paradox
ab intra silentio vera
No wonder JC told so many parables...they really communicate the essence of the pie! :wink2:
Great post by Paradox - as acknowledged above.
:baby1:
No wonder JC told so many parables...they really communicate the essence of the pie! :wink2:
Great post by Paradox - as acknowledged above.
Ah, jeeze, VaD, then I'd have to be all sociable n' shit, and drag out all the good china and silver plate, serve tea.... Just for a bit of apple strudel à la Mode. Here, it's hep yerselves. Hmm, that cherry would go good on top, tho'.
Were you gonna try to have it all for yourself? -
So you think that Mayo did not help to create the most destructive cult on the planet? He played no part in it?
The fact is Mayo was no ordinary member of Scientology. Even the current people such as Miscavige, Rinder, Rathbun etc were not in LRH's close circle to the point where they were actually writing the tech (whether it was later changed to LRH authorship or not). Nobody was in this position except Mayo. He was a co-creator of the "tech". So yes, I do think negatively of him.
He subsequently became a victim of the organization that he helped create, so that immunizes him from criticism? I don't think so.
I accept now that the Mayos are never going to say anything useful. It is apparent that they are under legal obligation to keep quiet. All we will hear will be wishy-washy good-roads good-weather type of stuff.
Almost everyone here is an exmember. Some did more harmful things when in the cult than others.
At what point can a person move forward?
Next question:
At which point can others let go and understand the fact that exes like David and Julie Mayo are also trying to move forward?
Next question:
At which point can others let go and understand the fact that exes like David and Julie Mayo are also trying to move forward?
VaD has accused me in another thread of not answering his/her questions posed in this thread. Could either VaD, or another please summarise the extant questions. I simply cannot read thru all this drivel again.
The process of auditing does not require belief or acceptance in Hubbard's narrative or his theory. Whether that is the best way to proceed is unclear. It is certainly one possible way to proceed, and one not without its benefits.
From Mark Baker @ post 271 (I think).
...The process of auditing does not require belief or acceptance in Hubbard's narrative or his theory. Whether that is the best way to proceed is unclear. It is certainly one possible way to proceed, and one not without its benefits.