Not all the way "out" yet. My views and introduction

SchwimmelPuckel

Genuine Meatball
Hey Veda -

Do Scientologists have the right to practice their own religion?
Didn't Hubturd mention something about whiners and dimwits claiming 'rights'?

Well, I'll say it then: Scientologists do NOT have the right to practice their 'religion'! - What I've seen of it is a treasonous war on human society.. Spying, black Ops and all manner of illegal shenanigans. Psycological swindle and processes that are harmful and damaging to the mind. Philosophy that are lies and logical fallacies formulated with evil intent.

Hmm.. Alanzo.. Did you mean only the overt PR version of Scientology?

Ok, I'll grant them the right to practrice The Way To Happiness... I got no beef with that..

I don't care about the militant cesspool.. As long as Scientology is kicked down it, it can be militant for all I care..

:yes:
 
This appears to be an application of Ron's policy of being Fabian.

So we have an unspecified number of groups and individuals, who you recommend an unspecified number of refugees to. But you don't wish to name any.

I think I might go to theat message board. It could be interesting.

Have you found a suitable FZer for Nickie?


A. So when a "freezoner" shares information he is "Fabian". When a "critic" shares information he is "supportive". :whistling:

B. You would be welcome to ask direct questions on freezone sites. From my exchanges with you, my thought is FZorg is a good place for you to start. :goodluck:

C. Nicki has close friends who operate freezone centers. I'm sure she'll have no trouble finding tech support.:)


Mark A. Baker
 

Megalomaniac

Silver Meritorious Patron
Do Scientologists have the right to practice their own religion?
My armadillo friend, you speak of freedom of religion. Then you choose an avatar that says "Ban NED". If someone wants New Era Dianetics, why not let them have it? :confused2:


:hmmph: (Megalomaniac's summary)

Vinaire,
to a fellow mathematician, :hug:


Living your best life...that's what it's all about now matter what you believe or subscribe to, or what anyone else does, either.
Nic

Thank you, Nicki! Whose thread was this?
 

lionheart

Gold Meritorious Patron
A. So when a "freezoner" shares information he is "Fabian". When a "critic" shares information he is "supportive". :whistling:

B. You would be welcome to ask direct questions on freezone sites. From my exchanges with you, my thought is FZorg is a good place for you to start. :goodluck:

C. Nicki has close friends who operate freezone centers. I'm sure she'll have no trouble finding tech support.:)


Mark A. Baker

Cool.

I was referring to somewhat generalised or non-specific replies about particular FZ groups and individuals. Looks like a Fabian policy to me. That's OK. I can see reasons for doing that.

Thanks for your good-tempered, polite replies, despite some intense questioning from me. It does you credit.

Looks like I've inadvertantly been a promoter of the FreeZone! :roflmao:

I think I might wander over to that message board.....
 

lionheart

Gold Meritorious Patron
Before the rhetorical blitzkrieg from the denizens of the militant cesspool blew all hope of reason from this thread, all I was saying was that laws are laws and people have rights - including Scientologists.

Here's how we will separate the sane citizenry from the militant denizens of the Nazi cesspool of ESMB:

Who will be the first to stand up and say that Scientologists do not have the right to practice their own religion?

I've got the guillotine sharpened and loaded.

Who will be the first in line?

Who are these "denizens of the militant cesspool"? Who exactly are they? Which "Nazi ESMB" members are you attacking here? Name names and lets see what the Mods make of your ad homs.

Name the usernames! Generalised ad homs instead of naming people is just an effort to get around the Board Rules. Who exactly are you attacking?

Using words like "Nazi" and "cesspool" reminds me so much of the old GO. This is Ron's game. Why are you playing it?

We were actually having quite a good discussion on this thread until you barged in with your generalised misrepresentations and exagerations and of course Vin chimed in in agreement as he saw it as an opportunity to ridicule me and my posts. (covertly of course, wihtout naming me, like a true coward).

Who is saying "Scientologists do not have the right to practice their own religion?" why are you asking when nobody has said it. By the way Alanzo, have you stopped beating your wife yet?


Hi LH,
No, Mark hasn't recommended anything particularly. I've been talking to different people. I've known about the freezone for a long time.
I figure, I'll find someone I'll be "compatible with" in the Freezone.
I'm more interested in what's going on there really than just going over and over and over, etc...all of the same common criticisms, of Scn, tech, LRH, etc.
People are going to do what they do with the tech, with scientology (which has taken on so many meanings, now.)
ot....or take whatever path or direction they want to go in.
We can all agree or disagree and go back and forth...but ultimately, we'll all do what we want to anyway.
I will let you know how I'm getting on...and I hope to see everyone here getting on, moving on with their lives...whether they do Scientology or not....know what I mean?
Living your best life...that's what it's all about now matter what you believe or subscribe to, or what anyone else does, either.
Nic


I agree. Since Scn declared me my life has been a wonderful adventure with personal religious experiences I could never have glimpsed of in the cult. I wish the same for you and all exes.

Personally part of my life includes going "over and over" points about the CofS and Scn tech. My purpose is to help people coming out of the cult wounded by it's many abuses, to come to terms with what happened, to heal and understand. I'm sure you can agree this is a worthwhile thing to do for those in need of help. I am delighted that you have come out without the need for any such help.

Outside the coercive influence of the CofS I'm sure you will find or attract tech people who harmonise with you. I feel you and Mark have not particularly minded my strong interrogation of FZ tech and beliefs. It is ironic that certain other members, ie Alanzo and Vin have objected and mis-represented what I was saying whereas you and Mark haven't. I'm sure I am not the only one to have noticed this.

So basically this thread has acted as quite a good PR tool for the FZ and while I have found some answers from the two of you to be a bit vague, which I find to be a scientological trait as regards questions, nevertheless I appreciate your good manners and willingness to communicate civilly.

I wish you well in your exciting new life free from the abuses of the CofS! :happydance:
 

Nicki

Patron with Honors
Thank you, Nicki! Whose thread was this?[/QUOTE]


Mine...I started it, but it has appeared to have taken on a life of it's own...without me....
:whistling: :yes: :eyeroll: :coolwink:
 

Zinjifar

Silver Meritorious Sponsor
Thank you, Nicki! Whose thread was this?


Mine...I started it, but it has appeared to have taken on a life of it's own...without me....
:whistling: :yes: :eyeroll: :coolwink:

threads usually take on a life of their own, at least any thread going past a couple of dozen posts. Anybody can start one, but, they don't get a leash :)

Sometimes, somebody who doesn't like where the discussion is headed may deliberately attempt to distract or 'derail' a thread, and, that's generally frowned on, but not uncommon.

For example, the disingenuous attempts to imply that condemnation of the organization of Scientology and even the *philosophy* of Scientology, which is, after all, the *basis* for the organization of Scientology (and the 'movment') is tantamount to book-burnings and persecution is a deliberate distraction from the discussion of the relationship between the 'philosophy' and the Organization. Including how, if practiced in ful, the Scientology Philosophy would inherently corrupt the practice of Scientology even *outside* the 'Church' of Scientology.

Or, making suggestions that some mysterious but unnamed factions (who know who they are) are bad bad bad in the hopes of limiting discussion of the relationship between the philosophy and the practice of Scientology would also be a 'distraction' and covert attempt control communication.

The culprits know who they are :)

Zinj
 

Nicki

Patron with Honors
I agree. Since Scn declared me my life has been a wonderful adventure with personal religious experiences I could never have glimpsed of in the cult. I wish the same for you and all exes.

Personally part of my life includes going "over and over" points about the CofS and Scn tech. My purpose is to help people coming out of the cult wounded by it's many abuses, to come to terms with what happened, to heal and understand. I'm sure you can agree this is a worthwhile thing to do for those in need of help. I am delighted that you have come out without the need for any such help.

Outside the coercive influence of the CofS I'm sure you will find or attract tech people who harmonise with you. I feel you and Mark have not particularly minded my strong interrogation of FZ tech and beliefs. It is ironic that certain other members, ie Alanzo and Vin have objected and mis-represented what I was saying whereas you and Mark haven't. I'm sure I am not the only one to have noticed this.

So basically this thread has acted as quite a good PR tool for the FZ and while I have found some answers from the two of you to be a bit vague, which I find to be a scientological trait as regards questions, nevertheless I appreciate your good manners and willingness to communicate civilly.

I wish you well in your exciting new life free from the abuses of the CofS! :happydance:[/QUOTE]


FROM NICKI:
(I still have not figured out how to keep your quotes in blue)
Thanks...You too.
I also felt a "release "and freedom once I decided that I would no longer be a member of the C of S. But what Scientology actually is, still means something to me and obviously Mark....I don't think either of us have been vague in our answers...but maybe...and I speak for myself now, we are both operating on the the premise, that what is true for you, is true for you and what works for you works for you. Scientology has worked for me.
Beings who are "in Scientology" who use the tech to abuse are control others...is not what Scientology actually means to everyone...but what it has come to mean to those who have been the abused, or betrayed by "Scientologists" who are their friends, or fellow staff supposedly, by a management takeover by a power hungry and cruel little man, by the media's use of broad generalization, etc.
And by people who have so much bypassed charge that the entire subject is just so "distateful" to them.
See, I really think that people should simply do what they must do in their heart to expose the truth (and I mean the specific truths - not just the "we are a mob that hates Scientology" truth), in what ever way they see fit and get the specific targets - if they can ...and move on. And if they are seeking a spiritual way, to continue...or if they have found it, as I did when I first found Scientology, to find their way to doing it without all of the CofS hooplah and fanfaire and bullshit.
People on this board that have been on this thread...obviously know enough about Scientology and they have formed their opinions or viewpoints, Pro and Con and we can all can defend them 'till the end of time.
We have all either found what we want or still looking, or not interested in spirituality, what ever....but I see no point in continuing the debates....That's just me.
The debate process might be fun for a while, but like I said (which really irked some ) I (as we ALL probably do -is that better?) have a life off of the net, and outside of Scientology or NON-scientology...and I chose to live it to the fullest and get as much enjoyment out of it as I can!
As should you!

Nicki
 

Nicki

Patron with Honors
threads usually take on a life of their own, at least any thread going past a couple of dozen posts. Anybody can start one, but, they don't get a leash :)

Sometimes, somebody who doesn't like where the discussion is headed may deliberately attempt to distract or 'derail' a thread, and, that's generally frowned on, but not uncommon.

For example, the disingenuous attempts to imply that condemnation of the organization of Scientology and even the *philosophy* of Scientology, which is, after all, the *basis* for the organization of Scientology (and the 'movment') is tantamount to book-burnings and persecution is a deliberate distraction from the discussion of the relationship between the 'philosophy' and the Organization. Including how, if practiced in ful, the Scientology Philosophy would inherently corrupt the practice of Scientology even *outside* the 'Church' of Scientology.

Or, making suggestions that some mysterious but unnamed factions (who know who they are) are bad bad bad in the hopes of limiting discussion of the relationship between the philosophy and the practice of Scientology would also be a 'distraction' and covert attempt control communication.

The culprits know who they are :)

Zinj


Whew...that's a mouthfull! I had to catch my breath just reading it!
Yeah...whatever you just said....thanks for participating, anyway.:wink2:
Nicki
 

lionheart

Gold Meritorious Patron
I agree Zinj.

This thread was actually going quite well, staying more or less on track and actually was quite an interesting discussion about the differences between Scn in the CofS and outside.

Then someone, who knows who he is, came on accusing people, who know who they are, of saying things that everyone knows they didn't! :roflmao:
 

lionheart

Gold Meritorious Patron
FROM NICKI:
(I still have not figured out how to keep your quotes in blue)
Thanks...You too.
I also felt a "release "and freedom once I decided that I would no longer be a member of the C of S. But what Scientology actually is, still means something to me and obviously Mark....I don't think either of us have been vague in our answers...but maybe...and I speak for myself now, we are both operating on the the premise, that what is true for you, is true for you and what works for you works for you. Scientology has worked for me.
Beings who are "in Scientology" who use the tech to abuse are control others...is not what Scientology actually means to everyone...but what it has come to mean to those who have been the abused, or betrayed by "Scientologists" who are their friends, or fellow staff supposedly, by a management takeover by a power hungry and cruel little man, by the media's use of broad generalization, etc.
And by people who have so much bypassed charge that the entire subject is just so "distateful" to them.
See, I really think that people should simply do what they must do in their heart to expose the truth (and I mean the specific truths - not just the "we are a mob that hates Scientology" truth), in what ever way they see fit and get the specific targets - if they can ...and move on. And if they are seeking a spiritual way, to continue...or if they have found it, as I did when I first found Scientology, to find their way to doing it without all of the CofS hooplah and fanfaire and bullshit.
People on this board that have been on this thread...obviously know enough about Scientology and they have formed their opinions or viewpoints, Pro and Con and we can all can defend them 'till the end of time.
We have all either found what we want or still looking, or not interested in spirituality, what ever....but I see no point in continuing the debates....That's just me.
The debate process might be fun for a while, but like I said (which really irked some ) I (as we ALL probably do -is that better?) have a life off of the net, and outside of Scientology or NON-scientology...and I chose to live it to the fullest and get as much enjoyment out of it as I can!
As should you!

Nicki

I do enjoy life to the full, don't concern yourself about that. I am on here a lot, because I have adopted the mission of helping people still hurting from Scn to enjoy life fully too. :happydance:

It is a conscious decision that I have made.

I think our only point of disagreement, and it is ok to disagree, is that I think the abuse is more inherent in the tech itself than you do.

Also the abuse and betrayal that you refer to was inherent in the CofS long before DM and RTC took over. My opinion is it is hardwired in some of the scn tech and deliberately so by LRH.

Google "Dianetics in Limbo", by Helen O'Brien - this is one of the earliest accounts of LRH and the development of Scn.

I expect the guy Ron chained up in the dog kennel at St Hill before the SO was created felt pretty abused and betrayed. Likewise the children thrown into the hold on the ship and those students overboarded.

Specific target is specific. My opinion is that DM is also a victim of this abuse, albeit a willing one. So I spotlight LRH. Source is source.

We were all willing victims except for the children born into the cult and not given a choice, while children.

I wish you and Mark well in the effort to separate out the non-abusive aspects of Scn. They certainly exist, but I'm not sure how easy it is for a scientologist to sift through the deceptiveness of some of Ron's tricks.

Do you expect your ideas and opinions of Scn to change as you go along studying the subject outside the CofS? Or do you expect your ideas to stay more or less the same?

Mine have changed hugely in the 27 years since I left.
 
Specific target is specific. My opinion is that DM is also a victim of this abuse, albeit a willing one. So I spotlight LRH. Source is source.


I agree in holding LRH responsible for his actions, both the clearly harmful as well as the potentially beneficial. I don't consider DM to have contributed anything beneficial to others. Hubbard, by the personal testimony of many, clearly did. As I've stated elsewhere, I personally believe that Hubbard suffered from a probable lifelong mental illness which influenced much of his most extreme behavior. In that sense, he was a "victim" also. It certainly doesn't justify the harm he has done, but it is important to consider all contributing factors.


Mark A. Baker
 

lionheart

Gold Meritorious Patron
I agree in holding LRH responsible for his actions, both the clearly harmful as well as the potentially beneficial. I don't consider DM to have contributed anything beneficial to others. Hubbard, by the personal testimony of many, clearly did. As I've stated elsewhere, I personally believe that Hubbard suffered from a probable lifelong mental illness which influenced much of his most extreme behavior. In that sense, he was a "victim" also. It certainly doesn't justify the harm he has done, but it is important to consider all contributing factors.


Mark A. Baker

Yes, I've often expressed sympathy and compassion for Ron too. He appears to me to have been a psychotic genius. And clearly a bigger victim than any of us.

I believe because of the organisation he set up, which mirrored his own insanity, anyone to rise to the top had inevitably to have been psychotic. The saner ones either blow themsleves off, get busted, or stay quietly lower down the org board. The leader has to be mad, because the organisation is mad and is designed to promote mad people up the org board.

Another way to look at it is that a slave organisation has to have a slave master in charge, not an altruist in charge.

Such a leader is almost inevitably going to be less of a genius than Hubbard, yet showing his psychotic traits. Cue David Miscavige! :duh:

I'm struggling a little to think of beneficial things Hubbard actually did. I think the good things in Scn and in the tech probably slipped through either despite Hubbard or because Hubbard let them through as part of his bait and switch to con more to become his slaves.

My concern for the FZ is that the upper level tech is basically a slave-making tech just as it is in the CofS, due to its highly evaluative nature. But I wish you well in the attempt to avoid this.

I think anyone considering using the FZ should at least be given a portential health warning by understanding better what Hubbard actually did.
 

Markus

Silver Meritorious Patron
Hi Nicki, nice to meet you here....

....my name is Markus Stuckenbrock. My observations in my 32 year "relationship" with scientology are that it doesn't work at all and that the writings of Mr. Hubbard destroyed my whole family. If you are interested I will give you all the references. In my opinion Scientology is evil even if you apply it as good as you can. This is only my opinion - but this opinion is based on first hand experiences - I compared this experiences with the writings of Mr. Hubbard and found out that 99% of the bad things that happened to me and my family through Scientology were no mistakes or faults by some stupid people not applying Hubbards technology but in deed were caused by the evil body of thought of this insane man called L. Ron Hubbard.
I can understand your point of view because I once was trapped by this cult too. But I hope you will try to really recognize how Scientology can hurt people in so many very cruel ways.

I have to spend many hours of my life to fight against this "Church" right now, because I know how harmfull this "Philosophy" can be. Beside that I'm a happy husband, father of two very sweet girls, soccer trainer - I have a fullfilling job in which I can help people to live a happy life and if i need some peace I'll do some work in my beautiful garden arround our house. When I was on staff in Scientology I was never able to lead my life as I wanted to. I was not even able to speak out what I thought without getting into deep trouble. And I know that it is not possible to live a happy fulfilled life when you are deeply involved in Scientology because members of my family were or are deeply involved in it. So take a good look on the "other side" and dare to live!


Best wishes from Germany

Markus
 

Nicki

Patron with Honors
Do you expect your ideas and opinions of Scn to change as you go along studying the subject outside the CofS? Or do you expect your ideas to stay more or less the same?


Only time - and experience - will truly tell.
Nicki
 

Veda

Sponsor
As far as I know, the idea that "Hubbard suffered from mental illness" has only been presented by one person to the (Ex) "public" on ESMB. I'd be curious if it's been presented anywhere else, such as on Scientology Freezone forums.

That Hubbard had the misfortune (perhaps due to evil off-planet meddling by anti-Ron forces) of having been born with a defective brain "an abnormal brain" would mean that Hubbard (Ron), now liberated of the problems of his old body, can return (to Earth or some other planet), as Freezone person Ken Urquhart has written, "1000 times more brilliant" - and this time with a healthy brain.

Looks like another variation of "Ron went crazy for (in an attempt to cure) your (Mankind's) aberrations." (After all, part of him was only a man - like Jesus - etc. And "we build a world with broken straws," etc.)

So, "Ron is responsible for his actions" yet is not responsible for his actions due to his Abby Normal brain.

There's actually a list of reasons why Hubard behaved "oddly" at times, and it ranges from the multiple Ron theory, which has several variations, to one that I heard from an "old timer" years ago. We had bumped into each other in a health food store, and he started excitedly telling me about the "cognition" that he had after listening to Ron on a tape describing why he walked like an average person, instead of simply floating along a few inches above the ground. The reason given (according to this fellow, who was by the way a genuinely nice person) was that Ron wanted us to have that ability also, and if he demonstrated it, that would have overwhelmed (over awed) us, thus preventing us from ever having that ability.

This line of thought extended to an explanation that "Ron deliberately did things (that showed human failings) so that we wouldn't worship him."

Of course, for this fellow, this idea only made Ron all the more worship-able. But anyway...

Let's face it: it's not easy being a Scientologist in the (unexpected) age of the Internet. So much that would have been Scientologically "erased" (or at least ignored without the Internet) now is visible, and - worse - is available to all by way of an electronic planetary net of communication.

That certainly wasn't part of the plan!
 

KnightVision

Gold Meritorious Patron
Any religion, if closely examined, falls apart.

There is no one "true" religion.

The question is, what does it do for the people who follow it?

Scientology, without the Sea Org, without enforced abortions, enforced disconnections, without an over-arching authoritarian structure, without bankrupting pricing, is very different from the Church of Scientology.

Scientology delivered like that gives a person a place to go to unburden himself, to seek redemption, and to find things he can do to improve his life in his own estimation. It has been proven over the years that Scientology can be delivered this way, because it HAS been delivered this way.

The militant minority on this board who would seek the power to take that away from people simply do not live in the real world. They live in their own version of the Church of Scientology and seek to dictate what people can think and believe.

Their vengeful crusade to destroy the Church of Scientology has turned them into foaming idiots over the years. Instead of learning and growing as exes, they have continued to feed their own fevered retribution. They are now pinheaded fanatics, who have simply come to occupy the other side of the same coin.

They can not stand unchallenged in any group that actually values the freedom of thought, and the right to one's own religion.

Sorry... but ya know what's missing here? The willingness to allow others to believe what they believe. scn can be good for some. For Some. Not All. Not even the majority. For Awhile. Not for long. Think man. Scn is a dinky sci-fi philo. Known to a scant few of the worlds populace. It will never reach the many that Catholicism, Christianity, Muslim-ism or Buddhism has. Never. No chance, no way, no how. And there's a reason. Figure out that reason and you'll perhaps realize that your comment of 'The militant minority' is a delusion perhaps given license by scn doctrine itself. Those who find Scn to be utter nonsense are the MAJORITY OF THE POPULACE. And that's a static statistic. Amen.
 
Last edited:
Top