Friday 21st August: Today Tonight Looks at Travolta's Dilemma
- Thread starter mate
- Start date
Royal Prince Xenu
Trust the Psi Corps.
To me the whole thing looks spontaneous on JT's side and unexpected on KD's side. To me it's a non-event.
If memory serves correctly, I believe most of the argument at that time was blaming JT for sticking by $cn instead of seeking the correct care for his son. Watching the TT segment, it seems that "blame" is being shifted back onto Scn directly. And yes, the passing of time does lower the "barriers of taste".
I believe the majority of the protest was aimed at those trying to say that JT was a bad parent etc etc.
Kha Khan
Patron Meritorious
Do you understand that this statement implies that there is something morally wrong with being gay? That, that being gay is "decadent," but "modern culture is [now] decadent enough where it would'nt even wink?"
Is that what you intended to imply? Or did you just word it poorly?
There are other words or phrases you could have used. "Open minded" and "enlightened" come to mind.
Alanzo
Bardo Tulpa
Or "Educated", "Understanding" or "Tolerant", or even "Pan-determined" come to mind as well.
Alanzo
Bardo Tulpa
I made a lot of posts in that thread. I was - even for me - pretty adamant about it.
I've come to realize that there is no way to control this. People are going to speak their minds and they are going to say whatever they are going to say, and the overwhelming tide of public opinion is going to deluge everything in its path.
I still think that John Travolta has tried his best to present the best of Scientology to the world, and I also believe that he probably lives his life that way.
But there comes a point where the overwhelming effect that Scientology has created upon the world will not secure JT from being painted with the same brush that his Church has splattered.
And that is why he should distance himself and make his stand - for HIS IDEALS - which his "Church" has so consistently violated for so many people.
Staying with them is actually now a violation of his own ideals. Because of the Church's own track record - through no fault of his own.
Yes, I'm sure the main protest on that thread was an objection to using the Travolta tragedy to criticise scn.
There was a feeling that this was poor taste. I just wondered why some ESMBers were criticised for doing that whereas nobody has criticised the TV programme for essentially doing the same.
The only difference I can see is some small amount of time having passed.
There was a feeling that this was poor taste. I just wondered why some ESMBers were criticised for doing that whereas nobody has criticised the TV programme for essentially doing the same.
The only difference I can see is some small amount of time having passed.
Alanzo
Bardo Tulpa
And what I said.
I meant "decandent" in the sense that Oswald Spengler would
have used the word. A decadent culture is a culture which is
in decline. Decadence applies to many aspects of culture, Art,
Music, Literature, Religion, Morality etc.
To say we are in "decline" inplies a point from which we are in decline.
Spengler proposed that cultures are analygous to organic, living
beings. They have a birth, a youth, an "adulthood", middle age,
old age, and finally death. The typical lifespan of a culture,
according to Spengler, is about 700 years from birth to death.
Each stage has typical characteristics for various points of culture
such as politics,art, literature, music, morality etc. For the example of
morality, Homosexuality is typically highly non tolerated ("immoral")
from birth of the culture up to "middle age". "Middle Age" is
the start of a cultures period of "decadence". In the last 100-200
years of a cultural lifespan, homosexuality as well as other
previous sexual taboos are first accepted, then mainstreamed.
Spengler gives examples of various ancient cultures which
followed this pattern. Rome stands out as a typical example.
Spengler wrote that our own Western Culture was born in the
1400's (The Renaissance) which would put its present "age"
at around 600 years. That would put us well into the stage
of "decadence". It does seem to fit into Spengler's pattern.
Political economic systems detriorating and breaking down.
Old religious dogmas, old gods no longer followed, obeyed.
The old moral codes breaking down, ignored (marriage, family,
sexual behavior etc.) New religious sects (such as scientology?)
spring up like weeds as people try to restore some cultural bearings.
So, as far as homosexuality is concerned, during certain epochs
it is "immoral", during others it is no longer "immoral" We are in a
period in which it is not immoral. 200 years from now it may again be
"immoral". Without some deep religious conviction, it is difficult
for modern man to hold onto any moral absolutes...especially
sexual morality given our modern knowledge of biology, genetics,
body and brain operation etc. Restrictions against
murder, stealing etc are pretty consistant in all cultures
which strongly hint that these may be "absolutes".
Sexual standards vary widely among cultures which to
me implies there is no "absolute" when dealing with sex.
The particular culture establishes and enforces sexual standards
based on whatever it needs (physical, economic, population
densities etc,) at a particular time period.
Carmel
Crusader
The tv pgm wasn't hostile to JT nor his family - If anything they showed compassion and its main focus was on the stance that the CofS and it's members have on drugs.
IIRC, there were about three threads on the matter, at the time of the Jet's passing. There was scathing criticism and hostility of JT and KP, and it was within a day or two of them losing a child.
How you can compare the content of the tv pgm (regardless of the time frame), to that of what was directed to those parents from a couple of ESMB posters, is beyond me - Chalk and cheese!
Sassy
Patron Meritorious
Seriously, is there anything that John Travolta may have revealed in his auditing sessions that anyone would give a shite about if we heard it? What, he may be gay? Who cares??!!?? Sex with animals? Totally gross, but who cares??!!?? What??!!?? Anyway, my point's made with that.
I think he should just go for it. If this church opens his confidential files and discloses his personal information, they're done. Period. Who would/could ever trust them again? If his wife wants to stay in & they can't be together, that will be close to the final nail in the church's coffin too. Why would a non-scio spouse not be able to stay with their scio spouse??? If she stays in & he can't see his daughter, it would probably kill him. People will likely not understand and the church will have to do some fancy footwork.
Regardless, I think he & Kelly Preston seem like incredible parents and have beautiful children. My heart aches still that they lost their son at such an early age, and while they may believe that Jett just "dropped his body", I believe that his death was not in vain & will help expose this church and/or force them to change their stance regarding medications for those who truly need it, i.e. Jett.
I think he should just go for it. If this church opens his confidential files and discloses his personal information, they're done. Period. Who would/could ever trust them again? If his wife wants to stay in & they can't be together, that will be close to the final nail in the church's coffin too. Why would a non-scio spouse not be able to stay with their scio spouse??? If she stays in & he can't see his daughter, it would probably kill him. People will likely not understand and the church will have to do some fancy footwork.
Regardless, I think he & Kelly Preston seem like incredible parents and have beautiful children. My heart aches still that they lost their son at such an early age, and while they may believe that Jett just "dropped his body", I believe that his death was not in vain & will help expose this church and/or force them to change their stance regarding medications for those who truly need it, i.e. Jett.
Last edited by a moderator:
mate
Patron Meritorious
I think that many of those who are posting on this thread, are making the mistake of assuming that celebrities are treated like non-celebrity public scientologists and staff. This is not the case. Celebrities are considered special and treated as such. If a celebrity wishes to leave, then he just withdraws, usually gradually. There will of course, be attempts to recover them but it is low key without any threats. James Packer is a good example. He is out but is able to maintain a good relationship with Cruise. Of course, if a celebrity becomes a hostile outspoken critic of scientology, like Jason Beghe, then Fair Game kicks in.
There is no doubt in my mind, that John Travolta, who has already started to withdraw, will continue to do so and more so.
Regards, David.
There is no doubt in my mind, that John Travolta, who has already started to withdraw, will continue to do so and more so.
Regards, David.
uniquemand
Unbeliever
Oh, David, I hope so, for his sake. I hope he finds peace without suicide. This is my great fear for Travolta. He seems to have a good heart. If he comes out of the Church, and has to face all the acrimony and recrimination that go along with having been a Scientology Poster-Boy for so many years, and on top of that having lost his child, blaming himself or "caving in" concerning how he's been used to manipulate so many people: I am gravely concerned for how a good person faces such things. It's hard enough for ex-staff or SO, but they can at least be anonymous. Travolta cannot.
I really hope he weathers the storm and comes out the other side, I just hope the world is not cruel to him, on top of the personal demons he'll have to face.
I told you I was trouble
Suspended animation
Agreed, they are certainly treated very differently.
Even celebs and/or their families and friends can read the internet though and must realize they are being used (they are only 'allowed' to leave and then maintain scientology relationships because it suits the church of scientology for PR reasons ... ask Nicole Kidman).
Well, if Travolta finds himself wracked with guilt over not only the
damage scientology has caused to his family, but over those he's
influenced to get in the cult; perhaps he can do some sort of
"amends" project.
Perhaps he could finance some sort of "underground railway" for those
long term slaves of the cult who seek escape. Safe houses with
paid security and all that. Guarantee a one year rehabilitation
for runaways. Secure, decent housing, food and clothing.
Some sort of meaningful work at least at minimum wage.
Perhaps some assistance finding a better paying job to
allow the refugee to restablish in the "wog" economy.
How much money has Travolta given to the cult over the years.
Money used to aid and abet the cult's nefarious deeds.
$25,000,000 ?
$25,000,000 could provide $25,000 assistance to 1,000
runaways. Ex scientologists are used to privation and getting
by on the minimum, so I would guess that $25 million could
help many more than 1,000 escapees. I would think such
an action would go far to begin to undo the damage
he had done over the years.
As to the death of his son, I don't know how he deal with that.
Certainly the pain and guilt may be part of the penance.
Life brings many trials and tragedies. Those with real
character pick up the pieces and go on after a personal disaster.
Similar threads
