Homosexuals- Treatment of in Scientology

I agree with Um - read science of survival. scientologists thinks gays are evil. period. anything else is a lie.

This is overly simplistic. Most of the freezoners I've known don't recognize a person being gay as some sort of "issue". Back in the days I was a member of the church the Co$, similar attitudes were common at the mission where I did services.

I've known several gay scientologists. All eventually left the church because of church practices. Not all left because of church attitudes about gays.

Hubbard was fixated on the popular attitudes current during much of his lifetime. These attitudes reflected the cultural bias of his youth & earlier adulthood. Well, the Stonewall Riot didn't happen until 1969. It occurred precisely because homosexuality was at that time STILL not regarded as "socially acceptable behavior" by the general society & laws. By that time Hubbard was approaching 60; not an age where many individuals are open to the expansion & adjustment of lifelong attitudes. Certainly not Ron anyway. :eyeroll: He had already formed the Sea Org and was busily extending his control increasingly throughout the church, using these loyal servants of his private will. And, it was all based on the SO's excessively dogmatic preoccupation with the written & spoken words of L.Ron Hubbard.

Attitudes concerning private lifestyles have altered considerably since the 60s.

I know. I've watched them change throughout the years. In the 60s it was a matter of high scandal for a pregnancy outside of marriage to be publicly seen or admitted. Similarly divorce still had a HUGE social stigma involved. A prior divorce could serve to prevent a political candidate from ever achieving office. Neither is considered remarkable now. Indeed, such practices are almost the norm throughout much of the western world.

Modern attitudes about homosexuality in the u.s. really only started to become widely held around the time of the 80's. Possibly it's not wholly "coincidental" that that was also the time period of the first MAJOR schism of the Co$. The seeds of social change first sown by youth during the years of Flower Power & the Summer of Love came to fruition as these latter day hippies started to influence society in elected office & positions of public responsibility. Even the "conservatives" had been affected by social change.

[Ronald Reagan was a divorced man on his second marriage, and a former actor (admittedly not very good), with a son who was a ballet dancer when he was elected as president of the united states. Not a likely curriculum vitae for any previous candidate for the office. :)]

At that time a publicly accepting stance towards homosexuality started to become more prevalent; not yet a majority, but clearly a significant minority, especially among "liberals". This was similar to common attitudes about racism. Racism is still with us, but has been dying off since the time period of the 60s. It has nowhere the degree of prevalence that was the case in earlier decades.

[n.b. Again refer to presidential history for anecdotal evidence.:)]

Nowadays such regressive perspectives are openly denounced on all sides. Not terribly long ago they were tolerated. Not much longer before that they were widely endorsed. Things change.

That the church too frequently continues to propagate such "fixed ideas" and the personal biases of Hubbard is one of its greatest general faults. Church dogma is unwilling "to come into present time" with regard to Hubbard's ideas. All official Co$ dogma is Hubbard-centered, and Hubbard is dead. Hubbard is not here to update his materials had he the wish to do so.

[n.b. For all that is known about Hubbard, in his present life he may well be a black lesbian woman and the child of hippie evangelical pharmaceutical psychiatrists working for the IRS. If so he would be desperately in need of an official revision to his earlier work to allow for his present acceptance by the Co$. I, for one, hope he gets it. :coolwink:]

For reasons of his own Davy has not yet chosen to make the necessary revisions himself, as he has been seen all too willing to do already for so much of the scientology tech. Well, it sucks to be in the SO. And, it sucks to be in the Co$. For members of this forum, that is a "given". It is also an excellent reason for consideration of disassociation of continued membership with those August Institutions.

Nowadays increasingly fewer scientologists are members of the Co$. Attitudes towards homosexuality among non-Co$ scientologists are quite diverse. Many are fully accepting of homosexuals and homosexuality. Condemnation of homosexuality is a fairly rare occurrence in the freezone. When it does occur it is roundly & vociferously condemned.

Those very few who support such condemnations are usually those who style themselves as "Dedicated Members of the SO & Loyal Officers of Ron". Clearly such attitudes don't allow room for much modernization or liberalization of thought. Fortunately they are also relatively rare.


Mark A. Baker
 

La La Lou Lou

Crusader
IMO the super butch macho male is just as busy not being himself as the limp wristed screatchy queen. Watch teenage kids and see how busy they are at constructing their 'beingness'. Many people wear a mask, just see through the mask to the person underneath.

By the way the big change in public opinion started after the AIDs epidemic, perhaps because people started to think and talk about about the subject instead of pretending they didn't know anyone 'like that'. Suddenly we realised that the nice guy down the road was a 'bender' and that he wasn't weird, didn't wear a pink jump suit or hang around the local school waiting for kids to show his willy to.
 
Top