Hubbard and Children

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
I think the real problem with Hub and children is that he was self interested and hypocritical. He wrote some nice stuff in Child Dianetics but didn't abide by it. I don't think you can blame his writings (about children) for anything that goes on in the cult re children. It's a cult, they're greedy, they're mean, they don't abide by any of their directives and policies when it gets in the way of someone's power trip or getting money in. Simply put, tech and policy really don't mean anything to them. I'm not saying that tech and policy are these great enlightened things- I just think that, hey, it's a cult.

It's a bit like when one sees some true crime thing or an appalling news story about someone doing something abusive and batshit crazy and there's all this agonizing about why did the person do that. Well, short answer- he or she was a nut. That's all you need to know. Why did that guy kill all those people in the theater in July? He's a nut. Why did Columbine happen? They were a pair of nuts. Why does CofS do that stuff? They're a cult. They suck. They're never going to refrain from sucking or from bieng a cult. Not if Marty takes over, not if Marty doesn't take over, not if DM stays, not if DM leaves, never ever. There's your answer.

I'm going to talk about a couple of things I've said about Hubbardism and children that had garnered some fervent responses.

1) The "children are thetans in small bodies" precept.

Of course a Scn'ist would think that. "Thetan" means spirit. Soul. Everyone is one/has one. Nobody in any religion believes that a soul goes through infancy, puberty, young adulthood, middle age adulthood, then old age with possible senility then death. Yes, they believe in spiritual development but they don't believe in cute little pre school souls that one day will end up being crotchety old man you kids get off my lawn souls.

2) Hubbard's infamous little kids and psychos reference. I take that to mean that he thought kids were pretty bad on impulse control and don't conduct themselves as adults would. As I said before, Lord of the Flies comes to mind (as does the South Park episode where the kids are cut loose by their dimwitted parents to fend for themselves). Yes, fiction, but fiction is a reflection of societies and current opinions.

If four year olds ran the world, there'd be a lot of hitting and probably killing.

So why did Hubbard abuse (yes, I said "abuse". Because he did) and neglect children and foster/allow/implement the same in the cult?

Because he didn't care about you. He didn't care about me. He didn't care about his family. He didn't care about the other guys' family.

What did he care about? Himself only.

DM's the same. He doesn't like people. Not his family, not senior staff, not people who do everything he wants them to do, not people who defy him, not people who agree with him, not people who help him- nobody.

Children are in his way. Adults are in his way. Adolescents are in his way.

Same with Hubbard.

Someone believing in a soul that does not go through pupal/larval stages, so to speak, or in the very lengthy and arduous psychological development of children is not mutually inclusive with someone just looking for an excuse to neglect or hurt a child.

They already have that excuse. In the cult.

It. Is. A. Cult.

Cults. Are. Mean.
 
Last edited:

Auditor's Toad

Clear as Mud
<snip>
I don't think you can blame his writings for anything that goes on in the cult.
<snip>

That is the kindest most loving statement about L Ron Hubbard I have ever, seen, heard, or read in the last 40 years.

The whole cult evolved from him & his writings - it is all pure LRH !

And, yes, totally insane.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Well, since I basically called the guy a child molester, it can't really be said that I'm being kind to him.

Also, I meant "his writings on children". Obviously he's got oodles of stuff on freeloader debts, PTS SP this and that... So, yah, fixed thread op accordingly.
 

Auditor's Toad

Clear as Mud
Well, since I basically called the guy a child molester, it can't really be said that I'm being kind to him.

Also, I meant "his writings on children". Obviously he's got oodles of stuff on freeloader debts, PTS SP this and that... So, yah, fixed thread op accordingly.

I appreciate your revisions, however, the problem of children being regarded as a thetan in a small body ( which is exactly what he said ) is it, as his writing ( and now Holy Scripture ) is applied in a way that allows children to be neglected, abused, & sexually abused. Still, even today.

You know like I know that there are many specific instances of sexual abuse of children where it was shrugged off as " They are thetans in small bodies, they are millions or trillions of years old "

Can you honestly tell me you have not heard that ?

Or that the child " pulled it on " or " They need to get their PTSness handled"-
in all instances where one form or another of abuse had been heaped on the child ?

Before we get into the 'that-was-not-LRH' justifications please let us review back on the Apollo just who was putting children in the chain locker. Who was that ?

Please spare me the LRH-was-God routine.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Anyone who could read the thread op and think it was written from an LRH is god standpoint would have to have not really read it.

I think you're perceiving things that I not only didn't write, but where I'd actually written to the contrary.
 

Adam7986

Declared SP
You guys both agree.

Claire is just wording her statements in a way that makes it as difficult as possible to understand her point of view: Children have souls and child abuse is bad.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Difficult for some, maybe. My stuff's pretty descriptive, detailed and plain spoken. (I was going to say "clear" but well, you know...)
 

Adam7986

Declared SP
The abuse that Hubbard committed and instructed his followers to continue committing even well after his death is simply and only for one reason: CONTROL.

He wanted to control people for the power trip and the money.

That is the only thing abuse accomplishes.

It was not because people were in his way. That implies that Hubbard wanted to accomplish something. He did not. He created one of the longest lasting fraudulent business empires on the planet. Scientology is like if Bernie Madoff had been allowed to continue his practice for 60 years.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
I think the problem with teaching that children are adults in small bodies is that it totally ignores the cognitive development that is yet to happen. It puts children in a situation where they are presumed to have already developed a maturity that is simply not possible, and the cost of that is the child not being allowed to have a childhood. Why let them waste time playing when they can work like an adult?

I get what you are saying about the "souls don't have an age" thing, but I think the difference is that other religions are still aware of the biological and cognitive development that is lacking. They don't require their children to be able to behave as an adult would. Whilst they seek to indoctrinate the child into their belief system they don't demand something that is not biologically possible.
 

omnom

Patron with Honors
Nobody in any religion believes that a soul goes through infancy, puberty, young adulthood, middle age adulthood, then old age with possible senility then death.

Depends on what you mean by "religion" and "soul". I believe a few different belief systems have different thoughts on the matter.

If four year olds ran the world, there'd be a lot of hitting and probably killing.

How strong are the four-years-olds you hang out with?!? I'd be inclined to say, though, that there'd be a lot more glitter and puppies in the world today, which is not always bad.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
I think the problem with teaching that children are adults in small bodies is that it totally ignores the cognitive development that is yet to happen. It puts children in a situation where they are presumed to have already developed a maturity that is simply not possible, and the cost of that is the child not being allowed to have a childhood. Why let them waste time playing when they can work like an adult?

I get what you are saying about the "souls don't have an age" thing, but I think the difference is that other religions are still aware of the biological and cognitive development that is lacking. They don't require their children to be able to behave as an adult would. Whilst they seek to indoctrinate the child into their belief system they don't demand something that is not biologically possible.

But I didn't say "adults in small bodies". At all. Had Hubbard said that, I'd not have posted what I posted.

My standpoint was more that a soul is a soul. And the child abuse and neglect in Scn- which is rampant- doesn't stem from the ideas about the supposed characteristics of "thetans". Or so it seems to me. (shrugging)

Children in Scn are considered to be in the way. So's everyone else.

To me, it seems more that the cult resents every diaper, every crutch, every wheelchair, every immunization, every splint, every cast, every bandage, every baby carriage, every tampon, every maxipad, every uniform, every piece of office furniture, every morsel of food or ounce of drink that any staff member or other member ever has to have, any time. Cuz that comes out of its pocket.

I don't think they care what children are, just as they don't care if you're a woman or a man or someone with special needs. If they had to pay for the air members breathe, there'd be a lot of people dying of asphyxiation while the cult decided whether stats were high enough and the paperwork was done so as to go get the osygen.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Depends on what you mean by "religion" and "soul". I believe a few different belief systems have different thoughts on the matter.



How strong are the four-years-olds you hang out with?!? I'd be inclined to say, though, that there'd be a lot more glitter and puppies in the world today, which is not always bad.

The ones with guns or blunt instruments can be rather daunting...

Sure, there're different belief systems, but, AFAIK, most don't consider that souls go through mortal maturity phases.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
But I didn't say "adults in small bodies". At all. Had Hubbard said that, I'd not have posted what I posted.

My standpoint was more that a soul is a soul. And the child abuse and neglect in Scn- which is rampant- doesn't stem from the ideas about the supposed characteristics of "thetans". Or so it seems to me. (shrugging)

Children in Scn are considered to be in the way. So's everyone else.

To me, it seems more that the cult resents every diaper, every crutch, every wheelchair, every immunization, every splint, every cast, every bandage, every baby carriage, every tampon, every maxipad, every uniform, every piece of office furniture, every morsel of food or ounce of drink that any staff member or other member ever has to have, any time. Cuz that comes out of its pocket.

I don't think they care what children are, just as they don't care if you're a woman or a man or someone with special needs. If they had to pay for the air members breathe, there'd be a lot of people dying of asphyxiation while the cult decided whether stats were high enough and the paperwork was done so as to go get the osygen.

Yes, but because Hubbard is not just saying that people have a soul - he's saying that they are a soul - thetans in small bodies - no adjustment is made for their stage of development or maturity. Note the "small" bodies - not undeveloped or un-grown but "little" - i.e. miniature versions of "big" bodies. In any case, Hubbard was certainly no Montessori.
 

Gadfly

Crusader
Yes, but because Hubbard is not just saying that people have a soul - he's saying that they are a soul - thetans in small bodies - no adjustment is made for their stage of development or maturity. Note the "small" bodies - not undeveloped or un-grown but "little" - i.e. miniature versions of "big" bodies. In any case, Hubbard was certainly no Montessori.

"Hubbard was certainly no Montessori".

THAT is sure the truth! :thumbsup:

If Hubbard could of had his way he would have had us all running around in DOLL BODIES. It would have been more efficient.
 

phenomanon

Canyon
That is the kindest most loving statement about L Ron Hubbard I have ever, seen, heard, or read in the last 40 years.

The whole cult evolved from him & his writings - it is all pure LRH !

And, yes, totally insane.

as a matter of fact, L Ron Hubbard did not write Child Dianetics.
Mary Sue did.

phenomanon
 

Adam7986

Declared SP
But I didn't say "adults in small bodies". At all. Had Hubbard said that, I'd not have posted what I posted.

Hubbard did say that. He said that they are trillion year old thetans and that they are just as mature as the rest of us. He taught his followers that they need no special consideration or care.

Hubbard is the reason for child neglect in Scientology.

Hubbard believed that children were born with the same cognitive abilities as the rest of us and that is absolutely 100% false and misleading.

That is what Hubbard said and taught his followers.

He believed that children should be treated as adults. Anyone who believes that children should be treated as adults is a fool.

We get that you believe children have souls. Congratulations.
 

olska

Silver Meritorious Patron
I think the real problem with Hub and children is that he was self interested and hypocritical. He wrote some nice stuff in Child Dianetics but didn't abide by it. I don't think you can blame his writings (about children) for anything that goes on in the cult re children...(etc. etc.)

As he was "founder" of the cult of scientology, EVERYTHING that went on, and still goes on, in "the cult" -- whether it has to do with children or with adults -- is a direct result of Hubbard's orders, directives, advices, policies and "tech" approved by him and published under his name (whether or not he actually wrote it) and his rants and opinions and so-called "philosophy" that his followers adopted and live by as though it was the holy word of God.

Hubbard's ideas, pronouncements, and enforcements came first; "the cult" with all its abuses resulted directly from those ideas, not the other way around. Included in that morass of absurdity are Hubbard's ideas on the treatment of children.

Hubbard's attitude toward children, regardless of whether they were infants or toddlers or teenagers, can be summed up by his belief that they were beings who had lived innumerable lives on the past "whole track" and who were thus possessed of vast knowledge and skills and abilities and had complete power of choice about their lives and behavior.

These beliefs and this attitude toward children, as well as Hubbard's pronouncements about the family group, permeates the scientology community and affects the views of scientologists -- both staff and public -- on how children should be treated and brought up. They underlie the dearth of family time for staff, the establishment of the Cadet Org, the Children's RPF, children's sec checks, the CMO, the posting of adolescents as ethics officers and in other positions of authority over adults, the use of "ethics conditions" by public scientology parents to manage their children's behavior, and many more absurdities within scientologyworld.

Because of it, even when they were not subjected to outright and obvious abuse, countless numbers of young children (the children of public scientologists as well as those of staff members) have been expected to assume adult roles and responsibilities, punished when they were unable to carry this off to the satisfaction of their leaders (or in some cases, their parents), and have been denied the nuture, care, protection, understanding, education, and guidance that should have been theirs through their childhoods.

This didn't happen because "the cult is mean" -- it was a direct result of people buying into Hubbard's ideas about the nature of human beings and their children.

Fortunately, not all scientologists bought into this -- some scientologists who were also parents had better sense.

Fortunately, many of the children who were damaged by this madness found their way out and were able to overcome it. Bea Kiddo who has posted her story on this forum is an excellent example.

And fortunately, some of the people who bought into this madness failed to pass it on to the next generation because they had no children.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Yes, but because Hubbard is not just saying that people have a soul - he's saying that they are a soul - thetans in small bodies - no adjustment is made for their stage of development or maturity. Note the "small" bodies - not undeveloped or un-grown but "little" - i.e. miniature versions of "big" bodies. In any case, Hubbard was certainly no Montessori.

Of course they're a soul. That's the Vedic view- one of the belief systems he...erm...appropriated.

Souls don't go through maturity phases. A child's soul is a soul. Period. But people do go through maturity phases, of course. But that's got nothing to do with them being souls or having souls or not having or being souls.

It's like this: I know a lot of non Scn'ists who believe in spirits and souls. Some believe we have souls, some believe we are souls. None of them, however, believe in a little kid's soul, an adolescent soul, a little old lady soul. But then again, every single one of them believes that a child should be a child, that he is developing, he has needs that adults don't have, and that it's a wonderful thing.

I don't really think Hubbard thought kids don't have needs or were developing. Judging by Child Dianetics, he did think so. But, in the end, he didn't really care and chose to ignore those needs and development- as well as ignoring the beauty and wonder of it.
I think he did that because that's how he was. Selfish and out for himself. To an extremely exaggerated and often criminal extent.

Having read Child Dianetics and having read a number of things about souls and spirits, including things that I think Hubbard had appropriated, it is not my opinion that the thetans in small bodies idea makes one whit of difference. It'd all have come down just like it has, without that concept. And maybe that's even sadder.
 

Gadfly

Crusader
As he was "founder" of the cult of scientology, EVERYTHING that went on, and still goes on, in "the cult" -- whether it has to do with children or with adults -- is a direct result of Hubbard's orders, directives, advices, policies and "tech" approved by him and published under his name (whether or not he actually wrote it) and his rants and opinions and so-called "philosophy" that his followers adopted and live by as though it was the holy word of God.

Hubbard's ideas, pronouncements, and enforcements came first; "the cult" with all its abuses resulted directly from those ideas, not the other way around. Included in that morass of absurdity are Hubbard's ideas on the treatment of children.

Hubbard's attitude toward children, regardless of whether they were infants or toddlers or teenagers, can be summed up by his belief that they were beings who had lived innumerable lives on the past "whole track" and who were thus possessed of vast knowledge and skills and abilities and had complete power of choice about their lives and behavior.

These beliefs and this attitude toward children, as well as Hubbard's pronouncements about the family group, permeates the scientology community and affects the views of scientologists -- both staff and public -- on how children should be treated and brought up. They underlie the dearth of family time for staff, the establishment of the Cadet Org, the Children's RPF, children's sec checks, the CMO, the posting of adolescents as ethics officers and in other positions of authority over adults, the use of "ethics conditions" by public scientology parents to manage their children's behavior, and many more absurdities within scientologyworld.

Because of it, even when they were not subjected to outright and obvious abuse, countless numbers of young children (the children of public scientologists as well as those of staff members) have been expected to assume adult roles and responsibilities, punished when they were unable to carry this off to the satisfaction of their leaders (or in some cases, their parents), and have been denied the nuture, care, protection, understanding, education, and guidance that should have been theirs through their childhoods.

This didn't happen because "the cult is mean" -- it was a direct result of people buying into Hubbard's ideas about the nature of human beings and their children.

Fortunately, not all scientologists bought into this -- some scientologists who were also parents had better sense.

Fortunately, many of the children who were damaged by this madness found their way out and were able to overcome it. Bea Kiddo who has posted her story on this forum is an excellent example.

And fortunately, some of the people who bought into this madness failed to pass it on to the next generation because they had no children.

Excellent, spot-on summary! :thumbsup:
 
Top