Quote:
Originally posted by robustpuppy
Thanks, I knew it was a Scientology thing. Which comes first, being an ass, or becoming a scientologist? It's intolerance no matter how you slice it. The fact that his criticism was consistent with his "religion" makes him no less of a schmuck for commenting publicly on it. If he were a Jehovah's Witness would he criticize, I don't know, Gary Busey for getting a blood transfusion to save his life after the umpteenth time he crashed his motorcycle without wearing a helmet? Brooke Shields was, according to her account, so depressed she could barely care for her child or bond with her. It seems to me that whatever help a person gets in that situation should be lauded, not criticized. The very point of Brooke Shields's publicizing her problem is that post-natal depression is something for which many women don't seek help. She was trying to remove a stigma (something I really don't understand -- I've been depressed and gotten help for it, although I preferred not to use AD's -- what's the big deal in admitting that?) and he was trying to create one.
He's a schmoe.
|
Pointing out the essential stupidity of Scientology is one of the reasons I'm opposed to "religious tolerance." Tolerating your religion means I will not pass any laws making it illegal to practice it; it does not mean I must believe it to have credibility equal to my own, or no religion at all.
It's not accidental that Scientology is popular with people who are famous for reasons other than being smart. Remember when Ann Richards said GHWB was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple? Hollywood is filled with people who advanced three bases on walks and think they got a hat trick.
