• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

United Way & Scientology

I don't think we can be sure that there is an issue without a lot more information. There's really no indication from that website that scientology would be pushed at all as part of that program, and it seems to be part of a huge database of volunteer programs. And it's no different them 'legitimizing' Christianity, which often, and with much greater success, tries to destroy the advances of science.
 
a_unique_person said:
I suppose the only problem I see is that Scientology is no more absurd than other 'religions' that accepted. They have just been around longer.
Click to expand...

The problem with Scientology is not the beliefs, which are indeed quite wacky.

The problem is that unlike, say, Reform Judaism, Scientology is a fascist cult. If you leave a Reform synagogue, your family isn't forced to disown you, you're not physically threatened, publicly smeared, and unable to talk to any of your friends and family. There are no brainwashing facilities or forced labor camps. If you protest a Reform synagogue, they don't send out a specially trained goon squad to intimidate and/or assault you. Reform Judaism is not run by some paramilitary outfit based on an imaginary navy dreamed up by an insane sci-fi writer. You are not forced to spend tens--or even hundreds--of thousands of dollars to "advance" to the point where you're finally allowed to study Torah.

So yes, in many ways, Scientology is more absurd, but that's not the problem here. The problem is actions, not beliefs.
 
Cleon said:
The problem with Scientology is not the beliefs, which are indeed quite wacky.

The problem is that unlike, say, Reform Judaism, Scientology is a fascist cult. If you leave a Reform synagogue, your family isn't forced to disown you, you're not physically threatened, publicly smeared, and unable to talk to any of your friends and family. There are no brainwashing facilities or forced labor camps. If you protest a Reform synagogue, they don't send out a specially trained goon squad to intimidate and/or assault you. Reform Judaism is not run by some paramilitary outfit based on an imaginary navy dreamed up by an insane sci-fi writer. You are not forced to spend tens--or even hundreds--of thousands of dollars to "advance" to the point where you're finally allowed to study Torah.

So yes, in many ways, Scientology is more absurd, but that's not the problem here. The problem is actions, not beliefs.
Click to expand...

Hits the nail right on the head.
 
Cleon said:
The problem with Scientology is not the beliefs, which are indeed quite wacky.

The problem is that unlike, say, Reform Judaism, Scientology is a fascist cult. If you leave a Reform synagogue, your family isn't forced to disown you, you're not physically threatened, publicly smeared, and unable to talk to any of your friends and family. There are no brainwashing facilities or forced labor camps. If you protest a Reform synagogue, they don't send out a specially trained goon squad to intimidate and/or assault you. Reform Judaism is not run by some paramilitary outfit based on an imaginary navy dreamed up by an insane sci-fi writer. You are not forced to spend tens--or even hundreds--of thousands of dollars to "advance" to the point where you're finally allowed to study Torah.

So yes, in many ways, Scientology is more absurd, but that's not the problem here. The problem is actions, not beliefs.
Click to expand...

exactly right.

Scientology beliefs are, indeed, as nutty as all the other religions, its actions are a lot more concerning.
 
Last edited:
varwoche said:
It's disconcerting to see a respected organization like United Way (of King County, WA state) legitimizing Scientology.

In case anyone wishes to contact them...

United Way of King County
206.461.3700
pr@uwkc.org
Click to expand...

I stopped giving to UW 25 years ago, when they decided (at least in St Louis) that Planned Parenthood shouldn't get any of their (and by extension, my) money, but Catholic Family Services should.
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
I stopped giving to UW 25 years ago, when they decided (at least in St Louis) that Planned Parenthood shouldn't get any of their (and by extension, my) money, but Catholic Family Services should.
Click to expand...
I quit when I realized just how much of the money they get goes to paying the hugely overinflated salaried of their execs; and just how much of it gets embezzled by those same execs.
 
luchog said:
I quit when I realized just how much of the money they get goes to paying the hugely overinflated salaried of their execs;
Click to expand...

That I can excuse. UW is a huge organization, and running something that big requires the same expertise as running a large corporation. Only without any stock to give as incentive, getting a CEO-type executive to take such a position would require a minor miracle. Think about it; if you ran a multi-gazillion dollar company, making hundreds of thousands of dollars in salary plus a chunk of the company's earnings, would you accept a $45,000 position running a similarly-sized nonprofit?

Even if they could find someone to take the position, most likely from the lower ranks, they'd only stick around as long as it took them to find a CEO position in a comporatively-sized corporation.

and just how much of it gets embezzled by those same execs.
Click to expand...

That I most certainly cannot excuse. :mad:
 
luchog said:
I quit when I realized just how much of the money they get goes to paying the hugely overinflated salaried of their execs; and just how much of it gets embezzled by those same execs.
Click to expand...

Charity Navigator rates charities. Some UW chapters get good marks, others get poor marks.

charitynavigator.org
 
This what makes UW seem so bizarre to me. It's pretty much guaranteed that, no matter what you political positions, UW will support a charity offensive to at least one of them. For instance, I have come to the conclusion that the BSA is run by a bunch of bigoted lying pieces of excrement, and I don't want any of my money going to them.

Cleon said:
That I can excuse. UW is a huge organization, and running something that big requires the same expertise as running a large corporation.
Click to expand...
Well, I don't think that charities tend to look at the same considerations as corpoations. And I think many of them would benefit from more of a OCC-type analysis. Furthermore, necessary and justified are two different things. UW takes your money, then spend a lot of it deciding how to spend it, eventually giving it to other charities, which in turn spend a lot more of it deciding how to spend it. Why not just give it to the charities yourself and save all that money?
 
Art Vandelay said:
This what makes UW seem so bizarre to me. It's pretty much guaranteed that, no matter what you political positions, UW will support a charity offensive to at least one of them. For instance, I have come to the conclusion that the BSA is run by a bunch of bigoted lying pieces of excrement, and I don't want any of my money going to them.
Click to expand...

This I agree 100% with.

Well, I don't think that charities tend to look at the same considerations as corpoations. And I think many of them would benefit from more of a OCC-type analysis.
Click to expand...

Running a large organization takes a certain amount of skill, whether it's for-profit or non-profit. You still have to consider the following:

PR
Marketing
Sales (gathering donations)
Deciding how to spend money (who to distribute to)
Human resources
Ongoing programs
Product development/services
Facilities management
Etc.

Now, you could argue that "Product development/services" is lessened because UW's main goal is distributing funds; however, this is not the case. UW also provides a number of services and volunteer opportunities and coordination. In for-profit parlance, we'd call this "consulting" and "project management." They don't charge for these services, so they make it up with donations

I'm not defending UW or support them; I generally agree with your (and others') criticisms of the organization. However, large financial benefits for executives of large organizations, for-profit or non-profit, is not unusual. It's not really unjustified, either.

There's a lot more to running an organization like the UW than sitting around and writing checks. The job descriptions of the guy who runs UW (whose name escapes me at the moment) and the CEO of Bank of America, I'd wager, aren't particularly different. The main differences are in the products offered, the means of income, legal status, and the financial filings.

Furthermore, necessary and justified are two different things. UW takes your money, then spend a lot of it deciding how to spend it, eventually giving it to other charities, which in turn spend a lot more of it deciding how to spend it. Why not just give it to the charities yourself and save all that money?
Click to expand...

Agreed, again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom