Where the Anti-Scientology Women Go Astray

Today's woman is so immoral because she has fallen away from Christian ethics and morals.

Our own Dalin (alt.fiftyplus) is a good example of whom I speak. She fancies herself a Christian but she puts herself and her sisters on an even playing field with Jesus Christ. She claims Jesus, when He walked this Earth, saw and treated women as equals when nothing could be further from the truth. It is plain that Satan is speaking through Dalin's mouth when she makes such absurd claims.

But, Dalin and her ilk are hardly in much of a position to even know what morality and ethics are because of how Western society has brainwashed them. Here is a morality line with Christian morality and ethics on the left (represented by J for Jesus) and outright Satanism on the right represented by S for Satan

|J|___________________________________!_____|S|

The exclamation point represents the current state
of Christianity in the United States. Too many
so-called Christians are making up their own rules
on the fly, ignoring the teachings of God as spelled
out in the Bible and generally taking a 'pick and choose'
outlook on the tenets of Christianity. Cafeteria
Christianity, as it is sometimes called.

Among the more important tenets of Christianity is the
fact, yes I said FACT, that women and men were not
created as equals according to the word of God. Nay,
women were created as an afterthought, a helpmate to Adam
who was created first and foremost and in God's image.

NEVER in the Bible is this basic tenet refuted or changed. Not in the Old Testament (sometimes referred to as "the Law")and not in the New Testament. It is what it is in the Book of Genesis. Women who call themselves Christians need to stop trying to rewrite the Bible to suit their American feminist agenda. It's arrogant, dysfunctional, perverted, counterproductive and sinful.

Now, I realize, full well, that this sounds VERY radical
to most people but look at the morality line above once
again. Consider the fact that the point of reference here
in the USA is the exclamation point way over on the Satan
side of morality and you might get some idea why my
traditional morality sounds so extreme to you. Well,
my traditional morality is NOT extreme in any way. It is
the word of God as my reference point, the Bible, is the
word of God.

Most liberated women are nothing more than Satan's little  helpers and, as a Christian, it is my duty to oppose such soul and society destroying behavior.







--
Gregory Hall

Those Who Live in Glass Houses . . .

Where, oh where, should I begin telling you about how uncouth Shirley and Kat are? How about this: Shirley and Kat are a couple of inchoately ridiculous femiNazis who quote the Bible but never read it, much less understand it, nor are they Christians. Both are too anti-religion-in-general to commit to a religion. Both also act as if they are morally superior by virtue (more like lack thereof) of the fact that their 'feelings' trump their logic. When discussing Shirley and Kat I think of one word (excrement) in place of another word (censored) which is now apparently permitted in Usenet posts but which I often edit out as profanity is as unnecessary and offensive as the two women this post addresses.

At the core of Shirley and Kat's anti-Scientology diatribes is
insecurity. These are two very insecure women. They absolutely
hate the fact that Babbles Schwartz is as secure as they are
insecure. Opposite ends of the spectrum and this disturbs them
because it makes them wonder why can't they also be happy
and secure. As you can see, dear reader, Shirley and Kat
really shouldn't criticize somebody just because they don't have
what somebody else has. It's so very immature. Shirley and Kat
are supposed to be grown-ups so why don't they try acting
like grown-ups instead of being green with envy because some
other woman has what they never will have - security in her life,
satisfaction in her religion, purpose in her goals, ethics in her
methods and integrity in her actions.

These are principles that have shaped our society and remain
at the core of our freedom and liberty. That's just plain common
sense. Why do Shirley and Kat lack even rudimentary common
sense? Probably because they were indoctrinated in the liberal,
government-run, public education system. Contrast them with
Babbles who is largely self-educated. Heck, it's plain that
Babbles is more learned than the both of them put together.



Shirley and Kat want to sanctify depravity. They openly
support Halloween mask-wearing cowards interfering with the
religious freedom of others. They feel right at home in ARS where
they are in good company - for the most part a warren of hate
mongering societal rejects many of whom have criminal records.
They feel oh so brave trying to gang up on a lady who doesn't
happen to share their corrupt ways and means. On the one hand
they demand they be treated as equals to any man but, on the other
hand, they openly state that Babbles is some kind of a second or
third rate entity. They drip with hypocrisy. It's sickening.
Their "superiority" is just a case of an overactive imagination.

Regular readers of my posts probably take it for granted that my logic is impeccable because none of the anti-Scientology hate mongers have been able to refute me in honest debate. So, take my word that Shirley and Kat are partners in crime and their stand against religious freedom lacks all decency. It also lacks the specifics of courage, truthfulness, courtesy, honesty, diligence, equal treatment, loyalty and originality. From this proven evidence brought to light in their postings I would argue that Shirley and Kat's secret passion is to evoke a hateful response to the heartfelt and genuine beliefs of one of their sisters .

For shame! You can see how badly they treat 'one of their own' so is it any wonder it's the rare man who finds them other than tiresome? I might not always have good things to say about the opposite gender but you will never hear me disparage another man as long as he acts like a man. In the same way, I have little bad to say about women who act like women. However, women who try to act like spoiled boy children, and Kat and Shirley are among these, I find tedious and in need of a lengthy timeout standing face-in in some dark corner.

To summarize consider the fact that Shirley and Kat don't represent an ideology. They don't represent a legitimate religious group of people. They DO represent a tautology - femiNazis repeated over and over again. They're just flat adversarial because they are contrary to their own gender.

Let's pray they repent of their evil ways.

--
Gregory Hall

Honest Abe thinks I'm a Scientologist

"Honest Abe" wrote in message
news:Q%0Ml.199048$4m1.43929@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

Greg, you have claimed to be a Christian, and I have
pointed out to you that in L. Ron Hubbard's teachings
on "OT3" he completely invalidates Jesus Christ and
Christianity. You have obviously ignored this fact, and
you go on supporting Hubbard and his teachings, thereby
supporting his anti-Christian teachings. You claim
regarding me and the others you listed that: "They only
wish to smear and defame - - with their lies and
defamation." Yet you do not think Scientology's
anti-Christian teachings are lies and defamation?

I replied:

Sorry, but I tend to disbelieve any so-called evidence
you anti-Scientology extremists cite in your posts.
With Babbles Schwartz's help pointing out the truth
it seems like what you folks cite is either lies or taken
out of context. I have not seen any text from the CoS
that says it's against Scientology to believe in Christ.
Any text published by extremist hate groups is suspect.

Honest Abe wrote:

I can only conclude that you are not what you
claimed you are, a Christian, but that you are a
Scientologist assigned to post pro-scientology
information to this newsgroup and to smear and
defame all that disagree. Consider your cover blown!

I replied to this nonsense:

You are free to believe what you will. And I tend to
shy away from discussing Christianity here in ARS
because it's not really on topic in and of itself. Only
Christianity's relationship to Scientology is on topic,
IMO. I have found that one of the fastest way to get
non-Christians to close their minds is to preach at them
all the time.

Rather than jump to conclusions about my being a
Scientologist defending Scientology, why not look at it
objectively. I am a Christian pointing out how one side
hates and defames the other side who practices its religion
as it sees fit.


If you haters can work to destroy a particular religion you
will not stop should you succeed. You will continue on to
the next religion you label a cult. You will not stop because
you have as your true agenda the destruction of all religions.
You are atheists and agnostics and some of you, I would
guess, are devil worshipers.

This is why I side with Scientology. I work against those
who would try to get a toe hold whereby they can attempt
to destroy all religious freedom, mine included.

Honest Abe wrote:

I am not against, in fact I support, any and all practices
that can and do better mankind - especially psychologically,
as when it comes to matters of the mind we are still pretty
much in the dark ages. I got into Scientology and similar
practices for that reason - enlightenment and evolution.

I became highly disillusioned with Scientology - far more
so than any other of the several deceptive and even
destructive cults I encountered along my path. I hope you
wake up before they make you penniless, brainwashed,
and a virtual slave to their autocratic organization. I got
out in time to salvage my life, and all should. Take what
gains you can, and then free yourself! And in your future
quests for truth, I'd advise you to look to science, and
avoid all "religion" like the plague.

I replied:

Disillusionment is something many people face. But, most
people don't turn their disillusionment into works of hate.
You and others should not see being disillusioned as a
failure of the system but as a personal choice. It is but
a choice you have made for yourself because you did not
appreciate what you learned about something. In other
words your expectations were dashed. If it was a correct
choice then be happy with it. That you continue trying to
justify it by lashing out and hating that which you decided
to be disillusioned with is not a mature course of action.
It smacks of hypocrisy. It's not anybody's or any
organization's fault your choice is what is is.

And, don't worry about me. I haven't given one thin dime
to Scientology. I'm even going to check out books from the
library so they aren't even selling me a book.

--
Gregory Hall

Outing the "Anonymous" Extremists.

I could be risking life and limb writing this but let me make
it abundantly clear that "Anonymous" extremists form a hate
speech organization devoted to the harassment and defamation
of the Church of Scientology. I shall begin this post by citing a
few examples from the public sphere. For starters, most of the
Anonymous extremists' ploys are seriously flawed, frequently
fail to meet minimal standards of intelligence, logic, decency,
acceptable public behavior and, on balance, are clumsy, rude,
obnoxious, childish and sociopathic. This can be seen by the way
they "demonstrate" wearing Halloween masks to intimidate
C o S members and to hide their criminal records being
associated with their faces most of which are easily recognized
on police department arrest record files all over the country as
well as at the FBI.

Gregory, are you crazy? Aren't you aware of how the
Anonymous extremists will react when they read what you
say about them? Yes, of course I am aware of how this slime
operates. Do I care? Hell no! because there's little chance these
known cowards will be able to do anything about it other than
whine and snivel. There's not a one of them that can even pen
a coherent paragraph in their own defense and they sure can't
put on their Halloween masks and picket my posting to Usenet.

It's an educated guess because I can't say I've read much of
their garbage (who could stomach it, anyway?) but it's already
become clear to me that most of the things the Anonymous
extremists have written would be considered merely
"mind-numbingly illiterate, parochial, religious hate speech."
I'll go further, the Anonymous extremists are only accomplished
at the utilization of questionable and illegal demonstrating
techniques. Their faceless, "in your face" tactics are so
hypocritical and disgusting. And their numbers? Ha ha, what
a joke. They are loathe to admit it but they are so few.
And their hate speech, amateur, little websites are an even
bigger joke.

Most people would only trust these Anonymous extremists
about as far as they could throw them and this is because the
Anonymous extremists are ignorant of some obvious facts,
most notably:

1) Anonymous extremist's rhetoric has gotten way out of
hand.

2) Anonymous extremist's facts are not facts but often
repeated lies, libel and defamation.

3) Anonymous extremists often use the phrase, "Studies or
surveys show that...", to introduce statements that wind up
being chiefly about various ways and means to defame
Scientology.

4) What the Anonymous extremists seem to be forgetting
is that they set too much store by ruffianism that is
fundamentally, pervasively, and inescapably the way
of the bully.

For the good of us all, we should never take these bullies
too seriously nor should we overreact to their pitiful little
demonstrations which make it perfectly clear to the general
public that "here are some deranged and truly sick
individuals." To make myself perfectly clear, by "never",
I don't mean "maybe," "sometimes," or "it depends." I mean
only that we must always report, as best we can, the facts
and circumstances surrounding any Anonymous extremist's
cretin outbursts.

If we fail in this, we're not failing someone else nor are we
disrupting some interest separate from ourselves. Rather, it is
we who suffer when we neglect to make it clear that all
Anonymous extremists try to reverse the normal process
of interpretation. Theirs is an orchestrated charade. That
is, they value the unsaid over the said, the obscure over the
clear. They think their masks make it appear that Scientology
is out to get them so they can't show their pimply faces.
Actually, it's the other way around. They can't show their
pimply faces because then every law enforcement officer
with a wanted poster in mind will be out to cuff them and
stuff them.

Due to the proliferation of information in this day and age,
when a mistake is made the smart thing to do is to admit it
and reverse course. This takes real courage. The way that
Anonymous extremists stubbornly refuse to own up to
their mistakes and change course serves only to convince
me that no one has a higher opinion of them than they do
themselves. They really think their sh*t doesn't stink.
My oh my, can anybody get more delusional than that?

This posting should be regarded as the beginning, not the
end, of my campaign against this Anonymous extremist
rabble. And those creep, Xenu lowlifes are on my list, too.
Please don't anybody ever believe what the Anonymous
extremists want you to believe - that the cure for evil is more
evil. On the one hand they pretend to label the Church of
Scientology as evil so why don't they decry the evil they
perpetrate in their so-called peaceful demonstrations where
they threaten, browbeat and bully? The only clear answer to
emerge from the conflicting, contradictory stances that
Anonymous and its provocateurs take is that threats and
intimidation are a crutch for the depravity of which these
hell-bound Satanists are capable and delight in carrying out.

Although there are no formal, internal, validating criteria for
the Anonymous extremists' callous actions, they seem to be
pretty much on the same page. This indicates to me that
sociopathic losers all pretty much think and act the same way
individually and in groups. Their mental illness is readily
evident even to the most impartial observer. Why else do
these morons all seem to believe rubbish like, "Those who
disagree with Anonymous extremists should be castigated,
harassed, threatened, impugned, defamed, libeled, slandered,
mocked, cast into the outer darkness, should be shunned,
should starve and should DIE!!!"

What they don't expect you to see, though, is that the
abhorrent things you see going on in their demonstrations are
symptoms of the Anonymous extremists' insincere, deranged
agenda. I say insincere because all they really wish to do is hate.
They don't really care who they hate as long as they can hate
somebody or something. If the Church of Scientology should all
of a sudden cease to exist they would not waste a single minute
reorganizing to settle on the next target of their hatred. They
are not a cause; they are an effect. Hate is what hated does.
They are hate personified. When I say that the Anonymous
extremists have rightly earned the scorn and derision with
which they are viewed in many quarters, this does not, I repeat,
does not mean that they should be taken lightly. They are still
capable of a certain amount of damage in a small, mean,
sub-human way.

Anonymous extremists don't want equal time. Anonymous
extremists want all of the time. Anonymous extremists
just want to poke and pry into every facet of Scientologist's lives.
In a sense, almost every day, Anonymous extremists overreach
themselves in setting new records for arrogance, deceit,
slimyness and shameful, antisocial behavior. All I ask is that
normal people see it for what it is - mental illness untreated
and run amok.

--
Gregory Hall

Anti-Scientology, a Criminal Racket

wrote in message
news:3aea6c1b-b1a6-4fd4-a813-82dabe3f8131@w31g2000prd.googlegroups.com...

>
> This ruse will continue as long as gutless reporters like KESQ-TV's
> Nathan Baca fail to wrap their minds around the fact that Anti-
> Scientology Activism is a criminal racket. Pathetically, these
> underpaid, self-serving so-called journalists opt for sensationalism
> over substance, taking everything the "critics" say as truth. Lies
> beget more lies and the deception continues....


I like that objective statement, ". . . Anti-Scientology Activism is a
criminal racket."

I like it because it's such an obviously true statement. The anti's
lie, lie and then lie some more. They claim to be concerned about
the plight of individual Scientologists they see as imprisoned or
enslaved. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The couldn't
care less about individual Scientologists. As a matter of fact they
care so little about them that they use them as unwilling and
unwitting pawns to further their atheistic hate mongering against
all organized religions.

There is nobody or nothing they will not use and abuse to further
their agenda of religious persecution. Here in this group they have
already used an innocent 3-year-old girl calling her autistic and
attempting to say Scientology caused it. People who claim to care
about individual Scientologists sure wouldn't use their hate speech
upon a little girl who has parents who are Scientologists, would they?

The anti-Scientologist rabble are simply concentrating on
Scientology at the moment because they think if they can take
down this one religion then they can take them all down, one at a
time. Should they succeed with Scientology (chances of that are
slim and none, btw) then who will be the next target of their
criminal racketeering? The Church of the Latter Day Saints?

These sociopathic anti's need to be exposed at every opportunity.
They need to have their lies rebuked. The gutless wonders who
hide behind Halloween masks while demonstrating need to be
given some trick or treat candy and then be required to move
along. Loitering of trick or treaters not allowed.

--
Gregory Hall
4-20-2009

Some Wash Out

"Ball of Fluff" <getoffmyass@fluffentology.com> wrote in message news:-8adnekqhI2x9m3UnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@posted.internetamerica...

> Sure. To me, the biggest problem is the way the cult treats members and
> also the fair game ops, and so on. But the cult never wants to take ANY
> responsibility.
> Anyone who really reads the posts and webpages written by ex members who
> are telling their stories of what happened to them and is really open to
> them would be struck by the similarities- these things are obviously true,
> repetitive and abusive. Plus, any long time Scn'ist should be able to
> recognize some names eventually and be able to maybe verify some of the
> information being related by exes. So if after all that, someone didn't
> believe all that, they'd either have to truly have their heads in the sand
> or be an OSA staff member or something of the sort where they're one of
> the ones dedicated to perpetrating such abuses.
> Very sad.

What's very sad to any unbiased, intelligent onlooker is the following: It always takes two to tango.

The small, vocal group of whining, crying ex-Scientologists, almost to the individual, has a bone to pick with Scientology mostly because they're ashamed they didn't have what it takes to stay the course. So they weren't Scientology qualified? They weren't the first and they won't be the last. Not everybody has what it takes.

You washouts should live with that fact and accept it and stop your insufferable complaining. It's all a pretense just to keep you from having to admit you couldn't cut the mustard. Instead of accepting that you failed and moving on with your lives in a positive, constructive manner by pursuing something more suited to your menial mentality and at which you can succeed, you failures who whine and complain choose to adopt a negative, immature, destructive stance and many of you have turned into extremist hate mongers who, because of your obvious sociopathy, have your own page on Religious Freedom Watch:

http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/

To me and other thinkers, the valid conclusion to draw is the Church of Scientology was correct and looking after its own interests when telling you unqualified individuals to hit the road. Scientologists certainly don't need suppressives and subversives in their ranks and it would be counter productive to retain such as these.

The fact that you now actively work against the church and are incapable of seeing your own failure indicates to me that you would have done the very same thing inside the church. You would have been a dangerous liability. A leopard cannot change its spots
even with advanced Scientology methods unless it truly wants to do so. Some diseased minds are so far gone they cannot be cured even with Dianetics. When there's nothing there to work with failure is inevitable.

Actually, I see it as a positive that the church drums out such defective thetans. If I were a high-ranking Sea Org OT aboard the "Freewinds" I would make such unqualifieds walk the plank in a formal ceremony. But, I would show them some mercy and do it while anchored close to shore so they'd be able to swim to shore and not have their lives put at risk. That swim to shore would do them good. It would be a chance for them to reflect upon the fact that they didn't have what it takes to be a part of an elite organization. This would also hold true for the mustered crew. They would use the opportunity to be thankful while reflecting upon their good standing in the church.

--
Gregory Hall

Extremist Bias in Action

The following posting to alt.religion.scientology by Roger Gonnet was rebuffed with ease by yours truly:

"xenufrance" <xenufrance@free.fr> wrote in message news:49f0131b$0$21825$426a74cc@news.free.fr...

> These pêople or pseudo owners are primarily victim of their cult, as I've
> been long ago , and they are just helping it to commit its frauds like I
> did ... 25 years ago.
>
> Since now, these "people" (rondroid or not) are perfectly aware of the
> cult's crimes we are exposing here, they have NO EXCUSE for their own
> criminality doing so.
>
> When helping Hubbard and C°, I was at least unconscious of the convictions
> of the cult and its chief, and of the complaints against it.
> But THESE are aware of what we expose here, so, they are accomplices of
> the criminal leading that cult, and will deserve to be jailed later.

What you expose here? Oh, please! You expose your ignorance, bigotry and hatred of things you don't understand. That's about the sum total of what you expose here, Monsieur Gonnet.

Why don't you open your eyes and get a clue, Roger Gonnet? The only crimes and evidence of crimes posted here are what is called 'anecdotal evidence.' Anecdotal evidence doesn't prove anything. Why, because in any large group of people there are always going to be a few bad apples who commit crimes. Until and unless you can prove *statistically* that the Church of Scientology has a greater percentage of crime than other church groups you prove nothing with posting random acts of crime or alleged crime. Much of what you and the other anti's post is exaggerated, biased or outright lies anyway.

In a post elsewhere I proved statistically from a list of alleged Scientology criminals that the Church of Scientology has a crime rate approximately 50,000 times less than that of the general population. So much for your lame examples of anecdotal evidence, Roger!

When posting this sparse anecdotal evidence you and the other anti's do prove one thing, however. You prove that you extremist, anti-Scientology hate mongers think the general public is rather stupid. You would have to think that if you actually expect your biased anecdotal evidence is going to have any effect other than the general public thinking, "Oh gee, there goes yet another fanatic anti-Scientologist loon. Why doesn't he get a life already." Why don't they stop being nattering nabobs of negativity and do something positive for a change?

And such hypocrites they all are. Just look at all of them and their criminal or near criminal deeds here: http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/anti-religious-extremists/

Scroll down and click on Roger Gonnet's photo and see how he is such a fine, upstanding fellow. (gag!)

--
Gregory Hall

Conflict Explained

"WHILE IT IS COMMONLY BELIEVED TO TAKE TWO TO MAKE A FIGHT, A THIRD PARTY MUST EXIST AND MUST DEVELOP IT FOR ACTUAL CONFLICT TO OCCUR." -- L. Ron Hubbard"

Farmer J and Rancher K have been tearing each other to pieces for years in continual conflict. There are obvious, logical reasons for the fight. Yet it continues and does not resolve. A close search finds Banker L who, due to their losses in the fighting, is able to loan each side money, while keeping the quarrel going, and who will get their lands completely if both lose." -- L. Ron. Hubbard

These quotes are from this web page. Everybody should read it.

http://www.scientology.org/humanrights/publications/pdf/warbklt.pdf

The above quotes describe what is going on in alt.religion.scientology. Allow me to paraphrase the second paragraph and you will understand why.

"Anti-Scientologists and Scientologists have been tearing each other to pieces for years in continual conflict in alt.religion.scientology. There are obvious, logical reasons for the fight. Yet it continues and does not resolve. A close search finds Marxist state promoters who, due to the losses to both sides in the fighting, are able to profit from the quarrel, while keeping the quarrel going, and who will get religion seen in a bad light and anti-religion seen in the same bad light.

The solution? Eliminate religion and the fighting stops as anti-religion has no antagonist. A Marxist state needs to eliminate religion."

As you can see, L. Ron Hubbard had it pretty well figured out. I would speculate that many of the anti-Scientologists are disguised Marxists who have seized upon a nefarious method to chip away at Scientology - nay, ALL religions by engaging in a battle with a church they have demonized and call a cult. Should they succeed in wiping out Scientology they will not stop there. They will then chose another victim and continue until all religious freedom is eliminated. Then the Marxist state will be secured. And people enslaved.

--
Gregory Hall
4-6-2009

Anecdotal Evidence

I can't help but notice there is a lot of anecdotal evidence against the Church of Scientology being thrown around here (newsgroup alt.religion.scientology). Some anti-Scientologist will dredge up this alleged horror story or that alleged abuse and then try to paint the whole of Scientology with a broad black brush.

C'mon! You anti's are going to have to do better than that. I just posted a rebuttal elsewhere where somebody posted a list of Scientology members who were arrested for various crimes and I used that list to demonstrate how it showed Scientology in a good light as the Scientology crime rate was around 50,000 times less than the general population crime rate.

Anecdotal evidence is less than effective in trying to show Scientology in a bad light. Every large group of people is going to have problems no matter the religious orientation of the group. Unless you anti-Scientologists can up the ante by around 50,000 times you only demonstrate by your evidence that Scientology has relatively few problems and should be praised for a job well done rather than defamed.

Think about it. Your methods are bankrupt and hurt your cause way more than they harm Scientology.

While some of you talk about the ineptitude and criminality of Scientology management you ignore the pathetic examples of humanity who are your spokespersons - your management, so to speak. Sure Scientology has a bad apple in the ranks from time to time who must be dealt with but it is a tiny fraction of the almost 100% of the demonstrably scurrilous and criminal records of the people at the helm of the anti-Scientology ship.

So, here's some advice for you:

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured unto you.
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me cast out the mote out of thine eye; and lo, the beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

-- Matthew 7 : 1-5 American Standard Version


Apply it to your own lives, please. Peace!

--
Gregory Hall
4-5-2009

Anti-Scientologists Explained

Dear a.r.s subscriber,

The question needs to be asked and answered why the "anti" in "anti-Scientologists?"

It's quite simple really and will take but a few short paragraphs to explain the whys and the wherefores. So, let's get right to it, shall we?

Here in this news group, (alt.religion.scientology) at least, I've observed anti-Scientology equals denial of the "self." The anti-Scientology stance is an outgrowth of an uninformed, destructive reaction rather than a positive, constructive action. From reading the posts of the more strident and obsessed anti's I have concluded that the following applies to them:

1) they couldn't meet the standards to become a Scientologist for various reasons,

2) they are former members who washed out but with no malice, (met basic standards but failed to progress)

3) they are SP's with malice who were discovered and shown the door (failures at their mission),

4) they didn't have what it takes to stay the course most likely because they lack the most basic of interpersonal relationship skills as demonstrated by their pathological writings here,

5) their egos are out of control.

So, rather than accept personal failure these individuals resort to scapegoating. That which they aspired to becomes their enemy and the focal point of their malice as a means of denial of their shortcomings so they:

1) lash out at their perceived tormentors saying Scientologists are the defective ones, (PKB)

2) go on a vendetta against Scientology rather than go on a person quest of much needed self-improvement, (immature and spiteful reaction)

3) become obsessed, paranoid, mean-spirited with a further buttressing of their self-denial (irrational)

4) thus strengthening their negativity and hate.

Summary: A sociopathic personality develops which personality adopts irrational denial and hatred as its mainstays. You anti's are a miserable lot because you work against yourselves instead of for them.

"Happiness could be said to be the overcoming of not unknowableobstacles toward a known and desirable goal." -- L. Ron Hubbard

-- Gregory Hall
4-4-2009

The Creed of the Church of Scientology

Below is the Creed of the Church of Scientology from website:

http://www.scientology.org/world/worldeng/corp/creed.htm

We of the Church believe:

That all men of whatever race, color, or creed were created with equal rights;

That all men have inalienable rights to their own religious practices and their performance;

That all men have inalienable rights to their own lives;

That all men have inalienable rights to their sanity;

That all men have inalienable rights to their own defense;

That all men have inalienable rights to conceive, choose, assist or support their own organizations, churches and governments;

That all men have inalienable rights to think freely, to talk freely, to write freely their own opinions and to counter or utter or write upon the opinions of others;

That all men have inalienable rights to the creation of their own kind;

That the souls of men have the rights of men;

That the study of the mind and the healing of mentally caused ills should not be alienated from religion or condoned in non-religious fields;

And that no agency less than God has the power to suspend or set aside these rights, overtly or covertly.

And we of the Church believe:

That man is basically good;

That he is seeking to survive;

That his survival depends upon himself and upon his fellows and his attainment of brotherhood with the universe.

And we of the Church believe that the laws of God forbid man:

To destroy his own kind;

To destroy the sanity of another;

To destroy or enslave another's soul;

To destroy or reduce the survival of one's companions or one's group.

And we of the Church believe that the spirit can be saved and that the spirit alone may save or heal the body.

===========================================

Now, who can find fault with any of this?

It all sounds very positive and uplifting to me.


--
Gregory Hall
4-6-2009 (posted to alt.religion.scientology)

Dismayed by Anti-Scientologists

Dear alt.religion.scientology, (Usenet newsgroup)

I'm posting this to express my dismay and concern over the anti-Scientologists' hate-mongering postings. Many people are probably convinced that anti-Scientologists are guided by the backwards facing ethos of dark ages neopaganism. I say that is not entirely correct in that I maintain they are also guided by modern-day atheistic evil. They are way more evil than mere pagans who at least believe in some manner of god or gods. Anti-Scientologists believe in themselves as the center of the universe and the brightest star in their universe is a dark star dully glowing with their evil and malice.

If someone wants me to believe something nonsensical like the anti-Scientologists really are concerned with the plight of individual, hapless Scientologists and wish to help him rather than having as their real goal the total destruction of the Church of Scientology, then they must think I'm as gullible and ignorant as they are. Sorry, but it just isn't going to happen. I, for one, intend to stand up for what's right and good. Until that person shows me some concrete evidence of positive doings by anti-Scientologists rather than the usual, malicious, evil-doing which is thinly veiled in a false altruism, I shall remain unconvinced that they are doing any work other than Satan's work.

Consider me an impartial voice who is no Scientologist myself but rather a Christian who can't help but see that, even though Scientology has some problems, they are so far above the anti-Scientologists that they might as well be living on this Xenu planet of theirs because they are light years ahead of anti-Scientologists in every meaningful ethical and moral way.

Of all the backwards, morally bankrupt, unethical souls of this world, anti-Scientologists, who intend to continue posting their lies and propaganda asserting that hate-filled atheism is a be-all, end-all system that should be forcefully imposed upon us, are among the worst of the lot. They think it's okay if their organized harassment initially causes all our quality of life to degrade because "sometime" "someone" will do "something" "somehow" to counteract the trend in the future once they rid the world of the "scourge" of Scientology.

This bizarre pattern of thinking leads to strange conclusions. For example, it convinces materialistic people (as distinct from the more spiritually inclined of us) that the anti-Scientologists' assertions are good for the environment, human rights, children's rights, civil rights and freedom and liberty. Yes, sir! Materialism over spiritualism every time! In reality, we were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, to learn, to evolve towards good and to reject evil by loving God. We were not put here to resort to ad hominem attacks on Scientologists and their families as a convenient way to engage in our sociopathy.

The anti-Scientologists' propaganda machine early on said that anti-Scientologists would never use mass propaganda as a system of integration and control because that was exactly what they claimed L. Ron Hubbard was doing and they were opposed to that. But, now they are a prime example of PKB. So much for credibility! Anti-Scientologists sure know how to lie. It's too bad they have yet to understand the ramifications of lying.

If anti-Scientologists can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that we can change the truth if we don't like it the way it is, I will personally deliver to them a Nobel Prize for hare-brained, disingenuous bombast. In the meanwhile, I think anti-Scientologist hypocrisy has reached a new low. You probably thought that, too, when you read the post where they libeled, supported the libel or did not object to the libel and defamation of a defenseless, 3-year-old daughter of a Scientologist. But, anti-Scientologists don't think that way. Anti-Scientologists think that society is screaming for its insults and sick methods of abuse. This is the warped world of their own making in which they live.

I promise you that I will never vandalize our culture like they attempt to do. I believe in diversity and live and let live. I don't attempt to be a self-appointed dictator who browbeats and controls every religious behavior like anti-Scientologists do. On the other hand, the anti's are so eager to do exactly that. It's already begun giving rise to devious and barbaric ways and means.

The reason I'm distinguishing my actions from its here is that the anti's have declared that they're staging a revolt against everyone who dares to speak up against their strong arm tactics. Anti-Scientologists are revolting all right but, in my opinion, for another very obvious reason: the very sight of them spewing their organized, hypocritical hatred turns my stomach. All kidding aside, the anti-Scientologists imply that the world's salvation will be derived from their own whims, irrationality, lack of a moral compass and delusions and sociopathic behavior.

The above is a comment that should chill the spine of anyone with moral convictions. To make sure you understand exactly how I feel I'll spell it out for you. For starters, I really loath anti-Scientologists. When somebody mentions scum of the earth types these anti's quickly come to mind. Likes or dislikes, however, are irrelevant to your observed reality so you may make the comment, "What does this have to do with ARS?" Well, once you begin to see the light you'll realize that the central paradox of the anti-Scientologists' magic-bullet explanations, the twist that makes the anti-Scientologists' radical approach so irresistible to atheistic hedonists, is that these people truly believe that anti-Scientologists defend the real needs of the people. In doing so they set themselves up as the very deities the decry. These false, hypocrite deities are going about attempting to eliminate any competition.

If some people are offended by my mentioning that the anti-Scientologists have an agenda—a political, social, cultural as well as religious agenda—then so be it. Anti-Scientologists seize every opportunity to overthrow all concepts of love, beauty and sublimity, of the noble and the good, and instead drag people down into the dark sphere of their own base nature. Think about it. Can you remember ever hearing a kind word or friendly gesture from anybody in the hateful, anti-Scientology camp? When I post that I love Babbles Schwartz and wish her well and hope for her happiness you'd think I was some kind of pariah as far as the anti-Scientology crowd's reactions go.

I cannot abide this colossal evil having any supporters at all but there seems to be a couple dozen hardcore evil doers here who keep riding the tailgate of their favorite base bandwagon. Any sane person knows that an anti-Scientologist is a salacious nutter. I use that label only because it's true. If you don't believe it is, then consider that everything anti-Scientologists write is unreadably desultory. Am I being unduly harsh for writing that? I think not. When the religious leaders in Jesus' time were wrong, Jesus denounced them in extremely harsh terms. So why shouldn't I, too, use extremely harsh terms to indicate that anti-Scientologists wouldn't be able to make a Usenet community the victim of their vile hatred while attempting to turn it into a toxic waste dump if sane people banded together and shouted, "ENOUGH ALREADY WITH YOUR LIES AND DECEPTION, BEGONE SATAN!!"

If anti-Scientologists believe that they command an army of mind-numbed robots who live in fear of the Church of Scientology they need to have it made perfectly clear to them that they barely control a squad and the squad is a bunch of freak rabble and sociopaths. Is it just me, or do some other people also think that there is little question that this is neither a post written in anger nor something I am being paid to write? I ask because if you read anti-Scientologists' writings while mentally out of focus, you may get the sense that they provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything else. But, if you read their writings while mentally in focus and weigh each point carefully, it's clear that they don't want this to be a free country, and I aver we ought to keep it free as it was Constitutionally established with freedom of religion among the main tenets.

In closing there are three points I wish to make:

First, anti-Scientologists are standard-bearers for the unbearable.

Second, I would very much like to see anti-Scientologists crawl back under the rock they slithered out from under.

And third, I do not have the time, in one sitting, to go into the long answer as to why anti-Scientologists go ballistic every time I so much as hint that the only way I can possibly forgive them is if they start telling the truth and offer to make restitution for all the ill they cause in this world.

But, the short answer is that these anti's say that everyone would be a lot safer if they were to monitor all of our personal communications and financial transactions—even our library access (like they did to Babbles Schwartz). Why on Earth do they need to control our library access? Many people consider that question irrelevant on the grounds that if anti-Scientologists are victorious in their quest to display unchallenged an irreconcilable hatred toward Scientology and all religions after that, then their crown will be the funeral wreath of human rights. Do give that some thought.


Gregory Hall
4-20-09