Reply to comment

This is a totally valid forum for this question, just as it would be if any other prominent site were so accused.

I wouldn't characterize Hendry as a bigot without examining the body of his work on this topic, and who has the time? This article seems balanced, but it is also a work half-finished.

The church (my church, too) seems to have answered all questions directed to it. Hendry seems to have presented the church's refutations objectively. We assume, but don't know as a certainty, that Hendry published all proofs/verifications he received. (Not an accusation; just a point of logic.)

But if any individual Scientologist(s) got carried away and put something into a video that isn't true, they can expect the same discipline that any reputable organisation would give them.

The *long*-published church policy on public releases and commentary is - and it's framed in capital letters for added emphasis: "DON'T SAY OR PUBLISH ANYTHING YOU CAN'T PROVE OR DOCUMENT."

Not a lot of wriggle-room in that.

So, another point of logic, before you can fairly accuse "The Church," best keep on investigating to get all the answers and not peremptorily accuse nor publish.

If I see a common fault in reporters' - and of course, critics' - coverage of the church, it's an unfailing rush to judgment and knee-jerk agreement with any other critics' accusations.

Final point: Those judicial citations below are from long past, before the church cleaned out some over-zealous types. And/or they're from countries where - *at that time* - there was an anti-Scientology witch hunt going on. Look at the dates, unless they've been purposely snipped out.

Check out those countries today and you'll find no untoward situations in re Scientology. Now, you have to go to still-backward countries like Germany to find such persecution. Germany has had Scientology under surveillance for a couple of decades and has found nothing more incriminating than an ice-cream social.