What's new

"Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay rights

Xenu's Boyfriend

Silver Meritorious Patron
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

I think it is naive to believe that Laura Prepon could be in Scientology and not know its position about homosexuality.

First of all, she has been linked to Tom Cruise, which means they must have had a conversation about her character on the show, and I'm assuming, if she is an active Scientologist, it must have come up in her auditing sessions.

If you have not seen the show, the lesbian scenes are graphic, and this second season is even more graphic than before. Women going down on each other, getting fingered, the whole nine. The first five minutes of the first episode has the main character Piper and Alex (Laura's character) making out naked in the shower with their breast touching. I'm a gay man And I have to say, the shit is HOT.

I also think it is important to differentiate between what people knew about Scientology 20 years ago, ten years ago, five years ago, or even last year. There has been so much more about it in the media, and almost everyone who knows anything about Scientology has heard the gossip about John Travolta. Remember Ricky Gervais' joke at the Golden Globes about the "Two gays Scientologists who were pretending to be straight?" That went into millions of American homes during prime time.

Scientology is a household conversation - with Jenna Miscavige Hill on The View and so many other talk shows, Laurence Right's book, and Paul Haggis' bold statement against homophobia in Scientology and extensive interviews in print and tv, you'd have to be under a rock not to know how Scientology feels about gay people.

But the one thing that trumps gay in Scientology, is fame and money. So millionaire gays who give generously or bring positive attention to the church because of their success will always be welcome. And if she can make money on the show and donate it to them, they will be willing to give her a pass. It's poor and unknown gay Scientologists who aren't welcome.

I feel Laura is doing a "Tommy Davis".....she is saying exactly what she was told to say. And she probably hasn't seen anything in print that was homophobic, but she is doing that celebrity thing of not particularly looking any deeper either because she doesn't want to find out more and have to take a stand.

I'm upset because I LOVE laura on the show, I think she is sexy as hell, and smart, and I was so disappointed to hear she was in Scientology. But lying like this just makes me sick and I'm really disappointed. I bet Tom got to her.

Everyone, protect your couches, Tom may be in love again!
 

tetloj

Silver Meritorious Patron
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

Alanna Masterson also plays the role of a gay woman on "The Walking Dead" - there seems to be no issue for Scientologists for 'going there' creatively, buta s you say XB, that's because money talks in Scientology like nothing else.

Actually being gay though....? A different matter as Haggis and others have observed first hand.
 

Wants2Talk

Silver Meritorious Patron
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

[video=youtube;DDEdFxUZ01s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDEdFxUZ01s[/video]
Is that Miss Purple?
 

GreyLensman

Silver Meritorious Patron
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

The Underground Bunker is starting to engage in witch hunt. Tony Ortega might want to watch more closely the quality of his free lancers work before publishing. Hopefully this was only a one off of his previous balanced and fair reporting style.

Ok, Laura Prepon said this:

“I’ve been a Scientologist since 1999 and I’ve never come across any piece of information that remotely is negative or derogatory in any way towards the LGBT community.”

How anybody can deduct from Laura Prepons statement that she would be a liar is beyond my sense of logic. Why would I assume immediately that she is lying? What kind of twisted thinking is that? She might as well say the truth and frankly, it seems to me that she is exactly doing that given the fact that celebrities are given the better version.

And then the writer from Underground Bunker goes on to further spin his article by asking hypothetical questions which "might have asked" but haven't. The writer of the article resorts to "fictional" questions, which haven't been asked to Laura Prepon as further "proof" that she would be a liar.

This particular Underground Bunker article is defamatory and trying to make a story out of nothing.

I think it can be said that anyone "in Scientology since 1999" can be expected to have heard LRH's long monologues and soliloquies on the evils of 1.1, which all homosexual people fall under, his opinion that they should all be quietly put down and on and on and on. Science of Survival has blatant references, so do many of the lectures. LRH was a racist anti-LGBT individual, with long standing issues about his own sexuality.

A truer statement would possibly be that she is either a liar or completely oblivious to obvious truth and circumstances around her.
 

Balthasar

Patron Meritorious
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

I think it's quite likely that Prepon has never read or heard Hubbard say anything against homosexuals. As Clamicide said very, very few mindfucked Scientologists have even read Dianetics from cover to cover. I did and people, and I'm talking about staff members, marveled that I read the whole thing. (Isn't that a clue that it's a piece of shit when the cultists don't even read it?)

Anyway, it's good to challenge Prepon publicly because it's an opportunity to make it known that not only was Hubbard homophobic, he believed the only way to solve the "problem" they presented to society was to "dispose of them without sorrow".

Of course you Balthasar, being a pro-Hubbard and Scientology apologist, just hate the light of truth and take it upon yourself to attack the light. So you attack Tony O.

OSA wannabe. Or perhaps you are OSA.


You didn't learn anything, did you?

So the end would justify the means? By accusing somebody innocent of lying it would give us the opportunity to shed light on something else we want to direct attention to? Well after all, why would we care about the feeling of an innocent person as long as it serves the higher goal to shed light onto another truth?

Whether or not the victim told the truth doesn't matter because as it happens, it serves us well to discredit another persons reputation. That Prepon never did anything to us, never posted here and very likely told the truth does not matter. Let's call her a liar!

Now let me ask you a question. Are you completely out of your mind?
 
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

You didn't learn anything, did you?

So the end would justify the means? By accusing somebody innocent of lying it would give us the opportunity to shed light on something else we want to direct attention to? Well after all, why would we care about the feeling of an innocent person as long as it serves the higher goal to shed light onto another truth?

Whether or not the victim told the truth doesn't matter because as it happens, it serves us well to discredit another persons reputation. That Prepon never did anything to us, never posted here and very likely told the truth does not matter. Let's call her a liar!

Now let me ask you a question. Are you completely out of your mind?


As a celebrity, she is looked upon as an "opinion leader" and is expected to know what she is talking about. The fact that she spoke an untruth is not in question, she most assuredly did speak an untruth. Whether it was technically a lie, due to the way she worded it, possibly not a lie. But there are crimes of commission and omission. It is possible she has not read DMSMH, nor any other text that lays out scientology's view of gays. However, I find it VERY hard to believe she is unaware of the "churches" stance on the subject, especially after Paul Haggis' departure. So maybe not a lie, but definitely a half truth, which given her status as a celebrity, is just as bad. It's like telling a child that you are not aware of fire causing burns, just because you yourself have never been burned.
 

Balthasar

Patron Meritorious
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

snipped///
The fact that she spoke an untruth is not in question, she most assuredly did speak an untruth.

snipped//

How can you be so certain?

Also, I did question what you and others are asserting. Are you living in a bubble which makes you impervious to external influences?
 
Last edited:

He-man

Hero extraordinary
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

How can you be so certain?

Also, I did question what you and others are asserting. Are you living in a bubble which makes you impervious to external influences?

So... Are you saying she is unaware of what her "church" stands for? :confused2:

Ignorance is an extremely unattractive trait in this day and age.
 

Balthasar

Patron Meritorious
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

Laura Prepon could well be unaware of many things which are totally evident for us. Especially this gay bit gets overlooked easily.

Frankly, I also never witnessed a gay discrimination in any form while active in Scientology. Perhaps because there were no gay persons or they did simply not out themselves. I never encountered a gay person in Scientology. It wasn't an issue which surfaced.

I do remember that Hubbard's wrote about it being an aberration. He wrote that in 1950. Did you know that homosexual activity was illegal in Germany until 1969? So if you were Scientologist in Germany before 1969 or even a few years after, you wouldn't have given it a second thought and already forgotten about it in the next minute. Were it not for Miscavige joking about John Travalta PC files and leaking of this incident plus a couple of other high profile cases, little would we know about.

Now what begs the question is if, for example, John Travolta knows about Miscavige discriminating him with PC folder info? I am not even sure about that. Does Travolta know? If he knew, would he accept such outrageous behaviour of CoS? I don't think so. I believe John Travolta has no clue what is happening behind his back. Perceptions are diminished while in Scientology.

People reading ESMB regularly are much better informed about dodgy Scientology stuff than anyone inside Scientology ever could be. Also, if I would not read ESMB and other critical sites, I am not sure if I would remember the part of Hubbard's writing about it.

Now because we are on it - how often did Hubbard say being gay is an aberration, not sane etc? How many times would a Scientologist be exposed to these particular "LRH data" in the course of his normal study?
 
Last edited:
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

You seem to be a fan of Laura's, which is totally cool, I had the hots for her all through "That 70s Show". And it's possible she is a really nice person, but the fact remains that in this case, she presented a picture that leads the uninformed to an incorrect conclusion. Unless it has been changed as some suggest, the "gays are 1.1" is in Dianetics, which is supposed to be the first book a person reads. I never read it, but I came across it in other places during my 25 years in. Is it in "Pain & Sex"? Maybe. But mainly it was one of those "everyone knows" things that was common knowledge. Isn't it also covered in that big ass life history everyone fills out? Oh, and Grade 2, in the Joburg sec check if I remember correctly there are several questions on it in there. I don't know where LP is on the bridge, but I'm assuming they have been able to extract enough money from her for to at least be clear.


So, I am willing to give her the benefit of the doubt, and accept she really has not seen anything about his writings on the subject. But I am fairly certain that behind closed doors, she knows the way of it, and she knows she misled.
 

R2-45

Silver Meritorious Patron
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

In Dianetics, The Modern Science of Mental Health, L. Ron Hubbard, the Founder of the Church of Scientology, wrote:



The sexual pervert (and by this term,
Dianetics, to be brief, includes any and all forms of deviation in dynamic two such as homosexuality, lesbianism, sexual sadism, etc., and all down the catalog of Ellis and Krafft-Ebing) is actually quite ill physically.




L. Ron Hubbard, Dianetics, The Modern Science of Mental Health, Book Two, Chapter 5, p. 120 ((c) 1989 L. Ron Hubbard Library)
 

Balthasar

Patron Meritorious
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

Any more "LRH data" on homosexuality which a student would be exposed to beside the Dianetic book?

Confessionals or Sec Checks are not pertinent because here we would have questions, not statements.
 
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

Any more "LRH data" on homosexuality which a student would be exposed to beside the Dianetic book?

Confessionals or Sec Checks are not pertinent because here we would have questions, not statements.
You are very wrong there, when you say they are not pertinent.
 

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

Any more "LRH data" on homosexuality which a student would be exposed to beside the Dianetic book?

Confessionals or Sec Checks are not pertinent because here we would have questions, not statements.
The Scientology book Science of Survival, by L. Ron Hubbard, the Founder of the Church of Scientology, specifically defines Tone Level 1.1, the level of "covert hostility," as follows:
At 1.1, we have lying, to avoid real communication. * * * Here is the level of covert hostility, the most dangerous and wicked level on the tone scale. Here is the person who smiles while he inserts a knife blade between your vertebrae. * * * Here is the insincere flatterer who yet awaits only a moment of unguardedness to destroy. * * * This is the level of the pervert, the homosexual, the turncoat. 4
In Science of Survival Hubbard reiterates that "perverts," such as homosexuals, fall at 1.1 on the tone scale, the level of "covert hostility":
At 1.1 on the tone scale we enter the area of the most vicious reversal of the second dynamic 2. Here we have promiscuity, perversion, sadism, and irregular practices. . . . He is the harlot, the pervert, the unfaithful wife, free love, easy marriage and quick divorce, and general sexual disaster. 2
Scientology, and its Founder, L. Ron Hubbard, teach that one should not, and cannot, trust a gay or lesbian "1.1 pervert." To be more precise:
The person may claim to love others and to have the good of others as his foremost interest; yet, at the same moment, he works, unconsciously or otherwise, to injure or destroy the lives and reputations of people and also to destroy property. 3
For Hubbard and the Church of Scientology, the danger posed by gay and lesbian "1.1" "perverts" cannot be underestimated, and given the danger posed by lesbian and gay "1.1" "perverts," society is faced with only one choice if it is to survive:
No social order which desires to survive dares overlook its stratum 1.1's. No social order will survive which does not remove these people from its midst. 5
There is no room for gay and lesbian "1.1" "perverts" in society, if Hubbard is to be believed. Indeed, Scientology looks forward to the day when only individuals meeting Hubbard's standards will be given civil rights:
Perhaps at some distant date only the unaberrated person will be granted civil rights before the law. Perhaps the goal will be reached at some future time when only the unaberrated person can attain to and benefit from citizenship. These are desirable goals and would produce a marked increase in the survival ability and happiness of man. 6
To Hubbard and
the Church of Scientology, the solution to the problem of lesbian and gay "1.1" "perverts" is a simple one:
Such people should be taken from the society as rapidly as possible and uniformly institutionalized; for here is the level of the contagion of immorality, and the destruction of ethics;" 7
On the other hand, the Church of Scientology offers an alternative:
The only answers would seem to be the permanent quarantine of such persons from society to avoid the contagion of their insanities and the general turbulence which they bring to any order, thus forcing it lower on the scale, or processing such persons until they have attained a level on the tone scale which gives them value. 8
Hubbard explains that:
with an effective science to handle the problem, a society which would continue to endure perversion and all its sad and sordid effects doesn't deserve to survive. 9
Thus, the Church offers a choice. Gay and lesbian "1.1" "perverts" can avoid being quarantined or institutionalized by simply undergoing Church "processing" to raise their tone level so that they are no longer "perverts," but instead have "value."

Finally, for all of those aberrated persons below 2.0 on his Tone Scale, L. Ron Hubbard envisions two alternative final solutions:
There are only two answers for the handling of people from 2.0 down on the Tone Sale, neither one of which has anything to do with reasoning with them or listening to their justification of their acts. The first is to raise them on the Tone Scale by unentrubulating some of their theta by any one of the three valid processes. The other is to dispose of them quietly and without sorrow. 10

3 Science of Survival, Book One, Chapt. 8.
4 Science of Survival, Book 1, Chapt. 13.
5 Science of Survival, Book 1, Chapt. 13.
6 Dianetics, Book 3, Chapt. 10.
7 Science of Survival, Book 1, Chapt. 13.
8 Science of Survival, Book 1, Chapt. 21.
9 Dianetics, Book 2, Chapt. 5.
10 Science of Survival, at 170-71

See http://www.solitarytrees.net/pickets/atlanta/leaflets/gay.txt

Finally, let me reiterate a point that to date has been conveniently ignored. Because it has been conveniently ignored, I'll take the liberty of adding just a bit of emphasis.

1) EVERY SCIENTOLOGIST HAS A DUTY TO DO THE BASICS, AND HAS HAD THAT DUTY SINCE THE BASICS WERE RELEASED IN 2007.

2) THE FIRST BOOK ON THE BASICS IS DIANETICS, WHICH MUST BE READ COVER TO COVER.

3) THE NEXT BOOK ON THE BASICS IS SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, WHICH MUST BE READ COVER TO COVER.

4) LAURA PREPON IS A SCIENTOLOGIST, HAS BEEN FOR 15 YEARS, AND CERTAINLY SINCE THE BASICS WERE RELEASED IN 2007.

5) LAURA PREPON THEREFORE HAD A DUTY TO DO THE BASICS, INCLUDING READING DIANETICS AND SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL.

6) IT MAY THEREFORE BE INFERRED THAT LAURA PREPON READ THE HOMOPHOBIC MATERIAL IN DIANETICS.

7) IT MAY ALSO THEREFORE BE INFERRED THAT LAURA PREPON READ THE HOMOPHOBIC MATERIAL IN SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL.

8) THEREFORE, IT IS REASONABLE TO INFER THAT LAURA PREPON IS A LIAR WHEN SHE STATES THAT SHE HAS:
“NEVER COME ACROSS ANY PIECE OF INFORMATION THAT REMOTELY IS NEGATIVE OR DEROGATORY IN ANY WAY TOWARDS THE LGBT COMMUNITY.”
Finally, the idea that someone who has spent fifteen years in Scientology has “never come across any piece of information that remotely is negative or derogatory in any way towards the LGBT community” is risible.
 
Last edited:

CommunicatorIC

@IndieScieNews on Twitter
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

Confessionals or Sec Checks are not pertinent because here we would have questions, not statements.
Your position that "Confessionals or Sec Checks are not pertinent because here we would have questions, not statements," is not only wrong, but completely and obviously without any merit.

One is not going to be questioned by the Church of Scientology about a matter or an issue that is neither an overt nor something that could be "withheld."

For example, one is not going to be questioned during a Confessional or Sec Check regarding whether one wears brown socks, as opposed to black socks, or whether one prefers a windsor knot or half windsor knot, or prefers Ford or Chevrolet, or prefers to wear a shirt with or without cufflinks.

In contrast, one is going to be questioned during a Confessional or a Sec Check regarding whether one has been spreading dreaded "enthea,' or has read "entheta," or stole from the Church, or engaged in homosexual conduct, precisely because those would be overts and would be items that could be withheld.

The fact that during a Confessional or Sec Check the Church of Scientology questions a parishioner or staff member about homosexuality and/or homosexual acts therefore implies that the Church of Scientology believes such acts are "overt" (i.e., wrongful) acts that may be "withheld" (i.e., not voluntarily disclosed).
 
Last edited:

everfree

Patron Meritorious
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

Hubbard evidently never wavered from his "segregate the homos from society so they can't infect it" stance.

In the Mission Earth science fiction series that he wrote in the last years of his life, at the end the alien civilization rounds up all of the homosexuals (who Hubbard equates continually throughout the series with child molesters) and isolates them from the rest of society - on an island I think, it's been a long time - with the idea that that will prevent homosexuality from spreading throughout that society.
 

clamicide

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

I don't know how 'messed up' or not Prepon is, but remembering how folks were in the cult, I'd buy about anything.

There is the PR stance as one explanation---do whatever it takes to make Scientology look good, as that is the greatest good and we need to communicate at the public's reality level. Society's take on homosexuality is changing, so the PR might be looking to align with that--especially after the blowback on Prop 8.

Another possibility is she doesn't know or 'get it'. Easy for us now outside to say that, since it is in black and white and on tapes. But, I remember being in the cult, and fuck if people didn't gloss over and 'not know' stuff that they didn't agree with. Sometimes folks just get blank with cognitive dissonance.

The folks I knew who hated gays--hell, they sure as hell picked up on those references. Others would swear up and down if asked, that Hubs had nothing on it. No joke. With all the star rates and study tech, I knew Scios would just go completely blank on stuff they could not deal with. It truly was bizarre to witness. It was sort of a joke for some of us--how a lot folks didn't get things at times.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

The Scientology book Science of Survival, by L. Ron Hubbard, the Founder of the Church of Scientology, specifically defines Tone Level 1.1, the level of "covert hostility," as follows:In Science of Survival Hubbard reiterates that "perverts," such as homosexuals, fall at 1.1 on the tone scale, the level of "covert hostility":Scientology, and its Founder, L. Ron Hubbard, teach that one should not, and cannot, trust a gay or lesbian "1.1 pervert." To be more precise:For Hubbard and the Church of Scientology, the danger posed by gay and lesbian "1.1" "perverts" cannot be underestimated, and given the danger posed by lesbian and gay "1.1" "perverts," society is faced with only one choice if it is to survive:There is no room for gay and lesbian "1.1" "perverts" in society, if Hubbard is to be believed. Indeed, Scientology looks forward to the day when only individuals meeting Hubbard's standards will be given civil rights:To Hubbard and
the Church of Scientology, the solution to the problem of lesbian and gay "1.1" "perverts" is a simple one:On the other hand, the Church of Scientology offers an alternative: Hubbard explains that:Thus, the Church offers a choice. Gay and lesbian "1.1" "perverts" can avoid being quarantined or institutionalized by simply undergoing Church "processing" to raise their tone level so that they are no longer "perverts," but instead have "value."

Finally, for all of those aberrated persons below 2.0 on his Tone Scale, L. Ron Hubbard envisions two alternative final solutions:

3 Science of Survival, Book One, Chapt. 8.
4 Science of Survival, Book 1, Chapt. 13.
5 Science of Survival, Book 1, Chapt. 13.
6 Dianetics, Book 3, Chapt. 10.
7 Science of Survival, Book 1, Chapt. 13.
8 Science of Survival, Book 1, Chapt. 21.
9 Dianetics, Book 2, Chapt. 5.
10 Science of Survival, at 170-71

See http://www.solitarytrees.net/pickets/atlanta/leaflets/gay.txt

Finally, let me reiterate a point that to date has been conveniently ignored. Because it has been conveniently ignored, I'll take the liberty of adding t jusT a bit of emphasis.

1) EVERY SCIENTOLOGIST HAS A DUTY TO DO THE BASICS, AND HAS HAD THAT DUTY SINCE THE BASICS WERE RELEASED IN 2007.

2) THE FIRST BOOK ON THE BASICS IS DIANETICS, WHICH MUST BE READ COVER TO COVER.

3) THE NEXT BOOK ON THE BASICS IS SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL, WHICH MUST BE READ COVER TO COVER.

4) LAURA PREPON IS A SCIENTOLOGIST, HAS BEEN FOR 15 YEARS, AND CERTAINLY SINCE THE BASICS WERE RELEASED IN 2007.

5) LAURA PREPON THEREFORE HAD A DUTY TO DO THE BASICS, INCLUDING READING DIANETICS AND SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL.

6) IT MAY THEREFORE BE INFERRED THAT LAURA PREPON READ THE HOMOPHOBIC MATERIAL IN DIANETICS.

7) IT MAY ALSO THEREFORE BE INFERRED THAT LAURA PREPON READ THE HOMOPHOBIC MATERIAL IN SCIENCE OF SURVIVAL.

8) THEREFORE, IT IS REASONABLE TO INFER THAT LAURA PREPON IS A LIAR WHEN SHE STATES THAT SHE HAS:
Finally, the idea that someone who has spent fifteen years in Scientology has “never come across any piece of information that remotely is negative or derogatory in any way towards the LGBT community” is risable.



Outstanding post!

With all the well organized citations and quotes, it is one most concise and poignant debunkings of Scientology PR lies that I have ever seen.

It's one of Scientology's dirtiest little secrets--that its celebrities are shills and incorrigible liars.

Laura Prepon is nothing more or less than a propagandist liar. As is Tom Cruise, John Travolta, Kirstie Alley, Ann Archer, Kate Ceberano, Jenna Elfman, Juliette Lewis and all the other "I have never heard of Xenu or aliens" acceptable liars.

There is a reason that Scientology actors are the most "upstat" and "dedicated" Scientologists and sit in exclusive front row VIP seat at the events. Because they are actors who are good at memorizing and "making their own" the scripted lines they are told to deliver.
 

Gib

Crusader
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

Outstanding post!

With all the well organized citations and quotes, it is one most concise and poignant debunkings of Scientology PR lies that I have ever seen.

It's one of Scientology's dirtiest little secrets--that its celebrities are shills and incorrigible liars.

Laura Prepon is nothing more or less than a propagandist liar. As is Tom Cruise, John Travolta, Kirstie Alley, Ann Archer, Kate Ceberano, Jenna Elfman, Juliette Lewis and all the other "I have never heard of Xenu or aliens" acceptable liars.

There is a reason that Scientology actors are the most "upstat" and "dedicated" Scientologists and sit in exclusive front row VIP seat at the events. Because they are actors who are good at memorizing and "making their own" the scripted lines they are told to deliver.

Underlining all this 1.1 tone level and Hubbards evaluations of people (SOS) in their so called tone levels,

is the [STRIKE]fact[/STRIKE] lie from Hubbard that anybody not "clear" is insane and not to be trusted. The perfect trap for people to get busy and go "clear" and get involved and continue up the bridge.

And what's really interesting is that non clears reg people to go up the bridge thinking with the datum from hubbard that non clears have doubts and their reactive minds give them doubts thus it is OK to HARD SELL them. When the non clear reg has in fact no data to compare a "clear" to a "non-clear".

:roflmao:

Thank god I have observed non clears against clears. But, jeepers, it only took me 26 years, and only because I could now compare notes as on ESMB. :duh:
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Re: "Laura Prepon is a liar" about Scientology's position on homosexuality and gay ri

Underlining all this 1.1 tone level and Hubbards evaluations of people (SOS) in their so called tone levels,

is the [STRIKE]fact[/STRIKE] lie from Hubbard that anybody not "clear" is insane and not to be trusted. The perfect trap for people to get busy and go "clear" and get involved and continue up the bridge.

And what's really interesting is that non clears reg people to go up the bridge thinking with the datum from hubbard that non clears have doubts and their reactive minds give them doubts thus it is OK to HARD SELL them. When the non clear reg has in fact no data to compare a "clear" to a "non-clear".

:roflmao:

Thank god I have observed non clears against clears. But, jeepers, it only took me 26 years, and only because I could now compare notes as on ESMB. :duh:


Rant on brother!

Talking about spotting liars and "1.1s", here is a copy of my worksheet from the Review session I did just before leaving Scientology. . .


L&N

WHO OR WHAT IS THE MOST TREACHEROUS
1.1 LIAR YOU HAVE EVER KNOWN?

SPs.....x

Psychs
....x

Xenu
.....x

David Miscavige
.....LF

L. Ron Hubbard
. . .LFBD F/N VGIs
item indicated




The ethics officer told me to handle or disconnect. I couldn't decide what to do, so I did both by coming to ESMB.






 
Top