freedom

Clearing Archive Roboposter roboposter at lightlink.com
Sun Jul 14 12:06:02 EDT 2019


 
>Homer Wilson Smith wrote:
>>     Picture a COUNTRY run by green on white.

  Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
  Subject: A ROSE
  From: dennis.l.erlich at support.com
  Date: Mon, 05 Sep 94 13:16:27 -0700

     Every time I get deposed by the scienos, they want to know the
whereabouts of Ken Rose.  He wrote the Key to Life Course.

     Well, here he is .  .  .

                         The Demons of Freedom

                                   by
                                Ken Rose

     The other day we were talking to a young man who had recently
become a member of the Church of Scientology.  This fellow's brother
had become concerned when the new scientologist decided to quit his
job and devote himself to full time study at the cult's "Technical
Mecca" in Clearwater, Florida.  We were asked to speak to the young
man and help all concerned with the process of making a decision as to
whether or not the family's trust fund should be used to finance the
considerable expense associated with the training the young man was
seeking in scientology.

     We spent a couple of hours trying to explain to these two
brothers what had become of us during our many years in scientology,
and then, slowly, the young scientologist began to ask questions.  One
which we found compelling was this: was there nothing within the
confines of this extraordinary organization that justified the loss
and suffering we had endured?  Was there not the promised freedom?
Was it not somehow true that no matter what the price one had to pay,
it was far short of the power and glory of the state of OT...of the
state of Total Freedom?

     At first we thought this was an easy question to answer.  No...in
a word.  Scientology, in fact, offers no such invaluable freedom.  But
as we looked into this young man's eyes, it became clear that a
further answer was needed.  What of people's dreams of freedom?  What
of the power and glory that is supposed to lie behind each more
confidential gateway to OT as one progresses up the "Bridge to Total
Freedom?"

     We told this fellow that he now found himself at a crossroads in
his life.  We made it quite clear that scientology is an all or
nothing proposition, that one cannot pick and choose from it as if it
were a spiritual smorgasbord.  We informed him that he had a
monumental decision to make.  [In order to avoid any sort of climactic
value which this story might otherwise possess, we'll tell you right
now that this young man made the right choice.  He is no longer a
member of the Church of Scientology.  Now we can proceed.]

     How do we deal with the subject of freedom?  Should you or
someone you know and care about find him or herself in a position of
having to decide whether or not to become or remain involved in
scientology, consider the following argument.  It concerns the First
Amendment to the Constitution.  Since this is an article of government
which is frequently cited by people and institutions on nearly every
side of nearly all issues relating to individual freedom, it is a
statement of principle with which we should all be familiar.

     It states in part:

     "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the
freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to
peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for the redress
of grievances." Thomas Jefferson, who possessed more than a passing
familiarity with and passion for such freedom, underscored the
importance of this protection saying, "Our most fundamental liberties
depend upon the freedom of thought and the freedom of expression; and
you cannot limit either one in any way without destroying both." In
recent years, scientology has attemped to style itself a champion of
the first amendment and of the liberties and freedoms it promises to
us all.  But beyond its protestations of alleged intrustions against
it's own freedom to defraud, coerce and conspire, the cult behaves in
a manner which is inimical to freedom.  To support this statement, let
us examine the behavior of scientologists with regard to the subject
of the freedom of speech and belief.

     According to scientology policy it is a High Crime and a
Suppressive Act for a scientologist in good standing to remain in
communication with any person who has been declared to be a
"Suppressive Person." What this means, of course, is that a
scientologist's right to freedom of speech is abrogated...at least it
is limited in that one cannot exercise free speech with respect to
declared SP's.  Savvy scientologists might argue that they accept this
limitation knowingly and willingly and thereby retain full freedom of
speech.  But Jefferson's caveat stands: one cannot limit this freedom
in any way without destroying it.  And, in fact, a scientologist who
wishes to exercise full freedom of speech, risks the consequences that
accompany violation of the above cited HCOPL.  One can, of course, be
declared a Suppressive Person oneself for continuing communication to
another declared Suppressive Person.

     The point here is simply this: regardless of the arguments that
can be made supporting such a limitation of free speech, it must be
recognized that scientology advocates this significant abridgement of
this freedom for its members.  Though they cite historical, religious
precedents for strict codes of conduct, etc., this fact remains.  When
it comes to talking to people who have been declared Suppressive or
discussing the faults of the group, scientologists are simply not free
to do so.

     To understand the force with which scientology attempts to impose
this limitation of the freedom of speech, one need only consider the
consequences of being declared a Suppressive Person and expelled from
the church.  When one is thus declared, one suddenly finds oneself cut
off from everyone with whom one has lived, loved, worked, and played.

     This is precisely what happens (or what is supposed to happen) to
a scientologist who is declared to be suppressive.  This is
disconnection.  Think about it for a minute.  Think of it in terms of
your own life.  Imagine that you live in a community heavily populated
by scientologists.

     For the sake of argument, let's say that you live in a community
that has wholeheartedly embraces the tenets of scientology.  After
all, it's only a matter of time before there are such scientology
communities?  Isn't it?

     Picture youself living in a world run by scientology.  Let's
pretend that scientology has achieved it's goal of world domination.
The Zone Plan has succeeded.  The planet has been "cleared." And while
the Sea Org gears up for Target Two (the expansion of scientology to
other worlds), the administration of Earth continues according to
Hubbard's policy.

     Remembering that you are an American, a descendant of Thomas
Jefferson, et al, you awaken one morning and decide to test whether or
not your most fundamental freedoms have been in any way abridged or
limited.  Perhaps you are suddenly tired of believing that your are
possessed; of auditing entities off your body and off the bodies of
everybody else you know and off the furniture and the cars as they go
by and so on.  Maybe you've decided to change your mind about a few
things or you just wake up angry...for no particular reason other than
you're just angry.  You decide to speak out.

     You go to the window and, remembering how effective it was in a
movie, you stick your head out and start yelling, "I'm mad as hell and
I'm not going to take it any more." What happens next?

     By noon, you are reading the Knowledge Reports which your
neighbors have written and forwarded to your Ethics File.  Of course
they sent carbons to their own files as evidence of their adherence to
standard policy.

     By 12:15 you are being interviewed by your Committee of Evidence.
(Remember, this is a scientology world, so everyone is required to be
extremely punctual and efficient.) The Bill of Particulars is read out
by the Committee Secretary.  The witnesses are called and heard.  The
Committee reviews the evidence and directs some questions towards you.

     Seeking to establish the truth, you honestly report that you were
simply fed up with the BT's and clusters and just wanted to exercise
your first amendment right to tell your friends and neighbors so.

     The committee members nod and half-ack as you talk on for a few
minutes.  By 12:30 the Findings and Recommendations are published
along with Ethics Order 12,375,894,995,863...declaring you to be a
Psychotic Person, a Suppressive Person, etc.  and directing all
scientologists (which, remember, constitute the entire population of
Teegeeack, or, as it was briefly known in the late 20th century,
Earth) to disconnect from you.

     Now it's 12:45.  You're hungry.  This sort of thing always makes
you hungry.  So, you step out into the sunlight and head off towards
the local McDonalds.  There, you figure, you can drown your sorrows in
a Big Mac (a Big Ron?), fries, and a chocolate shake.

     However, to your chagrin, your ethics order has been published
electronically all over the world.  It has arrived at the order desk
just before you.  And the young woman who works there will not talk to
you or take your order.  Her senior won't talk to you either.  No one
in the place will talk to you.  You head for Kentucky Fried Chicken.

     They won't talk to you either.  The clerk at the supermarket does
speak, but only says that he won't talk to you.  The other shoppers
seem annoyed.  They won't talk to you.  You wander home along streets
that fall strangely silent as you pass, and when you finally arrive
home, you find that your landlord has thrown your things into the
street, including your parrot.  Even he won't talk to you.

     Your mother's voice on the phone is cold and distant.  She tells
you, somewhat reluctantly, that she won't talk to you.  Your wife is
gone with the kids.  Or your husband's gone with the kids.  The next
morning, your boss has ordered the company's Ethic's Officer to inform
you that since no one at the office will talk to you, you can't
possibly do your job and so...no job.

     Your doctor won't talk to you.  You definitely don't feel well.
The District Attorney won't talk to you.  Only the International
Justice Chief will talk to you.  And all she will say is that you need
to do steps A-E of HCOPL blah de blah.

     OK.  That's enough.  But ask yourself does it really matter that
this tyranny was perpetrated against you by a "church" rather than an
agency of the state?  Is there any difference at all?

     How do we reconcile scientology's claims of championing the First
Amendment with its practice of disconnection and of limiting the right
of free speech of its members?

     For instance, we were declared to be Suppressive.  One day nobody
we had known for many, many years would talk to us.  Were they all
simply exercising their individual liberties?  Or were they acting out
of fear...the fear of being similarly put in Coventry and denied this
most fundamental freedom?

     The world we woke up to this morning is not one which is
dominated by scientology.  But it is one in which people have, indeed,
become reluctant to exercise the freedom of speech on the subject of
scientology.  Among those who are most reluctant are former members.
For they know the church's actual position on this freedom.  They know
that declared SP's do, indeed, become Fair Game (meaning that they can
be lied to, cheated, embarassed, attacked or even destroyed by other
scientologists).

     Former members, particularly those who have been declared
Suppessive Persons, know what all this is supposed to purchase: the
silence of those who would be critics of scientology.  Some of us were
raised with the notion that "I might not agree with what you have to
say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

     So, here we find Rev.  Heber Jentzsch, President of the Church of
Scientology, International, proclaiming himself and his "church" to be
the real champions of the freedoms of the First Amendment.  And here
we find the workaday scientolgists, the Ethics Officers, the Auditors,
the Directors of Processing, The Technical Secretaries, and
scientologists in general, engaging in what amounts to wholesale
destruction of those very rights.

     They say it is designed to "keep a safe space" for the expansion
of scientology.  And what does scientology do when it expands into
some new area?  More of the same.

     Will the earth ever enter in a post-"cleared" era like the one
described above?  We don't intend to wait and see.  But if it does,
you can be assured that you will no longer have the protection of the
First Amendment (or any other amendments or constitutions for that
matter).  In its place will stand the Substance and First Duty of HCO,
as diligent scientologists gather up the copyrights and trademarks of
dianetics and scientology and ensure their safety and security against
infringement on the infinite numbers of worlds that lie beyond the
stars and which, in the days after the earth has been cleared, will
fall, one by one, beneath the boots of Sea Org members as they make
their way back to the stars from whence they believe they came.

     These are the demons of freedom.  These are the lads and lasses
who threaten us while we sleep with their dedicated service to
mankind.  Make no mistake about it.  If you are a citizen of planet
earth, you are represented on the Battle Plan of scientology.  If you
are still a wog (i.e.  a non-scientologist), even if you've never even
heard of scientology, it is really only a matter of time before you
have your status clarified.  If all goes as scientology has planned,
sooner or later, you will know.

     And if you do wake up one fine morning and begin to realize that
no one is talking to you, at least you'll know what's going on.

     You probably just voiced the wrong opinion about the wrong
"defenders of freedom".  Right?

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jul 14 12:06:02 EDT 2019 
FTP://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/misc/freedom
WWW://www.clearing.org
BLOG://adoretheproof.blogspot.comSend mail to archive at lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but 
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.



More information about the Clear-L mailing list