Co$ updates
Earlier this year, I was posting some of my thoughts on the Church of $cientology. Frankly, I kinda got burned out on the whole topic, which is why it has taken me so long to post this. However, given that I feel I have a couple of unique angles on this topic that most don't have--both my education in Comparative World Religions & having a father who was a former Co$ memebearer who had taken me to Flag--it's been bugging me that I've not finished this series of posts. This post will probably be last I talk about the Co$.
First off, I finally had a chance to interview my father, who is a retired doctor who was most active with the Co$ during the (late?) 1980's. He and I have a very no-bullshit relationship, and I trust his answers. First off, he did emphasize to me that the Co$ is very much a Religion, in both feel and overall Practice (my dad's side of the family is notoriously anti-Religion). He told me that he had never seen any evidence of anything resembling "Fair Game" Practices, and had only positive experiences with the Co$. When I mentioned some counter-examples, he said that he would be surprised, because the Co$ wasn't like this when he was with them, and that the Co$ is a very non-changing Religion that sticks to core documents, practices, & a culture that doesn't change. When I pressed him about anything he didn't like with the Co$, after a few moments, he laughingly stated that the Co$ is very hard-selling. In my few experiences I recall with the Co$ whilst I was visiting my father during those summers (including the week-long stay at Flag), I don't recall anything out of the ordinary, aside from Financial Practices that I see as highly unethical by any "Church", which my dad thinks is rather naive of me. He reminded me that all Churches use their own methods to get money from their flock--the Co$ is just much more upfront about it than most (e.g., "hellfire & brimstone to non-tithers" that is a staple sermon of many a Christian Church). It should be noted that in my own personal real-life experiences, the most memorable thing from them is that I find it hilarious (not to mention proof of their deep pockets) that they still send my dad junk mail advertising of their latest seminar teachings, even after moving homes & 20 years of inactivity with the Co$ (and non-response) from my dad. It should be noted that--at least as far as what my father got out of the Co$ and their philosophies--he still likes some of their ideas, although he's told me many times that their "Secrets" are really things taught by many others, including NLP. So basically, except for their outrageous financial demands, the Co$ actually seems pretty decent.
One of the things I was examining in my research on the Co$ was the question, "Is $cientology a 'cult'?" Well, given that there are so many definitions of this highly controversial meme, like most arguments about whether something "is" or "isn't" something, it basically boils down to a long drawn-out semantic debate arguing over microscopic qualitative differences coupled with creative interpretations of events. One of the difficulties for me in this endeavor is separating out the exact differences betwixt what is a "cult" and what is a "religion". And since--last I checked--people are free to join the Co$ or snub it at their whim (like all other Religions), to me this seems like a moot point. If people today voluntarily join any organization in the Age of Information, caveat emptor.
Personally, I am not an official memebearer of any Religion for the simple fact that I see all Religions as overly controlling. Whether it be via the Control of Information ("Secrets"), Control over Social standards (Behave!), or Control of States of Consciousness via Trance inducing methods, all Religions are too Controlling for me, personally. Individuals will give more or less of this Power & Control to others, not only via their Religion, but in the Workplace, etc.--some give more, some give less. There are pros and cons to both extremes, and one of the cons of giving up personal Control is that you can more easily be abused. Another problem I have with me personally Practicing a particular Religion is that it almost seems a hallmark of Religion that such belief systems have (what seem to outsiders as) beLIEfs that defy common sense, Practices that put their members safety at risk, and overall do a great many things that seem rather inexplicable. One example that springs immediately to mind is Christian sects that deny their members blood transfusions or organ transplants, which often results in the death of their members. Any true Initiatory lineage is going to have some amount of "threat" to the members' safety, and whilst every precaution is taken, it is a statistical inevitability that a few horrific accidents will occur here and there, e.g. Lisa McPherson. If "danger" is a factor, then we should probably outlaw skydiving, working in a factory, or anything else that has caused loss of life or limb to humans. As long as the individuals retain their right to choose these actions (or not), I have no problem with people dying for what they choose to do. I'm a big fan of personal responsibility that way.
In conclusion, I think that there are definitely serious problems with the Co$, but no more than with any other Religion. As I've stated before, "The biggest problem with Religions is that they have other people involved" (complete with all their imperfections, baggage, biases, and personal demons) in the very intimate personal Spiritual Quest that is often referred to as "The Great Work". I'm glad that the role of "exposing atrocities" is done by other people against many organizations, and I'm glad that Anonymous has stepped up to the plate to confront the Co$ on some of its own problems. In the hypothetical instance that someone I knew was interested in joining the Co$ (which I can't imagine happening, given both my own values and the values of those people that I hold dear), I'd probably give them what information I have (including my rants against Organized Religions and warnings that many people see the Co$ as a dangerous cult--complete with links) and encourage them to reach their own conclusions. But frankly, given the adage "any publicity is good publicity", I can't help but think that Anonymous might ultimately do more good for the Co$ than harm.
That about sums it up for me, and with this post, I now politely step out of the Co$ debate. The New Hampshire State motto just popped into my head, which I find oddly Synchronistic, and I think makes a great closing to this thread:
"Live Free or Die."
First off, I finally had a chance to interview my father, who is a retired doctor who was most active with the Co$ during the (late?) 1980's. He and I have a very no-bullshit relationship, and I trust his answers. First off, he did emphasize to me that the Co$ is very much a Religion, in both feel and overall Practice (my dad's side of the family is notoriously anti-Religion). He told me that he had never seen any evidence of anything resembling "Fair Game" Practices, and had only positive experiences with the Co$. When I mentioned some counter-examples, he said that he would be surprised, because the Co$ wasn't like this when he was with them, and that the Co$ is a very non-changing Religion that sticks to core documents, practices, & a culture that doesn't change. When I pressed him about anything he didn't like with the Co$, after a few moments, he laughingly stated that the Co$ is very hard-selling. In my few experiences I recall with the Co$ whilst I was visiting my father during those summers (including the week-long stay at Flag), I don't recall anything out of the ordinary, aside from Financial Practices that I see as highly unethical by any "Church", which my dad thinks is rather naive of me. He reminded me that all Churches use their own methods to get money from their flock--the Co$ is just much more upfront about it than most (e.g., "hellfire & brimstone to non-tithers" that is a staple sermon of many a Christian Church). It should be noted that in my own personal real-life experiences, the most memorable thing from them is that I find it hilarious (not to mention proof of their deep pockets) that they still send my dad junk mail advertising of their latest seminar teachings, even after moving homes & 20 years of inactivity with the Co$ (and non-response) from my dad. It should be noted that--at least as far as what my father got out of the Co$ and their philosophies--he still likes some of their ideas, although he's told me many times that their "Secrets" are really things taught by many others, including NLP. So basically, except for their outrageous financial demands, the Co$ actually seems pretty decent.
One of the things I was examining in my research on the Co$ was the question, "Is $cientology a 'cult'?" Well, given that there are so many definitions of this highly controversial meme, like most arguments about whether something "is" or "isn't" something, it basically boils down to a long drawn-out semantic debate arguing over microscopic qualitative differences coupled with creative interpretations of events. One of the difficulties for me in this endeavor is separating out the exact differences betwixt what is a "cult" and what is a "religion". And since--last I checked--people are free to join the Co$ or snub it at their whim (like all other Religions), to me this seems like a moot point. If people today voluntarily join any organization in the Age of Information, caveat emptor.
Personally, I am not an official memebearer of any Religion for the simple fact that I see all Religions as overly controlling. Whether it be via the Control of Information ("Secrets"), Control over Social standards (Behave!), or Control of States of Consciousness via Trance inducing methods, all Religions are too Controlling for me, personally. Individuals will give more or less of this Power & Control to others, not only via their Religion, but in the Workplace, etc.--some give more, some give less. There are pros and cons to both extremes, and one of the cons of giving up personal Control is that you can more easily be abused. Another problem I have with me personally Practicing a particular Religion is that it almost seems a hallmark of Religion that such belief systems have (what seem to outsiders as) beLIEfs that defy common sense, Practices that put their members safety at risk, and overall do a great many things that seem rather inexplicable. One example that springs immediately to mind is Christian sects that deny their members blood transfusions or organ transplants, which often results in the death of their members. Any true Initiatory lineage is going to have some amount of "threat" to the members' safety, and whilst every precaution is taken, it is a statistical inevitability that a few horrific accidents will occur here and there, e.g. Lisa McPherson. If "danger" is a factor, then we should probably outlaw skydiving, working in a factory, or anything else that has caused loss of life or limb to humans. As long as the individuals retain their right to choose these actions (or not), I have no problem with people dying for what they choose to do. I'm a big fan of personal responsibility that way.
In conclusion, I think that there are definitely serious problems with the Co$, but no more than with any other Religion. As I've stated before, "The biggest problem with Religions is that they have other people involved" (complete with all their imperfections, baggage, biases, and personal demons) in the very intimate personal Spiritual Quest that is often referred to as "The Great Work". I'm glad that the role of "exposing atrocities" is done by other people against many organizations, and I'm glad that Anonymous has stepped up to the plate to confront the Co$ on some of its own problems. In the hypothetical instance that someone I knew was interested in joining the Co$ (which I can't imagine happening, given both my own values and the values of those people that I hold dear), I'd probably give them what information I have (including my rants against Organized Religions and warnings that many people see the Co$ as a dangerous cult--complete with links) and encourage them to reach their own conclusions. But frankly, given the adage "any publicity is good publicity", I can't help but think that Anonymous might ultimately do more good for the Co$ than harm.
That about sums it up for me, and with this post, I now politely step out of the Co$ debate. The New Hampshire State motto just popped into my head, which I find oddly Synchronistic, and I think makes a great closing to this thread:
"Live Free or Die."