That's called "being a 2nd gen scientologist".I get the idea that she was not doing Scientology on her own determinism, and therefore shouldn't have been on lines at all.
OK, you're saying Leah Remini didn't get case gain on OT 3 because she was a robot.I'm saying that robots don't get case gain.
Don't paraphrase me, dickhead. Torching straw men is a tedious exercise in time-wasting.OK, you're saying Leah Remini didn't get case gain on OT 3 because she was a robot.
The view you're expressing is that people who don't think Hubbard's Scientology was cool (prior to being "squirreled" by Miscavige) have something wrong with them. This is straight out of Hubbard 1955 Manual on Dissemination.
Correct.That's called "being a 2nd gen scientologist".
Leah was at least an adult at that time in her life when she was on OTIII. But she started at a much younger age. When you are a kid, you don't get to decide to do scientology "on your own determinism".
Sure, but that's pretty benign, and I don't see it as more harmful than any other form of education. As one who endured having his knuckles rapped by the edge of a three foot ruler by sadistic Catholic nuns, I'd say you probably had a better time of it.Certainly not if you are living in a scienology facility like the AB. You think anyone asked me or my sister if we want to do word-clearing and other stuff back then? Hell no.
I'm saying that robots don't get case gain.
OK, you're saying Leah Remini didn't get case gain on OT 3 because she was a robot.
Don't paraphrase me, dickhead.
The reason is apparent to most.You dedicate an extraordinary amount of personal attention to discrediting Hubbard for no apparent reason,
Mostly I use reliable witnesses with first hand experience and Hubbard's own words.using rumors and secondhand information from disaffected people.
I mostly focus on Hubbard writings and examination of the "tech."Such is neither the truth nor useful to anyone, since it leads to no greater understanding. And changing the subject from technical points to personalities is just aberrated.
Cool.I know several people from the 1970s who left Scientology in disgust after seeing the OT materials. And I can agree with your point that - compared to grades auditing - the presentation of a specific incident might be construed as evaluation of the person's case.
Would you like to share your wins with us?The proof of the pudding is in running it and finding out if it discharges and leaves the person in a better condition.
I would strongly disagree with calling it "benign".Sure, but that's pretty benign, and I don't see it as more harmful than any other form of education
I suspect the living conditions at most Catholics schools are much better than scientology in LA. And back as a kid, I'd happily traded my hours of M9 word clearing for a few blows with the ruler.As one who endured having his knuckles rapped by the edge of a three foot ruler by sadistic Catholic nuns, I'd say you probably had a better time of it.
I signed my contract when I was over 16 (let's leave it at that). But processing and TRs etc were not really the main problems. I actually enjoyed TR0 as a kid and I feel I got something out of it.OTOH I wouldn't try to audit anyone under 16 on anything but light locational and objective processes, and certainly wouldn't expect them to sign a billion year contract.
Well, that's one more place I don't want to see again. Unless they invite me for a "taking down the sign and closing the doors" ceremony.