UB mistaken on Scientology lease http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20051129/1014905.asp

Administrators should realize error and move quickly to protect students

11/29/2005 University at Buffalo officials cannot pretend that what happens there isn't their responsibility when an organization that could be detrimental to students, like the Church of Scientology, leases space on campus.

While the owner of the Commons may have final say on a lease, the new UB administration should not permit this mistake to go unchallenged and should seek and obtain veto or review powers over tenants. UB officials maintain they cannot block who obtains space in the privately owned and operated student center. That may be so, but in this case they are clearly shying away from protecting students. Scientology is at least controversial and some critics call it cult-like and potentially dangerous. This is not the kind of organization that should perch in a student center frequented by college-age people for whom experimentation is a rite of passage. Will posters of actor-scientologists Tom Cruise, Erika Christensen and John Travolta not attract wide-eyed students? Like it or not, letting Scientology onto the campus gives it official sanction. Would UB lease it space in a campus building UB does control?

Can UB truly do nothing, as administrators maintain, on this slippery slope of their own construction? What if a strip club leased space? What about a bar, or NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws? Or the Ku Klux Klan or the Communist Party? Would owner First Amherst Development seriously ignore pressure from UB on something like this if it fears its lease won't be renewed?

There is a line of good sense here, and allowing an on-campus Scientology office crosses that line. UB and First Amherst need move out the Scientologists and renegotiate the Commons lease to include a clause giving UB first refusal rights on tenants. A publicly funded university needs to respect rights, but that doesn't mean it has to be anyone's welcome mat.

--

http://buffaloscientologyinfo.com/

<p><hr><p> Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 07:19:26 -0800
From: barb <bwarr1@cox.net>
Organization: ARSCC Intel Div
Subject: Re: UB mistaken on Scientology lease
In-Reply-To: <1133304732.899215.169690@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <438dc41a$1@news2.lightlink.com>

clkates wrote:

> barb wrote:
>
>>clkates wrote:
>>
>>>So you think it's OK for state universities to discriminate against
>>>religious and political groups on the basis of their viewpoint?
>>>
>>>Just so I understand what you're saying, you know.
>>>
>>
>>Should they discriminate against destructive, assimilative cults?
>
>
> Are you asking me? I don't know what those terms mean or who defines
> them in this case. There are plenty of people who would define anything
> they have a problem with as destructive, including very constructive
> groups and organizations, and plenty of, for example, religious groups
> who would be keen to describe any other religious groups as "cults." I
> think people can make their own decisions about what organizations they
> want to join and what religious or spiritual practices they want to
> practice. I don't think viewpoint discrimination by the university
> where it gets to decide who or what is "destructive" or "assimilative"
> or a "cult" is a solution to anything.
>
> Charlotte
>
I think you could ask the victims. F'r instance, what kind of church would phone in that I was going to bomb the "church" of Scientology here? Can I prove that was an act perpetrated by a Scientologist? No, I can't. They phoned in anonymously, but the detectives who came to my door had to investigate it anyway. Interestingly, I was scheduled to speak at a County Board of Supervisors meeting the next week, in opposition to a Narconon facility proposed for San Diego County. However, I think it's pretty likely that this was not a random occurrance, that it was, in fact, perpetrated by the "church" of Scientology in a poor attempt to intimidate me. Didn't work.

Would a church send "parishioners" to my parents' house to inform them that "We know how to shut her up," referring to me?

How about sending in a guy on a motorcycle to try to draw me into a setup because I was his 'amends project?'

What, exactly do you think hate groups DO, Charlotte? This is what they do: attempt to terrify elderly parents, phone in anonymous complaints to the police, place libellous, untruthful fliers around neighborhoods.

Do you think for a second that, if they thought they could get away with doing more, they would?

And how about Keith Henson and Graham Berry's experiences, which have seriously disrupted their lives?

And you honestly think that this destructive, coercive organization should be given free access to naive, gullible college students? Even one life diverted is too many. Ken Hoden has a degree in engineering. Now he's a dragged out, unhealthy-looking prisoner whose potential was totally destroyed by Scientology. Oh, he wouldn't say so. But looking at his life, I'd say Scientology simply helped itself to him, and what's left is shambling around the second floor of Big Blue in the RPF.

He's a poster child for why Scientology should not be allowed around kids. Or adults. Or other living things...

-- --barb Chaplain,ARSCC xenubarb@netscape.net

"Imagine a church so dangerous, you must sign a release form before you can receive its "spiritual assistance." This assistance might involve holding you against your will for an indefinite period, isolating you from friends and family, and denying you access to appropriate medical care. You will of course be billed for this treatment - assuming you survive it. If not, the release form absolves your caretakers of all responsibility for your suffering and death.

Welcome to the Church of Scientology."

--Dr. Dave Touretzky Peter Alexander

Go Back