I'm unfamiliar with the use of legal contracts relating to religious services, so I read this one with great interest. Are there other churches that require contracts, and if so, are their contracts available to the uninitiated public?

have such a thing. who would sign it? do scientologists also send money to that man in nigeria who has a big check that he's willing to share if you endorse it for him?

Obviously, 3.5 million Americans signed this one and I don't intend to impugn their character. My interest is mostly academic, not antagonistic.

With respect to, say, the Roman Catholic church's sexual abuse lawsuits, would such a contract provide legal cover for those acts--if they were classified as "spiritual healing" or "religious services," for example?

Is this likely to be a trend?

A contract can say whatever it wants, but the right to sue is not so easily contracted away.

And no, it's not likely to be a trend. Any legitimate religion would find it abhorrant.

jeditoby, 3.5 million people have not signed that.

The CoS' claims of 3.5 million "American members" (and I think they claim something like 6 million worldwide are bogus. Like everything else from them, its a lie.

They've even been cornered themselves (in court testimony) to admit the actual membership figures are a fraction of this. 10% of that at best.

These is a dangerous group hiding under the "cloak" of religion. Which they aren't (and not simply because there's no "God" aspect), but because their practices and history are those of a cult. 5 minutes of Googling shows all anyone needs to see pretty good evidence of that--court documents, FBI and IRS documentation, international condemnations from countries that are more on the ball than the U.S. is on this subject, HUNDREDS of eyewitness accounts from ex-members.

3.45 million Americans left the church then.

Where do you get 3.5 million?

So, assuming most of the more legal aspects (anything dealing with the right to sue, and perhaps the right to request conventional medical care) are unenforceable in a court of law, how efficable is this long-winded and much-initialed document?

And what, if anything, is the penalty for breaching this contract? There doesn't seem to be any severance clause, so it seems the worst that could be done is excommunication. Did I miss something?

Finally, is it possible to argue that the whole contract is unconscionable, and on what grounds?

I'm just using the numbers from the article. Here's the extract, relevant section highlighted:

The church enjoys tax-exempt status and claims more than 3.5 million members in the United States, but its secretive organization has remained controversial since its inception, and the Scientologists have repeatedly been sued by defectors or their family members.

Granted, membership claims may be exaggerated. But tax-exempt status is either true or false. And if true, then someone in U.S. government finds merit to their claim as a bona fide religious organization.

What does it avail them to claim a higher membership count? It's fallacious to assume that higher numbers = legitimacy in either action or doctrine. Is it strictly PR, then? If so, wouldn't something so easily disputed (as a matter of court record) be disadvantageous?

I'd be interested to see that confession--is there a link to it on the web?

jeditoby:

What does it avail them to claim a higher membership count? It's fallacious to assume that higher numbers = legitimacy in either action or doctrine. Is it strictly PR, then? If so, wouldn't something so easily disputed (as a matter of court record) be disadvantageous?

I'd be interested to see that confession--is there a link to it on the web?

jeditoby, its your opinion that higher numbers don't equal legitimacy. I may even agree. But the issue isn't what WE think, its what the person making the bogus claim thinks. If they aren't a critical thinker who sees things that way, then don't you agree they'd follow the common belief that stregnth of numbers implies stregnth of purpose?

I'll admit I can't find the court document I've seen spoken of before myself anywhere obvious on the net, but there's this for supporting evidence:

<link>

<link>

<link>

<link>

<link>

Some of these numbers are even LOWER than I'd heard. Sure, a lot of that data is older, but there's such a HUGE difference between the current stated levels from the CoS (8 million--I was wrong when I recalled 6) and these other claims that you have to at least be skeptical.

jeditoby:

I'm unfamiliar with the use of legal contracts relating to religious services, so I read this one with great interest. Are there other churches that require contracts, and if so, are their contracts available to the uninitiated public?

well, technically speaking, jewish weddings require a contract ('ketubah' meaning generally a written document). <link> they are generally very ornate and used more for home decoration, but nonetheless presumably legally binding.

bobodclown:

jeditoby, 3.5 million people have not signed that.

The CoS' claims of 3.5 million "American members" (and I think they claim something like 6 million worldwide are bogus. Like everything else from them, its a lie.

They've even been cornered themselves (in court testimony) to admit the actual membership figures are a fraction of this. 10% of that at best.

These is a dangerous group hiding under the "cloak" of religion. Which they aren't (and not simply because there's no "God" aspect), but because their practices and history are those of a cult. 5 minutes of Googling shows all anyone needs to see pretty good evidence of that--court documents, FBI and IRS documentation, international condemnations from countries that are more on the ball than the U.S. is on this subject, HUNDREDS of eyewitness accounts from ex-members.

well, be reasonable. if it weren't for the contract, then people would think this was just something silly like the great spaghetti monster.

Interesting take on that. Contracts for specific ceremonies and services, rather than as an step in initiation. Would that be more useful, or just more wasteful of paper?

Obviously, all weddings are legal contracts (at least in the U.S.) requiring a marriage license signed by a representative of the state and the married parties.

*lol* Taken!

Inversely, if not for the contract, would a religion (and this one in particular) be more reputable?

It's not my opinion, it's a time-honored fallacy. But you're right in that only critical thinkers would catch that. Heck, if people didn't fall for fallacious thinking, ad executives would be out of business.

Those are some interesting sites and interesting numbers. Since none of them are based on anything more than hearsay or old census numbers, though, it's hard to nail down anything quantifiable. It can be said, however, that the quality of these numbers leave much to be desired. I suspect that, assuming the Church isn't just making the numbers up out of thin air--and I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt here--they are including in those numbers anyone who has ever taken a scientology or dianetics class, regardless of current affiliation. I think it would be easy to say that millions have looked into it. That number doesn't carry much weight: millions have visited New York City, but they don't all live there.

At the very least, it can be inferred that they don't have any reliable way to count their population. Arguably, there's no need to.