Yes, the documentation is called "Scientology and Dianetics".
Generality. Unsubstantiated. Not valid.
Yes, the documentation is called "Scientology and Dianetics".
Yes, I read them. I lost it.
Your posts are not relevant to the OP at all.
If you take your precious time to read what the OP is all about you will understand what the thread is all about. - I hope.
Are you kidding me? Do you really believe that? I know damn well, he wanted SO staff members without the encumberance of parental duties, but it wasn't about the cost to raise them, it was about the children ripping staff off post to be parents.Hubbard's 'Adults in small bodies' is soled based on greed. It is detrimental to your eternal spirituality to stand between a Hubbard's Cult and dollar. Every effort is made to discourage spending money on anything than promoting Hubbard and his cult. It costs a lot of money to raise children properly so Hubbard had to come up with a way to have Scientologists abandon the raising their children and devote their lives to advancing Hubbard's personal ambitions without feeling remorse for being such idiots, convincing them that they are really not children but adults in small bodies was the best he could come up with.
Is there a proof that he was a criminal in his treatment of all others?
Dox? or STFU?
Did you even bother reading the post you responded to?Are you kidding me? Do you really believe that? I know damn well, he wanted SO staff members without the encumberance of parental duties, but it wasn't about the cost to raise them, it was about the children ripping staff off post to be parents.
The damn cadet org was a failure, so they began to off load pregnant staff so fast it makes your head spin (the ones who are too far along to be convinced to have an abortion)
Wake up.
Mimsey
Did you ever have a minor child of yours molested by a staff member of the "church" of scn?
It'd just be nice if people like VaD could state they have actual first hand personal experience in what they come here and claim to be some kind of " expert " about.
I know it is a whole lot to ask that people who want to discuss child molestattion in the "church" of scientology had some first hand knowledge of what they were trying to post about.
I never saw LRH take a drink of alcohol. Does that mean in his life he never did?
I never saw a child in the chain locker on the Apollo. Does that meant there wasn't?
I never saw the body of Lisa McPherson. Hell, does that mean she isn't dead?
But, hey, it is the "valid" argument from the scientological "mindset".
God, scn'oligists are stupid.
Generality. Unsubstantiated. Not valid.
Are you defending the jackass in chief? Why?
I don't want shit flying around like "Hubbard is a FlyingSpaghettiMonster and he was the one who got you to do all those ugly things"
- I want real views. Not imaginary data BS.
<EDIT>
Where have I claimed to be an "expert"? - I just stated what I know from my viewpoint.
Or is my knowledge not knowledge enough?
Well thank you VaD for pushing up my stats toward my next star. You evidently do not see my point at all, and that is that nothing good has come out of the cult and real views are what you are reading all along here. Every single post I have entered is my real view. And, Hubbard is a FlyingSpaghettiMonster.
Your " knowledge"? I have not seen you exhibit any yet. Don't expecet to either - LOL !
One may note that I "liked" both ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn's post and Mimsey's reply to that post which was knocking it. Both posts as far as I am concerned contained valid points.