Hi, my name is Wayne Froemke (also known as "Safe").
First of all, I am now finally an ex-Scientologist (if we define a Scientologist, one who believes in the religious ideas of L. Ron Hubbard.) At this point, if one wants to label me anything that has to do with Scientology, call me a Scientology technologist who is free to apply whatever works without any dogma of KSW.
My religion is now Progressive Christianity. So as far as religion goes, I'm a Progressive Christian.
After being too "unruly" with the truth on the "Scientolopedia" and "Free Scientologist" Facebook groups, I realized there was no religionist-free Scientology groups on Facebook. So I started new one, with this in mind, recently called "Skeptical Scientologists", which name caused an uproar with a scathing letter to me from David Hall of scientology-cult.com, claiming I was trying to unmock the independent Scientology movement.
I cannot associate with the independent movement because of their rigid religiosity. Most believe the same as church Scientologists, except they're independent of the church. But it's still more of the same KSW type controlling dogma. I can't have that.
What I'm trying to unmock and deinculcate is KSW, because it's done nothing but lead to tyranny. I prove in my group that KSW is an IMPLANT. In spite of that, some are still having trouble that LRH implanted them and lied to them. Recently now, I've posed the question, Did LRH try to control Scientologists? So far, dead head-in-the sand silence. Then I show text from LRH himself in 1952, that if somebody is trying to control them, they are being lied to. I've actually found this true in many cases.
I've also found that, apparently, every Scientology Facebook group is CLOSED. What kind of outreach and transparency example is that? I started closed at first, and now have 14 members, but it's not growing very fast. So I'd like your opinions, and perhaps you can help me.
1) What do you think of me making my group OPEN so anybody can join? I want to still have a safe place for those who may still use the tech but don't subscribe to KSW, worship LRH, or even worship any of his words, knowing some tech may be good or bad.
2) Would anybody here join my group and help me with my battle in trying to open the minds about how Hubbard inculcated them and that it wasn't just Miscavige? The antagonism I've gotten so far from the independent field is that I may be starting a new "Skeptical Scientologist" movement, and if that would ever happen, I'd be thrilled, though in the beginning, there was no intention to do this. It was the FEAR I got from the indies that made me recognize the fear of a "Skeptical" movement that were Scientologists. I had no idea this idea created such a threat to them.
So I could certainly use the help by others here joining me. My only rules there is to stay on topic in each thread, and to not use ad hominem, and try to use logical debate. Other than that, the turf for discussion and argument is wide open.
As a closed group, I don't believe I'm going to be able to count on their networking contacts to grow the membership. I think I have to make it open. Besides, the idea of a closed group sickens me.
Any help from those who still believe in the validity of at least some remnants of Scientology tech would be helpful. If you don't find any of the tech true, then this is not a group you would likely enjoy, however, you're still welcome.
I do talk about my Progressive Christianity there sometimes as a way to compare what has and is going on with Christianity and Scientology. Both have "terrible texts". It is a good way to communicate analogies of the same type of bullshit.
Again, I appreciate any possible help.
If you want, you can friend me on my facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/wayne.froemke
My group facebook page is at http://www.facebook.com/groups/347797335311190
Nobody can call me a squirrel because I no longer represent myself as a Scientologist. What a freedom!
First of all, I am now finally an ex-Scientologist (if we define a Scientologist, one who believes in the religious ideas of L. Ron Hubbard.) At this point, if one wants to label me anything that has to do with Scientology, call me a Scientology technologist who is free to apply whatever works without any dogma of KSW.
My religion is now Progressive Christianity. So as far as religion goes, I'm a Progressive Christian.
After being too "unruly" with the truth on the "Scientolopedia" and "Free Scientologist" Facebook groups, I realized there was no religionist-free Scientology groups on Facebook. So I started new one, with this in mind, recently called "Skeptical Scientologists", which name caused an uproar with a scathing letter to me from David Hall of scientology-cult.com, claiming I was trying to unmock the independent Scientology movement.
I cannot associate with the independent movement because of their rigid religiosity. Most believe the same as church Scientologists, except they're independent of the church. But it's still more of the same KSW type controlling dogma. I can't have that.
What I'm trying to unmock and deinculcate is KSW, because it's done nothing but lead to tyranny. I prove in my group that KSW is an IMPLANT. In spite of that, some are still having trouble that LRH implanted them and lied to them. Recently now, I've posed the question, Did LRH try to control Scientologists? So far, dead head-in-the sand silence. Then I show text from LRH himself in 1952, that if somebody is trying to control them, they are being lied to. I've actually found this true in many cases.
I've also found that, apparently, every Scientology Facebook group is CLOSED. What kind of outreach and transparency example is that? I started closed at first, and now have 14 members, but it's not growing very fast. So I'd like your opinions, and perhaps you can help me.
1) What do you think of me making my group OPEN so anybody can join? I want to still have a safe place for those who may still use the tech but don't subscribe to KSW, worship LRH, or even worship any of his words, knowing some tech may be good or bad.
2) Would anybody here join my group and help me with my battle in trying to open the minds about how Hubbard inculcated them and that it wasn't just Miscavige? The antagonism I've gotten so far from the independent field is that I may be starting a new "Skeptical Scientologist" movement, and if that would ever happen, I'd be thrilled, though in the beginning, there was no intention to do this. It was the FEAR I got from the indies that made me recognize the fear of a "Skeptical" movement that were Scientologists. I had no idea this idea created such a threat to them.
So I could certainly use the help by others here joining me. My only rules there is to stay on topic in each thread, and to not use ad hominem, and try to use logical debate. Other than that, the turf for discussion and argument is wide open.
As a closed group, I don't believe I'm going to be able to count on their networking contacts to grow the membership. I think I have to make it open. Besides, the idea of a closed group sickens me.
Any help from those who still believe in the validity of at least some remnants of Scientology tech would be helpful. If you don't find any of the tech true, then this is not a group you would likely enjoy, however, you're still welcome.
I do talk about my Progressive Christianity there sometimes as a way to compare what has and is going on with Christianity and Scientology. Both have "terrible texts". It is a good way to communicate analogies of the same type of bullshit.
Again, I appreciate any possible help.
If you want, you can friend me on my facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/wayne.froemke
My group facebook page is at http://www.facebook.com/groups/347797335311190
Nobody can call me a squirrel because I no longer represent myself as a Scientologist. What a freedom!