Homosexuals- Treatment of in Scientology

[La La Lou Lou]

Zorgie, you're right of course the tone scale is bollocks, but the the thing is if the teckies use it as an excuse for not servicing gays, but service straight people who are 1.1, or refuse to service a gay person who's antagonistic then the prejudice is open for all to see.

I remember reading in SOS that lesbians have undeveloped hips, he obviously never met the same ones I have!

The point is that any real company will have explained to their staff that they must not discriminate on sexuality or gender issues, it is certainly a legal issue in Europe. If SO members of the same sex wish to be birthed together especially if they have had a legal Civil Partnership they would not legally be able to stop them. Of course in reality they wouldn't be recruited, or they would be sent straight to the RPF, along with the recruiter.

Hubbard was a homophobe, and DM learned from the best.

Aunty La La

 

[The Great Zorg]

Zorgie, you're right of course the tone scale is bollocks, but the the thing is if the teckies use it as an excuse for not servicing gays, but service straight people who are 1.1, or refuse to service a gay person who's antagonistic then the prejudice is open for all to see.

I remember reading in SOS that lesbians have undeveloped hips, he obviously never met the same ones I have!

The point is that any real company will have explained to their staff that they must not discriminate on sexuality or gender issues, it is certainly a legal issue in Europe. If SO members of the same sex wish to be birthed together especially if they have had a legal Civil Partnership they would not legally be able to stop them. Of course in reality they wouldn't be recruited, or they would be sent straight to the RPF, along with the recruiter.

Hubbard was a homophobe, and DM learned from the best.

Aunty La La

Well said!

 

[AnonSunshine]

Hubbard was really a homophobe. Read Quentin story.
Once, I had asked someone in Flag about it, and some officer in the SO told me that the person in this lifetime came with another body still having sexual attraction to the opposite sex of the past life.
I have a Public gay friend who Scientology wanted his money, but they made fun in the guy's back as it was an aberration, and low tone level.
Paul Haggis letter to Tommy Davis clearly states that the "Church" did not support gays:
"As you know, for ten months now I have been writing to ask you to make a public statement denouncing the actions of the Church of Scientology of San Diego. Their public sponsorship of Proposition 8, a hate-filled legislation that succeeded in taking away the civil rights of gay and lesbian citizens of California – rights that were granted them by the Supreme Court of our state – shames us.

I called and wrote and implored you, as the official spokesman of the church, to condemn their actions. I told you I could not, in good conscience, be a member of an organization where gay-bashing was tolerated."

http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/paul-haggis/

Scientology management says one thing and practices other. Scientology does not like gays, period. In my 20+ years as a public, I never heard that to be gay was acceptable. If they are saying they changed their views, it is all PR to appeal to the gay community, because they really like gay money.
Do not be fooled about it.

 

[Carmel]

There's a lot of 'group think' among Scios that is the same all over the world, but it seems there is some group think which has varied in different places at different times.

In the early eighties in Sydney, we had quite a few gays on lines at the same time (they were friends and a few of them had relationships with each other). At the time, it wasn't an issue for us in the tech divs, nor those in HCO. It was kinda considered their gig, and it was only addressed in auditing if they wanted it addressed (as in a problem to them).

Toward the late eighties, things started to change on that score and the group think on gays started to creep in. By the early 90's, being a "practising" homosexual was considered "out-ethics". By the mid 2000's, it was considered downright psycho sp behaviour by some. (For example, we had 'friends' who told us they wanted nothing to do with us while we were not putting ethics on our son for his suppressive behaviour).

Generally the female Scientologists didn't have a problem with homosexualty, but the males did. (Don't know if that was cultural or what). What used ta shit me though, was that some who were the most scathing about Zac being gay and down on us for "allowing" it eyeroll: ), had no problems with the odd lesbian on lines. I don't think that this was a scn thing though......just an aussie male thing, maybe.

In the past, I've had many debates with scios about homosexuality. There were always holes in their arguments, and they weren't being logical. With my generation of Scientologists in Oz, it wasn't so much that Scn gave them the idea that homosexuality was bad....it was more like Scn gave them back up to support their own pre-existing hang-ups on the issue. With my kid's generation though, it was a different story. So many of those kids (male and female) think/thought that homosexuality was just plain old out-ethics and that what was needed was simply an ethics handling to sort it out.

I know some gays who have been staff or crew for years now. They feel bad about their sexual desires and have denied themselves the intimacy of a relationship because they think that to have one with someone of the same sex would be wrong. That's undoubtedly the Scn indoc in play, and that's a bastard of a thing.

 

[PeterMan]

Evidence

 

[AnonSunshine]

The proof was in the book; however, DM ordered several changes in the 2nd dynamic to protect them from law suits and for PR purposes.

 

[Carmel]

<snipped for brevity>

Yep, I used to try and use that to justify my stance on homosexuality. It's not "evidence" though, cuz while that existed, so did other LRH writings/words that gave a comlpetely different message.

 

[PeterMan]

Prince - Sexuality

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3iEwO9PhJc

 

[Royal Prince Xenu]

Yep, I used to try and use that to justify my stance on homosexuality. It's not "evidence" though, cuz while that existed, so did other LRH writings/words that gave a comlpetely different message.

I don't ever remember reading anything that even justified homosexuality. All gays were 1.1 on the Tone Scale. This messed me up no end. Even then, I knew that I was gay but couldn't admit it to myself, and I had developed a very 1.1 thick skin as a survival mechanism at school, so according to my new belief system, I was the worst in the world.

Somehow I think I would have been better off in Sydney if I had discovered Oxford Street instead of Castlereagh Street...

 

[La La Lou Lou]

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. 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.

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.

 

[Opter]

Didn't Ron claim to be Cecil Rhodes in past life?

Didn't Cecil Rhodes have homosexual tendencies?:confused2:


Opter

 

[La La Lou Lou]

Cecil Rhodes had a boyfriend called Neville Pickering, you should have asked him, unfortunately he died over a hundred years ago.

So LRH was a past life queer!

 

[Carmel]

<snip>

Somehow I think I would have been better off in Sydney if I had discovered Oxford Street instead of Castlereagh Street...

No doubt about it, matey!

 

[The Great Zorg]

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.
Rong He just didn't understand the concept. He wasn't very good at looking from someone else's viewpoint.

"Rong"... funny! El Rong Flubbard.

My understanding is that we are born bisexual and develop our preferences or direction in our early teens (Freud, Kinsey, et al). :confused2:

Rong was a goof.

 

[Atalantan]

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. 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.

This tends to agree with my thinking.

Other questions having to do with any references to the "Tone Scale" might be along the lines of is the reference to Social tone? Thetan's "real" tone? GE's tone? Genetic makeup?

As well as all the possible stuck identities/valences affecting the person.

I too think Hubbard did many times play to public opinion, and probably did so in this matter, as he did in the matter of race.

 

[uniquemand]

Cecil Rhodes had a boyfriend called Neville Pickering, you should have asked him, unfortunately he died over a hundred years ago.

So LRH was a past life queer!

Hysterical. Past life queer! I thought he was a natural queer.

 

[TG1]

(snip)
... gay boys result from strong mothers and week fathers.

(snip)

You're sure about that, are you?

I don't believe that current research finds much evidence for this so-called cause of gayness. Instead, the issue of sexuality preferences has been found to be more than a bit more complex than that.

TG1

 

[uniquemand]

yes, of course, TG1. La La Lou Lou was reporting Hubbard's attitudes, not the reality.

 

[TG1]

yes, of course, TG1. La La Lou Lou was reporting Hubbard's attitudes, not the reality.

Well, yes, now that I pay better attention, that does make sense, since that old saw about "strong mothers produce gay sons" originated with Freud. Thanks, UM.

Apologies for not reading more carefully, La La La Lou.

TG1

 

[La La Lou Lou]

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.