Why some Scientologists continue with Scientology

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Well. Lurkie, I was with you right up to here... this idea of complete freedom is accurate when it comes to thoughts only, but does not extend to actions. Driving a car is an action in the real physical world that has real harmful consequences for others if not done safely. Supporting Scientology, even passively and tacitly, is an action which has harmful consequences for your fellow human beings.

Drivers do not have the right to decide where they want to go. They can't drive through a crowded playground of kids, just because they want to go there. They can't drive off the road and across someone else's property and through their house, just because they want to go there. The can't drive drunk or impaired, they can't drive blind or while on certain kinds of medications, they can't legally drive unsafe vehicles, they can't legally drive without insurance. We, as a society, have all kinds of rules to protect people from the harmful consequences of real world actions taken by individuals, like driving a car.

An individual has a right to think what they want, and to a slightly more limited extent, to say what they want, but they DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO whatever they want, in any decent society, because we as a group recognize that there are those among us who would cause great harm to us, if allowed to do so.

Scientology causes great harm to our fellow humans.

Well, wait a minute. The op was from an Indie/FZ point of view. He's not supporting CofS. He's supporting Scn which is an ology, but where's the harm in that?

There is NO harm in someone assessing what he or she believes ideologically speaking and making a decision, far apart from and without participating in any cultic activities.

Someone who does some auditing with someone else outside CofS is just practicing his or her ideology. I mean, I think Christianity is false, too, and I'm none too thrilled with certain church's activities and coverups, but I'm not going to worry if someone believes in that branch of Christianity. Now, if he sends some money to a butt fucking priest, well, yeah, I would have a problem with that.
 

newlife

Patron
Well, wait a minute. The op was from an Indie/FZ point of view. He's not supporting CofS. He's supporting Scn which is an ology, but where's the harm in that?

There is NO harm in someone assessing what he or she believes ideologically speaking and making a decision, far apart from and without participating in any cultic activities.

Thank you Voltaire's Child! That's right! :thumbsup:
 

Bill

Gold Meritorious Patron
Self delusion is not a crime

Well, wait a minute. The op was from an Indie/FZ point of view. He's not supporting CofS. He's supporting Scn which is an ology, but where's the harm in that?

There is NO harm in someone assessing what he or she believes ideologically speaking and making a decision, far apart from and without participating in any cultic activities.

Someone who does some auditing with someone else outside CofS is just practicing his or her ideology. I mean, I think Christianity is false, too, and I'm none too thrilled with certain church's activities and coverups, but I'm not going to worry if someone believes in that branch of Christianity. Now, if he sends some money to a butt fucking priest, well, yeah, I would have a problem with that.
I agree wholly. Any Scientologist who sells services with the promise that a person would go "up the Bridge", would attain "Release", "Clear" or "OT" should be sued for fraud and forced to return all monies paid.

But if they want to self-audit or co-audit with another believer well, that's their business.
 

Thrak

Gold Meritorious Patron
My apologies if I missed that but at this point I could never take anything hubbard said seriously again and fail to see how anyone else could who has had the opportunity to look things over. But, to each his own.
 
Regarding what's so bad about supporting Scientology as an "ology"?
This is a post I made on another thread about this subject:

"Everybody please read ALL of these documents, then make up your own mind!!!
Everybody who had ever done even a little bit of Scientology needs to read all of these documents on the links, to fully understand the Truth about Scientology. It is anti-kool-aide!

Arnie, you've done a great public service by pulling this information together out of the dusty archives of out of print books and obscure govt. manuals, etc. The confusion technique is aptly named and in my mind fully understanding the concept goes a loooong way to explaining the rationale for creating all the "space opera" that is at the upper levels of Scientology. As a non I feel like finally get it!!! At that point in time, Ron was crazy like a fox!

My hat's off to you!

Thank You! Take a bow."

And following what I say here is Arnie's post and a link to the whole thread.

Please read all of the documents, and THINK about it. This is the genesis of your Scientology, which is not a harmless philosophy. If you think that, then you haven't looked deeply and clearly enough at the facts about it and how and why it was created.

As for the Freezone/Indy argument, It's like saying, well, I no longer buy crystal meth from the gang dealing drugs down the street, now I cook mine up at home. So that's an improvement, right? I'm better now, aren't I ? My family is safer, isn't it?

People can and do get addicted to Scientology and auditing just as they can to drug use and other harmful habits. I know that comparison may hurt some feelings, and I don't want to cause anyone pain or embarrassment, but everybody who was ever involved in Scientology needs to wake up to the reality of what it is and what it does. For the good of us all. "Clear the planet" doesn't mean just save everybody from their so-called "re-active mind", it means indoctrinate everybody into Scientology and infiltrate Scientology into all human systems. That's it's real purpose and intent of KSW.

A person can be too close to the forest to see the trees sometimes. I get it. I really do. I have compassion for all Exes in all their different stages of recovery from their cult experience.

Getting unindoctrinated fully does take varying amounts of time for different people. It's work. It takes a lot of life experience away form the cult's influence, and if you are still reading the cult's books, using the cult's meter, listening to the cult's tapes and auditing or being audited by others as the cult taught you to do, and you are still thinking the way the cult taught you to, then you are NOT FREE from the cult's influence. You are neither free nor independent, truly!

Please read this everyone, I'm begging you!:

Alice in Wonderland - Hubbard said: "Always goto source" SO IT I DID!
IN the early 60's, L Ron Hubbard, in his TRs, or Training Routines, includes the use of the book Alice in Wonderland, telling adepts to read lines from this book to their partner, and then the other way around.
Here is an image from the then CLASSIFIED US KUBARK Interrogation manual, the page is titled "Alice in Wonderland" I feel current, recovering and ex-members of Scientology might find this of interest.


The entire KUBARK Manual is webbed here for your convenience:
http://www.lermanet.com/newimages/CIA+Kubark+1-60.pdf
http://www.lermanet.com/newimages/CIA+Kubark+61-112.pdf
http://www.lermanet.com/newimages/CI...rk+113-128.pdf

The entire once CLASSIFIED CIA/ARMY KUBARK Interrogation Manual is one hell of a read. In the footnotes at the end, close readers, will note that Interrogators are told to read Joost Meerloo's RAPE OF THE MIND, which I had previously webbed after finding the material in it astoundingly valuable, in order to "find out how your own mind works"

Dr. Joost Meerloo's Rape of the MIND
http://www.lermanet.com/scientology/

Remember, always "Go To Source"
__________________
Who is Arnie Lerma? NEW LINK
Why are we here? LINK
"Reducing people's freedom is big business" Bob Dylan in Masked and Anonymous
"Contrary to general belief, it has been my experience that the more intelligent the subject, the easier it is to induce hypnosis" Ralph Slater - "Hypnotism" May 1950 LINK

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=22499
 
Last edited:
i'd like a like of gouda on my sandwich

This is really insulting to devout Buddhists everywhere. Can you not see that? :duh:

All right, Newlife, good post and a brave attempt at an analogy. Analogies are some of the best ways to teach and illustrate concepts and ideas. Yours falls short in one or two very important ways in my mind. It does help us to understand the intensive selfishness, smug satisfaction and self-blinded complacency and disavowal of criminal culpability of everyone who still calls themselves a Scientologist and supports Corporate Scientology in any way, even tacitly, with their silence about their crimes.

I get it that you like your car, have a strong sense of ownership and you feel that you have negotiated a system where others have "failed", and are a little arrogant about it. Also, what you didn't state, is that you are paying a good deal of money every month to keep this criminal operation that builds and sells people these defective cars, so that even though you are complacent with yours, and give lip service to feeling compassion for the other people who are injured or killed by their defective cars, as long as YOURS is running all right, you are quite content to ignore the reality. The reality that your money, filtered through this organization, is paying for thugs, PI's and lawyers to harass, intimidate, and harm, "by any means necessary" anyone who tells the truth about your car and it's manufacturers. Why? Because: YOU LIKE your car!

How selfish is that? You feel comfortable and contented, so you can ignore that by paying money each month to the company that manufactures these cars, you are actually complicit in the harm they do to other innocent people.

Other people's cars blow up and burn, killing whole families, maiming people, injuring nearby pedestrians as well as other drivers on the road, but hey, because that hasn't happened to you yet and YOU LIKE your car, you feel no sense of responsibility for the harm done. Even though it is YOU, and people like you, who are fostering and supporting this criminal corporation that produces these defective and hazardous cars.

What you also don't state is that your car throws off sparks and causes brush fires alongside the road wherever it goes, some of them doing a great deal of property damage and threatening the lives of innocent people who have never seen your car (the front groups).

Also, from time to time, a hot metal part flies off of your car and through the windshield of another driver on the road, killing or injuring them and causing them to collide with other innocent drivers, causing a major pile up. Seldom are these reported on the news, and so far, no one has arrested or indited you for driving an unsafe car on the public highway, so you feel safe and comfortable. It's easy to ignore all those sad stories of bad things happening to other people, because of the company that made your car. You just have to not let yourself look too much in the rear-view mirror as you go your own way, and you don't see or have to deal with the wreckage left behind, because YOU LIKE your car, and it hasn't really harmed you, yet, right?

Well guess what? WE CAN SEE the harm it has done you, and continues to do.
And YOU DO continue to harm other people by saying I LIKE Scientology, you ARE promoting it to others. YOU ARE defending it and supporting it.

Do I think that you have the right to continue to drive your dangerous car on the public highway, just because you're in denial about the danger it presents to others? Hell no! Your car needs to be recalled for the public welfare! Too bad that YOU LIKE IT. That's not worth sacrificing people's lives and property for. Go find something else that works for you and that you like, that won't harm innocent people! Now THERE'S Spiritual gain for you!

"If I was a Buddhist, I would be so because that philosophy would make the most sense to me or give me the most spiritual gain. I would not consider to change my philosophy because it’s old and obsolete." GIVE ME THE MOST GAIN. Can you see how selfish and misguided this attitude is?

Are you REALLY getting "Spiritual gain", while ignoring and denying the great harm that the system that you are supporting does to others? Does any real religion in the world count that as a Spiritual gain, that you're comfortable while others are being harmed at your expense, and you do nothing to stop it, you take no responsibility for the harm done to them, to other groups and systems (government, law enforcement) that are being harmed, the harm done to the world-wide community as a whole? Google sociopath!

Old and obsolete??? Is that all Scientology is? Scientology is not a religion. Scientology is not a religious philosophy. Scientology is a destructive and dangerous cult that functions as a Corporation while masquerading as a church, whose main purpose is to "make money, make more money, and make other people make money", as Ron said and ordered his workers to do.

If you really hold this attitude, then you can't see the harm that it has done you. Others can see it in you, by your attitudes. You are either ignorant and need to be educated more about the real harm Scientology does to people, including yourself, your family and friends, or you are purposely ignoring the truth about it, and that makes you a part of the problem, and not part of the solution for society as a whole. Can you not see that?

This is why people say "Wake Up!" to the mind-blind and indoctrinated cult members who maintain this attitude: Well I'm out of the church, and I'm doing o.k. So what if other people are being harmed, lives destroyed by it? That's their problem. I LIKE my "religion".

Every person who still calls themself a Scientologist, or who openly talks to anyone else about their wins with it or how much they like Scientology, or shares their Corporate products of books, tapes, e-meter auditing with others is SUPPORTING it, even if you think you are operating outside the so-called "church".

If you think it's o.k. to do this, then either:

1. You haven't read and learned enough about the true nature and actions of your fake "religion" and the crimes of the present-day fanatics who maintain it. You are living in a mental state of denial. WAKE UP!

or

2. You have a criminally self-centered attitude yourself. Sociopathology is inbred into the culture of your pseudo-religion, Scientology, and you feel real comfortable there and fit right in! Your attitude is: Too bad about all those other people who are actively being harmed by it, but I CHOOSE to take no responsibility for that because I LIKE MY RELIGION and I am comfortable, so screw everybody else's safety and comfort.

And we as a society are supposed to tolerate criminal behavior because YOU are comfortable with it? I don't think so!

Get ready for change Pal, your car is being recalled!

wow S&L that is quite a diatribe. CoS does things i do not and cannot condone. psychiatrists do far worse. free men and women of good will can and do study the materials of dianetics and scientology and use them to benefit thmselves and others.

if there is to be an address of the problematic aspects of CoS it can only be effected by those who recognize the virtues and value of the subject
 

Mick Wenlock

Admin Emeritus (retired)
I saw a show (I'm addicted to reality shows and documentaries about obese people who make a new beginning. and, no, I'm not obese.) where there was this really sweet guy, a physician. He weighed 400 pounds and was struggling with his problem. But you know what? I bet he could have prescribed an antibiotic for me if I'd needed him to.

You know what? Talk about faulty logic.

The Post you were replying to was making the comment that in spiritual development matters they would not trust someone like HUbbard nor his "solutions" to life. In like manner if they were seeking how to care for their body they would not be wild about consulting a doctor who obviously does not have a clue about how to care for himself, let alone others.

So the correct "logic" in your example would be to point out that a 400 lb obese doctor struggling with his condition may not be the best person to go to dinner with.

A doctor who was blind drunk and snorting cocaine through a funnel could write a prescription for an antibiotic, in fact most anyone who can write could do it. Doesn't actually make much of a point though.

Back to Hubbard - someone who was a bigamist, married three times and who let his wife go to jail for him may not be the best person to listen to when it comes to dealing with marital fidelity. If he could not even solve his own condition it is highly unlikely that his writing is anything other than wild guesswork.
 

Jquepublic

Silver Meritorious Patron
Well, wait a minute. The op was from an Indie/FZ point of view. He's not supporting CofS. He's supporting Scn which is an ology, but where's the harm in that?

There is NO harm in someone assessing what he or she believes ideologically speaking and making a decision, far apart from and without participating in any cultic activities.

Someone who does some auditing with someone else outside CofS is just practicing his or her ideology. I mean, I think Christianity is false, too, and I'm none too thrilled with certain church's activities and coverups, but I'm not going to worry if someone believes in that branch of Christianity. Now, if he sends some money to a butt fucking priest, well, yeah, I would have a problem with that.

Agreed!

I owe you hugs from the OTHER FZ/Indie thread, too.

:bighug:
 

Mystic

Crusader
The ultimate lesson of any involvement in so-called "dianetics and scientology" is to learn what Spirit is not regardless of anything whatsoever one considers to be of value as all values are laced with deceit.

One is better off not accepting a single iota of anything the hubbard-thing ever spewed about.

Yes, "throw out the baby with the bathwater."
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
My apologies if I missed that but at this point I could never take anything hubbard said seriously again and fail to see how anyone else could who has had the opportunity to look things over. But, to each his own.

Because, for them, it's not about Hubbard, but about what they themselves find to work in their lives.

Looking at some of the lives of the saints and various prophets, BCE and more recent, I see a similar situation with Xtianity, Mormonism, Islam, Judaism, etc.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
This is a post I made on another thread about this subject:

Everybody please read ALL of these documents, then make up your own mind!!!
Everybody who had ever done even a little bit of Scientology needs to read all of these documents on the links, to fully understand the Truth about Scientology. It is anti-kool-aide!

Arnie, you've done a great public service by pulling this information together out of the dusty archives of out of print books and obscure govt. manuals, etc. The confusion technique is aptly named and in my mind fully understanding the concept goes a loooong way to explaining the rationale for creating all the "space opera" that is at the upper levels of Scientology. As a non I feel like finally get it!!! At that point in time, Ron was crazy like a fox!

My hat's off to you!

Thank You! Take a bow.

And following what I say here is Arnie's post and a link to the whole thread.

Please read all of the documents, and THINK about it. This is the genesis of your Scientology is not a harmless philosophy. If you think that, then you haven't looked deeply and clearly enough at the facts about it and how and why it was created.

As for the Freezone/Indy argument, It's like saying, well, I no longer buy crystal meth from the gang dealing drugs down the street, now I cook mine up at home. So that's an improvement, right? I'm better now, aren't I ? My family is safer, isn't it?

People can and do get addicted to Scientology and auditing just as they can to drug use and other harmful habits. I know that comparison may hurt some feelings, and I don't want to cause anyone pain or embarrassment, but everybody who was ever involved in Scientology needs to wake up to the reality of what it is and what it does. For the good of us all. Clear the planet doesn't mean just save everybody from their so-called "re-active mind", it means indoctrinate everybody into Scientology and infiltrate Scientology into all human systems. That's it's real purpose and intent of KSW

A person can be too close to the forest to see the trees sometimes. I get it. I really do. I have compassion for all Exes in all their different stages of recovery from their cult experience.

Getting unindoctrinated fully does take varying amounts of time for different people. It's work. It takes a lot of life experience away form the cult's influence, and if you are still reading the cult's books, using the cult's meter, listening to the cult's tapes and auditing or being audited by others as the cult taught you to do, and you are still thinking the way the cult taught you to, then you are NOT FREE from the cult's influence. You are neither free nor independent, truly!

Please read this everyone, I'm begging you!:

Alice in Wonderland - Hubbard said: "Always goto source" SO IT I DID!
IN the early 60's, L Ron Hubbard, in his TRs, or Training Routines, includes the use of the book Alice in Wonderland, telling adepts to read lines from this book to their partner, and then the other way around.
Here is an image from the then CLASSIFIED US KUBARK Interrogation manual, the page is titled "Alice in Wonderland" I feel current, recovering and ex-members of Scientology might find this of interest.


The entire KUBARK Manual is webbed here for your convenience:
http://www.lermanet.com/newimages/CIA+Kubark+1-60.pdf
http://www.lermanet.com/newimages/CIA+Kubark+61-112.pdf
http://www.lermanet.com/newimages/CI...rk+113-128.pdf

The entire once CLASSIFIED CIA/ARMY KUBARK Interrogation Manual is one hell of a read. In the footnotes at the end, close readers, will note that Interrogators are told to read Joost Meerloo's RAPE OF THE MIND, which I had previously webbed after finding the material in it astoundingly valuable, in order to "find out how your own mind works"

Dr. Joost Meerloo's Rape of the MIND
http://www.lermanet.com/scientology/

Remember, always "Go To Source"
__________________
Who is Arnie Lerma? NEW LINK
Why are we here? LINK
"Reducing people's freedom is big business" Bob Dylan in Masked and Anonymous
"Contrary to general belief, it has been my experience that the more intelligent the subject, the easier it is to induce hypnosis" Ralph Slater - "Hypnotism" May 1950 LINK

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?t=22499

Why would I take Arnie's or anyone else's word for something I feel about spirituality or emotional experiences? My experiences are my own. Dexter's are Dexter's. Terril's are Terrils. (yours are yours, etc)

I've seen some indoctrination in the FZ but far less than in CofS and with some people, no indoctrination. I also do not agree with the implication that anyone who studies Scn as a FreeZoner or Indie is indoctrinated and/or doesn't know what he or she is doing.

The crystal meth analogy is one I've heard (was lobbed at me repeatedly when I was a non CofS Scn'ist) many times. It more than limps, its legs are broken. It implies that there's something inherently and intrinsically harmful in peacefully doing some TRs or doing some auditing on ones' own.

The problems in CofS are due to the toxic policies and to the ideas in "tech" that it's all or nothing and that Hubbard was always right and that this is the way we should always live our lives (meaning, "I am the Source, thy Source, thou shalt have no other founders or ologies before me"). Absent those things, it's no prob.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
I personally find the whole being an ologist thing to be limited. And I think that is a potential pitfall with practice of Scn and Dn outside CofS. But that's nowhere near the implication that it's going to fuck up society because someone elects to do some TRs or processes from the Handbook for Preclears or still believes in theta or the ARC triangle.

Again, I refer readers to my analogy of Christianity outside the Roman Catholic Church, far away from the purview of buttfucking priests and the bishops and arch bishops and ex Nazi popes who covered for them. They still end up believing in utter nonsense like Purgatory and indulgences and mortal and original sin. But so what. They're just trying to live their lives. One could say their cars hadn't left the driveway either. Same thing.
 

Sindy

Crusader
I saw a show (I'm addicted to reality shows and documentaries about obese people who make a new beginning. and, no, I'm not obese.) where there was this really sweet guy, a physician. He weighed 400 pounds and was struggling with his problem. But you know what? I bet he could have prescribed an antibiotic for me if I'd needed him to.

Logical Fallacy

Would you trust this guy to show you the best way to eat or how to improve your time in the 40 yard dash?

You could think to answer that, "yes" you could trust this person if he observed others eating well (and the consequences of that) and he observed others running and the best ways to train (even though he would never run himself) and through this observation was able to come up a "workable" plan for others to follow (even if such plan was not considered something to be followed by the author).

Why wouldn't you just go directly to the person who DID live the idea or philosophy he/she was espousing?

In the above analogy, we all trusted Ron to show us how to lose weight while he was shoving Twinkies down his throat on the hour.
 

Voltaire's Child

Fool on the Hill
Well, Synthia, if he told me that I should eat less and move around more and that if I ate chicken and fish in four to six ounce portions with no sauces or cheese, and gave me a list of vegetables, and a book on calories and gave me an exercise program --

and I then followed that

and I lost 40 pounds

and he didn't...

then I'd assume he knew how to prescribe a diet. I'd also think "Huh. Those who can't do- TEACH." which is a smarmy truism but I sometimes think in such terms.

Your analogy does not totally work because you leave out the component of the recipient's experiences and decision making ability and the cause and effect of certain actions.

Conversely, I've also seen people who really seemed to have their act together who then claimed that this or that would really work, and oh, oops, no it didn't work for me.
 

Sindy

Crusader
Well, Synthia, if he told me that I should eat less and move around more and that if I ate chicken and fish in four to six ounce portions with no sauces or cheese, and gave me a list of vegetables, and a book on calories and gave me an exercise program --

and I then followed that

and I lost 40 pounds

and he didn't...

then I'd assume he knew how to prescribe a diet. I'd also think "Huh. Those who can't do- TEACH." which is a smarmy truism but I sometimes think in such terms.

Your analogy does not totally work because you leave out the component of the recipient's experiences and decision making ability and the cause and effect of certain actions.

Conversely, I've also seen people who really seemed to have their act together who then claimed that this or that would really work, and oh, oops, no it didn't work for me.

That's a good point. I would only caution someone to make sure that he/she studies the subject well, including as much as one can possibly glean about the teacher's intentions.

One can seemingly get great results, lose 40 pounds and then drop dead of a heart attack because of the stress put on the body through a "successful" program. In this analogy, did the person write success stories? Yes. Did he/she try to get friends and family to partake in this great program? Yes. Did others rave about it? Yes. Is the person still dead? Yes.
 

Jquepublic

Silver Meritorious Patron
That's a good point. I would only caution someone to make sure that he/she studies the subject well, including as much as one can possibly glean about the teacher's intentions.

One can seemingly get great results, lose 40 pounds and then drop dead of a heart attack because of the stress put on the body through a "successful" program. In this analogy, did the person write success stories? Yes. Did he/she try to get friends and family to partake in this great program? Yes. Did others rave about it? Yes. Is the person still dead? Yes.

I don't really think his intentions have a lot to do with it, but I think it's important to try to piece together a good idea of his mental condition because that IMO directly bears on the subject. I also think it's important to look for corroberating data from sources that were NOT Hubbard and make decisions based on info from as many sources as possible.

Studying various schools of psychology/psychotherapy and philosophy helps me sort out what I still value and what I can safely and happily toss in the dumpster.
 
Top