Freezoners, please answer these questions

[Voltaire's Child]

Well, maybe I'm just expressing it more distinctly. (note: I didn't say "clearly").

You may've seen me talk about this before, if so, forgive the rerun, but when I first got on the 'net on other discussion groups years ago, I was appalled at how evil (I thought) critics were. So then I decided that just because (I thought) they were SPs, didn't mean I should be mean to them and hurt their feelings. So I ended up listening to them and talking to them (on a.r.s.). And, of course, found that they were just individuals. Some I could converse with, some, well, didn't go so well. But still, individuals, not 20% (I was accused by the HCO guy at my old org for "helping the 20% and not the 80%" which I thought was sooo stupid.) whatevers or 2.5%ers. Just people.

So it's a matter of degree with anybody anywhere.

Then going over to some FZ forums was also enlightening. Awesome wonderful people who didn't care if I criticized Hubbard cheek by jowl with people who screamed and howled at my not typing "LRH" instead of "Hubbard" and didn't like my "Ron bashing" and endorsement of "mixing methods".

So life's a matter of degree. Every nice person is sometimes a jerk and just about every jerk can be very nice on occasion. My husband says people are a mixed bag. (mixed bags? plural?)

And of course I can't reply to anything in less than a gazillion words when a few dozen or so would have done just as well...

 

[Leon]

Scientology is a dark and dangerous thing

That is an opinion based on your own experience of what you were told is "Scientology". So far as that goes your opinion is entirely reasonable and unsurprising.

I have audited some hundreds of people over my 38 year history in the subject and I have not yet had one who complained or even suggested or hinted that they found the subject to be "dark and dangerous".

with the potential to wreck people totally - physically, mentally, and socially.

Indeed it does have that potential. Along with flying in aircraft, sailing across the ocean and hospital surgery and a million other things.

It also has the potential to change lives for the better in ways unattainable to the common Joe ever before. It has that potential.

People who have suffered this kind of damage have a strong desire to prevent other people going through the same trauma.

This is true. Furthermore, people who have experienced the potential benefits of Scientology in a big way and seen others have the same benefits ALSO have a strong desire to see people who have suffered because of psychotic misapplications of Scientology recover and get a better deal, as we ourselves have had.

With the best will in the world, I don't see how people who have been through that hell can accept the idea that Scn outside the Cof$ is all fine and shiny.

All Scn outside the Cof$ is certainly NOT all fine and shiny. There have been many prize idiots who set up practices delivering their own bullshit versions of auditing etc and tried to create cults of their own. I can name a few of these.

Anyone seeking auditing in the "Freezone" has a personal responsibility to check the practitioners out thoroughly beforehand. Only go where you believe you will get good service, where you can see what other people have experienced with that person, and so on. And if there is ANY indication that the guy is trying to set up a cult of his own then STAY TF AWAY.

I'm a big advocate of free speech, so I'm not suggesting that anyone should be silenced.

I have to be honest and say that my foremost inclination is to support people who have been hurt by the cult.

As my inclinatios are too, and I daresay everyone else's on this board.

It would be good if the FZ'ers on this board would give some deep thought to the damage done by the subject that they hold so dearly, and the fact that many of the people here suffered that damage. Most of them I think, are here to work on their recovery, and help others doing the same.

Please accept that this is a given, for most of us - if not all. On your side, and others in your position, please recognise that healing will not come merely by adopting an an "it's all bad and evil and the are all criminals" attitude and then commiserating with others and hoping for the bad feelings to go away.

For many of you in need of healing Scientology is a pretty unconfrontable subject right now. Understandable so as a result of the pain you went through. Healing does require that you face that pain and the subject itself dispassionately, calmly. Throwing it all in a bucket and hoping it will go away will not bring healing - it will lurk there as a bogeyman for all time. You do need to unravel what was done to you, understand what was done, understand why you got sucked into it. The same with Hubbard himself - he was a complex man, part genius, part psycho. After his motor bike accident...well, a man is as insane as he is in pain, and that was certainly true of him. You need to analuse, unravel, understand. And then, when you are ready, forgive.

And with that will come full healing.

So FZ'ers, please think about what you can do to make your presence here congruent with the fact that this is an ex - scientologists board.

Here's the big question:

If you are not here to recruit people and sing the praises of Scientology, why are you here, and what can you contribute?

From what I have seen, nearly everyone on this board has something to contribute. I am not here to recruit anyone, certainly. I sing the praises of correctly applied Scientology that benefits people - I condemn the other variety. I respect Hubbard for the good he did and I rebuke him for the bad.

In short, I have more of a balanced view of things than many others do. And I think that in a subject as polarised as Scientology where people seem to be either rabidly for or rabidly against a viewpoint of balance is valuable to all and can contribute far more than either extreme can offer.

You OK with that, Jacques?

 

[Free to shine]

I am not saying that people should not come here and discuss things. I am saying over and over again that I think it is wrong to promote Scientology here. By the way, I think you are actually the first person to answer the question. And I agree with it. But my point is that no one should, out of common decency, promote Scientology on an ex-Scientologist board. It is funny how people have equated not promoting Scientology with not being allowed to come here.

The Anabaptist Jacques

Thankyou for your insightful posts and asking the questions!

 

[nexus100]

That is an opinion based on your own experience of what you were told is "Scientology". So far as that goes your opinion is entirely reasonable and unsurprising.

I have audited some hundreds of people over my 38 year history in the subject and I have not yet had one who complained or even suggested or hinted that they found the subject to be "dark and dangerous".




Indeed it does have that potential. Along with flying in aircraft, sailing across the ocean and hospital surgery and a million other things.

It also has the potential to change lives for the better in ways unattainable to the common Joe ever before. It has that potential.



This is true. Furthermore, people who have experienced the potential benefits of Scientology in a big way and seen others have the same benefits ALSO have a strong desire to see people who have suffered because of psychotic misapplications of Scientology recover and get a better deal, as we ourselves have had.



All Scn outside the Cof$ is certainly NOT all fine and shiny. There have been many prize idiots who set up practices delivering their own bullshit versions of auditing etc and tried to create cults of their own. I can name a few of these.

Anyone seeking auditing in the "Freezone" has a personal responsibility to check the practitioners out thoroughly beforehand. Only go where you believe you will get good service, where you can see what other people have experienced with that person, and so on. And if there is ANY indication that the guy is trying to set up a cult of his own then STAY TF AWAY.



As my inclinatios are too, and I daresay everyone else's on this board.



Please accept that this is a given, for most of us - if not all. On your side, and others in your position, please recognise that healing will not come merely by adopting an an "it's all bad and evil and the are all criminals" attitude and then commiserating with others and hoping for the bad feelings to go away.

For many of you in need of healing Scientology is a pretty unconfrontable subject right now. Understandable so as a result of the pain you went through. Healing does require that you face that pain and the subject itself dispassionately, calmly. Throwing it all in a bucket and hoping it will go away will not bring healing - it will lurk there as a bogeyman for all time. You do need to unravel what was done to you, understand what was done, understand why you got sucked into it. The same with Hubbard himself - he was a complex man, part genius, part psycho. After his motor bike accident...well, a man is as insane as he is in pain, and that was certainly true of him. You need to analuse, unravel, understand. And then, when you are ready, forgive.

And with that will come full healing.



From what I have seen, nearly everyone on this board has something to contribute. I am not here to recruit anyone, vertainly. I sing the praises of correctly applied Scientology that benefits people - I condemn the other variety. I respect Hubbard for the good he did and I rebuke him for the bad.

In short, I have more of a balanced view of things than many others do. And I think that in a subject as polarised as Scientology where people seem to be either rabidly for or rabidly against a viewpoint of balance is valuable to all and can contribute far more than either extreme can offer.

You OK with that, Jacques?

Based on the above I guess Fox News is right, they are "fair and balanced."

 

[Mark A. Baker]

If you are not here to recruit people and sing the praises of Scientology, why are you here, and what can you contribute?

To communicate with others who have interesting viewpoints. Some of the posters here have remarkable insights into the nature of spirituality. As to what can I contribute, same as anyone else, my own comments.

As we know, there are plenty of FZ and independent boards; so why do you like to come here?

Why would you ask this question? Are YOU ONLY interested in communicating with others who hold similar views to your own? Nothing personal but I think this question is a nonsense.


Mark A. Baker

 

[Boldgirl]

That is an opinion based on your own experience of what you were told is "Scientology". So far as that goes your opinion is entirely reasonable and unsurprising.

I have audited some hundreds of people over my 38 year history in the subject and I have not yet had one who complained or even suggested or hinted that they found the subject to be "dark and dangerous".

Indeed it does have that potential. Along with flying in aircraft, sailing across the ocean and hospital surgery and a million other things.

It also has the potential to change lives for the better in ways unattainable to the common Joe ever before. It has that potential

Cmon, hello...? You think that if people knew it was dark and dangerous WHILE they were in it they would stay? NO!

So saying "I have not yet had one who complained or even suggested or hinted that they found the subject to be "dark and dangerous" is ridiculous.

It's the slow unravelling of a person's true character and it happens so slowly that most dont notice it at all until it gets worse and worse the further up the bridge they go.

Also I would like to know how many of you that audit in or outside the C of S have followed your pcs for years and years and have rechecked to see if they still in fact have maintained the EP of a grade or process.....I think not.
Go check with the people who have been off auditing lines for some time and ask them if they still have the EP's.
Do some type of scientific study to follow real true outcomes and then maybe you have some credibility. I am so sick of hearing folks on this board claim results with auditing when no one has any long term studies to really show the true picture of the person's well being or life years later.

I suggest from my own experience and observaion of hundreds of others who have audited that the results are very VERY temporary and that most OT's I have met are a bloody emotional mess.

Loosely, saying auditng helps people is like a doctor giving a patient a pill for the pain that they keep taking for years ----all the while developing a life threatening ulcer unbenownst to them because the only thing the pill did was change their behaviour towards his problem as he got worse and worse on the inside.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

That is an opinion based on your own experience of what you were told is "Scientology". So far as that goes your opinion is entirely reasonable and unsurprising.

I have audited some hundreds of people over my 38 year history in the subject and I have not yet had one who complained or even suggested or hinted that they found the subject to be "dark and dangerous".

Indeed it does have that potential. Along with flying in aircraft, sailing across the ocean and hospital surgery and a million other things.

It also has the potential to change lives for the better in ways unattainable to the common Joe ever before. It has that potential

Cmon, hello...? You think that if people knew it was dark and dangerous WHILE they were in it they would stay? NO!

Leon's comments are clearly with regard to the SUBJECT of scientology not the Co$. Being a MEMBER of the Co$ is quite a different thing from experiencing the SUBJECT through study or application.

Your objection is based on a misinterpretation of his remarks.


Mark A. Baker

 

[nw2394]

It would be good if the FZ'ers on this board would give some deep thought to the damage done by the subject that they hold so dearly, and the fact that many of the people here suffered that damage. Most of them I think, are here to work on their recovery, and help others doing the same.

So FZ'ers, please think about what you can do to make your presence here congruent with the fact that this is an ex - scientologists board.

Here's the big question:

If you are not here to recruit people and sing the praises of Scientology, why are you here, and what can you contribute?

None of these are trick questions, and I'm not asking so that I can duff you up when you answer.

As we know, there are plenty of FZ and independent boards; so why do you like to come here?

OK. First off, I am an FZer - but I haven't come here much of late as I've been busier on other things.

I am not here to recruit per se. However, I do think that many "ex Scios" were what they were because they were searching for enlightenment of some sort. For some, it seems, that "recovery" basically means turning one's back on all that stuff. To me that is not recovery, but an apathetic admission of failure. If anyone, as a result of coming here and listening to FZers and others of the independent field who have similar motives, is "recruited" into continuing their interest in some way, then that is a good thing in my view.

Too many people confuse Scio as applied by the CoS with the actual subject itself. Unfortunately you yourself are in this boat as shown by, "give some deep thought to the damage done by the subject." A subject never did any damage - people do. Similarly a gun never shot anyone - people pull triggers.

Too many people think that being/not being a Scio means some sort of black and white thing wherein one either believes everything Hubbard said and therefore is a Scio or that one turns one's back on all that as if it were 100% crap and is therefore not a Scio. Life isn't that black and white.

Nick

 

[nw2394]

You are twisting what I said. I am not calling for limiting anybody from this board. I am just saying that no one should promote Scientology on this board. And by promote, I mean actively seek to encourage someone to see a Scientology practitioner. You will have to explain to me why Scientology should be promoted on this board. It doesn't make sense to me. I am not talking about discussion. I am talking about promotion and marketing or advertising.

The Anabaptist Jacques

If you truly believe in free speech that is frankly naive. I cannot be here at all without being allowed to say who I am or what I think etc. Someone else, who may be interested in some way in the subject still, even though they may be ex CoS, may well think it perfectly appropriate to be told that there is a freezoner or whatever in their city that they could chose to go see and talk to if they wish.

I kind of agree that blatant advertising isn't inappropriate - or, if it occurs, it should be confined to places like the success stories section where people that don't want to read it don't have to. However, that is pretty much the status quo anyway.

Chill out. The FZers aren't here to eat you.

Nick

 

[Mark A. Baker]

Chill out. The FZers aren't here to eat you.

YEAH!

I'm vegetarian!


Mark A. Baker

 

[Escalus]

For some, it seems, that "recovery" basically means turning one's back on all that stuff. To me that is not recovery, but an apathetic admission of failure.

This is an extrapolated version of "the tech is never wrong."

Sometimes the demonstration of free will is success.

 

[nw2394]

This is an extrapolated version of "the tech is never wrong."

I think you take a leap too far with your logic (and some). Hubbard himself cancelled bulletins because they proved to be unworkable. And, at the other extreme, to think that there is nothing whatsoever of use in any of his books, albeit perhaps borrowed truths from other thinkers etc etc, is - well - if you think that you had better take a pill or something.

Nick

 

[Escalus]

I think you take a leap too far with your logic (and some). Hubbard himself cancelled bulletins because they proved to be unworkable. And, at the other extreme, to think that there is nothing whatsoever of use in any of his books, albeit perhaps borrowed truths from other thinkers etc etc, is - well - if you think that you had better take a pill or something.

Nick

No, I was talking about your quote... "For some, it seems, that 'recovery' basically means turning one's back on all that stuff. To me that is not recovery, but an apathetic admission of failure" and explaining to you that exhibiting free will is sometimes success. Just because a person turns their back on something doesn't mean they're a failure, as you imply. Sometimes exhibiting their free will is actually a success.

I'm not talking about Hubbard. I'm saying your point here is specious.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

You cannot have a 'discussion' with a $cientologist about anything and that includes a freezoner when they're minds are so fully immersed into a cultic mindset, they cannot think by themselves, they can only thing with a $camology viewpoint, where is the discussion in that?

Agreed, and this is pretty much the exact reason I left the CofS (apart from the high prices). You simply weren't allowed to have your own viewpoint if it conflicted with LRH's.

 

[Oneflewover]

I'm know longer a Freezoner, but I can think of lots of reasons one would be here.

Some enjoy the group dynamic.

Chat with others with similar background.

Listen to other peoples stories, of all kinds.

Offer some support to those newly out, by reason of having gone through some of what they are going through.

some who feel the Freezone has something to offer people that is absent in the church might want to promote that fact.

Different people have different definitions of Scientologist. It used to mean someone who practices the techniques and follows the philosophy. But that's since been redefined by the church to mean someone who is obedient to and recognized by the church.

A Freezoner can be a Scientologist by the first definition, and an Ex Scientologist by the second, which is why some of you trying to push a certain ex Scientologist definition might not be getting the answers you're looking for.

 

[nexus100]

I'm know longer a Freezoner, but I can think of lots of reasons one would be here.

Some enjoy the group dynamic.

Chat with others with similar background.

Listen to other peoples stories, of all kinds.

Offer some support to those newly out, by reason of having gone through some of what they are going through.

some who feel the Freezone has something to offer people that is absent in the church might want to promote that fact.

Different people have different definitions of Scientologist. It used to mean someone who practices the techniques and follows the philosophy. But that's since been redefined by the church to mean someone who is obedient to and recognized by the church.

A Freezoner can be a Scientologist by the first definition, and an Ex Scientologist by the second, which is why some of you trying to push a certain ex Scientologist definition might not be getting the answers you're looking for.

Why aren't you in the Freezone any longer?

 

[Pixie]

I'm know longer a Freezoner, but I can think of lots of reasons one would be here.

Some enjoy the group dynamic.

Chat with others with similar background.

Listen to other peoples stories, of all kinds.

Offer some support to those newly out, by reason of having gone through some of what they are going through.

some who feel the Freezone has something to offer people that is absent in the church might want to promote that fact.

Different people have different definitions of Scientologist. It used to mean someone who practices the techniques and follows the philosophy. But that's since been redefined by the church to mean someone who is obedient to and recognized by the church.

A Freezoner can be a Scientologist by the first definition, and an Ex Scientologist by the second, which is why some of you trying to push a certain ex Scientologist definition might not be getting the answers you're looking for.

I agree, and I do believe it ought to be there to help people out on a gradient for sure, however in my view, when someone is thinking 'with' scientology 'tech', they are still to that degree 'brainwashed'. The 'tech' is set up that one doesn't have to 'think for oneself' because the 'thinking' has all been done for you! It was one madmans' opinion, 'his' viewpoints on life, and he was a liar, a con artist, a cruel heartless criminal, his intention was to have men his utter slaves and a druggie, to name but a few. I rest my case.

 

[Emma]

The term " Ex-scientology" has a nice ring. However Emma
has posted and referred to this again on the long thread thus:-

----------------------------

What this board is:

A place where ex scientologists and interested general public can get together to discuss various experiences in Scientology.

A place where where ex's and non ex's can mingle and chat and get to know how the other half think and live.
-----------------------------

Thus to say as this is an EX scientology board, scientologists shouldn't come here is in violation of Emma's wishes on the matter as expressed up to now.

Whoa Nelly!!! Is THAT the "M/U"?

By "non exes" I mean't "those who had never been in". It wasn't referring to the FZone.

Anyway, all individuals are welcome here, so I spose it doesn't matter, but Terril please don't quote that part of what I wrote as my "invitation the freezone".

I also said this:

This board is not meant to be a vehicle to plead your case, reconvert the fallen or preach your brand. (emphasis mine)

 

[Veda]

-snip-

Different people have different definitions of Scientologist. It used to mean someone who practices the techniques and follows the philosophy. But that's since been redefined by the church to mean someone who is obedient to and recognized by the church.

-snip-

Which techniques?

Which philosophy?

Please specify which piece or pieces of the secretive subject of Scientology you're referencing.

 

[Dulloldfart]

Which techniques?

Which philosophy?

Please specify which piece or pieces of the secretive subject of Scientology you're referencing.

From El Dicko Tecko:

SCIENTOLOGIST, 1. one who betters the conditions of himself and the conditions of others by using Scn technology. (Aud 73 UK) 2. one who controls persons, environments and situations. A Scientologist operates within the boundaries of the Auditor’s Code and the Code of a Scientologist. (PAB 137) 3. one who understands life. His technical skill is devoted to the resolution of the problems of life. (COHA, p. 12) 4. a specialist in spiritual and human affairs. (Abil Ma 1)

Let's see....

1. PR and BS.
2. PR and BS.
3. PR and BS.
4. PR and BS.

Hmmm. I thought there was a definition that said something like "Someone who uses bits of Scientology". Guess not. Oh well, you win, Veda.

Although the first definition isn't too bad.

Paul