Sundown asked this question on 4/24/2000:
Okay, I finally went through enough answers to see what's going on. There are current 'church' members here, ex-members here, and critics who have never been members.
What I do not understand is why the critic's answers should be dismissed because they are not currently Scientologists. How does that make them less the experts on Scientology? Am I missing something here? Would not the critics be =MORE= educated and informed about Scientology, and not less? Help me out here, please.
desertphile gave this response on 4/24/2000:
Hello. Welcome to the Questions and Answers forum about Scientology and the Church of Scientology. You have asked a good question.
I have seen several replies written by the current Scientologists here who decry the experts who are ex-Scientologists and those who have never been Scientologists but who have studied Scientology and the Church. These current Scientologists wrote that they believe it is a bad thing that this forum has input from people other than themselves. They only want you (and every one else) to read only Church-approved "answers" to your questions. Two of their "answers" even said they wished that the administrator of AskMe.Com would "do something about" the other expert's giving their answers here--- they wish to have the answers to questions YOU ask censored.
The hallmark of democracy is the honest exchange of ideas and opinions. Hearing only one biased side means that one is not free to make a good decision. The Church of Scientology's motto is "Think For Yourself." One cannot do that without -all- of the best information. The critics and ex-members of Scientology allow that information to be heard, and thus an informed decision can be made.
One Creed of the Church of Scientology states: "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." This applies to the AskMe.Com forum here, but the current Scientologists in this forum refuse to apply that creed. They do not want critics to talk freely, write freely, and counter their Church-sponsored "answers" to questions asked here.
The best source of information about Scientology is from ex-Scientologists. This is because what they have learned is generally what caused them to leave the Church and cease being Scientologists. Ben Zablocki performed a study that spanned 25 years, and he found that the testimony and advice given by ex-members of destructive cults is exceptionally reliable and superior to current members of those cults. This is certainly true of the Church of Scientology, where one must be a non-member to learn what the Church keeps hidden from its members.
You will find that there are some very high-level ex-Scientologists in this first group. Stacy Brooks; Jesse Prince; Mike McClaughry; Arnie Lerma; Jeff Jacobson--- hundreds and hundreds of Operating Thetans of every level. These people will testify that Scientology is not a religion, but took on that persona for tax-exemption status. In fact, one of the people who worked to make people believe the lie that Scientology is a "religion" was Robert Vaughn Young: he will tell you it was done for political and financial reasons.
The second best source of information about Scientology and the Church of Scientology is from its victims: innocent people whom the Church attacked with their Fair Game policy. These victims of the Church had to learn about Scientology and the Church of Scientology out of self-defense and to understand why they were and are being attacked. John Atack, Paulette Cooper, Roy Wallis, Bob Minton, the Mayor of Clearwater--- the number of people in this category are too many to list.
The third best source of information is from humanitarian, liberal individuals who have observed the criminal actions of the Church of Scientology and deplore those actions. This is a Civil Rights issue for them. They learn about Scientology as a physician might learn about a disease; to help prevent others from being infected. I fall into this category, though I am also active in the Free Zone.
Please note that the issue of religion and religious freedom does not apply here. The answers from the critics and ex-Scientologists are predicated upon the truth about the Tech, the Church, and the activities the Church engages in. "Belief" is not criticized so much as the ACTIONS that MUST be criticized if people are to understand Scientology and the Church of Scientology. When the Church of Scientology was found with documents stolen from an Air Force base in Greece a few years ago, it was not an issue of "religious persecution" when the thieves were charged with felony trespassing, felony theft, and treason. Religion does not apply.
Finally, if you wish to lean about Scientology that is free from the criminal, sinister Nazi-like influence of the Church, check out the Free Zone at the following URL: http:// www.fza.org
If you have any questions concerning the details in what I have written above, please feel free to ask them.
The average rating for this answer is 4.7.
Sundown rated this answer a 5.
Wow. Good answer, and you have given me alot to think about. As it is, my interest in Scientology no longer exists. I looked it over and it frankly frightens the shit out of me. Thank you for your time. If I meet someone who is interested in Scientology I'll send them here to read your answers and ask you questions.