Scientology Blowout: Commenters of the Week!

That is a punishment, Mark. If Joe Blow is the "enemy" then why should someone else entirely, a perfectly happy and ethical Scientologist who minds his own business, be forced to make that choice? He is the wrong target. Blaming B or C when A is the obvious cause is one of the traits of a suppressive personality, as no doubt you are aware.

I know someone who was Declared for, get this, asking for a refund! That was the ONLY thing on her Declare! She wasn't "attacking" anybody, for goodness sake. She wasn't getting the results she was promised and so she asked for some (not all) of her money back. Her Declare is online, I can send you the link to it if you would like to see it.

Did I disconnect from her? Did I f**k. I'm not having anyone tell me who I can or can't talk to. Per the Code of Honour, I am my own advisor, I will keep my own counsel and select my own decisions. I will also give or receive communication if I so desire it. LRH, dude. Remember him?

Enforced disconnection was cancelled by Hubbard himself, Mark. "Since we can now handle all types of cases disconnection as a condition is cancelled." -- LRH, HCO PL 15 November 1968, Cancellation of Disconnection.

You think it was LRH who reinstated it? Think again.

“A man is as sane and safe as he is self-determined.” -- LRH, Child Dianetics, 1951.

#2 = That all men have inalienable rights to their own religious practices and their performance.

"does that make me a bad guy?"

IMO, Not at all. You are just defending your church in the best way you know. But, can we get an understanding of your views of  #2 below? 

WE OF THE CHURCH BELIEVEThat all men of whatever race, color or creed were created with equal rights.That all men have inalienable rights to their own religious practices and their performance.That all men have inalienable rights to their own lives.That all men have inalienable rights to their sanity.That all men have inalienable rights to their own defense.That all men have inalienable rights to conceive, choose, assist or support their own organizations, churches and governments.That all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others.That all men have inalienable rights to the creation of their own kind.That the souls of men have the rights of men.That the study of the Mind and the healing of mentally caused ills should not be alienated from religion or condoned in nonreligious fields.And that no agency less than God has the power to suspend or set aside these rights, overtly or covertly.

I hear you.  We have a tendency (well, at least, I do) that we have a tendency to feel that everyone sort of secretly loves us and that they will get over their anger along with their wish to disconnect from us. 

Please send a report -- "Go up the Chain of Command" -- to the Executive Director International, Church of Scientology International, Hollywood, CA.  I think the address is 6331 Hollywood Boulevard, CA.

Please don't get mad at me, but would I be very happy to hear from you regarding if it would be at all possible that you would ever be willing to give us a second chance.  (?)

Looks to me that you like you want all Scientologists and all staff to be more perfect than they are --- if you got shoddy auditing you can take efforts to get the auditor fixed or you ask for a refund.  

When you talk about "threat from a 'church'",  I cannot agree.  For example, if I was to say to you... 

"Scientia, if you are going to continue to have close relations with Joe Blow ---- who is not just complaining about our wrongdoings, but has been shown to have been in a non-stop attack mode.  In other words, he is not trying to get corrections for his dissatisfactions; but rather, he is trying to hurt us.  Well then, if you continue to want to be here in this church, in a state of good standing, or in any way at all, you will have to choose, by your own 'self-determination' alone, not because you fear me, that you wish to stay here with us under the rule that we have, that says you will be our friend along with a respect for our right to say that we expect that you will disconnect from that mean Joe Blow who is acting like an enemy that wants to take us down.  You can have your free speech, but in my house you will mind you manners and respect my right to have my church the way I want it."

...okay, you heard my speech; does that make me a bad guy?

I was "unhappy with Scientology" and left the "church" 31 years ago and for 31 years they still call me once a month even though for 31 years I have asked them to LEAVE ME ALONE!  My experience is living proof that "Scientology is an INSANE EVIL CULT.Only a hopelessy brainwashed bunch of Rondroids would do such a thing. Behavior like this demonstrates a lack of basic human courtesy

A person should be free to associate with whomever s/he chooses without fear or threat from a "church". It's called self-determinism, Mark. Having to sever ties with a friend or loved one because failure to do so would result in one's own expulsion is other-determined (in the robot band) and a violation of basic Scientology principles.

And what you may consider to be an "attack" on your "church" may actually have a valid basis - unless you're telling me you believe the CoS is utterly perfect, innocent and correct at all times (which would violate Logic 6). It could be because someone received shitty auditing and feels ripped off. It could be because someone was abused in some capacity. It could be due to a threat against free speech. It could be because of being hounded for money day in, day out. It could be any number of reasons. Rather than lump them all together, dismiss and invalidate them as "lies" made by "haters", you could apply Scientology, apply the multiple viewpoint system (FBDL 192R) and find out what people are thinking and why.

This is not a faith to be accepted blindly. Scientologists look. They inspect.

"Now, I say to you, 'Well, man is basically good.' And you look at me and you say: 'Well, that’s fine. I’m glad Ron thinks so.' I hope you say this, and not: 'Aha! Ron says man is basically good. Therefore they are basically good and that’s all the thinking I have to do on the subject.' You lazy bones! ..."And somebody that says he doesn’t understand Scientology has made a terrible confession. All he has said is that he can’t inspect, because that’s all Scientology asks you to do. And if Scientology says, 'Why don’t you inspect something?' and the person says, 'I don’t understand Scientology,' that person did what? He failed his first gradient. Well, that’s all it is and that’s all it means." -- LRH, from lecture 23 June 1960 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SCIENTOLOGY AND OTHER PHILOSOPHIES, London Congress on Dissemination and Help.

FIXED IDEA, is something accepted without personal inspection or agreement. (HCO PL 19 May 70)

1)  People unhappy with Scientology, should leave Scientology, but don't then start attacking the church, or we will no longer talk to you. 

2)  You can't stay in Scientology if you insist upon having close relations with people that are attacking us. 

That's the way it works.  It is rather simple and quite fair, I think.

Mark, Wake up!!Everytime a person uses his or free wil to leave scientology, they are treated as a suppressive person and all contact with that person is forbidden of all members. When disconnection becomes a problem, Fair Game is suggested at the risk of being expelled from the church. Scientology would like to quietly and without sorrow dispose of it's critics and anyone below or above 2.0 on the tone scale who takes a stand against it but it does not always work that way. So you have OT VIII Rex Fowler decide to just blow the brains out of the partner who contested his misuse of company funds ( under much pressure, $ given to Scientology instead of being used for the company needs). Not so quietly but probably with a bit regret afterwards. Too little too late

It did wonders for Rex Fowler. Or Mark Rathbun if you buy the Church of Scientology's line that he is a violent criminal.

Also, the whole attribution of all problems to low-toned people is a doctrinal position rather than an established fact.

The damage these people do is unfair to the rest of us.  Our weak economy, our national crimes, and our broken homes come from the below 2.0 person (the chronically unrepentant dangerous psychotic individual).  Our troubled world is not manufactured by the common regular person, nor is it created by shortages of resources or by the lack of adequate technologies.  What will someday be required, by the fed-up members of our societies, is that they will insist that people found documented as mentioned above, will need to be jailed; isolated; or audited (spiritual healing technology). 

I do not feel that any future civilization will execute people as they now do today.  The latest Hubbard auditing methods (developed after the above mentioned book) reforms all criminals and all murders.  There is no longer any need to "dispose of them quietly and without sorrow". 

The damage these people do is unfair to the rest of us.  Our weak economy, our national crimes, and our broken homes come from the below 2.0 person (the chronically unrepentant dangerous psychotic individual). 

Our troubled world is not manufactured by the common regular person, nor is it created by shortages of resources or by the lack of adequate technologies.

What will someday be required, by the fed-up members of our societies, is that they will insist that people found documented as mentioned above, will need to be jailed; isolated; or audited (spiritual healing technology). 

I do not feel that any future civilization will execute people as they now do today.  The latest Hubbard auditing methods (developed after the above mentioned book) reforms all criminals and all murders.  There is no longer any need to "dispose of them quietly and without sorrow". 

The proof that anything works is that it does work, and that it works again, and that it works again, and that it works again....

There is plenty of room for philosophical speculation on the nature of consciousness and the mind. Some of it is quite interesting.

However, even people who have some evidence to support their theories don't use the phrase "scientifically proven", or some variant, as much as Hubbard does.

The Church of Scientology has a lot of money. If it were inclined it could easily fund real research into Hubbard's theories. Serious scientific publications supporting them would do a lot to raise the standing of his ideas. However, it would also invite the opportunity to discredit them.

Oh really?? How? Science sunstantiates theories. There is no scientific proof of anything Hubbard wrote. Post some proof ( besides that often mocked report on Narconon which the scientific community states is not scientifically validated )

We have substantiated all of our science.

Hey, if we have the money you say, all the better.  When the U.S. economy collapses (a very real possibility) we will still be around to service you with all the services you will need in order to handle your depression -- which I fully expect will happen when all the things you depend on are gone.