This is an odd one.
But it’s another example of the falsehoods pushed out by scientology on a routine basis.
Scientology tells people the Way to Happiness is “non-religious” – the book doesn’t even have Hubbard’s name on it except in tiny print on the back. It is something used to gain footholds in society and the theory (like with Hubbard’s fiction) is that when people find something good or enjoyable about it, they then discover what else Hubbard has written and want to read that. No matter what the PR statements, the ultimate objective is always the same. Get more people using Hubbard’s “tech” and this will results in achieving “planetary clearing.”
But even by the low standards of scientology’s bait and switch (more appropriately “bait and reel in”) this makes little sense?
Ivan is the D/ED TWTH OSA Flag?
How non-non-religious is that? The honcho of the non-religious foundation is a Sea Org member in the Office of Special Affairs….
The Sea Org is dedicated to achieving the aims of scientology. Nothing else.
Why is it that in Tampa, where there are supposedly 15,000 scientologists, they cannot find a NON-Sea Org member to at least make a pretense of this being anything other than a scientology run “non-religious” campaign? And you know Ivan is the “deputy” to the actual “Executive Director” who MUST be a Sea Org member also. He cannot be junior to a non-SO member…
As I noted yesterday and repeat today. With scientology nothing is ever as it seems. There is always some subterfuge ongoing.
“Like gentle oil spread on a raging sea” Since when does an oil slick calm a raging sea? Eco-disaster yes, storm calmer – no.
If you’re not allowed to analyze it, it’s Scientology.
I ouldn’t post on the 10th Anniversary announcement post so I’ll post here.
HUGE congrats to you and all who have helped. Here is some more proof that you have created a huge impact.
Nov 1 video of CCI at 12:40 p.m. No staff, all but empty parking lot, not a public in sight. For those that know what CCI was like even a decade ago this is huge.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_FD5RBARyc
Great job, Mike. But since it seems the 10th anniversary post doesn’t allow comments, I do want to add some numbers you forgot.
1,247 — serious threats to Org and/or staff safety that resulted in police reports
73 — threats of death or serious bodily harm to COB
100% (guesstimate based on anecdotal evidence) — percentage of staff who have expressed fear of your and Leah’s and Tony’s band of unhinged Internet-based lunatics and religious bigots
Of course, a troll.
It’s a great opportunity to respond to your “talking points.”
1. Obviously, you are wrong, your comment is posted. Unlike scientology sites, you CAN post here. I not only cannot post, I am BLOCKED from most of them. And yet you shout about what champions of free speech you are.
2. 1247 “serious threats” is just a random number you have invented and is based on absolutely nothing. You guys tally up tweets that say things like “scientology is a harmful, abusive cult and should be shut down” and count it as a “serious threat” to your religious freedom. Or “I am going to picket the church today.” Or “I hope you get the retribution you deserve.” But even more relevant, has it ever entered your mind that perhaps people are upset at scientology because it has destroyed their family? Cost them their job? Taken all their money? Promised them the world and failed to deliver? When you do that to people, they get mad.
3. As for the “threats” to David Miscavige, again, plucked out of thin air. I guarantee you I have had more “threats” from rabid scientologists, PI’s and “anonymous” people than David Miscavige. That was for speaking out about the abuses of scientology. If Miscavige has in fact had threats, maybe it’s a result of him beating people? Physically and emotionally torturing them? Running a worldwide scam? I bet Bernie Madoff had people threaten him. As did Jim Jones. David Koresh.
4. As for your guesstimate… hopefully those staff will wise up and get the hell out. It’s ALWAYS uncomfortable when you are lying to people and ripping them off and you don’t know if the person you abused yesterday is going to end up in the media tomorrow. That’s the real reason for any fear they may feel.
Scientology dishes out abuse and lives on playing the victim.
You are evidence of this.
Thanks for taking the time to make the point.
“Serious threats”?! As when a couple of people sit on a park bench, and Scientology summons cars full of police in a paranoid overreaction? We know what the overblown hyperbolic standard for that is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idFO7UA3eXo
If there are unhinged lunics and bigots, they’re represented by Scientology’s OSA minions like the “squirrel busters” – once again scientologists reflexively accuse others of that which they themselves are guilty of:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM2SanSKk9c
When has Scientology ever really suffered threat or harm, except for a few cases where people were aggrieved by their personal involvement with orgs? Want to tell us about the Inglewood org sword-wielder, whose case Scientology is apparently still keeping swept under the rug?
Staff are afraid of Mike, Leah and Tony?! Dear Xenu, what babies you all are.
So much for the non-existent states of “clear” and “OT”. Aren’t you all supposed to be cause over “MEST”? Oops… guess not. Hubbard was a conman if the highest order. The crap he made up is beyond laughable.
If you’re “beyond” OT, can’t you just “postulate” all the so-called “SP’s” to stop criticizing your cult and exposing all the abuses? Oops…apparently not.
By the way, exposing the horrid abuses at the hands of $cientology does NOT equal bigotry. Duh. Look up the definition. After all, isn’t having an “MU” embarrassing for you?
People are free to believe whatever crazy sh*t they want. But when $cientologists are forced to disconnect from their own family members, be subjected to endless fundraising for empty orgs (and often go bankrupt), to have abortions for the “greatest good” (Sea Org women), sent to the RPF, psychically/mentally/sexually abused, fair gamed, forced to write ridiculous KR’s on their own family or anyone else for the slightest little silly thing, etc, etc, etc…. that’s a completely different thing which is absolutely disgusting, cruel and unacceptable.
Shall we get into Hubbard’s and Miscavige’s illegal acts time and time again? Probably not. You don’t have the courage to face reality. $cientologists love to project and always accuse others of what they themselves are doing.
I hope you wake up one day. You’re in for a rude awakening — and then some.
The docu-series, $cientology and The Aftermath ran for 3 seasons, was nominated for 2 Emmys, and won 1 Emmy. How ya like them apples?
I’m going to come out right now and say that I like the Way To Happiness booklet and the advice it offers, which is based on the 10 Commandments, no doubt about that. I think the precepts in this book are good guides to living happily with oneself and others.
Now, that’s ALL I’m saying, btw.
I’m NOT saying that HOW IT IS FALSELY PROMOTED AND USED by CO$ is ok.
Touted as an unfailing cure-all at disaster sites – beyond false, this is absurd. People suffering disasters are in no condition to read!
Or that WTH operates with unfailing magic as a life-changer, as a creator of instant and profound cognitions as regards the ethical conduct of any person reading it. Too vast a generalization. The effect this book has on anyone depends upon who he or she is and what is going on in his or her life and what this person’s experiences have been, etc. Who is reading it? A suburban American teenager? A policeman? A heroin addict? Who the hell knows what the effect of a book, any book, can have on a person?
So these claims CO$ makes are wrong and they’re made only to pressure the public into buying vast quantities of them so that the cherch gets the money and can make more false claims about the marvelous effects of the Way To Happiness.
Oh, and the claim that that WTH is not religious. Total lie. Of course its religious. CO$ publishes it, Co$ is a religion. Its religious literature, case closed.
All I’m saying is that, READING what is written, I like it. I would want to operate this way all the time, if I could. I would want to be around OTHERS who operated this way as much as possible.
Again, and sorry to be a bore, but just reading what is written PUTTING ASIDE everything else I know about the false benefits attributed to it, putting aside what I know about how its used to fleece people, putting aside everything I know ABOUT the book and/or its author including the fact that the author himself did not practice his own precepts, putting aside ALL else, I like what is written, that’s all. And I’d like it if it came from the Catholics, or the Jews or Muslims or Wiccans or some Protestant sect.
Ok, now you can hate me 🙂 I stepped into the kitchen; I’ll deal with the heat 🙂
Well. I didn’t need Hubbard to tell me to brush my teeth and the rest of it.
Common sense and common decency are pretty obvious to good people.
Don’t agree, respectfully. What you’re calling “common sense” is training, from babyhood. Little kids don’t brush their teeth because they have common sense, but because it becomes a habit, and it becomes a habit because their parents or some caregiver drilled it into them over and over that its necessary to brush their teeth and not brushing them is not an option, so do it or else.
Absolutely right. Anyone with half a brain knows these things.
I understand what Aqua is saying. But Hubbard’s only reason for writing that absurd booklet was to reel people in and indoctrinate them (which of course Aqua and you know quite well). And it pisses me right off that he was so deceptive in his intentions.
Aqua, are you really comfortable with all the sorts of ambiguity and equivocation, that I wrote about in another comment?
There’s plenty of room in it, for instance, for someone to judge (or accept an organization’s judgment) that many or even most people were not really “of Good Will” – and thus could permissibly, if not even justifiably, be harmed.
I submit that it’s specifically written so that none of Scientology’s exploitative practices or abuses are actually forbidden under it – except perhaps for Hubbard’s awful rotten teeth, but I think he might even have finally gotten those taken care of by the time this was written.
Note that it particularly doesn’t say to tell the truth – just to “Seek to Live with the Truth.” Sounds like deception or lying would be “acceptable” to me.
Thanks for asking me all of the above, Peacemaker.
I am totally NOT OK with any ambiguity and equivocation as regards who is or is not a person of good will. ESPECIALLY am I not OK with someone in the cherch with an axe to grind (Hubbard included) being the decision-maker about the person in question. Indeed – “good will” towards whom? Or what?
I see your points and appreciate them. Anything that the cherch does CAN be given a mulligan within the ambiguity of WTH. I didn’t see this angle before.
Now, as to “seek to live with the truth” – this is just me, but, this resonates with me because I DO seek to live with the truth, and “living” a lie makes me very unhappy – I’m just not cut out to lie a lot, ongoingly – you know? But that said, its almost impossible, I find, to tell the truth subjectively (meaning, my honest opinion about something, my own “truth”) ALL the time! In business, in relationships, its tough to be always 100% truthful. All I can say is, I know FOR MYSELF the level of honesty I require in myself and I really try and mostly succeed in living up to it. I’m pretty much incapable of pretending for any length of time to admire, respect or like what I don’t admire, respect, like or love. Its just not my nature. But then, what if a dear friend spends a fortune on a designer dress and it looks (or I think it looks ) awful on her? Am I going to shoot her down and say, “Listen, that thing cost you a week’s salary and does nothing for you. . You’d have been better off with something off the rack that hides your hips.” Am I going to say that to her, in ANY tone level? NOOOO. I just wouldn’t hurt her, or anyone, that way! That’s when I WILL give out with an “acceptable truth”. “That’s a pretty shade of green; matches your eyes.” Something like that. Something I can say that is the truth, in instances like this.
But about ANYTHING that is important, that is fundamental to one’s life and happiness – I can’t see lying about such things!
Look – “acceptable truths”…they can be kind, or they can be deliberately deceptive and extremely harmful…they can make people happy and grateful for your tact, or they can make you sick and fearful and guilty…it really depends, doesn’t it?
They can be twisted, you’re right! Twisted to justify nearly anything!
I like to make people happy. Life can really beat us down sometimes so its fun to lift oneself and others up. But I won’t make myself ill living a lie, not for anyone, not for anything.
Peacemaker, let me add that what I wrote above mostly addressed SUBJECTIVE honesty, as in opinions about things. As far as OBJECTIVE honesty and truth telling are concerned, yes, I’m totally on board with telling objective truths only, and not telling objective lies, pretty much EVER, e.g. “I went to the store yesterday” when I DIDN’T go to the store yesterday – objective lies – no. No, no no. Tangled webs, baby! Never works for me! AND telling objective lies has always brought me bad luck. I get caught, or have bad luck afterwards, so not for me! Made sure to stop doing that many years ago. True! And I’m much happier. True.
Aqua, thanks for your clarifications. I think the point about truth is a telling one, Hubbard just cunningly seems to resonate with what well-intended people like you already practice in their lives – while providing no firm guidance to those with a troubled relationship with the truth, like himself and the organization he spawned.
Yes, agreed on all, Peacemaker. And it is mind blowing that someone who lied as freely and continually and guiltlessly as he did WROTE this thing; would be even capable of writing it. Split Personality Disorder, maybe? If there is such a thing. Look, how this is possible with LRH or anyone is beyond me, beyond my powers of comprehension, I freely admit!
Aqua, to me the “code” is just typical work of a practiced psychopath: designed to to create an appearance to falsely gain trust, and to manipulate, while preserving if not increasing the perpetrator’s ability and advantage in operating without scruples and even ruthlessly.
I see it as just another piece in his massive output of disingenuous writing, such as the supposed “cancellation” of the notorious “Fair Game” policy – there’s seeking “to live with the truth” as Hubbard defined it.
Hubbard says nothing that isn’t stolen from sources like the Bible and the Boy Scout Handbook , where it’s said better and more powerfully.
I dig what you’re saying.
I too think its helpful to have a booklet such as TWTH and overall do not find its wording or content to be terribly offensive or culty.
Obvs the rotten mouthed weasel didn’t invent the concepts, and probably didn’t even author it**,
I would like to see an anonymously authored booklet which does fulfil the purported aims of TWTH. It could be given freely on Amazon and allow others to print it and use for good works.
We don’t need this version. It’s tainted.
** Mike? Anyone? who actually WROTE TWTH?
From Hawkins works and many other’s info, isn’t it true that some of the publications and bits were written by others?
Based on the timing of when it came out and our knowledge of how Hubbard was doing in the 80’s, my money is on this being the work of underlings.
It was written by Hubbard when he was off in his Bluebird. It was one of his last efforts to “smash his name into history” (along with Battlefield Earth and Mission Earth). He said if there was ONE THING he wanted to be remembered for, it was WTH.
Leaving aside what sounds like an extremely narcissistic purpose for writing WTH, I think it may well HAVE been the best thing he ever wrote. Honestly, now, if the author of this booklet were unknown, somehow totally unknown – let’s just suppose that this were the case, and no one had the vaguest clue as to who wrote
WTH – reading it, could anyone find offense with it? Look, I’m not saying it performs miracles the way CO$ claims it does. But honestly, isn’t it measured, good advice for well intentioned people on how to operate in life and be personally happy as well as contribute to the happiness of others?
Now, having said that, certainly, as Peacemaker pointed out, the ambiguity in WTH can and does give cover to criminals (read, Co$ and Miscavige) to commit criminal acts. (WTH: “TRY to do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. Criminal: “Well, OK, I TRIED.” ) So there IS that drawback. In America, our justice system also has that drawback. “Innocent until PROVEN guilty”. Plenty of criminals can go unpunished because of lack of evidence, or inadmissible evidence, etc. Yet our system protects the INNOCENT. If reading WTH helps the well intentioned, I’d say it was doing its job. Maybe I’m naive at my core, but I do believe that MOST of us have good intentions, or at least, start out with good intentions. OK, I’m starting to ramble so I’ll stop now.
I agree with you Aqua
Thanks for letting me know, Mike.
Yes Aqua, it IS a good list and can be useful to get into public schools because it is non-religious.
Thanks, Wynski and may I say my hat is off to you for your ability to make this distinction between the writER and the writING with regard to WTH – I do admire that you can do this. Given what your opinion of Hubbard is it is no small thing that you can still objectively make such a distinction!
Thanks Aqua I owe that ability to a long study of the subject of Logic. Quite ironic that I can credit Hubbard because of a subject he tried to dissuade his followers from studying.
Two separate issues. I like a LOT of what LRH wrote in his early books. Much of his philosophy and main points about life speak to my own thinking and experience. I have had great wins in lower level auditing as a pc and have seen others have them too as an auditor and as a CS.
On the other hand, I now also recognize LRH’s megolomania, paranoia, and tendency to lie and be vicious to those who supported and helped him. I also deplore the Soviet style fascistic organization he established.
“Two separate issues.” Agreed, Joe, and the two shouldn’t be conflated. For the record, I also have jmajor fundamental disagreements with the organization he established and how it operates, and am as well extremely turned off by LRH’s lying and actual behavior in life – it being far afield, so widely at variance with nearly everything he wrote.
As suspected.
Thanks, Mike.
It’s actually more a Luciferian-Satanic amoral and anethical code, setting the stage for egoistic and ends-justify-the-means thinking and action. It’s full of deliberate ambiguity and qualifiers, such as “try” not to do several things, or “Do not Harm a Person of Good Will” – which leaves vast room for wreaking harm on anyone whose assumed intentions could be questioned, as we see Scientology frequently doing with everything from “fair game” to “disconnection.”
While looking for a list of the precepts on a non-CofS website I ran across this, about how Scientology views WTH as part of their efforts:
‘A campaign in the early 1990s to distribute the book in United States schools was described in Church of Scientology publications as “the largest dissemination project in Scientology history” and “the bridge between broad society and Scientology.”‘
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Way_to_Happiness#Booklet
Oil in the sea is not good!! Remember the Exxon Valdez?
Seriously! What the hell is that supposed to mean? I’m used to the Commodores purple prose but I really can’t figure out what he was going for there.
In the certificate Dr. Hubbard claims his nook is “like oil in the sea” and I meant oil in the sea reminds me of a Tanker accident.
Sorry his book Not nook
Well, very simple. Organizations, International and otherwise, have NO Org. Board.
Remember? Miscabage dismantled it and all the personnel within. Wasn’t this the reason Miscavige got rid of Shelly when she tried to apply LRH tech with a proper Org. Board? Yes, indeed.
Scientology is in disarray all around – posts, duties, Hats, et al.
Miscavige only gives attention to what brings in the money and the properties.
Mike,
Re George White’s statement above, do you have any data that the 1982 tape ostensibly by Hubbard was a fake? I’ve heard the assertion before, but have never seen any hard evidence.
It’s a real recording. Sinar Parman sent Hubbard the recorder that tape was made on at his request specifically for that purpose,
I think that’s just loyalists’ and indies’ attempt (which George probably heard) to deny that Hubbard was in such bad shape, and talking so crazy, in later years.
Some also want to believe that Hubbard was replaced at one or more points by doppelgängers, to explain away his decline, and to try to construct an ideal in which his ideas about Scientology, and the way the organization was run, were somehow consistent and benevolent up to some point at which he was surreptitiously removed and replaced by a bad actor.
I personally love that it takes LRH so damn long to say what God said in the Ten Commandments.
Lynne, here’s a question for you:
How do you KNOW that “God” said the Ten Commandments? How do you KNOW that they didn’t come out of Moses’ OWN head, from his OWN brain, which he duly wrote down and said that God told him these things? And, look, for whatever its worth, why even worry about WHO said or wrote something, provided it works, so long as it makes sense so long as it helps people and can actually be applied as a guide to human existence and dominion over the planet?
Here’s where I’m going with this:
Example: “Thou shalt not kill”.
Well, OK. Thou shalt not kill – WHAT? Who? Anything, anyone, ever? There’s no explanation. No “Thou shalt not kill except if your country is at war…or unless its self defense…or unless its a chicken you’re cooking for dinner…or a cockroach on your kitchen floor, or, or, or..NOTHING! Just, “Thou Shalt Not Kill”. said God.
PERIOD.
And the interpretation of that is left up to MAN.
Do you know ANYONE who follows the 1st Commandment to the letter?
Neither do I.
In fact, we all CHERRY PICK who or what we kill or don’t kill. Depending upon our ubringing and our culture and our religion and our own sensibilities.
My point is, MAN has PLENTY to do with the interpretation of the 10 Commandments and the 1st Commandment is only a small example of how much MAN, not God, interprets and DECIDES what is workable about this precept and WHEN it can be applied and WHEN it can and SHOULD be ignored. Every time some living being is killed by someone, that Commandment is violated.
“GOD” , or Moses, or whoever “said” this, was VERY general in “his” instructions and left a LOT open to interpretation!
That’s all. Sorry for the rant. I hope it doesn’t offend you because that’s not my intent. I’m merely interested in your response.
Here’s another example: “Thou shalt not kill – if you live in an area where capital punishment is illegal – otherwise, hang or fry the bastard”.
You see? Man’s fine hand has EVERYTHING to do with how the 1st Commandment is applied and if its even applied at all. The same goes for the other nine too, but this is off-topic and Mike has been generous in allowing these comments of mine thru.
Aqua, in th original language is was you shall not murder. Ditch English text unless verified translation fro oldest text.. which was made FAR longer than 2,000 years ago
YES! Now THIS makes sense, Wynski! “Do not murder”. And someone, somewhere, possibly some enterprising, nobility-ass-kissing monk, generalized it to “kill” “Do not murder” can applied and used in the REAL world! Also, agreed that verified translation from oldest text HAD to have been far older than 2000 years ago.
Quick question for you: Would the “original language” have been ancient Hebrew?
According to a book I read a while ago, “The Story of English”, the Old Testament was written in first in Ancient Hebrew, THEN translated into Greek, THEN Latin, and THEN, finally, and nearly a thousand years later, into whatever English was at the time by John Wycliff.
Now, when I read this, I thought, “Wow, with all these translations going on over a THOUSAND years, I’d bet there”s an awful lot of “lost in translation” going on with the Holy Bible!”
I’m not a religious person but religions, their origins and similarities, etc., fascinate me.
Similarities of stories like – just off the top of my head – Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden with the snake, the Flood, the Virgin Birth – are to be found. All fascinating data to me.
Aqua, the oldest Jewish written language is Paleo-Hebrew and is over 3,000 years old.
Yes, translations back then cost a lot of money & time. No real quality control either… He who paid could control what was written.
Non-religious. I don’t think so. Here’s what the IRS has to say about ‘The Way to Happiness Foundation’ in the once secret 1993 Closing Agreement between the IRS and $cientology, which included numerous “$cientology-related entities” considered part of $cientology: (Reformatted slightly for readability):
“The social benefit and other public benefit entities discussed at pages 1-28 through 1-42 of the June submission along with all subsidiaries, subordinate chapters, subordinate organizations, or sublicensees thereof (e.g., organizations that are permitted to use particular names, copyrights, service marks, and/or technologies) are Scientology-related entities.
Thus, for example,
Citizens Commission on Human Rights,
National Commission on Law Enforcement and Social Justice,
Scientology Defense Fund Trust,
Association for the Better Living and Education,
Applied Scholastics Incorporated,
Narconon International,
==>> The Way to Happiness Foundation, <<==
and the Foundation for Religious Freedom are Scientology-related entities.
Pages 1-28 through 1-42 are attached as Exhibit VIII-2 to this Agreement. "
Mike, a very short blog today. Very powerful in driving how disingenuous the very core of Scientology’s intentions are. They can’t keep their lies straight.
Completed the ‘Happiness Rundown” circa 1982 in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. It was the year that Scientology released the fake tape with Hubbard’s voice impersonated by some celebrity. Total waste of money. David Mayo was king in Canada and I remember listening to his taped lectures. The one I remember most was when he criticized Hubbard for not including friendship or love in Scientology. How can you be happy with no friends and no love?
Funny thing is $cientologists are so love bombed by staff members that they actually believe they have friends/are loved. I went with my partner once to pick something up at the church and this woman came running up to me telling me that she was his ‘friend’ and basically ‘mentor’ although she didn’t say that word. I had had arguments with him about her msgs before this. Her attitude was proprietary and I was really offended. He, on the other hand, I believe felt accepted and cared for.
He has chosen not to be with me and my mind reels at the realization that someone would choose to not have love in their lives but rather these disingenuous people who profess to be their friends.
Because he hasn’t been for a while they have even taken to turning up at his home, leaving messages in his mailbox saying that they care and miss him etc. Even he admits that this is weird.
When I first read TWH I was intrigued. It did seem to contain an ethical way to living, but how can an ethical way to living exclude family, love, real friendship, empathy for those less fortunate etc. Why does $cientology believe that it is ok to ‘capture’ people with this booklet and then live contrary to those principles. The mind boggles. My mind is in turmoil.
Sometimes I feel that I need to give up this fight.
My motto in my entire life has been “Never quit”. It has worked for me. Scientology in 2008 came to our house and tried to get my wife to leave with them. They ignored me as I was declared suppressive. They did not succeed. Early in our relationship, they tried to get her a date with a rich dentist and they ignored me again. These people try to create “in” leverage by forming relationships with “in tech” people. It is a scam. When I was in Scientology in New York and in Miami, the orgs were rotating beds. When I was on the Freewinds, they tried to get me to join the Sea Org with “love bombs”. They had all of the attractive crew members act very nice as I was single at the time. It never works.
isitworthit,
This guy who “chose” not to be with you, who “chose” not to love you and accept your love, did not “choose” at all.
Very likely you were dealing with someone who was TRAINED – trained, drilled, inculcated, had it pounded INTO him so that he would operate WITHOUT QUESTION on one, single datum: “Handle, or Disconnect.”
“Handle or Disconnect” is applied ruthlessly to resolve all issues stemming from any lovers, spouses, parents, children, friends, bosses, employees or acquaintances who are deemed a threat – allow me to repeat and emphasize that – WHO ARE DEEMED IN ANY WAY A THREAT – to the continued dedication of any Scientologist in good standing.
You were deemed a threat. “Handle or Disconnect”. I’m guessing that your Scientologist boyfriend’s “mentor” likely advised him that you were not “handle-able” and that he should disconnect.
They are TRAINED this way. These decisions to disconnect are NOT the result of one or two Scientology Ethics cycles. This is TRAINING. When one has someone in their lives antipathetic in ANY way to Scientology, its “handle or disconnect”.
They may start out applying this rather painlessly. Maybe a friend or an acquaintance from public school. Someone they can easily avoid. Then it could be an employer. Well, “handle” that employer or QUIT that job! So they quit that job, get another job. Then it could be someone in their family, a cousin or an aunt who says negative stuff about Scientology, doesn’t like it. So, no more outings with that cousin! No more Thanksgiving dinners with that Aunt or Uncle. More and more practice, disconnecting from those who are antagonistic to Scientology. More and more practice, and they are backed up by their Scientologist parents, their Scientologist friends and the staff of their local org – backed up !00% by everyone who are important to their survival. The “dinging in” works, on a gradient. Sweethearts, people they’re dating, handle or disconnect. Mostly, almost ALWAYS, its “disconnect” . Then, one day, its their own child in front of them, who needs handling! Or their father, or their mother! Husband! Wife! Well, too bad! “Handle or Disconnect, Baby!” The message never varies. Doesn’t matter who it is.
And by this time, they’ve got plenty of practice with “handle and disconnect” so almost always its “So long, Dad!”…Sayonara, Spouse, my lawyer’s number is ____’ “Sorry, Son!”…”Good Riddance, Ma!”…doesn’t matter WHO it is. Their training gives them no other options.
Now, with some of them, the training doesn’t “take”. They DON’T obey, blindly, even though they’ve been TOLD to do so and TRAINED to do so from Day One.
But with too many of them, the training DOES take and they simply obey, that’s all.
And I have to say, God help ANYONE who loves one of these robots.
Aquamarine, thanks for your comment.
My eyes are being opened. In our first year together I started to feel very insecure and he said I should go for auditing. I had been waiting for him for a long time and wanted to please him. My kids were so against it. When I first started going out with him my eldest son who is a Christian asked me if I’d lost my mind. Needless to say I didn’t want to tell them i was going to auditing.
So, despite being on antidepressants, the fee was paid and I started auditing. I actually enjoyed it. It was winter, the room was warm and cozy, my auditor was an older, kind woman and I opened up. it felt good. But then my auditor did something bad. She wanted me to stop my pills and go onto vitamins. I told her I would think about it. She went behind my back to my boyfriend (betrayal/unethical), arranged for him to pay and then presented me with the vitamins the next day, saying I still had money on my account. (lie) He later told me he had been summoned to the church to pay for the vitamins.
I left and never went back. I felt betrayed and undermined. when I told him I felt like the behaviour was unethical and surely against what the church stood for he said I had just misunderstood and that the intentions were good.
I thank God I had the sense to stop going.
He, however, is always telling me that I ridicule the very people who can help me (insecure, jealous, feeling unloved – which he perpetuates). I despise the church and all their tactics from flirtatious messages, to love bombing all of which seems to be completely unnoticed by the person its aimed at. I have not hidden my dislike for the church and I suppose this has been my downfall. One time I screamed at him about how much I hate the church and he said that now we could never have a proper future because the church would know how i felt (it would come up in his auditing) and they would not allow him to continue. I had in fact ruined 20 years of his work with them. This has not been the case because clearly they still want his money.
I pray every day that the church, that has facilitated the demise of my relationship (oh and this is denied), will have its day of reckoning and that it is very soon.
And your comment about robots. That’s exactly how it feels. I’m crying and sad and lost and I just get this robotic stare, not empathy, sympathy, love ….
Sorry, I’m ranting. Just really angry.
isitworthit,
Understood on all, except for one point: Are you still WITH this man?
Please let me know.
There’s a lot more I can tell you.
But for now let me offer you some cold comfort that is at the same time 100% true, and not said merely to make you feel better, although of course I want you to feel better.
Here goes:
Whether you’re still with him, and he refuses to commit and uses your antipathy to Scientology as an excuse, or whether he dumped you because Scientology ordered him to – either way, your relationship was doomed from the start!
You could have NO issues, no personal issues, be movie-star GORGEOUS, an IQ of 150, every trapping of success in life, Ozzie & Harriet kids – you could be perfection on 2 legs, and your relationship would still be, or would have been, doomed.
The cult would and will NEVER permit a Scientologist “in good standing” to have a “2D” (spouse or romantic/physical partner) who is antipathetic to Scientology!
Its really that simple. They won’t allow it! You’re history. ANYONE would be history. The relationship will not be permitted.
Now, if he’s still with you, and stringing you along, then HE is “out-ethics” with the cherch. He is in big trouble with them if he has not already disconnected from you! Unless you’re giving him MONEY or something, OR providing some life necessity to him that PERMITS HIM TO KEEP CONTRIBUTING TO THEM. Do you see? If being with you HELPS HIM STAY WITH THEM in some way, then they’ll allow it. But aside from you allowing him to USE you in some way that HELPS HIM HELP THEM, aside from a scenario like this, no way! No freaking way will they allow him to commit to you. But they WILL allow him to live with you, or benefit financially from you somehow. THAT they will allow because you are USEFUL to him and your usefulness ENSURES his usefulness to them. Usually this usefulness is connected to finance.
Now, if he’s already dumped you, thank your lucky stars, lady, and don’t blame yourself. Seriously, you could look like the 21st century version of Elizabeth Taylor and be otherwise God’s Gift to Men On Earth physically, mentally, emotionally and every other way and it still wouldn’t matter. “Handle or Disconnect”. You don’t like Scientology and (gasp!) TELL him so? “Thank you, next!” You’re history.
Let me put it elegantly:
Don’t waste your tears, or, God forbid, your money, on this gonad-less loser!
PS: isitworthit, suggest you read Tony Ortega’s article today and the especially the accompanying comments by Ex-Scns which spell out it out exactly what you’re in for when marrying into this ruthless cult, and why, if its NOT going to happen, not only should you not internalize and blame yourself, but should instead give yourself a HUGE win, for not the heartbreak of being committed to a robot. Seriously, I’m not just saying this – go and read the experiences of people who have been been thru this. There is no such thing as being married or committed to your spouse or partner in this cult. As an individual you are married to the cult. As a couple your are married to the cult. A real eye opener of an article at Tony’s today, and the comments blew me away even though I’ve long known the truth of them.
To answer your question, we are not officially together. I try EVERYTHING to get him to love me. EVERYTHING. So yes, God help me, I love him. My son says that he’s ‘culted’ me. Not with Scientology but with tactics I suppose.
I try leave and that is wrong. I try stay and that is wrong. I try be soft, needy, strong, hard ….. all not good enough. I suppose I wont’ be able to win with the church as the third party.
In his defense I am not the one with money. He has been very good to me financially but there is no emotion. No ‘i love you’, etc and we’ve been together a number of years. So i can only deduce that he can’t commit to me 100% because I’m not with the church. Also he has been out of ethics a few times and been drilled and drilled and been exhausted and possibly it’s because of me. He denies this of course. They never talk about me apparently!
Just want to say thanks so much for this blog. I think I would have disintegrated without all this information. Makes me realise I’m not that crazy!
isitworthit,
Thanks for answering so candidly.
Understood on all.
I’m glad you’re not supporting him financially.
Now, you said, “I try everything to get him to love me. EVERYTHING.”
For purposes of this blog, I’m going to respond to you with a little, true story:
Do you know of Nicole Kidman? I’m sure you do.
An incredibly versatile and gifted actor, charismatic, drop dead beautiful? Head over heels in love with him? 34 years old?
She had been the wife of Tom Cruise’s for 10 years.
Dumped. Without warning. Merely served with divorce papers one day.
In a Vanity Fair article she described the shock she experienced. Her shock was so great that she lay on the floor in a fetal position for hours.
Well, she wouldn’t get on board with Scientology, that’s all. At least, not to the degree that would satisfy David Miscavige, was she on board. And it was feared that her disinterest was acting to keep HIM away. They wanted him back, securely in the fold, dependably controllable. Nicole Kidman had to go. He got his orders to disconnect.
And he obeyed.
This is TOM CRUISE, now. Endlessly rich, famous powerful, world by the tail, Tom Cruise!
He obeyed! He did what he was told.
He obeyed BECAUSE – notwithstanding his fame, fortune, looks, power and influence, HE IS A ROBOT.
The robot gets his orders and OBEYS.
And for crying out loud, look WHO he dumped! Using California’s no fault divorce laws because had no grounds.
She was in love with him! AND gorgeous AND young AND talented in her own right AND the loving mother to their adopted children, and, and, and…
No matter! She would not get on board with Scientology! Finis!
So, look, here’s the point of this story: a robot is a robot is a ROBOT. Robots in all shapes, sizes, skin colors, ages, professions and socio-economic groups. A robot can be male or female! Doesn’t matter. Someone, or something, CONTROLS a robot.
He or she may SOUND like he or she is self determined but this is not the case!
Scientology robots TALK a very good game about being self determined vur DON’T BE FOOLED. THEY ARE NOT! They are UTTERLY controlled by the cult.
They cannot love. They’re not capable of love, as you and I define it. Any “love” that you get from one of these creatures is worthless, meaningless. On order they’ll hurt you, disappoint you, cut connection with you altogether. On order they’ll do this to EACH OTHER. And every one of them lives in fear that ONE DAY, someone will do the same thing to THEM!
There’s no love for you to strive for with one of these cult creatures. And they’re doomed anyway, unless they themselves wake up somehow and recognize that they’ve been trained into being robots and that’s not who they REALLY are.
So I’d suggest that you stop trying to pretzel yourself into being someone that this cult robot will “love”.
I’d suggest that you start liking who you are and believing that other people do too, and that you go and put on some make up and a nice outfilt and go out and do something very nice for yourself and start making plans to dump this sorry creature…excuse me, “withdraw from this relationship” 🙂
One last thought, and I kid you not:
You could be the most unattractive woman on earth with all kinds of mental and emotional problems; you could be a beachball with arms with severe halitosis and body odor that no deodorant could handle; you could be an ex-convict from the women’s penitentiary who had sex with her brother as a teenager – you could be all of the above, and, IF YOU WERE OK WITH SCIENTOLOGY AND THE CULT TOLD HIM TO COMMIT TO YOU, HE WOULD.
Because he is a robot, and he does what he is told.
That is the simplicity of it.
Dry your tears, darling, and here’s a hug 🙂
I’m interested in ‘there’s a lot more I can tell you’.
That would be a laundry list of all the people I know, famous or not famous, who were dumped because they wouldn’t get on board with Scientology. There are people I personally know and so I’d have to exclude their names.
Being rejected by a koolaid drinker? Remember, it happened to Nicole Kidman! You’re in very good company 🙂
Aquamarine, thanks so much for that. My family and friends have all said the same. Funny enough my one son calls him a robot. He’s hung on with me for a few years so I think it’s been difficult for him. But yes, I will remove myself.
YOu laid it out exactly as it is Aquamarine. And yes, God help anyone who loves one of these robots. Well said.
Scientology – the church that lies and deceives religiously.
“Scientology- the church that lies and deceives religiously”. Now that’s a powerful statement!
👍
Religious moral codes can be a great thing for a society, but they must come with some form of credibility from the source. Nothing about the life of L. Ron Hubbard exemplified TWTH, neither does the organization he started, nor the people leading it. Don’t do anything illegal, be worthy of trust, respect the religious beliefs of others, the golden rule – Scientology practices NONE of those things UNLESS it’s good for Scientology in that moment. Every code and statement rings hollow when the author of TWTH did not, nor did he intend, to do as he said. It’s rules for thee but not for me.
“Don’t do anything illegal, be worthy of trust, respect the religious beliefs of others, the golden rule – Scientology practices NONE of those things UNLESS it’s good for Scientology in that moment.”
True. Very true. But its still very good. literal advice, I think. Despite the hypocrisy of the organization which promotes it yet does not adhere to it, and despite what may well have been the purely selfish and cynical intent of its author.
And in the end the only thing these pieces of paper are good for is campfire-starter-crumpled-balls.
You can have 24 inches thick of commendations from anyone within the bubble and they don’t matter if you do something off-policy (which seems to be all about interpretation of the most senior person in the chain of command of those you pissed off).
Out in the Wog World these slips of paper are pretty much good for blogging, Pinterest, Wikipedia, pod casting, movie making, scripts…entertainment. That’s it.
They will NOT help you get employed anywhere in the real world. The paper you need for that is called a High School Diploma AT LEAST and if you were a child in scientology chances are you don’t have one of those when you finally get to leave/or just leave.
I’d would have thunk the whole world knows by now that every Scientology front group is, at some point on the command chain, run by the Sea Org. Then again, I guess we cannot take for granted what some may not know or be very familiar with. In Scientology, all roads lead to the Sea Org eventually even if there are one or two vias. It’s all run by the Sea Org and thus Hubbard’s policies or even senior, Miscavige’s OODs. There are likely thousands of Commendations out there in the wild demonstrating every front group is run by Sea Org … I know I have several.
I worked for Applied Scholastics for 15 years and we lied continuously to our clients in telling them that we were not part of the Church of Scientology. Lucky none of them ever insisted on going to LA to meet our management people in ABLE … Staffed by Sea Org members! … The SO not Scientology?