Ahh...the truth is none of you would be slinging mud at Tom Cruise with the enthusiastic vim and vigor you are if he didn't go on record with opinions YOU disagree with.
His RELIGION and his ACTING ABILITY have NOTHING to do with his point of view. You don't like his point of view?
Fine.
Refute it on FACTS.
NOT by calling into question his looks, his sanity, his level of acting acumen or anything else. Everybody wants to kill the messenger if they don't like the message. Piss-poor way of rebutting an argument! Maybe because you don't know how.....?
Maybe Scientology IS a cult. Who cares? Maybe Tom IS a bad actor. Who cares? Maybe he WAS abused as a child. He has my sympathy for THAT, since that wasn't his fault, or his sisters', or his mother's.....
The thing is, even if you don't agree with ALL his opinions, some of them make sense, and SOME of them are right on the money. Make an EDUCATED argument against his points. Use FACTS. Do you remember what those are??
Bottom line, Dr. Pinsky shouldn't have made his diagnosis of Tom from afar, even if some of what he said could be true, because it's UNETHICAL. Any psychologist who's been through graduate school knows that. No P-doc worth his PhD makes an armchair diagnosis from across the country, and then cavalierly bruits it in public. It's at the very least in poor taste. He was correct to apologize to Tom. It would be prudent to watch your tongue in public in the future Dr. Pinsky, and leave your psychological expertise to those under your ACTUAL clinical care.



