[lpkmckenna]

Scientology deserves above-the-norm scorn because:
a) their charitable activities are used as recruiting grounds, unlike other religions;
b) their doctrine is deliberately hidden so it can be sold;
c) disinformation campaigns against their enemies, like psychiatrists;
d) criminal behavior by the organization itself, as opposed to offenses by members;
e) use of front groups like "anti-Cult awareness" to recruit.

Like some other religious groups like JWs, they brutally ostracize apostates, but that's a typical practice for "new religious movements." Some groups of the Amish continue to practice this very harshly, severing all ties between family members. The Church of Snakeoilogy goes further by using the courts to terrorize apostates. There should be some legal reforms made to prevent this abuse of the courts.

I'm an atheist, but I think it's small-minded to group all religions as cults. Individual movements need to be criticized for their specific doctrines and behaviors. Many religious groups, even while propagating incredibly silly notions, do make notable social contributions. Scientology makes no social contribution of any worth whatsoever. That justifiably singles them out as dangerous nutbars.

[iLikebeer]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

Then why CoS instead of a corporation or a politician who is doing for worse in this regard?

Because they CAN go after CoS and have an effect. That's who angered the internet Kingdom of Nerds, that's who they've targeted.

If you want to make a list of all the bad people in the world, by all means, do so. When you decide to do something about the people on the list, start with the ones you can affect. Simple concept.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

And again, it only took 2000 years, and these people's beliefs are in contradiction to the scriptures. As long as the scripture says what it says it will be open to wacky fundamentalism.

Intolerance is a part of the religion.

I don't think this is fair. The Bible reflects moral attitudes of people from the distant past. Smart people today can sift the wheat from the chaff. Don't tar the moderate Christians (or Jews or Muslims) for the intolerance of the fringe groups that are unable or unwilling to do so.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

It's in the scriptures, old and new testament.

Denial is not just the last name of a porn star…

Some realize that you should love everyone, even if you disagree with their lifestyle choices. In fact, that's a part of scripture.

Your prejudice seems to be on the same level as many fundamentalists.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Scientology deserves above-the-norm scorn because:
a) their charitable activities are used as recruiting grounds, unlike other religions;

Say what? You know all those "feed the children" charities that help 3rd world countries with your money? Well not only do they feed them but they also buy them Christian Bibles and put them in catholic schools.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

As long as the scripture says what it says it will be open to wacky fundamentalism.

You mean like the US government? Christianity runs the US end of story.

[pooka]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

You mean like the US government? Christianity runs the US end of story.

In your deluded and ****ed up dreams, buddy. I have lived in the holiest of holy parts of this country. Money runs the US plain and simple.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Probably, but the Teachers Union isn't forking up millions of dollars in their defense, then just relocate them to a new school so they can continue porking little kids.

Are you sure about that?

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Some realize that you should love everyone, even if you disagree with their lifestyle choices. In fact, that's a part of scripture.

Your prejudice seems to be on the same level as many fundamentalists.

Indeed. I am a fundamentalist Christian and I don't hate nearly as much as the hate espoused in this thread by anti-Christians. Truthfully, I don't hate anyone.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

You mean like the US government? Christianity runs the US end of story.

End of story, lawl. What would a Canadian know about America anyways?

Originally Posted by pooka 

In your deluded and ****ed up dreams, buddy. I have lived in the holiest of holy parts of this country. Money runs the US plain and simple.

QFT™

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Say what? You know all those "feed the children" charities that help 3rd world countries with your money? Well not only do they feed them but they also buy them Christian Bibles and put them in catholic schools.

If you say so.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

You mean like the US government? Christianity runs the US end of story.

Are you kidding? A Mormon is gonna win the Republican primary. For the most part, conservatives in the US just "talk Christian" to lure voters.

[macintologist]

Originally Posted by Tyler McAdams 

Macintologist are you a scientologist?

Nah I just hate it when majorities pick on minority groups like it's some sort of fashion statement.

[Chuckit]

You really believe that Buddhists and other atheists — or Anons, for that matter — are a majority in America?

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

You know, I enjoy making fun of Tom Cruise and his particular brand of wackiness, but just because I or you don't believe in Scientology doesn't mean it should be OK to harass them. Haven't we been down the road of harassing or oppressing (ok, it's hard to oppress a church with that much money and influence…) a group because of their beliefs?

Yeah, they seem to me to be a bit cultish, but they have a right to worship who and how they please.

IT IS A FREAKIN' CULT1!!1 CAN YOU HEAR ME???

BACK TO YOUR CLOSET TUSHIE !!1

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

I don't think this is fair. The Bible reflects moral attitudes of people from the distant past. Smart people today can sift the wheat from the chaff. Don't tar the moderate Christians (or Jews or Muslims) for the intolerance of the fringe groups that are unable or unwilling to do so.

I know that it does.

The problem is that too many Christians don't seem to know or believe that. Many think that the bible is THE word of God and if it says that homosexuals are unholy degenerates, then that is what God says.

I'm not trying to tar the Christians themselves, I'm trying to say that it is built into the scriptures and as such is inherently flawed. Many people today do filter it through their modern values and that's good, but it's not what the bible SAYS and that's the problem. The word of God doesn't include "take from the bible what you think is ok and discard the rest." That is a modern practice that has noting to do with what God or Jesus supposedly said.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

I know that it does.

The problem is that too many Christians don't seem to know or believe that. Many think that the bible is THE word of God and if it says that homosexuals are unholy degenerates, then that is what God says.

I'm not trying to tar the Christians themselves, I'm trying to say that it is built into the scriptures and as such is inherently flawed. Many people today do filter it through their modern values and that's good, but it's not what the bible SAYS and that's the problem. The word of God doesn't include "take from the bible what you think is ok and discard the rest." That is a modern practice that has noting to do with what God or Jesus supposedly said.

Leviticus(18-20) is one of the books of Moses (Old Testament) as is Genesis (19-the destruction of Sodom)

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Some realize that you should love everyone, even if you disagree with their lifestyle choices. In fact, that's a part of scripture.

Your prejudice seems to be on the same level as many fundamentalists.

Oh, I am prejudiced. I will readily admit that.

Yes, but in the same way you are supposed to love any lowlife, degenerate, profane, pieces of trash undeserving of God's love.

"Love them…but pity the poor, immoral, detestable cretins for they don't know any better. Not like us misogynistic slave owners. We're good people."

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Leviticus(18-20) is one of the books of Moses (Old Testament) as is Genesis (19-the destruction of Sodom)

Anyone else getting this "download" CFUG.aspx nonsense upon entering the NN?

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

Oh, I am prejudiced. I will readily admit that.

Yes, but in the same way you are supposed to love any lowlife, degenerate, profane, pieces of trash undeserving of God's love.

"Love them…but pity the poor, immoral, detestable cretins for they don't know any better. Not like us misogynistic slave owners. We're good people."

You never really have studied the eastern and oriental sects of orthodox Christianity, have you? Many of those followers actually practice what they preach.

Personally, I'm not Christian and I don't love everyone, but I can respect a true Christian's dedication.

[chris v]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Scientology deserves above-the-norm scorn because:
a) their charitable activities are used as recruiting grounds, unlike other religions;
b) their doctrine is deliberately hidden so it can be sold;
c) disinformation campaigns against their enemies, like psychiatrists;
d) criminal behavior by the organization itself, as opposed to offenses by members;
e) use of front groups like "anti-Cult awareness" to recruit.

Like some other religious groups like JWs, they brutally ostracize apostates, but that's a typical practice for "new religious movements." Some groups of the Amish continue to practice this very harshly, severing all ties between family members. The Church of Snakeoilogy goes further by using the courts to terrorize apostates. There should be some legal reforms made to prevent this abuse of the courts.

I'm an atheist, but I think it's small-minded to group all religions as cults. Individual movements need to be criticized for their specific doctrines and behaviors. Many religious groups, even while propagating incredibly silly notions, do make notable social contributions. Scientology makes no social contribution of any worth whatsoever. That justifiably singles them out as dangerous nutbars.

This was worth quoting for truth,

Look. people -- it doesn't MATTER what your other favorite-religion-to-hate is this week -- or what horrid things have been done in the name of (insert diety here) as regards to these criminal f**ks at the CoS. Can someone here please explain why you want to excuse these people?

They saw a giant loophole in the tax law and are driving Freightliners full of $1,000.00 bills right smack through it, full of other people's money. CoS was INVENTED for the sole purpose of fleecing the emotionally weak and needy of whatever money they have. Many people who need medication are suffering at the hands of these sh*tstains, who are keeping them sick for the purpose of raping their bank accounts.

I don't care if the Pope gets up tomorrow morning and declares that Jesus Herbert Christ came to earth on a giant flying cigar, and dismounted it on a flaming pogo stick. It has no bearing on whether the CoS should be allowed to function. They NEED to be shut down. Seriously.

[chris v]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Many of those followers actually practice what they preach.

Personally, I'm not Christian and I don't love everyone, but I can respect a true Christian's dedication.

Word. I like the people who pay attention to the red letters in those red-letter bibles. The actual tenets of Christianity, as set down by their prophet are good tenets, whether or not there's a heaven and/or hell.

[Tyre MacAdmin]

The Scientology BS I just can't get past:

First you must believe in aliens.

Then you must believe in spirits.

Next you've got to believe in a story with the spirits of Aliens.

Then you've got to believe in aliens spiritual possession of you by the thousands.

Rinse & repeat until OT 8 all the while paying large sums of money.

I think the bullsh!t bar is put up at least a few notches more than regular for this religion. Especially since it's so new compared to true religions.

Why it looks so much like a cult to me is they're using the symbol of the cross (albeit somewhat modified) but they claim bad things about Jesus. At least in Christianity you've got some thing's that look normal... like almost everybody uses the date format BC/AD, ie year 2008. Then they claim that you can believe in your other religions and still be a Scientologist... damn these people want your money! Next the E Meter... now they look like they're helpful and using "real science" to help you. Then they completely discredit psychology... ok bad thing's do happen to people in psychologist's care but it's certainly less of a pseudoscience than how Scientology looks! Finally LRH with that stupid captain's hat on all the damn time ...yeah, he's certifiable.

[smacintush]

Sorry. I get a little carried away in these religious threads.

I'm out.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

The problem is that too many Christians don't seem to know or believe that. Many think that the bible is THE word of God and if it says that homosexuals are unholy degenerates, then that is what God says.

I'd have to say those quick to single out homosexuals as "unholy degenerates" need to read THE word of God. We're all unholy degenerates.

I'm not trying to tar the Christians themselves, I'm trying to say that it is built into the scriptures and as such is inherently flawed.

Often times what is flawed is our level of understanding. This is certainly not exclusive to Christians.

Many people today do filter it through their modern values and that's good, but it's not what the bible SAYS and that's the problem. The word of God doesn't include "take from the bible what you think is ok and discard the rest." That is a modern practice that has noting to do with what God or Jesus supposedly said.

No, you should take the Bible and take all of it if you so chose. You should not assume it is one thing or another thing. You should study it and be prepared to teach it if that's truly what you want to do. It should be taken as a whole. The problems you speak about are perpetrated by those who do not accept Scripture in its entirety. Too many will strip Scripture from context to suit their own arguments and yet I don't recall any original papyri being segregated as such and numbered. What you seem to refer to are the legalistic ones and the ones who experienced an awful lot of Jesus' correction and rebuke. The only way to know whether or not God or Jesus "supposedly" said something is to know. Most people's actions have absolutely nothing to do with what God or Jesus said.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

Sorry. I get a little carried away in these religious threads.

I'm out.

Noooooo! Come back and argue!

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

The problem is that too many Christians don't seem to know or believe that. Many think that the bible is THE word of God and if it says that homosexuals are unholy degenerates, then that is what God says.

I don't think most Christians think this way at all, but a noisy minority do a great job at misrepresenting their cultural influence. The fact that a Mormon has a shot at the White House is indicative of the actual weakness of fundamentalism in America.

I'm not trying to tar the Christians themselves, I'm trying to say that it is built into the scriptures and as such is inherently flawed.

Everything ever written has backwards or outmoded beliefs embedded into it. I think you're holding the Bible up to a standard that no book can endure. As such, you're making the same mistake that the Biblical literalists make.

You don't need to go that far into history to find great innovators who held peculiar beliefs in parallel to their great thinking. Newton was an avid astrologer, for instance. If the writings of the great Newton can be so deluded, why not cut the writings of those undereducated shepherds some slack?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

I don't think most Christians think this way at all, but a noisy minority do a great job at misrepresenting their cultural influence. The fact that a Mormon has a shot at the White House is indicative of the actual weakness of fundamentalism in America.

A Mormon, viewed through a somewhat fuzzy lens, is much closer to a Christian fundamentalist than most of the guys in this race. Mormonism is a very conservative religion — it adds on some things that fundamentalist Christians would object to just because they're different, but the general nature of Mormonism is closer to Christian fundamentalism than it is to more moderate Christianity. So I'm not sure this shows a weakness in fundamentalism so much as desperation in the fundamentalist ranks to find a candidate who at least kind of agrees with them.

[lpkmckenna]

Collateral damage in the war on Snakeoilogy: Hackers aim at CoS, but hit a Dutch school.

[Chuckit]

Doesn't sound like much in the way of damage, actually. I'm impressed they stopped the attack so fast when they realized they were mistaken. I'd never given Anonymous credit for being that responsible.

[Tiresias]

It's a well written piece of prose.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Anyone else getting this "download" CFUG.aspx nonsense upon entering the NN?

???

[PaperNotes]

So after we download and install Tor, how do we join the Anonymous group if they're anonymous?

[red rocket]

Originally Posted by Tyler McAdams

The Scientology BS I just can't get past:

First you must believe in aliens.

Then you must believe in spirits.

Next you've got to believe in a story with the spirits of Aliens.

Then you've got to believe in aliens spiritual possession of you by the thousands.

Rinse & repeat until OT 8 all the while paying large sums of money.

I think the bullsh!t bar is put up at least a few notches more than regular for this religion. Especially since it's so new compared to true religions.

Why it looks so much like a cult to me is they're using the symbol of the cross (albeit somewhat modified) but they claim bad things about Jesus. At least in Christianity you've got some thing's that look normal... like almost everybody uses the date format BC/AD, ie year 2008. Then they claim that you can believe in your other religions and still be a Scientologist... damn these people want your money! Next the E Meter... now they look like they're helpful and using "real science" to help you. Then they completely discredit psychology... ok bad thing's do happen to people in psychologist's care but it's certainly less of a pseudoscience than how Scientology looks! Finally LRH with that stupid captain's hat on all the damn time ...yeah, he's certifiable.

1. As I understand it, OT III and the Xenu story aren't key to current Scientology, the whole nonsense has long been superseded by New Era Dianetics for Operating Thetans and functions as mythological icing on the cake, more specifically the only reason it's still in there at all is to give the operation its financially required religious gloss.

2. If you view ‘Thetans’ as an abstraction, the notion isn't particularly absurd. At any rate, I find it more realistic to view the human psyche as consisting of a multitude of personalities than as a monistic or dualistic entity. If you can accept that your personality might be more complex than you can understand, trying to work out some type of regimen to bring the multiplicity under your control, or at least introduce some order into the mess, seems like the only sane pathway if you're interested in self‑therapy/improvement.

3. The Scientology cross isn't a modified Christian symbol, it's been adapted from an illustration on a tarot card by early 20th century occultist Aleister Crowley. The points of the cross there are representative of magical concepts, in the CoS's simplified version they represent their fundamental eight ‘dynamics’.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by PaperNotes 

So after we download and install Tor, how do we join the Anonymous group if they're anonymous?

Like I said earlier, Anonymous isn't really an organization. "Anonymous" is just what some people on certain Web sites (particularly the Chans) call themselves. It's not a properly organized group that you can join.

[Tyre MacAdmin]

Originally Posted by red rocket 

1. As I understand it, OT III and the Xenu story aren't key to current Scientology, the whole nonsense has long been superseded by New Era Dianetics for Operating Thetans and functions as mythological icing on the cake, more specifically the only reason it's still in there at all is to give the operation its financially required religious gloss.

2. If you view ‘Thetans’ as an abstraction, the notion isn't particularly absurd. At any rate, I find it more realistic to view the human psyche as consisting of a multitude of personalities than as a monistic or dualistic entity. If you can accept that your personality might be more complex than you can understand, trying to work out some type of regimen to bring the multiplicity under your control, or at least introduce some order into the mess, seems like the only sane pathway if you're interested in self‑therapy/improvement.

3. The Scientology cross isn't a modified Christian symbol, it's been adapted from an illustration on a tarot card by early 20th century occultist Aleister Crowley. The points of the cross there are representative of magical concepts, in the CoS's simplified version they represent their fundamental eight ‘dynamics’.

On your number 3 I'll have to admit that I'm no authority on the CoS "cross symbol"... in fact until last week when all this news hit I had no idea what it was or what Scientology is.

Having said that, if you had blind folded me last week, took me to a scientology church, pointed my head to the steeple of the church where their cross is located (like any other church) and took the blind fold off I would have said: "Oh you've taken me to a Christian church!" Why? Because it's just like a regular church.

Likewise, if you took me in to their church and in to the sanctuary and told me to look at the stained glass window at the center of the sanctuary I would have said "Oh that's a Christian cross in the glass... I'm at a Christian church."

That is how this is deceiving. It's a wannabe church. That is how it can sucker people in because it poses as a church... that's why it looks like a big cult to me. Seriously, do you think that in America if they had used the symbol of the Crescent and added a little "bling" to it that it would be as accepted? Absolutely not! Scientology was born in the Western culture and is thus marketed to western people.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by sek929 

End of story, lawl. What would a Canadian know about America anyways?

Scarily enough more than the average american i meet

[Kerrigan]

This business of equating Scientology with Christianity results in a gross misunderstanding of the nature of both these religions.

[Tyre MacAdmin]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan 

This business of equating Scientology with Christianity results in a gross misunderstanding of the nature of both these religions.

Which is exactly why I'm unequating it.

[Jawbone54]

I think this is worth the 5 minutes it will take to watch:

The Unfunny Truth

I've read about these incidents for over a year now. Anyone who defends Scientology and compares it to other major religions is only doing so because they're adamantly opposed to all religion.

In Scientology, if you expect more knowledge, you have to pay for it. You guys all know this. However, if someone walks into the doors of my church and asks to know about what we believe, I'll sit down with them and spend several weeks going over every last shred of doctrine that I can teach them. I'll tell them everything that I know. And what I know isn't going to differ from the "higher-ups" in my religious organization. They believe what I believe, for the most part.

Total Cost: $0.00

I think any religion in which you have to buy "truth" with your money is ridiculous, especially considering the origins of that "truth." L. Ron Hubbard was a SCIENCE FICTION WRITER, people! Helloooooo!

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by chris v 

Scientology was invented as a means of separating the gullible from ALL their money. This has been, and remains, its sole purpose.

So, just like the UK Labour Party then.

(On-Topic: Scientology sucks badly and needs killing.)

[chris v]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

So, just like the UK Labour Party then.

(On-Topic: Scientology sucks badly and needs killing.)

Thetans, and Engrams, and MPs, oh, my! (heh just saw the white text, there. Yeah.)

[macintologist]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

You really believe that Buddhists and other atheists — or Anons, for that matter — are a majority in America?

The non-Scientology majority, yes.

[macintologist]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Scientology deserves above-the-norm scorn because:
a) their charitable activities are used as recruiting grounds, unlike other religions;
b) their doctrine is deliberately hidden so it can be sold;
c) disinformation campaigns against their enemies, like psychiatrists;
d) criminal behavior by the organization itself, as opposed to offenses by members;
e) use of front groups like "anti-Cult awareness" to recruit.

Like some other religious groups like JWs, they brutally ostracize apostates, but that's a typical practice for "new religious movements." Some groups of the Amish continue to practice this very harshly, severing all ties between family members. The Church of Snakeoilogy goes further by using the courts to terrorize apostates. There should be some legal reforms made to prevent this abuse of the courts.

I'm an atheist, but I think it's small-minded to group all religions as cults. Individual movements need to be criticized for their specific doctrines and behaviors. Many religious groups, even while propagating incredibly silly notions, do make notable social contributions. Scientology makes no social contribution of any worth whatsoever. That justifiably singles them out as dangerous nutbars.

I don't think Scientology is dangerous. They aren't lobbying the government for a constitutional amendment to ban abortion. They aren't lobbying the government for "school choice" ie. defund public schools. They are harmless morons and should be left alone. If you join Scientology and your life goes to pot that's YOUR fault not mine.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by macintologist 

The non-Scientology majority, yes.

I'm sorry, but that's a completely unworkable way of looking at things. By that logic, no criminal trial should ever proceed, because we are all minorities of one, and minorities apparently can't be held responsible for their actions by people outside the minority.

I could see your point if people were picking on Scientologists simply because they smell funny or something, but you seem to be arguing that Scientologists should be immune to all criticism simply because they are not the majority. (And by the way, going by their numbers, it seems almost certain that there are more Scientologists than Anonymous.)

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by macintologist 

I don't think Scientology is dangerous. They aren't lobbying the government for a constitutional amendment to ban abortion. They aren't lobbying the government for "school choice" ie. defund public schools. They are harmless morons and should be left alone. If you join Scientology and your life goes to pot that's YOUR fault not mine.

You have that precisely backwards. Lobbying the government is harmless. Taking advantage of the downtrodden, killing people, actively infiltrating the government to cover up your crimes, suppressing free speech, slandering and attempting to ruin the lives of people who disagree with you — these are harmful actions.

[Tyre MacAdmin]

Originally Posted by macintologist 

If you join Scientology and your life goes to pot that's YOUR fault not mine.

That's a little brutal don't you think? These people are seemed to be known for particularly well thought out brainwashing schemes, yes? I mean there are actually people out there with practices specifically devoted to deprogramming ex-scientologists. The unfortunate reality is that the mass population at large in America today is highly susceptible to suggestion... even watered down. Even programmed for it sometimes. Capitalism is not without it's problems and this is such an exploit. It seems that the UK policy on Scientology is better in my opinion.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

You have that precisely backwards. Lobbying the government is harmless. Taking advantage of the downtrodden, killing people, actively infiltrating the government to cover up your crimes, suppressing free speech, slandering and attempting to ruin the lives of people who disagree with you — these are harmful actions.

Here, here! Well said.

Last time I checked, murdering people was a crime. Read L. Ron Jr.'s interview where he speaks about his father and Scientology.

[vmarks]

Macintologist,

Before you finish making up your mind about the Church of Scientology, please look into the events that took place in Scientology's conflict and eventual settlement with the IRS.

The short history is that in 1967 they lost tax-exempt status due to their shady financial dealings, sued the IRS both as an institution and its employees as individuals, and harassed the IRS to grant them a special deal that no other organization or individual in the USA has received.

I don't know about you, but setting aside any distaste I have for the IRS, I believe in a country whose laws apply equally to all, not one that has sweetheart deals granted to an organization that harasses the government into ceasing the execution of its duties.

[PaperNotes]

I don't see the point of this rambling. If there is hard enough evidence Scientology abuses human rights and uses fear and intimidation against individuals, companies and government, then just go out and organize a squad to firebomb Scientology centers. Much better than posting lame threats as "Anonymous". If anarchists can attack harmless McDonalds branches surely someone must have the balls to attack a positively harmful franchise.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying you should do that. And none of you will say you will