AboutJet Heller Expertise As a trained auditor and an OT VIII, I can answer a wide range of questions on Scientology. However, I cannot divulge material the Church of Scientology deems confidential.
Expert: Jet Heller Date: 6/11/2008 Subject: An insider's perspective
Question Hey Jet,
I'm a critic of the Church Of Scientology myself based on the things I've seen on the internet, and I've been a part of the recent Anonymous protests. In the past when I've asked Scientologists to comment on the things within the CoS I find objectionable they haven't really answered, or have just denied everything. Hopefully since you've actually volunteered to answer questions you might be able to provide me with some answers.
Sorry about the length of this – feel free not to answer if you don’t want to, but I’m interested to see what an actual Scientologist would say about this. I have nothing whatsoever against your religion or personal philosophy, but I find some of the acts the “Church Of Scientology” organisation commits pretty disturbing. Hopefully you can provide your perspective on these things, and maybe refute some of them.
The main reasons I have for protesting are these:
Firstly, the Fair Game policy. While I'm aware that the Fair Game policy was cancelled in the 60s, according to many sources including very reliable ex-Scientologists the "cancellation" only cancelled the usage of the words "fair game" and didn't change any of the policies used. Tory Magoo, a critic of Scientology has recently been “fair gamed” and had slanderous fliers posted around her neighbourhood; many Anonymous protesters report being stalked and harassed after protests; even the classic example of fair game occurred after the “cancellation”: Operation Freakout, a conspiracy uncovered by the FBI in which the Church Of Scientology attempted to frame journalist Paulette Cooper for sending bomb threats.
What is your response to this? Do you find it justified, or do you think this is a valid criticism of the church?
Secondly, the RPF. I am aware that the RPF is technically “voluntary” – but if you refuse to enter the RPF you will be kicked out of the CoS, and this means no more “bridge to total freedom”. Someone who refuses to enter the RPF will never be able to reach the state of “clear” or become an “Operating Thetan” – and for a faithful Scientologist, this is hardly an option. What would you say about this, does this seem accurate?
Thirdly, the suppression of information. If you look at other religions, for example Christianity: people are allowed to know what Christianity is about before becoming a Christian. With Scientology, however, people don’t hear the Xenu story or find out about body thetans until spending many years inside the CoS and paying over 15,000 dollars. Now I’m not saying that the CoS is a money-hungry, but hopefully you will be able to see why some people think it is. It certainly appears as if the CoS is treating Scientology doctrine as a product to be sold, rather than a truth that everyone must know. Why do you think the CoS does this? What does it seem like from an insider’s perspective?
Finally, disconnection. While it is true everyone has the right to cease communication with someone and any church has the right to kick people out, this is not what disconnection seems to be: It appears to me as if disconnection is where the CoS actually orders people to cease communication with someone, and if they do not then they risk being kicked out of the church – and I’ve already explained why being kicked out is simply not an option. I personally think that a “church” should not have the power to decide who its members communicate with. Is this what disconnection actually is, and what is your opinion on it?
This isn’t everything I have seen that I object to, but they are the main points everyone seems to bring up. Hopefully you will be able to provide some insight here.
Thanks
-David
Answer Nice email! Many of the questions I get, both pro and anti, are somewhat incoherent, but yours is a welcome relief.
To quote L. Ron Hubbard (from his Apollo days):
"Scientology - badly applied - is NOTHING TO DEFEND"
I couldn't agree more!
Tory "Magoo"....I knew her for some time while she was in Scientology in the 1980s. I always felt she embodied most of the negative traits that I despise when I find them in Scientologists, particularly being glib, superficial, kind of a shallow thinking "true believer" type, the type that would clap and cheer at Scientology events no matter HOW banal the speaker's utterances may have been. Also, she was chronically physically ill, which I have always found to be a warning signal about anyone. Now she's an "anti-Scientology" true believer, so nothing has really changed.
Stupidly fair-gaming Magoo just plays into her hands, as she CRAVES "being a victim".
The LDS church (Mormons) doesn't let on what the "inner church" consists of either. This doesn't seem like such a big deal to me, though I in fact find Mormons' secret beliefs and practices hilarious, and their "Book of Mormon" a transparent fraud. But if people enjoy Mormonism, then let them play!
Disconnection - I have practiced it on many occasions in my personal and family life. A family member, or even a PARENT might be an insufferable asshole, so why cut them any slack just because they are Scientologists?
Scientology is voluntary, but it sure can attract numbskulls who seem to LOVE being ordered about and subjected to indignities. Such folks should wise up and demonstrate more self-determinism.
Whether or not a person was Declared SP or not, if I liked them I still communicated with them. At different times I have disconnected from SCIENTOLOGY when it was being Suppressive!! So, I 100% support voluntary Disconnection.
