I have to say that I've thought a lot since leaving the feet about this subject, & have concluded that I don't give a shit about what people believe as long as they pay for it with their own money. The thing with DLM/EV is that they get tax breaks,in effect other peoples money, to support a man whose message isn't religious, or is it? A very smart strategy which couldn't possibly be addressed by such a broadbrush State Dept. report, dealing as it does with the reprehensible persecution of minorities within all too many nations.

The German analysis on Scientology is rather peculiar given this on the same subject in the UK........

According to a 1999 decision of the Charity Commission, a quasi-judicial, independent body established by law as the regulator and registrar for charities, the Church of Scientology does not come within the charity law definition of a religion. The Church of Scientology has not exercised its right of appeal to the court against the commission's decision. Scientology ministers are not considered ministers of religion for the purpose of immigration relations. Scientologist chapels do not qualify as places of worship under the law. The Prison Service does not recognize Scientology as a religion for the purpose of facilitating prison visits by ministers, although prisoners who are adherents of Scientology are free to register their adherence and to manifest their beliefs consistent with good order and discipline in prisons. In order to meet the needs of individual prisoners, the Prison Service allows any prisoner registered as a Scientologist to have access to a representative of the Church of Scientology if he wishes to receive its ministry.

......but then, the co-ordination of individual input into bureacracies is very difficult, if the end result is to be a seamless whole.

Their take on the situation in England is correct:

Religious groups are not required to register with the Government. No church or religious organization--established or otherwise--receives direct funding from the State. Religious bodies are expected to finance their own activities through endowment, investments, and fund-raising...........

..........Most religious institutions are classified as charities and, as such, enjoy a wide range of tax benefits. (The advancement of religion is considered to be a charitable purpose.) In England and Wales, the Charity Commission reviews the application of each body applying for registration as a charity. Commissioners base their decisions on a substantial body of case law.

Then a statement of fact:

The Reverend Sun Myung Moon, leader of the Unification Church, has been excluded from the country since 2003 following a decision by the Home Secretary. Reverend Moon subsequently applied for entry clearance to enable him to visit. This was refused as a consequence of the exclusion, and Reverend Moon appealed against this refusal on human rights grounds. An Immigration Adjudicator dismissed this appeal in April.

The thing with Rawat in the UK is that his scam is registered as an Educational Charity, which muddies the waters a great deal. How you in the US deal with the fact that he's a 'Church' is your affair. This thing needs to be tackled on a case by case basis, & on a lower level than that of International Human Rights.

I thought the report in general was very fair minded, & I applaud the US for having taken the trouble to research & issue it.