I really don't know the intention of the writer of this article....perhaps it is simply an intention to be an unbiased religion reporter.

I will say that any arguments, opinions, etc. which use comparisons as a basis for some proposed view (i.e. Scientology isn't much different than Catholicism) is specious reasoning.

Scientology is indeed a corrupt organization that simply gloms as much money as it can from its adherents. The writer seems to poo-poo the idea of Xenu as unimportant or even not essential to the scientology organization when in fact it is THE central tenet of the scientology belief system.

This is a very light-weight article and I can't imagine the reasoning behind it nor can I understand why Slate magazine would give such a light-weight piece of writing actual space in its pages.

it is a good thing the Pope doesn't wear clothing made of gold and live in a big freaking church that the church turned into a country to avoid government taxes and Nazi domination. Its hides perverts and protects them. The Catholic Church is a pure as the driven snow. It is nowhere near as corrupt as ... I can't think of anything more corrupt , oh well.

My post made no comment as to the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church will certainly have to answer for its behaviour, as in the Los Angeles diocese settlement, and hopefully will be put to task for its ridiculous promise of 'eternal happiness'. The Catholic Church has no answers for problems such as wars, personal suffering, deforestation of the planet, pollution, loss of species, crime, addictions, etc.etc. People pinning their hopes on 'eternal happiness' with the lord instead of trying to create a livable planet for future generations is a 'head in the sand' type of thinking which I am not in favor of.

My post simply tried to point out the lack of investigative skill and the use of specious reasoning in the article I commented on.