What's new

I once thought that. . .

Purple Rain

Crusader
But you are too often, in my opinion, reading 'promotion of Scientology' into things that are in no way intended to promote Scientology.



My posts in that thread, as I stated many times in that thread, were not about Scientology - they were about protecting other non-theistic religions from an overly-broad ruling on Scientology. If they want to declare Scientology not a religion based on its abuses that is fine with me - I _don't_ want them to declare it not a religion because there is no deity worship because that has legal implications for too many other religions.



I consider it a religion and I don't care if other people do. I will point out the reasons I believe it to be a religion but you and Anonycat have both attacked me for simply stating that belief. I am always fine with agreeing to disagree but you are not even fine with that it seems, you want me to believe what you believe and will attack me if I do not.



And my point is that is dangerous because this approach has the potential to inadvertently create more Scientologists and make the existing ones even more fervent believers.



You have a tendency to pick and choose the things I say and pick out the ones which could in some potential interpretation be construed as being pro-Scientology and then exaggerate what I was saying and read things into it that I was not in any way saying. You have gotten to the point where you are not arguing against the words I type, you are arguing against your idea of who you think I am.



Well quit attacking _me_ like I am the one who did it.

Attacking you? Like, um, talking? I am a critic of Scientology. Quit praising it and I'll quit criticising your praise.

Edit: And actually I just asked you a question "Who is doing this?" - as you seemed to be positioning my fellow critics in a quite negative light - unfoundedly so I thought - which once again fits the idea of an agenda - like, why would you want to do that?

YOU then chose to "lol" at my post instead of answering the question. So who was attacking who? I then called you out on the "moderate" line which I think is your strategy. I've seen lots of shills on other boards - often with a political agenda in that case - and I just can't respect it. Scientologists like Tory Christman or Claire Swazey who were upfront about who and what they were - who came to a board to defend their religion are one thing. People could have an honest dialogue with them. But people who are covert I cannot respect.
 

kate8024

-deleted-
I have never met anybody nor have I ever heard of anybody who actually attacked an individual Scientologist.

Have you?

Rd00

I have. And this is why I used the word "some" preceding the word "anti-scientologists". Of course the person who read that and highlighted what I wrote left off highlighting the word "some".
 

kate8024

-deleted-
Attacking you? Like, um, talking? I am a critic of Scientology. Quit praising it and I'll quit criticising your praise.

Accusing someone more than once of being a shill for an organization that they have repeatedly expressed a general dislike of is a personal attack.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
Accusing someone more than once of being a shill for an organization that they have repeatedly expressed a general dislike of is a personal attack.

No, it is my personal opinion. If it is mistaken it is my mistaken personal opinion. Feel free to act otherwise.

Edit: And what is calling somebody a "bully"? Pot meet kettle.
 

kate8024

-deleted-
Edit: And actually I just asked you a question "Who is doing this?" - as you seemed to be positioning my fellow critics in a quite negative light - unfoundedly so I thought - which once again fits the idea of an agenda - like, why would you want to do that?

I said _some_ anti-scientologists. I am certainly not about to start listing those people in a forum like this as I believe that would be quite inappropriate.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
I said _some_ anti-scientologists. I am certainly not about to start listing those people in a forum like this as I believe that would be quite inappropriate.

Yeah right. :eyeroll: Even your terms - exes NEVER say "LRH". At the politest it's "Hubbard". And we never call critics "anti-Scientologists" either. I guess _some_ of us should just stop attacking INDIVIDUAL Scientologists. As we do.
 

kate8024

-deleted-
Yeah right. :eyeroll: Even your terms - exes NEVER say "LRH". At the politest it's "Hubbard". And we never call critics "anti-Scientologists" either.

Well I am sorry if I use terms other than the ones you dictate to be appropriate even though the term LRH is used frequently on this site.

I was not talking about general critics, I was talking about a subset of the ones who I would personally classify as anti-scientologists which is a subset of critics, generally on the more extreme end.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
Well I am sorry if I use terms other than the ones you dictate to be appropriate even though the term LRH is used frequently on this site.

I was not talking about general critics, I was talking about a subset of the ones who I would personally classify as anti-scientologists which is a subset of critics, generally on the more extreme end.

I don't dictate anything. I observe. Scientologists call him "LRH" - either corporate or indie. But thanks for the accusation.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
Well I am sorry if I use terms other than the ones you dictate to be appropriate even though the term LRH is used frequently on this site.

I was not talking about general critics, I was talking about a subset of the ones who I would personally classify as anti-scientologists which is a subset of critics, generally on the more extreme end.

Are you a Scientologist?
 

Sindy

Crusader
Accusing someone more than once of being a shill for an organization that they have repeatedly expressed a general dislike of is a personal attack.

No, it is my personal opinion. If it is mistaken it is my mistaken personal opinion. Feel free to act otherwise.

Edit: And what is calling somebody a "bully"? Pot meet kettle.

Now god dammit ya'll. It's time to sit down
and have a drink -- cool your heads some.


images


"Have a seat. I'm buyin'"

tumblr_luzyi2Qsus1qfet8co1_500.jpg
 

NoName

A Girl Has No Name
Yeah right. :eyeroll: Even your terms - exes NEVER say "LRH". At the politest it's "Hubbard". And we never call critics "anti-Scientologists" either. I guess _some_ of us should just stop attacking INDIVIDUAL Scientologists. As we do.

We'll also take Old Man, Lafatty, ElCon, Ron the Con, etc.
 

Lermanet_com

Gold Meritorious Patron
I once thought that $cientology would give me the tools necessary to end war.
I never expected to find that it's core policies were based upon the Art of War.
 

Sindy

Crusader
No, this is important. I'm not angry.

Okay, may I ask you if the majority of the moderate shilling posts are on this thread or do I need to look at other threads too, to understand? Please help me out here because I do want to understand.

I only pulled out my humor card (which clearly didn't land - lol) because ya know I love you a ton and to be frank, I'm thinking this Kate chick is pretty cool too. So, man...I hate when I miss so much stuff that I don't understand.

Allow me to say: I don't understand.
 

Purple Rain

Crusader
Okay, may I ask you if the majority of the moderate shilling posts are on this thread or do I need to look at other threads too, to understand? Please help me out here because I do want to understand.

I only pulled out my humor card (which clearly didn't land - lol) because ya know I love you a ton and to be frank, I'm thinking this Kate chick is pretty cool too. So, man...I hate when I miss so much stuff that I don't understand.

Allow me to say: I don't understand.

I could go on and on if I list how her posts promote Scientology. Always in the formula Negative comment (criticism of some aspect) then Positive comment (praise for some aspect). I'm not wrong about this. I don't mind people who believe genuinely questioning but I really loathe attempts to sell the virtues of Scientology, particularly covertly.

Edit: And then it's like, "Oh, but I'm a critic. See how I criticised?" But the whole point of the criticism is to create an opportunity to slip in the promotion.
 

Rene Descartes

Gold Meritorious Patron
I once thought that the following people were suppressive assholes

Larry Wollersheim

Michael Flynn

Jon Atack

That girl who sued the Church in Portland Oregon, I forget her name

David Suskind, because he did a show with ex-cult members and one was an ex-Scientologist

Ted Kennedy, because some guy visited our org and explained that Ted killed Mary Joe because she was going to rat out that John and Bob boffed Marilyn then had her killed.

Martin Deuztch, because he was the ex-Scientologist on the David Suskind show and he said "They even have a process called R-45".

Rd00
 

kate8024

-deleted-
Okay, may I ask you if the majority of the moderate shilling posts are on this thread or do I need to look at other threads too, to understand? Please help me out here because I do want to understand.

I only pulled out my humor card (which clearly didn't land - lol) because ya know I love you a ton and to be frank, I'm thinking this Kate chick is pretty cool too. So, man...I hate when I miss so much stuff that I don't understand.

Allow me to say: I don't understand.

From what I can tell it seems to have started here:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...eens-criminals&p=822948&viewfull=1#post822948

which led to:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...eens-criminals&p=822958&viewfull=1#post822958

which I obliged with here:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?32358-Is-every-statement-made-by-L-Ron-Hubbard-false

Which was quickly derailed into accusations being thrown at me and me having to constantly repeat things like:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...-Hubbard-false&p=823453&viewfull=1#post823453

After that mess, this post:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ng-of-religion&p=824581&viewfull=1#post824581

led to 12 more pages of me having to explain and defend that simple statement.

which included me defending the rights of _every_ religion, even the when I view them as potentially harmful:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ng-of-religion&p=824643&viewfull=1#post824643

and restating why this particular court case is important beyond Scientology:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ng-of-religion&p=824654&viewfull=1#post824654

Someone brought up that that the church of Scientology makes people sign an NDA as an example of a bad practice and I stated that the local Episcopal church requires church staff to also sign an NDA

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ng-of-religion&p=824653&viewfull=1#post824653

I linked to an Episcopal NDA here: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ng-of-religion&p=824667&viewfull=1#post824667

which was dismissed as not living up to Anonycat's standards here:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ng-of-religion&p=824670&viewfull=1#post824670

Accusations bu Purple Rain I believe started here:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ng-of-religion&p=824672&viewfull=1#post824672

Anonycat asked me to support Wiccan's (even though I had earlier stated that I support every religion including Wiccan's earlier):

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ng-of-religion&p=824675&viewfull=1#post824675

So I referred Anonycat to my posts here:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ng-of-religion&p=824687&viewfull=1#post824687

which includes a brief description of my personal religious beliefs: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...lieve-in-Magic&p=821561&viewfull=1#post821561

Which was dismissed with basically "I don't want to read that right now I'm having fun here"

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ng-of-religion&p=824690&viewfull=1#post824690

Even me complimenting another user on a good post has been met with hostility:

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...Up-In-The-Cult&p=824759&viewfull=1#post824759

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...Up-In-The-Cult&p=824761&viewfull=1#post824761

If you need any further clarification on any of this please let me know.
 
Top