RSS Feed MenuIt’s early days yet, but it does seem we can acquit Sharron Angle herself of belonging to the Church of Scientology. But she did forcefully advocate introducing Scientology backed programs into Nevada prisons. Why?
A group of Scientology critics offer this explanation:
In the early years of [the 2000s], there were efforts in the Four Corners states to place Scientology front group programs into prisons at taxpayer’s expense. Sharron Angle, a Nevada legislator, worked very hard to convince her fellows on the legislature that a Scientology front group called Second Chance would be a good program for Nevada prisons. Second Chance is another Scientology entity which sells the dangerous Purification Rundown. After an email campaign to inform the legislators of the truth behind Second Chance, it was nearly unanimously decided that public money could be better spend [sic] elsewhere. Only Sharron Angle was still supporting it, expressing her bewielderment [sic] at the Legislature’s refusal to adopt it into their state prisons. Had Ms. Angle done any research outside of listening to Scientology representatives, her confusion would have been easily cleared up.
Interestingly enough, Ms. Angle is a member of the National Foundation of Women Legislators, an organization which has been around since the 1930s. However, the NFWL’s current treasurer is Bruce Wiseman, a Scientologist and president of the Citizen’s Commission on Human Rights, a Scientology front group aimed at discrediting and destroying psychiatry and mental health programs. Also on a NFWL board is Joy Westrum, Scientologist, and president of Second Chance.
It is no coincidence that Scientologists are on the board of the NFWL. It gives them an opportunity to connect with legislators from all over the country. The NFWL claims to have several thousand members nationwide, and some of them wind up supporting and endorsing Scientology’s fraudulent programs.
So the good news for Nevada Republicans is that Angle is not personally a member of the notorious Church.
The bad news: She seems to be a gullible person, easily deceived by persons with sinister agendas. Thanks, Tea Party!
CentristNYer // Jun 9, 2010 at 2:56 pm
Carney // Jun 9, 2010 at 1:01 pm
“My opposition is Scientology-specific. They’re not a real religion, science, charity, or educational institution, but rather a sinister cult and a moneymaking scam.”
Government shouldn’t be subsidizing — via tax breaks — religions of any kind, whether or not you deem them worthy. Period. The moneymaking scams of Scientology are no more or less sinister than the moneymaking scams of the Catholic Church.
WillyP // Jun 9, 2010 at 3:38 pm
centristNYer says:
“The moneymaking scams of Scientology are no more or less sinister than the moneymaking scams of the Catholic Church.”
That’s nice. Get some anti-Catholic propaganda in when you can. All in a day’s work isn’t it.
What a creep.
busboy33 // Jun 9, 2010 at 3:52 pm
@dante:
I would have agreed with you a year ago that the GOP is still living in denial, and needed a solid spanking to jar them out of whatever dream they’re inhabiting now . . . but today, I think it might be too late.
The “shock therapy” idea would only work if the GOP had enough rational people left to raise a loud voice saying “Take the f##king hint, people! We’ve got to change course!”. But as you alluded to, those voices have been mostly driven out of the big tent as RINOS. Now the response to voter rejection is just getting louder and louder — “We need to get more extreme! Voters are disgusted with how centrist we are, and that’s why they voted leftie Democratic! Hardcore Right-Wing Extreme Purity will attract all the mainstream voters!”
(yeah, I never understood this logic either)
The Great RINO Purge of 08-09 has (IMHO) crippled the GOP’s ability to think rationally. If the majority of the party is comprised of whack-a-doodles now, then the “pilots” of the party are going to have to chart courses that they want, which is just creating a vicious cycle of driving moderates away, encouraging the party to go even more Right, which just keeps magnifying the problem.
CentristNYer // Jun 9, 2010 at 3:54 pm
WillyP // Jun 9, 2010 at 3:38 pm
“Get some anti-Catholic propaganda in when you can.”
You can tell that to my Catholic friends who tried to get an annulment and had to shop around to different churches, each one with their own pricing system for it. Or maybe you’d prefer to share your thoughts with one of the thousands of young people who were abused by their trusted priests and spent years trying to live with the shame of the experience.
I’m not the creep here, dude.
andydp // Jun 9, 2010 at 4:01 pm
I’ve said this before (Please note this is a very simplistic analysis) The Democrats lost in 1968 because they had gone over to the “granola eating fringes”. The riots in Chicago basically turned their traditional union working slob/southern Democrat power base into GOP voters. In 1972 they felt they had not been “liberal enough” so they nominate McGovern against Pres Nixon. The plank the Democrats adopted was basically to the left of Lenin. McGovern lost so bad he didn’t even carry his native state. He lost to a President that was under the cloud of Watergate.
Fast forward to 2008: GOP loses because the majority of Americans are moderate and they were running a campaign that frankly, frightened me. I was going to vote for McCain but his choice of Gov Palin as VP scared me away. I’m certain the “tone” of the GOP in the campaign was enought to scare almost anyone with a working set of neurons away.
Now, with the loss of both houses and the Presidency the GOP feels it lost because they weren’t “pure” enough. They are nominating people from the fringes who would normally be swept aside and would turn off any rational voter. The Tea Party and Club for Growth have insured that only “ideologically pure” conservatives will run. As seen in a few races already it isn’t working. (Yes there are some “wins”) Someone here said the only reason Scott Brown won was because the Tea Party didn’t notice him until it was too late for them to change anything.
Will there be some wins ? Yes. Will they gain control of anything ? Doubtful.
Diomedes // Jun 9, 2010 at 5:43 pm
By the way, am I the only one that finds tremendous irony in a Tea Party candidate being a Scientologist? Or at least, loosely affiliated with that church?
Curious how they will reconcile that with their evangelical base. Anybody got any popcorn? This should be good.
jakester // Jun 9, 2010 at 8:45 pm
Didn’t Charles Manson learn and master Scientology in prison? Honestly this is pointless, at worse she may have fallen for some reform the prisoners scam.
jakester // Jun 9, 2010 at 8:46 pm
andydp,
Left of Lenin? Wow, were they the left of Mao too, force us all into rice harvesting communes to sleep in monitored dormitories
AMurphy // Jun 9, 2010 at 9:20 pm
She has also come out against fluoride. The good news with that is if they ever come around to remaking Dr. Stranglove, they know who to get to play the General Jack D. Ripper character
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjL9g3s6Fro
jakester // Jun 9, 2010 at 10:43 pm
Diomedes,
Look at Greta Van Susteren, who was appointed media nanny to the Palins
drdredel // Jun 10, 2010 at 3:34 am
I’m confused… are we to understand that Scientology is a “notorious” church but the people that believe in Jesus are… what? rational? reasonable? non-gullible? As far as I know, every prison has a minister and prisoners are routinely coerced into cults, be they christian or Islam (I’m not sure how many Jews are created in prison, but I’m happy to throw them into the mix as well).
The point is that a fairy tale is a fairy tale and a cult is a cult. Just because Hubbard invented his nonsense a lot more recently than those that conjured up the second to last variation on the superstitions of Egypt doesn’t make it any less eligible to be taken seriously by those that like to live in the world of make-believe.
Tea Party Candidate Supports Scientology : XENU TV // Jun 10, 2010 at 4:00 am
[...] the major problem surrounding Scientology’s front group but it’s good to see that Scientology’s stank is stinking to Angle as she continues her campaign. [...]
ottovbvs // Jun 10, 2010 at 8:28 am
……all I know is this woman is a gift to the Democrats……….Scientologist or Scientology fellow traveller……a distinction without a difference surely…….anti fluoridization…….wants to end social security and privatize medicare………wants to shut down the ed dept……believes there’s a link betwen “forced abortions” and breast cancer……and there’s plenty more for a well funded Democrat to make hay with……Reid will be back
Carney // Jun 10, 2010 at 10:08 am
“Centrist”, seriously equating Scientology as a whole with Catholicism as a whole is yet another example of your extremism, and the misleading nature of your nick/handle here. You still haven’t identified a SINGLE issue stance you take in serious contention between the US right and left where you come down on the conservative side.
CentristNYer // Jun 10, 2010 at 10:23 am
Carney // Jun 10, 2010 at 10:08 am
“Centrist…You still haven’t identified a SINGLE issue stance you take in serious contention between the US right and left where you come down on the conservative side.”
Actually, this has been answered on numerous occasions. Perhaps if take your tin foil hat off, it just might penetrate.
ottovbvs // Jun 10, 2010 at 10:34 am
CentristNYer // Jun 10, 2010 at 10:23 am
……….I wouldn’t equate the Catholic Church with Scientology…..it’s longevity and considerable theological underpinning are worth something……on the other hand it is built around a fairy story as you say and it has killed many more people and committed more crimes……….and not in ancient history either……..it’s tolerance and then cover up of the physical and sexual abuse of minors has essentially been a criminal conspiracy……my wife’s devout catholic btw…..she’s welcome to her beliefs but it doesn’t alter the facts
LFC // Jun 10, 2010 at 11:09 am
“Centrist”, seriously equating Scientology as a whole with Catholicism as a whole is yet another example of your extremism…
Well for one thing, Scientology never murdered thousands of people in the name of god.
There are good Catholics and there are good Scientologists, but I believe that the upper echelons of both organizations are corrupt and depraved.
CentristNYer // Jun 10, 2010 at 11:37 am
ottovbvs // Jun 10, 2010 at 10:34 am
“……….I wouldn’t equate the Catholic Church with Scientology…it’s longevity and considerable theological underpinning are worth something”
I wouldn’t disagree. My point was only that both have scammed members in one way or another and that it wasn’t up to people like Carney to determine what’s a religion and what’s not (ie, government shouldn’t be in the business of deciding whose fairy tale is more believable). That’s why there shouldn’t be automatic tax breaks for churches.
LFC gets it right: “There are good Catholics and there are good Scientologists, but I believe that the upper echelons of both organizations are corrupt and depraved.
canuckistani // Jun 10, 2010 at 1:42 pm
I still can’t believe we spend so much time on nothing states like Nevada.
Should be given the same weight as Puerto Rico in Washington.
Reid’s a Mormon….Angle or Reid, so what’s the difference again? One person’s faith is another’s cult.
Nevada deserves what they get if they pick a fringe wacko with no connections over a wacko that is already leader.
Her view on Social Security is a death blow and Reid is an old operator and will win.
rbottoms // Jun 10, 2010 at 9:40 pm
Scientology is worse than you think!
Nobody gives a crap about her religion.
If she believes in snake handling and talking in tongues that’s her business. If she tries to legislate her idiotic religious views then it becomes my problem.
balconesfault // Jun 11, 2010 at 10:00 am
Carney “Centrist”, seriously equating Scientology as a whole with Catholicism as a whole is yet another example of your extremism, and the misleading nature of your nick/handle here. You still haven’t identified a SINGLE issue stance you take in serious contention between the US right and left where you come down on the conservative side.
Since when is labelling Catholicism a cult a “leftist” position?
Wasn’t it Bob Jones University that proclaimed on their University Website that Catholicism and Mormonism were both cults?
http://www.beliefnet.com/News/2000/03/Bob-Jones-Reposts-Mormon-Catholic-Cult-Reference.aspx
If Bob Jones University is a portion of the American Left, then we’ve drawn a line where there really isn’t anything left on the Right, is there?
Carney // Jun 11, 2010 at 2:21 pm
balconesfault, labeling Catholicism a cult, or equating it with Scientology, is an extremist stance in general, and like much extremism that rather blends together, can fit into various forms of extremism – left or right, Protestant or atheist, you name it.
balconesfault // Jun 11, 2010 at 2:45 pm
Carney – I agree that it is an extremist position. Not necessarily because it’s wrong, mind you – for example, in 1840 abolitionism was an extremist position – but because it deviates from the way the vast majority of Americans currently see things.
For what it’s worth, at the time of our founding, the view that Catholicism was a cult was actually the centrist position in America. There was in fact a serious debate over whether “Papists” could ever be good citizens, since their first loyalty would always be to directives from a foreign Pontiff, and not to any secular government.
It is hardly inconceivable that 200 years from now the majoritarian view in America will be that Scientology and Catholicism are equivalent in standing.
My main concern was, and you did address that, in your kneejerk labelling of NYCentrists position as “leftist”.
Ironically, for most of American history Catholicism was one of the prime drivers of liberalism in America. It’s only because the Cardinals of the Catholic Church in America have decided to largely ignore encyclicals dealing with social justice, and toss in with the Protestant Evangelical community to fetishize the abortion issue above any other political concern, that the Church leadership came to be an affiliate of the Republican Party.
msmilack // Jun 14, 2010 at 8:57 pm
Balconesfault
This might seem like a bit of a leap, but reading your comment about the relationship between the Catholic Church and the Republican Party just made me wonder about N. Gingrich’s recent conversion to Catholicism. Nothing about him strikes me as particularly spiritual and since he has been married multiple times, I’m not even sure how he was able to pull it off and get permission from the Church; call me cynical, but I confess that I question his motives; could there be political advantage in such a conversion? I apologize in advance to anyone of genuine faith who I might be offending by doubting the sincerity of this particular convert.
Republicans condemn Sharron Angle as a NUT!!! - Why We Protest | Activism Forum // Jul 28, 2010 at 8:23 am
[...] not an half-witted extremist like Angle. The original Frum article is posted on Frum's website at: Angle’s Scientology Problem | FrumForum As can be seen there, even Frum is quoting another source, "A Group of Scientology [...]