L Ron Hubbard made many claims for Clear and OT which have never once come to pass for any of the people who paid tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of dollars, to achieve them.
Many of them have quit and tried to warn others, only to be shunned and even attacked in various ways by the Church, under orders of L Ron Hubbard to do so. Even to this day, almost 30 years after Hubbard’s death, the Church that he founded still attacks those who stand up and decry the abuses of the Church and the deception that Scientology engages in.
The question for each Scientologist who continues to sell Hubbard’s claims for OT and Clear are:
1. Have I ever really seen any claim of Hubbard’s for Clear and OT actually come true?
2. Can I justify fair game tactics and other “ALWAYS ATTACK, NEVER DEFEND” style policies if we can’t actually create Clears and OTs as Ron claimed?
3. Where is the line that I must be aware of, and never cross, considering what I myself know to be true, and what Ron has claimed?
After years of careful consideration, I came to the conclusion that I could not ethically support, or vouch for Scientology, or L Ron Hubbard’s claims. That is not necessarily everyone’s conclusion.
But what is moral and ethical in this area of dissemination?
Can you ask someone to pay money for a service that does not make a person “stably exterior”, but still sell it by saying that it will?
Can you ask a person, as I’ve seen asked, to mortgage their homes to pay for their OT 5, because they have just been diagnosed with breast cancer and this is the service they need to be able to “handle it”?
Can you stand by while a woman who has just lost her husband, and who is in a grieving state and very vulnerable, is pressured to pay $45,000 for her Scientology courses, because it will help her “get back in comm” with her husband from beyond the grave?
Can you stand by while young teenagers are signing billion year contracts to work for free in the Sea Org, and their parents are cut off from seeing them?
Can you stand by while women in the Sea Org are forced to have abortions if they should become pregnant?
How can you justify the many thousands of families that have been destroyed by L Ron Hubbard’s policy of enforced disconnection in Scientology?
These are very important questions to ask.
How can you ethically disseminate Scientology for so much money, and for so much loyalty and sacrifice and time, when there is no evidence that the claims that Hubbard makes for the technology are true?
Just so you understand me, I have decided, based on the same ideals that got me into Scientology, that I can not support the Church of Scientology, or any form of Scientology, any longer. And for the reasons above.
Just so you understand me.
Alanzo this topic has great interest for me.
In the past, I always assumed that, given the extreme cost of Scn, there was no way that people would continue to pay the kind of money that was being charged, if they were NOT getting exactly what was promised.
Nothing else made sense to me, at the time.
However, I now understand that it was always the PROMISE of “higher states” that kept people coming back and paying increasingly higher fees; only to eventually find out that LRH did NOT have the route to “OT” fully mapped out, as he had claimed.
It was always the wins that ARE available in Scn that caused me to continue to support Scn for so long. However, when I eventually looked closely and honestly at the discrepancy between the available wins and the advertised results, I was eventually forced to admit to myself that Scn IS perpetrating a knowing FRAUD.
In my opinion, there are benefits to be had in Scn; and so I am not sure why the church couldn’t just promote the wins that are actually available. If LRH were as honest as he should have been, he would have eventually admitted that he had given it his best shot, but had to admit that he was not able to produce a “Book I Clear” or a TRUE “Operating Thetan”. Then he could have just pushed, pushed, pushed what could be accomplished.
In time, people might have forgotten the old dream of Clear and OT; and LRH might have continued to receive high praise for his honesty; and for developing the workable technology he did develop.
But, as it is, due to the deceptive route LRH and his church took, Scn is crumbling before our very eyes.
So, I agree with you that it is simply no longer possible to ethically disseminate this subject – certainly not based on the advertised claims. Indeed, in its current form, this is not a group deserving of support.
ZJ