red22
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2009
- Messages
- 2,061
The Church of Scientology Dusts Off Reagan-Era Rhetoric in Statement Against Psychedelic Therapy for Veterans
DoubleBlind 2025-07-21
A Church-affiliated group warns that legalizing therapy for veterans could revive Cold War mind control.
In a scathing critique cloaked as concern for the health and well-being of veterans, the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) — a watchdog group founded by members of the Church of Scientology that’s sometimes described as a “front group” for the church — has denounced federal efforts to legalize psychedelics for veterans, calling it dangerous, exploitative, and reminiscent of Cold War-era mind control. (Sensational much?)
But while the group accuses psychedelic medicine proponents of reviving “a shameful legacy of unethical experimentation,” their rhetoric raises another question: Why is the Church of Scientology and its watchdog mouthpiece against psychedelics in the first place?
CCHR’s OpEd contends that the new legislation fast-tracking psychedelic therapies could “turn vets into test subjects for a projected $10 billion profit bonanza.” The group cites grim historical anecdotes — like the CIA’s infamous MK-Ultra program and Operation Delirium at Edgewood Arsenal — as proof that psychedelics and psychiatry are a nefarious pairing.
The story completely disregards the growing body of scientific literature showing that, when administered in controlled settings, psychedelics like MDMA and psilocybin can help certain individuals treat PTSD, depression, and substance use disorders, all of which are ailments that disproportionately impact veterans. Dozens of peer-reviewed studies, including a number of Phase 3 trials, which, not for nothing, show significant and sometimes life-saving improvements for vets.
The CCHR, however, insists these substances only serve to “mask” trauma, rather than heal it. They warn that such therapies are “a betrayal” of veterans’ trust and provide a litany of worst-case scenarios — anecdotes of bad trips, panic, psychosis, and even murder linked to psychedelic use. “Real-world studies show psychedelics can do more harm than good,” the group writes.
Most of the evidence CCHR cites comes from recreational or unguided use; settings that lack the therapeutic container now considered the gold standard in clinical research. But the bills on Capitol Hill authorize psychedelic-assisted therapy, not unsupervised partying, so CCHR’s horror-story comparisons are largely beside the point.
Back to the question we proposed earlier: Why is this watchdog — which, again, is basically the PR arm of Scientology — so vehemently opposed to a movement that many scientists say could revolutionize mental health care?
While CCHR doesn't disclose its theological affiliations in the article, the group was co-founded by the Church of Scientology in 1969 and shares its deep antagonism toward psychiatry. Scientology doctrine positions psychiatry as a malevolent force, responsible for everything from global conflict to personal misery. The church has long crusaded against psychiatric medication, electroshock therapy, and diagnostic labels.
Given that psychedelics are increasingly being explored through psychiatric frameworks, their emergence as therapeutic tools may threaten the core of Scientology’s anti-psychiatric worldview. Is the opposition philosophical? Strategic? Theologically motivated? It’s impossible to say with certainty, but the intensity of the pushback suggests the resistance may go beyond concern for veterans.
Ultimately, CCHR’s alarmist framing, while not devoid of cautionary value (psychedelics really aren’t for everyone), fails to grapple with the nuance of the current psychedelic movement. Yes, there are risks. There’s also a troubling history! But, there’s also progress that’s real, measurable, and for many people, life-changing.
And for veterans in the grip of PTSD, the question may not be whether psychedelics are risk-free, but whether we owe them access to every possible tool for healing, particularly those backed by science and administered with care.
So why is the Church of Scientology so afraid of that possibility? Lol. Your guess is as good as ours.
Via DoubleBlind's newsletter.
DoubleBlind 2025-07-21
A Church-affiliated group warns that legalizing therapy for veterans could revive Cold War mind control.
In a scathing critique cloaked as concern for the health and well-being of veterans, the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) — a watchdog group founded by members of the Church of Scientology that’s sometimes described as a “front group” for the church — has denounced federal efforts to legalize psychedelics for veterans, calling it dangerous, exploitative, and reminiscent of Cold War-era mind control. (Sensational much?)
But while the group accuses psychedelic medicine proponents of reviving “a shameful legacy of unethical experimentation,” their rhetoric raises another question: Why is the Church of Scientology and its watchdog mouthpiece against psychedelics in the first place?
CCHR’s OpEd contends that the new legislation fast-tracking psychedelic therapies could “turn vets into test subjects for a projected $10 billion profit bonanza.” The group cites grim historical anecdotes — like the CIA’s infamous MK-Ultra program and Operation Delirium at Edgewood Arsenal — as proof that psychedelics and psychiatry are a nefarious pairing.
The story completely disregards the growing body of scientific literature showing that, when administered in controlled settings, psychedelics like MDMA and psilocybin can help certain individuals treat PTSD, depression, and substance use disorders, all of which are ailments that disproportionately impact veterans. Dozens of peer-reviewed studies, including a number of Phase 3 trials, which, not for nothing, show significant and sometimes life-saving improvements for vets.
The CCHR, however, insists these substances only serve to “mask” trauma, rather than heal it. They warn that such therapies are “a betrayal” of veterans’ trust and provide a litany of worst-case scenarios — anecdotes of bad trips, panic, psychosis, and even murder linked to psychedelic use. “Real-world studies show psychedelics can do more harm than good,” the group writes.
Most of the evidence CCHR cites comes from recreational or unguided use; settings that lack the therapeutic container now considered the gold standard in clinical research. But the bills on Capitol Hill authorize psychedelic-assisted therapy, not unsupervised partying, so CCHR’s horror-story comparisons are largely beside the point.
Back to the question we proposed earlier: Why is this watchdog — which, again, is basically the PR arm of Scientology — so vehemently opposed to a movement that many scientists say could revolutionize mental health care?
While CCHR doesn't disclose its theological affiliations in the article, the group was co-founded by the Church of Scientology in 1969 and shares its deep antagonism toward psychiatry. Scientology doctrine positions psychiatry as a malevolent force, responsible for everything from global conflict to personal misery. The church has long crusaded against psychiatric medication, electroshock therapy, and diagnostic labels.
Given that psychedelics are increasingly being explored through psychiatric frameworks, their emergence as therapeutic tools may threaten the core of Scientology’s anti-psychiatric worldview. Is the opposition philosophical? Strategic? Theologically motivated? It’s impossible to say with certainty, but the intensity of the pushback suggests the resistance may go beyond concern for veterans.
Ultimately, CCHR’s alarmist framing, while not devoid of cautionary value (psychedelics really aren’t for everyone), fails to grapple with the nuance of the current psychedelic movement. Yes, there are risks. There’s also a troubling history! But, there’s also progress that’s real, measurable, and for many people, life-changing.
And for veterans in the grip of PTSD, the question may not be whether psychedelics are risk-free, but whether we owe them access to every possible tool for healing, particularly those backed by science and administered with care.
So why is the Church of Scientology so afraid of that possibility? Lol. Your guess is as good as ours.
Via DoubleBlind's newsletter.
, this seems for me indeed one good reason.