TG1, no problems.
I consider myself a bit of an expert in this subject because I am an openly gay ex-Scio and count an openly gay attorney (Graham Berry) as a dear friend.
Scientology is notoriously hateful & hostile towards homosexuality and the gay community in general. As many an ex-Scio can tell you, there is a HUGE disconnect between what Scientology purports to be the facts from a purely PR and marketing/profitability front ("Show me the money..") and what they truly believe and put out to it's subservient members.
Keith Relkin, a 2nd generation Scientologist tried to pull a charade on the public when he proclaimed himself to be a happy, productive, openly gay Scientologist: http://www.liveandgrow.org/fab-scn.html
I posted a history on Keith and his efforts to decieve:
Interestingly, a member of Keith's "Clear Rainbow" Yahoo! group (long disbanded) was Rex Fowler, the OTVII owner of Fowler Software, awaiting trial on 1st degree murder charges in Denver, CO. Rex posted as "OT Cowboy".
Scientology's hatred of homsexuals is clearly apparent in the dead agenting & Fair Game tactics I was exposed to when I spoke out against the cult. The same happened to Graham Berry. Our sexual orientation became a focal point in OSA's flagrant attempts to use it as a means to accuse us of being child molesters, deliberately infecting others with AIDS, and engaging in bestiality, etc. solely intended to slander and demean. (I am HIV+; Graham Berry is not).
I continue to get emails from people about Scientology's official take on homosexuality. Obviously, the cult's PR attempts to distance themselves from how they truly feel about it, continues to confuse & befuddle people today. Honestly, I get quite tired of talking about it and trying to explain the two sides of the organization.
suggest asking for some quotes from Quentin.
In other words, don't adopt a false valence. Makes sense to me.
Have you ever wondered why the whites even thought of using blacks as slaves? Because they thought of them as animals - a lesser life form.
Now, the white race has learned that blacks can do anything that the white person can do, thus are equals. The white race is swallowing that bullet.
Next comes the homosexual bullet.
Looking again at the definition of the 2D, bisexuality would be the natural thing for a spirit that can inhabit a male or female body. Revulsion for sex with either male or female would be aberrated.(1) Homophobia therefore is aberrated. I'm not saying that all good scientologists must have bisexual experiences but if someone believes they are a spirit and not a body the revulsion of same sex sex, or opposite sex sex would be proof they are being their body have case or they are being their social conditioning, all of which are wrong in cult terms.
What upset Rong most about gayness was public opinion, he was PTS to middle class morality. He didn't want scandal, he didnt want people to think his tech failed or that he was the type of father that could produce a gay son. Per his understanding that would prove that Mary Sue was stronger than him, as gay boys result from strong mothers and week fathers.(2)
Also I do remember the bit in mission earth where some lesbians got serviced by a real man and became straight instantly. He just didn't understand the concept. He wasn't very good at looking from someone else's viewpoint.
Didn't Ron claim to be Cecil Rhodes in past life?
Didn't Cecil Rhodes have homosexual tendencies?:confused2:
No doubt about it, matey!
Simplistic views like normal or perverse come from religious bigots and the porn trade, not from reality. Not all men that have sex with other men consider themselves to be homosexuals. Humans are very complicated beings.
I know an Egyptian man who was arrested for willingly bending over for another guy. The guy who shagged him was doing nothing wrong, he was a witness at the trial! Cultures vary on concepts, to the Egyptians the man with the erection pumping away was just doing what comes naturally while the guy biting his pillow was a danger to decent society.
Religions and law should have nothing to do with sex when it it is between consenting adults.
For some men sexual enjoyment is about being dominant. Often the dominance of a man over a woman. To me that is perverse, but it is fine by most religious texts, even if a bit of force enters in to it. Even if it's at controlling bodies on the tome scale.
I think current labels of gay bi or straight are vastly inadequate. Sexuality is variable, it varies between individuals and families and cultures. At it's best sex can be fun and enjoyable, emotionally uplifting regardless of the sex of the people involved, certainly not deadly serious and the subject of blackmail by a cult.
All I can say is that if family's who suck up to the SoS bull and other claptrap regarding LRH's view on homosexuality fully applied the LRH tech then they would be disconnecting form their homosexual children, writing up SP declares on them and even fairgaming them.
For someone who claimed to undestand a lot about the analytical mind and the reactive mind, two things which I have yet to see proof of their existence, LRH sure could not make a plain and simple conclusion such as...
Not all homosexuals are perverts
Not all perverts are homosexuals
If LRH had to use full programming logic and write in exclusions privy to all of human behavior he would not have been able to write Science of Survival in 3 days.
Regarding his charts from that book - all theoretical.
Someone might add theoretical bullshit.
But I imagine that to LRH "theory" meant the same as "truth" when it was his theory that was being considered.
I think more appropriately Hubbard could not confront the "crime" that his theory was headed for the sewers.
At that point he would have to make it a "crime" to not be in agreement with his "theory" or rather to not consider his "theory" to be "truth".
Another New Age perspective, however, is that of Eckhart Tolle, author of The Power of Now. Starting with the idea that "the realization that you are 'different' from others may force you to dissidentify from socially conditioned patterns of thought and behavior," he claims that being gay can help in the "quest for enlightenment", but only so long as one does not "develop a sense of identity based on... gayness."
e.g., Will Truman of Will & Grace, I would find attractive, but Jack would send me batty in less than a week. It should be noted that I refer to the characters because both actors are straight; Whereas John Barrowman--Captain Jack in Dr Who 2005+ and Torchwood is genuinely gay and was rejected from Will and Grace because the casting staff didn't think he was "gay" enough!?
I do note that most of this thread has been devoted to male homosexuality, and female homosexuality hasn't exactly attracted much attention--again I have worked with gay females any have no problem, but start to have problems with I encounter the pseudo-trucker personality of black singlet, really short hair and therefore project an over "masculine" ~ism that is just as destructive to their social perception.