Tony Ortega

Atheist & Anti-Scientologist Tony Ortega Goes After Christians In Hysterical Twitter Rant

On Saturday April 8, I was thumbing my way through my Twitter feed, minding my own business, when a fusillade of Twitters blasts from the atheist anti-Scientologist Tony Ortega filled my screen.

Tony Ortega - Only Christians can hold high office in the US

Tony Ortega Attacks The Bible As Justification for Evil

Tony Ortega Calls Christian Man an Idiot on Twitter

Tony Ortega Persecutes Christians on Twitter
Obviously this Christian woman needed a little intimidating on Twitter.

That last Tweet is significant in understanding Tony Ortega. He is on an anti-religious and anti-spiritual crusade against all religions and spiritual pursuits – Scientology is just the low-hanging cult right now.

I’ve reached out to Tony Ortega via email for a comment about what kind of hatred of Christians was going through his mind, or if there was anything they actually did or said in the real world that set him off.

I’ll publish his response here if he gets back to me in time for publication.

75 thoughts on “Atheist & Anti-Scientologist Tony Ortega Goes After Christians In Hysterical Twitter Rant”

  1. I don’t believe in a deity, never have—well since age 4 when I was forced to go to church, never believed any of it. I do believe, however, there’s different planes of existence, life after death, and it’s not deity dependent. I’ve been told more than once I’m a bad atheist. ::eye roll::

    I strongly believe people can believe whatever they wish, as long as they are not harming others or forcing their beliefs onto others. I’ve witnessed the comfort Bible scriptures have given friends of mine. I admit, at times, I’m envious they have faith to support and sustain them at times. At the basis of most faiths is the theme of helping others, being kind, etc. The atheists I’m friends with believe that too, as do I.

    I view militant atheists as bad as evangelicals. The YOU WILL BELIEVE AS I DO OR I WILL CONSIDER YOU A LESSER BEING!!! Like drill sargents screaming. They spend their time judging others, when really, they should look in the mirror. They probably have some insecurities they’re deflecting.

    At the end of the day, we’re all human and bleed red. We all want to eek out a decent life, provide for families, enjoy life, and help others out. Well most of us, there’s always exceptions.

    Reply

  2. Regarding Christianity I’ve decided to share something that an acquaintance of mine posted on his site last week. This gentleman is a true Bible scholar in my opinion, although he would probably scoff at that designation. He does a great job of dispelling centuries old myths about what orthodox christianity claims to be “from the scriptures”. What follows is a succinct belief statement by him, if you will. I was moved by it when I first read it and I thought maybe one or two of you might like reading it…

    Christ Without Religion by Dan Sheridan http://www.sheridanvoice.com

    Most people think the faith that is in Christ, as revealed in the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, is to be ranked among the religions of the world. There are those who talk about Christianity in terms of religion. I am a student of history, especially American history. The Founders and Europeans talked about Christianity in terms of the Christian religion. In America today, Religion and the State are intimately combined.

    However, the faith in Christ, as revealed in the Scriptures, has nothing to do with religion. I love God, Jesus Christ, the Scriptures, Believers, and all mankind. However, I practice no religion whatsoever. I don’t “go to Church”; I don’t need an organization of any kind to filter my charity or practical living through.

    As for my love of Country, it has nothing to do with a nationalistic Roman/Pagan idea, and it certainly has nothing to do with combining the so-called “Christian Religion and the State.”

    There is absolutely no relation between the “christian system” and the Sacred Scriptures. There are many true believers in the system, but I don’t let sentimentality fool me into approving the system for that reason. I embrace everyone who believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and Savior of the World. But I don’t go along with the system they belong to. People think the system is “of God” because they read the system back into the Scriptures and talk themselves into believing that what they see at the “Sunday Services” resembles what took place in Acts. It’s a mind magic trick – period.

    I am a believer in the revelation God gave us concerning His Son, Jesus Christ my Lord, as revealed in the Scriptures. Religion, including the Christian religion, is a system of ceremony and works to try to please the gods. But what religions set before scared human beings as the goal, I have for my starting point. I am safe and secure with my Savior through the accomplishments of Jesus Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection. Religion sends the fearful on the impossible task of trying to find security with the gods through religious exercises. But I am already complete and at peace with God through the Lord Jesus Christ.

    Western Christianity promotes the idea that a person can be part of the “Jesus Club” by joining one of the organizations going by the name of “church” and submitting to their requirements. Paul calls this “having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.”

    The western “Church” organizations are powerful and wealthy businesses which provide social, economic, and political advantage when you join them. These organizations and their activities give the illusion that those involved in these “great works” are engaged in God’s work.

    Otis Seller put it this way: “The religion called Christianity has one test for everything: material and numerical success. To it, truth is whatever works. If men will not endure sound teaching, it will find something they will endure. It is busily engaged in dispensing instant Christianity; to others, always laying hold of those upon whom the Spirit of God is working, dousing the light that He is generating by large or small applications of water, or by some other ceremony in their catalog of religious exercises.”

    “Many who give themselves over to popular Christianity find it to be financially rewarding, especially in view of the explosion of piety that is seen on every hand today, also because Christianity has become one more form of entertainment.”

    One has only to see the “methods” of modern “churches” to see the truth of these words of Mr. Sellers. Christian church spokespeople constantly appeal to the senses through the music, entertainment, and the atmosphere of their religion to make people “feel religious.”

    But Jesus Christ didn’t come to give us a “Christian Religion.”

    Sellers adds, “When God created the first man and placed him in the garden of Eden, He gave him no religion. When He surveyed all that He had created and declared it to be very good, there was not a speck of religion anywhere. When Eve was added to this beautiful scene as a ‘help meet’ for Adam, she did not bring into it a load of religion to lay upon her husband, as so many wives are trying to do to their husbands today. This first pair had no ceremonies, rituals, ordinances, or exercises by which they were to show their reverence for and devotion to the God who had created them… Adam and Eve were entirely without religion. Their relationship to God was religionless… It was sometime after A.D. 70 that a new alignment of religions appeared in the Roman Empire. This was called Christianity. It was an amalgam of Greek philosophy, Mithraic ritualism, and religious elements from many sources. It called itself the Christian Church, and it was far removed from the simple fellowship of the first followers of Jesus Christ. It did not come out of Him, since it was built by men who today are universally acknowledged to have been ‘the church fathers.’ Fifteen of these are recognized in ecclesiastical history between 70 A.D. and 440 A.D. Ten of them are commonly called “the Greek fathers,” and five are called ‘the Latin fathers.’ It was these men who produced from many sources the religion of Christendom, which today had developed into a thousand-and-one companies, a great myriad of ceremonies, rituals, acts of exterior worship, all of which together pass for Christianity today.”

    Sellers concludes,

    “There are those who say that one is no part of Christ unless he is in some way a part of this conglomeration. This we repudiate. And in defense we would point to the truth declared by Paul in Colossians 2:8-23. This portion when honestly translated and understood sets forth religionless Christianity in all its splendor. It removes from the believer in Christ every vestige of religion both human and divine, and declares without equivocation: And you are complete in Him.”

    I, as a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, am complete in Christ without any religion.

    Dan Sheridan

    Reply

    • Hi Lone Star,
      This is very interesting, although I think I will have to read it 10 times before I understand it. I am setting it on my IPad as my reading for the day. Several important insights here, I think.
      Thanks also for the link to Dan Sheridan, the name is familiar, I’ll check it out.

      Reply

  3. I was banned from the Bunker for “dragging it into the sewer” [although he had previously asked those that turned up to the first Howdycon to deliberately start an argument with me so he could ban me…. there were no takers]… I had posted a fat-shaming Krustie shoop in case you’re interested https://www.scientologybollocks.com/donald-trump-scientology-watchers/

    Also he called me a “scum-sucker” for naming one of the girls who accused Danny Masterson of rape on my blog… what he failed to mention was that this girl had accused Masterson herself on public twitter at the time and I reached out made it clear I would remove her name if she wanted me too… what he was pissed off about was that she had recently made her twitter account private so he had no access to the tweet unless he grabbed it from my site…

    As far as I’m concerned about tony it’s all about ego and control…. apart from that I will say that he does a pretty good job otherwise

    Reply

    • Virginia – I also noticed that. Maybe he’s thinking about swearing in on the Bible for some (high) government positions. I don’t know if it’s a requirement to use the Bible or another religious text or take any oath at all. In early American history the Quakers refused to take oaths and exceptions were made.

      I just read over the tweets once. I’m not interested in exploring “the mind of Ortega.” Andy Nolch was more fun.

      Reply

      • There’s a term in Islam which I don’t recall which endorses and encourages Muslims to lie to infidels if it’s in the cause of advancing Islam. So much for oaths.

        Reply

          • Doloras – I agree. I should have qualified my comment or not made it at all. It applies only to radicals. The stupid radicals in Iran burn American flags in the streets and chant while the sane and rational Muslims stay home. The idea of Taqiya (justified lying) is being applied to the Iran nuclear agreement which some people say the clerics running Iran take as a joke.

            Alanzo has been posting about bigotry. Idle comments like mine shouldn’t be made. Thanks for pointing it out.

            Reply

    • I think he is referring to the fact that all our Presidents have “officially” been Christian, all except JFK have been Protestant,
      However, Joe Lieberman made a pretty good showing, Bernie Sanders is very popular, Mitt Romney is sort of “alt-Christian”. Not sure an atheist would be elected, LOL

      Reply

      • “Officially” – good way of putting it. lol. People like Jefferson and Jackson (Presidents) weren’t any kind of “official” Christian. I think Jefferson put it well – that he was a “sect of one”. Cracks me up every time I see it.

        Reply

        • Jefferson was despised by the “fundamentalists” of that time. He did not believe in Christianity although he had a respect for the man Jesus. He didn’t believe Jesus was a savior.

          George Washington attended Anglican services with his wife but never took communion. In fact he went outside during communion.

          The meme that the US was founded as a Christian nation is complete nonsense. The founders went out of their way to ensure that it wasn’t.

          Reply

            • Eileen – The “Jefferson Bible” would be an example. He constructed it in the later years of his life by cutting and pasting sections of the Bible into his own notebook, omitting miracles.

              A snippet from wiki:

              Jefferson wrote that “Jesus did not impose himself on mankind as the son of God.” He called the writers of the New Testament “ignorant unlettered men” who produced “superstitions, fanaticisms, and fabrications.” He called the Apostle Paul “the first corrupter of the doctrine of Jesus.”

              etc.- laughter

              Reply

              • Studying the works of Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and Even Edmund Burke got me out of Scientology.

                I finally understood this “Bridge to Total Freedom” thing was not leading me to more freedom.

                I could not have known that unless I’d read these guys.

                Reply

              • Richard gets the prize! I purposely left out the Jefferson Bible to see if anyone else would bring it up. You get free tickets to the next Ghost show playing at the city of your choice! (Ok that is a satanic lie).

                Back to the US being a “Christian nation” *, all these moron fundys hafta do is notice that “Jesus” was NEVER mentioned in any of our founding documents. Not the Declaration….not the Articles of Confederation….and not the Constitution. If they wanted this to be an official Christian nation then it stands to reason that they would’ve officially declared Jesus Christ to be the supreme King over the country and set up an official church to be tied in with the government as His representative. But on the contrary they did NOT want to make the same mistakes of Catholic Europe or Anglican Britain. It’s all documented in their correspondences with one another during the founding period.

                *In the beginning the US was not regarded as a singular nation. They called it “These United States”, not “The United States”. It wasn’t until Lincoln that it became one Nation. The idea of independent sovereign States died with the Civil War. And we’ve been getting effed by Washington DC ever since. IMNSHO.

                Reply

                • I left it out on purpose too Lone – was curious if anyone else knew about it. That’s funny. Plus, I was tied up with some other things earlier. Anyway, I’m quite familiar with the Jefferson bible history. I find it fascinating.

          • I think at least some of the founders were mason’s. Which if they were high ranking, would make them only pseudo Christians.

            In Stephen Mitchell’s book ‘The Gospel According to Jesus'(Great book!) he admittedly expands on a theory Jefferson had regarding only some of the teachings attributed to Jesus being true.

            Reply

  7. As I recall you were banned, not for protesting Bernstein’s post, but for suggesting that a report should be made to Bernstein’s professional licensing board. That intimidation is quite different than Ortega rudeness. Have you ever owned your responsibility in the exchange?

    Reply

    • I remember that you disagreed with my view that Bernstein’s behavior in publicly shaming the mental state of Cathy Tweed should be a reportable offense. Is that right?

      Reply

      • Right, it is not a reportable offense. It is generally discouraged as unprofessional, but you can’t bar a person’s right to speak. But you were definitely intimidating. If the remark had been directed to me I would probably have complained to Tony and ask that it be removed. I suspect that is what occurred.
        I think the rest of what you said to Bernstein was fine, I think I commented on that at the time.

        Reply

        • I saw it as unthinkably cruel. And I mean “unthinkably”. As in, these Bunkerites were out for blood, and they did not think or care that Cathy Tweed was not a public person, and that she was making statements to Tony Ortega the day after she buried her daughter – from suicide.

          And, I’m sorry, in my opinion no therapist – especially a licensed one – should ever use their license in that way. And make no mistake – she did use her license to prop up the mental shaming she performed on Cathy Tweed.

          So what part of this, exactly, should I “own”?

          If you are thinking that I regret getting banned from Tony’s site, that’s not the case, either. I know what will get me banned and what won’t get me banned from a site. I did not want to be part of that kind of cruelty – from Scientologists or critics.

          So I’m thinking – what do I need to “own” here….

          cogitation….cogitation…

          Reply

            • LOL!!

              What’s that mean??

              EDIT: Still laughing at this, picturing myself driving a backhoe – trying to figure out what I’m doing on this thing!

              EDIT2: I’m not coming after you. I really want to know what you think in answer to those questions.

              Reply

              • I know you are not coming after me, I think you challenge but don’t attack. Hopefully, I do the same for you.

                I had an image of the therapist (or Tony Ortega) standing in front of Jesus. What would Jesus say? -Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
                In answer I saw the “sinless man” rounding the corner, riding high, gold mask flashing in the sun. You had a pile of boulders in the basket.

                Sometimes your “certainty” about what is “unthinkably cruel” and your fury at Tony Ortega is unsettling. I view them as people who made mistakes.
                Just like me.
                But not you.

                Reply

                • I couldn’t disagree more. That was not a mistake. A mistake is something on the order of a math error.

                  Public degradation in that way was so beyond the level of “mistake” it’s not even on the same planet.

                  All for a story.

                  I remember it, and I was horrified at what I saw going on that day. Both in Tony even running the story, and that – trotted out by Karen I believe – horrible woman pretending to have one clue whatsoever about anything was absolutely disgusting – and that’s not even getting into the insane behavior of the so-called commenters.

                  Wow.

                  Tony should apologize and retract the story. No two ways about it.

                • Off topic, but your comment about the math error reminded me of something funny that happened yesterday.
                  A student calculated the number of ounces of a medication that would be administered to a patient.
                  According to his math the number of ounces was 20,000,000.
                  I asked him to estimate what kind of vehicle we would need to back the medication into his room. I suggested perhaps a semi tractor trailer?
                  Don’t worry, he is several years away from getting within 10 feet of a patient. It is amazing how anxiety can shut down even basic logical thinking. He is an intelligent young man, and the mistake will make him safer (someday).

                • Right, I get what you are saying Eileen. But, if he was to do that as a professional and actually gave that to a patient – it wouldn’t be classified as a mistake. He’d lose his license and a whole lot more.

                  It’s good that as a student, he has someone like you around to help him see both the potential severity something like that could have, at the same time as adding enough humor so that he can recognize that he is still learning.

                • Numbers, calculations…the way we judge other people’s intentions…our ability to sit in judgement…
                  They all exist on an abstract plane, a place of pure thought.
                  Then, when applied to the real world, the absurdity becomes evident. 20,000,000 ounces of reaction when only 2 ounces is beneficial.

                  *Moment of insight about why I shared that anecdote yesterday*

                • “Then, when applied to the real world, the absurdity becomes evident.”

                  I would say that is very true once that psychologist put her diagnosis into an online media outlet.

                  It was no longer an abstract absurdity and very bad idea.

            • Well Eileen, aren’t those kind of blogs put there and maintained precisely as venues for casting stones at others? ESMB, Ortega’s, etc

              Reply

                • Well, it eventually becomes that way. But I don’t think it was always meant that way at the beginning.

                • Claire- I think you are right. Tony’s blog has become incomprehensible; a “free for all” where there are cliques, friendships, feuds, and lots of foolishness. Nothing wrong with that, if that is what people want, I guess. But if a serious discussion starts to break out it is quickly interrupted by one of the in-house trolls.
                  Rinder’s blog is almost the other extreme, there is no spark there.
                  Maybe it is just the life cycle, or the numbers of contributers

      • The amount of aggravation that can be created by even a specious complaint can be overwhelming. The licensing boards can make a practitioner’s life hell. I know one NP who had her credentials questioned via an anonymous (to her) complaint. Even though they were all in line, she still had to face a hearing.
        That is their role (the licensing board), people may not realize how thorough some state boards are in protecting patients.
        I think that Bernstein’s credentials are on the master’s degree level, harder to protect. She may have genuinely felt her license was threatened.
        You meant to sting her, but she saw a Molotov cocktail. Personally, I would have told you to fuck off, but I’ve been around a lot longer.

        Reply

      • You may not realize how important a person’s “license to practice” is to their sense of self, and how fragile it can feel sometimes. Bernstein was wrong, I suspect she won’t make that mistake again. A number of people jumped on her. We’ve all been there.

        Reply

        • OK. So what do you think I should have “owned” about this incident?

          How do you think I should have handled it?

          Keep in mind that Tony and I had already discussed the cruelty here the first time he did this to Cathy Tweed. And at that first time, he let me know very clearly where I could shove my opinions on this. You should also know that there was a time when I was very polite and respectful to Tony Ortega. Years of that, in fact. This was during that time.

          In fact, it was this incident where I began to become aware of Tony Ortega’s horrible bias, his penchant for cruelty, and his all around rude and disrespectful assholery – to me in particular. And

          I was now done with that.

          So when this second time came around, and Tony had doubled-down on it and brought in a psych to back him up, there was no more talking to Tony about it.

          So what would you have done?

          Reply

            • What I did was I sent her an email asking her what her reasoning was for doing such a thing. I said that I would want to know this before I went to her board about what she did.

              I did not go to her board.

              If she did it again, I would have.

              And if she does it again in the future, I will.

              So yeah, I can own that.

              EDIT: It would be hard to create that same situation though – a mother who had lost her daughter to suicide and Tony calls her up a day after her daughter’s funeral and quotes her attempts to keep moving on after such a tragedy, and then have all those Bunkerites rip her to shreds, and then months later have Rachel Bernstein come in and highlight parts of her coping statements to show that the mother was mentally ill for what she said.

              But hey – if there’s another money-making opportunity like this one for Tony or Rachel – who knows? They might get lucky. Practice building is a constant struggle.

              Reply

              • Wow. That action I can respect.
                She won’t. It was a rookie error. I suspect she got swept up in being an “expert.” After awhile you realize that there are no experts, only people figuring things out together.

                Reply

              • Absofuckinglutely. I totally agree Alanzo, and would own that too. I have successfully done that myself, taken action that ultimately resulted in someone losing their license permanently – it was that bad.

                But people need to remember that these boards make the decision, not the person making the complaint.

                If you have good evidence, like I did, it was an open-and-shut case and the board acted accordingly.

                I certainly don’t do that kind of thing at the drop of a hat, nor even if someone is an “enemy” or not or whether I “like” them or not – not like some people out there do. That doesn’t enter my thinking at all when I decide something like that.

                Professionals needs to adhere to professional standards, it’s as simple as that.

                And we can’t complain about the system if we aren’t willing to inform the system when something goes wrong, and give it a chance to do the right thing.

                Reply

  8. I’m rained out of work again today. I’m 71 and semi retired. I used to run a small construction company and pick up occasional jobs from previous customers.

    I think a person’s perception or experience of “Divinity” would be influenced by their culture, background and their own personal makeup. It might come to them as Jesus, Krishna, the Holy Spirit or whatever. Christians I’ve known speak unabashedly about being saved.

    Most criticism of religion is of organized religion, not necessarily of its individual beliefs, some of which are accepted or rejected by believers with the exception of fundamentalists.

    Atheists cherry pick the worst or most illogical parts. I think there’s some sense to Tony’s criticism of government being run entirely by Christian principles and various Bible beaters, but what’s the alternative?
    There’s a gamut of governments across the world, some better, some worse. I guess he’s just enjoying a chance to rant – lol

    Reply

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.