Code of Ethical Practice of Freezone

me myself & i

Patron Meritorious
There are not that many " standard tech" freezoners here. Much more of an independant stance, Roger B for example.

I don't really think its much of an issue, as in the FZ one can always vote with ones feet. Thus the excesses and problems connected with COS
can't really exist. Just leave and/or go somewhere else
.

Also FZ tech people are very well meaning.

But Terril that is so not fully true. It may partially true. But it is not wholly true. And please, setting semantics aside, take a look at how it is not only not wholly-true but smacks of the exact scientology type flippant lingo addressing serious issues that is the cause for the rise of anonymous in the world.

When you start playing with, or working with, or assisting with, or fucking with a human beings mind you start playing with fire my friend. And this is a board where numerous individuals have had their mind fucked with under the guise of being assisting with.

I'm with Gottabrain on this one. The silence of the group of freezoners here on the ESMB in regard to an agreed upon code of ethics for them in regard to their practicing scientology in the world is not only Frightening, it's Deafening.

If you are speaking for Roger, so be it.


mm&i
 

nw2394

Silver Meritorious Patron
I'm with Gottabrain on this one. The silence of the group of freezoners here on the ESMB in regard to an agreed upon code of ethics for them in regard to their practicing scientology in the world is not only Frightening, it's Deafening.

Well, it is not really deafening given that most of the more standard tech type FZers rarely even read what is here, let alone post here. Right or wrong many think this board is a rats nest. Thus this thread is asking an audience that is not present.

The nearest there is to a formal, organised FZ is IFA - I am sure they have some sort of code and some sort of complaints procedure. But even there many FZers are not a member of that.

Nick
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Well, it is not really deafening given that most of the more standard tech type FZers rarely even read what is here, let alone post here. Right or wrong many think this board is a rats nest. Thus this thread is asking an audience that is not present.

The nearest there is to a formal, organised FZ is IFA - I am sure they have some sort of code and some sort of complaints procedure. But even there many FZers are not a member of that.

Nick


'Cept thingie person was saying the group of ESMB FZers or something like that. I'm pretty sure that's what was meant. But there aren't that many FZers on ESMB. And you and Terril have both posted- as have I. (I'm no longer a Freezoner but am a supporter and friend of the FZ and of a number of FZers so hopefully you won't mind my referring to self here as partially fitting that particular bill.) It's not like there's scores of ESMB FZers who've not posted and are going ewwww ick, cooties!
 

me myself & i

Patron Meritorious
Well, it is not really deafening given that most of the more standard tech type FZers rarely even read what is here, let alone post here. Right or wrong many think this board is a rats nest. Thus this thread is asking an audience that is not present.[/Q]

I get it.

[Q]The nearest there is to a formal, organised FZ is IFA - I am sure they have some sort of code and some sort of complaints procedure. But even there many FZers are not a member of that.
Nick

That's my/our point Nick. Highlighted above and below. When one has the technology to fuck with someone elses mind, proven, and one chooses to have no, or sign no, or agree to no, code of ethics agreeable to the society/world at large where such minds can be fucked with, a flippant 'that's just the way it is' ain't gonna fly forever my friend. Which is precisely what I hear you saying. Sadly enough.

Time is on our side.

We are legion.

What anonymous was to the old scientology. We are to the new.

Not accepting the new scientology propoganda being implied as: 'that's just the way it is'.

No Nick. That's just the way it was.

Notice the absense of slant?

mm&i
 
Last edited:
Hi,

I am not an FZer though I certainly have a lot of friends who are.

I have reservations about some of the things in the FZ. A lot of exScns do. But I will not go into them here - this is your section of the forum. Peace. :)

I would really like to see of a Code of Professional Conduct or similar for the FZ, though. It would make me feel heaps better, especially with all the abuses that have gone on and continue to go on with the C of S.

What do you guys think? Wouldn't it be cool if there was a senior code of conduct for all of you to agree to?

Most of those who participate in the freezone actually DO try to implement the Auditor's Code & the Code of a Scientologist. To a great extent these two codes do serve as such codes for professional conduct. In contrast KSW is much less universally admired in its unaltered form.


Mark A. Baker
 

Veda

Sponsor
Anyone who calls himself a Scientologist, and takes Scientology and its Grade Chart seriously, and such things as the 'Code of a Scientologist' seriously, will usually also take 'KSW' seriously. However, he/she will also likely take Scientology's PR tech seriously, and may fashion "acceptable truths" for his/her intended audience (in this case, ESMB).

The Auditors code, when in Scientology, is just that. It's IN Scientology - if not in corporate Scientology, then certainly IN the subject of Scientology, a subject with a "Grade Chart," a "Grade Chart" that leads to the mind-grope "upper levels," and, if one is abiding by the 'Code of a Scientologist', will "insist upon standard and unvaried Scientology as an applied activity in ethics, processing, and administration..." and "increasing the numbers and strength of Scientology in the world."

Considering the duplicity inherent in Scientology, which, as with its manipulative and suggestive aspect, is so pervasive that Scientologists become numb to it, while being influenced and shaped by it, such codes as the 'Auditor's Code' (which seems to make sense and be benign, if one ignores that to which it is attached), and the 'Code of a Scientologist', which is mostly PR with a few serious points slipped in - the final version having been written by Hubbard when Scientology was at its zenith as a deceptive, totalist "destructive cult" - discussion of Scientology with Scientologists is, to say the least, likely to be "problematic."
 
G

Gottabrain

Guest
Anyone who calls himself a Scientologist, and takes Scientology and its Grade Chart seriously, and such things as the 'Code of a Scientologist' seriously, will usually also take 'KSW' seriously. However, he/she will also likely take Scientology's PR tech seriously, and may fashion "acceptable truths" for his/her intended audience (in this case, ESMB).

The Auditors code, when in Scientology, is just that. It's IN Scientology - if not in corporate Scientology, then certainly IN the subject of Scientology, a subject with a "Grade Chart," a "Grade Chart" that leads to the mind-grope "upper levels," and, if one is abiding by the 'Code of a Scientologist', will "insist upon standard and unvaried Scientology as an applied activity in ethics, processing, and administration..." and "increasing the numbers and strength of Scientology in the world."

Considering the duplicity inherent in Scientology, which, as with its manipulative and suggestive aspect, is so pervasive that Scientologists become numb to it, while being influenced and shaped by it, such codes as the 'Auditor's Code' (which seems to make sense and be benign, if one ignores that to which it is attached), and the 'Code of a Scientologist', which is mostly PR with a few serious points slipped in - the final version having been written by Hubbard when Scientology was at its zenith as a deceptive, totalist "destructive cult" - discussion of Scientology with Scientologists is, to say the least, likely to be "problematic."

^^^^THAT^^^^^

Neither the Code of a Scientologist or The Auditor's Code make any definite statement about protecting and defending the individual's human rights, dignity and rights to choose their priorities in their lives as they see fit.

The FZ Auditors are here because they supposedly do not agree with the human rights abuses of the C of S.

I never expected this to receive the cold response it has in the Free Zone. The silence is deafening.

Show me you defend human rights. Show us.
 

the-ghostwhowalks

Patron with Honors
Thanks, Terril! :) Having a Code protects the counselor as well as the individual. It also would show that you guys have a much higher ethical standard than those practicing within the C of S and would not abuse individuals.

If you've got it, flaunt it. Let them know you are better.

Here's a start. How about adding to it or commenting?

This is adapted from one of Australia's Professional Code of Ethics:

In accordance with our expertise and in the context of our relationship to Independent Scientologists in the Freezone, we commit ourselves to protect the following rights of those receiving our Scientology services:

1. the right of individuals to be treated with respect;
2. the rights of the individual to life, liberty, and security;
3. the right of individuals to have their religious, familial and
cultural identity respected;
4. the rights of individuals to self-determination;
5. the right to an individual program suitable to the individual's needs;
6. the right to privacy and confidentiality;
7. the recognition that human beings are social beings with
social and other needs beyond counseling;

And we will protect these rights no matter how frail,
physically or mentally disabled, or financially, socially or
psychologically vulnerable, the person may be.

We further recognise that all partners in the delivery of Scientology services in the Freezone have the same fundamental human rights which carry with them the duties and obligations set out in the Guide to Ethical Conduct.


I really like this gottabrain - I have had concerns along these lines myself for a long time - Thanks , I think your suggestions are excellent :)
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
There's a neat small PDF here from the British Association for Counselling & Psychotherapy entitled Ethical Framework for Good Practice in Counselling & Psychotherapy.

It is too long to quote in full, but worth reading for FZ practitioners to see what is acceptable in the outside world.

Paul
 

Terril park

Sponsor
There's a neat small PDF here from the British Association for Counselling & Psychotherapy entitled Ethical Framework for Good Practice in Counselling & Psychotherapy.

It is too long to quote in full, but worth reading for FZ practitioners to see what is acceptable in the outside world.

Paul

Yes it seems to be all good stuff, though there dosn't seem to be anything equivalent to the auditors code point on evaluation.

"The fundamental values of counselling and psychotherapy include a commitment to:
n Respecting human rights and dignity
n Protecting the safety of clients
n Ensuring the integrity of practitioner-client relationships
n Enhancing the quality of professional knowledge and its application
n Alleviating personal distress and suffering
n Fostering a sense of self that is meaningful to the person(s) concerned
n Increasing personal effectiveness
n Enhancing the quality of relationships between people
n Appreciating the variety of human experience and culture
n Striving for the fair and adequate provision of counselling and psychotherapy services

Values inform principles. They represent an important way of expressing a general ethical commitment"

These guidelines are for a wide variety of methods and in places points out potential ethical problems, such as below, and elsewhere raises the point
of ethical problems when a client may harm self or others.

"However, practitioners will encounter
circumstances in which it is impossible to reconcile all the applicable principles and choosing between
principles may be required. A decision or course of action does not necessarily become unethical merely
because it is contentious or other practitioners would have reached different conclusions in similar
circumstances. A practitioner’s obligation is to consider all the relevant circumstances with as much care
as is reasonably possible and to be appropriately accountable for decisions made."

Its interesting how this ethical framework parallels scientology procedure,
strongly recommending an equivalent of a C/S, and a commitment to improving skills/training. Even to equivalents of comm evs and appeal comm evs. The latter I'd trust more under this association than in COS.
 

Terril park

Sponsor
Most of those who participate in the freezone actually DO try to implement the Auditor's Code & the Code of a Scientologist. To a great extent these two codes do serve as such codes for professional conduct. In contrast KSW is much less universally admired in its unaltered form.


Mark A. Baker

I think its important to also include the Creed where human rights are set out.

Also note that the point in the auditors code re granting beingness is a very
powerful and important point, and that point alone covers much of the
Ethical Framework Paul has linked to.
 

Veda

Sponsor
I wouldn't want it to be illegal but

I must admit, it's slightly disconcerting to consider that someone who cannot discern the sordid insincerity of Scientology's phony 'Creed', written as accompanying PR-cover for its "Religion angle," would be in a position to influence the minds of others in an intimate fashion, providing "Hubbard Guidance" as others are led "up the Scientology Bridge." http://scientologistsfreezone.com/LRH2.jpg
 

nw2394

Silver Meritorious Patron
Time is on our side.

We are legion.

What anonymous was to the old scientology. We are to the new.

Not accepting the new scientology propoganda being implied as: 'that's just the way it is'.

No Nick. That's just the way it was.

Notice the absense of slant?

mm&i

What? Is this some sort of threat? Yawn. I am not even in the business of selling any of this - you're preaching to the wrong person. Go preach to someone who might give a shit.

Nick
 

Terril park

Sponsor
I must admit, it's slightly disconcerting to consider that someone who cannot discern the sordid insincerity of Scientology's phony 'Creed', written as accompanying PR-cover for its "Religion angle," would be in a position to influence the minds of others in an intimate fashion, providing "Hubbard Guidance" as others are led "up the Scientology Bridge." http://scientologistsfreezone.com/LRH2.jpg

You've often made such disparaging comments.

And yes the creed has been honoured in the breech so often.

You often claim that I and others use PR.

That scientologists are not able to discern anything.

You here blatently use black PR.

You describe the creed as " sordid insincerity", " Phony".

As PR cover for its "religion angle".

That its a bad thing leading others "up the Scientology Bridge."


So you don't subscribe to human rights?

The Creed expresses many points re humann rights.

We could assume her that you and human rights are distant.

A Creed by definition embodies fundamental beliefs.

You seem to be unaware of that.
 

Veda

Sponsor
You've often made such disparaging comments.

And yes the creed has been honoured in the breech so often.

You often claim that I and others use PR.

That scientologists are not able to discern anything.

You here blatently use black PR.

You describe the creed as " sordid insincerity", " Phony".

As PR cover for its "religion angle".

That its a bad thing leading others "up the Scientology Bridge."


So you don't subscribe to human rights?

The Creed expresses many points re humann rights.

We could assume her that you and human rights are distant.


A Creed by definition embodies fundamental beliefs.

You seem to be unaware of that. [Emphasis added]

'Ron's Journal 68' - Hubbard begins with a pep talk and "explanation," directed at the good intentions of naive well-meaning Scientologists, then, once they're "set up," he proceeds to the next step: a description of manipulative tactics to be used on the 'wogs'.

"Each time Scientology is attacked, we will build into society, if all of you do this, we'll build into society an actual stimulus response mechanism whereas an attack on Scientology is actually an attack on human rights."

(See 4:43 - 5:03 of video below):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAFhqHTTD7s

"Know the mores of your public opinion, what they hate. That's the enemy. What they love. That's you."

L. Ron Hubbard, from the confidential issue, 'Battle Tactics' of 16 February 1969.

"The objective is to be identified as attackers of popularly considered evils. This declassifies us from former labels. It reclassifies our attackers as evil people."

L. Ron Hubbard, from the confidential issue, 'Black Propaganda' of 12 January 1972.

Scientology, as designed by its founder, is covert (sneaky) and, just as it expects Scientologists to manipulate 'wogs' and potential 'raw meat', it also manipulates its own followers, including well meaning people who've been hooked (and hooks require bait, the bait being the positives, or seeming positives, of the subject).

It's not uncommon for Scientologists to unconsciously use aspects of Scientology of which they do not have direct awareness, but which influence them, nonetheless.

One reason why it's important to expose every dark nook and cranny of the secretive subject of Scientology is the hope that these (partially unconscious) Scientologists become conscious and, as a result, move beyond Scientology's manipulations.
 
Last edited:
Top