Family Matters--Just Venting

Discussion in 'General Scientology Discussion' started by Boojuum, Oct 7, 2009.

View Users: View Users
  1. Boojuum

    Boojuum Silver Meritorious Patron

    One of my biggest issues with the cofs is its lack of sensitivity to the family--you know, mom and dad, sis and little brother Joey? 2D in churchspeak means sex or sex partner. A family is a distraction. Instead of celebrating one of the most beautiful organizations possible, the family, the church makes numerous attempts to extract you from any family. It willfully pulls you off of any familial responsibility.

    Recalling the SO "day care" and the violated "family time" is only a symptom of a deeper issue, which is the push to not have a family. It's tragic to think of the lost family time, the lost growth from having to be responsible as a mom or dad or even as a child--a family member. The lost opportunities as a parent to nuture and teach one's children is a travesty. :melodramatic:

    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. :clap:

    It's enlightening to think that someone was incredibly selfish and/or deluded when telling me, commanding me, ordering me, cajoling me, intimidating me, forcing me or otherwise coercing me to ignor the needs of my family. I know many did and I was not innocent. What a crazy place. Inexcusably wrong.:omg: :angry: :grouch:
     
  2. everfree

    everfree Patron Meritorious

    You said it.
     
  3. A heartbreaking truth

    A big hug to you Boojum, I agree with everything you've said.:goodposting:

    If people really understood this about COS policy, they would stay away in droves.
     
  4. bts2free

    bts2free Patron with Honors

    You are so right! It's not only the CoS that has this viewpoint about the family but from the Founder himself. In Scientology you frequently hear people being berrated for being "2D oriented." :confused2:

    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.”

    :omg:
     
  5. supafreak

    supafreak Patron Meritorious

    What does GE stand for?
     
  6. Carmel

    Carmel Crusader

    "Genetic entity" - Looks like he's using the term loosely, referring to us "homo sapiens" with "meat bodies".
     
  7. justaguy

    justaguy Patron Meritorious

    THat proves it. LRH was a sick bastard.

    :angry:
     
  8. GreyWolf

    GreyWolf Gold Meritorious Patron

    Break up the family there are less kids = Less eventual certain civilization. It is not an accident.
     
  9. Opter

    Opter Silver Meritorious Patron



    Ditto:thumbsup:

    BTW, DM changed the second dynamic definition to CREATIVITY.:yes:

    The disregard of the cult towards families is sickening.

    Few examples - out of many - that I personally witnessed:
    1. A mother of a baby and a toddler was recruited for the SO and left the children with their father.
    2. Two mothers,on staff, with few months old babies, were sent to do the GAT training and stayed in LA - away from home - for about six months.
    3. A woman who left her three teenagers and husband to join the SO.

    Yes, some people may say: well, they didn't have to go, But what sane group would even consider separating children from their mothers? ( not to mention the fathers who were very unhappy about the whole thing).




    And as a staff member, at a class 5 org and with a young daughter I used to feel so guilty for not spending enough time with my daughter because of the pressure of the long hours on post. the all hands, "enhancement"= studies in the academy after post time ( after you finish staff status 1 ) and the like. When I dared to "complain" about the situation, I was told that as an OT I should have been able to handle it and NO CASE ON POST.:yes: :angry:

    Opter
     
  10. Type4_PTS

    Type4_PTS Diamond Invictus SP

    Hey Boojuum,
    I'm 100% in agreement with you on this point. The Co$ has been suppressive towards family in general and should face criminal charges for forced abortions, forced divorces, ect. They're guilty of human rights violations, human trafficking, among many other violations.
     
  11. supafreak

    supafreak Patron Meritorious

    Thanks, Carmel. Just saying "person" and keeping it simple mustn't have appealed to Hubbard. :eyeroll:
     
  12. Happy Days

    Happy Days Silver Meritorious Patron

    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 ...:no:

    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 :yes: :yes:
     
  13. lkwdblds

    lkwdblds Crusader

    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
     
  14. Axiom142

    Axiom142 Gold Meritorious Patron

    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
     
  15. Ted

    Ted Gold Meritorious Patron


    Yet another very quotable quote.
     
  16. pollywannacracker

    pollywannacracker Patron Meritorious

    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'....
     
  17. Ted

    Ted Gold Meritorious Patron


    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: Oct 7, 2009
  18. lkwdblds

    lkwdblds Crusader

    Very astute observation!

    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
     
  19. Ted

    Ted Gold Meritorious Patron


    Yes!

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

    Zinjifar Banned

    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
     

Share This Page