Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: Family Matters--Just Venting

  1. #11
    Patron Meritorious supafreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    644

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carmel View Post
    "Genetic entity" - Looks like he's using the term loosely, referring to us "homo sapiens" with "meat bodies".
    Thanks, Carmel. Just saying "person" and keeping it simple mustn't have appealed to Hubbard.
    "You're an idiot." - Cyrus Brooks shares his opinion of me.

    [08:32] <@Pyro> I love that woman.

    Despite rumours to the contrary, I'm not dead.

  2. #12
    Silver Meritorious Patron Happy Days's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Over the rainbow - looking for that pot of gold
    Posts
    1,151

    Default

    Both myself and my then husband were recruited for the SO back in 1986... what you are told about family time, caring for your kid and taking responsibility as a parent is totally different to what occurs ... once you sign on that dotted line and commit to the cause, the arrangements slip into a big hole and all agreements are cancelled.

    On occasions the ANZO SO nursery staff would take the children out to ensure they were not there when DOCs came to visit due to overcrowding and bad conditions... no life for little ones.. f**k it makes me angry to think I was there condoning this. Obviously I was not in my right mind ...

    We can't turn back time and change what has occurred but we can change the future by speaking out against the Church and it's disregard for families, human rights, advocation of abortion and its disconnection policy being used to break up families. We can do that
    Cheers
    Happy Days

    "If the leaders of the Church of Scientology think that this will all go away, that it will be business as usual then they are deluded." Independent Senator Nick Xenophon

  3. #13
    Crusader lkwdblds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Orange Country, CA
    Posts
    6,354

    Default Changing the definition of the 2nd Dynamic.

    No one has mentioned how the Church will change their own "scriptures" when necessary. The second dynamic was always defined as the urge to survive through sex and the family and included the raising of children. The tech on the dynamics said that the dynamics were inter-related, if any dynamic was in a low condition, it would pull the others down so a person had to concentrate on keeping all their dynamics in a high condition so as to prevent the high toned ones from all being pulled down.

    I imagine that when it became against policy for a woman to have a baby while in the Sea Org and she was forced to get an abortion and other restrictions were put on families,sex, children and family time, Sea Org members probably presented the LRH policies which I stated above to argue against these restrictions. What was Management's reaction?

    They merely redefined the second dynamic to mean the urge to survive through creativity. I imagine many good people realized how insane that was and left but the majority of people probably remained in.

    Incidently, on the term G.E. for genetic entity. I know that term was used a lot in the early 1950's shortly after the thetan was defined and Dianetics changed into Scientology. The topic is covered pretty thoroughly on several of the old tapes in the early 1950's. I believe the Genetic Entity was a sort of sub being who was supposed to co habitate in the body with the thetan.

    The G.E. had its own genetic time track which extended back only to the beginning of life on Earth. This was different from the time track of the thetan which went much further back. It carried with it the genetic blueprint of how the body operated and it had cellular memories and things of that nature. It was really into the carnal pleasures of food and sex and Hubbard said something to the effect that if the thetan left the body, the G.E. could still run it but would live an existence no better than that of a field mouse.
    Lkwdblds

  4. #14
    Gold Meritorious Patron Axiom142's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Sussex, England
    Posts
    3,316

    Default

    I agree Boojum.

    But, when you think about it, this is a necessary part of running a cult. Scientology relies very heavily on isolating people from the realities of the outside world and moulding them into drones but giving them a new way of thinking. If you want to brainwash people, the last thing you want is outside influences such as family members telling your victims that they are acting irrationally and being sucked into a cult.

    Therefore, Hubbard and now Miscavige negate the importance of the family and stress the importance of ‘the cause’ over everything else. You only have to look at the huge number of Scientologists who have been coerced into breaking ties with their families to realise that this is the case.

    When I was in the Sea Org, in 1987, there were a couple called Jean and Kevin Tyson. They had a baby just as the new 2D rules on not having kids in the SO came in, but they were allowed to stay in CLO. Jean got into some sort of ethics trouble and was sent to ‘the decks’ (similar to, but less severe than the RPF) for a few weeks and had to stay away from the regular staff berthing. This meant that Kevin was left to look after a very young baby all on his own. Thankfully, they both left the SO some time after this and so had a chance to have a proper family life.

    Treatment of children in the SO was appalling. The childcare facilities for the staff at St Hill consisted of a hut at Stonelands, surrounded by a patch of grass (and mud) enclosed by a chicken wire fence. It looked more like a concentration camp than a ‘theta environment’ for children of ‘the most able group on the planet’. There were only about 2 nannies to look after about a dozen young children.

    On several occasions, I’ve heard staff refer to children as ‘thetans with little bodies’. Presumably this is something they say to themselves to assuage their guilt at not looking after them properly.

    Axiom142
    "Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth." - Siddhartha Gautama

    “He is tall, sort of dark, and sort of handsome. Well not ugly anyway.” - Terril Park on Axiom142

    Some of my videos: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthrea...s-Video-Thread

  5. #15
    Gold Meritorious Patron Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    *Paradise*
    Posts
    3,292

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Boojuum View Post
    [...]

    Having children is one of the clearest signs of growth and renewal. Taking responsibility for a family as a parent or spouse is a big step towards being fully alive.

    [...]

    Yet another very quotable quote.

  6. #16
    Patron Meritorious
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    567

    Default

    With new public in downstat and existing membership falling, you'd think they would promote the 2D (not creativity) to repopulate their ranks.

    Just sayin'....

  7. #17
    Gold Meritorious Patron Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    *Paradise*
    Posts
    3,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bts2free View Post
    [...]

    Here's what Hubbard had to say about families: (fair use)

    from 10 December 1952 Lecture
    Flows: Patterns of Interaction,

    “The GE is a family man; the GE is lost without a family. It is very strange but homo sap is a family unit. The GE is built on that basis. It’s fascinating, fascinating. If you wanted to study the GE, you’d really get yourself some data about what could happen in this universe. It’s not important for you to know it, but a lot of your urges toward family and so forth are not thetan urges at all; they’re the GE. The GE can’t survive without the family unit. He is as dead as a mackerel if he isn’t a family unit, whereas your thetan is just as dead as a mackerel if he gets too mixed up in family units.”


    Hubbard played to different audiences telling them what he thought they needed or wanted to hear. He was always running some idea up a flagpole to see who would stop and salute. This placed him in a position where he was constantly speaking against himself placing one assertion against an earlier assertion. The only idea he held firm was his own sense of self-importance. Much of the time he speaks as if he is talking to himself in the mirror. The actual audience is there to provide an income. That's it.

    Evaluating the above statement against the Chart of Human Evaluation in SOS puts this concept (quoted above) low on the tone scale.
    Last edited by Ted; 7th October 2009 at 01:13 PM. Reason: clarity

  8. #18
    Crusader lkwdblds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Orange Country, CA
    Posts
    6,354

    Default Very astute observation!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted View Post
    Hubbard played to different audiences telling them what he thought they needed or wanted to hear. He was always running some idea up a flagpole to see who would stop and salute. This placed him in a position where he was constantly speaking against himself placing one assertion against an earlier assertion. The only idea he held firm was his own sense of self-importance. Much of the time he speaks as if he is talking to himself in the mirror. The actual audience is there to provide an income. That's it.

    Evaluating the above statement against the Chart of Human Evaluation in SOS puts this concept (quoted above) low on the tone scale.
    Ted, you've hit the nail right on the head with this astute observation of why Hubbard constantly was placing one new assertion of his against previous assertions which he had made. Many people have noticed and commented on this fact but yours is the first explanation for this phenomena which makes sense, i.e. running a trial baloons (new ideas) up a flagpole to test which ones people will respond to the most. Brilliant deduction!

    Besides the audience providing an income, I think he needed the adulation which the audience gave him. To back this up, he let no one else share the limelight with him during his entire career in Scientology. Those who shared a piece of the limelight, usually inadvertently without seeking it, were unceremoniously gotten rid of, no matter how great their contributions were. Besides just being gotten rid of, their existence was expunged from Scientology history. Hubbard also did not want any famous Scientology villains to exist and gain fame from being his enemy. Once someone crossed him they were treated as if they no longer existed.
    Lkwdblds

  9. #19
    Gold Meritorious Patron Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    *Paradise*
    Posts
    3,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lkwdblds View Post
    [...]

    Besides the audience providing an income, I think he needed the adulation which the audience gave him. To back this up, he let no one else share the limelight with him during his entire career in Scientology. Those who shared a piece of the limelight, usually inadvertently without seeking it, were unceremoniously gotten rid of, no matter how great their contributions were. Besides just being gotten rid of, their existence was expunged from Scientology history. Hubbard also did not want any famous Scientology villains to exist and gain fame from being his enemy. Once someone crossed him they were treated as if they no longer existed.
    Lkwdblds

    Yes!

    He was a pathological narcissist. Adulation and only-one-ism were part of his obsessive income package.

  10. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pollywannacracker View Post
    With new public in downstat and existing membership falling, you'd think they would promote the 2D (not creativity) to repopulate their ranks.

    Just sayin'....
    Unless there were flickers of sanity in the Organization and along with a realization of the unsupportable nature of the scam, a desire to maximize *current* profit rather than 'growth'. Parents are 'off purpose' and, when operating as *good* Scientologists, a liability because Wog child care agencies don't really 'get' the supreme importance of Scientology as the greatest good for *all* dynamics.

    Zinj

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. venting thread (warning, ALL CAPS ALERT)
    By justaguy in forum General Scientology Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12th June 2009, 02:02 AM
  2. A letter to my family
    By Recovering Scientologist in forum Stories From Inside Scientology
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 15th May 2009, 02:35 AM
  3. Venting!!
    By HappyGirl in forum Evaluating and Criticising Scientology
    Replies: 97
    Last Post: 7th November 2008, 12:57 AM
  4. Need help concerning my family
    By CooLa in forum Leaving Scientology
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 21st June 2008, 05:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •