Hi:
H Alan Montgomery wrote:
> In article <359870B3.CB2D0...@home.com>
> Claire Swazey <swa...@home.com> writes:
> >Tashback wrote:
> >> Claire, you're not responding to my post, although you seem to think you
> >> are. Certainly incest and abuse are reasons to disconnect from folks.
> >> Impedence of spiritual progress is another matter.
> >> We're not talking about abusers. We're talking about folks antagonistic to
> >> your church. And, as ydrrisil pointed out, we're also talking about family
> >> members and friends who have been declared by the church.
> >> You want to defend the concept that it's wise to disconnect from abusers
> >> and molesters? Gosh, yeah, that's a good idea. But that's not what
> >> Scientological disconnection is about, and you know it's not.
> >> Tash
> >I don't know any such thing. I refer you to my post wherein I described
> >my unusual family and the fact that I have never been asked or told to
> >disconnect from them. I have been around in alot of orgs & missions and
> >I am telling you that I have rarely seen incidents of disconnection.
> >And, one of the points I DID make in the afore-mentioned post is that
> >when people DO disconnect when they should not have,when they could have
> >just live and let live, that this is not Scn policy.As a former staff
> >member and a course supervisor I know whereof I speak. Please have the
> >goodness to not attribute "knowledge" to me that I do not possess.
> This is a really strange concept to me. I read the Anderson Report
> from the 1960's and the disconnection policy is tearing families
> apart. I see the mention of it in Bare Faced Messiah and it is
> tearing families apart. I see a post on this NG about a girl who had
> a sister that disconnect from her when she had not even SAID
> anything about Co$. Then Claire comes along and and says, "I
> personally have not experieneced this. I have been in alot of orgs
> and it was not mentioned there. It thus follows that the
> disconnection policy is as I perceive it, not as how the external
> world perceives."
> The problem with that type of analysis is that you can NEVER
> disprove an assertion. It always comes back to "What is true for me,
> is true." Claire, if you choose to believe that the disconnection
> policy is as you describe, that is fine, but other people have had
> different experiences. By saying that you have the final word you
> invalidate their experiences by saying that they are wrong or
> misguided or just plain lying. Have you considered that the reason
> you have no conflicting information is because people at the orgs
> you were with would be frightened or ashamed of talking about their
> disconnection experiences? The only way you could defend you
> position is to say, "Hey! At every org I was in I asked around and
> the disconnection policy was applied in an evenhanded, fair way."
> Even then it would not adequately invalidate the experiences of
> other people.
I don't ask around all that much, I keep my eyes and ears open. I find
out alot more that way, truly.
If management habitually in an arbitrary manner told people to
disconnect from family when all that was needed was a little
communications- if that *really* was common, it certainly would have
happened to me. Yet out of 7 orgs and missions where I've been on
lines- 0 asked or told me to do so. I think that says something.
I realize that abuses may happen and I have seen some accounts of
improper disconnection posted here and webbed as well. All I can say is
that when such things occur, (improperly, I mean) that this is not
right. It is not Scientology. I think we have all seen people and
organizations who did not act in accordance with
policies,beliefs,creeds,standards,mores, etc, that they supposedly
subscribed to, both in and outside Scientology. But I do not think that
the majority of people and organizations betray their standards as a
regular course of events. But it does happen, both in the
non-Scientology world and in Scientology. But I believe,based on my
experiences and knowing the people I know and have known, that abuse of
disconnection is not encouraged or wanted in Scientology. I know a man
whose wife is a non-Scientologist. The man is a dyed in the wool
Scientologist. The wife has trouble seeing the attraction. For a while
there was some disharmony on the home front. Even then, the Org did not
order the guy to disconnect from his wife. They suggested better
communication. I think this must have worked as they are still
together. She is still a non-Scientologist but they are happy together
and no one's pressuring them to split up.
As far as being sent to Ethics, that, in my opinion is really not a big
deal. (shall I get my flame suit ready?) Really. In the occasions I
have seen an Ethics Officer, the first thing (s)he did was just to ask
me what was going on. I have found the experience to be generally
painless. In fact, I know of someone (my husband) who has been told a
certain thing by an Ethics Officer (this has happened to John a couple
times) and given a certain indication and John explained that this was
not the case. And he was *listened* to seriously.
Speaking as someone who has had a comm-ev,among other things, going to
Ethics is not the end of the world. Let's say that some staff member
did not like something a person did and for whatever reason,sent the
person to Ethics. That is the person's chance to get the situation
cleared up. The person can then explain to the Ethics Officer what did
happen. I know at my Org, the Ethics Officer takes such things
seriously and listens to the person. The treatment is fair.
> As I have said in another post, it is not that disconnection IS
> abused, but that it can easily be abused. ALl a member of the
> management of an org would have to do is demand that you disconnect
> from someone. If you refused, they could send you to ethics. If the
> management was adament about sending you to ethics and would not
> allow you receive auditing until you disconnected, what would you
> do? Appeal their decision? How? Overe and over again it has been
> shown that the justice system within Co$ does not actually provide
> justice.
See prev paragraph- I forgot I wasn't at the bottom of the posting and
put everything up there...
> Disconnection is not as you perceive, Claire.
Going to have to disagree with you on that one.
Objective reality
> conflicts with your experiences. You could if you wanted test what I
> have said by asking around current members at your org, but it would
> be rather dangerous to do so.
Regards,
Claire
