various adventures. That was wayyyyyy back, if I recall correctly, wasn't it? 1967 or thereabouts?

I think it was refused entry at Gib once -- something about being a spy ship for the CIA. No telling what they thought!

Most of its port adventures were much friendlier, I am told by those who knew.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: robomatic
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 10:12 AM

I've been a big fan of Isaac Hayes since he was a guest star on Rockford Files (called James Garner's character "Rockfish").

He was definitely one of the high points of South Park, and it was a stroke of near genius when they invited him on, so to speak.

Hope they can make up, but if not, it's one of those 'thangs'.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: SINSULL
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 10:14 AM

According to Operation Clambake that episode will not be shown again in the US or the UK. It is a network decision. It is being shown on the website:

http://www.xenu.net/



"Got my Scientology warning today via PM. Can't wait to see the smear attempt.

~Susan "
When I saw this I believed that Susan had actually been threatened. But I could not understand why no one else had been sent the same threat. After reading Amos' post, I am more confused.

I firmly believe that all religions offer hope to some people. My son was a Black Muslim for a while when they were the only ones to help him out during a jail stay. It gave him something to hold on to. If Scientology or Christianity or Hari Krishna or Paganism gives a person a foundation on which to anchor his life, good. In my experience, all require a "believer" to suspend reason and accept certain tenets "on Faith". Be it Xenu and the lost souls or a GodMan redeeming the sins of mankind.
The problems start when any religion claims it is the only true faith and condemns everyone else to damnation. Assuming "god" exists, does anyone really think he cares whether he is worshipped in the form of a mass or a moon festival or whatever? And if a religion helps people to live and prosper - isn't that what it is all about?

Sorry for the stream of consciousness.
Mary, who loves South Park

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: saulgoldie
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 10:22 AM

The main difference between what we call a "cult" and what we recognize as "legitimate religion" is the time they take to indoctrinate their followers. But as long as there is no coercion, followers of either should be free to practice how they will without our interference. And also free to keep their practices off ME.

Shame Hayes doesn't jibe with the "take no prisoners" attitude of South Park. (Or so it seems.) I'll miss him. But I will move on to the next chapter, whatever that may be. South Park is funny as all get out!

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Windsinger
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 10:33 AM

the "take no prisoners" attitude of South Park

That's just it; the show basically follows the comedic style of a roast. Not everybody enjoys watching roasts, but I do.

One thing about a roast is that nothing is considered too low, too scathing, or too off-limits for comedic fodder. Another, is that if one has been held for each of your friends, rest assured that eventually it WILL be your turn.

When that day comes, to throw a hissyfit and stalk off in a huff instead of laughing it off (especially if you were an active participant in all the other fiery engagements!) is just plain sulky.

Slán,

~Fionn

www.geocities.com/children_of_lir

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Jeri
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 11:43 AM

I don't know if he threw a hissyfit or not. As far as him working on the show when it was taking the piss out of other religions and quitting when it came to taking his own on, well, he may be a hypocrit. It may also be the 'final straw' syndrome, or he could have changed his mind. It's not worth getting upset about, and the South Park folks are happy just to let him out of his contract. Mary, I agree with you completely. Religion, when it helps individual people cope and gives them some power over their own world, helps them feel less afraid and strong enough to be kind, is a good thing. When it becomes about power over others, be-littling people, taking from them and controlling them, and going through life treating others as if they're lesser beings, it's not.

ANY religion can go either way, and sometimes the nasty stuff is institutionalized. BUT... most folks would be under the radar of the powerful, and the threats and other scary stuff are likely to happen only to the rich, famous, or otherwise influential folks.   

I heard an interview with George Clooney on NPR a couple of months ago. (Paraphrasing, from my memory) He said one of the most important things a famous person needs to be able to do is to laugh at themselves. This is probably a good ability for everyone to have, if they don't want to be overly vulnerable and get their egos injured all the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: SINSULL
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 04:33 PM

I just read John Travolta's free e-book. It is a guidebook to happiness that appears to me to be a rip-off of the ten commandments, the Golden Rule and common sense.
Don't steal, don't lie, don't kill, respect your parents? Not exactly groundbreaking, I think. One point he makes is a little unsettling. That is that truth is whatever you know to be true. HMMMMM. Truth is relative to an individual. So if one is dyslexic, god is a dog? Absolute fact? For the record, I am NOT being facetious.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Alba
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 04:49 PM

Well if that's the case Sins and the truth is what we want it to be....

I AM A GODDESS


Although I have to say that particular extract from the "Guide to Happiness" is a tad unsettling!!
Kind of like saying if you don't like things the way they actually are you just stick your fingers in your ears and scream lalalalalalala very quickly while at the same time forming a "truth" as you would like it be:)
If you get my drift!
I don't even know if "I" get my drift on that...sorry I am hungry..lol
Love
Jude

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: GUEST,Dave'sWife
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 08:09 PM

AMos, I don't know you very well, but I am glad to hear that my experiences are not unusual with regard to my freindships with Scientologists. Since I am active in a Christian Church and take issue with a fair amount of what my Scientology friends choose to believe, I don't see how I can remotely be labelled as an "apologist" by anyone. An Apologists seek to demonstarte that the tenents of a particulr faith are true and to be believed. I've done none of that.

For the record, I'm an Anthropologist and linguist with a fair amount of fieldwork in the are of New Religious Movements. I've seen the good, the wacky, the simply misguided and the dangerous. I believe there is potential for emotional abuse in every faith and sect. The basic issue is not is Sceintolougy weird, it is are people as adults free to choose what they wish to believe in and/or worship. I use the term 'worship' in the legal sense but I acknowledge that many faiths don't worship at all including scientology.

This thread has both saddenned me and encouraged me. Amos, if I ever figure out my password, I'll PM you. We may have some friends in common. Shame on me for not being in touch with them for a long while. I think the perfect antidote to this thread might be a nice dinner with some old pals.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: frogprince
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 08:14 PM

"truth is whatever you know to be true"
Is that really any different than saying "It's just common sense" when you really mean "that's what I was taught to believe, so that's my final answer" ?

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 08:30 PM

All great spiritual teachings could be termed "ripoffs" then, SINSULL, because they do all emphasize the same basic principles, I've found. (like, Duh!) Combine common sense, good morals, good rules of bodily health, being kind, being truthful, not stealing, the Golden Rule, and various stuff like that and PRESTO! ...you have the basic essential teachings that underlie virtually every major faith and most of the minor ones. It would be incredible if they did NOT appear in L. Ron Hubbard's books.

It's the political authority structures that gloss over that stuff, pay it lip service, and go around conquering and enslaving. That is not the fault of the original teachings, it just shows that greedy people can take ANY teaching and rapidly turn it to evil ends if they want to.

As for the remark someone made about "apologists" for Scientoloy...that was particularly nasty, in that it makes the automatic assumption that there must BE something to apologize for. There might not be anything to apologize for.

It's like saying, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" and requiring only a "yes" or "no" answer in reply.

There's never been anyone who joined any offbeat spiritual organization who wasn't accused by some @sshole of being in a "cult". Matter of fact, even people who change into another major religion are usually accused of the same thing, in different words.

People have a 100% right to freely join any darned religion they want to, and be left alone, and not be pre-judged or condemned for it. Judge them by what happens afterward if you wish to judge them. Judge them by their fruits...their attitude and their works, not their religious label.

I have found excellent people and jerks in most religions...although...I don't think I've ever met a Buddhist who was a jerk. (but I'm sure there's one out there somewhere...I just haven't met him yet, that's all)

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: wysiwyg
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 08:51 PM

"Apologist" as a term discussiong religion is not about apologies as we understand that word today-- it's about explaining in such a way as to convert. It's not a pejorative, although when used in a secular sense it would be. CS Lewis, for example, was a well-known apologist. Look it up, LH-- you'll see what I'm explaining so poorly.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 08:57 PM

Okay....

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Dave'sWife
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 08:58 PM

I found my cookie! yay. Actually, found my password and so reset my cookie. but:

Littlehawk - Apologetics or to be an Apologost isn't apologizing for something - it's defending it. it's a subfield of theology.

Here's a link to an exlanation of what Apologetics is:


Apologetics - definition

In brief:
>>> Apolegitcs is the field of study concerned with the systematic defense of a position. Someone who engages in apologetics is called an apologist or an "apologete".<<



While it was mean to call me or Amos an Apologist for Scientology, it was mean for different reasons. It characterizes us as people who believe in Scientology's principles which both of us has stated we do not.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 09:11 PM

Yes, well, I could certainly detect a bit of nastiness behind Eric the Red's use of the word...a clear presumption of his own superiority to those who could find anything good to say about scientology, shall we say?

I recall, back in the early 70's, seeing stuff about scientology. I figured it was probably weird, and I wasn't interested in it, but I never actually knew anything about it worth mentioning...nor did any of the people I ever heard voicing strong opinions about it.

They were all just talking to hear themselves talk, basically.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Dave'sWife
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 09:25 PM

I actually don't feel Eric the red meant anything personal by it just that it was a handy way to dimiss my own and Amos' experiences. Just thought I'd say that. Perhaps he also thought ther term means something other than what it does. EtR is OK.

The page I linked to shows a little of what I was discussing regarding the vehemence of the Anti-Cult movement. if you look down the page to the bibliographic references, you will see a classic Anti-Cult work entitled KINGDOM OF THE CULTS - a book that if you read it today ould appall you in its small-mindedness of 1960s spirtual movements.

Another interesting thing is how the world 'cult' is viewed in different countries. It simply means 'sect'and is still used that way in French common usage. It wasn't until some very angry British parents of young adults who joined The Processs sued in court to have them declared as incompetants (circa 1965) that the word came to its present association with mind control.

The Processeans were a fascinating grouo, one that still exists here in the United States as Best Friends Animal Sanctuary. They have attemtped to go mainstream Christian and leave their Tri-une appraoch of Jehovah/Lucifer/Satan behind them. Their founders were dissident Scientology students. Their legal cases in the United States and in England are important ones in terms of freedom of religion and rights to worship. One could argue that as misguided as they seemed to be, they advanced the rights of everyone who wants to not have to worry about the parents labelling them insane for leaving Christianity for paganism or other more experimental-seeming faiths. (The Processeans had a decidely pagan bent in their first 10 years which faded after the ouster of the original leader, Robert De Grimston.)

Well, that's more than anyone needed to read I'm sure. I'll stop now. This isn't class after all.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Peace
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 09:26 PM

I will say again that Amos is a wonderful human being. And that ain't apologetics; that's fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 09:42 PM

I was frequently encountering people with the Process on Toronto streets in the early 70's. Again, I thought they were a little weird, but it was a superficial impression I had, and nothing more than that. I was opposed to all religions at that time on principle. ;-)

It's easy to be an atheist when you're at that young age, and besides, it makes you feel cool, sophisticated, and way smarter than people who are religious. Everyone loves feeling smarter than other people, that's what I've always noticed.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: SINSULL
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 09:42 PM

Little Hawk,
John Travolta has published an e-book and that is what I was referring to. He wants everyone to read it and pass it on to their friends. In the end, he believes, it will change the world.
My point is that if the Ten Commandments, the Golden Rule and common sense haven't changed the world to date, I doubt that John Travolta's reciting of them will.
But go read it for yourself. It will take less than hour. And tell me what you think.
SINS

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 09:53 PM

Okay. Will do.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: wysiwyg
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 10:22 PM

Thanks, Dave's Wife, for the apologetics clarification. I was multitasking when I posted earlier and I could not get the small portion of available brain to spin to the correct place! :~)

This, from Wikipedia, further clarifies my post:

Religious apologetics is the effort to show:

<> that the preferred faith [being defended] is not irrational,
<> that believing in it is not against human reason,
<> and that in fact the religion contains values and promotes ways of life more in accord with human nature than other faiths or beliefs.

~S~
[my bullets and bracketed text]

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Dave'sWife
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 11:13 PM

Susan - don't thank me too quickly. You pointed out something in your post that makes your calling anyone in this thread an apologist for scientology sorely mistaken.

Neither Amos nor I ever tried to defend the things Scientology believes in. Rather, we defended their right to freely associate with like-minded people without being accused of en masse dementia. We defended the rights of adults to choose to believe in something that might seem disturbing or weird to their communities and families - all rights deeply embedded within the US Constitution.

Here's my problem with apostasy in any religion in a nutshell - and apostasy is another one of those terms that gets horribly misused by people in the Anti-Cult movement. An Apostate is not someone who has merely left a faith but someone who goes to a great deal of trouble and effort to either try and seek the utter demise of the faith they left or to actively dissuade current members to leave through various means, often as questionable as any means used to convert new members.

The way I see it, if a religion, sect, faith etc is something you grow to feel is no longer for you - why not walk away, send a letter of disassociation to make the break and then go walk with "god" on your path to enlightenment? Why dedicate your life to the destruction of something you don't believe in? Just asking.

The organized groups that are "against" a particular faith be it Christian Science, Catholicism, Scientology Jehovah's Witnesses, Hare Krishna, WICCA, Neo-Paganism, Amway, etc etc are virtually New Religious Movements in their own right. To belong, you must adhere to a stated set of belief which includes that your former beliefs are wrong and evil. To defy the 'order' of the anri-faith group is to be 'excommunicated' from that group. Smells like religion to me.

If I were an "apologist" for Scientology, I would have to be telling you that what they believe is either true or rational or valid. I've said no such thing. All I've said is that I know dozens, maybe even hundreds of Scientologists and that I have not once seen the legendary stuff referred to in this thread. I've further stated that NO scientologist has ever tried to 'program' me despite having had me in their "evil clutches" for days at a time while vacationing at the Manor Hotel or on long trips I've taken with those Scientologist friends. My Sea Org friends have never tried to kidnap me and take me to sea either. Am I so special that they wouldn't dare? I doubt it.

Enough of that -

Littlehawk - I would LOVE to talk to you real time about any experiences you had with members of The Process. I have been making field recordings of stories people tell about The Proceess or about Processians for over 20 years. I am espeically interested in any experiences any one had at one of their ceremonies, at any visits to Processian sponsored Cafes in Toronto, NY, Boston, New Orleans, San Francisco and Los Angeles. I would be very intrested in any recordings of any music performed at such cafes.

If you can recall any of the names of Processians that would be fabulous. They used to adopt names such as 'Brother Ely' 'Sister Hecate" and so on. Having the Process names of people helps me trace the evolution of the group during their travels. Their records were largely destroyed in 1974.

My goal is to publish a serious acadamic work on the history of The Process, their specific liturgy prior to the 1974 rift and to trace the various factions' evolution following the great rift. The serious study done of The Process is woefully subjective. Bainbridge, the author, was virtually a member while he travelled with them and he obsured the identities of his 'subjects' in a lame effort to claim academic distance. He was not objective and his observations stopped shrotly after 1974.

Anyone here can help me will have my assurance that I will assign you coded names in the event that you have concerns about being identified. Many people who encountered the Process in the late 60s and early 70s mistakenly believed them to be Satanists and so are often scared to talk about them.

I am especially interested in an offshoot of The Process which sprung up in Yonkers, White Plains and Brewster NY in the mid-1970s. They were Neo-Pagan in nature and had some connection to a few well-known rock musicians. Anyone with info, please PM me. Again, confidences will be kept. I already have an academic publisher interested - this will not be a smear campaign although I will be covering some unsavory aspects of the Brewster group and clashes with law enforcement.

Thanks. Forgive my typos please. The mere prospect of getting new info on The Process and Process splinter groups overwhelmed me with excitement.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: wysiwyg
Date: 16 Mar 06 - 11:17 PM

I didn't call ANYONE an apologist, Dave's Wife. So I didn't read past that in your post.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Seamus Kennedy
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 01:44 AM

Boy, my Erhardt Seminar Training is paying dividends right now!

Gotta pee.

Seamus

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: GUEST,Billy
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 01:51 AM

There used to be a maxim for taverns. Don't try to argue about politics or religion and everyone would get on fine. In other words, "Don't try to change my viewpoint and I won't try to change yours." That doesn't seem to work on the internet but it would be nice if it did.
IMHO ALL religions are "cults" to one degree or another. I had to attend "Sunday School" as a kid for many years. But at the age of 14 (I guess I reached the age of reason) I was learning science and attempted to engage my (presbeterian) minister in a discussion on the reality of God. I was puzzled between the charictarization of the vengeful god of the old testament, the loving God of the new testament and the presbeterian visualization as an angry God who would not forgive a sin. I also argued science and Natural Selection. After some arguement on both sides, I asked, "If God created the Earth with Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, then why did he take so much trouble burying all the dinosaur bones in the ground that date to well before the supposed 5,000 BC Jewish date (corroborated by the King James Bible of "Eden" so beloved of the presbeterians) when the Garden of Eden supposely existed. At that he gave up and said, "You have to have FAITH!" Well, growing up poor, I didn't see where this magical commodity was going to appear from so I just gave it up as a complete fraud on the part of all organized religions. You either have FAITH or you don't. It seems to be as Karl Marx said, "Religion is the opiate of the masses." And organized religions of all persuasions are the drug pushers.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Purple Foxx
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 02:23 AM

Guest Billy I recall getting into a protracted argument with an R.S.L. member back in the eighties.
He had taken great offence at my suggestion that Leninism was itself,to all intents & purposes, a surrogate religion.
I was subjected to a tediously long & ill-tempered itemisation of the Materialistic & empirical bases of Marxist thought which concluded with him informing me that "You've lost your FAITH in the Working Class!"
Since which time I have tended to the view that Dialectical Materialism is the opiate of the Marxists.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Dave'sWife
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:32 AM

Purple Fox, yes you have quite a point there and so does guest Billy. Is it any wonder that we often pair up politics and religion in the same code of things that shouldn't be discussed lest they start arguments. Political beliefs are no different than religion to many and an Ex-members of political parties often dedicate their lives to trying to warn the massses of the evils and dangers of their former party associations the same way former members of certain faiths do.

Rock Ross, the anti-cult crusader I mentioned earlier goes even further than that and labels Multi-level marketing schemes such as Amway as "cults." I bring that up just to illustrate that once one begins assigning negative 'cult' status to groups they don't like, it's fairly hard to stop.

But even as Guest Billy has pointed out that arguing about regligion and politcs is fairly pointless, there seems to be no shrotage of BS threads about both!

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: bobad
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:54 AM

Dave's Wife, how would you define a cult?

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 07:31 AM

From the ' Rhythm Of Life ' " Theres a million pigeons, waiting to be hooked on new religions "

Scientology was invented by Ron Hubbard, who was proved to be a charlatan many years ago in the UK, how can it be a religion ? cult is a kind word for it, are these peoples lives so meaningless that they have to have something invented to give them meaning or worth ?

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: SINSULL
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 07:39 AM

Erhardt was an offshoot of Holiday Magic. I worked for them running a warehouse in the 60s. I was signed up as a distributor to keep the members from recruiting me and attended their Alpha Training and Executive Training seminars. Yes - no peeing except when allowed and no sleeping given the length of the class and the amount of homework given. I got in trouble when I just didn't bother to show up on Day 4.

There was a "Cult" atmosphere. If you believed and belonged, all was happy and prosperous. If you doubted, you were abused. $10,000 later I ended my association with cults.

But I got my first sales training there and it has stood me well for years. At the same time, I saw very sad cases - people with no money borrowing from relatives to advance up the pyramid when it was obvious that they didn't have a clue about the business end. No one sold product; everyone who made money did it by recruiting new distributors who also never sold product.

It was a constant "up and down" for them. They would go to a seminar, come back all psyched, and a week later when they couldn't find a single recruit, they'd be down, way down and abused into attending another seminar. There was a never ending line of paid seminars. Strange times.

But EST, Amway and other offshoots prospered for years even after Holiday Magic got in trouble with the bunko squad.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: SINSULL
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 07:56 AM

eric,
Can you not see that the same can be said of any organized religion? Texts read with magic glasses that conveniently get lost, Virgin births and Resurrections, guarantees of an afterlife surrounded by virgins, the evil of using medications even for fatal illnesses - these are beliefs accepted by members of established major religions.

This is NOT a criticism. It is an observation. I am not ridiculing anyone's beliefs. I respect religion and understand the stabilizing affect it has on society. I understand that for some, the church is the very center of their lives and the place they turn to when trouble strikes.

If Scientology offered me a belief system that made it possible for me to live and function happily, I would accept Xenu as easily as I would accept an angry god turning people into salt or drowning everyone and starting over. Faith is the key. That one step beyond what can be proved. As far as I can tell all religions require a Leap of Faith.

Scientology is a legally recognized religion. It has tax free status in the US. There are people who accept Scientology as their belief system. I can respect that. Money? I know many Catholics and Jews who routinely give huge amounts of money to their churches and synagogues as donations, payment for instruction, payment for funeral and wedding ceremonies. $10,000 for the key to existence would be a small price to pay if I believed someone had it.

SINS

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 09:27 AM

Totally agree with you SINSULL, I've been an atheist since my father died over fifty years ago but most of my friends and aquaintences are bog standard christians ie. catholics and protestants although some are devout, I also have some pagan friends, all these have one thing in common, [ no matter how daft I think them ] they were founded thousands of years ago, by whom I don't think anyone really knows, scientology on the other hand was invented only a few years ago by a third rate science FICTION writer called Ron.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Amos
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 10:23 AM

As an aside, let me apologistically add that the whole Xenu routine was laid on top of a subject that was pretty fully developed already, around 1968. The fundamentals of Scientology are an effort to take the major peieces of human thought and experience -- such as communication, human affinites, and agreements -- and build a working understanding based on how these things work. I have always thought that was an idea that made more sense than trying to insist that all thought, feeling and reality comes from neurons having good or bad days.

My suspicion is that Isaac would have laughed off the Scientology episode of South Park, if left to his own devices, but that he was put under some sort of organizational pressure to make an issue out of it. As has been pointed out above, the show about Scientology was pretty minimal compared to some of the silly take-offs about other religous groups. And it was certainly within the norms of South Park. So it may not be a hypocrisy on Hayes' part, but rather on the organization's part.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 11:47 AM

I know this is threadrift but.......

since we are discussing cults in general, can you tell me what you know about the Landmark group? Seems to me that their 'training' involves practices that are similar to brainwashing. What have you heard about this group?

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 01:05 PM

I think that any religion...and I do mean ANY...could easily be seen as a cult by people who didn't belong to it. And why not? But what does that say about religion? Nothing. It just says that people have a resistance toward stuff other people believe if it's different from what they believe or they just are ignorant of it. They tend to judge divergent and unfamiliar forms of belief in a negative manner.

Is Leninism a religion...or a cult? Darned right it is! But it's not a religion or a cult about God, it's a religion and a cult about dialectical materialism.

Are multi-level marketing sytems cults? Yeah! But they are cults, in the most basic sense, about making money through a pyramid scheme.

Are political parties cults? Damn right they are! That's my
opinion. They are complex and highly powerful cults which manipulate the public in order to secure political power for an elite few.

Then you've got the Masons and various other smaller organizations. More cults. They all have their ow particular beliefs, their own power structure and hierarchy, and they are all a mystery to people who don't belong to them.

The only people who won't join cults are people who refuse to join anything at all, in my opinion. So...if you want to join something in oder to give your life more meaning, just find the cult that best suits you, join it, and stop fretting about all the other cults that don't suit you. They aren't there for you, they're there for somebody else, obviously.

If a religion (cult) makes you happier and improves your life, then it's clearly useful for you, isn't it?

Dave's Wife - Regarding the Process: Sorry, I have no real information to offer at this point, I just remember running into their people on the street numerous times, and glancing at some of their flyers.

SINSULL - I read about half of Travolta's Ebook. It appears to be mostly just common sense to me. I don't think I'll bother reading the 2nd half.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Amos
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 01:38 PM

Eric:

Ya know, I am not so sure it is true that Hubbard was proved to be a charlatan. I think he may have been a bit carried away with himself, but if you have not, yourself, examined what he did and said, I would be reluctant to throw around so condemnatory a word. Idiosyncratic, eccentric, I can see.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: GUEST,M.Ted
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 03:08 PM

I have been following this thread with interest, if not occasional alarm. I am pleased that Amos and Dave's Wife have acquited themselves so well. I was a little bit worried for a while...

I have always had an affinity for "fringe" beliefs, and always give people as much time as I can to tell me about what they believe and why. I wish that more people would do that--I think there would be a lot less trouble if people made it their objective to understand, rather than to argue or "expose"--

At any rate, I've met some interesting people, some of whom later came to rather bad ends--I have found it much easier, over time, to find compassion for them, despite their human failings, than to have sympathy for their antagonists--

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 03:23 PM

Good post, M.Ted.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Amos
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 03:38 PM

Sins,

I don't think the statement was, "truth is anything you think". I have never spoken about it to Hubbard, but my impression is that it is not a statement about vocabulary or articulation. A dyslexic does not KNOW backwards -- he just manages symbols backwards or sees them wrongly. The proposition that 'the truth is what is true for you' is a terribly important spiritual principle that flies in the face of authoritarian religions (including the organization of Scientology to some degre, paradoxically enough) by asserting that for any individual being, truth must be what that being owns as truth, not what he is told to believe by others. This does not preclude communication, learning, changing your mind, but it warns the individual that his own integrity is important and not to be cowed by others who would like to enforce their view of truth. I think it is a valuable little maxim, but like any maxim, you have to use it well to make it useful. Cf. "The kingdom of heaven is within you" loosely translated from another philosopher, which if used wrongly can do more harm than good, for example, by making someone feel they have no reason to do anything positive in life "because they already have heaven within them". That isn't what the maxim really means, in context, if you see my point! :D

A

A

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 04:08 PM

To be truly free, any human being must own their own truth, not have someone else's truth grafted onto them by persuasion, trickery, repetition, common convention, charismatic power, or whatever. The only way to know truth is to KNOW it inside yourself as a direct realization. People will tell you absolutely anything...for a variety of reasons...but only you can know what is true for you.

I take it that is what was meant by the passage in question.

I don't take it as referring to someone believing the moon is made out of cheese or the Earth is hollow or something else arbitrary or capricious like that...which they have no actual experience of.

If, for instance, Joan of Arc believed that she had been spoken to by Angels, then there was (and is) no one else who really had or has anything definitive to say about the matter at all as to whether it might be false or true. Only Joan could say, because only she KNEW by direct experience. For her, it was true, true beyond question, and for her that was the only relevant opinion on the matter. This made her strong. It enabled her to accomplish incredible things. (And it made her very dangerous to the status quo of her society, which is why it was used later to kill her.)

This may bug someone who cannot believe in Angels and who wants everyone else to share his disbelief. If so, that's his problem, his hangup, it's not the problem of Joan of Arc. He wasn't there, she was.

This is why you must find your own truth, not let other people browbeat or frighten you into theirs...if you want to be free, that is. If you are, a lot of people won't like it. They'd rather you let them decide for you what is true.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: SINSULL
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 05:11 PM

Little Hawk - I understand. When I read that one of the key 20 rules I needed to follow in order to promote world peace was to brush my teeth - I'm sorry. Yes - the world will be a better place if no one has bad breath. And people will have more self confidence if they have all their teeth. But promote world peace by brushing your teeth? I'd rather go dig for those missing magic glasses.

Amos - thanks for the clarification.

Eric - I too am an atheist with a family that is at times vehemently Catholic. They love me so they pray for me - A LOT. What they can't understand is how I pray for them.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: GUEST,M.Ted
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 05:15 PM

What St. Joan meant when she says"Angels" may not be what you think of when you hear someone say "Angels". You never know.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 05:18 PM

To have supportive thoughts for someone and to wish them well is to pray for them in my way of thinking...and you can do that just fine whether as an atheist or not.

I guess that in general the world would be a more peaceful place if everyone were healthier. No question about it, actually. People do antisocial things most often when they're under stress of some kind. But yeah, it makes for kind of boring reading, doesn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Peace
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 05:32 PM

Amway. Anyone heard of it?

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 05:52 PM

Yeah. I had an acquaintance who tried to sell me on Amway. I went to a meeting, but was not impressed. Not my kind of thing at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:02 PM

the truth is what is true for you'

hmmm, Amos...the difficulty is, that 'principle', said in such a way, is poorly stated. It is, by its very nature, ambiguous and subject to gross misuse. It can easily fall victim to something like you note in "the kindgom of heaven" example.

We have here a statement, and implicitly also, a 'meta-statement' about the very definition of 'truth'. This happens over & over in some of these debates as one person takes a poetic, subjective idea of a concept and thinks they are expressing some sort of absolute. All "True for me" can be is an assertion that I like the locution being put forward. This can be useful, and if all it means is that "thinking this way is comforting for me and expresses my belief system..etc..", then we have, if not agreement, at least useful communication. But if a person gets the notion that merely holding a view somehow ennobles and establishes it as **true** in a more precise sense, then we have a problem!

I write..(yeah, maybe 'preach') over & over about equivocation and the very real problems it causes.....and I'm sorry, but not really 'getting' why it IS a problem doesn't excuse one from the ramifications of its use. It is beyond important to be clear about what is being claimed to be 'true' if we are to have a meaningful discussion about it. The same points hold even more strongly for uses of the word 'valid'...as in "my belief is just as valid as yours.

If we don't adopt some rules about all this and educate people in their use, we'll be forever just talking past one another.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:09 PM

We will forever be talking past each other, Bill. Accept it, that's my advice. ;-)

Or else start a brand new church, and you can preach your gospel of non-equivocation and total objectivity there. In time you may succeed in assembling a large number of people who are as bothered about the use of equivocation as you are. Together you will become a mighty force which can then go forth on the planet, spreading the word and converting (or exterminating) the heathen. Why confine your efforts to this puny forum? Think big, man! You could become as famous as Jesus or Mohammed or even Harry Lee Wigley, if you play it right.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: SINSULL
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:39 PM

Ayn Rand tried that. She made some money and still has a cult following. A is A.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Peace
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:40 PM

Amway uses the same techniques as religions to attract followers.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Peace
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:42 PM

Oh, BTW,



C

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: SINSULL
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:43 PM

Amway is an offshoot of Holiday Magic - mentioned above.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Peace
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:45 PM

Thank you, SINSULL. I wasn't aware of that.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Deda
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 06:48 PM

Another story about this
here in Variety,
And another Here, hollywood interrupted.

(Scroll down on the last one.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 07:05 PM

" Accept it, that's my advice. ;-)"

I try...I really try...☺...and then someone makes some off-the-wall broad-as-the-Nile generalization and my eyes glaze over and...........

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Jeri
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 07:17 PM

HAHA!

"So, Scientology, you may have won THIS battle, but the million-year war for earth has just begun! Temporarily anozinizing our episode will NOT stop us from keeping Thetans forever trapped in your pitiful man-bodies. Curses and drat! You have obstructed us for now, but your feeble bid to save humanity will fail! Hail Xenu!!!"

The duo signed the statement [to Daily Variety] "Trey Parker and Matt Stone, servants of the dark lord Xenu."

I can't wait to see the episode on Scientology they do next... on whatever network they'll be on.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 07:38 PM

I already think of human beings as virtual god-soul-beings temporarily trapped in man-bodies on this little planet, living out lives of almost total illusion and horrid limitation as a result of that mind trap...and I'm not a Scientologist. ;-D I only found out about scientology's ideas on it in the last couple of days.

What they call body, mind, and "theta" I call body, mind, and spirit. The same concepts are well understood in the East. It is the mind that leads people astray and makes them think small. Very small. Very scared. Very critical. Very jealous. Very demanding. Very argumentative. Very intolerant. Addicted to being "right". Very stressed. Very hungry...but for what, it truly doesn't know.

The main purpose of meditation in Eastern religions is to quiet that nattering little mind and discover something far wiser and greater and much kinder in the silence that comes when it finally shuts up.

That will never happen on this forum, needless to say. The chattering and arguing and the continual being "right" (at someone else's expense) will just go on forever here or until the site crashes for the last time or Max shuts it down or until they drop "the big one".

Whichever happens first.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Azizi
Date: 17 Mar 06 - 10:11 PM

It just occurred to me that having Isaac Hayes play the part of a Chef on "South Park" might have been-at least in part-a witty reference to his classic album "Hot Buttered Soul".

For me, and I'm willing to bet quite a number of people, Issac Hayes will always be associated with that album. And apart from the songs on the album, the album's cover-a bare chested bald headed Black brotha man with chains around his chest-has to rank as one of the most memorable album covers ever.

Here's an excerpt from an online review of "Hot Buttered Soul":

Released at the tail end of the '60s, Hot Buttered Soul set the precedent for how soul would evolve in the early '70s, simultaneously establishing Isaac Hayes and the Bar-Kays as major forces within black music. Though not quite as definitive as Black Moses or as well-known as Shaft, Hot Buttered Soul remains an undeniably seminal record; it stretched its songs far beyond the traditional three-to-four-minute industry norm, featured long instrumental stretches where the Bar-Kays stole the spotlight, and it introduced a new, iconic persona for soul with Hayes' tough yet sensual image. With the release of this album, Motown suddenly seemed manufactured and James Brown a bit too theatrical. Surprising many, the album features only four songs. The first, "Walk on By," is an epic 12-minute moment of true perfection, its trademark string-laden intro just dripping with syrupy sentiment, and the thumping mid-tempo drum beat and accompanying bassline instilling a complementary sense of nasty funk to the song; if that isn't enough to make it an amazing song, Hayes' almost painful performance brings yet more feeling to the song,with the guitar's heavy vibrato and the female background singers taking the song to even further heights.The following three songs aren't quite as stunning but are still no doubt impressive: "Hyperbolicsyllabicsequedalymistic" trades in sappy sentiment for straight-ahead funk, highlighted by a stomping piano halfway through the song; "One Woman" is the least epic moment, clocking in at only five minutes, but stands as a straightforward, well-executed love ballad; and finally, there's the infamous 18-minute "By the Time I Get to Phoenix" and its lengthy monologue which slowly eases you toward the climactic, almost-orchestral finale, a beautiful way to end one of soul's timeless, landmark albums, the album that transformed Hayes into a lifelong icon. ~ Jason Birchmeier, All Music Guide

Isaac Hayes: Hot Buttered Soul

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Alice
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 10:27 AM

LH, there is much about the history and abuse done by Scientology at factnet.org. It is nothing like eastern religions or philosophy. The telling is in the deeds, not the creed.

Fact net has an update on South Park's bravery to confront Scientology. Because the cult has a policy called "fair game" and requires members to attack any critics, including using illegal methods (fair game), it is rare that anyone gets away with criticising Scient. They tried to crush TIME magazine for doing an expose years ago, they forced MTV to give them free ad time because MTV mentioned them in a cult program, they have sued former members into bankruptcy and worse.

Factnet was founded to expose Scientology and finally won their battle in the courts.
Here is a link to the factnet home page and their article on South Park.
Click here

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Alice
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 10:39 AM

You wouldn't think anyone could intimidate the IRS, but Scientology can and has.
quote in part:
"The Church of Scientology may routinely operate by shrouding its practices, but its interactions with government should be a matter of public record. Taxpayers need to know if they are being treated fairly and whether the IRS, as Judge Silverman queried, has made Scientologists its 'chosen people.'"
Read March, 2004, St. Petersburg Times full article here:
http://www.sptimes.com/2004/03/25/Opinion/IRS___chosen_people_.shtml

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Alice
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 10:47 AM

What Scientology won't tell you - an info pack.
Operation Clambake the Inner Secrets of Scientology

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Alice
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 10:57 AM

Something I didn't know about Hubbard that I found on the clambake expose - Click

"In mid-1967 Hubbard bought three ships and put to sea with a small cadre of followers. Styling himself "the Commodore," he spent the next several years wandering the Atlantic, pursued by imaginary Reds and Nazis and attended by "Commodore's Messengers," teenaged girls dressed in white hot pants who waited on him hand and foot, bathing and dressing him and even catching the ash from his cigarettes. He had frequent screaming tantrums and instituted brutal punishments such as incarceration in the ship's filthy chain-locker for days or weeks at a time and "overboarding," in which errant crew members were blindfolded, bound and thrown overboard, dropping up to 40 ft. into the cold sea and hoping not to hit the side of the ship with its razor-sharp barnacles on the way down.  These punishments applied to children as well as to adults.
 
Hubbard made bungling attempts to take over Morocco and Rhodesia and was banned from further entry into Britain. He began the Sea Organization (SO), whose members wear pseudo-naval uniforms, adopt naval ranks, sign billion year contracts and are pressured to have abortions when they become pregnant because children are perceived as interfering with their SO obligations. Hubbard created the infamously abusive Rehabilitation Project Force as a special punishment for SO members who fail to follow orders, make mistakes or fall short of production goals. "

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Amos
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 11:00 AM

Wow, Alice, you are on a roll! LOL!!

My suggestion is to not get involved in the organizations of Scientology. It works for me!! :D

A

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: GUEST,Google user
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 01:11 PM

You should know, Amos.

It might be easier if you just gave a brief account of why you know, since so much is available anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Amos
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 01:24 PM

Hell, just read the Bush thread, anonymous one.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: michaelr
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 01:38 PM

Interesting...

A spokesperson for Tom Cruise has come forward and denied that South Park's Scientology episode was yanked because of pressure from Cruise. The spokesperson stated that Cruise did not threaten not to promote his upcoming movie "Mission: Impossible 3". (The movie is produced by Paramount, which is owned by Viacom, which also owns Comedy Central).

Methinks they do protest too much!

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 01:52 PM

well, it's all very interesting. I gather that Amos does have personal knowlege of the problems with COS. I also read between the lines that he doesn't think it would serve much to regale us with details.

I try to limit my conversations and debates here to what people say HERE, not to what they 'may' have done or said in the past.

Amos & I have traded banter, from light to serious, for several years, but when I finally met him, we played music and sipped beverages.

I can easily read information that makes clear to me that *I* would not care for COS or 99% of its concepts, and though I might pop in with my 2¢ worth if I see COS ideas being touted, I see no use in trying to link folks in subtle ways.

let's be clear, but let's be fair.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 02:02 PM

Alice, this is a matter I have no personal stake in, one way or the other. I was simply noting that Scientology's theory of the 3-part human being (body, mind, spirit) is much the same as that in some of the Eastern religions. I found that interesting.

I have noticed that any controversial matter whatsoever...be it scientology, George Bush, the CIA, USA plans to attack Iran, Haliburton, magnetic therapy, chemotherapy, heart surgery, the AMA, the FDA, any alternative health prodecure, vaccination...anything at all like that has spawned libraries full of stuff on the Internet which either utterly damns it or utterly praises and exonerates it.

Pick the side you like. Look up the sites that support your view....pro or con...ignore the ones that don't...and you will be delighted with what you find, I'm sure.

This leaves me, frankly, with nowhere to go except to consult people I actually know who have had actual experience with scientology. I trust that more than a site with an ax to grind or an unknown person on the Internet with an ax to grind.

Like all people, though, if I already have a strong opinion on something I am much encouraged by the internet sites which bolster my established opinion, I sneer knowingly at those which don't, and I see that you already have a strong opinion on scientology. ;-D

I don't.

Your efforts to convince me to share your opinion are likely to get a shrug, because I've already heard 68 million divergent, totally contradictory opinions about just about everything imaginable on the Net and I know how far it all goes. As far as I can throw a refrigerator. People have their own personal reasons to form strong opinions, and those reasons are often rather arbitrary. They often do so merely on the basis of the FIRST thing they heard about something from someone else. That sets the pattern, which thereafter repeats itself endlessly. Most opinions are based on mere hearsay, not experience. If one was easily convinced by all the disembodied opinions one heard, one would be obliged to change one's mind about every five minutes or so, I imagine.

So why should I be unduly influenced by your hatred of scientology if I don't actually know you? Everything out there is hated by various people with strong opinions. I don't know where they got them or why. Were you ever in scientology? Was someone you know well on it? With what result? Why does it concern you this much?

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Alice
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 02:07 PM

Hi, LH, yes, I've had personal experience with people whose lives were destroyed by Scientology. I don't base my point of view on just what I read on the internet (or, as they say, in the newspaper).

Alice

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 06:42 PM

I don't know anyone - to my knowledge - who is into Scientology. Nor do I - to my knowledge - know anyone into Jehovah's Witnesses. Nor - to my knowledge - anyone into Paganism.

I do have family in the World Wide Church of God (Herbert Armstrong) and I was reared Amish; I have hundreds of relatives in the Amish and Mennonite churches.

To my mind practically every religion began life as a cult. What do you suppose people said about brand new Christianity?

I think that fear, whether of harm or of being swallowed up, is at the root of hate and distrust and scorn, kind of like Capitalism versus Communism- if one system is superior to the other it will eventually become evident.

Abuse is Society's concern. Treat that and leave the rest alone. Ain't our business.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: bobad
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 06:58 PM

"Abuse is Society's concern. Treat that and leave the rest alone. Ain't our business."

Slavery should be everyone's business and the psychological enslavement by cults is worse IMO than physical enslavement.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Mar 06 - 07:01 PM

That is correct, Ebbie. EVERY religion began as a cult. The more successful a cult becomes, the more legitimacy it gains in the eyes of large numbers of people as time goes by. After awhile they don't think of it as a "cult" anymore.

Look at the horrifying things done in the name of Christianity in the last 2,000 years. Can any modern "cult" match all that in for sheer dimensions of abuse and human suffering? I don't think so.

On the other hand, many wonderful things have also been done by Christians and by the Christian churches, so it all depends what part you focus on, doesn't it?

****

I have known quite a number of Jehovah's witnesses personally, Ebbie, and I'll say this. Although I consider some of their beliefs totally wacky, and I think they are naive to go around knocking on people's doors and trying to convert them, still the Jehovah's Witnesses that I have known personally have without exception been very good and honest people who I am glad to have as friends. I don't care if their religion seems wacky. It suits them, and that's okay with me.

Have also known a number of Pagans. Some were great people, some were a bit odd, one was downright dangerous. My basic opinion of Paganism, therefore, remains neutral at this point. I like their version of the Golden Rule: "Do as you will, and harm no one."

*****

Alice, if you have had friends who were seriously hurt by Scientology, then yes, I do understand why it is an important issue to you. Fair enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Tam the man
Date: 19 Mar 06 - 01:02 AM

I agree all they want is Money and the more the better, I tried to Join once and when they asked me for money I thought no way.

Tom

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Mar 06 - 01:08 AM

Have been reading up on it some. Yeah, they appear to want a lot of money. That's not a good sign at all.

The only groups I've ever been comfortable with are those who do not try to get money out of you, and do not try to restrict you from studying teachings other than their own.

I gather that does not describe the Church of Scientology.

The most open-minded people I've come across in general would include Bahais, Taoists, Buddhists, some of the more liberal Christians, and some Pagans. Oh...and some non-religious people as well. ;-D

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Peace
Date: 19 Mar 06 - 01:11 AM

Yeah. Well it seems that the Transcendental Meditation crew want lots of money, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Mar 06 - 01:39 AM

Oh, they do indeed, Peace. That's why you find that more than a few of their core members are pretty well off. They'd never have been able to afford it if they hadn't been.

I should've added Vedanta people (a good many of them) to that list of open-minded types. Vedanta, in general, is the body of teachings referred to as Hindu by some people. Some of the basic principles:

reincarnation, karma, eternal soul existence through many embodied lives, different levels of spiritual existence for the discarnate souls, meditation, the many forms of yoga, self-realization (by stilling the chattering mind you arrive at the Self...the original and far greater consciousness that is beyond the mind and which the mind is simply a temporary small extension of). The common mistake of the mind is: it thinks it is the whole conscious self...the ruler of the person it is attached to. It isn't. It's a fragment of the whole conscious self. The whole conscious Self can be termed "God"...if you wish to call it that. A person like Jesus, entitled "Christ", is an example of a person who became conscious at that level. That level is synonymous with God. Everyone is God, potentially...but they have not realized it, and they are not living at their full potential because they have not realized it. If they did realize it, they would be at once totally happy, totally loving, totally at peace, and totally effective.

I have seen one such person so far in this entire life. One. I've seen a handful of others that were at least part way there...far enough so you could notice it. Me? I'm not even close...but I've seen it, like you might see a mountaintop in the distance. I don't know if I'll ever get there in this life. I doubt it, frankly. I'm too lazy. You don't get there without working hard for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: michaelr
Date: 19 Mar 06 - 02:51 AM

Thou art God!

Heinlein had it right, after all.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: michaelr
Date: 19 Mar 06 - 02:54 AM

Does no one care to comment on the convoluted Tom Cruise denial?

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Mar 06 - 05:15 PM

The words would only self-destruct in ten seconds.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Peace
Date: 19 Mar 06 - 05:19 PM

Naw, Shambles, just the ones that don't serve someone's purpose.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: The Shambles
Date: 19 Mar 06 - 05:20 PM

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

Mark Twain

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Mar 06 - 05:23 PM

Yes, Heinlein apparently had it right... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Jeri
Date: 22 Mar 06 - 10:42 PM

I expect somebody other than me watched this latest episode, and it was pretty devastating. A organization of pedophiles, an insane founder, brainwashing... It was very unsubtle, but it was intended to be. This isn't necessarily an exact quote, but it's close: "We don't blame Chef for leaving. We blame the fruity little club that scrambled his brains."

And I swear I had no inside information regarding the James Earl Jones voice.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: SINSULL
Date: 23 Mar 06 - 10:52 AM

Repeat tonight - I will watch.
Now the story is that Isaac had heart problems in January, is suffering from exhaustion, and did not resign - he was resigned by unknown parties. His agent says he is in no position (financially) to resign.
We'll see.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Jeri
Date: 23 Mar 06 - 11:46 AM

Mary, from FOX News, in an article by Roger Friedman on March 20, he wrote, "My sources say that someone quit it for him." He also writes, "Contrary to news reports, the great writer, singer and musician suffered a stroke on Jan. 17. At the time it was said that he was hospitalized and suffering from exhaustion."

I don't know about that, because he did communicate with South Park's producers.

***The following may contain spoilers***






If these producers are waiting for more ideas from me...
I forsee Chef and Cartman having an epic battle with light-farts and cool (but appropriate) sound effects. Carman will win, but only because Chef forgets he's in that suit and accidentally blows himself up. Now, there are two possiblilities: 1)Cartman rips off Chef's helmet and the duct taped-together character reveals he's Cartman's father, or 2) Stan cries out, "You killed Chef, you bastard!" (which I half expected anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Jeri
Date: 23 Mar 06 - 10:48 PM

Re: "which I half expected"
The second time I watched the show, he said it. It just sounded more serious than when Kenny bites it, so it threw me off.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Greg F.
Date: 24 Mar 06 - 10:20 AM

Sure, Fox News[sic]- gotta be true. Only slightly less reliable than an Ouija board.

Subject: RE: BS: Isaac Hayes Quits
From: Alice
Date: 24 Mar 06 - 07:47 PM

You can view the "closet" episode online from links at factnet.org. Go to the end of the article on South Park on the home page.
The links are ScienTOMogy (RM) or Xenutv.com Low Band (WMV) or Xenutv.com High Band (WMV)

CLICK