"How a Scientologist Loses Faith in His Church: A Case Study" by Tony Ortega

[Coyote13]

"One of the reasons Debbie Cook's infamous New Year's Eve e-mail had such a huge effect was that it provided a look from inside at what was tearing apart the Church of Scientology.

Cook's e-mail spelled out in high relief what ex-Scientologists had been telling us were the issues causing so many longtime, dedicated church members to flee the organization. It had nothing to do with Xenu, the jokes of late-night comedians, the constant bad press, or even the global protests. Cook's complaints were all about a cancer eating away at Scientology from its guts: a crisis in faith over the leadership of David Miscavige.

Now, just a few months later, we have another remarkable testimony describing in even greater detail the problems facing Miscavige's church."

Continued at:

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runnin...dave_fagen.php

[Sindy]

Imagine being a technical staff member, Flag trained supervisor and auditor, Key to Life and Co-Audit Sup and just one course (the Primary Rundown -- no longer delivered) short of being what is called a "Scientology Professor". That's a lot of training (or indoctrination if you wish).

My husband spent probably 6 years of his life or maybe more, at Flag and 25 year straight on staff. Yikes. He thoughtfully put that blog together and it was, I'm sure, cathartic to do so. How else does one reconcile that amount of investment of one's life, mind, and belief?

In that time he got very proficient at what he was trained in and did help others, even if only momentarily (before some other faction of the church came swooping in like vultures).

If there is anything that hurts me the most deeply it is the misuse and abuse of the kindest soul I have ever known. How dare they?

Oh well. They have lost a gem and they grow more decrepit everyday as those who used to call themselves his friends lose a bit of their humanity every single day that they don't pop out of their trance and ask themselves, "Wait, what am I doing? What do I REALLY believe?"

L Ron Hubbard and David Miscavige are not and never were good enough to even shine my husband's shoes. When they can go back to square one and work back to being as decent as he is, then they can join humanity again. Until then, they are not worth anything to me.

To me, nothing worthwhile comes from sifting through the crap to find a piece of gold as all you get anyway is something shiny still covered in shit.

[This is NOT OK !!!!]

Sindy,

Is Dave allowed to come into the ESMB sandbox and play?

[Gadfly]

If there is anything that hurts me the most deeply it is the misuse and abuse of the kindest soul I have ever known. How dare they?

While I loved your entire post, and each point made, the above sentence hits at a basic aspect of the scam of Scientology.

From a certain perspective Scientology survives off of the lofty intentions, actions, hopes and dreams of what are fundamentally VERY GOOD PEOPLE. It is a vampire sort of relationship where Scientolopy "feeds" off of the life and energy of others. It is basically parasitic in nature. And, in certain ways, sadly, it devours the many hosts (the often kind and caring Church members who have been suckered into believing that Scientology actually lived up to their own high ideals of the same).

When involved with Scientology I saw SO MANY instances where all of a sudden somebody who I had always liked and/or admired was one day "gone" - tossed out, declared, RPFed - or in Scientology terms - "wasted".

The Scientology organizational machinery, operating on exact LRH policies, takes everything that any person will give, often demanding even MORE, and then tosses them aside, like garbage, like an old used carcass. Scientology leaves in its wake an endless litany of abused and used souls.

There are many ways to look at this, but this stems from Hubbard's built-in attitude that Scientology itself, as a subject and organization, is always the TOP PRIORITY, far above all other concerns. If and when a person ceases to be a full-tilt, dedicated, 100% gung-ho supporter, at that point, he or she loses any and all value to Hubbard and the Church.

People need to be shown this clearly so that unsuspecting future GOOD PEOPLE do not fall into the same trap.

[Sindy]

While I loved your entire post, and each point made, the above sentence hits at a basic aspect of the scam of Scientology.

From a certain perspective Scientology survives off of the lofty intentions, actions, hopes and dreams of what are fundamentally VERY GOOD PEOPLE. It is a vampire sort of relationship where Scientolopy "feeds" off of the life and energy of others. It is basically parasitic in nature. And, in certain ways, sadly, it devours the many hosts (the often kind and caring Church members who have been suckered into believing that Scientology actually lived up to their own high ideals of the same).

When involved with Scientology I saw SO MANY instances where all of a sudden somebody who I had always liked and/or admired was one day "gone" - tossed out, declared, RPFed - or in Scientology terms - "wasted".

The Scientology organizational machinery, operating on exact LRH policies, takes everything that any person will give, often demanding even MORE, and then tosses them aside, like garbage, like an old used carcass. Scientology leaves in its wake an endless litany of abused and used souls.

There are many ways to look at this, but this stems from Hubbard's built-in attitude that Scientology itself, as a subject and organization, is always the TOP PRIORITY, far above all other concerns. If and when a person ceases to be a full-tilt, dedicated, 100% gung-ho supporter, at that point, he or she loses any and all value to Hubbard and the Church.

People need to be shown this clearly so that unsuspecting future GOOD PEOPLE do not fall into the same trap.

Agreed.

It's interesting that once you get out, it's clear to see what Hubbard's intentions were. I slowly, over time, began to justify his weird meanderings and caustic commentary as some odd quirky charm. WTF?

Looked at objectively, the harmful aspects of Hubbard's thoughts and philosophy are clear to see upon first glance. I believe part of the trap is that one reasons that he and the subject can't be as bad as it first appears because, then, who would stay? Look at all these happy people.

[Gadfly]

From the Village Voice on David Fagen:

"Then, Dave made his own fateful decision: to trust his own intelligence and judgment. He would look at the material online to evaluate it for himself."

In David''s own words, "Do I not have the ability to judge data for myself? Why would I need an authority to tell me whether something is true or something is not true?"

This was a dilemma of Scientology that struck at me pretty early on. I read, understood and agreed with various points of the Code of Honor, and other ideas written down by Hubbard (not that Hubbard actually believed what he wrote).

From the Code of Honor:

6. Never compromise with your own reality.

9. Your self-determinism and your honor are more important than your immediate life.

10. Your integrity to yourself is more important than your body.

14. Be your own adviser, keep your own counsel and select your own decisions.

From Hubbard's HCOPL Personal Integrity, I greatly agreed with the notion that a person should always and only accept as true what he or she has OBSERVED for him or herself. And, continuing, when you have lost that, you have lost everything. You and ONLY YOU, should be the final arbiter of what is true and real for you. That's what I got from reading that essay.

"WHAT IS TRUE FOR YOU is what you have observed yourself and when you lose that you have lost everything. What is personal integrity?
Personal integrity is knowing what you know–
What you know is what you know–
And to have the courage to know and say what you have observed.
And that is integrity.
And there is no other integrity."

At the end of the essay Hubbard says this:

"Nothing in Dianetics and Scientology is true for you
Unless you have observed it
And it is true according to your observation.
That is all."

Now, to me, and I am sure to many others, this sounds like a great way to deal with things and operate in life. But, there is a BIG PROBLEM.

Nobody can actually PRACTICE that in Scientology, as regards the subjects of Hubbard or Scientology!

The contradictions and hypocrisy of Scientology were unbearable for me. There WAS something very "rotten in Denmark".

And, if you do try to say what you truly think, in your heart of hearts, based on what you have honestly observed, about Hubbard or Scientology, and it is anything other than 100% supportive, YOU get ATTACKED, and quickly separated from the rest of the group (Non-Enturbulation Orders, SP Declares, Disconnection). That is not some mistake of Scientology, but instead, Hubbard set it up exactly THAT WAY. He wrote all the policies that are ruthlessly followed that cause the first (wonderful) references/quotes above to be wholly ignored. Why Hubbard did that, and I for one have the opinion that he did so quite intentionally, is open to speculation.

Further, I really liked THESE ideas that Hubbard wrote down:

Be able to communicate with anyone on any subject.

The ONLY crime in this universe is being there and communicating.

Communication is the universal solvent.

One needs to be able to access ALL information so that one can operate with personal integrity. If you are unable or unwilling to observe, how can you EVER be able to truly get to know what you know for "truth". "Vital Information" is missing. (hey I actually GOT the "vital information R/D" so I know what I am talking about here ).

And, the way Scientology is designed and how it functions, you are denied and prevented from communicating with a great many things. Again, the above ideas that sound SO GOOD, cannot be practiced within a "standard" Scientology environment that follows and enforces ALL of Hubbard's administrative orders and policies.

That is just a part of it, but that should be enough to make the point. That really IRKED me about Scientology. At first I thought it was just some aberration of current management, but then, as I really took a look at WHAT Hubbard actually ordered in the OEC Volumes and Management Series, it was clear that there was NO OTHER POSSIBLE way for that group to behave (not as long as they duplicated, understood and carefully applied Hubbard's instructions on how to run the Church of Scientology).

Hubbard himself set the booby-traps. Obviously, if he never intended for the "good sounding" policies to be applied (for example, like the essay, "What is Greatness"), then he meant these only as fluff - as PR - as something to put in a frame and point to when somebody came to visit an org or mission. But they NEVER had anything REALLY to do with how he wanted people to think and behave.

From Hubbard's accurate, but largely PR-serving essay:

What is Greatness

The hardest task one can have is to continue to love his fellows despite all reasons he should not.
And the true sign of sanity and greatness is to so continue.
For the one who can achieve this, there is abundant hope.
For those who cannot, there is only sorrow, hatred and despair. And these are not the things of which greatness or sanity or happiness are made.
A primary trap is to succumb to invitations to hate.

And, once again, it impossible to practice that if you are an "ethical policy-following robot of the Church of Scientology". Hubbard was right, for the people who CAN'T achieve this, there is only sorrow, hatred and despair, and these are not the things of which greatness or sanity or happiness are made. And, THAT is exactly what involvement with Scientology eventually creates.

(Note to TAJ: I don't really "understand" what I wrote above - it just appears that way . . . )