Written by
The Scientology organization in Australia has filed a recommendation with the Australian Human Rights Commission’s Freedom of Religion and Belief in the 21st century project, arguing that “Websites created with the primary purpose of inciting religious vilification shall be removed or their access to the Australian public restricted” and that restrictions be placed on “Religious Misinformation and Misrepresentation known or reasonably known to be untruthful, in the Media”.
In addition, they have requested that "creators of Web sites whose primary purpose is the incitement of religious vilification shall be prevented from concealing their identity."
In its submission, the Church argues that these Web sites are not legitimate forums, but rather “have as their central purpose to act as a forum for Anonymous members whose sole goal is to ‘destroy’ our Church for what they consider to be the ‘good of mankind’ and for their ‘own enjoyment.’”
“We have identified that such websites play a major role in the ongoing hate campaign against our Church and their removal or a restriction of access and of content would play a major role in preventing further religious vilification against us,” the submission reads.
While the Church recognises the importance of freedom of speech in a democratic society, it does not believe that a “constant campaign of misinformation and misrepresentation of our beliefs in the media should be tolerated”.
“It is recommended that a law be enacted to prevent the dissemination of antireligious propaganda in the media, which is based on unfounded hearsay and either known or reasonably known to be untruthful,” the submission reads. “Such dissemination shall be the subject of a civil penalty provision in favour of the defamed Church, and/or its individual parishioners if they are individually named or otherwise identified.”
In other words, if they get their way, if you criticise any religion on the internet (or newspaper, or television), you may face lawsuits or penalties, and be forced to defend your opinion in court. Even if what you say is true, this measure would inevitably result in a huge increase in lawsuits, as critics are forced to justify each statement.
Specifically, of course, the filing targets websites critical to the organization, such as WhyWeProtest and similar sites.
This, of course, sets a very dangerous precident, and one that we've seen before. We've learned in high-school history class that there was a time when religous institutions used law to silence criticism, in effect making it illegal to criticise their activities in an open forum. In many areas, blasphemy was (and still is) a capital crime.
But what if this precedent is set? What about organizations that "raid" and protest groups? Or demonize groups, accusing them of horrible atrocities? Or perhaps encourage the destruction of a group that they consider to be harmful?
Then scientology websites shall be shut down, as well. While trying to focus perceptions on the alleged "crimes" against scientology, this same group is, at the same time, is engaged in a dedicated campaign against those of the mental health profession. They raid psychiatric conventions (see the youtube video), and their site (and occasional postings or speeches) accuse psychiatrists of the most horrible crimes in history, from the holocaust to murders and other crimes occuring today.
So if scientology wants critical sites shut down, they must halt their campaign against the mental health campaign, lest the pot call the kettle black.
It is ironic that scientology is now turning to Australia to "protect" themselves, after Hubbard himself called it a nation of thieves and criminals. But that leaves Australia with a considerable decision- where do they want their freedom of speech to end, and how much authority will they give scientology?