Just Saying...

Cat's Squirrel

Gold Meritorious Patron
One can always find what one looks for in a complex subject like Scientology. The same can be said about the Christian Bible.

What one finds only reflects on the person who finds it.

For example, when I look at the Christian Bible from the viewpoint of a typical Christian missionary in India, I find an exclusivity to the Bible that puts it above all other religions, and which looks down upon all other religions.

But when I look at the Christian Bible from the viewpoint of Swami Vivekananda (a Hindu) I find universal truths in it.

.

Yeah, "when thine eye be single, thy body shall be full of light" (Matthew 6, v.22) is a statement of non-dualism. Also, the first verse of John's gospel is almost exactly the same as something in one of the Vedas.

And yet, the list of crimes committed in the name of Christianity is a long one; I think teaching impressionable children that hell awaits them after death if they don't repent their sins is one of the worst.
 
Last edited:

asagai

Patron Meritorious
One can always find what one looks for in a complex subject like Scientology. The same can be said about the Christian Bible.

What one finds only reflects on the person who finds it.

For example, when I look at the Christian Bible from the viewpoint of a typical Christian missionary in India, I find an exclusivity to the Bible that puts it above all other religions, and which looks down upon all other religions.

But when I look at the Christian Bible from the viewpoint of Swami Vivekananda (a Hindu) I find universal truths in it.

.

Well personally I found mainly wonderful experiences in the CofS! :D

But a quarter of a century later, my experience is not exactly the point! The point for me now is the effect Scn had on most people and still has. Especially kids brought up in the cult and who never made the choice like the likes of you and me Vin.

I find people like myself who "benefitted" from Ron's cult to be a tiny minority. It is for most others that I speak out - why would I only want to speak of my personal experiences? That would be self-centered nuttiness! :melodramatic:

Seeing other peopel's experience and point of view enables one to re-evaluate one's own. Maybe what we "winners" in the Scn game experienced was not quite what we thought it was? Maybe that is part of the cult experience?

Also while I was in and "winning" I was sensible enough to know that the further away from Ron you were (physically and organisationally) the more likely you were to have an enjoyable experience. Conversely the closer to him the more likely you were to not enjoy it! :hysterical:

This is why I pick up newbies who imply Ron's CofS was somehow golden and DM is the one who messed it up. It is simply not historically accurate to assert this like Cats Squirrel did.
 

asagai

Patron Meritorious
Ron's actions from what point? I think things went down sometime in the 1960s, probably around the time that the Apollo "Mission Into Time" started. Dart has written about what happened then and I've seen others do the same. Losing John McMaster was a decisive point but there were probably others.

Veda's links show that there was no pre-1960's golden age, before Ron went downhill. Maybe his true intentions were more successfully masked and hidden by him because he actually believed his own affirmations and believed he would be successful in making men his slaves? Maybe in the 60's he realised he was failing and so he became less successful in hiding his true intentions?
 

Royal Prince Xenu

Trust the Psi Corps.
Ladybird, I'm stunned by your OP

I don't keep track of who is or is not Freezone, Ron's Orgs, $cn still contemplating leaving, or other forms of escapee.

Whether by choice or ignorance, I don't see any imbalance towards the FZ.

I find this a comfortable board to discuss some topics, have a few giggles, and learn some new data.

There are only two board members who I could confidently call FZ, and I have no problem with either of them.

In fact, I have asked previously that anyone who has a grievance with me, use PMs to find what's really going on*. A nice PM asking what really is the matter? what have I allegedly done? Oops, sorry, I didn't mean it to sound like that, I meant .... has usually been a successful action in keeping things friendly.

* I have publicly apologised for jamming so many people into DC8s and blowing them up in volcanoes, so let's keep this in PT.

I'm not FZ, but neither am I adverse to dallying slightly with it if it teaches me how to use my meter effectively. I do have my own connections with other exes, and in recognition of the crazy world in which we lived whilst in the org, we've all forgiven and forgotten nearly all personal issues because the aggravation that may have caused them no longer exists.

Have some fun!

RPX
 

Cat's Squirrel

Gold Meritorious Patron
Well personally I found mainly wonderful experiences in the CofS! :D

But a quarter of a century later, my experience is not exactly the point! The point for me now is the effect Scn had on most people and still has. Especially kids brought up in the cult and who never made the choice like the likes of you and me Vin.

I find people like myself who "benefitted" from Ron's cult to be a tiny minority. It is for most others that I speak out - why would I only want to speak of my personal experiences? That would be self-centered nuttiness! :melodramatic:

Seeing other people's experience and point of view enables one to re-evaluate one's own. Maybe what we "winners" in the Scn game experienced was not quite what we thought it was? Maybe that is part of the cult experience?

Also while I was in and "winning" I was sensible enough to know that the further away from Ron you were (physically and organisationally) the more likely you were to have an enjoyable experience. Conversely the closer to him the more likely you were to not enjoy it! :hysterical:

This is why I pick up newbies who imply Ron's CofS was somehow golden and DM is the one who messed it up. It is simply not historically accurate to assert this like Cats Squirrel did.

I'm not saying it was fine until DM came along, there was clearly something wrong with it in the '70s as well when I made my first contact with the local org and came away unimpressed. I think it got even worse after 1982 when a lot of the good tech people got declared, but the CofS's loss was the freezone's gain because the AACs were set up then.

But the fact that you had wins when in the Church indicates that for you something went right. Wouldn't you want to find out what that was and build on it?
 

Vinaire

Sponsor
Well personally I found mainly wonderful experiences in the CofS! :D

But a quarter of a century later, my experience is not exactly the point! The point for me now is the effect Scn had on most people and still has. Especially kids brought up in the cult and who never made the choice like the likes of you and me Vin.

I find people like myself who "benefitted" from Ron's cult to be a tiny minority. It is for most others that I speak out - why would I only want to speak of my personal experiences? That would be self-centered nuttiness! :melodramatic:

Seeing other peopel's experience and point of view enables one to re-evaluate one's own. Maybe what we "winners" in the Scn game experienced was not quite what we thought it was? Maybe that is part of the cult experience?

Also while I was in and "winning" I was sensible enough to know that the further away from Ron you were (physically and organisationally) the more likely you were to have an enjoyable experience. Conversely the closer to him the more likely you were to not enjoy it! :hysterical:

This is why I pick up newbies who imply Ron's CofS was somehow golden and DM is the one who messed it up. It is simply not historically accurate to assert this like Cats Squirrel did.

I am now learning not to presume much about others and try to speak for others.

I have done that in the past, but I am finding that is just selfish and has no value other than entertainment for me.

So, I am trying to move away from that position of having to speak for others.

I can create more value just by speaking honestly for myself.

.
 

asagai

Patron Meritorious
I'm not saying it was fine until DM came along, there was clearly something wrong with it in the '70s as well when I made my first contact with the local org and came away unimpressed. I think it got even worse after 1982 when a lot of the good tech people got declared, but the CofS's loss was the freezone's gain because the AACs were set up then.


... and something wrong in the '60s .... and something wrong in the '50's .... and something wrong in the 40's! :melodramatic:

Just track back the "outpoints" Cat if you want to use Scn tech in your investigations. Or just look for the nuttiness in each decade if you prefer to do it without using Scn tech.

When I did that it I found the "source" of the nuttiness was old Ronnie.

Maybe it deteriorated after 1982, but maybe it earlier deteriorated in the 70's and before that it deteriorated in the '60's and before that in the '50's and before that in the '40's.

Look at LRH's 1940's admissions and you see all the sources of Scns later problems. Poor DM is the hapless sap who inherited or stole the nutty "church".

We have to look outside our own individual experience to see the actual picture.

I remember years ago when I was out but still thinking there was merit in a lot of the tech, I met a bunch of "old-timers" at the Theosophical Society who had left the CofS in the '60's. Their complaints were about Ron's treatment of Reg Sharpe, they'd left when Hubbard went nutty over his best friend.

I pondered on this, so similar to my disagreement with Ron's ditching of David Mayo. Talking to them there were so many similarities with the situation I had found in the CofS 15 to 20 years later! I began to see the cyclical nature of Ron's nuttiness. For them the golden age of Scn was the late fifties/early sixties then it went downhill.

For you and I, Cat, the golden age was the 70's and it went downhill in the 80's. I'm suggesting this cyle is an illusion because we were only looking from our limited experience without seeing the wider picture.

Just for clarity, Mayo's ACC's were never part of Capt Bill's FreeZone.

But the fact that you had wins when in the Church indicates that for you something went right. Wouldn't you want to find out what that was and build on it?

How do you know I haven't? :D

Why would that limit me to the confines of Scn tech which at best is dubious in its intention and derivation, coming as it does from a nutcase? :)
 

Good twin

Floater
I am now learning not to presume much about others and try to speak for others.

I have done that in the past, but I am finding that is just selfish and has no value other than entertainment for me.

So, I am trying to move away from that position of having to speak for others.

I can create more value just by speaking honestly for myself.

.

You're joking, right?
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Newbies like you often repeat this idea that the CofS deteriorated after Miscavige took over. There was no golden age of Scn when Ron ran the CofS. All Miscavige's nutty actions have their origin in Ron's actions. Miscavige is a product of Ron's Scientology, unhappily!

I've said the same exact thing many many times. And you know what? I still, to this day just about, get claims that I think it's just the current regime that's effed up and that everything Ron did was fine.

So seems to me that people on this forum are judged not so much by what they write in every instance, but by what people WANT to see.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Having read Dianetics in Limbo -- seems to me that there'd been some problems and blind spots on the part of LRH even in the beginning. He really does seem to have been quite irresponsible quite early on.

This still does not detract (in my eyes) from any of his methods since I maintain that the proof of the pudding is, etc. But yeah, historically, I do think that there is no point at which LRH wasn't being problematic.
 

asagai

Patron Meritorious
I've said the same exact thing many many times. And you know what? I still, to this day just about, get claims that I think it's just the current regime that's effed up and that everything Ron did was fine.

So seems to me that people on this forum are judged not so much by what they write in every instance, but by what people WANT to see.

I was replying to these words by Cats Squirrel:

"No one here is claiming that either LRH or the Tech are or were perfect, and it's pretty much agreed upon by everyone on ESMB that the CofS sucks big time, especially since Miscavige took over."
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
I know you were. But I had something to add. I also wrote another post, as well.

Thing is, DM does seem worse than Hubbard. But that doesn't mean that the seeds weren't planted during Hub's time or that Hub didn't teach DM how to be a right bastard. He did. Hub's reign was, by many accounts, really bad.

DM's seems to be even worse.
 

asagai

Patron Meritorious
Having read Dianetics in Limbo -- seems to me that there'd been some problems and blind spots on the part of LRH even in the beginning. He really does seem to have been quite irresponsible quite early on.

This still does not detract (in my eyes) from any of his methods since I maintain that the proof of the pudding is, etc. But yeah, historically, I do think that there is no point at which LRH wasn't being problematic.

That's an excellent example from the '50's.

It's rather sad really when you look at the l-o-n-g trail of people who fell out with Ron or who Ron fell out with. It seems that whenever things were going quite well, they were scuppered by Ron. I think it was him who actively prevented any golden age for Scientology. Poor Ron. :bigcry:
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Yeah, it is. It was an eye opener though I'd suspected for years that it went back a long ways.

It constantly amazes me that he did come up with the things he came up with that actually do create some effects, though the claims are, of course, exaggerated.
 

asagai

Patron Meritorious
I know you were. But I had something to add. I also wrote another post, as well.

Thing is, DM does seem worse than Hubbard. But that doesn't mean that the seeds weren't planted during Hub's time or that Hub didn't teach DM how to be a right bastard. He did. Hub's reign was, by many accounts, really bad.

DM's seems to be even worse.

DM inherited or stole an already messed up "Church". And like you say he learned from Hubbo how to be the fool that he is today! So perhaps it was inevitable that things would deteriorate even further to the point we are at now where the CofS is probably in terminal decline.
 

Roan

Patron with Honors
There are those who claim that he (James Randi) has refused to let impartial third parties hold the proof while people took the test. I personally think he's as big a liar as Hubbard ever was, if not more.
Fluffy, this is how you have gained your "reputation" on message boards critical to Scientology.

You have the unmitigated gall to try foist upon people the idea that James Randi, a debunker, was a bigger liar than L. Ron Hubbard, who is generally viewed as perhaps the biggest/most destructive con man of the 20th Century. Your viewpoint, your reasoning is so idiotic it is actually obscene to the real victims of Scientology. This is why you receive the vitriolic responses you do (which you love whinge about).

Once in a while, mildly stating that Hubbards claims were "exaggerated" does not make you a critic, Fluffy.

On message boards filled with people who have had decades of their life ruined by LRH you, time after time, try to float the proposition that Hubbard was just "problematic" (wtf?!?!)

I've said the same exact thing many many times. And you know what? I still, to this day just about, get claims that I think it's just the current regime that's effed up and that everything Ron did was fine.

So seems to me that people on this forum are judged not so much by what they write in every instance, but by what people WANT to see.

.
 
Top