No moral high ground in war & conflict


The Church, through its various groups and organisations, has become well-known for using times of strife, conflict and disaster to raise money and get PR.

Whenever disaster strikes, Church generally gets into immediate action by eliciting donations from Scientologists for relief efforts such as funding VM teams, handing out WTH booklets and the like. These activities are then broadly documented, photographed and disseminated in press releases sent out by the Church. Virtually every IMPACT magazine has some or other article covering such activities.

But now they are taking sides in the unfolding human tragedy in the middle east.

The following email is being sent out by the Way to Happiness chapter in Israel:

WTH Israel Email

We have provided a link to the webpage at the bottom of this article for those of you who want to have a look.

When one clicks on the link/s provided, the first headline in HUGE letters is this:

“Do you support the helping of children in bomb shelters?”

And then this:

“Isreal Defense Forces (Israel’s Army) wins over Hamas – Together we will help innocent children and their parents!”

At first glance the promo piece looks innocent enough. Until one starts reading further. And then it quickly becomes clear that it’s a blatant piece of pro-Israeli and anti-Islamic war propaganda not dissimilar to the anti-semitic Nazi propaganda from WWII. Only, this time the target is Palestinians, Hamas and other “terrorists” (i.e. anyone not a citizen of Israel).

The article is peppered with anti-Palestinian and Hamas remarks such as:

” Now that all Israelis are united, the IDF acts in an effort to bring an end to the threat of missiles and to the terrorist tunnels of Hamas”

“Maintaining high morale – not surrendering to Hamas!”

“Reinforcing our national strength.”

“Positive occupation for children during summer vacation, interrupted by Hamas’ actions.”

“Strengthening the moral of the IDF.” (IDF: Israeli Defence Force).

One of the pictures featured in the article is of some WTH workshop being run for Israeli Soldiers. The drill is not recognizable as a WTH exercise, but with the crudely scratched out faces, it looks more like the blind leading the blind:

Israeli Soldiers


The administrators of this blog take no political stance either for or against Israel or Palestine. We do however hold the opinion that ANY war and/or intentional targeting of civilians is an unforgivable atrocity on humankind and actions such as these fly in the teeth of the Declaration of Human Rights – a program which the Church of Scientology purports to champion and promote. Even a casual view of articles from a variety of media shows how divisive this issue is. One’s mans terrorist is another’s freedom fighter as the saying goes. We all know that Nelson Mandela was terrorist in the 60, 70s and 80s but a hero in the 1990s.

We are aware that heated debates regarding the rightness and wrongness of either side have been raging for a while now, however we contend that the LAST thing the Church should be getting involved in is taking a moral stand in this issue and stating who the terrorists are.

We wonder what Louis Farrakahn would have to say about the Church’s open stand against a prominent Islamic organisation?

Someone should ask his opinion.

Link to article can be seen here:


36 thoughts on “No moral high ground in war & conflict

  1. I remember my first sec check and revealing my sexual exploits (they weren’t as bad as you probably think). When asked for justifications, all I think to say was “I never thought I’d have to tell anyone”. Sounds exactly the same as the Church. They really don’t give a crap what they do to get a stat, and even here in South Africa have brazenly taken sides with the IFP (Inkatha). Obviously, because the Internet is nowhere referred to by LRH, they never thought they’d be so undressed in public or have to tell anyone what they’re doing and where they’ve been. Bad boys!

  2. This is unbelievable!!! What the hell are they going to come up with next?!? “Donate money now for arms and ammunition – let’s end this war now and save the children!”


  3. There is no injustice, tragedy, death and destruction whether it be man made or “an act of god” that Scientology won’t use to their advantage of raising money and giving nothing of value back. It’s just sad. So very very sad.

  4. We’re thinking the church is being run by the CIA or has strong CIA connections anyway, perhaps that’s the link to this – support the terrorists. The CIA is in cohoots with Mossad, if understand correctly.
    What about the stance of the church that it is not political?

  5. This is sick. Scientology has been take over by the Reactive Mind of this planet, which Hubbard was trying to clear.

    The Reactive Mind of the planet is fast taking over the Analytical Mind. Scientology has gone under.. .

  6. Scientology has a long history of camouflaging itself, and attempting to manipulate.
    This is expressed in various places, including the HCOPL ‘Battle Tactics’ of 16 February 1969:
    “Know the mores of your public opinion. What they hate. That’s the enemy. What they love. That’s you.”

  7. Back in 2002, shortly before the Irak war began (iirc), I went to a “special IAS briefing” money grab where the reg used the dangerous environment technique, explaining to us that Hussein had unmanned drones with chemical warheads aimed at Europe. Bush used that story and I think the IAS was quite happy to borrow it.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if other people have earlier tales of IAS regges using cold war propaganda to extort gullible money. The strategy is anything but new in this group.

    • An early example of using cold war propaganda:
      In the original 1955 Manual – which was supposed to have been written in Russia the 1930s – the term Dianetics appears multiple times as an adversary of the much hated Soviet Union. In the American St. Hill version, of 1968, the term Dianetics was replaced with “Church of Scientology.”
      In the 1970s, when the USA became embroiled in the Vietnam war, and public opinion shifted, Scientology quietly stopped selling the Manual in its Orgs.

      • The US sent Green Berets to Vietnam on a support and training basis
        in 1961. In 1965 the US became fully involved. In 1973 the last of US
        troops left Vietnam. Public opinion shifted long before the 1970’s arrived.

      • Hi Potpie,
        By 1967 only a small minority of the public opposed the war in Vietnam. Most people regarded us – the protesters – as hippies or troublemakers. By 1968, the opposition grew but we we’re still in the minority.
        It was in 1968 that the American Saint Hill Org in Los Angeles had printed its last edition of the “Russian Manual.” Earlier editions were from the mid 1960s (St. Hill in England), and 1958, and 1955. (Originating from Washington DC org through Manny Publishing.)
        I bought 2 copies of the Manual (the 1968 edition), along with all of LRH’s books, in 1970. I don’t recall seeing it in any Scientology Org after 1971.
        The majority of the public was not apposed to the war in Vietnam in November 1968. The pro-war Nixon vote plus the pro-war George Wallace vote well exceeded the anti-war vote. Majority public opinion didn’t shift until the early 1970s.
        By then, the broad public “hated” fascism and Nazi-ism more than they did Communism, and the “Russian Communist” manual was no longer useful as a propaganda vehicle.

  8. it’s par for the course. scientology, just like EVERY politician will speak out of both sides of their mouth. they will say whatever they think the people they are speaking to want to hear.
    you know as well as i do that scientology thinks ALL sides are just degraded beings, that both sides, all sides, are wrong. they don’t support israel or hamas or democracy or communism or socialism…..or anything of the wog world, they only act as if they do when it suits them.
    the only thing they believe in is their own “slant on life”, their own group, they are the authorities and thus don’t need to ask permission (read: they don’t have to respect other people). they have ALL the answers for humankind. they know it all. they are smart and you are stupid so shut up and do what they say and if you don’t they will trick you into it and that’s okay because after all it is for your own good.
    am i lying, is that not how they think, feel and operate ?

    extremism is the problem. people who are extreme in their views are the problem, not what they believe, but how they believe it. take scientology out of the equation and those who used scientology to oppress people will simply use something else.

    bad is bad and good is good and their character doesn’t change regardless of the dress they wear. a wolf in sheep’s clothing is a wolf and a sheep in wolf’s clothing is a sheep.
    wisdom is discerning which is which.
    that is a truth that underlies all.

    you members and former members of the “church”, how were you able to decide when something was a shore story or not? whether you were getting a shore story or the truth?
    if they blatantly lie to other people, how do you know they weren’t lying to you?

    people you knew were lying to other people but not to you? and even if that was the case, you wanted to be part of a group that lies to people? lying is part of the tech (and if you don’t think lying is part of the tech then you were lied to and haven’t bothered to find out the truth), why wouldn’t it be used on you as needed?
    if you ever lied to another scientologist, did you think you were the only genius that realized if you lie to people you can get them to do what you want, like nobody was ever going to do that to you?
    you trusted them because they told you they are the most ethical people and you didn’t bother to wonder maybe they are lying about that?

    would an unethical person tell you they are ethical? yes because that’s what makes them unethical.
    would an ethical person tell you they are ethical? yes because that’s what they are.
    so how do you tell the difference between the two without questioning? you can’t.
    how you tell the difference is by their works, not what they say. what they do on the WHOLE, not just a selection.
    it’s obvious that if you accept without questioning it means you can be lied to.
    ANYONE who tells you not to question is manipulating you, they have their own interest at heart not yours.
    “scientologists back in comm”………were you ever really in comm to begin with?
    maybe this blog should be called “scientologists finally in comm”.

    • Well..a wolf in sheep`s clothing certainly remains a wolf!A spade…is also..a spade!Thank you for seeing and saying it like it is WhiteStar.I also see value in your last comment and have pondered on this too.Rock on….

    • “it’s obvious that if you accept without questioning it means you can be lied to.
      “ANYONE who tells you not to question is manipulating you, they have their own interest at heart not yours.”

      “scientologists back in comm”………were you ever really in comm to begin with?
      “maybe this blog should be called “scientologists finally in comm”. – VERY GOOD POINT. We couldn’t comm before, it was to risky. I, for one, learnt to be quiet rather than to voice an opinion. If I did dare to voice an opinion, it was with trepidation.
      Well put, WhiteStar.

    • Good is good and bad is bad … “wisdom is discerning which is which.
      That is a truth that underlies all.”

      I don’t agree with the Co$ taking advantage of misery to cynically fundraise. I’m not sure I agree with an official stance of a church supporting either side – not sure about that, but I’m happy the Catholic Church repudiated Nazis and everything they stood for.

      What I am sure about is that the fatal flaw of Scientologists is the widely held belief that axiom of Scn #31 is an “Axiom of Life.” “Goodness and badness, beautifulness and ugliness, are alike considerations and have no other basis than opinion.”

      That is an “Axiom of Scientology.” That’s what it says. It is true in a session – or we could not audit anyone. But if someone cannot make a decision about what is good and bad IN LIFE, they should not pretend to be a Scientologist. Because they’ll blindly follow fucking ANYONE without a Goddamned CLUE.

      “Don’t take sides” my ass. That’s just saying, “I’m a pussy and cave in at the slightest threat.” Wait until some moron terrorist suicide assassin blows up your children at an ice-cream parlor – THEN try telling me some sanctimonious bullshit that you “don’t take sides.” The top of the tone scale is better than the bottom. A higher level of awareness is better than a low one. What the hell are you (article writer – not you Whitestar) talking about, you “don’t take sides?” Fulfill your Condition of Confusion by looking straight down the barrel of a gun held by someone smiling in glee because they’re about to blow your head off, deprive your wife of her husband and your children of their father. The asshole with the gun is the one who “can’t take sides” – he’s EVIL.

      You what the North Vietnamese did? To torture a young woman, they stripped her naked, hung her by her ankles, hands bound behind her back, over a bucket full of harsh soap that they also pissed in, lowered her head into it, put cigarettes out on her ass, waited for her to go into a drowning frenzy, inhale the lye and piss, go limp (“die”), then pulled her up to let the burning liquid drain from her lungs so she could revive herself gasping and choking and coughing. Can you imagine what i feels like to drown again and again and again and again? Try inhaling a teaspoon full of water in your bathroom sink some day (but have someone trained in CPR there with you first, because you’ll cough for about a minute straight and wonder if you’re ever going to breathe again, or are just going to die). Can you imagine what that lye-piss liquid feels like in your nose and throat and lungs? Like they’re being torn out of your body. I’d rather be skinned alive. Have you ever had piss in your mouth? It takes hours to get just a few drops of the taste to go away. How about piss from some real evil assholes you absolutely hate? How about when you know you’re slowly going blind? When your entire face is swollen and your skin is beginning to burn off? And if you’re a woman, all your beauty is literally dissolving and you’re being scarred for life. (I got that first-hand account from a South Vietnamese woman who witnessed that torture, managed to escape to the USA and wrote that book. You think she could write that book in North Vietnam?You don’t take sides?)

      Don’t give me your shit about “don’t take sides.”

      (I don’t have your compassion, Whitestar. I hate cowards, I hate cowardice. and I should know, because whole track I’ve been one. I’m trying like hell to run it all out so I can see again. It DOES take wisdom, and sometimes, that wisdom is what we in the western world call “guts.” Like some said, there’s no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole. Courage is an acquired taste, but once you have it, you just cannot do without it.)

      The Israelis are right, and the terrorists are wrong. When you are so consumed by hatred for someone that you blow yourself up in order to kill them, you have crossed over to the Dark Side of the Force. If you HAVE to kill, you do NOT kill with HATRED. You kill because you have no alternative left. And the evil you kill will later thank you for stopping them (I know that one, too).

      Scientology is all about Ethics, the wisdom to differentiate between good and bad, and there is technology to it. Damn shame so many don’t get that..

      • NIckname, you are arguably the biggest cretin to have posted here. BOTH SIDES are staring down the barrel of a gun, and BOTH SIDES are pointing those guns. That’s what the writer is communicating. I am a big fan of Israel, but nobody but an idiot would question to some degree whether what they are doing is right. Nobody is going to deny Hamas is a terrorist organisation, but the point most people are picking up on is the death toll among innocent civilians.
        In your world it seems very straightforward that one side is right and the other wrong – last time I saw both were firing rockets at innocent people.

      • “We do however hold the opinion that ANY war and/or intentional targeting of civilians is an unforgivable atrocity on humankind and actions such as these fly in the teeth of the Declaration of Human Rights – a program which the Church of Scientology purports to champion and promote.”

        I see that as unfortunate wording. ANY war is wrong? The principal “what the writer is saying” is about the Co$ taking a stance on either side, and their motivations or purposes for doing so.

        I also question whether it is appropriate for a church to do that. I posted a lot of thoughts, and you come up with the astounding indication to me – granted you implied the metaphor – that both aides have guns pointed at each other? (Wow … I didn’t know!) I read over your post several times, and really don’t see how you address what I said. On one hand, you deplore the violence, and on the other hand you support the Israelis. But I posted about a lot more than just this one conflict.

        A few people here are talking about taking sides. I’m talking about Ethics behind the decision. I’m saying that there is good, and there is evil, and the two can indeed be differentiated. Instead of a knee-jerk reaction, why not tackle what I said about axiom (of Scn, not Dn), 31, and the distinction between “auditing session” and “life”?? Or simply tell me it is very impolite to call out the owner of a blog? Or clarify for me that there is a difference between calling someone something, and calling their product the same thing? Or make a bit more of a point that you do take sides, and do question whether you are right or wrong, but perhaps give a bit more about the basis for your best decision?

        It’s interesting that the word “cretin” actually derives from “Christian.” (I did my Method One word clearing!) I guess Romans thought it was stupid to allow oneself to be killed. But it has come to mean, somehow, in all the twists of minds of men, “loutish, crude, insensitive” – something the Christians perhaps thought of the Romans who killed them.

        How about this one: “I refuse to take sides between the Co$ and the Indies, because “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter,” and the Indies are causing pain to those brave freedom fighters inside the church, forcing them to sacrifice their families for what they believe in, making their lives much more difficult than they already are. The Indies should know this the best of all, having been inside the church once, themselves!” Or maybe, “Render unto the terrorist what is the terrorist’s, even if that is your wives and children.” Or, “It’s OK with me if the radical Islamists win and dominate the world with Sharia law, because I know that eventually karma will come around and make me right, so I don’t have to do anything.”

        Things can get so awfully confusing when one has no definition of what is right, and what is wrong. The courts call that “insanity.” Maybe I am stupid, but it seems to me there must be some basis for right and wrong – other than agreements and superior force. In fact, it seems to me from reading The Factors in Scn that once must conclude that being right more often than being wrong, is in fact what leads to the potential of superior force, as one is not constantly reducing one’s own strength and power after being wrong. If there is something wrong with being strong and powerful, then I must really be insane, but that potential force must be used with the same wisdom that brought it.

        And if you are saying I’m stupid for trying to stand in the path of an angry mob to give them better organization and direction so that they can accomplish their true objectives as individuals more effectively, even if they themselves don’t know what those are, well, maybe you’re right. There seem to be an awful lot of angry mobs in the history of mankind. One might suspect that if the Russians want to win territory on which Russians live, but which the Ukraine claims is theirs, all they have to do is take a whole lot of casualties of women and children, and keep that up until world opinion goes against the Ukraine. “Doesn’t matter who’s right or wrong, heh heh. It’s all a game, heh heh. All’s fair in love and war. Life is nasty, brutish, and short, and there is no r-e-a-l purpose to it. Heh heh.”

  9. I read your opinion, “We all know that Nelson Mandela was terrorist in the 60, 70s and 80s but a hero in the 1990s.” and I find it very strange that you can compare Nelson Mandela with the Hamas that attack civilians and their ideal is NOT having a free country but to eradicate Israel. I DO NOT support war, killings or suffering of any human being, but I guess that if we want to end suffering in the middle east (or anywhere else) we should look for WHO is causing it, and what do they gain from it. That is the way to end having more future suffering.

    • izhar – you obviously are not from nor have you lived in South Africa. If you did, you would understand the Nelson Mandela comparison. Don’t forget that Nelson Mandela was imprisoned for TREASON and that the military wing of the ANC was targeting civilians by placing and blowing up bombs in restaurants and even Churches – anywhere frequented by mainly white civilian targets. The carnage and devastation caused to INNOCENT lives was untold, and were very definitely acts of terrorism. The ANC was banned as a terrorist organisation for years in this country. Now they are in power, and Nelson Mandela is a hero – as he rightly should be. I am not stating any opinion here – I am just giving facts. I agree with you fully on the issue of war and human suffering – but this cuts both ways. Israel is just as guilty (and yes, that is my opinion) or are they “excused” from these atrocities because they are “right”? This is a very slippery slope……

      • My point is not who is right and who is wrong. The point is what will make this world saner and safer for constructive ethical people. I think that is the only interest for all constructive people, and with the Internet today it is easier now to spread truth and data, and the main objective is to educate people to be free and learn about life and civilizations.
        Getting into “who is right” and also be hypocritically concerned with 1’000 violence victims, while in Iraq and Syria this is done daily for years, and nobody really is doing a thing about it. Please let us not forget that the MEDIA is one of the MAIN parties that earn lots of money out of videos with blood, violence, etc.
        We should be smarter than to play into the hands of the ones who are manipulating us.
        In the end it is the truth that will set us free, and educating people is the best we can do, I think.

    • no comparison was made, they weren’t likening mandela to hamas.
      they just used mandela as an example to make the point that one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter. suggesting the church should refrain from passing judgment as to which is which, as it is the duty of the church to offer help to all people. as an individual one can decide for themselves who is a terrorist or not, but as an all inclusive organization they should be neutral. otherwise they may as well state to their members “if you don’t support Israel then you may as well leave because we can’t offer any understanding of your feelings.”

      • Helps a bit in resolving my quandary about what the role of a church should be in a conflict. Too bad radical Islam doesn’t see it that way. The distinguishing feature of Scientology is that it is a technology to help all who ask for help. That help occurs in session, and on courses. I personally believe that a church should not stoop to become a political entity (because it is “stooping” to a lower level). But I personally believe as you do, apparently, that an individual must be able to differentiate and take the side of good. That goes to, I believe, the purpose of religion, which is not to enslave an individual to agreements, but to free the individual to find his place in God’s Creation.

  10. After I routed of the Sea Org, in an effort to be a “good Scientologist” I paid and paid and paid for these urgent, frantic phone calls for TWTH to prevent catastrophic wars. I don’t know if I actually swallowed it, or wanted to pay to get them off the phone line, but I did cough up the bucks.
    Well, TWTH is a pure fund raising scheme and the war is worse than ever and 30 years of TWTH and the millions raised and distributed has not lessened any conflict in the Middle East. It is brazen that the *Church* can use the same scam decade after decade…..
    Follow the Yellow Brick Road !

    • Thank you for redirecting the thread back to the central topic. That is the Admin Scale for this thread, the purpose of the article.

  11. “Do you support the helping of children in bomb shelters?”

    I certainly do support various transparent groups and reputable organizations who also make available for inspection the financial records to their members, who have a veritable result-based track records and are in a position to directly affect the livelihood and well-being of the very children being referred to.

    And that pretty much excludes the Church of Scientology or any of its Front Ends.

  12. Well, the document is obviously pro israeli. They could show a bit of pandeterminism and be also interested in the fate of Palestinien dying under the bomb. But it’s nevertheless true that the purpose of Hamas is not to have a palestinian state but to destroy Israel. They were those who refused to cease fire. Of course, there can be also some SP on the israeli side. Basically the Jews are in a fear of being destroyed, and they try to stop it from happen again. Well they have a big engram with Hitler. The destruction of the Jews by the nazis is probably the biggest crime ever accomplished this last 2000 years.
    The ennemy of the peace is religious fanatism, from radical Islam but also from ultra religious Jews who are dwelling the palestinian territory. For them it’s a bible conflict. Palestinien are compared to Amalecite that Joshua was fighting in Jericho.
    All this religious crap either from Jews or Islam is a “stuck on the track” situation. They are living in the past.
    So, scientologists, if you are OTs and are on solo not’s or excal, pick up the cans. I know it’s easy to say. Needs a bit of organisation. Basically the “not’s case” is hanging around stuck in the past, third partying people also, with some evil purp…
    Yes, looks like i’m a true believer, but really this is what scientologist could do to ease off all this violence.
    100 years ago, people of Europe went into a mad war. There are so many things to clear. So many beings to unstuck from engram to bring peace on earth. Was it not what LRH said was the purpose of scientology?

  13. “ANY war and/or intentional targeting of civilians is an unforgivable atrocity on humankind.” That says it all.

    The old HASI had an aim of a world without insanity, crime or war, but this seems to be getting overlooked by today’s ‘Church’.

    • Perhaps. Someone pointed out that if we had had the TV live coverage we have today when the Allies were bombing France, blowing up chickens and horses, cows, innocent fat geese, and Frenchmen and Frenchwomen – we would have halted WW II and Hitler would have overrun England, then the USA (with the first ICBMs).

  14. Hot topic! The Church of Scientology has not taken the moral high ground for decades – they only follow what they perceive to be the most politically expedient and profitable stance. Since the Co$ is a United States multinational corporation, it follows they will follow the party line of the US government. In this case, however, they have seriously misread global opinion, which is overwhelmingly in the opposite direction, as evidenced when the UN voted on whether to investigate Israel for war crimes – the US was the sole country to cast a “No” vote:

    If the Church were even remotely sincere, they would not be playing Third Party by taking a side, but rather looking for a way to foster peace. But then, the Church of Scientology and the concept of morality are mutually exclusive.

    • The UN is hardly anything that can be seen as positive. It is a bloated bureaucracy that only serves itself. Look at it’s results.
      Actually, there are a lot of similarities to it and the church (when the church had better PR). They both talk up a PR storm, and do little.

    • “The Church of Scientology has not taken the moral high ground for decades.”
      What decade was that?
      Not the 1950s when dissenters from Scientology were routinely presented as Communists or Soviet sympathizers. To be called a Communist in the era of Joe McCarthy could be ruinous to a person.
      Was it the moral high ground when, under the heading of ‘Hubbard Dianetic Research Foundation,” LRH wrote to the FBI reporting his wife as a suspected Communist?

      Amoral expediency has always been standard practice, utilizing basic propaganda techniques, and sometimes embroidered with noble sounding PR.

      • At one point, CCHR was having some good results, and Freedom Magazine was gaining respect.
        It wasn’t always all negative.

      • Hi 1984,
        I agree. It wasn’t always all negative.
        Years ago, there were some good people involved in both CCHR and Freedom magazine, and some did good things, but they were naive – as were we all.
        Both CCHR and Freedom magazine have their foundation in LRH’s instructions on the use of propaganda, and his secret project to destroy psychiatry and replace it, thus becoming the ones who dictate who is sane and who is not sane.
        That’s a goal which is about power not spirituality.
        There have always been good people, with good intentions, in Scientology.
        Even today, corporate Scientology, *uses* good people.

  15. The credibility of the UN itself was not the point, that event was merely used as an indicator of global opinion. It is the *vote* that was the point, not the forum in which it took place.

    With regard to the Church and “morality”, I believe many of the *individuals*, especially in the earlier days, but also recently, were really sincere in their desire to improve conditions in this world. At least they did *something* towards improving society, even if they themselves were politically, psychologically, and financially exploited by the Church. I have far more time for those people, than I have for self-serving hedonists who care nothing for the plight of their fellow humans in developing countries, for the environmental destruction heaped on the world by the multinational corporations, for the exploitation and rape of Africa and Latin America by the West, and for the war-drums currently being beaten by a desperate, bankrupt bunch of criminals who are heaping unimaginable suffering on innocent civilians across the world.

    The original point of the OP reflects that the Church, which should be neutral, is clearly partisan and in so becoming, is part of the problem, albeit a very small, and increasingly irrelevant part.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s