ESMB has entered archive mode. All posts and threads that were available to the general public are still readable. The board is still searchable. 

Thank you all for your participation and readership over the last 12 years.

If you want to join in the conversation, please join the new ESMB Redux at www.exscn2.net.



Scientology is Anti-Human

Discussion in 'General Scientology Discussion' started by well_that_sucked, May 30, 2009.

  1. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    Alex has read them, I have no doubt, Markus.

    I don't know why Alex continues to maintain some idea that Hubbard was well-intended. The contrary evidence is staggering. Just about the only person who had anything good to say about Hubbard was Hubbard. But he said it SO MUCH. Alex has heard it a lot. My opinion is that people who cling to this idea are so dependent on Hubbard being a good person, in terms of an emotional connection and justification for their continued adherence to his will, that they cannot let it go. In this area, they seem functionally delusional.

    I think it's in very bad taste to maintain Hubbard's decency and goodwill in the face of the obvious harm he has caused to so many people for the simple expediency of his comfort and narcissism.
     
  2. Bee Sting

    Bee Sting Patron with Honors

    Thank you Markus for that song - something to think about, yes, definetly! I understand. :bigcry:

    Ignore Alex' evaluation of Troll. It's a smoke screen and a very clever tactic used in Scientology to deter, throw off and change the subject by refocusing the attention on something else other than the original subject or more accurately, focusing attention onto a person (as away from the subject) conceived to be the enemy. I am the "enemy" thus in his opinion, a "Troll."

    Alex' own words were "I will continue to spew." I merely responed. We all have our "truths" viewed from our own perspectives but until Alex chooses to explain in more depth the basis and origins of his points of views different from quotes of policies not revealing perhaps his own experience or that he might be accepting another's perspective as his opinion; which neither should be used as a weapon against him as right or wrong; I will ask my questions.

    Whatever the basis of Alex'' "spewing", I am still curious how he came to his conclusions. My questions are valid but I have the feeling his perspective is that the questions I asked were intended to eh, "make him wrong." It's quite the contrary.

    In one of Alex' own posts, I gathered his opinion as a very matterly-of-fact claim, that he has and feel, he is very successful in debating his points of views with and non-scientologists. Then, I am curious as to what and how he holds his water? What makes those opinions true for Alex, not as a fact finding mission of fault to make right or wrong. There is a different point of view and I am interested in ALEX, the person not his scientology point of views.

    My intention is not to harm or "destroy" Alex. I am here to listen and trying to understand, whether in agreement or not. I am absolutely certain Alex already know I do not subscribe to the "religion" of Scientology. But what better opportunity for Alex to re-affirm or strengthen his point of view, right, wrong or indifferent?

    Many years ago, I coined a phrase "To allow others be what they are, no matter what they are and whether in agreement or not." I can love another human being for what they are. I can find compassion. I can sympathise. I can envy. I can feel empathy and deep down I can still love a person as a human being with all their good and faults. But that doesn't meant I will waiver or agree. I call that being human. Scientology, from everything that I have learned, experienced and know is - Anti-Human.

    If Alex respond to a thread about Scientology being Anti-Human as Human in contradiction of my own opinion, I am interested in learning that perspective and what basis ALEX, the person use to defend that point of view.

    Markus, :heartbeat:

    Lots of Honey Love,

    Bee Sting
     
  3. Ladies and Gentleman,

    I have found it futile to expect anything from Alex than justification and obfuscation for the crimes and insidiousness of Scientology and Hubbard.

    I think you are wasting your time and worse, your compassion, on someone who, in true Scientology fashion, will use your time, compassion and humanity as a tool against you.

    She is a drain on the emotions with her psuedo-logic and fake concerns.

    Don't waste your time even answering her. Better to share your compassion and help with others who understand the reality of the situation.

    The Anabaptist Jacques
     
  4. Bee Sting

    Bee Sting Patron with Honors

    UM,

    Oh yeah, Alex - I have no doubt has read a lot! I think Alex is a "techy", one whom has read a lot and I believe, he mentioned something about the reading the read volumes in one of his own posts.... well, maybe I got that wrong, but I have no doubt Alex has read oodles of oodles of scientology tech material, policies, books, bulletins, red text on white paper or was it cream as the green on cream? Oh, well, Bees don't care if it was blue on white, brown or golden rod.

    Functionally delusional makes sense to those whom continue to defend an ideology unable to free themselves from the slavery of its oppressors.

    Love,

    Bee Sting
     
  5. alex

    alex Gold Meritorious Patron

    Hubbard was obviously flawed as a person, with seeming phobias, compulsions and obsessions galore, but also because of that perhaps, driven in a certain direction. He frequently warns to separate his opinions from what you yourself can observe as true by the test of life.

    His lies about himself were self serving and ultimately harmful to his reputation. His product, technology for advancing the state of man, stands ready to be tested in life. You yourself subscribe to a variant of his work.

    Thus we have a situation of various things that need to be looked at and their value determined.

    My conclusion after many years of reading and life is that there is much of great value and much that deserves to be discarded.

    My own flaws and those of those I love give me reason to excuse Hubbard his. To me the balance of his ideas and their potential, outweighs the personal faults of one dead man.

    The church is the product of the followers of hubbard past and present, you, me, and others. Hubbards varying influence is not the sole nor most powerful influence on that. Our collective flaws, apparently, are.

    YOMY
     
  6. alex

    alex Gold Meritorious Patron

    Yes. Please. Close the circle and stick with those of your own kind. Much safer than ..... thinking.

    Its simple black and white. Once it was white, now its black.

    No shades of gray.
     
  7. Bee Sting

    Bee Sting Patron with Honors

    SHE?


    HE is a SHE? Point taken as wasting time. Respectively, I thank you for your opinion.

    I have no illusion I will be successful "reaching" this individual nor am I trying to achieve these things. Everyone deserve compassion and humanity whether if they can accept it or not.

    It is sad to learn, she has no idea what is happening around her and that she can not allow herself to be the recepient of love and understanding so, then the purpose is not for her to understand but to remind the world that one must not waiver in the truism of might be considered love, compassion and understanding for another human being.

    Thanks for your input, it is well recieved and appreciated.

    Honey Love,

    Bee Sting
     
  8. Voltaire's Child

    Voltaire's Child Fool on the Hill

    I don't think Alex is a she. But either way, doesn't matter.

    I've heard those things said about other people before- I won't say whom since there are people lurking who are just hoping for something like that so they can have some more ammo'. But put it this way- it's something people say when they try to convert or change someone's mind to their way of thinking and are unsuccessful and not only that, the recipient of such attempts leads them a merry chase.

    You're free to try to change people's minds about Scn or anything you like, such is the nature of freedom of speech. But anytime you try to make converts, you get what you get. Such is the nature of Alex's rights to freedom of speech.

    So I think it's draining because of the effort spent but imagine how it would be if someone tried to expend that amount of effort on you re attempting to change YOUR mind about YOUR stance on Scn or anything else where it was important to you. Then imagine if they wrote on a forum that many thousands of people see, that millions can potentially see, what a waste of time you were and draining and how messed up you were, where every attempt of yours to stand up for yourself or to explain your position was held up to ridicule. Imagine how you would feel.
     
  9. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    Hold it right there, Alex! There could be a long argument about who stole what from whom, what is derivative, what is not, etc. However, suffice it to say that Metapsychology, while parallel to Scientology at the Grades area, is not a "variant" of Scientology, any more than Gestalt therapy is. That said, carry on...

    I'm with you on that. I'd be interested in hearing what you think should be discarded.

    Hubbard's influence is King in the Church of Scientology, and for anyone who takes his word as being the primary reference point.

    I can forgive Hubbard his flaws. We all have them. It's not something he ever sought, though. This discussion is not about judgement of Hubbard, though, and I think it's quite off the mark to discuss that sort of thing in topic like this one. That's all.
     
  10. Bee Sting

    Bee Sting Patron with Honors

    I don't think Alex is a she either, but never no mind, he/she whatever, that's not important. And your absolutely correct in trying to convert people. Not happening, well, not from this Bee hive anyhow.

    Regardless if we assume Alex is lurking or not, my simple questions to Alex are just trying to determine whether he/she- ALEX- is representing his/her own personal views and if so, how he/she came about them, whether I agree with them or not is a different issue altogether.

    If he/she is working from inside Church his/her answers are presumably, orchestrated from the inside the difference being whom we are dealing with. I think we should know, one way or the other. I suppose, the only one who knows that answer is - Alex!

    Who is Alex?

    Honey Love,

    Bee Sting
     
  11. This is a good point Fluffy, but, I am talking about when Alex is being evasive and insensitive and begging the question or dodging the point.

    I have argued with people about Scientology on this board and people like Mark Baker and Terril and you have made me modify my views.

    I never doubted, nor did I see a reason to doubt, that you, or Mark, or Terril were not sincere in your communication.

    It is one thing when someone discusses something and another thing when someone shoots down with shallow psuedo-semantics what the other person says in order to dodge the point, which is what Alex does and which shows how disingenious she is.

    The Anabaptist Jacques
     
  12. alex

    alex Gold Meritorious Patron

    Search for "for the record" posted under my name. I have answered this question many times and have referred you to my previous posts elsewhere in this thread.

    To get a sense of who I am read my posts. My drunken meloncholy poetry, my impassioned railing at fools who attack scientology on grounds that it is not vulnerable on, my lengthy pontifications on nots and entities, my tales of my own spiritual exploration outside the church, my story of my joining after being "critical" and antagonistic.....and my views on what and why it is the way it is now, and the baiting and playing with fools. I am hardly who you think I am. Open your mind. Read.
     
  13. alex

    alex Gold Meritorious Patron

    "psuedo-semantics" (sic)..

    Now there is a brain bending concept. A bit non-sequitur.

    http://www.onelook.com/?w=pseudo&ls=a

    http://www.onelook.com/?w=semantics&ls=a
     
  14. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    Well, not that I'm beyond reproach, myself, but I'll certainly vouch for Alex. I think that people assume everybody is a superskilled craftsman of a message, subtlely dropping messages beyond what they are saying, etc.

    I've been interacting with Alex for many years. While we disagree on many things, I don't think Alex is intellectually dishonest.

    Can we put this ad hom down and get back to the point (whatever the fuck that was?).
     
  15. alex

    alex Gold Meritorious Patron

    That I am inhuman?
    :coolwink:

    tks.
     
  16. Bee Sting

    Bee Sting Patron with Honors

    Alrighty then!

    Just like I have tried to convey earlier so let me try again! Alex is using a very clever Scientology tactic which is intended to "re-focus" and "deter" the focus from the main subject or the point. If it "looks like duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck - it's a duck" or "walk the walk - talk the talk..." ??? Just wondering ... -

    I do not recall at his point in which study I learned that but that IS what he is doing, "dodging the bullet", "changing the valence", "beating the enemy at his own game" etc... I know what it is but I can't for my life recall the proper terminology but I know what it is! Alex is a "techy!" He has read many issues in Scientology, been on course and no doubt, at some point spent time on staff but I do not believe he is currently on staff.

    I have asked the question if he might currently be "inside" but I am not so sure he is. No doubt, he is enjoying this guess work about who he is and the nature of his intentions. Now, a question for you, what makes you believe Alex is a SHE and not a HE?

    One more thing, wasted efforts is a matter of opinion of course, but not wasted if one feel there is a value and one consider the value is worth the effort.


    Bz

    Bee Sting
     
  17. Let me know in a year from now if you think dealing with Alex is worth it.
    I always assumed Alex was a she because of something she said a long time ago, but I don't remember what that is.
    Alex comes here, in my view, to rub salt on the wounds of those injured.

    The Anabaptist Jacques
     
  18. Bee Sting

    Bee Sting Patron with Honors

    :) The subject was never about ALEX nor was it related to a discussion of his or hers worth (Alex') although it might have occurred.

    Alex do what Alex does and Alex will continue to do what Alex do. We know that! I got that! I might have spoken about Alex but it was related only in about how Alex and for what Alex could not answer, and in as to the relevance and example what Scientology is all about when it comes to humanity or rather lack of humanity!

    Alex made himself the prime example of how Anti-Human, the very subject of this thread as he continuously defend the Scientology point of views! Listen to the song that Markus provided!

    These conversations were not about ALEX or his points of views, they were about humanity and Scientology's lack of humanity. Alex' points of views, if anything emphazise those of Scientology's indoctrinations and exactly demonstrate what the thread implied, Scientology is Anti-Human.

    The subject was not about of a person's personal point of view, it is about Scientology being ANTI-HUMAN, exposing what humanity is really all about, the significant of its value and how it might be valued. If you missed that well, look again.

    Bz

    Bee Sting
     
  19. uniquemand

    uniquemand Unbeliever

    Gotcha, Bee. I agree that Scientology is anti-human. It's quite explicit, in many, many issues, that being human is a very low state of awareness, something which Scientologists should aspire to transcend. Scientologists believe, when they are educated in their subject, that a human being is a "composite entity". That composite is:

    1: Thetan
    2: Body
    3: Genetic Entity
    4: Body Thetans/Clusters

    When the being confuses himself as a "human", in this way of thinking, he doesn't realize he is actually this composite. Thus, "humans" are viewed almost with contempt (or maybe with contempt, by the hardened), as they are ignorant of their composite case, they think they are a body, etc.

    Scientologists therefore tend to treat their bodies as a pet, when they are kindly disposed, or as a slave, when they are, themselves, slaves to Hubbard's full intent. This is why the SO "dramatizes" punishing bodies so severely. The GE is viewed as a lower order thetan, one that is in disagreement with the "command thetan" (YOU, yourself, of course), and which must be handled as needed to bring it into alignment with command. Of course, we all know about NOTS and it's use to break up clusters and bts so that the person will be free as a thetan, either to operate with body or not, and not to be confused as a composite anymore.

    When you understand this, of course Scientology is anti-human. Particularly if you think being human means being a body.
     
  20. degraded being

    degraded being Sponsor


    The point was about scientology being Anti Human. We are right on the point!