PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religion

[Jachs]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

I don't recall them all off hand, from what I remember the options involved making a Statement at Exams, DofP Interviews, Qual Interviews, Cram Off Interviews etc.

The most obvious handling to me, if you're not getting any satisfaction, is the old "head for the Exit Door" strategy followed by Refund/Repayment.

I understand that scientology has a lot of trouble admitting to its failures, it never does and it's always the PC or Student's fault in their mind. My real point in all this is that anyone who keeps lying to himself and others about how they're doing with it is heading for a world of hurt.

The most obvious solution, is not the most selected in scn world, in the toaster world its the common selection.

Lying to self?

Scientology cant lie as its not a person, its a system with "ideas"

How many scns sit around and discuss inadequacy ?

Hubbards ideas present a vision of a beautiful flower bed , most scns arent aware that the flowers are attached to gorse .

 

[Good twin]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

So what is your view Panda? You sound a bit like someone who is still in. I assume you feel everyone has the right to practice their religion. That is a tolerant and compassionate view. You also seem to think that the atrocities that have occurred within Scientology and involving Scientologists are not "built in" to the system and could be avoided while keeping the philosophy and practice available.

I agree that a variety of views is what makes this place interesting, but only because people change their views by examining what others say and have experienced. It's not so fun when a bunch of us have made up our minds and agree to disagree and no one really learns or gets any insight from the conversation.

I like the "Meet other exes. Share your experiences. Reunite with old friends" part of ESMB the most. Some never share their experience, but continue to push a viewpoint. Sometimes it's interesting. It can be entertaining. It also is occasionally tedious.

I still love Scientologists. I will never forget how I felt and thought while I was in. Since leaving I have tried to learn things that I rejected simply because Ron said to. I also continue to find strange ideas or behavior patterns that I learned in the cult.

I can't say anything with the kind of certainty I had when I was in, but I really don't miss that arrogance.

 

[MrNobody]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

You honestly don't think that all scios believe that shit, do you?

No, but there are always some Scilons who believe in some of that shit. One example I've already given: Rex Fowler did believe in R2-45, no?

Oh, and tbh. I really don't want to know what Babbles believes, but she definitely is a product of $cientology.

I used "interesting" as a word because that's how I describe it. I thought of my studies in scientology as spiritual progress made, addressing things in auditing and training etc which gave me a sense of change in a positive way.

What's spiritual in chasing dead space aliens? What's spiritual in TRs? I don't see any true spirituality in $cn, just another way to deceive people in the name of spirituality. So, in a way, "sprituality" is an abused vehicle to serve the cult's sinister purposes, just like "religion" is.

If I had the choice, I wouldn't do it again but I don't regret having done it.

Yes, I understand. It has to do with self-perception and self-acceptance.

I just wondered if you'd considered the concept. Most scios seem to think that each Level is better than the preceding one. Rational, provable? Who cares? Scientology is all about State of Mind, it's either good or it's not. I don't judge others on their States Of Mind, I know Christians who espouse the same sort of "wins" as some scios do.

I know some of those sort of Christians you speak of, and they make me cringe just like some $cilons do. They also don't have anything to show for their claims.

Which "mental switch"would that be?

The one that makes one accept lies for truth.

Do you have some rational, factual provable data to back this idea up?

No. It's just a theory I made up from what I observed. What do you think makes people think Hubbard was a good guy and his drivel had some value?

I don't grant that "all scientologists lie."

Well, there might be an exception or two, I give you that.

I already stated to another poster that lying is anathema to scientologists. There are VERY harsh penalties for False Reports. Scientologist that I knew were more concerned about EXACT time, place, form and event than anyone I knew/know outside of scientology. There are reams of Hubbard on this subject, the fact that he didn't follow his own advice on lying is unknown by the average scientologist.

So then why does TR-L exist? Why do any TRs exist? What about "Dear Alice"?

No you didn't but you implied it by talking about progress thru the scientology levels/courses and sugesting that this was where it ends up.

Well, every little "win", no matter whether real or imagined, is a brick firmly placed on the "Yes" road and helps to fuck one up a little more.

I don't disagree that scientology has fucked up a lot of people. It's similar to some other things in that way.

How does that relate to the sentence "$cientology, correctly applied, always works"? It doesn't only fuck people up, it tells them it's their own fault, because they didn't apply it correctly.

Newsflash: There's nothing that could be correctly applied. $cientology is fucked up and it fucks people up. The fact that a few people survived it relatively unharmed, doesn't prove me wrong. Perhaps they were just extremely lucky.

That's, as you say, your opinion. Mine is somewhat different.

OK, let's agree to disagree. You may believe the "Ron the War Hero" story, I believe in the official military records.

I'm not sure what this means. Are you saying that you think all "perceived gains" made in scientology are wishful thinking?

Perhaps not all of them, because, as I've mentioned, Hubbard did sprinkle some working stuff over his drivel, so you will of course find something that works in there. Chances are, that it's some of the stolen stuff, that works.

 

[Gadfly]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

I can't say anything with the kind of certainty I had when I was in, but I really don't miss that arrogance.

Me too!

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

It would have been better if I hadn't posted them. I misunderstood the point of your post, so I apologise for that, and for posting the images when it wasn't really necessary. It's a subject I have strong feelings about for personal reasons. I'm going to have a few days off from ESMB to chill out.

I like you, Smilla. Always have. My use of the term "thought police" was inflammatory and undoubtedly contributed to the misunderstandings.

It didn't piss me off, but I figured that there was a misunderstanding. I definitely think that those countries have proven they can enforce what can be said and not said which can affect the beliefs that go with it. I think it's very interesting. As an American, I have a different viewpoint on saying or not saying that stuff, but then again, I'm not the one who had to live in the middle of war torn Europe or post war Europe. I'm sure that would give me an entirely differnet perspective.

I wish my Aunt (recently deceased) were still here. She lived it. Crossed from Estonia into E Germany at the age of 12 with her family during WWII and then from E Germany to W Germany 8 years later. She said it was very tough.

I wonder what she thought of the laws governing things like holocaust denying.

I also want to say that anyone who would possibly deny that the Holocaust took place or claim that it happened but not those numbers of people or whatnot- has got to be either incredibly fucking stupid, insane or has a shitty agenda. I could never support something like that.

 

[Gadfly]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

I also want to say that anyone who would possibly deny that the Holocaust took place or claim that it happened but not those numbers of people or whatnot- has got to be either incredibly fucking stupid, insane or has a shitty agenda. I could never support something like that.

Well, there is no shortage of people who would like others to accept figures, ideas and concepts that are NOT aligned with "actual verifiable physical universe facts".

Far above agendas and belief, as I see it, is the desire to perceive "what is, just as it is, with no coloration, bias or distortion". That may not be entirely possible since we each have a "unique viepwoint", but one can strive to get closer to that place.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

I don't know that Rex Fowler believed in R45. He's a murderer who snapped. That's my take on it.

 

[MrNobody]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

I don't know that Rex Fowler believed in R45. He's a murderer who snapped. That's my take on it.

Sure... You would probably say that about Mario Majorsky too, or about that kid who jumped out of the window, or about anyone who "snapped" after having been in touch with that cult.

That doesn't take away anything from the fact, that quite a few people "snapped" after they had their "experience" with the "experts on the mind".

You can "sweet talk" that as much as you like, but I doubt that you can convince me that $cientology does improve any human being one bit.

Just look at the true success rates of NarCONon.

Everything bad is to be blamed on the individual(s), everything positive is because of $cientology, eh? Can you please stop this cult propaganda?

 

[Smilla]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

I like you, Smilla. Always have. My use of the term "thought police" was inflammatory and undoubtedly contributed to the misunderstandings.

It didn't piss me off, but I figured that there was a misunderstanding. I definitely think that those countries have proven they can enforce what can be said and not said which can affect the beliefs that go with it. I think it's very interesting. As an American, I have a different viewpoint on saying or not saying that stuff, but then again, I'm not the one who had to live in the middle of war torn Europe or post war Europe. I'm sure that would give me an entirely differnet perspective.

I wish my Aunt (recently deceased) were still here. She lived it. Crossed from Estonia into E Germany at the age of 12 with her family during WWII and then from E Germany to W Germany 8 years later. She said it was very tough.

I wonder what she thought of the laws governing things like holocaust denying.

I also want to say that anyone who would possibly deny that the Holocaust took place or claim that it happened but not those numbers of people or whatnot- has got to be either incredibly fucking stupid, insane or has a shitty agenda. I could never support something like that.

Thanks very much.

I think it does all look very different if you are near to the places where these things happened. It feels more immediate, and you can go and touch the evidence - see the bullet holes in the walls, etc.

I'm going to get off this topic because it always ends in tears. but sometimes music can say what words can't. Thanks again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miLV0o4AhE4

Respect to all the precious ones taken - Jewish, Romany, Homosexuals, Disabled, and all the others.

 

[Voltaire's Child]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

Thread derail alert--(a benign one)

Then to cheer us up, I will just say that I made a homemade apple pie today from scratch for my friends (going to a party) and it smells like heaven.

Life also has pie (and music).

 

[Smilla]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

Thread derail alert--(a benign one)

Then to cheer us up, I will just say that I made a homemade apple pie today from scratch for my friends (going to a party) and it smells like heaven.

Life also has pie (and music).

Yummy apple pie. I made an asparagus risotto and ate too much of it!

 

[Veda]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

-snip-

I already stated to another poster that lying is anathema to scientologists.

-snip-

Is this a joke thread?

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

Sure... You would probably say that about Mario Majorsky too, or about that kid who jumped out of the window, or about anyone who "snapped" after having been in touch with that cult. ...

And what of the many non-scientologists who have 'snapped'? In your mind do their tragedies necessarily represent the effects of scientology also? Or, are those tragedies the necessary by product of their own religious or social associations?

The notion that a person who is a scientologist and who has also experienced a nervous breakdown of some kind must necessarily have experienced such an outcome as a result of the influence of scientology is a logical fallacy.

Correlation does NOT reflect causality.​

Numerous other factors are normally involved. Questions of physical health, genetic factors, individual lifestyle & responsibility, personal choice, etc. are apt to be involved. A church or even a known manipulative & exploitive cult is not prima facie directly responsible for the actions of its adherents.

Attempts to assign blame simply, especially in the instance of absent information, is evidence of biased thinking, not reason.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Panda Termint]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

So what is your view Panda? You sound a bit like someone who is still in. I assume you feel everyone has the right to practice their religion. That is a tolerant and compassionate view. You also seem to think that the atrocities that have occurred within Scientology and involving Scientologists are not "built in" to the system and could be avoided while keeping the philosophy and practice available.

I agree that a variety of views is what makes this place interesting, but only because people change their views by examining what others say and have experienced. It's not so fun when a bunch of us have made up our minds and agree to disagree and no one really learns or gets any insight from the conversation.

I like the "Meet other exes. Share your experiences. Reunite with old friends" part of ESMB the most. Some never share their experience, but continue to push a viewpoint. Sometimes it's interesting. It can be entertaining. It also is occasionally tedious.

I still love Scientologists. I will never forget how I felt and thought while I was in. Since leaving I have tried to learn things that I rejected simply because Ron said to. I also continue to find strange ideas or behavior patterns that I learned in the cult.

I can't say anything with the kind of certainty I had when I was in, but I really don't miss that arrogance.

GT, My view on the OP question has been stated but just in case you missed it;

I believe that where a person truly believes that scientology is a religion and where it is their religion of choice I would not seek to deny them the right to practice it as a religion as long as they are doing no harm. My personal point of view is that the atrocities you mention are, in fact, built into the "church" structure but are not necessarily things that individual scientologists would choose to engage in.

I'm not still a scientologist but understand how some of the things I post here might create that impression. Whenever I take the Devil's Advocate view and post from that stance it is only to encourage others to consider some things they might not have looked at. Some here choose to use insult and personal remarks as counter-arguments to the points I make but that doesn't really discourage me too often in my chosen role here. I'm for truth and tell it as I see it. It's what's true for me, lol. If that makes me sound just like a scientologist to you, so be it.

The bulk of the discussion on this particular thread avoids the religious tolerance aspect of my initial question. I'm not defending the many reprehensible aspects of scientology, despite what some might think. I'm not even discussing the rightness or wrongness of scientology. I simply asked a question about religious tolerance. I asked it out of curiosity after reading some of the responses on the Marty In Hamburg thread (that's where the question was originally posed). It struck me as odd that someone who usually decries any tinge of anti-Antisemitism here on ESMB could not see the irony of a constant flow of anti-Scientologism. If you look to the original thread you might see the context.

There are many here who love to argue. I don't mind that but it's not my purpose here and I enjoy discussion much more than tit-for-tat. For everything I've taken up and argued an opposing viewpoint there are 10 things I've simply let slide because I know how the argument goes, it's the same argument restated by the same people.

Some here appear to be unable to distinguish between the whole of scientology's doctrine/history and the people who actually practice it as their religion of choice. I find scientologists to be good people in the main and entitled to believe and practice as they see fit. It's not my religion but I respect their rights. Don't you?

My story in scientology is well known by the people who know me. I have told parts of it here but it is not really the sort of story that gets much interest and I don't like to post anything which might be construed as pro-scientology out of respect for the many people who have suffered so much at its hands.

tl;dr version: I did well at it and enjoyed most of my time in scientology. (That sort of comment usually begets remarks about "round ball-bearings" and similar slights, let's see what happens this time). If I had my druthers I wouldn't do it again but I don't regret having done it.

I'm sorry if you think I'm being arrogant, that's not something I'd choose to be.

 

[Panda Termint]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

No <snip...>

Your personal insults and misconceptions about me are duly noted. Continually restating the same poorly considered arguments, things which have been said so many times before, in such a manner does little to further your cause with me.

Let me try some of that arrogance stuff GT was talking about;

I don't have the patience to answer further. Let's agree to disagree.

 

[Markus]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

I will expand more on the point that Scientologists are taught how to lie.

"Tell an acceptable truth". That is broadly understood by many Scientologists. What that ends up meaning when applied in real life is that the conniving Scientologist, using ARC, will intentionally LEAVE out salient features, distort by exaggerating certain points, and generally misrepresent something. The truth is "exact time, place, form and event" of any event that occurred in this universe. Even Hubbard agrees with that.

I remember when my Sea Org wife was dying of cancer, and after drilling by staff on PTS data, she LIED to her parents about the severity of the condition and whether she needed their financial help (she did). I have seen MANY others lie in PTS handlings and in getting money from others for reg cycles. I saw FSO staff encourage Flag FSMs to LIE to Swedish banks to get unwarranted loans. MANY Scandanavian Flag public intenitonally lied to banks to get unqualifed "co-signers" accepted by various banks. I think somebody has to be blind, stupid or in extreme denial NOT to see the extensive lying that goes on continually in Scientology. Lying has always been fine, as long as it satisfies the "greatest good for the greatest number of Scientology's dynamics".

I pulled my head out of the sand a long time ago. I think some others need to do the same.

Picking out some aspect of some reality, and ignoring the rest, is one way I often saw the above maxim used. It involves intentional deceit. Misrepresentation is a special form of "lying".

"Only pass along good news". This routinely gets turned into, as far as Scientology is concerned, "exaggerate the positive, even make it up if necessary, and refuse to EVER discuss anything negative". I saw MANY Scientologists behave in this manner. I consider it lying. Maybe you don't. The freedom that many Scientologists took with "truth" was amazing to me. This "only pass along good news" gets grossly misused right from the top on down. Upper management sets the tone of the whole thing by HIDING all negative facts, and greatly exaggerating or making up positive facts about Hubbard and Scientology. I remember when the crazy issues were released about Ron the great philosopher and Ron the great musician, and when I saw these I gagged. It was so amazingly pretentious and fabricated. Scientology involves a non-stop machinery of lies.

When I was involved, within 6 months, it became abundantly OBVIOUS to me that Church management would consistently LIE, exaggerate and misrepresent situations and realities. Unless of course the Scientology participants were dumb, blind or unwilling to confront what was sitting squarely in front of their faces. Granted MANY seem to suffer from THAT last one.

To go through a LONG life in Scientology necessarily requires intense denial of observations. I agree with your last sentence completely in this regard.

Also, most would not consider that they were lying, but ANYTIME I saw ANY trrianed Scientologist talking to non-Scientologists THE LIE MACHINE went into gear. I agree, that in some regards it is a learned habit, that occurs below awareness.

And, I never meant to imply that TR-L is taught to general public or even staff. TR-L is an OSA tool, and its existence and use is hidden from most staff too. But since ALL LRH "tech" and "policy" is redefined by the Church to be "ecclesiastical dogma", well, "TR-L" IS Scientology Dogma. It is COMMONLY used by OSA, and by high level Scientology PR people. Ever heard of "trickle-down economics"? In Scientology we have "trickle down lunacy".

Thank you - just thank you


Love
Markus

 

[Panda Termint]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

Is this a joke thread?

I believe so.

 

[Smilla]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

GT, My view on the OP question has been stated but just in case you missed it;

I believe that where a person truly believes that scientology is a religion and where it is their religion of choice I would not seek to deny them the right to practice it as a religion as long as they are doing no harm. My personal point of view is that the atrocities you mention are, in fact, built into the "church" structure but are not necessarily things that individual scientologists would choose to engage in.

I'm not still a scientologist but understand how some of the things I post here might create that impression. Whenever I take the Devil's Advocate view and post from that stance it is only to encourage others to consider some things they might not have looked at. Some here choose to use insult and personal remarks as counter-arguments to the points I make but that doesn't really discourage me too often in my chosen role here. I'm for truth and tell it as I see it. It's what's true for me, lol. If that makes me sound just like a scientologist to you, so be it.

The bulk of the discussion on this particular thread avoids the religious tolerance aspect of my initial question. I'm not defending the many reprehensible aspects of scientology, despite what some might think. I'm not even discussing the rightness or wrongness of scientology. I simply asked a question about religious tolerance. I asked it out of curiosity after reading some of the responses on the Marty In Hamburg thread (that's where the question was originally posed). *It struck me as odd that someone who usually decries any tinge of anti-Antisemitism here on ESMB could not see the irony of a constant flow of anti-Scientologism* If you look to the original thread you might see the context.

I suspect that you might mean me here, and you might have a (fairly weak) point, but most of the people who post here have suffered at the hands of Scientology, so there is an unavoidable bias in what people post about it.

There are many here who love to argue. I don't mind that but it's not my purpose here and I enjoy discussion much more than tit-for-tat. For everything I've taken up and argued an opposing viewpoint there are 10 things I've simply let slide because I know how the argument goes, it's the same argument restated by the same people.

Some here appear to be unable to distinguish between the whole of scientology's doctrine/history and the people who actually practice it as their religion of choice. I find scientologists to be good people in the main and entitled to believe and practice as they see fit. It's not my religion but I respect their rights. Don't you?

I don't mind what religion people believe in, but the minute they break the law, I want them jumped on.

My story in scientology is well known by the people who know me. I have told parts of it here but it is not really the sort of story that gets much interest and I don't like to post anything which might be construed as pro-scientology out of respect for the many people who have suffered so much at its hands.

tl;dr version: I did well at it and enjoyed most of my time in scientology. (That sort of comment usually begets remarks about "round ball-bearings" and similar slights, let's see what happens this time). If I had my druthers I wouldn't do it again but I don't regret having done it.

I'm sorry if you think I'm being arrogant, that's not something I'd choose to be.

I don't think you're arrogant at all, but I think you have your own bias just like everyone else here. Nothing wrong with that - we're human, and humans personalise things. Every judgment we make includes ourselves as a variable - there's no such thing as objectivity in human thinking. Not a bit, no matter how much some people pride themselves on their 'objective' opinions.

 

[Markus]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

Mr Nobody, I have to ask.

Do you actually know any real world scientologists apart from the ones you've met, read about, conversed with or seen on the Internet?

They're not all the same, you know.

I've met many of "real world scientologists" in my life and unfortunately most of them are "the same"

Love
Markus

 

[Markus]

Re: PandaTermint's question on the rights of scientologists to practice their religio

Sure... You would probably say that about Mario Majorsky too, or about that kid who jumped out of the window, or about anyone who "snapped" after having been in touch with that cult.

That doesn't take away anything from the fact, that quite a few people "snapped" after they had their "experience" with the "experts on the mind".

You can "sweet talk" that as much as you like, but I doubt that you can convince me that $cientology does improve any human being one bit.

Just look at the true success rates of NarCONon.

Everything bad is to be blamed on the individual(s), everything positive is because of $cientology, eh? Can you please stop this cult propaganda?

In 35 years I haven't seen that a human being has improved one bit by studying Scientology.

Love
Markus