I was recently skimming over the Wikipedia article on Scientology controversies and came across a particularly interesting bit of text:
The Church maintains strict control over the use of its symbols, names and religious texts. It holds copyright and trademark ownership over its cross and has taken legal action against individuals and organizations who have quoted short paragraphs of Scientology texts in print or on Web sites, in some cases asserting their scriptures constitute "trade secrets." Individuals or groups who practice Scientology without affiliation with the Church have been sued for violation of copyright and trademark law.
I thought this was kind of interesting. Arguably, the point of copyright law is to protect businesses (including sole proprietorships) from other businesses trying to make pure profit off of the former. That is, copyright law is there so that should Joe Schmoe want to create a book called Joe Schmoe's Guide to Modern Cults, another profiteer by the name of Jane Doe couldn't come along and copy, verbatim, Joe's Guide to Modern Cults and claim it as her own work while making pure profit.
So, when I see Scientology trying to delve into laws made to protect businesses, a red flag is raised in my head: they're a church— not a business. By definition, they're technically a 501(c)(3) non-profit religious organization. Therefore, I have but one question: why should they be covered by copyright law if the fundamental goal of the organization, legally, is not to turn a profit, but instead to benefit mankind? More importantly, is it valid to use patent/trademark law in matters of religion to begin with?
Above all, if the legal protections designed to protect profit-oriented activities of businesses and individuals are allowed to be applied to churches, then how, exactly, could you even legally distinguish a religion from a business? This one's fairly intriguing, because if the only method for doing so are the tax reporting and exemption statuses delegated by the IRS/states, then we have, in effect, created the largest loophole to a tax code ever known by man. Not only is a religious organization tax-exempt, but unlike every other non-profit organization, it also does not have to report its income to the IRS. Therefore, if religious organizations like Scientology are afforded the same luxury protections as businesses, they are essentially tax-free/tax-reporting-free businesses.
Now, can you imagine how profitable (and dangerous) a business would be if: it never had to pay taxes; it never had to tell the IRS where it's getting its money from; it never had to tell the IRS how it's spending its money; and, it could sue anyone who said anything bad about them? Yikes.
If religious organizations are allowed to be covered by copyright law, and they're allowed to trademark their religion's name, and, on top of that, they can actively bring suit against people who use the name when the religion doesn't want them to, then they are demonstrating business behavior. Essentially, they sue in order to "protect" the corporate image of their "brand name." That makes them even more indistinguishable from businesses. Using the power of the government, they can proactively suppress political dissent, preying directly upon the financial disparity between them, a multi-million dollar organization, and their target, a multi-hundred dollar citizen.
(continued)That brings up another possible issue: by legally targeting dissenters using the courts, one could argue the case that they are officially endorsing political ideologies and are allocating church funds toward doing so. Additionally, by targeting people using the term "Scientology" to describe a faith not endorsed by the main church, they're also using the courts to target denominations. For example, it would be like the Catholic Church being able to sue Protestants for using the term "Christianity" to describe their faith. It's simply unheard of, and I'm confident that no rational American would allow their tax dollars to go toward allowing the legal system to be abused in such a way. Even more more dangerously, a finding in either direction could be construed as preventing the free exercise of religion, with the victor possibly being legally "established" over the other, both of which would directly violate the first amendment.
We, the citizens, have historically granted religious organizations tax-exempt status because life can be rough for some churches. Not only is it hard to gain market penetration (i.e., those good 'ol "free exercise" and "non-establishment" clauses of the constitution), but you're also subjected to other religions as well as non-religions openly criticizing you (i.e., the good 'ol "free speech" clause) without repercussion. Terms like "libel" and "slander" fundamentally can't apply in religious organizations, because there's no way of factually proving a statement like, "[that religion] is bullshit," because, as a religion, it is fundamentally impossible to prove one's claims. For a person and/or a business, however, "libel" and "slander" are perfectly valid terms, as there actually can be a depriving of "life, liberty, or property," and the ensuing legal proceedings are the "due process of law."
Religious organizations don't get that, because, as part of taking the "tax exempt" status, you agree to a whole slew of criticism just for being a religion. People will, like Christianity, call you a cult. Like other religions, they'll say both your followers and your leaders are delusional. They'll call your prophet bullshit while elevating their own in self-righteousness. Oh, and don't forget: they'll also call you the most evil people on the planet, a company of brainwashers, and corrupters of youth— no matter how much good you claim to be doing. They'll say that you enslave the masses with an opiate high, and, as you no doubt have realized by now, they'll criticize you on the internet.
Yes, Scientology— that's the price that you pay for making us pay for your taxes. We, the people, like to get the most for our investments. As a result, we'll ridicule you day in and day out, because you're either a business or you're a religion, and you've chosen to be a religion. Sorry, but you can't have it both ways in this country, so now when your followers have buyers remorse, and when the competition calls you crazy, I'm sorry, but there's jack shit you can do about it.
It sucks, doesn't it? Too bad— my earnings pay your taxes, so if you think you can continue abusing the legal system without paying a cent back into it, well you can kiss my ass. You're now just one religion out of many.
Oh, and if you're a Scientology lawyer who's reading this right now, I already know what you're thinking, and I, as well my friends, have only two words to say in response: Streisand effect. Hopefully that's clear enough for you.
