Cult News

Rev. Sun Myung Moon’s followers within the Unification Church consider him their “savior” and “messiah” and according to a statement run within his Washington Times newspaper 36 dead US presidents speaking from “spirit world” have agreed and proclaimed him “Lord of the Second Advent, the Messiah, the Savior and the True Parent.”

Moon even had himself crowned once within the US Senate building, in a ceremony attended by politicians and assorted sychophants.

However, the one self-proclaimed and gradiose title the seeming megalomaniac Moon has spoken that just might prove to be true, was when he called himself “king of the ocean.”

Given to ranting and rambling on and on about his supposed greatness the man many consider a “cult leader” outlined a plan in a 1980 speech about how he would eventually rule the world’s fishing industry.

“I have the entire system worked out, starting with boat building. After we build the boats, we catch the fish and process them for the market, and then have a distribution network. This is not just on the drawing board; I have already done it.”

And despite some pretty pitiful business failures, such as the Washington Times that has cost Moon millions annually to subsidize, his fishing investments have actually paid off. 

Moon is now “dominating one of America’s trendiest indulgences: sushi,” according to the Chicago Tribune as reported by Monica Eng, Delroy Alexander and David Jackson. 

The Moon-controlled enterprise called “True World Group” has apparently largely fulfilled the would-be “messiah’s” 1980s prophecy. The business “builds fleets of boats, runs dozens of distribution centers and, each day, supplies most of the nation’s estimated 9,000 sushi restaurants” reports the Chicago Tribune.  

True World Foods reported revenue for 2005 was $250 million. Its fleet of 230 refrigerated trucks delivers raw fish to 7,000 sushi and fine-dining restaurants across America and Moon’s Alaska plant processes more than 20 million pounds of salmon, cod and pollock annually.

Rev. Moon’s fish businesses operate under a nonprofit umbrella called “Unification Church International Inc.” (UCI) 

In 1978 a congressional investigation concluded that UCI had no “independent functions other than serving as a financial clearinghouse for various Moon organization subsidiaries and projects.”

Like Moon who was convicted criminally for tax fraud in the 1980s and sentenced to 13 months at Danbury, the one-time prison inmate’s fish business has gotten into its share of trouble too.

True World Foods in Alaska pled guilty to a federal felony, was fined $150,000 and put on probation in 2001. And more recently Moon’s company has had repeated problems with the FDA, which cited it for “gross unsanitary conditions” just last year.

The 86-year-old Moon’s journey is nearing its end and it won’t be long until he is in “spirit world.”  He has failed to fulfill his goal to become a globally recognized “messiah” and perhaps the head harvester of human souls.

But maybe the purported “cult leader” has finally succeeded at something somewhat more conventional, as a sole catcher and sushi provider.

Does that make Moon a “messiah/fishmonger”? 

According to Los Angeles Times staff writer Louis Sahagun, J. Gordon Melton is “eternally curious,” has an “encyclopedic mind” and “is one of the nation’s foremost authorities on religion.” Scientology, which has recommended Melton as a “religious resource, would certainly endorse the reporter’s view.

But serious journalists have often found Melton’s expertise a bit biased to say the least and he has been called a “cult apologist.”

The 64-year-old Melton was apparently using the article to tout his “Encyclopedia of American Religions,” a boring book that weighs about seven pounds and retails for $320.00.

But don’t expect to find weighty research within his creation, at least not anything that the groups listed don’t want the general public to know.

There seems to be something like a “quid pro quo” understanding between Melton and groups frequently called “cults,” which is essentially that he won’t write up anything they don’t like. 

For example, you won’t find out about the Scientology belief in space aliens and how that’s linked to pesky little critters the controversial church calls “body thetans,” because Melton’s “encyclopedic mind” doesn’t allow such information to leak out, at least not to the public.

Note this short study by Melton  about Scientology. He doesn’t even mention the mythical Xenu, who 75 million years ago sent billions of beings to earth that still haunt us.

Melton could easily add a page or two about the legendary galactic overlord within his 1,250-page book, but Scientology wouldn’t like that.

Maybe it’s cost and/or the questionable quality of his research that makes the ranking of his book so low at Amazon.com. Melton’s encyclopedia has at times been listed below 500,000, though the LA Times article gave it a bump up recently. 

Melton is not known for meaningful analysis about what he calls “new religions.” The itinerant academic doesn’t appear all that “curious” when it comes to the darker side of groups more commonly called “cults.”

Perhaps that’s why many of those same groups have paid Melton hefty fees to help them out with a friendly book, or as an “expert witness” and “consultant.”

The part-time teacher and library worker lionized within the LA Times, basically is known to reiterate whatever “cults” want and/or need for him to say.

However, first he attempted to sell himself as a reource to “help” those working against “cults,” but for “$5,000.00,” to expose the “soft underbelly” of cults because he was “convinced that such groups cannot stand the light of day.”

But later Melton found that the real money lay on the other side of the “cult” question. 

J.Z. Knight, a purported “cult” leader who claims she channels the spirit of a 35,000-year-old dead general from the lost continent of Atlantis, had no problem getting Melton to take her seriously. She paid him to write a book for her titled Finding Enlightenment: Ramtha’s School of Ancient Wisdom.

And after Scientology lawyers bankrupted the Cult Awareness Network  they gave that organization’s files to Melton, who subsequently went through them before he eventually handed them over to UC Santa Barbara.

Melton has often collaborated with Scientologists and was also recommended as a “religious resource” by so-called “new Cult Awareness Network” essentially controlled by Scientology.

The librarian/author seems eager to help “cults” whenever he can.

Once he flew all the way to Japan to defend the cult Aum, right after it released poison gas within Tokyo’s subway system murdering twelve. While thousands of victims were being rushed to hospitals Melton came to the rescue, of the cult that is.

Melton’s traveling companions were James Lewis, another “religious resource” recommended by Scientology and Los Angeles attorney Barry Fisher, recommended by the “new Cult Awareness Network.” The trio’s expenses were paid for by the Japanese cult.

The Washington Post reported that the three Americans pronounced the subway gassing cult “innocent of criminal charges and…a victim of excessive police pressure.”

This remains a profound embarrassment for Melton, since Aum was ultimately proven guilty by overwhelming evidence and its leaders are now sentenced to death

Melton’s insists otherwise, “We concluded that there was a high likelihood that the groups’ leaders had done what they were accused of,” he told Sahagun at the LA Times. 

It appears that Sahagun didn’t take the time to Google Melton, or he doesn’t care about such research search results.

CultNews thinks the Washington Post got it right and the LA Times apparently was taken in by Melton’s spin.

For a “scholar” Gordon Melton often seems indifferent regarding historical facts.

Jim Jones was responsible for the cult mass murder-suicide of more than 900 people in Jonestown November 18, 1978. However, Melton says, “This wasn’t a cult. This was a respectable, mainline Christian group.”

Melton most often completely dismisses or ignores the testimony of former cult members that he calls “apostates.”

Professor Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi of the University of Haifa noted, “In every single case since the Jonestown tragedy, statements by ex-members turned out to be more accurate than those of apologists and NRM researchers¦It is indeed baffling¦the strange, deafening, silence of [such scholars]¦a thorny issue¦like the dog that didn’t bark¦ should make us curious, if not outright suspicious.”

Is Gordon Melton and example of a silent scholar, or perhaps more like a “silent partner”? 

Melton was prominently mentioned within a confidential memo written and distributed by Jeffery Hadden. This memo has been cited as a kind of “smoking gun,” regarding the tacit cooperation of like-minded “cult apologists” within academia cooperation in a kind of network.

Within that memo the now deceased Hadden cited Melton’s importance and willingness to cooperate in an organized effort, which would hopefully be funded by “cults,” to essentially quell criticism about them.

Hadden said, “We recognize that Gordon Melton’s Institute is singularly the most important information resource in the US, and we feel that any new organization would need to work closely with him.”

More recently Melton was exposed for receiving a specious gift, or what looked like a possible payoff, from a notorious group once known as the “Children of God” (COG) now called “The Family.” The purported “cult” taught its members to sexualize their minor children and encouraged women to become “hookers for Christ.”

Melton apparently hooked $10,000.00 for his so-called “International Religious Directory,” a pet project he runs. 

Melton was exposed by Moving On.org, a Web site created by young adults that were raised within COG, but have left the group and formed a support network through the Internet.

Their Web site made public a portion of a 2000 IRS disclosure document filed by a charity linked to COG listing Melton as a recipient of a $10,000.00 gift.

Sahagun didn’t report about the cash Melton has received, but did find the space to discuss Melton’s “fascination with vampires.” The supposed scholar once was paid to testify in court about “vampire and werewolf relationships.” An attorney that worked with Melton lauded his ability to recall examples off the top of his head.

Maybe that’s because just such a relationship has become J. Gordon Melton’s stock in trade?

Melton markets himself to groups often seen as something like weerwolves in sheeps clothing, and he feeds on the misery they create much like a vampire.

Cayman Net News “inaccurately claimed that Landmark’s founder lives in the Cayman Islands mischaracterized Landmark Education and its program The Landmark Forum, ” says Art Schreiber, General Counsel for the private for-profit company Landmark Education.

However, Schreiber has a tendency to carefully parse his language in a way that often seems deliberately misleading.

In the same statement Schreiber insists that “Landmark Education was not formerly known as EST (Erhard Seminars Training).”

EST was founded by Werner Erhard, also known as Jack Rosenberg a former used car salesman without meaningful academic or professional credentials, and was sold in 1992. Eventually the newly formed company came to be called “Landmark Education” and has been run ever Erhard’s brother Harry Rosenberg ever since.

And a licensing agreement provided payments to Erhard for his “technology” eventually paid by Landmark.

Schreiber himself is an old crony of Werner Erhard’s, an association that dates back to the days of EST.

Apparently, Mr. Schreiber has conveniently chosen to forget and omit this history so he can say that “Landmark’s founder” does not live in Georgetown as reported by New York Magazine in 2001.

However, this seems just a bit disingenuous, which seems to have become a particular penchant of Landmark’s General Counsel.

In fact, despite Schreiber’s effort to obscure it, Landmark has a deeply troubled history of bad press and persistent complaints. And the company has frequently been accused of “brainwashing” its program participants and its staff not so flatteringly referred to as “mindbreakers.”

Clinical psychologists and experts in the type of mass marathon training sold by companies like Landmark have noted the structural problems that appear to be inherent within such seminars. These problems have at times been linked to what can be seen as psychological casualties.

Landmark Education has also been sued for personal injuries repeatedly and in one lawsuit for wrongful death.

Art Schreiber as Landmark’s lawyer has often threatened media outlets and individuals with litigation in an apparent effort to silence his employer’s critics.

CultNews was targeted by just such a campaign of that eventually led to a lawsuit filed against this Web site.

But in a humiliating turn of events Landmark eventually dismissed its own lawsuit, rather than submit to open discovery.

The following is an excerpt from an introduction to an archive about Landmark’s litigation. This introduction was written by noted attorneys Peter Skolnik and Michael Norwick of Lowenstein Sandler, a prestigious New Jersey law firm that defeated Landmark, and sent its lawyers scurrying from a New Jersey federal court.

“Landmark, like Erhard before it, has repeatedly used litigation and threats of litigation as an improper tool to silence its vocal public critics.  This type of lawsuit — typically accusing the defendant of defamation and related torts — is known in various American jurisdictions as a SLAPP suit: i.e., a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation; a lawsuit brought not for its merits, but for the specific purpose of silencing a vocal critic, often one who is unlikely to have the financial resources to defend himself. Given Landmark’s history of filing such lawsuits, it came as no surprise that Ross’s website would enter Landmark’s litigation cross hairs.  The democratizing effect of the internet has endowed this website, practically a one-man operation, with the same publishing power and reach as Landmark, a multi-million dollar for-profit corporation.  The popular search engine, Google, which ranks web sites by popularity and not financial means, lists www.culteducation.com as #2 on the search term “Landmark Education,” right behind Landmark’s own website.  Thus, persons seeking information about Landmark’s programs have easy access to both the information provided on Landmark’s website, as well as the contra point-of-view about Landmark often expressed here.”

“As was reported here nearly a year-and-a-half ago, Landmark and its related companies sued Ross on June 25, 2004, based upon allegedly disparaging statements made about Landmark on www.culteducation.com, www.cultnews.com, and www.culteducation.com.  In its Complaint, Landmark charged that allegedly false and disparaging comments made on Ross’s website and statements made by Ross to the media constituted, among other things, product disparagement, tortious interference, consumer fraud and unfair competition.  Although much of the material complained about by Landmark consisted of visitor comments, personal stories and bulletin board messages written by users of the website, Landmark’s complaint made the baseless accusation that these statements were actually authored by Rick Ross under false pseudonyms. Cited among comments about Landmark attributed to Ross were that:

“commentaries accuse Landmark of hypnotizing’ and brainwashing’ participants, attempting cult recruitment’ and mind control’ and of constituting cultish-ness.’”  (Complaint ¶ 18)   

“Landmark’s program make a deliberate assault on your mind;’ . . . Landmark’s programs are downright dangerous’ and destructive,’ Landmark’s programs are designed to make participants vulnerable to suggestion;’ Landmark’s programs have cult attributes;’ and Landmark’s programs are a form of subtle brainwashing.’” (Complaint ¶ 22) 

“Defendants made false charges that Landmark participants endured days of bullying’ and humiliation.’”  (Complaint ¶ 18 (c)). 

“Participants are subject to total “control . . . from the moment [they] are in that room.”’”  Complaint ¶ 22 (2) and “Landmark representative exhibited a reluctance to allow toilet breaks.’”  (Complaint ¶ 18 (j)). 

These are among the same allegations and opinions about Landmark that its critics have published for years, and for which Landmark has repeatedly sued or threatened to sue.  Indeed, Landmark itself has been sued a number of times for personal injuries alleged to have arisen out of its programs.”

The pivotal point in this frivolous lawsuit occurred when a federal judge “refused to stipulate to a protective order that would have kept Landmark’s internal documents confidential and hidden from public view.  Although Landmark took preliminary steps to have its training manuals and other documents kept confidential, (see letter) Landmark came to understand that the law has recently begun looking far less favorably on orders protecting the disclosure of evidence produced in litigation, and that if motion practice for discovery ensued, Landmark would likely be required to disclose publicly documents that it recognized would not only damage its case, but would further establish that its complaint was, from the outset, brought in bad faith.”  

Lowenstein and Sandler “learned from papers filed in Landmark’s litigation against Self Magazine that Landmark’s own training manuals directly contradict the allegations made in Landmark’s complaint against Ross, and entirely support the comments on Ross’s website that Landmark claimed were disparaging. For example, in their Complaint against Ross, Landmark alleges that: 

“Defendants made false charges that Landmark participants endured days of bullying’ and humiliation.’”  Complaint ¶ 18 (c).

But Landmark’s own training manuals for its Forum Supervisors state:  

“a Landmark Forum Supervisor’ needs to be an s.o.b. for impeccability.  you need to give up a concern for being liked. . . . Be a destroyer. . . .  ” and “Don’t ever let people move or stand up or talk before you have declared the start of the break.  Don’t ever let stuff like that go by.  Ever, ever, ever.”   Furthermore, in Landmark’s Complaint, it attributes to Ross comments such as: Furthermore, in Landmark’s Complaint, it attributes to Ross comments such as: “the Landmark Forum is a very stressful process that is not for everyone;’” (Complaint ¶ 41(a)); 

Furthermore, in Landmark’s Complaint, it attributes to Ross comments such as: “the Landmark Forum is a very stressful process that is not for everyone;’” (Complaint ¶ 41(a)); Yet, Landmark’s own warnings and disclaimers in its application for the Landmark Forum state: 

. . . people will from time to time cry or experience headaches, tiredness, nausea, confusion, disappointment, feelings of anxiety, uncertainty, and hopelessness.  Some participants may find the Program physically, mentally, and emotionally stressful.”  

See, e.g, Application Form produced in a Texas lawsuit against Landmark in 1997, Neff v. Landmark Education Corp. Continued discovery in this case might have forced Landmark publicly to disclose the information and related documents that led Landmark to require participants in its programs to sign and acknowledge these disclaimers.  Much of what we uncovered about Landmark’s internal documents directly contradicting the allegations.'”Continued discovery in this case might have forced Landmark publicly to disclose the information and related documents that led Landmark to require participants in its programs to sign and acknowledge these disclaimers.  Much of what we uncovered about Landmark’s internal documents directly contradicting the allegations.'”Did Landmark Education and Art Schreiber attempt to intimidate and/or bully Cayman Net News?

Continued discovery in this case might have forced Landmark publicly to disclose the information and related documents that led Landmark to require participants in its programs to sign and acknowledge these disclaimers.  Much of what we uncovered about Landmark’s internal documents directly contradicting the allegations.'”Did Landmark Education and Art Schreiber attempt to intimidate and/or bully This has been the familiar pattern before. That is, when the private for-profit company and its lead lawyer don’t like something said and/or anticipate a critical article may be published, they have been known to essentially bully reporters and/or their publishers.  

CultNews will not be bullied by either Schreiber or his employer Landmark and the Ross Institute database will continue to provide meaningful information about the company and its practices.

Thankfully there are law firms like Lowenstein Sandler and lawyers such as Skolnik and Norwick that care deeply about the First Amendment and are willing to provide pro bono legal assistance to protect it.

CultNews and the Ross Institute have been sued five times by groups or individuals that apparently hoped to silence and/or purge this Web site of critical information.

First, in Arizona by the so-called “Church of Immortal Consciousness.”

Later, by Judy Hammond and her “Pure Bride Ministries.”

And also by the “Gentle Wind Project” of Maine.

Four of those five lawsuits were dismissed without ever going to trial. A fifth, filed by a group similar to Landmark called NXIVM has recently been moved from federal court in New York to New Jersey.

Lowenstein Sandler is now local counsel in that case, along with long-time pro bono lawyers Douglas Brooks of Boston and Thomas Gleason of Albany, New York.

Groups called “cults” or “cult-like” have frequently sued critics historically and succeeded in silencing some, such as the former Cult Awareness Network, which was put closed down and then taken over by Scientology lawyers.

CutNews makes this promise, to keep reporting the facts despite threats from such groups and would-be bullies like Art Schreiber.

Transexual Kate Bornstein was once a Scientologist, but now is an activist performing a solo show called “A Queer and Pleasant Danger,” reports Towerlight Online.

During the performance the former man who now lives as a woman says she was “kicked out of Scientology.” Bornstein symbolically spray paints an X on herself to represent that ex-Scientologist status.

Was the transsexual tossed aside for being too sexually ambiguous to suit Scientology?

The controversial religion’s founder L. Ron Hubbard had harsh words for gays. He wrote that homosexuals “should be taken from¦society as rapidly as possible” because “no social order will survive which does not remove these people from its midst” reported Rolling Stone.

Was Hubbard homophobic?

Did Scientology follow his instructions and remove Bornstein?

In Hollywood today Hubbard’s sentiments don’t sound “politically correct,” especially after all those Emmys Will and Grace got, not to mention the Oscars Brokeback received this year, so Scientologists repeatedly try to spin such quaint Hubbardisms.

For example one Scientologist writing commentary for The Post Chronicle insists Hubbard was only “speaking figuratively” when he made such seemingly nasty remarks and that they were written “in 1952, over half a century ago.”

Apparently the Scientology religious sage’s “words of wisdom” were not always “eternal truths,” but instead at times rather dated and some are now expired.

However, rumors have circulated for years that Scientology helps to hide its homosexuals if they are celebrities. South Park mocked that speculation with its hilarious send-up about the controversial religion titled “Trapped in the Closet.”

Tom Cruise allegedly kept that episode from repeating because he was supposedly so upset by it.

Does Bornstein have the inside scoop about what’s behind some Scientolostist’s closed closet doors?

Kate “makes it clear that she has plenty of ‘dirt’ she could ‘dish’ about the church,” reports Towerlight Online.  

But Bornstein isn’t about to tell her story explaining that she hasn’t found “a voice to write about the church of Scientology.” More tellingly the transsexual seems worried about possible retaliation and is looking for “a way not to be mean to [Scientologists] so they would not be mean to [her].”

Scientology and its lawyers have been known to get pretty “mean.”

Bornstein is certainly no “anti-Cult activist,” but rather an author, playwright and performance artist focused on another message about gender and the freedom to make personal choices.

The closing message for the one-woman-show is “All roads in life lead nowhere so you might as well choose the road with the most heart and has the most fun.”

It might be fun to find out just what the road was like for the future gender bender while tripping along within Scientology.

Note: CultNews received a response from Kate Bornstein after this story ran. “May I please make some corrections? The reviewer in the Towson student newspaper did her best to report what she saw happen on the  stage, and she got a lot of it right, but not quite all. I  never claim to have been kicked out of Scientology. I was offered the choice of 3 years in the RPF or excommunication and I chose excommunication. And I’m pretty sure my transsexuality had nothing to do with why I was being offered that choice. Long story. And I do tell it all in the show, honest. I’ve found a voice to speak this story with,” said Ms. Bornstein. 

It’s Passover time and that means it’s the season for the annual traveling road show produced by the so-called “Jews for Jesus” (JFJ), an evangelical Christian missionary organization that targets Jews for conversion. The group sends out its faithful in touring buses every year to present “Christ in the Passover,” as reported by the Dakota Voice.

These programs are typically staged within evangelical and fundamentalist churches where JFJ puts on the program and then profits from contributions.

Passover is a proven fundraiser for JFJ, which has a multi-million-dollar budget and payroll to meet.

But the organized Jewish community has repeatedly expressed concern about such programs, which superimpose fundamentalist Christian beliefs over the historic understanding of the Jewish Passover observance.

JFJ presents its own rather ethnocentric, idiosyncratic version of Passover to evangelical Christian churches across the United States such as Grace Church of Toledo Ohio, Fremont Berean Bible Church in Nebraska and occasionally at mainline Protestant churches like Trinity United Methodist Church of Seymour, Indiana.

Needless to say Christian missionaries parading about, as “Jews” for Passover doesn’t exactly inspire enthusiasm amongst Jews, who most often observe its traditional Seder dinner in the privacy of home.

After all Passover and its Seder symbols have a long-established historic meaning that predates both Jesus and Christianity.

For those that have read Book of Exodus or watched the movie “Ten Commandments” Passover is not about Jesus or Christianity, it is a holiday specifically observed to commemorate the deliverance of Jews from bondage in ancient Egypt more than a millenium before the birth of Jesus.

But for JFJ this sacred Jewish holiday has been reduced essentially to a fund raising hook.

JFJ’s founder is Martin Rosen, a retired Baptist minister, who hit the road again not long ago when his brainchild had some budget problems.

Pastor Martin prefers to be called “Moishe,” which he seems to think makes him seem Jewish.

Jewish surnames also suffuse the list of front line JFJ staff, again giving the group a seemingly “Jewish” patina.

However, Rosen’s successor as the top “Jew” at JFJ, David Brickner, was recently exposed by author David Klinghoffer in the Jewish Journal as a “non-Jew.”

His bio on the JFJ Web site refers to him as “a fifth-generation Jewish believer in Jesus,” which means his family actually has been Christian for some time.  

And Brickner’s mother was not Jewish, which means he isn’t either according to any Orthodox understanding.

By Orthodox definition if a mother isn’t Jewish her baby isn’t either. And Brickner’s maternal grandmother was not Jewish.

Oops.

This means that by no Jewish definition would the JFJ leader even qualify as an apostate Jew, let alone simply as “Jewish.”

Not surprisingly JFJ’s funding comes essentially from sympathetic fellow believers within the Christian fundamentalist community.

But are these the same Christians who frequently say they “love” both Jews and Israel?

If these evangelicals truly “love” Jews why do they continue to so stubbornly support groups that offend Jews by falsely reinterpreting Jewish holidays?

It would seem that this continued support by many Christian fundamentalists demonstrates a disregard and/or insensitivity to the concerns of Jews, which has been repeatedly and publicly expressed?

In fairness it should be noted that some evangelical leaders have spoken out critically against groups like JFJ, such as Billy Graham.

It seems the founder of Scientology might be considered a racist based upon some of his writings.

L. Ron Hubbard wrote within Scientology: The Fundamentals of Thought “Unlike yellow and brown people, the white does not usually believe he can get attention from matter or objects. The yellow and brown believe for the most part that rocks, trees, walls, etc, can give them attention. The white saves people, prevents famine, floods, disease and revolution … the yellow and brown races are not very progressive.”

Hmm, does this mean that Hubbard saw something like a pecking order amongst the races with his own white race at the top?

This was recently reported by Zoe Williams for The Guardian in Great Britain.

Stars like Tom Cruise and John Travolta frequently extol Hubbard as their hero publicly, so on balance it seems fair to scrutinize the author’s writings critically.

But there doesn’t appear to be anything heroic about his racial theories, which sound more like condescending bigotry than an example of brave new thinking.

Scientologists often orchestrate awards and special celebrations for the creator of their religion.

Last month they gathered in Los Angeles for Hubbard’s birthday and to announce a “worldwide celebration” about what they call his “extraordinary life” stated Scientology’s official Newsroom.

One man attending the party was Reverend James McLaughlin, senior pastor of the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church of Houston, Texas.

McLaughlin praised Hubbard as a “genius.”

“I admire him. I respect him. I consider him to be an angel that came to help humankind to work out its problems,” said the African-American pastor.

Well according to Hubbard’s good book that recites the fundamentals of his faith, saving people is what white people do, while folks like Rev. McLaughlin crave attention from “rocks, trees, walls, etc.”

In fact, it seems that according to the “Word of Hubbard” the reverend would be relegated to the general category of “not very progressive.”

However, Hubbard himself wasn’t always judged as a fount for truth.

California Superior Court Judge Paul Breckenridge probably wouldn’t appear on any Scientology party list. He called Hubbard “virtually a pathological liar.”   

And apparently angered by the seemingly racist statements made within “Fundementals of Thought” Zoe Williams urged her readers to consider “boycotting [Scientology stars’] cinematic endeavors and pelting them with eggs.”

Well, that might be a bit much, but isn’t celebrating L. Ron Hubbard as a “genius” and calling him an “angel” just a bit over the top too?

Apparently Isaac Hayes isn’t the only Scientologist that has done voiceover for comedy cartoon characters that can’t take a joke and has no sense of humor when it comes to their controversial religion.

Nancy Cartwright, the voice for Bart Simpson on the TV show The Simpsons, seemingly suffers from the same malady as Hayes reports 7 Days.

Perhaps inspired by the creators of South Park, who ridiculed Scientology so successfully, some of The Simpsons writers wanted to have a little fun too.

The proposed line to be spoken by Bart went something like this, “Mormonism? That’s the second freakiest religion in America!”

One guess who must be the first “freakiest”?

Cartwright certainly got the joke, but she didn’t like it, so the show dumped it according to insiders.

So even a purported allusion to Scientology got the axe at the Fox show.  

“That’s ridiculous…Scripts change all the time as shows are prepared, and what goes into a show and what doesn’t go into a show is based on what’s funny, and that is it, her publicist.

Notice though that Cartwright’s spokesperson doesn’t flatly deny the report altogether.

Hollywood Scientologists and their publicists like to parse their language when responding to accusations that star power was somehow used to censor things within the entertainment industry.

Like South Park the longer running cartoon show The Simpsons has at times made fun of religion, but Scientologists seem to be very thin skinned when it comes to their own “sacred cow.”

However, unlike Isaac Hayes, Nancy Cartwright isn’t threatening anyone at Fox with a walkout.

The 58-year-old voiceover queen earns a reported $360,000 per episode, which means she takes in $8 million per season.

And besides, unlike Hayes, it appears Cartwright the cartoon diva cowed the show over her “sacred cow.”

CultNews previously reported within “Scientology’s top tin tips for having kids” that Tom Cruise bought his girlfriend Katie Holmes an MP3 player packed with her favorite tunes to apparently pacify the actress during childbirth, now it seems he has decided to pick up the real thing too, an actual “adult pacifier.”

And all this appears to have been done to keep within the divine guidelines dictated by Scientology’s founder L. Ron Hubbard, for what Scientologists call “silent birth.”

“The alleged pacifier, which is reportedly made of plastic and molded to perfectly fit the 27-year-old Katie’s mouth, could be deployed very soon,” reports the New York Daily News.

Apparently the thinking is that Ms. Holmes will be so preoccupied with jamming and sucking on her big “binky” that she’ll forget about the baby.

Perhaps the pacifier is a fitting symbol of the child-like dependence the actress has developed, both on Cruise and his controversial church.

David Hinkley observed within the New York Daily News that Tom Cruise doesn’t discourage  the “speculation that whether Katie Holmes asked or not, he feels his Scientology-based thinking is plenty for both of them.”

But would it be a “mission impossible” for the girl to get a little epidural?

“The Church has no policy against the use of medicines to help a person with a physical situation. This, too, is up to the mother and her doctor,” says Scientology through a recent release from the official newsroom.

Though this just might be an example of Scientology carefully parsing its language for media consumption.

The release doesn’t specifically state that “painkillers” would be an option for Holmes’ doctor, only “the use of medicines,” whatever that means.

However, this may provide enough wiggle room for an epidural, if it’s needed.

No matter how soothing the music is coming out of her MP3 player, the baby coming out might just make Katie swallow her pacifier.

It appears that Nicole Kidman was granted an annulment regarding her marriage to Scientology’s “Top Gun” Tom Cruise because it “did not conform to the requirements of the church,” according to Jeanette Walls at MSNBC.

But what does that mean?

Does this mean that the Cruise/Kidman marriage was somehow sexless or that matrimony Scientology-style is outside the parameters of what the Roman Catholic Church considers reasonable?

Maybe religious organizations like Scientology, which have been called “cults,” can’t “conform” to its “requirements” and therefore Ms. Kidman is off the hook.

How ironic that Tom Cruise’s Oscar-winning ex has returned to embrace the church, just as the next Mrs. Cruise has apparently rejected that same religious heritage.

Perhaps the conservative Catholic parents of Katie Holmes should look into the process of obtaining an annulment, given their future son-in-law’s marital track record?

But would their daughter giving birth before walking down the aisle be OK with Catholic clergy?

Probably not.

Looks like if things don’t work out for Katie Holmes she will probably have to get along without an annulment.

As if Whitney Houston didn’t have enough problems, she has apparently continued her involvement with a group often called a “cult.” The fallen star reportedly sought help from the “Black Hebrews” as recently as two months ago.

“Friends hoped she had reformed thanks to a ‘spiritual adviser’ and her renewed links to a controversial religious sect” reports the Herald Sun.

But is it wise for Houston’s friends to hope her crack habit can be cured by a cult?

Certainly there are more credible options, such as a hospital treatment program.

Houston and husband Bobby Brown first hooked up with the so-called “Black Hebrews” in 2003 on a trip to Israel. The strange group is led by Ben Carter a former Chicago resident who now calls himself “Ben Ammi Ben Israel”

Carter claims that the “Archangel Gabriel told him that many African Americans were descendants of the lost Israeli tribe of Judah.” He led some followers to settle in Israel during 1969, but they didn’t receive permanent residence status until 2003.

The “Black Hebrews” have been linked to crime and the death of a child.

One of Carter’s henchmen was found guilty of “operating an international crime ring” in 1986 and just last year a couple was charged with manslaughter. And the death of their baby was allegedly tied to the group’s strange diet.

Does Whitney Houston really need this kind of help?

Her family has said repeatedly that the influence of Bobby Brown brought about the star’s downfall.

Is the undue influence of this strange sect really going to restore reason to the former diva?

Perhaps Houston’s friends should come up with something better than a choice between either crack or a “cult” for the troubled singer.