What is an ex scientologist?
- Thread starter Emma
- Start date
This is my stand point. I just dont have any labels of anything attached to me regarding anything. Why should anyone have to? I adhere to certain Buddhist practices and beliefs. I have been to the buddhist temple in Melbourne. What should I label myself with regard that? I was forced as a child to attend church and later, as a 12 year old child, did my 'Confirmation' with the Uniting church . Does that mean i have to label myself a christian? I admire the Uniting Church for their charity work and have helped them in the past (even while a staff member at Scientology.) But I dont wear the label "a christian". I studied and applied Level training to level 5 at the church of Scientology.I even worked there. Does that mean i am a Scientologist? I saw the dfinition of a Scientolgist once. I agree I fit that definition in that i do help others and myself..etc... (not a quote, in case I infringe a copyright law). So. . . i wear no labels. I am who and what i am. I have DONE what i have done, during my life. But the Label EX SCIENTOLOGIST is fitting for this Board, i reckon. Its a label for a Board, that's all. And YOU and your fellow helpers DID the work I guess to provide this site.
Maybe later, when "ex's" from other religions (defectees, or EX communicated such as some Jehova witnesses i know) who are hurting on what was done to them, might post on this Board. Then the word EX could be altered to the word 'FORMER'. Means the same thing anyway. But thanks for this Board. It has helped others who dont read or post here. Good wishes to ya! . . . Lynette
Ulf K. Maier
Patron Meritorious
Took me long enough to get to this thread 
An ex-scientologist is someone who, after leaving $cientology, comes to realise that the "Hubbard Standard Tech" doesn't work, and that a $cientology auditor is a wannabe therapist without a license.
Some might argue that the "Tech" works, and others that only some of it works. I would argue that the parts Hubbard plagiarised are the working parts. Mayo's NOTs just makes nuts, if OT II and III didn't already accomplish this.
An ex-scientologist is someone who, after leaving $cientology, comes to realise that the "Hubbard Standard Tech" doesn't work, and that a $cientology auditor is a wannabe therapist without a license.
Some might argue that the "Tech" works, and others that only some of it works. I would argue that the parts Hubbard plagiarised are the working parts. Mayo's NOTs just makes nuts, if OT II and III didn't already accomplish this.
To Nozeno. . . There is one long standing (and CURRENT) label which is secretely given out to "members in good standing" about me. quote "UNSTABLE". But last year it seems that the church OFFICIAL label is now "Unstable SP" . What do you think a STABLE SP might do? Or for that matter what would a STABLE person or an UNSTABLE SP do? I am amused by that. Very amusing. . . . cheers Lynette
I told you I was trouble
Suspended animation
nozeno
Gold Meritorious Patron
I shudder to think of the alternatives.......
Congratulations on your State of Unstable.
Mest Lover
Not Sea Org Qualified
How can anyone that believes in the LRH tech but only outside of the church consider themselves an Ex-Scientologist. I think they would be Ex-communicated Scientologists. I view the EX as being rid of SCN for good. where does the grayfactor come in here.
Who cares anyway, If you are out of the church but still believe some of the tech works for you let it be.
Who cares anyway, If you are out of the church but still believe some of the tech works for you let it be.
JackieWilson
Patron
Ex
Emma,
I was in for some 7 years. But I am unsure I was ever a Scientologist. One day I wandered over by it and one day I wandered out, always in doubt. On the RPF's RPF, I did a doubt formula in which I really compared scientology to other groups. I tried to make Scientology win, but never really did. I recall that an RPF EO was shocked that I compared Scientology to other groups. What attracted me was not the "bridge." It was the idea of a path way, not to "happiness," but to understanding. I was pretty much a pain in the ass to others, fighting, struggling. Surprise! I am now a psychologist. I find I even use some of Hubbard's ideas in treatment. Example: The 'why' is the answer that opens the door to a handling. So, I am not really an ex. I did meet some amazing souls there. So far I have not found anyone I knew here.
Be well
Emma,
I was in for some 7 years. But I am unsure I was ever a Scientologist. One day I wandered over by it and one day I wandered out, always in doubt. On the RPF's RPF, I did a doubt formula in which I really compared scientology to other groups. I tried to make Scientology win, but never really did. I recall that an RPF EO was shocked that I compared Scientology to other groups. What attracted me was not the "bridge." It was the idea of a path way, not to "happiness," but to understanding. I was pretty much a pain in the ass to others, fighting, struggling. Surprise! I am now a psychologist. I find I even use some of Hubbard's ideas in treatment. Example: The 'why' is the answer that opens the door to a handling. So, I am not really an ex. I did meet some amazing souls there. So far I have not found anyone I knew here.
Be well
Last edited:
what's an exer?
Hi Emma;
I call an "exer" someone who has left scientology and discovered documentation that dramatically causes them to believe that they've been duped. That scientology is/was a scam. There are many people that get "out" and hold desperately to LRH or to his tech...but believe only that David Miscavige has messed everything up. If you see "the children of scientology"...something like that - its David Miscavige's niece and friends: they document many claims by LRH that can be disproven with legal documentation. I'm sorry I can't recall the exact website, it should come up by using those words in the search window.
Hi Emma;
I call an "exer" someone who has left scientology and discovered documentation that dramatically causes them to believe that they've been duped. That scientology is/was a scam. There are many people that get "out" and hold desperately to LRH or to his tech...but believe only that David Miscavige has messed everything up. If you see "the children of scientology"...something like that - its David Miscavige's niece and friends: they document many claims by LRH that can be disproven with legal documentation. I'm sorry I can't recall the exact website, it should come up by using those words in the search window.
FamousFeatures
New Member
I'm sorry for just butting in on this thread and posting something which is entirely unrelated, but I was directed here by a member of another scientology forum and I'm wondering if you could possibly help me at all.
I'm a journalist in the UK, working on a newspaper which is currently organising an article on scientology. We have found current scientologists, but what we are really looking for are former scientologists to speak about their experiences.
If anyone could point me in the direction of someone I could speak to, or perhaps even yourself, that would be great and much appreciated.
Thank you so much,
Frankie Cary
[email protected]
012 93 459 808
I'm a journalist in the UK, working on a newspaper which is currently organising an article on scientology. We have found current scientologists, but what we are really looking for are former scientologists to speak about their experiences.
If anyone could point me in the direction of someone I could speak to, or perhaps even yourself, that would be great and much appreciated.
Thank you so much,
Frankie Cary
[email protected]
012 93 459 808
I don't consider myself as an ex-Scientologist. I consider myself to be ex-COS. The misuse of the Ethics Tech (declaring sps) to put "lots of heads on pikes" rather than finding real sps was one of the main reasons, I left COS.
I know about Search and Discovery Tech (S&D).
Scientology split into two groups, the present church and freezoners of different stripes.
I spent over 20 years in Scientology. I know about natter, HE&R, ARCBreaks and downscale beings. This has to be handled or you make no progress as a being.
I'm a independent now. I have my own cosmic views of the universe. I believe in being true to oneself and following a path that respects different viewpoints and religious beliefs.
I know about Search and Discovery Tech (S&D).
Scientology split into two groups, the present church and freezoners of different stripes.
I spent over 20 years in Scientology. I know about natter, HE&R, ARCBreaks and downscale beings. This has to be handled or you make no progress as a being.
I'm a independent now. I have my own cosmic views of the universe. I believe in being true to oneself and following a path that respects different viewpoints and religious beliefs.
Tiger Lily
Gold Meritorious Patron
Helena Handbasket
Gold Meritorious Patron
Does it matter? They all pretty much do the same thing.
Helena (call me HH2 if you like)
lkwdblds
Crusader
I agree with your conclusions.
I agree with everything in this post and its conclusions. Perhaps it is far fetched but compare it to the Nazi movement and Hitler. Almost everyone agrees that Hitler and the Nazi movement was totally evil, based on the Aryan race being superior to others and on the concept that might made right.
Now, Hitler had a few good traits. He brought his country out of the Great Depression, commisioned the production of the Volkswagen and built the autobahns, the first system of freeways. Other things with a plus side to them were pushing forward with the design and production of his V2 rockets, also the fact that he liked Wagner's music, that he treated his dog well, that he was a vegetarian and under his leadership, the trains ran on time.
SO, TO FORM AN ANALOGY WITH SCN, WHAT WOULD AN EX NAZI BE?
So, does one who was once in the Hitler Youth have to never purchase a VW product, shun using the freeways, not support our space program, treat their dog cruelly, never listen to Wagner and never eat meat in order to oppose Hitler and Nazism and call themselves an ex Nazi?
I think the answer is pretty obvious and that answer is a resounding NO!! An ex Nazi does not have to avoid any positive items which Hitler espoused!!
If a person was once in a group and supported it strongly and leaves once the inner workings of the group are exposed to him/her, he/she does not have to give up any good which existed or was practiced by the leadership of that group to consider himself/ herself an "ex" member.
In a nutshell "ex" means no longer active, and not supporting the basic principles and goals of a group one was once in. There should be no requirement to give up anything good which the leader of that group espoused.
Some former members believe there was no good whatever existent in their previous group while some others believe there was some good in that group. Each person should be honored for their own position. Efforts to change minds on both sides are certainly allowable and in fact such discussions should be encouraged.
IMHO, neither side should attempt to force their beliefs down the throats of the opposing side. When it gets down to that level, the biggest contradiction is that the side trying to enforce their beliefs on all EXes is on the road to becomming more like the group which they just EXited from i.e.,they are not allowing any voice of dissension from their particular views to exist.
Lakey aka Gary Hart
I agree with everything in this post and its conclusions. Perhaps it is far fetched but compare it to the Nazi movement and Hitler. Almost everyone agrees that Hitler and the Nazi movement was totally evil, based on the Aryan race being superior to others and on the concept that might made right.
Now, Hitler had a few good traits. He brought his country out of the Great Depression, commisioned the production of the Volkswagen and built the autobahns, the first system of freeways. Other things with a plus side to them were pushing forward with the design and production of his V2 rockets, also the fact that he liked Wagner's music, that he treated his dog well, that he was a vegetarian and under his leadership, the trains ran on time.
SO, TO FORM AN ANALOGY WITH SCN, WHAT WOULD AN EX NAZI BE?
So, does one who was once in the Hitler Youth have to never purchase a VW product, shun using the freeways, not support our space program, treat their dog cruelly, never listen to Wagner and never eat meat in order to oppose Hitler and Nazism and call themselves an ex Nazi?
I think the answer is pretty obvious and that answer is a resounding NO!! An ex Nazi does not have to avoid any positive items which Hitler espoused!!
If a person was once in a group and supported it strongly and leaves once the inner workings of the group are exposed to him/her, he/she does not have to give up any good which existed or was practiced by the leadership of that group to consider himself/ herself an "ex" member.
In a nutshell "ex" means no longer active, and not supporting the basic principles and goals of a group one was once in. There should be no requirement to give up anything good which the leader of that group espoused.
Some former members believe there was no good whatever existent in their previous group while some others believe there was some good in that group. Each person should be honored for their own position. Efforts to change minds on both sides are certainly allowable and in fact such discussions should be encouraged.
IMHO, neither side should attempt to force their beliefs down the throats of the opposing side. When it gets down to that level, the biggest contradiction is that the side trying to enforce their beliefs on all EXes is on the road to becomming more like the group which they just EXited from i.e.,they are not allowing any voice of dissension from their particular views to exist.
Lakey aka Gary Hart
Auditor's Toad
Clear as Mud
It is true that Hitler treated his dog very well - right up to the moment he tested the cyanide pill on it and killed it.
When someone puts having a road built, etc as the "good stuff" Hitler did and skip WWII got 50 million people killed. Nevermind, the horrors - we got VW bugs!
A comparison of Hilter and the Nazi party and what they did in comparison to Hubbie and scientology is pretty funny given scientology is an itty bitty little "religious" cult that seems to be dying out and never had many members or got very well known.
What an absolute batshit crazy cult leader thinks of himself doesn't exactly put him in the class of truely well known people in history.
How about ex = used to be. That work for anybody?
When someone puts having a road built, etc as the "good stuff" Hitler did and skip WWII got 50 million people killed. Nevermind, the horrors - we got VW bugs!
A comparison of Hilter and the Nazi party and what they did in comparison to Hubbie and scientology is pretty funny given scientology is an itty bitty little "religious" cult that seems to be dying out and never had many members or got very well known.
What an absolute batshit crazy cult leader thinks of himself doesn't exactly put him in the class of truely well known people in history.
How about ex = used to be. That work for anybody?
Helena Handbasket
Gold Meritorious Patron
I believe he left his body in 1978 and was replaced by a "walk-in". Someone who was a dumbass, and they had to hide him away until his body death.
lkwdblds
Crusader
If such a thing happened, it would have been later than 1978.
If such a thing did happen which is possible but an unlikely long shot, it would have been a couple of years later than 1978.
A pretty authenticated story of LRH being ill and near death is written by David Mayo. Mayo was called in and through auditing restored Hubbards health. The two of them worked out NOTs. This activity went on into 1979, I believe. A "walk in" would not have received Mayo's services not particpated in developing NOTs.
Also the Kima Douglas story goes all the way up to Feb, 1980 where she and her husband were living with Hubbard and seeing him daily.
Then there are authenticated reports by Mike Goldstein and others about the San Francisco 2nd Mission Holders Conference in 1982. There is agreement that the Church take over of the missions from the mission holders was Hubbards last major official act in C of S.
Then Hubbard participated in 1983 in directing the shooting tech films in the desert. It is extremely unlikely that a "walk in" could have pulled that off. Probably somewhere in 1983, Hubbard went completely off the radar screen and likely was quite ill. If there ever was a "walk on" he would have had to take over from Hubbard in 1983. But then since Hubbard was completely out of the view of the public and all but a hand full of staff, why would a walk in be needed.
I have read speculation that the body which Dr Denk certified as being Hubbard's dead body in Jan, 1986 was not really Hubbard's body. Only DM and a couple of others know for sure but the rapid cremation and the fact that the coroners pictures of the body are missing leave the door open for the "walk in" theory.
Here is one instance where I would like Veda to follow after me and make any needed corrections. He really knows this stuff cold!
Lakey
If such a thing did happen which is possible but an unlikely long shot, it would have been a couple of years later than 1978.
A pretty authenticated story of LRH being ill and near death is written by David Mayo. Mayo was called in and through auditing restored Hubbards health. The two of them worked out NOTs. This activity went on into 1979, I believe. A "walk in" would not have received Mayo's services not particpated in developing NOTs.
Also the Kima Douglas story goes all the way up to Feb, 1980 where she and her husband were living with Hubbard and seeing him daily.
Then there are authenticated reports by Mike Goldstein and others about the San Francisco 2nd Mission Holders Conference in 1982. There is agreement that the Church take over of the missions from the mission holders was Hubbards last major official act in C of S.
Then Hubbard participated in 1983 in directing the shooting tech films in the desert. It is extremely unlikely that a "walk in" could have pulled that off. Probably somewhere in 1983, Hubbard went completely off the radar screen and likely was quite ill. If there ever was a "walk on" he would have had to take over from Hubbard in 1983. But then since Hubbard was completely out of the view of the public and all but a hand full of staff, why would a walk in be needed.
I have read speculation that the body which Dr Denk certified as being Hubbard's dead body in Jan, 1986 was not really Hubbard's body. Only DM and a couple of others know for sure but the rapid cremation and the fact that the coroners pictures of the body are missing leave the door open for the "walk in" theory.
Here is one instance where I would like Veda to follow after me and make any needed corrections. He really knows this stuff cold!
Lakey
Similar threads
