Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Evaluating and Criticising Scientology' started by Mimsey Borogrove, Jan 21, 2018.
Scientology using extortion?
You're gambling with your eternity, people!
I don't understand why people would just shoot off a reply without reading the original post. What is being discussed is disconnection as a group policy, not "not talking to someone" or "non-voluntary." Of course it's voluntary. Most frauds are voluntary. Blackmail is voluntary (you can choose to not pay, right?). Any huckster worth his salt will tell you that the best scam is the one where the mark never realizes he's been had.
OK, please explain the legal basis for prosecuting disconnection.
It's not about the Scientologist choosing to disconnect, it's about the methods which the orgs use to compel disconnection. If an EO responds to a Scientologist not wanting to disconnect with threats to reveal the Scientologist's session-overts to people, then that could be considered blackmail. If an EO threatens to damage a Scientologist's business relationships or employment, then that could be considered extortion. There's also tortuous interference with contracts or business relationships.
I was in a situation where the org demanded I disconnect from a friend. I kept asking "Well, what did he DO that was suppressive? What were his actual offenses?". They would not give specifics. Finally, they demanded that I get sec-checked in the HGC, and demanded I pay for an intensive. I told them I would sit for any sec checking they wanted, but refused to pay for it. They demanded I pay. When I attempted to leave the org, I was forcibly restrained, locked in, and was threatened with violence. THIS is the sort of thing I'm talking about.
"Gambling with your Eternity" is a recent development
Back in the day, when Scn was a thing worth doing, I was on staff in either Dec'72 or Jan '73 when a very charming and welcome black on white Executive Directive was issued warning against using Scientology to invalidate people (If anyone can up with that?)
But now I read of things like the father who got a letter from the 13 year old child whom he loved, who loved him plaintively beseeching him that he was forfeiting his eternity...
To say nothing of mixing practices with the RCC.
And also a further indication Co$ is locked into the downward spiral
More crap that didn't happen back in the day.
At least not where I was
You are correct that such coercion, if proven, is against the law. Illegal imprisonment, kidnapping, etc. But that doesn't prove that disconnection, itself, is illegal.
Is there any legal basis for prosecuting anyone for the simple act of disconnection? If the church policy is that parishioners must not remain connected to "enemies" of the church, can a case be made that the church can be prosecuted for this policy as a crime?
As much as I consider this policy to be completely reprehensible, is it a crime?
Just so Bill.
First Amendment freedom of association means freedom of disassociation
I didn't say anything about any legal basis. I am not a lawyer, neither do I know anything about the relevant laws. I was just trying to bring people back on-topic.
I agree, it's a difficult one. I was in another spiritual group before Scientology (which I'd prefer not to name in the open forum in case any of its members are looking in) which practiced disconnection in all but name. If anyone left the group, those members who were still "in" were instructed to not communicate with or have anything further to do with them.
On that level, distasteful as you could certainly argue it was, it's hard to see how any criminal offence had been committed; especially as I've never heard of any children being shut out in this way (only adults).
As Enthetan said though, what Scientology does is of a whole different order and certainly the methods they use to compel disconnection at least border on the criminal.