As usual life gets in the way. Won't bore anybody with excuses, but suffice to say work is work and life is full of things.
Someone I have friended recently made a post about keeping holy writ "up to date". That is, if there's anything in your particular holy text you don't feel represents you, or is out of date/unacceptable, then to just remove it completely. And if any religion is not willing to do that, to stop asking to join the rest of us in civilisation.
It's an interesting point, certainly. Members of my family are still Christians, but I know for a fact that there are parts of the bible they scoff at because they're sensible. I'm talking mainly about things like the Adam and Eve story, but also the rules about shellfish, etc. Leviticus, give it a read. But they would baulk at the idea of "re-issuing" the Bible to not include these parts, or the parts that give you examples of when it's ok to rape someone, because they assume that no sensible person would pay attention to them anyway.
This may be true, but why chance it? If no one agrees with 'em anyway, why not take 'em out completely? I'd be happy to bet a lot of religious people feel this way, but feel some sense of misplaced guilt over it, like they shouldn't be thinking that way.
I wonder if that can be applied to Scientology? I think it can. Having listened to Magoo on Youtube, I thought that what she described was a social circle and an friendly familial organisation like that of any church, including a "text" which parts were now outdated and ignored. We can compare the Bible's "when it's ok to rape" with Hubbard's "fair game" practice. I'm willing to bet that most Scientologists think about that what my family think about the outdated parts of the Bible, that they are no longer used or listened to and that anyone who DOES follow them is a dangerous individual who they do not want to be associated with personally or through their organisation. These are good, normal people. I can relate to them. All Scientologists are human beings.
Unfortunately, the CoS differs from my family's church in that if my mother was to feel unsure about part of her holy text, she could discuss, reason and debate it with a priest or other church-goers, and they may agree, they may not. That wouldn't be a problem. She could debate it with her husband, with me, with anyone. No one would think any less of her, no one would try and make her feel she "wasn't getting it". Faith is very personal, there can't be a "one size fits all mentality". If you don't understand something, if it isn't speaking to you, you should have the freedom to argue it out, to broaden your understanding.
I don't claim to be any kind of expert on the CoS. I read the web and I've seen TV programmes, hardly compelling. (This is partly because peer-reviewed literature on this topic is very scarce.) I embrace my lack of knowledge and instead offer a hopeful thought, this:
I hope that it IS all untrue, all of it. All the browbeating, the control, the disconnection, the inability to debate, the bullshit about aliens, the belief they can fly... I hope all that is bollocks. I hope we HAVE "got some wrong information" about the CoS. I hope for the sake of every member, I'm hoping that they get nothing but good out of their involvement with this organisation. That's what I hope, hell, we should ALL hope that.
But I really really in my heart of hearts can't believe that that is the situation right now. Maybe it will be in the future, but not now. No amount of Anonymous protests will be able to directly stop the CoS's more unsavoury practices, but by raising awareness, Anons will cause the current structure to be destroyed and rebuilt. Maybe it'll be for the better, maybe worse. I don't know.
This is why I just keep slogging on. Don't forget about it, it's still out there, the elephant at the party.
Peace out.
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=88.8){kind=small}
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif?v=88.8){kind=small}
