I think we need to REACT VERY Quickly!
In addition, lets start the email ball rolling NOW!

IF YOU ARE READING THIS COPY, & EMAIL THE BELOW NOW TO THE S.A. DEMOCRATS! NOW! NOT LATER… OPEN YOUR EMAIL AND SEND IT NOW!

The Democrat party are the ones most likely to
a) "Keep the bastards honest" (their slogan from the 80s! lol")
b) Defend unpopular opinions. e.g. ones the conservatives or toe the line parties wont touch.

e-mail: sa.democrats@democrats.org.au

Please email the S.A. Democrats, regarding:

—————————————————-

"Keep the bastards honest!"

I support Jane Lomax Smith who shouldn't have to suffer for questioning the highly controversial issue of Scientology's tax exempt status. The Democrats have a long history of addressing unpopular issues. I implore that you please look into the following issues:

(a) In several countries Scientology are already considered a business rather then a religion. Why it's so hard for Australia to question / re-address the issue of their tax free status?

(b) Whats the best way for the public who are subsidising them to start? Pushing the government to take this issue seriously? With current petrol increases and budget cuts, why would the government not take the Australian public seriously about not subsidising a business / cult?

(c) Why is S.A. being exploited?
They are attempting to ride the Australian Tax Exempt status! E.g. at the bottom of the U.K. Sci website:
Church of Scientology in the UK | What is Scientology ? | Find out for yourself is a statement saying:

© 1996-2007 Church of Scientology Religious Education College Inc, a non-profit making association incorporated in South Australia.
All Rights Reserved. For Trademark Information on Scientology Services.

Please HELP take this seriously! As usual the democrats are the only Australian party who can!

Sincerely awaiting your reply,

Hey thanks for posting the reply! Interesting.. amongst this mumbo jumbo it seems to say that since they get exempt from tax, the government doesn't record how much tax they should have paid. Hence there is no way of comparing how much tax organisations such as these are exempt from! OR how much the public is thus having to subsidise in taxes to make up for the fact they pay none! <shakes fist!>

I sent this email to Treasurer Kevin Foley, here is the letter I wrote and the response that follows;

"Dear Mr. Foley,

I would like to address my personal concerns regarding the current state of tax-free exemption in regards to the ''Church of Scientology. I am sure you would have become aware of the group ''Anonymous'' and their world-wide call to expose the disturbing nature of this ''religion''. I use the term religion in quotations because from my understanding, religious organisations do not profit from their followers, nor do they condone intolerance towards family members who question their beliefs. Religions do not use intimidation methods such as the threat of being sued for not believing in certain ideals and brainwashing activities.

Whilst ''Anonymous'' does NOT condone threats of violence against members of the ''church'' or any illegal activities for that matter, their will always be certain individuals who take rogue action and decide to proceed in an illegal manner. I personally do not condone this and it makes it harder for our cause to be heard and taken seriously.

Their are several reasons why I believe the organisation should be stripped from it's tax-free status and the reasons are as follows;

(1) The German government considers Scientology a commercial enterprise that takes advantage of vulnerable people;

(2) Endless resources of proof, substantiate the above claim, with intimidation tactics and litigation of people that the ''church'' considers to be against them;

(3) The countless reports on suicide, murder and exploitation of individuals involved with this ''church'', including the late follower, Lisa McPherson who died as a direct result of the ''church'' in which can be seen with more detail at http://www.lisamcpherson.org, to which heavy litigation provided by the church, forced the prosecution to withdraw the case,

(4) Policies indicted by the ''church'', such as ''Free Game'' in which the late Ron Hubbard stated,

''the law can be used very easily to harass … The purpose of the suit is to harass and discourage, rather than to win – if possible, of course, ruin [the target] utterly''

are still clearly operational even though the church denies that they practice them. Intimidation and litigation are high strong suits of this organisation.

(5) Ron Hubbard was a convicted criminal

(6) The organisation is clearly a cult, it takes advantage of vulnerable persons, profits from them, intimidates and threatens non-followers with litigation if confronted, uses bullying tactics and harasses innocent people.

(7) The organisation is a profit ridden business. It is not a religion. Using the term religion only continues to give the ''church'' grounds for calling people racial bigots, terrorists and inciting ''hate crimes''.

(8) The organisation is ridden with members that accuse non-believers of being pedophiles, violent abusers towards families, child-molesters and other offensive terms with no proof or knowledge of that persons family background. Many members are highly aggressive.

I will be forwarding the bulk of this email on to Treasurer Kevin Foley, as I live in South Australia and hope that action will be taken soon.

With respect, Mr. Foley, it has been far too long for this sort of conduct to be allowed and the repercussions from allowing this behaviour from a so-called ''church'' is disturbing and highly offensive. In a brief summary of how I became involved with ''Anonymous'', I had no previous idea what Scientology was or how it began, until very recently, and subsequently was shocked and disgusted that such an organisation continues to roam free, profit and take advantage of susceptibly innocent people. I will be attending a rally on August 16th of this month, 2008 to show my support towards this cause. I am aware Dr. Jane-Lomax Smith has made comments relating to this matter and I think ignoring her personal views amongst political ones can be foolish.

Yours Sincerely,

etc.."

With etc obviously replacing my name and this is the response I recieved,

"Thank you for your recent email, which has been referred to the Minister for his information and attention as appropriate. 

Receptionist

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY PREMIER 

TREASURER

MINISTER FOR INDUSTRY AND TRADE 

MINISTER FOR FEDERAL/STATE RELATIONS"

—

Be intersting to see what happens if anything. It all lies on Kevin Foley at the moment. I found it interesting to note that the UK funding relies on SA's loophole. I don't think we want to see ALL charities be relinquished from tax exemption, but that of Scientology. I'm sure there's a few others too but I personally am not interested in themas much as CoS. Keep up the good work! Good to see the enthusiasm.

Very well written Schweinstein, i look forward to reading a thoughtful response of some kind.

15 September 2008
 
 
 
Mr *
 
e-mail: *
 
Dear Mr *
Thank you for your letter of 9 August 2008, in relation to the Church of Scientology
Incorporated ("Church of Scientology").
You state that the Church of Scientology should to be stripped of its tax-exempt status on the
basis that it is not a religious organisation.  It is not clear from the information you provide
whether this in respect to Commonwealth income tax law, State taxation laws or both.
You may be aware that the Church of Scientology has, since a decision of the High Court of
Australia in 1983, been recognised as a religious institution.
In Australia, the endorsement of an organisation as exempt from the payment of income tax
and as a deductible gift recipient is a decision made by the Commonwealth Commissioner of
Taxation.  It would be more appropriate to provide your views to the Australian Taxation
Office, or to the Commonwealth Government. 
Any application for State taxation exemption or concession by the Church of Scientology will
be treated on its merits at the time of application.
Yours sincerely
 
 
 
 
 
Kevin Foley MP
DEPUTY PREMIER
TREASURER

In true pollie style, he avoids the main arguments and compromises it of but one. Something completely bloody irrelevant. Meh I tried.

Hey, seriously good work following up on this by the way =)

It's still a step closer to who to target… =)