Glenda
Well-known member
Separation of state and church is a fairly complex issue.
Scientology obtained its tax exemption (on religious grounds) in a bombastic, bullying and duplicitous manner. It used every trick in the book (legally) to insist it was due all the benefits of religious tax exemption group. In essence scientology shaped itself to FIT the definitions of a religious group. Dodgy at best, outright illegal bullshit at worst - but cleverly done.
Here in NZ (I am a kiwi) scientology fought relentlessly to ensure the governing agency that grants the exemption (Inland Revenue) was backed into a corner and had no choice but to grant it. Why? It is way more complicated than what the face of the issue appears to be. Religious status grants a whole lot of other "benefits" to an organisation than merely the tax position. It also includes an "opting out" of various other legal requirements such as employment laws and various other judicial requirements.
Scientology could not have continued to function and gain respectability (pfff) and build longevity if it had not used protective religious cloaking. Beliefs are one small part of this issue. People are free to believe what they want to. That isn't the issue. The issue is that religious exemption status has wide implications - and benefits. Charitable behaviour is caught up in all this. Historically churches have been very involved in activities of a charitable nature - for "the public benefit". The "public benefit" test is still used here in NZ when religious tax exemptions are looked into. Scientology lied, or perverted the truth, to get what it wanted. What it wanted was for government agencies to have little to no legal ground to interfere with the inside workings of scientology. Hubbard hated authority. Hubbard wanted to rule the world, his way. This isn't about freedom of beliefs. That is just smoke and mirrors.
The "tax base" issue is a very narrow view of a much bigger picture regarding scientology, beliefs and the "religion" label it has forced govt. agencies to grant. It isn't about beliefs, it is about behaviour.
People get all caught up in the religious freedom debate. That is exactly what scientology wants. "You can't touch us because we are a religion and the government backs us". But what about the behaviour? What about the abuses that are being hidden within the group? What about the fact that members of scientology are prevented from accessing due process and access to their other legal rights (e.g. access to judicial process; true freedom of speech, etc). What about actions which are for the public benefit? Where is scientology truly behaving for the public good? Sure they have their volunteer ministers program but it is fake, designed to keep the religious cloaking intact and the authorities where they want them.
One day someone super smart and highly skilled in these legally complex issues will take scientology apart and tear back the cloak to reveal that the actions of this so-called "for the public good religious activity" are all smoke and mirrors. It should not pose a risk to genuine churches because the deeper issues will stand on solid ground. Authentic "for the public good" charitable behaviour will act as the protection.
In the words of Nick Xenophon (I paraphrase): People can believe what they want. People are not free to be involved in criminal activity, without consequence(s).
I will add: It is outrageous that a group, scientology, can con and cheat a system designed for the public good. For true charity to exist, with non-interfering state support. For people to safely follow their faith and find comfort and community in that. These traditions are centuries old and come with both faults and benefits. Scientology has made a mockery of something which was, imo, mostly decent.
Scientology obtained its tax exemption (on religious grounds) in a bombastic, bullying and duplicitous manner. It used every trick in the book (legally) to insist it was due all the benefits of religious tax exemption group. In essence scientology shaped itself to FIT the definitions of a religious group. Dodgy at best, outright illegal bullshit at worst - but cleverly done.
Here in NZ (I am a kiwi) scientology fought relentlessly to ensure the governing agency that grants the exemption (Inland Revenue) was backed into a corner and had no choice but to grant it. Why? It is way more complicated than what the face of the issue appears to be. Religious status grants a whole lot of other "benefits" to an organisation than merely the tax position. It also includes an "opting out" of various other legal requirements such as employment laws and various other judicial requirements.
Scientology could not have continued to function and gain respectability (pfff) and build longevity if it had not used protective religious cloaking. Beliefs are one small part of this issue. People are free to believe what they want to. That isn't the issue. The issue is that religious exemption status has wide implications - and benefits. Charitable behaviour is caught up in all this. Historically churches have been very involved in activities of a charitable nature - for "the public benefit". The "public benefit" test is still used here in NZ when religious tax exemptions are looked into. Scientology lied, or perverted the truth, to get what it wanted. What it wanted was for government agencies to have little to no legal ground to interfere with the inside workings of scientology. Hubbard hated authority. Hubbard wanted to rule the world, his way. This isn't about freedom of beliefs. That is just smoke and mirrors.
The "tax base" issue is a very narrow view of a much bigger picture regarding scientology, beliefs and the "religion" label it has forced govt. agencies to grant. It isn't about beliefs, it is about behaviour.
People get all caught up in the religious freedom debate. That is exactly what scientology wants. "You can't touch us because we are a religion and the government backs us". But what about the behaviour? What about the abuses that are being hidden within the group? What about the fact that members of scientology are prevented from accessing due process and access to their other legal rights (e.g. access to judicial process; true freedom of speech, etc). What about actions which are for the public benefit? Where is scientology truly behaving for the public good? Sure they have their volunteer ministers program but it is fake, designed to keep the religious cloaking intact and the authorities where they want them.
One day someone super smart and highly skilled in these legally complex issues will take scientology apart and tear back the cloak to reveal that the actions of this so-called "for the public good religious activity" are all smoke and mirrors. It should not pose a risk to genuine churches because the deeper issues will stand on solid ground. Authentic "for the public good" charitable behaviour will act as the protection.
In the words of Nick Xenophon (I paraphrase): People can believe what they want. People are not free to be involved in criminal activity, without consequence(s).
I will add: It is outrageous that a group, scientology, can con and cheat a system designed for the public good. For true charity to exist, with non-interfering state support. For people to safely follow their faith and find comfort and community in that. These traditions are centuries old and come with both faults and benefits. Scientology has made a mockery of something which was, imo, mostly decent.