Do Scientologists believe in God?

[ibkc]

You are quite right, I am ignorant about Scientology. However, since I don’t see all that many Scientologists out there committing genocide or murders of lesser numbers,

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology

In 1965 Hubbard formulated the “Fair Game Law”, which states how to deal with people who interfere with Scientology’s activities. These problematic people, called suppressive persons, could be considered “fair game” for retaliation:
A Suppressive Person or Group becomes fair game. By FAIR GAME is meant, may not be further protected by the codes and disciplines or the rights of a Scientologist.[4]
Later in December of that year, Hubbard reissued the Fair Game policy with additional clarifications to define the scope of Fair Game. He made it clear that the policy applied to non-Scientologists as well. He declared:
The homes, property, places and abodes of persons who have been active in attempting to: suppress Scientology or Scientologists are all beyond any protection of Scientology Ethics, unless absolved by later Ethics or an amnesty … this Policy Letter extends to suppressive non-Scientology wives and husbands and parents, or other family members or hostile groups or even close friends.[5]
Hubbard made it clear elsewhere in his writings that the policy would be applied to external organizations, including governments, that were guilty of having interfered with Scientology’s activities. He told Scientologists:
If the Internal Revenue Service (in refusing the FCDC Founding Church of Scientology, Washington DC] non-profit status) continues to act up or if the FDA does sue we can of course Comm Ev Committee of Evidence] them and if found guilty, label and publish them as a Suppressive Group and fair game … [N]one is fair game until he or she declares against us.[6]
The policy was further extended in an October 1967 Policy Letter (HCOPL 18 Oct 67 Issue IV, Penalties for Lower Conditions), where Hubbard defined the “penalties” for an individual deemed to be in a “Condition of Enemy”:
ENEMY — SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.[7]

These are not nice people. You really don’t want to defend them or their practices.

 

[dianaiad]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology

In 1965 Hubbard formulated the “Fair Game Law”, which states how to deal with people who interfere with Scientology’s activities. These problematic people, called suppressive persons, could be considered “fair game” for retaliation:
A Suppressive Person or Group becomes fair game. By FAIR GAME is meant, may not be further protected by the codes and disciplines or the rights of a Scientologist.[4]
Later in December of that year, Hubbard reissued the Fair Game policy with additional clarifications to define the scope of Fair Game. He made it clear that the policy applied to non-Scientologists as well. He declared:
The homes, property, places and abodes of persons who have been active in attempting to: suppress Scientology or Scientologists are all beyond any protection of Scientology Ethics, unless absolved by later Ethics or an amnesty … this Policy Letter extends to suppressive non-Scientology wives and husbands and parents, or other family members or hostile groups or even close friends.[5]
Hubbard made it clear elsewhere in his writings that the policy would be applied to external organizations, including governments, that were guilty of having interfered with Scientology’s activities. He told Scientologists:
If the Internal Revenue Service (in refusing the FCDC Founding Church of Scientology, Washington DC] non-profit status) continues to act up or if the FDA does sue we can of course Comm Ev Committee of Evidence] them and if found guilty, label and publish them as a Suppressive Group and fair game … [N]one is fair game until he or she declares against us.[6]
The policy was further extended in an October 1967 Policy Letter (HCOPL 18 Oct 67 Issue IV, Penalties for Lower Conditions), where Hubbard defined the “penalties” for an individual deemed to be in a “Condition of Enemy”:
ENEMY — SP Order. Fair game. May be deprived of property or injured by any means by any Scientologist without any discipline of the Scientologist. May be tricked, sued or lied to or destroyed.[7]

These are not nice people. You really don’t want to defend them or their practices.

So.

You have seen Scientologists out there committing murders/genocide?

you know, serial killer type activity?

 

[ibkc]

So.

You have seen Scientologists out there committing murders/genocide?

you know, serial killer type activity?

whyaretheydead.net/

It isn’t fun reading, and it will take some time out of your day, but you did ask.

I repeat, these are not good people, and you don’t want to be defending them.

 

[dianaiad]

whyaretheydead.net/

It isn’t fun reading, and it will take some time out of your day, but you did ask.

I repeat, these are not good people, and you don’t want to be defending them.

you are right. I did ask—I had forgotten about these.

 

[Detales]

Re the original post: here is a link to the CofS f.a.q.s.

faq.scientology.org/contents.htm

Scroll down to see the one about God.

As to the “these are not good people” critique, once again, I refer you to the history of religions in general. “These are not good people” is technically a blanket statement. If it can be proved that the individual allegations are accurate, and crimes have been commited, then those actions are "bad,’ but not necessarily reflective of the system. If I was to tell you the tales of my encounters with clerics in our Church, and those of some of my friends, you might just as easily say that Catholics are “bad people.”

I have little doubt that a number of understandings I have come to over the years about my faith would likely get me the rack or some other unpleasantness had I lived in another time and place. Perhaps you might be at my side, completely innocent of your charges, and yet schueduled for an excruciating end, all on hearsay or less. Or perhaps you could have been the indian virgin fortunate enough to have her womb cleansed by sexual intercourse with the Catholic missionary so that you would not be regarded as a savage and thus be worthy of conversion, as happened in California history.

There may be very, very bad Scientologists. But I personally have not met one to the best of my knowledge, and have been aided in many practical matters by their approach to certain practical areas. I do not regard myself a Scientologist any more then I do a Mormon for attending services with my sister when she is making a presentation, or a practitioner of Zen Buddhism for recieving successful treatment from my brother. Nor do I consider myself a charismatic Catholic because I have conversations with my other sister. Etc, etc.

I am really concerned with my participation on here sometimes, because it is clear that matters under consideration lead many to leap to conclusions before they parse out or tease out the cognative line that is actually the main thread of their concern. Babies flying out with bath water and apples masquerading as oranges seem to abound. Not the least of these errors it the blaket application of an allegation on some group. It is this exact thing that lead people of integrity into the temptation of leaving the Church. It is exactly why Mark Twain said " Man is a Religious Animal. He is the only Religious Animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion - several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat if his theology isn’t straight. He has made a graveyard of the globe in trying his honest best to smooth his brother’s path to happiness and heaven." There is too much the smack of truth in that. I also wonder if the author of “The Dumbing Down of America” may have had an abundance of evidence based on our general lack of clear thinking.

If we love our God and our Faith, perhaps it is a good idea to have as well a great dose of maturity, and maybe even a few lessons in critical thinking under our belt. Maybe then we could disprove Lenny Bruce’s contention that people are leaving their religions every day to find God. Even on here I have read letters from converts pleading against the hatred and malice they feel from their brothers and sisters on issues that are better dealt with by the means of sanity. Are we here to be a further test of everyone’s faith, or to show why it is the evidence of God’s Love?