[Main Page] Main Page | Recent changes | View source | Page history

Printable version | Disclaimers | Privacy policy | Latest revision

Not logged in
Log in | Help
 

Scientology form letter

(Difference between revisions)

(Letter)
(Letter)
Line 37: Line 37:
 
The prohibition on the CoS was lifted only after a long and expensive legal battle, specifically the cases 1. Hubbard Association of Scientologists -v- Anderson (1971) VR 788; 2. Hubbard Association of Scientologists v. Anderson (1972) VR 340 [appeal of 1971 VR 740]; 3. Hubbard Association of Scientologists International v Anderson and Just (No 2) (1972) VR 577. I am very surprised that the Anderson Report was put aside at the time, because it is very critical of the practices of the CoS. Paulette Cooper outlines the arguments used by the Cos to overturn the Anderson report in her book, The Scandal of Scientology. The reaction to the publication of this book by the CoS is most disturbing. Operation Freakout was mounted by the CoS with the sole purpose of discrediting Paulette Cooper by any means possible, including many illegal mean. These are not qualities of a religious organisation that is for the public benefit.  
 
The prohibition on the CoS was lifted only after a long and expensive legal battle, specifically the cases 1. Hubbard Association of Scientologists -v- Anderson (1971) VR 788; 2. Hubbard Association of Scientologists v. Anderson (1972) VR 340 [appeal of 1971 VR 740]; 3. Hubbard Association of Scientologists International v Anderson and Just (No 2) (1972) VR 577. I am very surprised that the Anderson Report was put aside at the time, because it is very critical of the practices of the CoS. Paulette Cooper outlines the arguments used by the Cos to overturn the Anderson report in her book, The Scandal of Scientology. The reaction to the publication of this book by the CoS is most disturbing. Operation Freakout was mounted by the CoS with the sole purpose of discrediting Paulette Cooper by any means possible, including many illegal mean. These are not qualities of a religious organisation that is for the public benefit.  
  
Many countries in Europe are reviewing the status of the CoS and Germany has classified it as a business, even going as far as considering a ban. The decision (1999) of the commissioners of the Charity Commission in the UK in the application by the CoS for registration as a charity found "that CoS was not established for charitable purposes or for the
+
Many countries in Europe are reviewing the status of the CoS and Germany has classified it as a business, even going as far as considering a ban. Also, the decision (1999) of the Commissioners of the Charity Commission in the UK in the application by the CoS for registration as a charity found "that CoS was not established for charitable purposes or for the
 
public benefit and was therefore not registrable as a charity" If other countries are deciding that the CoS was not founded for the public benefit, it is time for Australia to review the status we have given it.  
 
public benefit and was therefore not registrable as a charity" If other countries are deciding that the CoS was not founded for the public benefit, it is time for Australia to review the status we have given it.  
  

Revision as of 20:11, 4 February 2008

This page is to be a form letter to your local Federal Member of Parliament regarding the tax free status of the Church of Scientology.

This letter needs spell/grammar checking and some parts may need rewording.


Contents

Letter

{Align Right} {Your Firstname and Lastname}

{Align Right} {Your Street Address}

{Align Right} {Your Town/Suburb}, {State and PC}


{Rep's Firstname and Lastname}

{Rep's Street Address}

{Rep's Town/Suburb}, {State and PC}


Dear {Name of Representative},

I am contacting you in regards to some serious concerns I have about the Church of Scientology (CoS) in Australia. My understanding is that the CoS enjoys a tax exempt status on the basis that it is a Religious organisation. The Australian Tax Office defines a tax exempt religion as 1 - belief in a supernatural Being, Thing or Principle; and 2 - acceptance and observance of canons of conduct in order to give effect to that belief.

My main concern is that these qualifiers of a tax exempt status for religious institutions are too broad and are easily taken advantage of. I understand that defining a religion too finely can have an adverse effect; however, I would like to see additional ongoing oversight in the practices that exempt religious institutions from tax. My view is that the CoS has taken advantage of the broad definition of a religious organisation for the sole purpose of their own financial benefit.

In Chapter 20 of the Report of the Inquiry into the Definition of Charities and Related Organisations of 2001, the Committee's conclusions say: "Organisations that have as their dominant purpose the advancement of religion are for the public benefit because they aim to satisfy the spiritual needs of the community". My understanding is that the CoS requires donations from members before they are able to read the teachings and advance past the initial meetings. The payments required for their spiritual guidance are in addition to the tax benefits the CoS receives from the community. My concern is that this double dipping is to the detriment of the public.

Moreover, if the community provides the CoS with a tax exempt status, the CoS should be accountable to the community. I believe that all of the financial records of the CoS should be available for public scrutiny to gauge the benefit the CoS provides. It is near impossible to find reliable information on where and how the CoS spends the tax exempt funds. The CoS appears to have large sums of money to wage legal battles against information that may portray them in a negative way. The many court cases against the publication of Andrew Morton's book and the attempts to remove a Tom Cruise video from youtube.com are both against the spirit of free speech and appear extremely wasteful of funds when the CoS should be benefiting the community.

I would like to point your attention to the Anderson Report of 1965 by Kevin Victor Anderson, Q.C., which was the basis for the prohibition of the CoS in the states of Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia in the late 1960's. The enquiry was presented with documents revealing "a most alarming feature of Scientology, namely, the tremendous power which the HASI (Hubbard Association of Scientologists International) is in a position to exercise over its preclears, for they contain the record of intimate disclosures made by thousands of preclears at a time when normal inhibitions and restraints were suspended and they were revealing their most secret hopes and fears, their shame and grief and guilt." These disclosures are carefully archived by the CoS and used for harassment, blackmail and character assassination against members of the CoS that may want to leave the organisation and speak out against it according to personal accounts listed on www.xenu.net.

The Anderson report also says: "One of the great dangers of scientology is that it poisons the minds of its followers against the medical profession and generates an abhorrence of medical treatment generally, and psychiatric and psychological treatment in particular." and "Thinly disguised as something of quality and value, scientology has insidiously infiltrated the community. In reality it is a dangerous medical cult, with special though not exclusive interest in mental health, and it is concerned primarily to discredit orthodox medicine and psychology and in lieu thereof offer its deluded victims dangerous hypnotic and other techniques which falsely masquerade as scientific." The detriment that the CoS causes to the community can be clearly seen in the recent double murder in Revesby, NSW on the 5th of July, 2007, which was caused by the denial of psychiatric help by the teachings of the CoS.

The prohibition on the CoS was lifted only after a long and expensive legal battle, specifically the cases 1. Hubbard Association of Scientologists -v- Anderson (1971) VR 788; 2. Hubbard Association of Scientologists v. Anderson (1972) VR 340 [appeal of 1971 VR 740]; 3. Hubbard Association of Scientologists International v Anderson and Just (No 2) (1972) VR 577. I am very surprised that the Anderson Report was put aside at the time, because it is very critical of the practices of the CoS. Paulette Cooper outlines the arguments used by the Cos to overturn the Anderson report in her book, The Scandal of Scientology. The reaction to the publication of this book by the CoS is most disturbing. Operation Freakout was mounted by the CoS with the sole purpose of discrediting Paulette Cooper by any means possible, including many illegal mean. These are not qualities of a religious organisation that is for the public benefit.

Many countries in Europe are reviewing the status of the CoS and Germany has classified it as a business, even going as far as considering a ban. Also, the decision (1999) of the Commissioners of the Charity Commission in the UK in the application by the CoS for registration as a charity found "that CoS was not established for charitable purposes or for the public benefit and was therefore not registrable as a charity" If other countries are deciding that the CoS was not founded for the public benefit, it is time for Australia to review the status we have given it.

In conclusion, I am seriously concerned about the honesty and ethics of the CoS and it's conduct here in Australia. I implore you to take action against the tax exempt status of this so called church. The CoS is raising tax exempt funds and using them for mysterious and unknown purposes. In addition, I implore you to seek more information and take action on the medical practices used and recommended by the CoS. L Ron Hubbard, the founder of the CoS, admitted himself in 1948: "You don't get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you start a religion."

I eagerly await hearing your opinion on these issues.


Thank you,


{YOUR SIGNATURE}


{your Firstname and Lastname}

Ammunition

Please list any information ammunition and sources for this letter. I am looking for information on their tax status and how they got it (litigation), why the CoS was banned in 3 Australian States and then unbanned a few years later, what the requirements are for an organisation to be a tax exempt religion, etc etc. Please hit the government websites and list the info here. This information can then be collated into the actual letter.



Charities Definition Inquiry Final Report

How do I get my hands on this document?

The Anderson Report 1965

Scientology cited in killings

Full text of The Scandal of Scientology by Paulette Cooper

How to write a letter to a politician

ATO page on religious institutions

APPLICATION BY THE CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY (ENGLAND AND WALES)FOR REGISTRATION AS A CHARITY "The Commissioners having considered the full legal and factual case put to them by CoS,and having reviewed the relevant law, taking into account the principles embodied in ECHR where appropriate, decided that CoS was not established for charitable purposes or for the public benefit and was therefore not registrable as a charity under section 3(2) of the Charities Act 1993."

Your Representatives

Send this letter to all your representatives at State and Federal level. The more people that talk about this issue, the more that gets done.

Federal Representatives

List of Federal Members by Electorate

PDF document with contact details of all Federal Members

Senators

Contact details for Senators

State Representatives

Queensland State Representatives

NSW State Representatives

Victoria State Representatives

Western Australia State Representatives

South Australia State Representatives

Tasmania State Representatives

Northern Territory State Representatives