See, the distinction between a religion and a cult is brutally clear...

Gettingit.com: In Doubt We Trust:

"There are two clear-cut and empirical lines between a 'cult' and a 'religion': [a] membership (voters) and [b] bank account, [b] being a function of [a]. If a group has enough members to influence elections, it will also have a large bank account, and these two factors will guarantee that the politicians, the cops and the corporate media will treat it with respect, as a 'religion.' With few members and little money, the same group could be called a 'cult' and treated accordingly, even to the extent of toasting, roasting and charbroiling, as in Waco.

This line remains obvious and visible to all observers. The only problems arise when people try to draw a less 'materialistic,' more metaphysical distinction between one gang of True Believers and another. Materialistic questions can be answered, e.g., 'Does that matchbox have any matches left in it?' Metaphysical questions about 'mind control' or any other immeasurable 'entity' or 'essence' cannot be answered, and the best that can be said is that arguing about them has provided a certain amount of intellectual entertainment, or combat, for a few thousand years. At least for those who enjoy that kind of pastime. Sort of like chess, you know."