A lurker emerges -- Lawson checks in to a.r.s newsgroup
06 Oct 2001
Personal integrity lead me into $cientology, and got me the hell out. In my search for truth, it clicked and I became a member of that church because I believed the policy put forth by its founder that I was to take a careful look at the religion and only accept what I found to be true. After many disappointments with the strict dogma of various groups, this tenet fit with me perfectly.
Rapidly, I bought into the whole package, certain that I could reject something I felt was untrue. I studied. I audited. I received auditing. I was a staff slave. I was a fanatic.
From the beginning I saw things that didn't make sense.
I was taught to target myself as the reason $cientology didn't work. Myself and others in the church screwed up because they were out-Tek, Off-policy, or out-ethics. The church, the founder, and the body of the philosophy were never to be questioned - it was always, always, always a matter of correcting individuals to agree with the church, founder, etc.
The wins and gains kept me slugging for years, despite overwhelming horrendous evidence that the church & philosophy were not going to Clear the Planet - much less a miniscule fraction of the population (now I really question whether Clear & any level of OT do much of anything). Much has been posted to this newsgroup about the overwhelming evidence I am talking about.
To make a too long story short, I spent my credit cards to the limit to "handle the dangerous condition I was in", received Review/Sec Checks at a top church, and had a tremendous win when I ran out of money. I totally realized that it wasn't me that was screwed up, it was the church and the whole applied philosophy was in question. I knew it wasn't my MUs, overts, false data, etc. It's the goddamn church of $cientology.
Everything I had spotted as being off from the time I first entered the church clicked into place. I also kept all of the gains and good experiences. I gained the ability to talk about the good and the bad of this religion.
This ability is not appreciated in the church. No dissenters allowed. The actions and policies of the church are not open to change from the users of the religion.
The Good actions are all that are promoted to followers. Things that make the religion look bad are covered up.
Sure, a member can go ask OSA about the bad things.
To be a member, one has to agree to all of the tech, policy & ethics set forth by the group. This is in direct contradiction to the policy on personal integrity that hooked me at the beginning, unless I keep the blinders on and keep repeating "Yes, Master!".
As an individual, you will always be assigned responsibility for your own condition by the church. They can show you policy that they don't owe you a thing. Questioning the church will always be turned around on you. Questioning a bad action will target someone misapplying the Tek.
The Tek is never wrong; someone (probably YOU) just screwed up.
If this religion was really the miracle it claims, it would have already taken over the planet.
I believe anyone in this church voluntarily gives away the personal integrity to call bullshit on the bad actions & policies of the church. I hope to converse & contribute in ARS.
Any text written by other authors which may be quoted in part or in full within this exposure of the Scientology cult is provided according to U. S. Code Title 17 "Fair Use" dictates which may be reviewed at http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html If you're an author of an article and do not wish to allow it to be mirrored or otherwise provided on The Skeptic Tank web site, let us know and it will be removed fairly promptly.E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank