Jump to content

Talk:Heaven's Gate (religious group)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Action Jackson IV (talk | contribs) at 05:10, 2 August 2007 (this should not be the main page for Heaven's Gate). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconReligion Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Saturday Night Live episode

A 1997 episode of Saturday Night Live opened with a sketch in which the dead members of the cult were still alive, had been successful in boarding an alien spacecraft in the comet, and were doing a live interview from the spacecraft with Ted Koppel on Nightline. This same episode featured a commercial parody that utilized footage of the cult members' Nike sneakers, followed by the Keds logo, accompanied by the phrase "Keds: Worn by Level-Headed Christians."

Does anyone know if this video is on You Tube, or some other online video service?

Comet naming

Just a quick note: "Hale-Bopp" is a proper name describing a particular object of the cometary type. In conventional usage regarding comets, asteroids, constellations, and some other celestial bodies and phenomena, the type preceeds the name, just as it does for many (though not all) proper names in the English language.

The former usage here, "the Hale-Bopp comet," makes about as much sense as the term "the George Bush President," or "the Nicole Kidman actress." There's a reason the wikipedia article on Comet Hale-Bopp is named the way it is, so it is kind of pointless to undo the naming convention with a more complex than necessary piped link. Thanks. Jeff Medkeff 04:23, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

So it's wrong to say Halley's Comet? It should be Comet Haley's instead?--T. Anthony 08:45, 18 September 2005 (UTC) I guess it is I got redirected to Comet Halley. Still I've never known anyone who called it that.--T. Anthony 08:46, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Halley's is an expection. It's kind of grandfathered in. Wahkeenah 04:50, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that over time, "Halley's Comet" came to be a proper name itself through repeated usage. A comet might be named "Dan's Comet" in the same fashion; the entire genitive phrase is the proper name, not just "Dan." On the other hand, "Hale-Bopp" is the whole proper name of our other example; not "Hale-Bopp's Comet, or "Hale's and Bopp's Comet." Most comets are referred to in this fashion, just like hurricanes. You wouldn't say "the Katrina hurricane," but rather "Hurricane Katrina." Why we are having this discussion here-- I have no idea! And since I can't resist-- does anyone else remember that before Halley's Comet returned in '86, everyone always pronounced it with a long A, as in HALE-ees? And seemingly overnight, that long A became a short a? That blew my mind. Richard Lewis had a great bit about that on Letterman.


Gnosticism

Can somebody expand on this? I know that it is not directly related to Gnosticism, but that it is quite similar. Please discuss this? 69.248.43.27 03:44, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not explicitly, though their lifestyle could be considered such, since their is a dissregard for life in general, and the majority of the sects' emphesis on abstenant self-denial in particular (though there were other sects who where just the opposite, since matter was inherently evil in this philosophy, it would not make much difference what one did).

69.248.43.27 21:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree - though Gnosticism tended, in the main, towards ascetism, recent scholarly work seems to indicate that their world view was more abiguous and ambivalent towards materiality than was previously held. Also, the trait of self-denial is not exclusively Gnostic. As such, while an emphasis on asceticism might be a preliminary parallel with Gnosticism, it is not sufficient for a cult to practise suicide to be Gnostic. In any case, the correct usage of the term 'Gnosticism' is to denote a set of religions of the third century CE; since Heaven's Gate was a twentieth century movement, it could not be 'Gnostic' in the proper sense. Visual Error 00:21, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suicide technique

Is ingestion of phenobarbital-laced applesauce and vodka lethal? --Abdull 14:48, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Alcohol tends to amplify effects of depressant drugs, and alcohol and barbiturates are a particularly dangerous combination since the depressant effects of barbiturates are more broad-based than those of benzodiazepines, which is why benzos are more popular as sedatives these days. You can survive a massive OD of, say, Valium (though I would assume there would be some brain damage), but barbiturates will kill you until you are dead. Alcohol intoxication makes it much easier for them to do so. Haikupoet 19:23, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mark King

I'm curious as to why this article has no mention of former cult member Mark King, who retianed a large amount ot cult property after a court battle with LA County? There's quite a bit out on the net about him and his relationship to Heavensgate. In fact he owns the cult's domain name... Jake b 21:57, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A list of members would also be a nice thing here, Mark King would be added. Ninja neko 09:25, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Louis Theroux's book 'The Call of the Wierd' he talks to former Heaven's Gate members Mark and Sarah and seems to find them both rather pleasent. He asks them why they did not "leave" with the other cult members and sarah answers: "Still wrestle with that today."
Louis then comments in his book, "The answer, I suspected, was because they loved each other. Their love trumped the love of the group." (p.220, 'The Call of the Wierd')
I find this strangely touching, even if it is just the musings of a journalist, would it be appropriate to have something like this on the wiki page? Mythiran 18:54, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of 'Cult'

I find it unprofessional that the word 'cult' appears in the very title of this page. 'Cult' is a term loaded with moral judgement, which is often used to inhumanize an 'other.' No religion should be so reprimanded. The reference to Heaven's Gate as a cult implies that the members involved were acting under the influence of a force, rather than as believers of an ideology which, however misguided, they judged to be accurate. I submit that this page should be called "Heaven's Gate (religion)"

So, you are saying that there is no such thing as a cult? Really?
A cult has specific qualities that are pretty well defined. Cults and the word "cult" carry a bad connotation because the things that define a cult as a "cult" are pretty bad. Perhaps calling it a “religious cult” rather than just “cult” would be more appropriate, but by all commonly accepted definitions, Heavens Gate was a cult.
From Wikipedia:
In religion and sociology, a cult is a cohesive group of people (often a relatively small and recently founded religious movement) devoted to beliefs or practices that the surrounding culture or society considers to be far outside the mainstream. Its separate status may come about either due to its novel belief system, because of its idiosyncratic practices or because it opposes the interests of the mainstream culture.
Sounds like Heavens Gate to me...
Christianity "was" a cult. There are still followers of Heaven's Gate. Just becuase they don't have the political power of the Church does not mean we should stigmatize them with such a loaded word. I agree with the first person in this section but would submit to call the page simply "Heaven's Gate" or "Heaven's Gate (spiritual movement)"

Andy D —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.89.85.239 (talk) 16:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

By the way, you should not be afraid to sign your comments. Jake b 05:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The title is extremely POV... I will change it to "Heaven's Gate (NRM)" which has less negative connotations - unless there are other proposals. Sfacets 00:22, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mike and Gary the television show had an episode making fun of this...

The list of popular culture references is longer than the article itself...
Maybe a seperate page should be created for the references, and just a few striking ones should remain in this article.
Ninja neko 09:23, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's completely unbalanced as it stands - we actually have very little info on the cult, and lots of random tv references. Secretlondon 07:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erroneous Mention of Scientology?

The third paragraph of "Origins and History" seems entirely out of place. It describes a posting to usenet about Scientology and the Cult Awareness Network, which seem unconnected to the rest of this article. --Joe Fusion 18:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Alleged' cult?

Based on the current structure of category:Cults, which is now a metacategory, this is listed under alleged cults. This was done to clean up the category, which contained cult researchers, anti-cult activists, cults, concepts about cults, etc. and the category is fairly new. Another category name that has been considered is category:Groups that have been referred to as cults to echo the List of groups referred to as cults and this is probably a better option so that clearcut cases don't get slapped with an 'alleged' label. Antonrojo 13:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Category_talk:Alleged_cults regarding this possible alternate name for the category. Antonrojo 15:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Purple cloths?

I have recently read that these purple cloths were in fact purple armbands which read "Heaven's gate away team" Has anyone else heard about this?

Cross-article problems:

In the Cult Suicide article, on the subject of the Heaven's Gate Cult, it says:

"Some male members of the cult underwent voluntary castration in preparation for the genderless life they believed awaited them after the suicide."

However, in the main Heaven's Gate Article, it says:

"Many male members of the cult voluntarily underwent castration as an extreme means of maintaining the ascetic lifestyle."

So what's the real answer?

Inspector Baynes 17:34, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Gardner reports that there were seven castrati in the cult, which is a bit more precise than "some" or "many". See http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2843/is_n4_v21/ai_19727569/pg_4

eerie synchronicity

Robert Silverberg's 1985 novel "Tom O'Bedlam" prefigures Heaven's gate almost exactly--even down to the San Diego location. ---miguelj

New Followers

Hi I was browsing the internet and found that "God's Gates" had been erased but I found another "Revolution" of followers you'll can change it back if you want to

There was a version of this article that had a section on the alleged new followers but it was deleted by an ediot who deemed it a hoax. While the section was poorly written and very hard to comphrehend, the current followers are not a hoax. they appear to be a remnant of the original group that, for whatever reason, did not graduate with the others in 1997. They claim to keep sacred the original teachings including celibacy and to warn against former members who continue to speak for the group but who have forsaken their celibacy by marying and having children. The celibacy issue was central to the teachings of the group so I'm not suprised that the current followers make such a big deal of it on their site. Their site also tries to explain that the rumor that a new class was going to graduate to the next level with the appearance of a new comet is false. (Graduate to the next level = suicide). I believe a brief and more coherent paragraph on the current group shoulkd be included. i will try and come up with something in the next few days. The 10th anniversary of the suicides is fast upon us and people will undoubtedly be clicking on this article a lot. I am not a member of the group ort affiliated with it in any way, I'm an Anthropologist and folklorist with an interest in new religious movements. -- LiPollis 06:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This really needs reducing. Particularly those portions which merely resemble the cult, rather than being directly influenced by it, need to go. --Saforrest 05:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. For now, I've fixed "Heaven's Smile" (of Killer7) as it is actually spelt - "Heaven Smile." Whether this is actually relevant is up for discussion. --Edwin Herdman 06:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've just read through the list and it looks like a good list at the current time. All of the references are pretty direct references; none of them are really obscure or questionable. Sources need to be cited, however. Johntex\talk 00:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the list is ridiculous. It is longer than the rest of the article and includes many oblique references to the cult. Anything that is not cited should be removed. --Chuck Sirloin 16:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I purged the list of anything not directly related to HG and marked the rest as needing citations. In a month or so, any without citations will be cut too (none in the list have cites). --Chuck Sirloin 23:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is carrying Jesus?

The spaceship or the comet? The current sentence is not very clear. 203.170.226.253 15:51, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.


Heaven's Gate (cult) > Heaven's Gate (NRM) Sfacets 00:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this group better known as a "NRM" or as a "cult"? Google says "Heaven's Gate (NRM)"=526 while "Heaven's Gate (cult)"=195,000. That's a decisive difference. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 05:59, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From our own article on Cult:

<quotation>In religion and sociology, a cult is a term designating a cohesive group of people (generally, but not exclusively a relatively small and recently founded religious movement) devoted to beliefs or practices that the surrounding culture or society considers to be outside the mainstream. Its status may come about either due to its novel belief system, its idiosyncratic practices, its perceived harmful effects on members, or because its perceived opposition to the interests of the mainstream culture. Non-religious groups may also display cult-like characteristics.</quoatation> (Emphasis mine)

I'd say this is an accurate use of the term. I don't think any of their members are going to complain about it -- Phoeba WrightOBJECTION! 06:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The word 'cult' is a pejorative: from our own article:

"In common usage "cult" has a negative connotation and is generally applied to a group by opponents for a variety of reasons. "This popular use of the term has gained such credence and momentum that it has virtually swallowed up the more neutral historical meaning of the term from the sociology of religion" James T. Richardson wrote in 1993. "

Also the decision cannot be based on something like google hits. Sfacets 08:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not true. See WP:UCN and WP:GT. The main debate here is if it's offensive or not, and there really isn't anyone here to offend, so we should go with the more commonly accepted title. -- Phoeba WrightOBJECTION! 09:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about what is offensive or not, it's about what is neutral or not - 'cult' is a prejudicial and non-neutral term, and should not be used, least of all in a title. Sfacets 10:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If it isn't offensive, and it isn't praise, it's neutral. Cult is neither. Still, it would make more sense to move this page to "Heaven's Gate", and move the page that's currently there to "Heaven's Gate (disambiguation)" -- Phoeba WrightOBJECTION! 10:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neutrality isn't about offensiveness - it is about supporting a point of view... but yes that sounds like a good idea. Sfacets 10:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the move. NRM stands for new religious movement. It's not accurate in this case, and in any case is more POV than cult, as there's a subtle but often deliberate implication in calling a cult an NRM that other, established religions are just as bad. Andrewa 09:53, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In a perfect world (or encyclopedia in this case) a title should not carry any description of the subject it discusses - thereby eliminating any chance of bias. Sfacets 11:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We could also just call it "Heaven's Gate (Group)" -- Phoeba WrightOBJECTION! 11:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose the move. I think we can find plenty of sources to describe this group as a cult, and most people looking for this article won't identify this group as a NRM. Aliasd 08:13, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, it's not about describing it, it's about finding a NPOV way of naming it. Sfacets 08:24, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

This article has been renamed from Heaven's Gate (cult) to Heaven's Gate as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 09:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Words to avoid

WP:Words to avoid#Cult, sect If the author wants to indicate that there is something wrong with a group by applying the cult label then the article in Wikipedia should focus on the question of what is wrong with the group.

Other than them mostly all being dead of suicide? AndroidCat 00:27, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistent references to Heaven's Gate in article

For what it's worth, I don't agree at all with the above sentiment regarding the change of HG from "cult" status. In fact, the Cult WP cited above indicates very clearly that the one occasion in which one should attribute cult status is for religious movements outside the mainstream that attain mainstream notoriety (deserved or not.)

Regardless, something that needs to be changed in the article is the fact that the initial paragraph refers to HG as a "new religious movement," while the remainder of the article refers to it as a cult. JasonPresyl 21:49, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion is that cult is correct here. the_undertow talk 01:12, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cult is most certainly correct. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and commits mass suicide in a way that almost the entire rest of the population finds certifiably insane like a duck, it's probably a duck. Really, calling it an NRM is an insult to NRMs. --Lie!
The word 'cult' is a pejorative. Making the assumption that the group is a cult is your own Original Research based on a supposition which in turn is loosely based on only vaguely reliable sources. 'New Religious Movement' on the other hand is more neutral, less biased, and doesn't carry the undertones of an accusation. Sfacets 03:31, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Loosely based on what, just about every media outlet that has ever referred to them? Looking at our own references and external links, it's a cult. Calling it an NRM would be giving it WP:UNDUE weight to a very minority opinion, and potentially a WP:NPOV violation as well --Lie! 03:34, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How is 'NRM' less neutral than 'cult'? Sfacets 03:43, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Because it rejects the massive, massive majority referring to it as a cult. See Virginia Tech massacre, just because you think a word is NPOV doesn't mean it isn't the more popular, or even correct, term --Lie! 03:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(undent) To address 'vaguely RS,' CNN implicitly refers to it as a cult. They are a reliable source. NPOV argument doesn't sit well with me. Hitler used propaganda as an effective tool, and yet, 'propaganda' does indeed have a negative connotation. There is no way to define the Holocaust as strictly actions taken without the implication that it was not a good thing. Without implication we are left with simple timelines. However, consensus decides which actions are deplorable and unjust, and I feel that it is impossible to accurately describe the subject of this article as religious movement. Those who commit suicide in order to attain some enlightenment must surely qualify as a cult. If not, how does one attain cult status? the_undertow talk 08:01, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In that case something like "the group has been referred to as a cult by several news outlets..." in a criticism section is appropriate. There is a reason cult/sect are words to avoid. Sfacets 12:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And please note that words to avoid (key section quoted above this) isn't an absolute ban. It certainly isn't pejorative (against whom?) but an accurate technical description of a group that committed group suicide. AndroidCat 12:34, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cult is a word to avoid. I agree. But not here. Avoidance is a guideline. the_undertow talk 12:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the word cult should be avoided in this case either. --Chuck Sirloin 14:32, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not POV to call a spade a spade, regardless of whether or not a spade is a nice thing to have around the house. That said, this needs to be moved back to Heaven's Gate (cult) or Heaven's Gate (oppressed misunderstood underground minority religion) or Heaven's Gate (got no respect) or Heaven's Gate (really awesome bunch of people), because Heaven's Gate (film) is plenty notable. The film, a noted bomb, is seen as an unfortunate landmark, a turning point between the days of director-controlled films and producer-controlled films. Being that the film has absolutely nothing to do with the cult, having the main page be devoted to the cult is disingenuous. --Action Jackson IV 05:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]