What's new

Non CofS Scientology

Gadfly

Crusader
'Indie' Scientology is a cult led by a thug.

Yep! :thumbsup:

Just like the current Church of Scientology with Miscavige, and just like the past Church of Scientology with Hubbard.

In THAT the similarity is major. But then, they are all "dedicated Scientologists" who have accepted the bait hook-line-and-sinker.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
I understand that, David, I do. But thing is, people keep painting non CofS Scn'ists with the same brush as the goose stepping RPFing FreeLoader debting culties and it's wildly inaccurate. I know this because I was an indie for a long time, my husband still is one, and friends I know are such. I have concerns- not about people's views that Scn as ology/ism is full of shit, but moar about personalized vilification of people who are not doing what some claim they are doing.

So that's my concern and I am correct in that.

I can understand you speaking up for yourself regarding all matters Scientology. As well as your husband to a certain degree. Even a close circle of intimate friends. What I find interesting is that you continuously bring them up as a moral example of Scientology practices as a reference for all Indies. If these individuals have such relevant views, could they not convey their beliefs themselves? In what manner is your husband and a few friends the entire pulse of the Indie click?

When I read posts here at ESMB written by the people you speak for, I'll take notice. Until then it's empty P.R. to white wash the Hubbard cultist fence.
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
I can understand you speaking up for yourself regarding all matters Scientology. As well as your husband to a certain degree. Even a close circle of intimate friends. What I find interesting is that you continuously bring them up as a moral example of Scientology practices as a reference for all Indies. If these individuals have such relevant views, could they not convey their beliefs themselves? In what manner is your husband and a few friends the entire pulse of the Indie click?

When I read posts here at ESMB written by the people you speak for, I'll take notice. Until then it's empty P.R. to white wash the Hubbard cultist fence.

If my husband or a close friend was in a Cult, my priority would be helping them to escape.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
I can understand you speaking up for yourself regarding all matters Scientology. As well as your husband to a certain degree. Even a close circle of intimate friends. What I find interesting is that you continuously bring them up as a moral example of Scientology practices as a reference for all Indies. If these individuals have such relevant views, could they not convey their beliefs themselves? In what manner is your husband and a few friends the entire pulse of the Indie click?

When I read posts here at ESMB written by the people you speak for, I'll take notice. Until then it's empty P.R. to white wash the Hubbard cultist fence.

I knew that sooner or later someone would say that. It's nonsense, though.

I name certain individuals as examples. People here often do that. Such as with...say, Steve Hall, or Marty, or Pierre Ethier or Mike Hobson or someone else they like, don't like, adore, hate, etc.

I can find post after post written by others than I who name specific individuals as examples of a given phenomenon that they are discussing.

Further, when people fail to give examples, others will ask them for such, no matter what the topic is.

I trust that sets matters straight. Do let me know if you need further assistance.
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
Everybody is different. Take our cook for example. She makes nice falafel.


denial1.jpg
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
I understand that, David, I do. But thing is, people keep painting non CofS Scn'ists with the same brush as the goose stepping RPFing FreeLoader debting culties and it's wildly inaccurate. I know this because I was an indie for a long time, my husband still is one, and friends I know are such. I have concerns- not about people's views that Scn as ology/ism is full of shit, but moar about personalized vilification of people who are not doing what some claim they are doing.

So that's my concern and I am correct in that.

I can understand you speaking up for yourself regarding all matters Scientology. As well as your husband to a certain degree. Even a close circle of intimate friends. What I find interesting is that you continuously bring them up as a moral example of Scientology practices as a reference for all Indies. If these individuals have such relevant views, could they not convey their beliefs themselves? In what manner is your husband and a few friends the entire pulse of the Indie click?

When I read posts here at ESMB written by the people you speak for, I'll take notice. Until then it's empty P.R. to white wash the Hubbard cultist fence.

I knew that sooner or later someone would say that. It's nonsense, though.

I name certain individuals as examples. People here often do that. Such as with...say, Steve Hall, or Marty, or Pierre Ethier or Mike Hobson or someone else they like, don't like, adore, hate, etc.

I can find post after post written by others than I who name specific individuals as examples of a given phenomenon that they are discussing.

Further, when people fail to give examples, others will ask them for such, no matter what the topic is.

I trust that sets matters straight. Do let me know if you need further assistance.

You don't refute anything I've stated, instead offer self applied sophistry and a dismissive "nonsense". Such shallow tactics don't explain how you, in all your omnipotent glory, have divined the moral stature of every non CofS Indie to lay upon the ESMB altar.

As I said, can't these people speak for themselves? Such Free Thinking cultists would be welcome to indulge in discussion, as well as a novelty. Not to mention, a refreshing event since they wouldn't be anonymous voices you use to further empty claims while back peddling to examples there of.
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
You don't refute anything I've stated, instead offer self applied sophistry and a dismissive "nonsense". Such shallow tactics don't explain how you, in all your omnipotent glory, have divined the moral stature of every non CofS Indie to lay upon the ESMB altar.

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOvabFrdQes&feature=related[/video]

As I said, can't these people speak for themselves? Such Free Thinking cultists would be welcome to indulge in discussion, as well as a novelty. Not to mention, a refreshing event since they wouldn't be anonymous voices you use to further empty claims while back peddling to examples there of.

:thumbsup:
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
You don't refute anything I've stated, instead offer self applied sophistry and a dismissive "nonsense". Such shallow tactics don't explain how you, in all your omnipotent glory, have divined the moral stature of every non CofS Indie to lay upon the ESMB altar.

As I said, can't these people speak for themselves? Such Free Thinking cultists would be welcome to indulge in discussion, as well as a novelty. Not to mention, a refreshing event since they wouldn't be anonymous voices you use to further empty claims while back peddling to examples there of.

As I said, whenever I name anyone here whom I know, that's done to provide an example. I see lots and lots of posts by people citing others (usually whom they're in disagreement with) as examples. Surely I can follow suit to illustrate points I'm making.

As far as anything else goes, this is a public forum. We discuss things. Some of the people I discuss post about those things, as well as I. Sneaks has, for example, and so has Terril, Mark Baker. Some don't. Some (like the wonder husband) used to and then wandered off to play World of Warcraft and Quake 3. And some post on other fora than this. And so it goes. The human condition is rich and varied.

I start threads about some stuff or on other threads not created by me, chime in about stuff. I'm free to do that. And you're free to read or not read those things.

We all post according to our frames of reference, near's' I can tell. Interestingly, it seems that only certain experiences, testimonials and observations of other people or other venues is ok with you. But try as I might, I find nothing in the ROCs barring the subject matter of my posts. And, as John often says (which annoys the shit out of me and I hope it annoys you just as much) "Let that be a lesson to you"

Really, these things should be obvious to anyone with the IQ of the average philodendron. If not, you're certainly free to not come on to a thread started by a person then complain about this thread that you did not have to read or respond to.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
As I said, whenever I name anyone here whom I know, that's done to provide an example. I see lots and lots of posts by people citing others (usually whom they're in disagreement with) as examples. Surely I can follow suit to illustrate points I'm making.

As far as anything else goes, this is a public forum. We discuss things. Some of the people I discuss post about those things, as well as I. Sneaks has, for example, and so has Terril, Mark Baker. Some don't. Some (like the wonder husband) used to and then wandered off to play World of Warcraft and Quake 3. And some post on other fora than this. And so it goes. The human condition is rich and varied.

I start threads about some stuff or on other threads not created by me, chime in about stuff. I'm free to do that. And you're free to read or not read those things.

We all post according to our frames of reference, near's' I can tell. Interestingly, it seems that only certain experiences, testimonials and observations of other people or other venues is ok with you. But try as I might, I find nothing in the ROCs barring the subject matter of my posts. And, as John often says (which annoys the shit out of me and I hope it annoys you just as much) "Let that be a lesson to you"

Really, these things should be obvious to anyone with the IQ of the average philodendron. If not, you're certainly free to not come on to a thread started by a person then complain about this thread that you did not have to read or respond to.

Sigh, lets go through this again. Claiming yourself, your husband and unnamed friends as a moral template for an entire group of Scientologists (Indie), with certainty that they aren't indoctrinated RonBots is ridiculous. You have designated your self as a Spokesperson, even offering assurances on their behalf (Indies) for all to behold.

I don't believe you or that indoctrinated Hubbard cultists, irregardless of affiliation, are any more than that, indoctrinated Hubbard cultists. I see nothing offered on your part substantiating anything you have said. Merely an indignant stance coupled with rejective verbiage.

Considering you claim no Scientological affiliations, you take upon yourself great pains to paint Indies as the un-cultists, this Good Will Ambassadorship of yours is amusing yet serves no real purpose.
 

Panda Termint

Cabal Of One
Sigh, lets go through this again. Claiming yourself, your husband and unnamed friends as a moral template for an entire group of Scientologists (Indie), with certainty that they aren't indoctrinated RonBots is ridiculous. <snip....>
Yes it is ridiculous to assume such a thing, if that is what Claire was actually saying, which she wasn't, per my reading of it.

It's almost as ridiculous as someone claiming that the bad acts of a few Indies/Freezoners/scientologists is the moral template for that entire group! Funnily enough, when someone takes the trouble to point to that particular fact all kinds of weird stuff happens.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Sigh, lets go through this again. Claiming yourself, your husband and unnamed friends as a moral template for an entire group of Scientologists (Indie), with certainty that they aren't indoctrinated RonBots is ridiculous. You have designated your self as a Spokesperson, even offering assurances on their behalf (Indies) for all to behold.

I don't believe you or that indoctrinated Hubbard cultists, irregardless of affiliation, are any more than that, indoctrinated Hubbard cultists. I see nothing offered on your part substantiating anything you have said. Merely an indignant stance coupled with rejective verbiage.

Considering you claim no Scientological affiliations, you take upon yourself great pains to paint Indies as the un-cultists, this Good Will Ambassadorship of yours is amusing yet serves no real purpose.

I do not consider or offer my family or acquaintances up as moral templates. If I'm talking about Indies, I'm gonna give examples of ones I know. And if I don't, somebody's sure to ask me to rectify such an omission.

I do claim I have no Scientological affiliation because that happens to be the sitch.

I'm sure I'm as free to discuss my opinions here as anyone else. Feel free to not read the posts, if you don't like 'em.

Panda seems to get where I'm comin' from. Maybe you could go bestow your dubious attentions on him.
 
If my husband or a close friend was in a Cult, my priority would be helping them to escape.

And the problem with that, Smilla, is that one person's "cult" is another person's religious orthodoxy. Hostile attitudes to minority religions leads to communal isolation as often as does voluntary isolation among religious groups in order to maintain "communal purity". Both forms of isolation are destructive of larger social relationships; history has made that very clear.

In the case of judaism, much of the origins of anti-jewish sentiment historically stems from jewish traditions opposing inter-mixing with non-jewish communities.

If you can't brook the idea that someone for whom you care has disparate views of religion or spirituality than yourself, then perhaps the problem does not lie with them.


Mark A. Baker
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
Originally Posted by Smilla
If my husband or a close friend was in a Cult, my priority would be helping them to escape.


And the problem with that, Smilla, is that one person's "cult" is another person's religious orthodoxy. Hostile attitudes to minority religions leads to communal isolation as often as does voluntary isolation among religious groups in order to maintain "communal purity". Both forms of isolation are destructive of larger social relationships; history has made that very clear.

In the case of judaism, much of the origins of anti-jewish sentiment historically stems from jewish traditions opposing inter-mixing with non-jewish communities.

If you can't brook the idea that someone for whom you care has disparate views of religion or spirituality than yourself, then perhaps the problem does not lie with them.

Mark A. Baker

LOLOLOLOL

Baker tries to "hammer out of existence" Smilla's incorrect technology.

Instead of helping people get out of a mind-warping and very damaging cult, she should instead address her mental problems for having wanted to help them.

So, Baker, we talked many times here on this board about your Top Ten Techniques to promote your special tech and hammer others out of existence. I would like to commend you for a new trick, combining two (2) of them. In your post to Smilla you combined the one that says "Your opinions against the cult are due to (obsession, mental illness...)" and your other standby "Insinuation".

I guess it's kinda cool that you can mix up your repertoire once in a while.

Just wanted to let you know that your "case gain" over there was not unnoticed. Keep up the great propaganda, you've almost got this sector of the internet salvaged.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
And the problem with that, Smilla, is that one person's "cult" is another person's religious orthodoxy. Hostile attitudes to minority religions leads to communal isolation as often as does voluntary isolation among religious groups in order to maintain "communal purity". Both forms of isolation are destructive of larger social relationships; history has made that very clear.

In the case of judaism, much of the origins of anti-jewish sentiment historically stems from jewish traditions opposing inter-mixing with non-jewish communities.

If you can't brook the idea that someone for whom you care has disparate views of religion or spirituality than yourself, then perhaps the problem does not lie with them.


Mark A. Baker

Thanks for quoting that. I'd not have seen it, otherwise.

I don't have any family or friends in a cult. I do have a couple friends who were still in CofS, last I checked, but been years since I heard from them. I certainly hope they're ok.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
I do not consider or offer my family or acquaintances up as moral templates. If I'm talking about Indies, I'm gonna give examples of ones I know. And if I don't, somebody's sure to ask me to rectify such an omission.

I do claim I have no Scientological affiliation because that happens to be the sitch.

I'm sure I'm as free to discuss my opinions here as anyone else. Feel free to not read the posts, if you don't like 'em.

Panda seems to get where I'm comin' from. Maybe you could go bestow your dubious attentions on him.

You still don't refute my statements. Stating your board rights were never questioned, disputed or a valid rebuttal to my questions. Reread from post 86. Your answer is to debate with some one else.... or go away. Not a convincing argument on your own behalf, nor indicative of warranting further debate insofar as you don't like having your statements challenged, simply accepted.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
You still don't refute my statements. Stating your board rights were never questioned, disputed or a valid rebuttal to my questions. Reread from post 86. Your answer is to debate with some one else.... or go away. Not a convincing argument on your own behalf, nor indicative of warranting further debate insofar as you don't like having your statements challenged, simply accepted.

You'd referred to my offering family and friends as moral templates. I explained several times that I did not and what I was doing.

You also used verbiage that seemed to imply that I was only claiming to not have affiliation with Scn. I answered that as well.

I'm fine with having my statements challenged. I'd say I hope you're fine with my answering but I don't really care.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
I understand that, David, I do. But thing is, people keep painting non CofS Scn'ists with the same brush as the goose stepping RPFing FreeLoader debting culties and it's wildly inaccurate. I know this because I was an indie for a long time, my husband still is one, and friends I know are such. I have concerns- not about people's views that Scn as ology/ism is full of shit, but moar about personalized vilification of people who are not doing what some claim they are doing.

So that's my concern and I am correct in that.
(Emphasis mine.)

You'd referred to my offering family and friends as moral templates. I explained several times that I did not and what I was doing.

You also used verbiage that seemed to imply that I was only claiming to not have affiliation with Scn. I answered that as well.

I'm fine with having my statements challenged. I'd say I hope you're fine with my answering but I don't really care.

Again, I disagree. The above emphasized by me, clearly stated by you, are claiming that non CofS Scio's (Indies) have the same caliber of virtue as you, your husband as friends. I see no evidence to the contrary to back up this claim. A cult is a cult and the mind warp accompanying it is not noble, desirable or to be accepted just because you have a P.R. agenda to further Indie Scio's as the non-cult Hubbard followers.
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
(Emphasis mine.)



Again, I disagree. The above emphasized by me, clearly stated by you, are claiming that non CofS Scio's (Indies) have the same caliber of virtue as you, your husband as friends. I see no evidence to the contrary to back up this claim. A cult is a cult and the mind warp accompanying it is not noble, desirable or to be accepted just because you have a P.R. agenda to further Indie Scio's as the non-cult Hubbard followers.


No, I don't claim that every non CofS Scn'ist (and, no, they aren't all called Indies) has the same caliber of virtue as myself, husband and friends.

For one thing, I'm not in that number (of non CofS Scn'ists), though I was, at one point.

I name people as examples to show how it can vary, so that generalizing of individuals there doesn't really work.

Plus there are some assholes in the non CofS Scn scene. So your election to use the word "every" misrepresents my POV there, as well.

In the cult, you don't get much variance. It's frowned on, it's drummed out of existence when found due to KSW and DM's madness. I mention the latter because if all one did was be a KSW Scn'ist, one wouldn't do so well with him, either. Nobody who doesn't abide by whatever the flavor of the week in CofS happens to be is going to do well. But one thing they do have to do is never question authority, never dissent. And everyone ultimately does have to dance to the same tune, even if DM- and Hubbard before him- occasionally change the record/CD/MP3.

Elsewhere one does get variance. It's demonstrable but I'd be pretty piss poor at backing up my point if I didn't provide some examples of people.

I consider it to be analagous to the following hypothetical situation:

suppose I knew a churchie who was pretty hostile to critics, skeptics, exes, etc but actually decided to hear me out with a somewhat open mind. I mean, this hypothetical guy would still have his biases, but suppose he tried to listen anyway at least somewhat. And he'd say some stuff about evil critics and cite some examples. Now, suppose he actually didn't fuck it up and found a relatively decent example of some fucked up shit a critic did- not some made up OSA bullshit. So he'd go, hey, Claire, what about Cat'O'Nine"Tails (I made this nick up) and the rock he threw through a Scn'ist's window? (this, too, made up). See what they're like, Claire?

Well, I'd give an example of a critic I know who uses his airplane to help children who need transplants. I'd give him an example of critics I knew who donated money to help someone who was out of work.

Those would be examples of people who are critics who are nothing like he says. Maybe he'd respond citing the crappy mean rock throwing guy. I'd respond that hey, ok, but you cannot generalize that all critics are a certain way because of that one guy. I've given examples of some cool shit and given a few more hours of sleep and some caffeine, I could think of more. So he'd say, maybe, are you saying that all critics and exes are these wonderful altruistic people and nobody is bigoted or mean? I'd say, not at all. There's all sorts of different people involved, though, if you want my opinion, most of them are the nice sort and not the rock throwing sort. I'm giving you examples because you were generalizing about critics and exes. And you can't do that because, unlike the cult to which you belong, they are not answering to a centralized authority that is making them be a certain way and they are individuals.

Now, of course, where this hypothetical analogy doesn't quite cut it is that it does omit the other crucial difference- CofS is a toxic cult belonging to a hypocritical COB and his henchmen- whom he doesn't even treat well and critics are not only free and independent people but they are also coming from a stance of helping the abused. That totally got left out of my analogy but the purpose of it was to show an hypothetical debate about the folly of generalizing people who aren't in CofS and that individual behavior ranges and also that it can be difficult to claim this if one doesn't have at least some examples.
 

Smilla

Ordinary Human
(Emphasis mine.)

Again, I disagree. The above emphasized by me, clearly stated by you, are claiming that non CofS Scio's (Indies) have the same caliber of virtue as you, your husband as friends. I see no evidence to the contrary to back up this claim. A cult is a cult and the mind warp accompanying it is not noble, desirable or to be accepted just because you have a P.R. agenda to further Indie Scio's as the non-cult Hubbard followers.

Vegetarians are excellent pianists. My mother has quite an extensive repertoire.
 
Top