Cardiff Councillor in Trouble for Calling Scientology “Stupid”
Executive member of Cardiff Council, John Dixon, has been accused of bigotry and referred to the Council's Standards & Ethics committee after describing Scientology as “stupid” on Twitter.
The comment was made in May 2009, when Councillor Dixon walked past a Scientology church in London. Posting under the username 'CllrJohnDixon', his tweet read: “Didn't know there was a Scientology 'church' on Tottenham Court Road. Just hurried past in case the stupid rubs off.”
Despite the comment being made over a year ago (making it practically ancient in Twitter terms, where new tweets appear every millisecond), a complaint was made a number of months later, which shone a light on the comment along with two subsequent tweets which implied Scientology, along with Homeopathy, were pseudo-sciences and led to the involvement of Cardiff Council's Standards & Ethics committee.
YourCardiff reports: Adamsdown councillor John Dixon made three comments about Scientology that provoked a complaint from a member of the public and a media storm.
Public service Ombudsman (complaints investigator) Peter Tyndall in his report to Cardiff Council's Standards & Ethics committee said: “I am however concerned that a member who has served his community for over ten years and has recently attended training does not appear to understand the provisions of the Code [of Conduct].
“I also note that Councillor Dixon has not shown any remorse for his actions.”
A number of people across the internet have sprung to the support of councillor Dixon and have started the hashtag #StupidScientology which has spread across Twitter whenever this fiasco is discussed. People discussing it include David Mitchell and Tim Minchin. Comedian Mark Thomas tweeted: “Anything that upsets Scientology and therefore Tom Cruise is a good thing.”
What Do You Think?
Is it wrong for a councillor to express his personal views over Twitter? Or should he in fact be applauded for being sincere and sticking to these views, rather than saving face and issuing an apology? We want to know what you think. Leave a comment, upload a video and send it to our YouTube, or write an article and share your views.
What is Scientology?
Founded by science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard in 1952, Scientology is a body of beliefs and related practices based on Hubbard's ideas of the metaphysical relationship between the mind and the body, which he termed 'Dianetics'. It is considered by some to be an alternative approach to psychology and psychological treatment. Despite the name, the scientific teachings of Scientology have been rejected by the overall scientific community.
Although not officially recognised as a religion in the UK, it is often referred to as the Church of Scientology, and is legally recognised as a religion in the United States, granting it tax-exempt status. Unlike standard religions, Scientology requires its members to pay considerable sums of money in order to advance to the 'higher levels' within the church. The religion is popular among Hollywood celebrities and other wealthy figures.
The Church of Scientology has many critics. In 1991, Time magazine published an article which described Scientology as “a hugely profitable global racket that survives by intimidating members and critics in a Mafia-like manner.” In October 2009 a French court found the church guilty of organised fraud, and in Germany information leaflets are distributed warning citizens about getting involved with the church.
Dr Dean Burnett, a Neuroscientist from Cardiff, explains some of the criticisms:
"In my opinion the so-called scientific approach of Scientology is widely rejected by the scientific community largely due to its lack of basis in any known or even recognisable evidence. Their central belief in the theories of L. Ron Hubbard (theories made about areas and subjects in which he possessed no recognisable expertise) leads them to veer widely from an evidence based approach to science and instead make claims based on little more than their proscribed beliefs.
This would be worrying in itself, but according to reports they actually conduct analyses and conditioning of individuals and even raise children according to these unsubstantiated theories, potentially causing a great deal of psychological and emotional harm that could easily become permanent. The shroud of secrecy surrounding Scientology and their aggressive attitude toward anyone who criticises or even raises questions about them prevents any further analysis of their teachings, but as science is founded on the sharing and refinement of knowledge, Scientology can never be said to be scientifically valid until they do the same.”
Links:
Information Directory: Religion
YourCardiff: Dixon Twitter case due to be heard in September
YourCardiff: Comedians join debate about councillor's Scientology tweet
Wikipedia entry on Scientology
(Sub-Ed note: normally I wouldn't recommend Wikipedia as the first place to go for reliable information, but the official Scientology pages are incredibly biased while anti-Scientology pages tend to contain links to disturbing content, so your best bet to reading an impartial viewpoint in this case is probably Wikipedia)
1 Comment – Post a comment
P3
Commented 63 months ago - 26th February 2011 - 16:24pm
I am aware that this article was published some time ago but the man is great and is really great when working within his community, I personally have no issue with his comment and believe it is justified