I hear you Foolproof.

Ok! In future I will ignore your comments, or try to anyway. But implying that I am some sort of Nazi Scientologist who won’t tolerate others sounds all very reasonable and all that but you started the ball rolling by taking the time and trouble to state in my view incorrect criticisms about something that I hold dear (the tech of Scientology and thus the dude who founded it). So – you can attempt to attack and belittle (i.e. “wipe off the face of the earth” then) my religion and its founder and not grant me or others any beingness about being a Scientologist – but when I defend it I am juxtaposed with Nazis! What does my (workable and effective when properly applied) religion then “deserve” in your mind? Or were you not then attacking my religion or not granting me beingness? It works both ways – and I didn’t “invade Poland first”.

Haha. Aquamarine – Oh! Alright then! I won’t go. LOL!

Yes I realize that other people have other viewpoints. But I will always state mine when I can see nonsenses or actually unfair comments, actually even against Miscavige if untrue, because I would find that just as poor form as doing what he is doing and doesn’t really get us anywhere. And most of my thrust so to speak is against the current Church management and their shenanigans – as they have driven the subject into the ground.

To be frank though sometimes I do not understand why people who have had not much experience with Scientology come on here and want to try prove some point actually because they have not conceptually grasped the writings or principle being criticized. There are plenty of other forums for that and although Mike seems to be OK with allowing non-Scientologists to post, do you know I don’t really think that this is the forum for this. Now, it’s not my forum it’s Mike’s but even so it would seem that the vast majority of people who comment on here are still Scientologists in the true sense and I find it a bit non-sensical to try and be handling people’s basic questions here about how the Church is run or the the tech or philosophy. But as I say it is probably quite presumptuous of me to be “wishing” for a forum that I like or prefer rather than leaving it to the guy whose forum it is and who makes the decisions and does the work, (which is very much appreciated).Perhaps Mike also thinks that way but necessity dictates that he allow all comers but then he maybe doesn’t. Perhaps it does serve a purpose? Anyway, whatever, I’ll shut up now (on this theme anyway).

Thanks so much Aquamarine!

“There are certainly no “facts” about Hubbard that would prompt me to give up learning and benefiting from his technology that he discovered.” I agree. There is a vast difference between the man and his work. The final test is: if you apply it, does it work. If it is true for you, it is true. If it doesn’t work for you, and you applied it correctly, it isn’t true for you.

You’ve outdone yourself, MJ. A Masterpiece 🙂

Whew, Foolproof, you “faked me out”, as we used to say in my youth. I was all set to post “No, Foolproof, don’t go, please”.

Considering that Mike is laissez-faire as to content while at the same time monitoring alertly as to context (that one stays for the most part on topic, no extreme vulgarity, ad homs, etc) – considering that a wide range of viewpoints and differing opinions on Scientology, L.Ron Hubbard and David Miscavige can be aired here, I think we co-exist fairly well.

I second that. Don’t go.