A Great Man

On July 1st a great man passed. His name was Raymond Peace. He was on this earth for 90 years. He was a great man because he understood the secret to life was love. He loved everyone and everyone who came into contact with him couldn't help but love him back.

He got into Scientology in Austin Texas and came to LA about 10 years ago. During his stay in LA he was always available to help anyone who needed it. He volunteered for more things than anyone I've ever seen. He was a volunteer minister because he loved people and knew he could help them just with his admiration and appreciation for the person, together with a big dose of enthusiasm.

Everyone knew you could depend on Raymond to get things done. His friends started referring to him as an OT, meaning "Operating Texan". He liked that title so much that he put it at the top of his business card. The Church did not get the joke and raised a big stink over this!

About a year ago he moved back to Texas to be with his family, so he hasn't been around to see the Anonymous protests. But if he had been here I can imagine what he would have done. He was never afraid of committing the "only crime in the universe", that of being there and communicating. I could just envision him walking out to greet each and everyone of us with a warm smile and a firm handshake and telling us the story about how he became known as an Operating Texan. And he would have danced with all the ladies.
He loved dancing with the ladies! He would have loved us all and we would have loved him back.
And we would have seen that Scientology in the hands of someone with love in his heart and soul would do no harm. There would be no reason to protest if Scientology were run by men such as Raymond. Love does not fair game. Love does not RPF. Love does not disconnect families. Love does not send goons out to harass those who disagree with it. Love has no secrets or crimes. Love simply admires and appreciates and spreads it's love far and wide.

Godspeed Raymond, thanks for being here and sharing your love.:thumbsup:
 

byte301

Crusader
He sounds like a lovely man. Sorry I never met him but I have known people like him. They glow. So sorry for this loss.
 

Cat's Squirrel

Gold Meritorious Patron
It is a lovely example, sure, and I agree with the sentiments you express but; but since this is a critical website; what was he like before he entered Scientology? Was it the application of the Tech that allowed him to blossom in that way?

I have my own example; a delightful man on the Isle of Wight called Leonard Dunn whom I was fortunate enough to meet after he'd finished NOTS. At 77 he still walked more than 10 miles a day and said he was in excellent health and enjoying life immensely.
 

Feral

Rogue male
AS,

Thanks for posting that it melts my heart. He sounds like the best of everything that is truly important
 

Alanzo

Bardo Tulpa
There would be no reason to protest if Scientology were run by men such as Raymond. Love does not fair game. Love does not RPF. Love does not disconnect families. Love does not send goons out to harass those who disagree with it. Love has no secrets or crimes. Love simply admires and appreciates and spreads it's love far and wide.

That is correct.

It was a devastating thing to have a person like DM take over the Church of Scientology.

And the idea that no other Scientologist has taken control of the Church from him in 26 years says a lot about the self-determinism that Scientology produces in people.

Welcome to ESMB, AS.
 

alex

Gold Meritorious Patron
It is a lovely example, sure, and I agree with the sentiments you express but; but since this is a critical website; what was he like before he entered Scientology? Was it the application of the Tech that allowed him to blossom in that way?

I have my own example; a delightful man on the Isle of Wight called Leonard Dunn whom I was fortunate enough to meet after he'd finished NOTS. At 77 he still walked more than 10 miles a day and said he was in excellent health and enjoying life immensely.

I would take issue with your assertion that this is a critical site.

It says above that it is available to "freely discuss mutual experiences in Scientology....and recovering from a cult experience."

That could include people, and I think does, who's intent and focus is not on criticism.

Please do not help to create an exclusionary attitude.

alex
 

Zinjifar

Silver Meritorious Sponsor
By Scientology's own 'evaluation', anything but 100% Compliance with Scientology is suppressive, critical, objectionable.

ESMB *is* a 'critical site', because it's not in 100% Compliance with Scientology, including scientology theory on the discussion of Scientology.

Does this mean that one can't discuss Scientology except negatively? No. It means that there is no requirement to discuss Scientology in terms acceptable to the Scientology Philosophy (or the 'Church', movement or chowder and marching society)

Zinj
 

feline

Patron Meritorious
I would take issue with your assertion that this is a critical site.

It says above that it is available to "freely discuss mutual experiences in Scientology....and recovering from a cult experience."

That could include people, and I think does, who's intent and focus is not on criticism.

Please do not help to create an exclusionary attitude.

alex

Alex, I didn't see anything exclusionary in Cat's post. He simply asked if there was knowledge that Raymond's love of life was a product of the tech. I would have asked the same, but Cat's got there first.

I think that the things people embrace form much of their demeanor and attitude. If Raymond did find his center as a result of tech wins, that is great. Or perhaps it is that he was just gentle natured to begin with. Either way, asking the question isn't exclusionary or even critical. Recognizing that critical discussion is a part of what we do here isn't exclusionary. It simply IS.
 

Cat's Squirrel

Gold Meritorious Patron
By Scientology's own 'evaluation', anything but 100% Compliance with Scientology is suppressive, critical, objectionable.

ESMB *is* a 'critical site', because it's not in 100% Compliance with Scientology, including scientology theory on the discussion of Scientology.

Does this mean that one can't discuss Scientology except negatively? No. It means that there is no requirement to discuss Scientology in terms acceptable to the Scientology Philosophy (or the 'Church', movement or chowder and marching society)

Zinj

Exactly. Here's a good online definition of the word "critical";

–adjective
1. inclined to find fault or to judge with severity, often too readily.
2. occupied with or skilled in criticism.
3. involving skillful judgment as to truth, merit, etc.; judicial: a critical analysis.

4. of or pertaining to critics or criticism: critical essays.
5. providing textual variants, proposed emendations, etc.: a critical edition of Chaucer.
6. pertaining to or of the nature of a crisis: a critical shortage of food.
7. of decisive importance with respect to the outcome; crucial: a critical moment.
8. of essential importance; indispensable: a critical ingredient.
9. Medicine/Medical. (of a patient's condition) having unstable and abnormal vital signs and other unfavorable indicators, as loss of appetite, poor mobility, or unconsciousness.
10. Physics.
a. pertaining to a state, value, or quantity at which one or more properties of a substance or system undergo a change.
b. (of fissionable material) having enough mass to sustain a chain reaction.
[Origin: 1580–90; critic + -al1]

—Related forms
crit·i·cal·ly, adverb
crit·i·cal·i·ty, crit·i·cal·ness, noun

—Synonyms 1. captious, censorious, carping, faultfinding, caviling. 3. discriminating, exact, precise.

–adjective
1. inclined to find fault or to judge with severity, often too readily.
2. occupied with or skilled in criticism.
3. involving skillful judgment as to truth, merit, etc.; judicial: a critical analysis.
4. of or pertaining to critics or criticism: critical essays.
5. providing textual variants, proposed emendations, etc.: a critical edition of Chaucer.
6. pertaining to or of the nature of a crisis: a critical shortage of food.
7. of decisive importance with respect to the outcome; crucial: a critical moment.
8. of essential importance; indispensable: a critical ingredient.
9. Medicine/Medical. (of a patient's condition) having unstable and abnormal vital signs and other unfavorable indicators, as loss of appetite, poor mobility, or unconsciousness.
10. Physics.
a. pertaining to a state, value, or quantity at which one or more properties of a substance or system undergo a change.
b. (of fissionable material) having enough mass to sustain a chain reaction.
[Origin: 1580–90; critic + -al1]

—Related forms
crit·i·cal·ly, adverb
crit·i·cal·i·ty, crit·i·cal·ness, noun

—Synonyms 1. captious, censorious, carping, faultfinding, caviling. 3. discriminating, exact, precise.
 

ThisIsIt

Patron with Honors
This discussion about "critical" reminds me of the question on the personality test that asks whether or not I am critical after reading a book or seeing a movie...something like that anyway. It always was a difficult one for me to answer because I was not sure what to make of "critical" in the question. :confused2:

I used to change may answer on purpose every time to see if it made a difference. It did! That "Lack of Accord" column was affected.

Am I guilty of screwing with the results? :whistling:

Nah...:yes:

ThisIsIt
 
Thanks for your replies. Regarding Cats Squirrel's question, I feel that Raymond was just naturally this way. I don't know for sure because I didn't know him before he got into Scientology. But I do know that he did not go up the bridge very far. In my opinion he didn't need to, he was already operating at a higher level than any "certified ot" I'd ever seen. If you don't have love in your heart to begin with I don't think Scientology is likely to put it there. Maybe in the beginning when you are doing TR-0 with somebody and you cognite that he's just like you, your affinity for others may rise. But without the love, you're more likely to end up working for OSA than being a caring human being.

Raymond attracted people to him who also operated on the basis of love. His close friends, many of whom are old time Scientologists and OTs are all beautiful people.

The recent events have gotten me thinking about life. Seems to me there are 2 types of people on this planet. Those who love people and those who use people. Unfortunately those who love are naturally trusting of others and the users are quite good at trickery, so often you will find good people doing the bidding of those whose desire is to dominate. This is as much the case in organized Scientology as it is in the US government or any group and is perhaps the basis of all the problems on earth.
 
"Operating Texan" LMFAO, sweeeeeeet. I want to be one! He should give G double you a few lessons, I think that sumbitch needs to go to cramming.
 

scientrollogy

Patron with Honors
sadly..

i cant keep my fingers from the keyboard..

community is INclusive as opposed to EXclusive, it saddens me to think that a brilliant old soul like the deceased spent his last years being duped into volunteer ministers or anything acsociated with RTC.

There are many voluteer groups in America & around the world, the charity shops, and community groups, many who use space provided by churches that don't have Gestapos etc

i would urge anyone to choose almost ANY other org to volunteer through, who knows the effort might even be worth more than a few bucks or a bit of good PR for the Cult.

Anyways this site isn't totally critical of Sci, in fact the mods here are far more allowing than i would be. For instance, on http://scientrology.org which i control, you won't see the word "Church" within reading distance of "Scientology"
 

Feral

Rogue male
Scientrollogy, The church ...and Hubbard appealed to the very best aspects in people, their loyalty, hope for mankind, generousity and courage, then having recruited them and gotten their participation from the goodness of their hearts proceeded to twist them onto the Scios you see on you-tube.

It is almost one for one. Some just don't twist so easily.

I am sorry this thread may not have been the best place for my comment
 

Cat's Squirrel

Gold Meritorious Patron
Thanks for your replies. Regarding Cats Squirrel's question, I feel that Raymond was just naturally this way. I don't know for sure because I didn't know him before he got into Scientology. But I do know that he did not go up the bridge very far. In my opinion he didn't need to, he was already operating at a higher level than any "certified ot" I'd ever seen. If you don't have love in your heart to begin with I don't think Scientology is likely to put it there. Maybe in the beginning when you are doing TR-0 with somebody and you cognite that he's just like you, your affinity for others may rise. But without the love, you're more likely to end up working for OSA than being a caring human being.

Raymond attracted people to him who also operated on the basis of love. His close friends, many of whom are old time Scientologists and OTs are all beautiful people.

The recent events have gotten me thinking about life. Seems to me there are 2 types of people on this planet. Those who love people and those who use people. Unfortunately those who love are naturally trusting of others and the users are quite good at trickery, so often you will find good people doing the bidding of those whose desire is to dominate. This is as much the case in organized Scientology as it is in the US government or any group and is perhaps the basis of all the problems on earth.

Good post. :) Sadly I can't see a solution to the point you make in your third paragraph.
 
Top