What's new

Prohibit Scientology from Delivering Auditing to Minors as Anti-Gay Therapy

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
Isn't it necessary to believe in some of the concepts hubbard put together, explaining the workings of the mind, to find some of the tech useful, while those same concepts are used to convince people that their gayness is an illness that can only be cured by the tech. The underlying philosophy of scientology is what is harmful about scientology and that philosophy has a way of contaminating the parts because it is the basis the parts are built upon. I can't see a way to use a part of scientology without it being a part of scientology.

Thanks for the explanation.

I'm not sure what you consider the underlying philosophy of Scn to be. My thought currently is that Hubbard's philosophy was to aggrandize and enrich himself (and similar vulgar aims) while disguising the whole as a noble endeavour, with any genuine truth-seeking perverted by his overall goals. However, many others who contributed to Scn's body of work -- with their contributions labelled as Hubbard's -- were genuine truth-seekers. The total is a hotch-potch.

As an example of using a part of Scientology I talk about "sessionability" in my PaulsRobot pages. I find it a useful concept. I tell the user that to the extent he/she is "sessionable" (enough food, enough sleep, not under the influence, willing and able to follow the instructions, no distractions like kids or pets or tv or phone, enough time for the session) to that extent the session will tend to go better. And vice versa. I don't parrot some inflexible "no alcohol within 24 hours before a session" as I think that is far too simplistic and wrong.

Paul
 
Last edited:
I think the Org itself is the worst part of the CoS, not the tech. Granted, most is nonsense, but I still use the study tech, tone scale, and mastery of TRs on a daily basis. I think some aspects of it are good almost despite itself. LOL:biggrin:
 

JustSheila

Crusader
:welcome2: to ESMB, Ranger Poisonfox!

I read what you said about still using the TRs, tone scale and study tech.

Personally, after I'd been out a while, I found that there was no such thing as "chronic tone" for anyone, that most of the tones on the tone scale weren't the least bit useful or even appropriate or related to emotion and the body death tones were just stupid. Of the tone levels people most use, the one that L Ron Hubbard got the most wrong was 1.1. Sheesh! If someone is just a bit shy or uncommunicative they are labeled as 1.1. If someone jokes, they are labeled as 1.1, and so on. I know exscns who still misjudge and mistreat others because they believe in the tone scale.

I think bringing someone in grief up to anger, antagonism and even boredom was the only part that was ever the least bit useful or maybe increasing someone's interest or enjoyment of something. There are better ways, though, more humane ways of dealing with others. If someone is sad, it's so much nicer to honestly listen and just cheer them up than fake different emotions and manipulate their feelings. There is something inherently wrong about that, IMO.

Do you use study tech when you read a novel? Do you stop and look up every word you don't know, clear every definition and use the word in sentences? Do you clear all the derivations, too? I did that when I first got out and found it was tedious and most words I could figure out from the context, anyway. I couldn't even enjoy reading novels using study tech, so it didn't take me long to dump it and go back to using a dictionary the way I did before scn - when I actually needed or wanted to use one without some extensive rules.
 
Last edited:

Enthetan

Master of Disaster
In contrast, the Church of Scientology believes homosexual sex even in the context of marriage is an overt and, indeed, opposes gay marriage.

So does the Catholic Church and Orthodox Judaism. I won't even get into what Islam says.

I'm not sure how much outrage this issue will generate.
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
So does the Catholic Church and Orthodox Judaism. I won't even get into what Islam says.

I'm not sure how much outrage this issue will generate.
The issue specific to the Church of Scientology is, as usual, deceptiveness. Lying. The Catholic Church, Orthdox Judaism and Islam are quite up front about their respective views of homosexuality and the LGBT community. The reason so much effort is put into informing the LGBT community about Scientology's real view of them is that Scientology is not. I regularly battle Scientology drones on Twitter that insist that Scientology is totally accepting of LGBT people (as opposed to being accepting of their money). The COS has proxy websites devoted to making that argument.
 
Last edited:
Quote:
"Do you use study tech when you read a novel? Do you stop and look up every word you don't know, clear every definition and use the word in sentences? Do you clear all the derivations, too? I did that when I first got out and found it was tedious and most words I could figure out from the context, anyway. I couldn't even enjoy reading novels using study tech, so it didn't take me long to dump it and go back to using a dictionary the way I did before scn - when I actually needed or wanted to use one without some extensive rules.[/QUOTE]

I hear you, and to be honest, I don't use the entire scale. A lot of them are pointless, agree completely. I do clear words when I am reading a novel, though. I find it useful. I left the Org almost 17 years ago now, and I don't use as many things as I used to.
 
Top