------------------------------------------------------------------- F.A.C.T.Net, Inc. (Fight Against Coercive Tactics Network, Incorporated) a non-profit computer bulletin board and electronic library 601 16th St. #C-217 Golden, Colorado 80401 USA BBS 303 530-1942 FAX 303 530-2950 Office 303 473-0111 This document is part of an electronic lending library and preservational electronic archive. F.A.C.T.Net does not sell documents, it only lends them according to the terms of your library cardholder agreement with F.A.C.T.Net, Inc. ===================================================================== _________________________________________________________________ 1. CURRENT FILE NAME: APP5A.TXT 2. ADMINISTRATIVE CODE:OK 3. SECURITY CODE:GP 4. DISTRIBUTION CODE:PDMCF 5. DESCRIPTIVE NAME FOR BBS: The pervasive pretext of religion in Scientology. This appendix was submitted in sum and substance to the California Court of Appeals, the California Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court as an appendix to existing briefs in the Wollersheim case. Its purpose was to inform the court as to the actual history, nature, activities, and goals of Scientology as opposed to what Scientology's propaganda machine would like the court to believe. Must reading for someone interested in Scientology's financial history. 6. SORT TO: ONE COPY TO IN SCIENTOLOGY LEGAL\WOLLERSHEIM, ONE COPY TO GENERAL 7. CONTRIBUTOR: IMHO-LAWRENCE WOLLERSHEIM 8. LOC. OF ORIG. OR IMAGE FILE: LAWRENCE WOLLERSHEIM & F.A.C.T. 9. NOTES: All of Wollersheim brief appendices 1,2,3,4, and 5 that are included in this database were submitted in sum and substance to the California Court of Appeals, the California Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court as appendices to existing briefs in the Wollersheim case. Their purpose was to inform the court as to the actual history, nature, activities, and goals of Scientology as opposed to what Scientology's propaganda machine would like the court to believe. 10. FINAL PROOFING DONE ON (DATE): 11. FINAL PROOFING DONE BY: 12. FINAL INDEXING DONE ON (DATE): 13. FINAL INDEXING DONE BY: _________________________________________________________________ \App 5 - Pervasive Pretext\Page.00001 APPENDIX SECTION 5 THE PERVASIVE PRETEXT OF RELIGION IN SCIENTOLOGY A pervasive pretext standard has been used to address the need of maintaining the balance between not passing judgment on the value or verity of a claimed religious belief on the one hand, and preventing abuse of the liberality of the functional definition of religion on the other.1 An effective way to show pervasive pretext is throughtroduction of doctrinal literature not offered by the other side. SCIENTOLOGY'S PUBLIC ORIGIN Pervasive pretext is not found JUST in Scientology's secret materials. One can see intrinsic and extrinsic pervasive pretext in Scientology's public origin, history, policy AND doctrine. Scientology and its alter ego Dianetics did not always claim to be a religion. "Scientology had its earliest origins in the article entitled Dianetics: The Evolution of a Science which L. Ron Hubbard published in the May 1950 issue of ASTOUNDING SCIENCE FICTION magazine. Dianetics was described in this article as "an organized science of thought" which offered a therapeutic technique for the treatment of "any and all inorganic mental and organic psychosomatic ills, with assurance of complete cure in unselected cases. "The science of Dianetics became further developed in subsequent writings by Hubbard and others. This development was solely scientific in nature, and religious aspects were not present. In 1952 Hubbard abandoned Dianetics as such and began to concentrate his energies on Scientology. Scientology was viewed by its followers as a science much broader that Dianetics and concerned with knowledge in general, while Dianetics dealt mainly with psychotherapy and the mind. Nevertheless, the two were quite similar in practice." The above "Founding Church" case involved an effort by the ---------------------------- l.Loney v. Scurr, 474F.Supp. 1186, 1192(S.D Iowa 1979). 2."Other People's Faiths" The Scientology litigation and the Justicabiiity of religious fraud, Hastings Law Quarterly Vol 9 p.181. 3.From the findings of Founding Church of Scientology v. United States 412 F.2d 1197,1198 (Ct. C1., 1969). 58 \App 5 - Pervasive Pretext\Page.00002 Federal Government to condemn Scientology's E-Meteyl under the Food and Drug laws. The issue was one of "mislabeling," and the government was required to show false secular representations regarding the use and benefits of the device. In the "Founding Church" case the government made no effort to attack the "good faith" of the religious representations involved. Thus the Court expressly refrained from making iertain holdings: "(1) We do not hold the Founding church is for all legal purposes a religion. Any prima facie case made out for religious status is subject to contradiction by a showing that the beliefs are not held in good faith by those asserting them, and that forms of religious organizations were erected for the sole purpose of cloaking a secular enterprise with the legal protections of a religion." The case was then re-tried, and an opinion issued by the District Court entitled United States v. Article or Device, Etc., 333 F.Supp. 357 (D.D.C. 1971).'The Court stated: "The bulk of the material is replete with false medical and scientific claims devoid of any religious overlay or reference." (333 F.Supp. at 361) The Court's opinion directly and forcefully confronts the issue of claimed First Amendment protection by Scientolo gy. The Court then held that the practice of Scientology was secular. (333 F.Supp. at 359) When the Commissioners of the City of Clearwater, Florida convened public hearings on Scientology on May 5-10, 1982, they received documentary and testimonial evidence with respect to the operation, activities and conduct of Scientology. Based upon the sworn testimony of witnesses, affidavits, state and federal court decisions, and miscellaneous documents reviewed and considered, the Commission made the following factual recitation: "Evidentiary fact: The Cburch of Scientology is cur- rently engaged in a nationwide conspiracy to impede and obstruct municipal, state and federal taxing authori- ties, by adopting a religious and charitable guise to avoid payment of taxes." "They (the public) want ministers. We will show them what ministers look like," (Vol. 1 p.41). Scientology's internal policy states: "Churches are looked upon as reform groups . Therefore, we must act like a reform group,"(Vol.l p.196). Scientology has nothing to do with religion. The Church did not adopt the religious guise until it was neces- sary to seek First amendment protection, (Vol.4 p.405). ---------------------------- l.The E-meter is a crude lie detector used in Scientology's one-to-one counseling called auditing. 2. On re-trial, surprisingly, the government again made no effort to attack the good faith of the defendant's religious claims. 59 \App 5 - Pervasive Pretext\Page.00003 Scientology uses a religious image checklist designed to falsely portray a religious image to mislead offi- cials, (Vol. 2 p.238,239). The Church uses ministerial garb to convey the appearance of religion, (Vol. p. 43). Church policy instructs members to lie to inquiring officials, (Vol.l p.226,227). Scientology' s expediently developed, "checklist" religious overlay is not the result of a sincere religious evolution but of Scientology's reactions to court losses, increasing liability for anti-social activities, and other negative legal confrontations. At the commission hearings, the son of Scientology's founder, L. Ron Hubbard Jr., who had been a top ranking Scientologist, testified that the reason his father began claiming Scientology is a religion was to escape problems he was having with courts, the IRS, the American Medical Association, and to make money, (Vol. 1 p. 276,286). From Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology of California No. C. 332827 Cal. Super. (1986), exhibit No. 269, HCOPL 29 Oct. 1962, "Religion": "Scientology 1970 is being planned on a religious organization basis throughout the world. This will not upset in any way the usual activities of any organiza- tion. It is entirely a matter for accountants and solicitors." Wollersheim's evidence disclosed that Scientology's hierarchy concocted a religious front for financial, legal, and public relations advantages. The religious front was to be used as a "safe point"l to obtain favorable tax status, to present a favorable PR image to the courts, and to the media. The religious front was to be used as an immunitizing legal and PR shield whenever Scientology was criticized or sued for its dangerous conduct. Evidentiary exhibits consisting inter alia, of Scientology's own policy letters disclosed that Scientology fabricated religious trappings solely for appearances. Notions of religion and religious belief were non-existent in the actual conduct and operations of Scientology. These trappings were but a cloaking overlay. No words reflect the origin to present, pervasive pretext better than those of Scientology's founder. On April 10, 1953, L. Ron Hubbard, in a letter to Helen O'Brian a Dianetics and Scientology franchise holder said: "We don't want a clinic. We want one operation but not in name. Perhaps we could call it a Spiritual Guidance ----------------------------- l.From L. Ron Hubbard's Board Policy Letter of 12 Jan. 1973 reissued 29 June 1975, "The Safe Point." "It is necessary of course to have a safe place to get into, from which one can safely speak up. One cannot defend himself from a point that has no defenses.... Thus the safe point takes precedence over active defense." 2.R.T. Vols. 9-15, and 91 p. 1157-1980, 14210-14268. 60 \App 5 - Pervasive Pretext\Page.00004 Center... we could put in nice desks and our boys in neat blue with diplomas on the walls and one, knock psychotherapy into history and two, make enough money to shine up my operating scope and three, keep the H. A. S.( Hubbard Association of Scientologists) solvent....I await your reaction on the religion angle. In my opinion we couldn't get worse public opinion than we have had or less customers with what we have got to sell." Just seven months later Dec. 18, 1953 the Church of Scientology, the Church of Human Engineering, and the Church of American Science was secretly incorporated by L. Ron Hubbard, L. Ron Hubbard Jr., Ron Jr's wife and three others. " Those who seek constitutional protections for their participation in an establishment of religion and freedom to practice its beliefs must not be permitted the special freedoms of this special sanctuary may provide merely by adopting religious nomenclature and cynically using it as a shield to protect them when participating in anti social conduct that otherwise stands condemned."1 PERVASIVE PRETEXT IN THE PRESENT, DIANETICS TODAY Selling the Dianetics book 2 is the near-exclusive method used to gradually bring new people into the secret Scientology. Bridge Publications, a Scientology affiliate, spends upwards of ten million dollars a year advertising Dianetics on television and in the print media. For a single book prqmotion, this budget is unprecedented in the publishing industry. If you have seen any of these ads, you may recall their complete lack of religious context. Nowhere is there mention of the Church of Scientology as the unequivocal source and benefactor of these ads. You might also recall the promotion of Dianetics as a science, a mental health product, an implied psychotherapy, and as a provider of social science-like secular benefits. From the Clearwater Commission report: "The practices of Scientology undoubtedly constitute psychotherapy. Among the various psychotherapeutic claims of Scientology are increased interpersonal communication skills, improved memory, freedom from neuroses and anxiety, marital and family harmony, and cures for drug addiction... All of these ---------------------------- l.U.S. v. Kuch 288 F Sup. 439 (1968). 2. In cocydination with the Hubbard Dianetics Foundation, and Bridge Publications. 3.See "Hubbard hot author status called illusion", San Diego Union April 15, 1990 by Mike McIntyre at end of this appendix section. 61 \App 5 - Pervasive Pretext\Page.00005 benefits are claimed to be achieved in a process of "auditing" identical to psychotherapy. An auditor, on a paid hourly basis, 1 interviews a "preclear" (person receiving services ) intensively about the details of his emotional life, while using a lie-detector (the E-Meter) to sharpen his questioning. The auditor keeps notes of everything that is said....The entire process is represented as having a scientific basis and stated to be the product of "research." The preclear is told that the process, if carried through, is guaranteed to achieve results." At the material time of first contact and the key formative first impression, Scientology deliberately conceals its claim to religious status. Through Dianetics, it advertises its benefits and "cures" outside a recognizable religious domain. The ad scripts hardly read, "the Church of Scientology proudly announces Dianetics, the religious science of mental health." Review of current Dianetics ads show Scientology's ongoing pervasive pretext. At material times, through Dianetics, even in its initial level Scientology has failed to maintain a clear, obvious,3 and coherent front of religious context and religious doctrine while presenting its views to attract new members.4 Belief in Scientology and Dianetics is held out in such a way that it could be totally predicated on scientific standards, e.g. science, scientific research studies, and comparisons of its effectiveness with psychotherapy. Stated from their document s in the Hubbard Information Letter of 12 April 1961 revised 14 April," P.E. Handout," submitted as evidence in the Wollersheim case: "Scientology [auditing~ is today the only validated psychotherapy in the world.... Scientology is a preci- sion science....Scientology is the first precision science in the field of the humanities . . . . The first science to put the cost of psychotherapy within the range of any person's pocketbook....The first science to contain the exact technology to routinely alleviate physical illness with predictable success." ---------------------------- l.Up to five hundred dollars per hour or more. 2.This is a full money back guarantee if not fully satisfied. If in fact, you do ever get your money back, what you are not told, is the stress that they will put you through first. 3. Book buyers send the included business reply post cards for more information or free personality tests directly to a Scientology front corporation called Bridge Publications. Near the very end of the Dianetics book on page 607 in a footnote, in a seldom read section behind the index, for the first time, Scientology is mentioned as "an applied religious philosophy." 4.Privilege, Posture, and Protection--"Religion" in the Law," 73 Yale Law Journal, 593-604,(1964). 62 \App 5 - Pervasive Pretext\Page.00006 These are representations which are usually strongly associated with non-religious perspectives---perspectives which one normally finds discussed in the particular contents of other disciplines.1 Now, like then, the content and context of Dianetics promotion is convincingly secular suggesting competition with businesses providing psychiatric, psychological, or social services. With Dianetics, Scientology drops its religious cloak to recruit young and naive new people into Scientology. When needed in the courts or elsewhere, Scientology pulls the "religious" cloak and shield back up again. Whenever false curative claims are not made in a religious context, the government has a responsibility to protect the public. Representations that are presented as verifiable from some nonreligious perspective can be considered fraudulent, if most people in a common sense way, or in a way informed by the various disciplines, would find those representations to be false.2 "...it is a gross exaggeration to insist that the energetic, persistent solicitation of E-Meter audited cures for a fee has all occurred in a spiritual setting without use of a secular appeals and false sci~ntific promises made in a wholly nonreligious context."' Besides failing to challenge the alleged fraud in Scientology's original establishment, the government has consistently failed to challenge how Scientology presently presents its representations to the public. When it finally takes place, this chal1enge should consider the misleading and contrary bait and switch practices of Scientology. It also should take into full account the additional use of the coercive persuasion technology by Scientology on its membership. From this perspective it should then be able to finally legally challenge the "good faith" and sincerity of Scientology's representations. No doubt verifying religious sincerity may be difficult but, "...subtle and difficult as the inquiry might be it should not be avoided because of convenience." U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 1. (At this point please see the following two articles which are provided in image file format. Use your graphics viewer software to examine the .PCX files contained in APP5.ZIP.) ---------------------------- l.Privilege, Posture, and Protection--"Religion" in the Law, 73 Yale Law Journal, (1964). 2.Priviledge, Posture, and Protection--"Religion" in the Law, 73 Yale Law Journal, (1964). 3.United States v. Article or Device Etc. 333 F.Supp. at 360 (1971). 63 \App 5 - Pervasive Pretext\Page.00007 THE SECRET SCIENTOLOGY1 Some experts believe that Scientology may be the largest and best organized secret satanic organization in the world today. They believe it embraces substantial traditional satanic and neo-satanic elements and, as such it is entitled to religious status according to our current legal definition of religion. These opinions are generally based on examination of the consistency found in Scientology's secret origin, actual nature, and in its secret cosmological goals and "destiny." SCIENTOLOGY'S SECRET ORIGIN Experts have noted that to understand the secret Scientology, such as statements by L. Ron Hubbard like "Only a barbarian minister is a man of God..."', and "All men are your slaves," and put Scientology's unique criminal "history" into a clearer, but still not a final framework, it is necessary to examine to the actual intentions of L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology's point of origin and alter ego, and his pre-Scientology relationship in 1945 with Jack Parsons. By discovering the ACTUAL origin, nature, and professed destiny of a group you discover what it really is. Jack Parsons was an acknowledged genius in the field of chemistry and a major figure in the first stirrings of rocket research at Cal Tech. Parsons was involved with an occult secret society called the O.T.O.(Ordo Templi Orientis). The leader of this group was none other than Master Therion, the "Beast 666," or as the contemporary press described him, "the wickedest man in the world," Alister Crowley.4 During the first World war Alister Crowley had written a novel called the "Butterfly Net" later to be published under the name ----------------------------- 1. All information that is court restricted has been removed from this "Secret Scientology" section. To obtain it you will have to write to the Chief Deputy Clerk of the U.S. Supreme Court, Francis Lorsen, for the Respondent's Supplemental brief in U.S. 89-1361, appendix #2, "The Secret Scientology." 2.From Scientology's Professional Auditors Bulletin No.32. 3. This quote was disclosed in the most critical Armstrong v. Scientology court record. This revealing statement was a part of L Ron Hubbard's hand written affirmation meditations. 4.In his time Crowley was known to be a paramount showman. His claim to the title "The Beast, 666," has often been considered more attention getter than act of substance. Overt satanism, or in Scientology's case, covert psuedo-satanism, (being "The Beast"), can be useful and, upon cursory initial inspection, seemingly sincere. In Scientology it is an expediently adopted avocation and veneer to "cover" and most importantly immunitize its actual secular goals of political power, corporate greed, and undue influence. 64 \App 5 - Pervasive Pretext\Page.00008 "Moonchild." This novel tells the story of a magical operation based on the theory that a particular type of spirit can be induced to incarnate in an unborn human embryo by surrounding the mother with the appropriate influences, carrying out certain rituals, etc. Parsons wished to carry out such an operation designed to achieve the incarnation of Babalon, an aspect of the great Mother goddess Nuit, in an unborn child, and decided that Hubbard would make an ideal co-worker 1 In order to obtain a woman prepared to bear this magical child, Parsons and Hubbard engaged themselves for eleven days in rituals. These do not seem to have produced any marked result until January 14, 1946 when, so Parsons said, Hubbard had a candle knocked out of his hand. Parsons went on to record that Hubbard called him and, we observed a brownish yellow light about seven feet high. I brandished a Magical sword and it disappeared. Hubbard's right arm was paralyzed for the rest of the night. All this work seemed to have its desired result and, on January 18, 1946 Parsons found a girl who was prepared to go through the required incantation rituals and become the mother of Babalon. Parsons was the High Priest and had sexual intercourse with the girl, while Hubbard, who was present, acted as a skryer, seer, or clairvoyant aad described what was supposed to be happening on the astral plane L Hubbard explains his Parsons, O.T.O., Crowley history by stating that "certain agencies" objected that many nuclear physicists were living under the same roof as Parsons and to the "savage bestial rites" of the O.T.O.. Hubbard, then an officer in the U.S. navy, claims he was sent to handle the situation. Hubbard claims he was completely successful in his mission for "the black magic group was dispersed and destroyed and has never recovered." L. Ron Hubbard's explanation may be incomplete: 1). The O.T.O. still has organizations all over the U.S. including Los Angeles.3 2). "Much of what became the "OT data" of the Philadel- phia Doctorate Course tapes, and other lectures and writings of L. Ron Hubbard's which Scientologists read and listen to with appreciative awe, are simply rehash- ---------------------------- l.Parsons wrote of Hubbard, "Although he has no formal training in magic he has an extraordinary amount of experience and understanding of the field." 2.From "Ritual Magic in England " by Francis King. Also see "L. Ron Hubbard, Messiah or Madman" by Bent Corydon and L. Ron Hubbard Jr. As is common with management transition in similar secretive groups, after the death of Parsons, the U.S. head of the O.T.O, the organization continued to exist in various splinter groups. Later the original O.T.O. acquired a new U.S. leader. As of 1988 it has 56 lodges in the U.S. and 93 worldwide. Parson's Pasadena O.T.O. lodge has in fact been credited as the prime source of satanic groups in modern America. 65 \App 5 - Pervasive Pretext\Page.00009 ings of data and techniques from the writings of Alister Crowley....The parallels between Hubbard's works and those of Crowley could fill an entire book."1 3). The following is from a piece, written by L. Ron Hubbard Jr. in 1985 entitled "Philadelphia": We were in Philadelphia. It was November 1952. Dianet- ics was all but forgotten; Scientology, a "new science," had become the focus of attention. Every night, in the hotel, in preparation for the next day's lecture, he'd pace the floor, exhilarated by this or that passage from Alister Crowley's writings. Just a month before, he had been in London, where he had finally been able to quench his thirst; to fill his cup with the true, raw, naked power of magi ck. The lust of centuries at his very fingertips. To stroke and taste the environs of the Great Beast, to fondle Crowley's books, papers, and memorabilia had filled him with pure ecstasy! In London he had acquired, at last, the final keys; enabling him to take his place upon the "Throne of the Beast," to which he firmly believed himself to be the rightful heir. The tech gushed forth and2 resulted in the Philadelphia Doctorate Course lectures. 4.) At the beginning of the first Philadelphia lecture Hubbard cracked a joke about the "Prince of Darkness."--- Who do you think I am? He asked. The audience chuckled. Ron's such a kidder. ---------------------------- l.From "L. Ron Hubbard Messiah or Madman?" by Bent Corydon and L. Ron Hubbard Jr. 1987. Quote from Brian Ambry p. 232. 2.In the tapes of these lectures Hubbard mentions Crowley as a "good friend." 66 \App 5 - Pervasive Pretext\Page.00011 SCIENTOLOGY'S NATURE The othey appp'di'ec inrl~dpd with thjc d'~u"t (I1_eti:! actual nature of Scientology as reflected in its criminal actions and policies rather than in its public relations statements of its alleged charitable or humanitarian intentions. Those that continue to believe Scientolosv to be a secret satanic organization point out that its secretive behaviors and policies are again consistent with the nature of both traditional satanic 1 and neo-satanic orqanizations. SCIENTOLOGY'S SECRET DESTINY The most tellinq document which those who believe Scientology to be a satanic organization reference is a document called "The O.T. 8, Series I, Confidential Student Briefinq," of May 5 1980. This newer document also is consistent with the previously stated 40 plus year old Crowleyesque origins of Scientology and the statements of L Ron Hubbard Junior concerning his father's "role model." Unfortunately for the public's, safety this newer defector verified disclosure is under Court ordered restriction at the U.S. Supreme Court. THE SINCERITY FACTOR IN RELIGIOUS STATUS If one looks just at this cloaking satanic layer without looking at the next underlying and more basic "onion skin" layer of Scientology one could conceivablv agree with those experts who believe that as a satanic religion Scientology is entitled to religious status. But this would be true ONLY if Scientology sincerely held these beliefs. Looking carefully at Scientology's underlying 1 aver there is strons evidence that this is not the case. Scientology's secret political intelligence agency nature, political goals, other antireligious positions, as well as continuous history of criminal activities counters religious actuality or sincerity. (The following newspaper article will help to explain the contents of this next section, The reader is also asked to bear with the peculiar progression of information. The progression is untwinins part of a complex overlay that was designed first to confuse, then to misdirect, and finally to cloak the underlying actual nature and intentions of the organization and to provide it with religious immunities.) ----------------------------- 1. Scientology's actions and policies reflect Alister Crowley's infamous focal principle. Do what thou wilt and that is the law. 67 \App 5 - Pervasive Pretext\Page.00013 From Scientolosv's Professional Auditors Bulletin #31: "Religion does much to keep the assumption in restimu- lation, being basically a control mechanism used by those who have sent the preclear (person receiving service) into a body. You will find the cross as a symbol all over the universe, and the Christ legend as an implant 1 in the preclears a million years ago." Can an organization be a religious organization if it holds as its central doctrine, that religion itself is an aberration and must be "audited out?" Can an organization be a religion that holds as its most secret and central doctrine, that an ancient alien invader created the very ideas, concept, symbols, and content of "religion" as a political weapon to control, confuse, and enslave the population of earth? Can an organization seeking to remedy its conception of the mistakes of far distant political "history" operating currently as an intelligence agencv and a political secret society fall within the broadest possible interpretation of the "ultimate concern"3 test without violation the "shams and absurdity standard?" As Chief Justice Burger observed in Thomas v. Review Board "one can, of course, imagine an asserted claim so bizarre, so clearly non religious in motivation, as not to be entitled to protection under the free exercise clause.. "4 Can an organization be a religion if it uses coercive persuasion to effect conversion of new members or to maintain old members? CONCLUSION TO THE PERVASIVE PRETEXT APPENDIX ----------------------------- 1. Implant 1. A painful and forceful means of overwhelming a being with artificial purpose or false concepts in a malicious attempt to control and suppress him (Scientoloav Auditor No. 71 ASHO) 2. An electronic means of overwhelming the thetan or the individual themselves with a significance. (Hubbard Communication Office Bulletin 8 May 1963). 2.To avoid repetition here see appendix sections in this document which detail Scientology's secret society and an intelligence agency nature, its secret goals and the reasons it must insincerely claim religious status to cloak its activities. 3 The ultimate concern test resuires that for a belief to be considered religious and be part of a religion it must hold a place for the believer parallel to that of a Supreme Being found in traditional religions. 4.Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Emplovment Securitv Division 450 U.S. 707 ~?981). 68 \App 5 - Pervasive Pretext\Page.00014 Scientology's evolution into becomins a "religion" was expedient and utilitarian. It was not a "good faith" sincere evolution in arowins meanin~s and values of substantive religious doctrine. It was driven solely by legal, and commercial expediency. Scientologv's religious evolution has been achieved bv the arbitrary changing of the definitions of words and the adoption of a cloak and mantle of religious trappings.1 Done for no better reason than this is what society would expect a religion to look or act like to maintain its relisious sanctuary immunities and privileges. Maybe this was what Justice Welsh meant when he helped mark out some outer boundaries of religion by restricting non-religious beliefs to those that rest "solely upon considerations of policy, pragmatism, or expediency."2 As a deliberate defense to create and enhance the appearances of a doctrinal religious front, Scientology's cloak and mantle has been impregnated with deliberately confusing mixtures of "hopelessly intertwined protected and unprotected activities."3 Pervasive pretext, coercive persuasion, and coercion permeate Scientology's public AND secret pre-history, history, and present. Challenges should continue to be put forward for a new threshold inquiry regarding Scientology's claims to worthiness for religious ---------------------------- l.This can be seen in part, by reviewing Scientology's sriaina! publications with newer edited editions and tracing how key definltions have been reworked to accommodate "the look and feel" of religious subject matter and where L. Ron Hubbard's controversial secular or political materials have been edited out. 2.Welsh v. U.S.. 398 U.S. 333 (1970). 3."A hopelessly intertwined mixture of protected and unprotected activities" is one of the most frequently used arguments by Scientology's lawvers. This hopelessly intertwined mixture was a planned non-intrinsic "checksheet" additive to the purely "scientific" original nature of Dianetics and Scientolosv. The defendability of this intertwined mixture is premised on its deliberate complexity, its similarity to other religions and the legal paradoxes surrounding religious fraud. To those uniformed as to Scientology's hidden doctrine this outer front could appear from the outer perspective as strained but possible religious doctrine, context, and trappings. Without access to Scientology's substantive secret doctrine this hopelesslv intertwined mixture has justifiably involved innocent religious associations and expert witnesses in Scientology's defense as a religion. 4.Challenge might also be brought from an extrapolation of a principle brought forward in United States v. See~er, 380 U.S 163 ,1965). Exemption could he denied if secular components were found to be MORE substantial even thoush views were presented simultaneously that had, or may have had an arguable religious moral component. This position might be applied to the problem of the cloakins overlay and deliberate mixture of "hopelessly intertwined" claims. 69 \App 5 - Pervasive Pretext\Page.00015 status and sanctuarv. Paradoxically, fraud or falsity of an asserted religion or belief cannot be litigated if it was presented in a clear religious context. Fraud involved in a non-religious context, bait and switch, or fraud pre-dating the establishment of the organization which was involved to effect the actual establishment of that alleged religion should be litigatable. "The good faith standard implies that a defendant raising a religion defense issue may be resuired to show that he holds his beliefs sincerely and not as a mere pretext for some other purpose."l In the over 200 year historv of America, the Supreme Court has only "disestablished" (not given religious protection,) to two organizations claiming religious status. One was a group seeking to use illegal drugs insincerely as sacraments. The other a group of criminals in U.S, prison forminq a "religion" with special practices to obtain special privileges while in prison. The court has denied insincerely sought privileges to criminals and where illesal activities were involved. It is now time to apply the same standards to what may well become only the 3rd "religion" in U.S. history to be denied religious status advantages, the current for-profit corporation called Scientology. ----------------------------- l.U.S. v. Seeser 380 U.S. 163 ~. 1964. 2. Continuous negative I.R.S. rulings on Scientology's ever transmuting next "new" mother church seeking tax exempt status has given Scientology the unique distinction of beinq America's only non-tax exempt, for a profit "reliqion." 70 ================================================================= If this is a copyrighted work, you are acknowledging by receipt of this document from FACTNet that on the basis of reasonable investigation, you have not been to obtain a copy elsewhere at a fair price, and that you are and will abide by the following copyright warning. WARNING CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS: The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photo copies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified by law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be "used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research." If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of "fair use," that user may be liable for copyright infringement. FACTNet reserves the right to refuse to accept an order for copying or other duplication, or delivery of copied or duplicated material if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law. ------------------------------------------------------------------- CARD CATALOG ENTRY DOS FILENAME OF TEXT FILE: E:\PCB\SCN\FILES\GENERAL\APP5A.TXT DOS FILENAME OF IMAGE FILES: ADMINISTRATIVE CODE: SECURITY CODE: DISTRIBUTION CODE: NAME FOR BBS: SORT TO: CONTRIBUTOR: LOC. OF ORIG: NOTES: For additional verification see image files contained in the file with same name and .ZIP extension. UPDATED ON: UPDATED BY: =================================================================