CommentsOpener (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

"All I do know is that it works for plenty of people and you resent that because you don't have any sort of belief system."Actually fakeGumby, that's not why. It's because Scientology's management ruins lives, harasses critics, breaks up families, and abuses the weak and the lost. It impoverishes the gullible, and then turns them to indentured servitude when they can no longer afford to pay their way to 'enlightenment'. It has no respect for human dignity, human rights, and human life.

GumbytheUnstoppabIe (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

Fake Comments Opener, I don't know enough about it to answer. All I do know is that it works for plenty of people and you resent that because you don't have any sort of belief system.A long time ago, Sci was being shut down in Germany and Belgium, but that turned out to be incorrect, just like everything else writtn by the Sci haters. Haha ha, all that hope for nothing!

squilky1951 (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

Too tired Val,leave me to just fade away for a while.

vaLLarrr (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

'Good lord Val forgot her dictionary,bravo."oh, no, I didn't.try blathering your opinion, or engage in an ad hominem attack, and see what happens. LOL

vaLLarrr (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

'he wasn't saying it's okay to put a person on another drug"and he DOESN'T say in THAT QUOTE, that it ISN'T ok to put them on a different drug EITHER.he SPECIFICALLY talks about a "tranquilizer" that they "keep them on", "year in and year out."BUT, I don't think LRH stated it properly EITHER, btw.obviously it SHOULD be done be a doctor and NOT an auditor, and in fact that IS the way it happens.but I don't disagree that it IS a poor choice of words, even if it ISN'T the policy of the CoS

cultssuck (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

Well unfortunately for you Val people can read my direct quote from Hubbard and your 'response' and decide for themselves. I'm confident most will shudder at the thought of a $cientologist deciding if a person requires medication and if so, what they will 'allow'.And believe me, right now the public is VERY interested in what $cientology has to say about seizures.Hubbard's words don't bode well for you, especially when they're being posted all over the web.

squilky1951 (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

Good lord Val forgot her dictionary,bravo.

vaLLarrr (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

'Pretty damn clear Val."it sure IS.read my RESPONSE.clear as a BELL.

cultssuck (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

Val it is quite clear what Hubbard said, and he wasn't saying it's okay to put a person on another drug, he stated quite clearly that an auditoe take one off a drug prescribed by their doctor. A DOCTOR Val, who actually went to medical school. I think a physician is perhaps in a better position to decide what medication is appropriate, not some untrained auditor or Hubbard.

vaLLarrr (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

'Its just a tranquilizer and they keep them on that one year, year in and year out. And then you come along as an auditor and...you tell the pc that hell have to go off that drug"does it ever occur to you that there are OTHER NON "tranquilizer" drugs, that they COULD be on, that DON'T interfere with Scientology, and they are NOT put on these drugs because doctors have NO IDEA that "tranquilizers" are harmful, and they would be BETTER OFF on a DIFFERENT DRUG?what's wrong with that?