The Faith Column
Every week a different believer gives the inside track on their religion or philosophy.
Scientology in society
- Posted by Kenneth Eckersley
- 19 February 2008
In his second post on the controversial beliefs of Scientologists, Kenneth Eckersley discusses the principle of “survival”
Because the fundamentals upon which Scientology rests embrace all aspects of life, certain key principles can be broadly employed to better any condition. Scientologists use these principles in their daily lives, and I have found that their usage alone can often make the difference between success and failure.
One of these principles provides a means to separately view the components of life so that its many activities, often confused, can assume a new clarity. L. Ron Hubbard discovered that the basic drive behind all of life is “Survive!” This dynamic urge can be subdivided into eight parts so that each one can be more easily inspected and understood. These parts are called the eight dynamics, and by understanding each of them and their relationship, one to the other, a person is able to increase his or her survival on all of them.
What I found was that these dynamics describe one’s drive to survive for self, family, groups, mankind, all life, the physical universe, the spiritual universe and the Infinite or Supreme Being, and I have personally used Scientology to enhance my survival in all of these spheres.
My parents and other family have helped me in numerous ways and I have been able to return that help. For example, in his twenties, my brother was able to rid himself of 19 years of asthma through Dianetics procedures. My first wife, after several years of non-conception, was diagnosed as totally incapable of bearing children, yet later gave birth to our two beautiful girls as a direct result of Scientology spiritual counselling.
As to groups, without membership of the C of E church choir, my Boy Scout Troop, the Air Cadets, my teachers and fellow pupils in the various schools I attended and without my colleagues in the companies in which I worked - I could never have achieved my present 80 years of enjoyment of life, and my good health and high level of activity in the community. Over that period I have regularly studied Scientology, and still do every week. Without this, I know my life to date could never have been as full or as satisfying to both myself and others, and might also have been much shorter.
Then there is the broader group we call Mankind. My Scientology beliefs guide me in contributing in numerous ways to other people. I voluntarily help to run a Narconon drug rehabilitation and prevention education charity, with a high success rate in helping our students achieve complete abstinence for life. I also work with the Citizens Commission on Human Rights; the Volunteer Ministers community help group; the Foundation for a Drug Free Europe in Brussels; Criminon the criminal rehabilitation programme; and with The Way To Happiness Foundation distributing a common sense guide to better living. I also support my wife in her work with Applied Scholastics the revolutionary teaching system which is today helping so many of our youth to escape illiteracy. Groups all utilising the work of L. Ron Hubbard.
Without all this, I could never be as fulfilled as I am. You have only to see the light of comprehension in the eyes of a child or a young offender; you have only to witness the relief of an individual who is now off heroin and holding down a job, or the relief of one who has just escaped physical or emotional pain - to know the value of Mr Hubbard’s work.
Post this article to
35 comments from readers
-
Anon
19 February 2008 at 14:19 This, sadly, is a classic example of how the "Church" of Scientology takes a person's zeal to do good in the community and hideously warps it for their own financial gain.
Take Narconon, for instance. Narconon is supposed to cure addicts through the application of L. Ron Hubbard's so-called "tech." The physical therapy is known as the "New Life Detoxification Program", and involves the use of saunas (at temperatures of 60-82°C for periods of up to five hours at a time), exercise (usually running) and ingestion of so-called "drug bombs" of massive doses of vitamins, minerals and vegetable oils. The rationale for this is that addiction is caused by drug residues trapped in fatty tissue, and this treatment flushes the drugs away.
There is no verifiable scientific evidence that this therapy can cure addiction. None. In fact, the vitamin overdoses and sauna treatments frequently cause serious health issues.
The Church of Scientology licenses the use of this so-called "tech" to Narconon for exorbitant fees, and thus is able to funnel the money back out of the charity into its coffers. It is simply the worst form of quackery, victimizing taxpayers and those members of society least able to defend themselves.
Please, please review the information below and make up your own minds:
Narconon Exposed
-
Sidney Suppressive
19 February 2008 at 14:23 You know, when you walk into a church you see an effigy of Jesus on the cross. If you walk into a synagogue and ask about Moses anyone will tell you the story of the burning bush that would not consume itself. But why is it, Kenneth, that you don't tell us about Xenu and the Body Thetans. Do you think that if you told people that Scientologists, after paying hundreds of thousands of dollars, get to sit in a partially darkened room and tell the souls of space aliens that are causing all our problems to get off them, people would still join? When I was part of the cult they told the OT's that if the uninitiated even heard the word "Xenu" the unitiated would die within two days of pneumonia. Well the word is out (literally) and the instances of pneumonia have not increased.
Kenneth, as a former magistrate and justice of the peace did you ever have to people people to "tell the truth, THE WHOLE TRUTH, and nothing but the truth?
Your article is very pleasant, but I must suggest that you have failed to do so.
Also re-read Dianetics. You are wearing glasses in your picture. Hubbard plainly says that your vision will return to perfect and that you will no longer need glasses. What happened?
-
Outraged Non-Hacker
19 February 2008 at 14:59 Good for this gentleman that he wants to help society.
Unfortunately, he has associated himself with an immoral organization whose primary objective is world domination and accumulation of wealth through fraud -- not helping others.
Dear readers, before you turn away and go back to your lives thinking this is a simple philosophical matter, please Google Scientology and read, read, read. Ample evidence exists that this is a subversive, dangerous, and covert group which deliberately conceals its true nature from the public and its low-level members. Even many of their own low-level members don't know what is happening at the core, and it's thanks only to those who have been repelled and left that we know what the group truly aims to do, and how. Please study the court testimony, the documents which the Church of Scientology has claimed as its own during copyright lawsuits, and ex-Scientologist stories. Ample evidence exists to support the contention that the Church of Scientology deserves no legal protection and no polite respect on the basis of being a "religion." Reach your own conclusion, but many have come to know that the Church of Scientology is an organized crime outfit, pure and simple.
Beware. Protect yourself and your families with a wide base of knowledge, and if the facts so move you, please join those of us who will peacefully stand before orgs across the world to spread the truth. The truth can protect us all.
-
GrnApl
19 February 2008 at 15:20 It is amazing to think that societies problems are caused by someone or some group and that those same people fight to prevent the problems solutions. It is particularly nice to have worthwhile organizations such as the Church of Scientology offering worthwhile solutions to societies problems. It is wonderful to hear the successes of a Scientologists life and to have him take the time to share despite the criticisms of the people who are likely the very source of the problems.
-
AnyAnonymous
19 February 2008 at 15:25 GrnApl, thank you for your baseless accusation of unspecified crimes towards people who disagree with your worldview. It is always best to allow people to announce their intentions through their own words.
-
Anonymous9000
19 February 2008 at 15:38 Unfortunately Mr Eckersley is still confounding the two separate intentions of "helping others" and "helping the Church of Scientology". These many organisations - with their worthwhile sounding names are all simply front groups for the Church of Scientology and it's interests.
Narconon, Criminon and Applied Scholastics all funnel money from outwardly sounding principled organisations back to the Church by "licensing Tech". So taxpayers get relatively useless services founded on untested dogma for their money whilst the Church profits from them. The actual programmes these organisations use are basically recruitment fronts - so the Church is paid first by the Scientologists who are usually honestly funding them believing them to be "helping", then by the taxpayer, then finally by the individuals recruited into the church and onto the paid for courses and auditing programmes.
The "Foundation for a Drug Free Europe" is simply a lobbying organisation to try and get Narconon paid for by the taxpayer, and to legitimise it's programmes.
The cynically named "Citizens Commission on Human Rights" is basically a shrill organisation which tries to tar every critic of Scientology as a bigot and "religious hatred" group - statements which are repeatedly made by the Church and it's members in the vague hope that saying it enough times makes it true. They also lobby to have this for-profit organisation attain the same rights as non-profit charitable organisation.
Again we see the same pattern. The CoS supports itself through a number of different front organisations
it "proves" it's dubious claims for it's "Tech" by simply providing supporting (also dubious) claims through organisations with other names, set up in different ways to provide a smokescreen to their real owners and leaders.
These organisations are also those quoted when the Church talks about it's humanitarian and charitable aims and donations - whereas they are simply another manifestation of the Church itself.
See here for more details:
-
Anonymous9000
19 February 2008 at 15:42 Apologies: The "Citizens Commission on Human Rights" is a concerted attempt to libel and discredit Psychiatry and it's practise. I think I was thinking of "Religious Freedom Watch" - another front group...
-
James Randi
19 February 2008 at 15:55 Kenneth Eckersley advertisesd that he’s
…active in the Church of Scientology, and a former Magistrate and Justice of the Peace.”
This chap makes two claims that certainly can be examined, and that are very eligible for the JREF million-dollar prize, which can be seen at http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/38/31/
"…in his twenties, my brother was able to rid himself of 19 years of asthma through Dianetics procedures. My first wife, after several years of non-conception, was diagnosed as totally incapable of bearing children, yet later gave birth to our two beautiful girls as a direct result of Scientology spiritual counseling."
Surely these are miracles? The problem I see, however, is that (a) the cessation of asthma in the brother will not be able to proven to be due to Dianetics, and (b) somehow there will be no medical records in existence showing that Mrs. Eckersley was “totally incapable of bearing children” prior to receiving counseling from the Church. Drat! The evidence just seems to elude us, doesn’t it…?
-
parker1
19 February 2008 at 15:59 I just must respond to this. I grew up in a house hold where we were taught to think for ourselves and to respect the religious beliefs of others. This is why I chose to be a Scientologist. Note I said CHOSE. No one or any writings of Mr. Hubbard's made me or tricked me into believing anything. It just makes sense. I thank Kenneth Eckersley (thanks Kenneth!) for you heart felt description of your experience with Scientology. I too have had similiar experiences, from saving by business, to saving my marriage and raising a child that does think for himself and is not trapped by drugs and unethical activity. I also support 100% the aims of Scientology - "A civilization without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights, are the aims of Scientology. ". How can anyone, who has any ounce of caring left in them, disagree with this? We have a world that is heading in the wrong direction. Please stop attacking something that has answers. Spend your time attacking iliteracy, poverty, crime, drugs and crimminality. You'll feel much better about yourself when you do get involved.
-
Peter Schilte
19 February 2008 at 16:19 Dear Mr. Eckersley, believing that it was scientology that cured your brother from asthma and gave your first wife two children is exactly that: Believing. But ask any medical doctor and he can tell you it happens all the time, without the "help" of scientology.
There are also people who swear the pimped fridge magnet they bought for over 190 dollars cured them from hig blood pressure, migrain, insomnia.
Scientology also make you believe, so it seems, you reached the blessed age of 80 years because of what you do for scientology. What about other people of your age and in good health that were never in contact with scientology?
You see, scientology has this tendency to credit itself for everything that goes well. But in the event it goes wrong, it is YOU who fails, not scientology.
And you are one more example of a member that is kept ignorant of the inhumane policies, the criminal past, the lies, the questionable money flows, the secret operations that were meant to kill or jail people like the mayor of Clearwater Gabe Cazares, and writer Paulette Cooper. You probably never heard of Raul Lopez who was extorted from 1.3 million dollars by promising him he could completely recover from a horrible car accident. Or Maria Pia Gardini, who lost 1 million to scientology under severe pressure. And you seem to purposely ignore the terrorist threats by David Miscavige to psychiatry and psychiatrists.
-
Anonymous9000
19 February 2008 at 16:23 "I also support 100% the aims of Scientology - "A civilization without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights, are the aims of Scientology. ". How can anyone, who has any ounce of caring left in them, disagree with this? We have a world that is heading in the wrong direction. Please stop attacking something that has answers. Spend your time attacking iliteracy, poverty, crime, drugs and crimminality."
Oh those are my aims. Except I actually do something USEFUL to help. Mr Eckersley passed his OT VI NOTS SOLO Aufiting course in 1996. A rough calculation means he must have spent approximately £100,000 so far on his Church of Scientology training.
The organisations he lists above DO NOT HELP PEOPLE. They help the Church. The wonders that Oxfam, the Red Cross, Amnesty International or any number of drug charities, homelessness charities, criminal rehabilitation charities could achieve spending that amount of money on projects OBJECTIVELY PROVEN to help people in need is phenomenal.
That money is not there for them now. It has gone to the Church and will not come back out again...
-
beebee
19 February 2008 at 16:31 Anonymous encourages people to research for themselves.
Scientologists insist on only referencing scientology literature and websites.
If Scientology wants to be high-profile (courting celebrities and such), it will have to face the scrutiny that ALL high-profile entities face under the microscope of the public’s eye. The CoS is not holding up well under scrutiny at all and people are not happy with it. The CoS is DESPERATE to discredit the critics, and that’s just angering people even more. People have become more and more familiar with policies for handling SPs and are seeing more and more evidence of it with every attack they make. People don’t like being handled.
Doing good deeds for society is great, but when the CoS and it's supporters go around bragging about them, it makes people wonder if it is for nothing more than good PR to be used in times like this when the Church's morals are called into question. Even worse, some may see it as distraction tactics to get people to look away from the darker side of the organization.
I have NO doubt that scientologists really do want the world to be a better place, but it seems that the CoS wants this on THEIR terms. Please accept that not everyone agrees with the terms of the CoS.
I've read quite a bit of the literature that is available to the public, and there are indeed some useful insights. We are not suggesting throwing the baby out with the bath water, we are just wanting to see the CoS make the necessary changes to improve it's reputation.
-
AnyAnonymous
19 February 2008 at 17:54 "Spend your time attacking iliteracy, poverty, crime, drugs and crimminality. You'll feel much better about yourself when you do get involved."
I already do this professionally. I could tell you a dozen stories that would break your heart about the suffering I've seen.
I view my opposition to Scientology in the same light as I do my work with the disadvantaged. I've seen more than one scam to fleece the vulnerable and the desperate. Despite its high minded ideals, which I support fully, the current Church of Scientology has fallen to the point of being another scam upon the weak and helpless.
-
Moochie
19 February 2008 at 17:54 Readers interested in learning just how pernicious a cult this is, and how absolutely useless their "tech" is, will benefit from listening to the Woodcraft family tell of the "wonderful" time they had while deeply involved with the cult, both in England and in the U.S.
http://www.xenutv.com/interviews/index.html
Once I began watching these interviews, I was very reluctant to stop, although I had many more important things to be doing. The Woodcrafts' testimony resonates with so much that I have seen/heard/read about this cult that one either accepts their testimony or there is a huge conspiracy on the part of ex-members to totally discredit Scientology.
I see no conspiracy, just an ever increasing number of former members who were fortunate enough to escape the cult with their sanity intact.
-
David Miscarriage
19 February 2008 at 20:04 Parker1 wrote:
I too have had similiar experiences, from saving by business, to saving my marriage and raising a child that does think for himself and is not trapped by drugs and unethical activity.
You know, this sounds CURIOUSLY like the exact same thing other people have been posting on other scientology-related websites.
Que sera sera...
Also, my mother had me when she was 18, raised me by herself for the majority of the time, smoked pot, and occassionally harassed me when she was younger.
I am not addicted to any drugs, nor have I ever tried any. I've only ever tasted at most mouthfuls of alcohol, which I hate. I do not let anybody tell me what to think, and I am not trapped by any unethical activity.
We have never had anything to do with Scientology. The fact that you attribute such common-place things to some "SCIENTOLOGICAL MEE-RACK-AL!" is ludicrous. This is not some miraculous change from "a status quo of corruption" but IS the status quo. Most people than not are perfectly normal, not addicted to drugs, and not committing unethical actions.
All this shows is that you are an average person, who chooses to tunnel money into an organization who tells you that you're better than other people because you pay them.
If you want that kind of treatment, why not just hire a toadie instead of being someone else's?
-
A Nodding Mouse
19 February 2008 at 21:54 When it comes to this writer and Scientology, it's not all sweetness and light: http://www.religio.de/atack/hh402401.html
-
Paul Riddick
20 February 2008 at 03:17 Anon ... very interesting.
It seems Kenneth isn't free of the church's criminality after all, but a (willing?) participant. It is an easily researched fact that L. Ron Hubbard told his minions to find other's crimes and if they couldn't, make them up.
Maybe you represent Scientology well after all ...
Were you really allowed to be a Magistrate and Justice of the Peace? It looks like your legacy is taking a turn by writing these articles. I look forward to the next one.
-
IamoneofmanyIamLegion
20 February 2008 at 04:58 Kenneth, I want you to take a good hard look into your soul, if L. Ron hasn't sucked it out yet, and think about this:
whether or not you agree with psychiatry, millions of people around the world have had their lives saved by psychiatrists. many of them children. when I was a little kid, I wanted very desperately to die. A psychiatrist saved my life.
The tools he used to do so are now blackboxed because your "church" lobbied to have the FDA ban them under false pretenses. Knowing nothing about psychiatry other than that it's "evil" and knowing nothing about neuroscience, you jeopardized the lives of many people, many of them children. Since 2004, when the FDA put blackbox warnings on SRI drugs, teenage girl suicide rates spiked.
The finding of recent scientists asked to investigate? That the blackbox warnings scared legitimate medical doctors from making the right decision and consequently these kids were denied proper medical treatment. Proper medical treatment is considered a fundamental human right by the UN.
No matter how much you believe in the words of "LRH", he was not a scientist and he was not perfect. Now his inability to admit this is costing people their lives, not just their livelihoods.
I hope this gives you some perspective, but I'm sure you'll run screaming from the truth.
I don't hate you, Kenneth. I'm sure you are a good man. Your "Church" concerns me deeply. Believe what you want, but please stay out of science. I hold the same belief about fundamentalist christianity and Islam. Keep your religion out of my science.
If you want to coexist, then so be it. If you can't handle that, you cannot handle democracy and that makes you incompatible with a free world.
-
Terryeo
20 February 2008 at 19:28 Thank you for the column Mr. Eckersley. After reading several of them I wished to say that I find your writing inspirational. Have a nice day.
-
JeanneB
20 February 2008 at 22:54 Anon said: "This, sadly, is a classic example of how the "Church" of Scientology takes a person's zeal to do good in the community and hideously warps it for their own financial gain. " Wow. Hiding behind your mask Anon doesn't excuse not looking. You tell an addict who came off drugs because of Narconon. You tell the inmates who are getting off on good behavior after being salvaged by Criminon. Or how about tell the mother who's kid came off drugs after reading one of the booklets the church publishes. If everyone who knows so much about Scientology got out into the community and helped people like the Scientologists I know do, maybe we'd have a better place to live. Easy to bash what you don't know or understand. Harder to commit yourself to helping people.
-
A Nodding Mouse
21 February 2008 at 01:28 Thank you for the unverifiable stories, JeanneB, for that's all you have to offer in response to the facts brought forth about Scientology. By the way, complaining about anonymity while hiding behind names like "JeanneB" is disingenuous at best and deliberately deceptive at worst. Tell you what, "JeanneB"-if you reveal your real full name, I'll apologize and actually pay for a Scientology course.
-
AnyAnonymous
21 February 2008 at 14:13 I would like to reiterate that I do, in fact, help people professionally. I work with people with severe disabilities and try to help them to live better lives. I've seen drugs hurt, but I've also seen drugs help many people. I personally know a half-dozen people who would have to be consigned to institutions if not for their medication.
I view the current struggle against Scientology in the same light. By removing the baseless fear and ignorance promoted by Scientology, I dedicate myself to helping thousands of people to live better lives.
-
stewart
21 February 2008 at 16:28 Research, of any kind, is not the sum total of what you read on the internet, through Google, Wikipedia or otherwise.
It may be a good start point, but all research must end with what you have seen for yourself with your own eyeballs.
That goes for any subject, including physics or any science, as well as any other area of life.
After all, authorities can be wrong, and have often been so in the past. Wikipedia, being editable by anyone, is not a 100% reliable source and sometimes is point-blank wrong.
Case in point: A while back I read some of the Scientology article there. It claimed that Scientologists were forbidden to breat-feed their newborns. Utter tripe! My baby daughter is doing very well indeed, and her diet definitely includes breast-milk.
I have seen with my own eyes that acceleration due to gravity is 9.8m/s/s.
I have seen with my own eyes the failures and cruelties of psychiatry.
I have seen with my own eyes the successes of Dianetics and Scientology.
The fact is that Scientology is really a subject for free-thinkers and observers, not those who unquestioningly swallow "authority".
-
A Nodding Mouse
21 February 2008 at 18:58 Got any more unvarifiable stories and attempts to change the subject to psychiatry, "stewart"? That IS your real name, right? Y'all do so hate anonymous attacks, right?
Speaking of daring to question Authority, why don't you tell us about the ways you disagree with some of the tenets of Scientology, and some of the things L. Ron Hubbard might have been wrong about.
-
thsman
21 February 2008 at 22:43 Interesting comments. All those who are anti scientology seem to have just one aim; discouraging us from taking an honest look at it ourselves. If it doesn't work we should be able to find that out for ourselves without having to read about the negative experience of others. Or are they saying we can't trust our own judgment?
-
A Nodding Mouse
22 February 2008 at 00:36 We can trust you to do and say anything to further the cause of Scientology, including lie outright: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Narconon/sources/media/dm010397.h...
Note the final quote where Kenneth denies outright that Narconon is associated with the COS. Was he telling lies to the public, or was the COS telling lies to him?
-
beebee
22 February 2008 at 00:53 thsman, we more than encourage you to look into it yourself. That's all we want, for people to look into it, but to understand that they may try to decieve you. Doubt them and doubt us, just inform yourself.
-
lisamcpherson
22 February 2008 at 07:58 stewart, it seems that you know what is a counter example? Usually one failure in one thousand is very OK. But when Scientology fails, they don't admit it and cover it up at all cost. Lisa McPherson ended up dead in the sole care of CoS, not because of incurable physical illness.
Also, I think you are Xenu and alien allergic. Seen OT III yet? I have, and I'm still alive.
-
stewart
22 February 2008 at 13:19 Actually, it is my real name.
I have absolutely nothing to hide, at all.
An example of where Hubbard may have been wrong?
Well, for at least 18 months after I got involved in Dianetics, I had no interest and wanted no interest in Scientology. I doubted that certain "spiritual" phenomena existed, and was not at all convinced by the theory upon which the E-meter is based.
The staff were completely fine about this. I was welcome to study and do Dianetics, and no one tried to shove anything down my throught about Scientology. (They are seperate subjects after all.) When I mentioned my doubts, their response was "fair enough".
What is true, is what you have observed for yourself.
-
A Nodding Mouse
22 February 2008 at 16:09 "stewart", your were asked for an example where Hubbard was wrong in your opinion, and you give us an example where you claim YOU were wrong.
Have you been in so long that you are actually incapable of giving a straight answer?
-
Peter Simple
22 February 2008 at 21:40 stewart,
Just because you've "seen with your own eyes the successes of Dianetics and Scientology" do NOT close those same eyes to the crimes, lies and abuses of the church of Scientology.
That item (possible successes) does not, cannot forgive the abuses of the organization. That item does not prove that the organization is blameless. That item does not prove the organization "can do no harm".
-
excultmember
23 February 2008 at 06:30 "Know the value of Mr Hubbard’s work"? I certainly know that value. It is an interesting exercise in building a huge corporate cult. Brilliant work, I might add. But soon to come tumbling down.
-
A Nodding Mouse
24 February 2008 at 08:59 You can tell when real Scientologists show up-people that oppose them are called haters, questions asked are never answered, unsubstantiated charges are made, and they keep trying to change the subject from them to psychiatry.
Still no answer as to why Kenneth lied about Narconon being associated with Scientology?
-
Anon, Anon, My Boyfriend's Back!
28 February 2008 at 22:58 Oh JeanneB, oh Terryeo, oh GrnApl...where are Sylver, Marge, Curiouser, and Lu. It certainly does seem you guys post in shifts...as if it were your job. Is it your job? Why does it seem your IP addresses are all come from CoS sources? Anywho...
Jeanne, you said:
"You tell an addict who came off drugs because of Narconon."
You tell all the heroin addicts that came off of the addiction because of methadone and psychiatric counseling or several Christian or other faith based rehabilitation programs whos church affiliations aren't hidden and are very successful how useless they are...
"You tell the inmates who are getting off on good behavior after being salvaged by Criminon."
You tell the countless scapegoats your church has traipsed in front of the media in an effort to win back PR that they've "off lined" and :declared" for their trangressions (basically getting caught doing what they were told) how you seek to rehabilitate criminals...I think Mary Sue Hubbard would appreciate that...maybe David Fishman, too? Maybe when Rinder finally comes forward (if the CoS hasn't already gotten to him) he'll have more to say about this...
"Or how about tell the mother who's kid came off drugs after reading one of the booklets the church publishes."
Give the kid a few years and we'll have another mother stabbed to death 77 times. Sound familiar? Why don't you tell the countless people who have benefitted from the psychiatric communities efforts that it's all bunk. That they are alive today because of the evil, evil Psychs...I personally don't subscribe to medicating mild mental "illnesses" (depression, bi-polar type 2, etc) as I think those conditions, at one time or another, exist in most everyone. I, instead, subscribe to a more cognitive approach and endorse changing the way one thinks...on one's own. I've done it, I can attest to it. It's all problem solving and recognizing dangerous trains of thought and cirtailing them. I, however, am not aligned with the CoS's inability to embrace and accept critical thinking.
"If everyone who knows so much about Scientology got out into the community and helped people like the Scientologists I know do, maybe we'd have a better place to live. Easy to bash what you don't know or understand. Harder to commit yourself to helping people."
Spare me. Your definition of "helping someone" and "ethics" and blah blah blah is all based on your position of perspective (sond familiar?). To you, getting people into Orgs and getting them up the bridge is a charitable act. To me, operating a "snack store" in an empty cubicle for a co-worker who was diagnosed with cancer and donating ALL procedes (taking no re-couped expenses out) to him and his family is charitable. Don't presume to know our nature as we don't presume to know your personal nature (i.e. anywhere where I said 'you' or 'your' was in reference to the CoS unless it was quote something you specifically typed)...this battle is all a matter of perspective and in the eyes of the law, the allegations against your church are punishable crimes.
See you on the 15th.
-
deano
29 July 2008 at 15:16 There are some real idiots out there. Scientology is based on realising things for yourself, not having 'blind faith'. Nobody makes anyone do anything in scientology at all. The Church is one of many organisations in the world trying to build a better place for all of us. All this hooey comes from people who don't know a danm thing about scientology for themselves and are driven by some blind panic that 'some dreadful group' is out to get us all. Paranoid twaddle. Crimes and abuses? My god, I'm sure mistakes are made somewhere along the line... that's just the way life is... but to imply the organisation is institutionally trying to ruin lives could be further from the truth.
Anyway. Anyone who reads this, rather than just blindly believe people who criticise and scaremonger. Find out for yourself. You won;t be eaten... sucked in and spat out,,, brainwashed... you'll just meet a bunch of people that want to help others. Perhaps you need some courage not to be too scared of this great unknown. But, have 'faith'. It may be one of your better decisions in life. You never know!
We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.
