CommunicatorIC
@IndieScieNews on Twitter
KCRW: Growing up in the Church of Scientology; Scientology defends disconnection.
The audio and article are at the following link:
KCRW: Growing up in the Church of Scientology
http://blogs.kcrw.com/whichwayla/2015/05/growing-up-in-the-church-of-scientology
Interestingly, in a printed response the Church of Scientology, speaking through Karen Pouw, defends disconnection:
* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *
Claim: Families of members who leave the Church are no longer allowed to be in contact with them. Members of wealthier families may be exempt the requirement to “disconnect.”
This misstates our practice. The Church’s voluntary practice of disconnection in circumstances where individual’s spiritual progress is imperiled by continued connection to people hostile to their survival is explained on our website at
Courts have addressed this voluntary practice and have validated the Constitutional rights of the Church and its members to freedom of association, which must necessarily include the right not to associate with someone:
* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *
The audio and article are at the following link:
KCRW: Growing up in the Church of Scientology
http://blogs.kcrw.com/whichwayla/2015/05/growing-up-in-the-church-of-scientology
Interestingly, in a printed response the Church of Scientology, speaking through Karen Pouw, defends disconnection:
* * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *
Claim: Families of members who leave the Church are no longer allowed to be in contact with them. Members of wealthier families may be exempt the requirement to “disconnect.”
This misstates our practice. The Church’s voluntary practice of disconnection in circumstances where individual’s spiritual progress is imperiled by continued connection to people hostile to their survival is explained on our website at
Code:
www.scientology.org/faq/scientology-attitudes-and-practices/what-is-disconnection.html.
Courts have addressed this voluntary practice and have validated the Constitutional rights of the Church and its members to freedom of association, which must necessarily include the right not to associate with someone:
“A church is entitled to stop associating with someone who abandons it. Paul v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc’y of N.Y., Inc., 819 F.2d 875, 883 (9th Cir.1987) (holding that the free exercise clause protects the practice of shunning, explaining that when “[t]he members of [a] [c]hurch” “no longer want to associate with” someone who has “abandon[ed]” them, those members “are free” under the First Amendment “to make that choice”). A church may also warn that it will stop associating with members who do not act in accordance with church doctrine. The former is a legitimate consequence, the latter a legitimate warning.”
– Headley v. Church of Scientology International (9th Cir. 2012) 687 F.3d 1173, 1180.
– Headley v. Church of Scientology International (9th Cir. 2012) 687 F.3d 1173, 1180.
* * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *