International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 10, 2019 57
Bureau of Statistics did not necessarily apply to
other government agencies. Perhaps some
Scientologists can make a nice distinction
between those agencies that are, more or less,
independent from government direction. Perhaps
in these instances the Church actively
encouraged its members to make their
complaints known, particularly if they were
hopeful of a sympathetic hearing from agencies
with a professional interest in seeking out
instances of discrimination and other breaches of
human rights. However, it should be observed
that the HREOC report notes receipt of
“numerous accounts, articles and affidavits from
ex-members of the Church of Scientology, who
allege mistreatment, malnutrition and forced
imprisonment at the hands of that
organization.”33 This is indicative of an even-
handed acknowledgement of complaints by and
against Scientology, albeit without offering any
resolution.34 In addition, the Commission’s
recommendation for government to convene an
inter-faith dialogue to examine ways of dealing
with coercion in religious belief and practice (so
as to formulate minimum standards for religious
practice)35 seems sensible and prescient,
although a minimal step. Even so, it can be
contrasted with the political advocacy of the
NSW Anti-Discrimination Board for a laissez
faire approach to the “controversial activities of
unpopular minority religious groups,” which
apparently “belong rather in the province of
public discussion than in that of governmental
regulation.”36
Transplanted New Religions
Concerns are sometimes expressed that members
of transplanted new religions suffer from a
disproportionate level of discrimination
compared to established traditions (although
Australia is at the very tolerant end of the
33 Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Article 18.
Freedom of Religion and Belief, Sydney, 1998, p. 57.
34 Indeed, the Commission admitted that “without a full
investigation into the accusations made in the submissions against
various religious movements, it is not possible to recommend
changes to the law on this point” (ibidem).
35 S. Mutch, Cults, Religion, and Public Policy, p. 11, citing
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, op. cit., p. 62.
36 A. Possamai, A. Possamai-Inesedy, op. cit., p. 353.
scale).37 So another suggestion for poor census
numbers might lie in the alleged difficulties
shared by emergent religions attempting to
establish an identity in a foreign culture. In
common with all new religious groups,38
Scientology lacks a substantial, accumulated
base of support which may take many
generations to acquire. It does not have the
advantage of some breakaway sects which can
take with them part of the membership base of
the parent religion.39
Problems can arise for any transplanted religion,
and it is suggested that these might be
exacerbated in the case of new (or quasi)
religions. However, Scientology originated in
the United States, a country with close cultural,
economic, political and security links with
Australia. In addition, it is said to comprise a
relatively advantaged membership demographic.
So it might be hypothesised that Scientology
should enjoy relatively less opprobrium and
consequently less social disadvantage than other
new and unorthodox religions. This point has
been underlined by two writers who note that:
“Scientology, even if it is a transnational
movement, is well established among the
Australian population. Even though this religion
is an American import, it is far from being a
religion for American migrants.40 …
Scientologists tend to be baby boomers and
Generation Xers with high-income jobs. They
represent a much higher percentage than average
in active employment, and although Scientology
is a NRM imported from the United States, it is
37 “It is also to be noted that according to the feedback from the
various state and territory anti-discrimination bodies, the number
of religious discrimination complaints is relatively small and
limited, reflecting Australia’s acclaimed religious harmony” (G.
Bouma, D. Cahill, H. Dellal, A. Zwartz, Freedom of Religion and
Belief in 21st Century Australia, Sydney, 2011, p. 30).
38 Although the term “new religious movements” is now common
parlance among sociologists and scholars of new religions, I
generally prefer to use the word “group,” so as to provide a
contrast with broader movements such as the feminist or
environmental movements.
39 Indeed, some sects have divided from Scientology.
40 The comment that the organization is “well established” is a
reference to the large percentage majority (67 percent in the 2001
census) of Scientology members born in Australia.
Bureau of Statistics did not necessarily apply to
other government agencies. Perhaps some
Scientologists can make a nice distinction
between those agencies that are, more or less,
independent from government direction. Perhaps
in these instances the Church actively
encouraged its members to make their
complaints known, particularly if they were
hopeful of a sympathetic hearing from agencies
with a professional interest in seeking out
instances of discrimination and other breaches of
human rights. However, it should be observed
that the HREOC report notes receipt of
“numerous accounts, articles and affidavits from
ex-members of the Church of Scientology, who
allege mistreatment, malnutrition and forced
imprisonment at the hands of that
organization.”33 This is indicative of an even-
handed acknowledgement of complaints by and
against Scientology, albeit without offering any
resolution.34 In addition, the Commission’s
recommendation for government to convene an
inter-faith dialogue to examine ways of dealing
with coercion in religious belief and practice (so
as to formulate minimum standards for religious
practice)35 seems sensible and prescient,
although a minimal step. Even so, it can be
contrasted with the political advocacy of the
NSW Anti-Discrimination Board for a laissez
faire approach to the “controversial activities of
unpopular minority religious groups,” which
apparently “belong rather in the province of
public discussion than in that of governmental
regulation.”36
Transplanted New Religions
Concerns are sometimes expressed that members
of transplanted new religions suffer from a
disproportionate level of discrimination
compared to established traditions (although
Australia is at the very tolerant end of the
33 Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Article 18.
Freedom of Religion and Belief, Sydney, 1998, p. 57.
34 Indeed, the Commission admitted that “without a full
investigation into the accusations made in the submissions against
various religious movements, it is not possible to recommend
changes to the law on this point” (ibidem).
35 S. Mutch, Cults, Religion, and Public Policy, p. 11, citing
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, op. cit., p. 62.
36 A. Possamai, A. Possamai-Inesedy, op. cit., p. 353.
scale).37 So another suggestion for poor census
numbers might lie in the alleged difficulties
shared by emergent religions attempting to
establish an identity in a foreign culture. In
common with all new religious groups,38
Scientology lacks a substantial, accumulated
base of support which may take many
generations to acquire. It does not have the
advantage of some breakaway sects which can
take with them part of the membership base of
the parent religion.39
Problems can arise for any transplanted religion,
and it is suggested that these might be
exacerbated in the case of new (or quasi)
religions. However, Scientology originated in
the United States, a country with close cultural,
economic, political and security links with
Australia. In addition, it is said to comprise a
relatively advantaged membership demographic.
So it might be hypothesised that Scientology
should enjoy relatively less opprobrium and
consequently less social disadvantage than other
new and unorthodox religions. This point has
been underlined by two writers who note that:
“Scientology, even if it is a transnational
movement, is well established among the
Australian population. Even though this religion
is an American import, it is far from being a
religion for American migrants.40 …
Scientologists tend to be baby boomers and
Generation Xers with high-income jobs. They
represent a much higher percentage than average
in active employment, and although Scientology
is a NRM imported from the United States, it is
37 “It is also to be noted that according to the feedback from the
various state and territory anti-discrimination bodies, the number
of religious discrimination complaints is relatively small and
limited, reflecting Australia’s acclaimed religious harmony” (G.
Bouma, D. Cahill, H. Dellal, A. Zwartz, Freedom of Religion and
Belief in 21st Century Australia, Sydney, 2011, p. 30).
38 Although the term “new religious movements” is now common
parlance among sociologists and scholars of new religions, I
generally prefer to use the word “group,” so as to provide a
contrast with broader movements such as the feminist or
environmental movements.
39 Indeed, some sects have divided from Scientology.
40 The comment that the organization is “well established” is a
reference to the large percentage majority (67 percent in the 2001
census) of Scientology members born in Australia.
