Poll: Why leave?

Let’s do a quick poll. The rules are simple:

  • Answer by leaving a comment to this blog post.
  • Only Scientologists having left the church or considering leaving may answer.
  • One answer per person.
  • Answer the first question only with “yes” or “no”.
  • Answer the second question with just one sentence:
  1. Have you left the Church of Scientology?
  2. Why did you leave or why are you considering leaving the CoS?

The comments to this blog post give an interesting overview showing why some people left the church or why they are considering leaving.

Note (2009-10-08): Off-topic comments to this blog post will be deleted. No warning. Also, due to the amount of comments in a short time, I will keep this as the latest blog post for yet another day. Tomorrow, I will post another poll.

Advertisements
  1. Hubbardianen
    2009-10-06 at 19:00

    1. No. (I’m not really in either, sort of off line).
    2. I have not “officially” left because I like the idea of a Church of Scientology, a central, ethical good organization built by LRH standards & policy letters where you can meet other scientologists, because I believe in trying to solve the problems from within and I would try that until somebody throws me out or I get declared and I would try this even if I was an OT VIII and didn’t have to worry about my bridge, but I fully respect those who leave and try to fix it from the outside.

  2. Jim Logan
    2009-10-06 at 19:00

    1.Yes
    2. I was declared an SP and expelled by DM/RTC.

  3. Tomas
    2009-10-06 at 19:12

    1. Yes
    2. It was impossible to uphold my integrity in the CoS.

  4. LO
    2009-10-06 at 19:55

    1. Not
    2. I’ll only do it when I’m sure I’ll can do my nots and training in a standard group and the sit with my relatives and friends that are in is resolved. I’m waiting and want to see what you guys put up, or perhaps Miscavige has a heart Stroke and is dead or your pressure is as big that he resigns ! But please continue your work ! I’m still sorting it out !

    • Mark A. Baker
      2009-10-06 at 21:45

      I suggest you investigate the Freezone’s Midwest Tech Center in Indiana as a starter. They’ll be happy to answer your questions or make an appropriate referral if needed.

      http://www.freezoneauditors.org/index.php/auditor/success/37/

      Mark A. Baker

      • thisiswrong
        2009-10-08 at 05:03

        Quit harvesting victims to your personal “org.” (impoliteness deleted)

        • 2009-10-08 at 08:38

          Be polite and respectful here. Opposing views are welcome, but no name calling, please.

        • Chris
          2009-10-12 at 03:43

          Oh joy another critic who thinks we’re vultures for daring to use Scientology outside of the fascism of the Church.
          Good luck with stopping us thisiswrong.
          I don’t take care too kindly to Concentration Camps.

      • Overdriver
        2009-10-09 at 14:01

        I personally doubt there could be any organisation besides the Church which could be able to deliver the tech correctly. The Church would need to correct itself to become consequent in applying the WISDOM of Scientology…
        KSW No. 1.:
        One: Having the correct technology.
        It can be said that in the internet age where the materials cannot be accessed online, KSW No. 1. is out. Why to prevent the references, the tech to become easily searcheable?

        • Chris
          2009-10-13 at 04:35

          Who praytell are you supposed to be replying to?
          Wordpress’s comment system is a sheer Joy like that…

  5. Linda McGinley
    2009-10-06 at 20:23

    1. Yes, there is now a non-enturb order out on me.
    2. I have first hand knowledge of DM and know without a doubt that current data about him as per SPTimes is true and in light of Tone Scale data, this is disastrous for the church of Scn, thru all strata, top to bottom.

  6. RJ
    2009-10-06 at 20:59

    Geir on question 1, I suggest using quotation marks around Scientology when writing about the current organization, because the Church of “Scientology” and the religion or philosophy of Scientology are no longer co-terminal and have become mutually exclusive.

    In other words to be more precise I never left it, it in fact abandoned me!

    This also answers question 2, since what is called the “Church of Scientology”, has instead become a vast money laundering empire posing as a “religion”.

    Personally I do not know where these funds go. Whether they personally line Miscavige’s pockets or as I suspect fund various black ops like the defunct and unlamented BCCI. The fact is they are no longer used to support the Staff so that 1) the services of Scientology can be delivered and 2) that through results achieved by Standard Tech the subject can be broadly disseminated.

    In other words what ever game they are playing right now is a game I do not want to be a part of.

  7. rebel008
    2009-10-06 at 20:59

    1. Yes
    2. I became aware of the abuse and human rights violations and realized this was not the Church I joined. I never agreed to be part of a group like the current Church.

  8. Axiom 32
    2009-10-06 at 21:26

    1. No

    2. Since 1981 the Church is gradually descending from LRH´s standards to the point where you get declared if you want to correct the squirreling.
    BTW, rumor has it that the Church in Stockholm,Sweden is conducting an investigation to find out if publics have been reading about Scientology on the net! :)))
    The Process is biting!;)

    • Hubbardianen
      2009-10-07 at 07:46

      Are you Swedish? Tell me more if you know anything…

      • Axiom 32
        2009-10-07 at 14:00

        Yes, I am Swedish!:) For a long while I thought those strange ideas about money and mest were resticted only to Sthlm Org but since then I´ve realized the opposite.
        That´s all I know about it.

  9. Gaiagnostic
    2009-10-06 at 22:07

    1. Yes.
    2. Overwhelming debt — the straw that broke the camel’s back. With what we’ve learned since we left (corruption of tech, SP miscavige, etc.) we realize we would not ever go back to the church.

  10. Thalkirst
    2009-10-06 at 22:37

    1. Yes.
    2. Personal integrity.

  11. ScientiaCapto
    2009-10-06 at 22:37

    1. Yes
    2. Disconnected because I will not contribute to that group while it advances the false purposes of wealth acquisition and control of beings under the guise of help.

  12. Miss Penguin
    2009-10-06 at 23:10

    1. Not officially
    2.Because the church is not on-source, and is off-purpose.

  13. Inky
    2009-10-06 at 23:18

    1. Yes
    2. I felt I was an embarrassment to the church, an ineffective OEC/FEBC grad and a poor Scientologist.

  14. Underground For Now
    2009-10-06 at 23:54

    Have you left the Church of Scientology?
    NoT official but just a week or two away.

    Why did you leave or why are you considering leaving the CoS?

    It started with the June & August article in the St. Pete Times. Watched the video featuring the head of security at GOLD. That video woke me up. Then I Googled the name Marty Rathburn…that was two or three weeks ago. I have been reading all of the blogs on Marty’s “Blog Roll”. This has been a trip of self-validation after self validation of noticing many outpoints over the years. My first service was the comm course in 1968. We are talking a few years here.

    Tonight, I just read T.Paine’s, “What it means to be a Scientologist” Bingo…truth revealed for me. Now I have the words to deal with friends and associates when I tell the current COS to “SHOVE IT”. OK for the COS to label me an SP. I consider that term “SPECIAL PERSON”. Every friend and associate on my email list will get T. Paine’s, “What it means to be a Scientologist”.

    The air is starting to smell clean again….

    • Jim Logan
      2009-10-07 at 15:37

      UFN,
      That smell of clean air is soooooo nice, isn’t it. To me it’s truth spreading out and increasing its sphere of influence. Like onE big, giant rehab session and the needle loosens, loosens, loosens, then flop, flop, the idle uninfluenced FN. THETA IS BACK!

    • Anonymous
      2009-10-12 at 07:04

      Underground For Now, I love you. That is all.

  15. Rebel Too
    2009-10-06 at 23:56

    1) yes
    2) Due to the insanities of all the off-policy actions I witnessed while on staff especially during and after the Basics “evolution”. After doing my own eval to find where all the off policy actions were originating from I discovered that these were being ordered and condoned from the very top.

    • overdriver
      2009-10-07 at 12:32

      Would you please, let me know some details of the off-policy actions.

      • Jim Logan
        2009-10-07 at 15:40

        OverD,
        I’m not Rebel Too, but here’s one contradicting the IAS regging.

        HCOPL 24 FEBRUARY 1964 – Urgent – Org Programming

        “If the Org slumps: Don’t engage in “fund raising” or “selling postcards” or borrowing money. Just make more income with Scientology. It’s a sign of very poor management to seek extraordinary solutions for finance outside Scientology. It has always failed. For Orgs as for pcs “Solve it With Scientology”. Every time I myself have sought to solve finance or personnel in other ways than Scientology I have lost out. So I can tell you from experience that Org solvency lies in More Scientology, not patented combs or fund raising Barbecues”.—L. Ron Hubbard

        • Overdriver
          2009-10-07 at 19:32

          Thanx, Jim. It’s correct. However, I am not sure this applies here as IAS regging goes to other purposes, not financing the orgs. So this is not about “Org solvency”. The Basics are another story maybe these “off-policy actions” are connected with that? I’m just curious.

          • Jim Logan
            2009-10-07 at 20:11

            OverD,
            I’m sure that the IAS regging, the Ideal Org prgm, that it ‘funds’ is very applicable to your question of off-policy actions. Take into consideration the severe ethics that ensues if one offers up this LRH PL in a KR in protest, or even if one just says ‘No, I won’t violate LRH finance policy and go into debt to donate to something with no exchange that is a violation of DS 40’. This very off-policy action very much applies. The ‘Basics’ push, to put any and all on what is tantamount to a Div 6 course are indeed another. Read T Paine’s articles on scientology-cult.com and in particular the Mechanisms of Miscavige for some more. Out-tech? Well, that’s a whole other series of alterations, interpretations and violations of LRH materials. Have you been living in the Mythcavige bubble? Time to burst it mate.

            • Overdriver
              2009-10-07 at 20:33

              I did not observe any counteractions because not giving money. I observed other outpoints I do not describe at this point.

              • Jim Logan
                2009-10-08 at 00:01

                Fair enough. Relook at the PL I quoted. It applies to IAS regging. This ‘fund raising’ violates LRH finance policy. Period.

          • Jim Logan
            2009-10-08 at 00:17

            Sorry about dat. Didn’t see that section.

          • concernedScn
            2009-10-09 at 15:20

            Basics pushing and IAS regging IS ALSO an unusual/squirrel solution for Org solvency.

            This is because the Org keeps a commission for every basics package that is given to a library, every IAS donation that is regged, etc.

            It is very common for a Class V org to tell staff, “We need to reg $5,000 for the IAS today or we won’t be able to pay the electric bill!” Any donation that is gotten by the org translates into a commission for the org.

            • Jim Logan
              2009-10-09 at 18:46

              OUCH! That hurts and you’ve a good right to be concerned. Translate that to action and we’ll all be better for it.

          • LA Scientologist
            2009-10-10 at 21:53

            There is also this from LRH which seems like it was written in direct response to DM’s “strategy”:

            “We own a tremendous amount of property. We own a tremendous amount of material, and so forth. And it keeps growing. But that’s not important. When buildings get important to us, for God’s sake, some of you born revolutionists, will you please blow up central headquarters. If someone had put some HE (high explosives) under the Vatican long ago, Catholicism might still be going. Don’t get interested in real estate. Don’t get interested in the masses of buildings, because that’s not important.”

            L. Ron Hubbard, 31 December 1960 lecture, The Genus of Dianetics and Scientology.
            More here: http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2009/08/10/response-to-miscavige-propaganda-campaign/

  16. Otto
    2009-10-07 at 00:28

    1. No.
    2. C of S is corrupted from the top, as public I have witnessed how Mgt. is PTSing the public, Class V Orgs staff and Missions with unreal quotas not about real products but always money.

    (Geir & The Dream Team™ + us must do something effective!)

  17. Lotus Miyamoto
    2009-10-07 at 00:30

    1. No.
    2. The way Miscavige is running the Church it has become very suppressive not only to public but to staff as well.

  18. Alex
    2009-10-07 at 01:08

    1. No, but it seems very close that I will.
    2. I cannot tolerate lies coming from Scientology which should represent LRH who was the leader of truth to me. DM is an SP in my opinion and what he has done to Sea Org members disgusts me. Sorry couldn’t do it all in one sentence!!

  19. GM
    2009-10-07 at 02:06

    1. Yes
    2. Because once I LOOKED (compared various internet data to my own observations) I realized I couldn’t support an organization with that kind of corruption at its very top. Secondly the discovery that standard tech is definitely available outside the C of S made it unnecessary to continue with the church. The constant Enforced Reality mode of operation within the C of S I experienced became the antithesis of “spiritual freedom”.

  20. BJX
    2009-10-07 at 04:43

    1. No (not officially, yet)
    2. Out tech, off policy, out ethics, no justice.

  21. StarsAwait
    2009-10-07 at 06:40

    1. no
    2. This new group and all they’re writing about.

  22. KSW1Fan
    2009-10-07 at 07:30

    1) We`re leaving but want to take our child with us(dedicated So Member)
    2) We`ve been notizing since years that the church is not taking the LRH path but
    going the weird , unlogical Miscavige way. We talked about our concerns and wrote
    many KRs. Now we are on our way to get declared.

    • overdriver
      2009-10-07 at 12:30

      Nobody can get declared because writing KRs. What did you wrote or what else happened?

      • Jim Logan
        2009-10-07 at 15:43

        OverD,
        You need to get more R on the capricious declares. Keep looking, or better still, write a KR on some Mythcavige nonsense. You’ll find out soon enough.

        • Jim Logan
          2009-10-07 at 15:48

          OverD,
          For your first KR, write one on the ‘fundraising’ and reference the aforementioned LRH PL. Here it is again, as truth in this alter-ised area.

          HCOPL 24 FEBRUARY 1964 – Urgent – Org Programming

          “If the Org slumps: Don’t engage in “fund raising” or “selling postcards” or borrowing money. Just make more income with Scientology. It’s a sign of very poor management to seek extraordinary solutions for finance outside Scientology. It has always failed. For Orgs as for pcs “Solve it With Scientology”. Every time I myself have sought to solve finance or personnel in other ways than Scientology I have lost out. So I can tell you from experience that Org solvency lies in More Scientology, not patented combs or fund raising Barbecues”.—L. Ron Hubbard

          • Overdriver
            2009-10-07 at 20:23

            Jim, I am not curious that you get problems when you cite this reference, regarding the IAS (as I explained above). Regging for buying the org building is a different story of course… But I still can’t see that being such bad thing if it causes expansion in a good sense. (You know in a war sacrifices are needed. And we can’t say there is no “war” if we look at the present situation on Earth. However, when I see that ethics personnel or Scientologists are dramatizing suppressive valences and are closed on two way communication…, that things are raising concerns in me, because they are just in the business of creating the very enemies of their own Church… So if OSA are watching this blog, which I am sure they are doing, they should look at the specific outpoints that people are spotting. Which is a very hard thing on the other side, ’cause they’ve got indoctrination specifically from LRH that they should look at the person being critical and not to the situation he is critical about… But LRH also told that ethics is reason… I am just concerned what reason can I expect from guys who live their lives isolated from the world they try to “conquer” and are working for almost no exchange at all. Disastrous. Also a sensitive situation. On one hand there are the “public” who think we are safe on this planet. On the other hand are the staff who lives seperated from the realities of everyday life… Disastrous too.

            • 2009-10-07 at 20:29

              Good exchange of viewpoints. Move the exchange over to General comments and questions (trying to keep the comments to this blog post slimmed down to just answers to the questions). Thanks

            • Jim Logan
              2009-10-08 at 00:13

              OverD,
              My mistake, I meant to include the bogus Ideal Org regging in the comment. That’s just as bad and just as off-policy as ANY ‘fund raising’. What Your Fees Buy, written by LRH explains this clearly, ALL of it comes from the exchange of money for service.
              Please look at the HCOB Criminal Mind for additional data on ‘accusation in addition to the tech dict def of criticism. ALL criticism isn’t ‘bad’, ‘random, carping, 1.1 criticism, when not borne out in fact is only an effort to reduce the size of the target of the overt’.

              • Jim Logan
                2009-10-08 at 00:15

                (Add, to last one,) is what LRH says in HCOB 21 Jan 60.

              • 2009-10-08 at 08:23

                Over to general comments section, please.

  23. 2009-10-07 at 08:30

    1. Yes
    2. I came to realize that I was in fear of the very thing I loved (Scn) and that caused me to look and not listen.

  24. thatsnotmyname
    2009-10-07 at 10:48

    1. No
    2. It isn’t fun any more, therefore it’s not scientology

  25. Paolo
    2009-10-07 at 11:12

    1. Yes
    2. Having many ties to the “wog world” I couldn’t stand anymore the black PR. At the beginning I fought it, then I realized that, although I don’t want to generalize, the people doing the black pr actually had better reasons and ideals than the ones in the inside. Scientology, although I recognize it has some also some very good points, wasn’t willing to correct itself while in many istances delivering overt products or creating bad byproducts. It was tough but I felt it wasn’t right to support such a group. Additionally I couldn’t stand anymore being “handled”. It had become a paradox: you study to gain self determinism, you get “handled” to become “other determined”…

  26. altruistichedonist
    2009-10-07 at 13:57

    1. Yes.

    2. Too may illogical outpoints in a local “insane” Class V org. Unethical actions by David Miscavige and the IAS. It’s not Scientology. Empty buildings don’t provide service.

  27. Dagny
    2009-10-07 at 16:26

    1. No
    2. Outpoints I have personally observed and experienced

  28. As-Is
    2009-10-07 at 16:29

    Yes.
    Non-application of fundamentals of the subject of scientology. What’s the point in being with an organization that doesn’t apply the subject it disseminates and charges for?

  29. UnDisturbed
    2009-10-07 at 19:05

    1. Yes
    2. I believe the Truth Rundown (at TampaBay.com) interviewees and Geir more than I do my Church’s responses. This is very sad to me that I can no longer believe my Church.

  30. All the young dudes
    2009-10-07 at 20:17

    1. Yes, spouse & I (both OTs) left in 2008 though not officially in writing.
    2. Noticing numerous outpoints inside ourselves, the constant regging and drain on our money, & sanity etc,.and seeing the truth (on DN,Mngt,personal stories etc).

  31. All the young dudes
    2009-10-07 at 20:18

    Oops I meant to say DM instead of DN

    • RJ
      2009-10-09 at 02:26

      Common error since it’s his usual needle manifestation. That and an R/S 🙂

  32. Rebel Too
    2009-10-07 at 20:35

    Gier, Just pointing out that your blog states “Only Scientologists having left the church or considering leaving may answer.” and then your first question is “Have you left the Church of Scientology?”. You may want to clarify if you mean leaving the church or leaving Scientology if that’s what you meant.

    • 2009-10-07 at 20:38

      I’m only addressing leaving he church. I hoped I was clear on that in the post… Both questions clearly addresses the church.

  33. 2009-10-07 at 20:53

    1. Yes
    2. Tired to linsten to management lies and found that what the Tech has to offer is available in the Freezone with less crap, arbitraries, abuse and no use of Ethics as a punishment or as a control tool.

  34. Kathy
    2009-10-07 at 22:09

    1. Yes.
    2. I left because I didn’t like the way things were changing – the tech, people were not nice anymore, auditing was like torture – basically I was miserable being a part of the CofS.

  35. lisa
    2009-10-07 at 22:48

    1. Yes
    2. Saw too many injustices in the name of justice. Tired of only seeing graphs in affluence without any diversions and knowing it was full of lies. Tired of seeing LRH and COB being considered “gods”.

  36. Truth
    2009-10-08 at 00:19

    1. Yes.

    2. I left because the Sea Org was very abusive under the guise of helping people.

  37. Dominic O'Brien
    2009-10-08 at 00:45

    yes
    Just wanted to be able to live and create my own life and stop being ‘run’ by screaming maniacs and NCGs.

    • dbloch7986
      2012-06-21 at 23:54

      Dominic,

      I remember when you were the Supercargo at AOLA. I was in CF. Derek Bloch, do you remember me? How crazy to see you here. Get in touch with me if you want.

  38. Winston Smith (1984)
    2009-10-08 at 01:24

    1. Yes
    2. I did not meet one Clear, OT or any Scientologist who demonstrated the abilities written about by LRH.

    • Jim Logan
      2009-10-09 at 18:48

      Hi Winston, I’m Jim Logan. We’ve now ‘met’.

      • Winston Smith
        2009-10-09 at 23:26

        Hi Jim Logan. Is there a reason you wanted to meet me?

    • RJ
      2009-10-09 at 22:09

      Obviously, you don’t get out much.

      • Chris
        2009-10-12 at 03:53

        lol.

  39. toujours
    2009-10-08 at 01:39

    1. Yes
    2. Because I didn’t enjoy the totalitarian atmosphere and the constant demands for money, coupled with the vindictive labelling of people with the many derogatory labels available; seemed completely contrary to a spiritually minded organisation – felt like I was selling my soul and losing my ability to think for myself.

  40. Rob Robinson
    2009-10-08 at 01:51

    1.YES
    2. Differences with High Command about on policy actions and Then I read some OT 3, OT 5 and OT 8 data before I was “ready for it”.

    • Winston Smith
      2009-10-09 at 23:28

      What possibly could bave bothered you about LRH’s hallucinations?

      • 2009-10-10 at 08:10

        Move trolling to the section on general comments and questions.

  41. An Observer
    2009-10-08 at 01:57

    1. Yes

    2. Because I decided I wasn’t interested in sacrificing all by goals and dreams and substitute them with the goals and ambitions of a self serving cult. I can’t belong to an organization which punishes it’s members for having their own dreams, their own desires, and most importantly their own thoughts.

    • Someone
      2009-10-11 at 01:02

      Exactly.

  42. jason beghe
    2009-10-08 at 02:33

    1. yes
    2. i could not maintain my personal integrity and remain a member of that group.

  43. Chris
    2009-10-08 at 03:22

    For clarification,can Freezoners answer this question?

  44. Koos
    2009-10-08 at 03:26

    1. Yes.
    2. RPF

  45. Margaret
    2009-10-08 at 04:13

    1. Have you left the Church of Scientology?

    No, not officially — but likely in the next 2-3 weeks, I will.

    2. Why did you leave or why are you considering leaving the CoS?

    The physical abuse of DM (confirmed by 14 individuals) was the final straw for me; prior to that, the ridiculous high-pressure reg’ing was just getting nuts; finally, the realization that a Standard (and more sanely delivered) Bridge exists outside the Church made the decision easier.

    • 2009-10-08 at 08:36

      Good point on the alternatives outside the CoS. There is plenty of Bridge delivered more standardly outside the church. This is a point that needs to be communicated to many more.

  46. Columbus
    2009-10-08 at 05:44

    (Comment deleted on request due to off-topic and impoliteness)

    • 2009-10-08 at 08:39

      This comment section is for Scientologists giving their reasons why they left or are considering leaving.

      Next off-topic post will be deleted.

      • Overdriver
        2009-10-08 at 09:03

        Dear Geir, this is just a malicious comment. Why did not delete at once? Makes me no sense. (Sorry.)

        • 2009-10-08 at 09:07

          Agreed. Done.

          • Overdriver
            2009-10-08 at 21:05

            Thanks. And for your work as well. Highly appreciated.

        • Columbus
          2009-10-08 at 22:38

          Well, you are still Scientology cultists, having a fallen out with the current dictator “DM.”

          Censorship of myself – a Class V auditor with much experience, offering helpful advice – is disappointing.

          And good luck to you anyway.

          • 2009-10-08 at 22:50

            You are not able to follow the simple rules for this blog post and as you did not respond to three straight warnings, you are hereby given a red card (see soccer rules).

  47. TRUTH
    2009-10-08 at 06:50

    1. I am no longer part of the Church, but still a Scientologist.
    2. witnessed many out-tech, injustice and Human Rights violation, tried to handle them with reports internally thru IJC and RTC but the church completely ignored them. Finally I realized that it is impossible to apply LRH’s policies in a group that is run by an SP (David Miscavige), because he doesn’t give a damn about LRH or his policies and his tech.

  48. Pavlovian Dogh
    2009-10-08 at 16:30

    1. I left the “church” after many years in the cult. Today, I don’t call myself a scientologist.

    2. Got economically destroyed. The harressment – constant phone, mail etc. The Dogma – the blind idolization of Hubbard, the derogatory position on wog, psychs and priests. The oppressive means to silence critics (natter). The false pretense, employing confessional data for black PR. Far too many lies!

    Well, this is the big picture; there were good people and efforts too, I miss them. But the burden of nasty stuff was too heavy. That’s why.

    BTW, good honest work, Geir! And all the luck for you!

  49. Rip Kirby
    2009-10-08 at 18:00

    1. Not officially, but theta wise I left the church 20 years ago. What about all of us not left yet decides upon a date (not to distant) and send in our letters at the same time?
    2. Having investigated (doing part of the doubt formula) for some months now, I have found all my suspicions from the eighties to be true. It is a relief and it is sad at the same time.
    In the beginning I managed to convince myself that it was only my bank (reactive mind) which said A=A=A. The huge events looked like Hitlers propaganda shows. I did not feel good about the GAT, but could not put my finger on anything special, and now: all the materials revised – important pieces deleted! If I thought some program or handling or ethics action was stupid, unfair or not nescessary – I blamed it on my bank as a good Scientologist should do. My o/ws must be great!

    Well, now, the last months have been mystery revealed for me. Thanks Geir, Marthy and the rest of the wild bunch. And to all of you who tried to fight this since the early eighties, I am sorry I didnt listen.

    • Jim Logan
      2009-10-09 at 18:52

      Sounds like you are listening now. And to your own counsel, your own integrity. Welcome back RK! REALLY good to hear from you again!

      • Rip Kirby
        2009-10-11 at 20:36

        Thanx for the ack! These days are really revitalizing. I’ll continue in another post/forum.

  50. Sara
    2009-10-08 at 18:43

    I wonder how many of these people answering the questions are actually real Scientologists?

    • 2009-10-08 at 18:49

      I believe most of them are – since I have earlier been approving lots of comments from many of them. Although it is hard to know what you would classify as a real Scientologist 😉

  51. Overdriver
    2009-10-08 at 21:01

    No.

    I do not want to leave but ethics forces you into either being aggressive, either to volunteer exile this later is also a kind of leaving. Scientologists and ethics are very liable to dramatizing police state. Instead of easy solutions the majority are going into enemy-finding and fight. But the worst thing is that these actions by their side can be easily backed up by LRH references… So although I can see the really superior side of Scientology, nowadays I have doubts even in the “scripts”. However if the basic tenets of the Church would be applied by the Church and “Scientologists”, no problem would arise. Maybe LRH intended it that way.

  52. Columbus
    2009-10-08 at 21:59

    My comments were deleted? None were impolite. All made valid points, IMO.

    This is your loss. Too bad.

    Censorship is the Scientological way.

    I wonder how many other useful and insightful comments have been deleted?

    • 2009-10-08 at 22:21

      Apart from your impolite and off-topic posts (trolling): 3 more out of around 1280 (all but one were deleted by adding in a comment that they were indeed deleted). Now, move to the section on general comments and questions for… general comments and question. You and everyone else are welcome as long as you are: Respectful and polite, on topic, not referencing confidential material and short in your comments.

  53. Columbus
    2009-10-08 at 22:01

    The Church of Scientology is the way it is, primarily, because it was designed that way by its founder.

    Will this comment be deleted too?

    • 2009-10-08 at 22:23

      No, but only because it warrants another notice that this is off topic for this poll. Move such comments to the section for General comments and questions.

  54. Columbus
    2009-10-08 at 22:07

    Why did I leave? I left because I no longer wished to participate in the deceptive and abusive personality cult put there by L. Ron Hubbard, and finalized by him by the late 1960s and early 1970s. This Hubbard-created cult is what David Miscavige inherited.

    • RJ
      2009-10-09 at 22:23

      Oh right poor Davy’s just doing what Ron says.

      Yeah whatever!

      I’d say you were part of the problem and not the solution.

      Also I don’t believe you’ve actually done any actual training in Scientology or actually applied the tech.

      • 2009-10-09 at 22:26

        Don’t feed the troll.

        • RJ
          2009-10-09 at 22:37

          You are totally right Geir 🙂

          But I couldn’t resist.

          • Chris
            2009-10-10 at 07:56

            But what if you intend on feeding the troll poison? 🙂

            • 2009-10-10 at 08:18

              😉

              Leave it to me to kick the troll out…. Done.

  55. James Anderson
    2009-10-09 at 03:16

    Question 1: I left after 25 years at the begining of this year (2009).
    Question 2: Many reasons really but the final straw was the abuse of my daughter at the hands of incompetent Sea Org members, she wanted to leave after 4 years and was not immediately put on a routing form. She had physical conditions that were not being addressed these were placing her health and mental well being at risk.
    We ended up pushing the org to allow her to route out standardly and quickly. There is more to all this as we still have a daughter in the SO.

    James

  56. Mac Stevens
    2009-10-09 at 04:01

    1. Yes.
    2. a. My own communication was suppressed. This was ruining my life.
    b. I had a number of disagreements with LRH policy which would not resolve without cancelling the policy, an impossibility.
    c. I found out that the big legal “win” we were cheering for in 2000 was the Lisa Mcpherson case, which should not even have been fought. Lisa was dead, CoS was in the wrong, and we (not knowing the facts) were $@%$@# cheering about it, like a bunch of idiots.
    d. I found out about coerced abortions in the Sea Org.

  57. Kevin Brady
    2009-10-09 at 04:27

    1. Yes, I have left. I left in 1995.

    2. I left a few times, but the final time was 1995. The reasons I left were multitudinous, but they boil down to the organization not representing “the Tech” as I had read it. I believe that they do run according to LRH’s writings, but many of these are confidential, and distribution is “eyes only”, compartmentalized for specific posts or ranks within the organization. The lie that there is no “hidden data line” leads to an impression that something is going on that Ron didn’t authorize. For me, I felt like “something is going on that they aren’t telling me about”. I thought it was a problem with me, but I should have trusted my senses. Instead, I was introverted severely on my way out the door, but left out of a sense of self-preservation. I was suicidal for a few months, and am surprised I survived, because I had actually believed I was a degraded being and a suppressive person. (link removed due to reference to confidential material) feel free to write to me at gomorrhan@hotmail.com

    There is life after scientology. I’m living proof.

    • Jim Logan
      2009-10-09 at 18:59

      Kevin,
      VERY well done on carrying through. The impression that there is a ‘hidden data line’ of ‘eyes only’ advices is one engendered knowingly and calculatedly by David Miscavige. I was married to LRH’s personal assistant and I can assure you, NO such ‘advices’ exist, that are contrary to easily available written materials. Scientology is what is stated in published bulletins, tapes, and issues. Period.

      • RJ
        2009-10-09 at 22:31

        What Jimmy says is sooth.

        Miscavige uses the nonexistent “R”advices to twist policy and pervert tech. The problem is that unlike you most people are afraid to counter his majesty by asking for the actual reference in writing just like it says in the HCOPL ‘The Hidden Data Line’.

  58. Carmel
    2009-10-09 at 05:16

    1. Yes

    2. I left when RTC orders became accepted as senior to tech and policy, and when I could no longer operate or “survive” within the ranks without compromising and/or going into agreement.

  59. Chris
    2009-10-09 at 06:03

    1.No,was never in.
    2.I’m a freezoner.

  60. Stewart
    2009-10-09 at 09:49

    1. Yes
    2. Initially I wavered due to the insane push for a very small field to find the money to purchase a building worth millions of dollars which would have been empty and unaffordable in ongoing costs. Then I discovered the truth concerning management being off policy, out ethics through lots of horror stories of ex SO at upper orgs. This combined with my own lack of attainment of OT states broke the poor old camel’s back after 30 years.

  61. FoTi
    2009-10-09 at 12:01

    l. Yes

    2. Witnessed too many gross outpoints/suppression, weirdnesses and crazy stuff happening to myself and with other people I knew…….instead of winning in life, I saw people being crushed, smashed and suppressed by the ‘church’ staff and by each other. The organization of the Church of Scientology was demonstrating that it was only interested in collecting money from it’s members and had no real intention, at all, of helping the members improve their life.

  62. concernedScn
    2009-10-09 at 15:29

    1. Working on it.
    2. Too many outpoints at events and at my local org, blatant over-the-top lying from Management, having to write too many KRs to RTC only to cognite that their whole KR handling operation is “Acknowledge and shred!”. Oh, and DM is completely evil.

  63. Jack
    2009-10-09 at 15:36

    1. Yes
    2. They changed the defintion of FN and thus my ‘Clear’ status morphed into ‘Release’ and I was TE’d for an entire bridge to Clear from zero. When I protested the C/S showed me a reference. BUT it was the same one they showed me when I attested Clear.

    They just could not get out of that one without admitting they’re altered the tech and the C/S shouted his mouth off for me to stop asking questions. I’m afraid I blew my top (appropriate response), told him to shove his cans where the sun don’t shine and stormed out, never to return.
    I heard of many Clears having the same scam pulled on them, particularly past-life-clears, but most of them just feebly went along with the Church’s bullying because of course they’re scared they’ll get in trouble with the ethics department etc. etc.

    • Jim Logan
      2009-10-09 at 19:01

      Jack,
      WELL DONE! I suggest you find a Standard Tech auditor/CS, ‘out here’ in the field. You’ll enjoy the real thing.

  64. hummingbird
    2009-10-09 at 16:09

    1. Yes
    2. Thrown out, but happy about it. Tired of the grinding poverty, sleepless nights, not being able to spend time with my child, dealing with the a*holes on top, putting up with the endless crapola, and just not seeing any future in anything I was doing. After 8 years, it seemed like we should have made a dent, should have been growing and flourishing, but we were dying.

  65. Nom de Plume
    2009-10-09 at 17:11

    isene :
    You (Columbus) are hereby given a red card…

    I hope that means, “Bye bye”. We are here barking at something huge, and he is busy barking at us. Wrong flow.

    • 2009-10-09 at 18:12

      Yes; A red card means an early shower 😉

  66. Nom de Plume
    2009-10-09 at 17:26

    1. Yes

    2. Finally couldn’t find enough “reasonable” explanations to self to justify the freaky ethics, enforced squirrel tech, and criminal admin. Did not throw myself under the train by op-terming with the enslavers just then.

    LRH said something somewhere once about if you have to get to a safe space from which to speak out, do it.

    I never saw one until, nearly simultaneously, a)Geir’s blog appeared, and b)I learned how to use a proxy. 😉

  67. Lawrence
    2009-10-09 at 21:16

    Then….tired of the poverty. Tired of chasing the carrot that one never seems to catch. Wanted to experience other things in life. Now… if I was in I would leave because I would not want to belong to such an unethical organization.

  68. D
    2009-10-10 at 06:58

    1. No but on my way

    2. Just woke up to the fact that The Church had been insidiously inhibiting & enforcing ARC. Examples of this are disconnections, us vs them, behavior modification through irrational ethics actions, high volumes of calls/emails/promos, physical & verbal abuses, crush regging & recruiting, long lists on must do/can’t do, threats of punishment unless one tows the company line,…).

    Knowing what I know about how aberrative the inhibition & enforcement of ARC are, I can no longer tolerate, participate, support and/or defend it whether it is done to me or others. I’m sick of getting evals/invals. I’m even sicker of seing others getting evals/invals all done in such an incidious way that one thinks it’s for his/her own good.

  69. scooter
    2009-10-10 at 11:19

    1.Yes

    2. Injustice that couldn’t be sanely handled, finding out a lot of OTs had left the “Church” and why thy were leaving, finding out about the enormous scam that the “Basics to Libraries” was and asking OSA for DA on this and other things and receiving blatant and provable lies or no-answers in return. In short, finding out that the “Church” I had devoted thirty years to wasn’t what i thought it was but it was simply a scam run for the benefit of one psycho at the top.

    • Elgin
      2009-10-11 at 03:26

      scooter, what is the “Basics to Libraries” scam about?
      Do you have some links about it?

      • 2009-10-11 at 09:25

        Hi Elgin, I think the library project is a scam from the get-go. If the intention is to dissiminate, you just put it on-line; you reach a far wider audience for a fraction’s fraction of the cost.

        Perhaps there is another intention, which has something to do with the enormous profit margin for which the destination doesn’t need to be accounted for…Who knows, but the whole project is a huge outpoint IMO.

        Church Management also lies about the results. In most countries they claim 80-100% ‘done’, whereas in reality only about 10$ of those libraries have Basics books. Someone has put together data from hundreds of online library catalogues – if you look for Scooter’s first threads on ESMB, you’ll find it.

        That means untold millios go unaccounted for. I’m still at a loss as to why Scientologists accept this.

        Dave (anon)

  70. Nat
    2009-10-10 at 17:30

    Yes.

    Because it ruined my family and everything else i really care about.

  71. Elgin
    2009-10-10 at 19:18

    1. No

    2. I used to believe that the SO was the only hope and way for Scn to make it. Later, having seen other organisations do just fine without such strict policies and demands, I feel that perhaps more modern and open ways would do just as fine.

    I have come to believe the stories of abuse at the int level, and I feel that doing things for the “greater good” simply cannot justify the oppression that has been happening there (the videos, stories of abuse (Jeff Hawkins and others stories), ex-Scientology Kids, etc.). The “greater good” starts with those in front of you here and now — family, friends, colleagues. Also, if staff cannot seem to make it, just route them off fast, but in a real nice way, so they can go on as publics instead of this insane pounding and threatening while keeping them there year and year out. It’s an invalidation of the technology to keep people on RPF for long. If it was done in a good way, a program should take from a weeks to a few months at most — its again this “must have” / “can’t have” dramatization going on.

    But I must also say that I just cannot see that the destruction of all that has been build up will do any good. So many people at the Org level (staff and public) do really well, getting wins with their training and auditing. Thus I find a change from within would be best — brought about by open communication. Revolutions tend to create situations which are worse than what was there before. Its a tough situation because definitely there need to be assurance that the top level is kept straight and on the right path, and in many organisations that is attained by transparency, openness and general elections which is just not the tradition in Scn.

  72. Someone
    2009-10-10 at 23:08

    Knowledge shared, Responsibility assumed, Control of one’s Self.
    I was a staff member for 2,5 years.
    From my viewpoint, the way scientology is practiced, is totally obsessed and out of control. Scientology is a perfect mirror of ourselves and our world. Information is power and power is for all. That’s why I defend this is not a matter of scientology only, but the whole universe as well, as it has all to do with the transparency of us all and the degree we know ourselves as communicating beings.

    Thank you for the amazing job of sharing all this precious info.

  73. Alex
    2009-10-11 at 00:47

    Hi Elgin,
    I really liked a lot of what you said here in your post. Especially just routing someone off if it looks like they are not making it. Why all this tortuous “ethics and justice”.
    It would be great if the situation could be handled from within. The way I see it, in order to get an SP out of the group who is at the top of the food chain it can take some serious efforts. Like LRH says somewhere there is no creation without some destruction. (something like that) DM is like a cancer and we hope that we could surgically cut him out. If not then radiation or chemo might be necessary, otherwise we will watch the body die a slow and agonizing death. If we get rid of the SP I believe that all the theta will regroup and you will see a miracle resurgence. That is my hope at least.
    ARC,
    Alex

    • 2009-10-11 at 06:36

      If DM is cancer, would you still try to handle the situation from within? I.e. would you operate on yourself or would you leave that to someone outside of your body… like a doctor?

      • Alex
        2009-10-12 at 05:11

        Great point. I don’t think that the body would preform the surgery on itself to a good result.
        🙂
        Alex

  74. Soderqvist1
    2009-10-11 at 06:49

    FBI should do the operation!

  75. Elgin
    2009-10-11 at 09:42

    Hi Alex and Geir,
    I have posted a reply under general comments so as to not clutter up this poll.

  76. EU-guy
    2009-10-11 at 14:52

    1) Yes, already in 2002

    2) Because I could not really move up the bridge. Too much detours, pre-steps and new courses. I was trying to move up the bridge for about 15 years and I did not even arrive on Grade-0. It is also too expensive (my income is higher than the average). Too much pushes on donations.

    In 2003 I started in the Free zone and get there up to OT-III, with great ease and without the need to take a loan, and the most important with Standard Tech.

  77. Axiom142
    2009-10-11 at 21:07

    1. Yes.
    2. I left because it became clear to me that they could not deliver what they promised – spiritual freedom. I was also fed up with the lies and constant pressure to give money to them.

  78. Lulu Belle
    2009-10-11 at 22:07

    1. Yes.

    2. I was in the Sea Org in PAC. It was obvious even at that level that management was getting more and more insane. I have a revelation – not really sure why – of the fact that the actual “plan” was to work us all to death. In the years I have been out I have been amazed about how right I was.

  79. programmer_guy
    2009-10-12 at 02:25

    1. Yes.

    2. Way back then, I left mainly because I didn’t want to live in poverty for the rest of my life.

  80. Dave Gibbons
    2009-10-13 at 12:38

    1. I was a scn’ist for 34 years. I disconnected from the CofS in 2008.

    2. I’m New OTVIII and Class VI plus a whole lot of other things.
    I left after I honestly examined the actual Intentions, Activities and Statistics of the current CofS and found it to be a Suppressive Group.

    • 2009-10-13 at 13:48

      Wow. Care to elaborate (a bit) on your story?

      • Anonymous
        2009-10-14 at 04:17

        Sure, what would you like to know?

        The obvious thing would be to say that I was a deeply committed scientologist for all of those years. I’m not anti-scientology nor anti-scientologist, some of the finest people I know are or were scientologists.

        When I say that I find the CofS to be a Suppressive Group, I’m speaking primarily of the current Management Regime and, by default, those who choose to support that Management. I consider these people to be actively suppressing its staff and members; the (mostly) well=intentioned, good-hearted people that make up the CofS ranks.

        I chose to disconnect from the CofS because I could no longer compromise my own integrity nor continue to support the current corruption, abuse and misuse of scientology technology.

        • Dave Gibbons
          2009-10-14 at 06:30

          the above post says “Anonymous” but it is actually my answer to Geir’s question above it. I’ll figure out how to edit comments here sooner or later. 🙂

    • Hoodwinked
      2009-10-15 at 04:49

      Excellent answer!

  81. 2Free
    2009-10-14 at 06:16

    1. Yes
    2. Having grown up a Scientologist and being involved for 23 years since 1977, which included being in the Sea Org and at the Int Base for 10 years, I cannot tell you how many abuses I witnessed and personally went through to finally decide to leave. This includes physical abuse, mental abuse and false imprisonment crimes. Leaving itself was a complete nightmare taking nearly 2 years of literally being in a prison camp situation, behind razor wire fences, cameras, motion detectors,and being Sec Checked (metered interrogation) for hours and hours daily, with no end in sight – and don’t forget the security guards. I decided to leave because the Int Base and DM had gone so off the rails policy and Tech wise, that Scientology no longer existed at Int. After finally getting out, I still considered myself to be a Scientologist and figured that it was probably DM that was the SP on the lines. I discovered the internet and started doing my own research about Scientology and read about the real history of LRH, rather than the PR version that the CoS has been churning out for years. That made me wake up. I realized as well that if someone or a group is going to claim to have ALL the answers, especially for life, the universe, and everything, he/she/it better have the research data to back it up as FACT – I’m no longer naive and won’t be fooled again. In Scientology, LRH stating it in HCOB and HCOPL form was always taken at face and word value, no questions asked – the golden truth, the answers to free all mankind. Getting out from being under the influence of mind control for most of my life, shook my cage, and so I stripped myself of everything Scientology. I’m a much happier person now and living life in the real world, with the rest of human kind. I’m PROUD to be a Wog.

  82. 2009-10-14 at 07:13

    I left the COS in 1983.

    I realized LRH was not the speaker on the tape “The Proof” in 1983. It was not the Ron I knew, loved, and listened to for 31 years. I knew I was being lied to by David Miscavige. Then came the horror stories of misapplication of tech such as Sec Checks given under physical duress. Resigning becaue a matter of integrity.

  83. StarsAwait
    2009-10-14 at 17:08

    Dave Gibbons, What stats did you see and what time frames? Mind saying? Thanks.

    • Dave Gibbons
      2009-10-15 at 03:58

      Can you please clarify what you’re asking about?
      Are you asking about the CofS’ stats or something else?

  84. 2009-10-14 at 19:25

    1) yes.
    2) Due to events connected with my wanting to freely post on the internet. But the
    real reason I got pissed off and walked away was that they showed me contempt
    while still soliciting MY time and MY money. That’s a dealbreaker, as
    far as I’m concerned.

  85. madmerris
    2009-10-15 at 02:05

    I walked away…no comm to any of them
    I will not contribute to the motion of a group that abuses others or has out exchange with their members (rip off prices)
    I also object to altering the Tech

  86. Charles Wildbank
    2009-10-15 at 05:20

    I left in December 1985. I wrote a letter of disconnection in April 1986 to the upper management and officials of Scientology and never turned back.

    I did artwork for Battlefield Earth and Mission Earth science fiction novels, as well as the cover art for Way to Happiness. I witnessed within 2 years of working for them the hostility and harsh treatment of staff. I was declared a Suppressive Person for leaving.
    There is really Life after Scientology! Wake up!

  87. 2009-10-16 at 17:07

    For me, it’s more is there life after CofS, and of course, my answer to that is yes. But my post CofS life includes Scn. It’s not question, as some of my net acquaintances have wondered, of me not being able to move on, it’s more that if I find something that works I think I can still use it later. And I can tweak it and cherry pick it cuz I’m an effing squirrel.

  88. 2009-10-17 at 14:55

    Yes.
    Because I could not live with the criminal way the church and individual scientologists deal with life.

  89. MP
    2009-10-17 at 20:14

    Yes. I left in 1998 after being “in” for 30 years.
    A number of things: the constant regging for money for no-exchange, suppressive use of ethics, the flagrant out-tech after GAT came out, inability to maintain my code of honor while connected. The final straw was a “PTS handling” I got in session that took 4 hours. Not one single question was designed to find the real culprit. A wrong “item” was found. I should have just said “I’m PTS to this organization”.

  90. Polymath
    2009-10-18 at 13:18

    1. Not officially
    2. Some of the reasons:
    a. Couldn’t do a staff post without constant attacks from people who were supposed to be on my own side. How about giving their fellow Scientologist a break? I ended up living in fear of what ridiculous KR I would find in my pigeon-hole next. Being actively suppressed on post. Not flowed the particles I needed to do my job. Job endangerment chits returned with comments to the effect that if my ethics were clean this wouldn’t be happening.
    b. Fed up of being labelled out-ethics, CI, evil purps or whatever when even a casual inspection of my folder by qualified personnel would have shown a beautifully in-range TA, clean & F/Ning needle and enormous case gain, when permitted to do so.
    c. Almost complete lack of Bridge progress. When I made it go right to find an auditor who was willing to do my next action, being constantly dragged off it again by seniors or missionaires who would put me onto Ethics cycles, O/W’s etc. and made sure that I red-tagged.
    d. When upset as a normal and natural response to situations such as the above, being told that this was “case on post”.
    e. No free time to see family, have a day out etc. and being told that desire for such was aberrated.
    f. Low or zero pay.
    g. Poor nutrition and too little sleep leading to constant out body ruds.
    h. Having to keep quiet about my interests in other subjects because if I mentioned I liked art, science or anything else, that instantly made me a “dilettante”. Would LRH have agreed that we were only supposed to have one interest, or not think for ourselves regarding all the interesting subjects that there are in the world?
    i. KRs and other staff member reports ALL returned to me with requests to withdraw, backflashy comments, etc. Interviewed by Ethics, a Cl.VIII in the org, AND the CJC over reports of out-points that I had written up.
    j. Pissed off at the treatment of certain public who were constantly singled out as ethics bait.
    k. No help or auditing for staff who were sick or who weren’t doing well for whatever reasons.
    l. Constant make-wrongy flows.
    m. It just wasn’t fun anymore!

    • 2009-10-18 at 16:39

      All good reasons – to long post 😉

  91. Liz Anderson
    2009-10-23 at 06:11

    1. yes, after 25 years

    2. I left for a number of reasons and too many to put here. however,I will state a few – firstly, I did not like the way the Church of Scientology made me feel about myself and how it made me feel about others. Secondly, I did not like at all the way the Church treated our daughter, what she experienced in the SO was enough for me to call a ‘that’s it’ on the Church and any affliated association. No one and I mean no one should be treated the way my daughter was treated.
    Thirdly, did not like the way the Church operates internally and the expectation that we give it all, in order to give it all you have to become it and it was not a nice thing to become.
    When I did finally find out about the violations of Human Rights within the Church particularly the SO… I was disgusted and want no further involvement in it. This is not a Church or a religion it’s just a dictatorship no different than Magabe…

  92. Jen
    2009-10-23 at 22:51

    1. Yes, I had been off lines for a long time and last year I decided that’s it.

    2. When I was still very new/green back in the 80’s I had an esoteric experience. I wrote it off at first but it has always haunted me. In the 90’s I made an origination in regards to that experience and that went unanswered. Last year I researched LRH’s involvement in the occult and discovered that his true biography includes his connection with Aleister Crowley and Thelema Kaballah and that he practiced and summoned demons. He believed himself to be Crowley’s successor. This practice explained my experience, but the Church did not. Also LRH’s actual Bio is completely different than what we were taught. Learning the truth made me decide instantly that it was over.
    I was angry that I had been practicing black magik unknowingly.

  93. D
    2009-11-18 at 16:13

    1. Kinda sorta connected but more interested in making some small influence to change them.
    2. high pressure regging tactics is sickening; the flow is more that the individual must help THEM and their goals rather then the reverse, the org is there to help the individual achieve their goals. CofS is OUT ETHICS and 1.1.

  94. ndp
    2009-11-20 at 00:31

    1. Yes.
    2. I was declared Suppressive, but was willing for that to happen as had they done so it only indicated the C of S had ceased to apply Scientology, and I did not care to remain a member if that was the case.

  95. Judy
    2010-01-28 at 09:37

    Yes.
    I had attested Clear in Los Angeles, was a CL IV auditor, had money on account at ASHO for the Briefing Course up to OT III (still do, trying to get it back for over a year)when my mother left her body in Ohio. I ended up being heavily regged by three and four people at a time from the Church of Scientology in Cincinnati in the amount of $5,000. Then I was broke and had to go to work to support my two children and myself and I was called a dilletante by the ethics officer because I wouldn’t join staff there and because I went to work at a WOG job. I was harrassed by org members while I was trying to do my job. I was so upset by their attempt to control that I left in 1980.

  96. Nom de Plume
    2010-01-29 at 07:14

    thetagal :
    I left the COS in 1983.
    I realized LRH was not the speaker on the tape “The Proof” in 1983. It was not the Ron I knew, loved, and listened to for 31 years. […]

    Thetagal, would love to see you over on Geir’s new forum, “The Scientology Forum”, (http://www.scnforum.org/index.php) and hopefully posting a bit more on this. 🙂

  97. Nathan
    2010-03-23 at 15:14

    Yes, I left staff in 2008 after 10yrs.

    I left because it became more and more arduous to be in the org. I could tolerate no money when we were all learning and discovering ourselves, but it became more and more controlled/supressed by the Sea Org and became more about raising money for ridiculous/unreal/vague purposes rather than just doing some Scientology.

    There seemed to be more and more events and PR which just looked like bullshit.

  98. Just Me
    2010-08-21 at 19:25

    1. Yes — I left in the late 1980s.

    2. Why I left (succinctly): I wanted to be free.

  99. 2010-08-25 at 23:23

    I left Scientology in April 1986 writing their executives of my disconnection.

    I left it entirely then that day in April after leaving my post as designer months earlier not just because I was declared suppressive in a Flag Order that week, I was absolutely convinced it was a a very sick and demented organization not having lived up to it’s professed principles.

  100. 2010-12-08 at 07:33

    Have you left the Church of Scientology?

    Yes. Wrote a letter to the AO in Los Angeles this year (2010) withdrawing my support, membership and any association with the Church of Scientology.

    Why did you leave or why are you considering leaving the CoS?

    It started with the out tech I experienced in my own auditing, progressively getting worse over the last 10 years, to the point where I could NOT go back in session again. Then the overwhelming regging for the Basics, Congresses, IAS, building funds, on and on…the list seemed to be endless: Criminon, TWTH, CCHR, WISE, etc. Then I started researching online and learning more and more truth about how LRH died, how David Misgavige took over the Church, the violence at the Int Base, the abuses within the SO and RPF, and the criminal activity occurring daily in the name of help and in the name of a RELIGION.

  101. Stat-"ICK"
    2012-03-07 at 01:13

    Completely out of exchange with humanity. Manipulative, vicious and evil regging. Clueless staff about what is really going on and illogical reasons why they will not look (until I found out they CANT LOOK – and this is Scientology? DON’T LOOK???). Staff blow off the “out points” even when they are glaring criminal acts by people in the Organization. I understand why they can’t and won’t. Did I mention the evil and vicious “traps” so covertly laid into this very complex Corporate Mafia Organization that is: The Church of Scientology. Did I mention the “religious cloaking” called “What Is Scientology” author: Larry Brennan. Read his story. Did I mention the “clears” and “OT’s” you will meet are NO Different than any other person with their flaws and imperfections who are not “clear” and “OT”.

    LOOK at the products. No one in CCHR except a few people. No one in Volunteer Minister’s. They call the public and they pay their way to help whoever and the Church of Scientology takes all the credit. Wise is a funneling group to get people into the “Church”. You can pay $50 per month to get a e-mail once a week telling you to “promote” and “pay your bills”. It is a joke! Lots of glossy promo with promises not kept. Extortion and blackmail and abuse. Use people and throw them away. No regard for human beings. Human trafficking, NO TRANSPARENCY, most the parishioners are bankrupt, special treatment for movie stars, do not WALK THE TALK or follow the tech!

    Did I mention Debbie Cook??? Need I go on?

    • 2012-03-11 at 00:20

      No, I believe you have made your point. And well.

  102. lizabeth
    2012-06-07 at 03:10

    1. yes, walked away in ’85, back in 2010, resigned 2012.
    2. I could not maintain my personal integrity and remain a member of that group, also heavy regging, suppression, out-ethics and over-bearing control, etc.,etc.

  103. Madora Pennington
    2013-08-29 at 03:13

    1. Yes. We’re done.

    2. Stopped participating about 10 years ago, hoping the CofS would someday figure out how to act professional, polite, and with some semblance religious/spiritual decorum. We had no plans to return until we saw some evidence of reform.

    The whole thing was just nutty. OTs were confused, difficult people, often extremely irresponsible, like with children or ex-spouses who’d committed suicide and they didn’t have appropriate responses, just sort of didn’t care. I won’t mention any names here.

    We saw person after person leave the SO, completely de-stabilized, hysterical (sadly, we had no idea why). We met too many criminal-megalomaniac types, esp people who did the Ls, doing highly unethical or illegal things. Our Scientologist friends were a challenge to be around, and took patience and tolerance, Nice people, but difficult, I suspect, from having to shut off their emotions, not being allowed free will and free thought, and being spiritually tortured in one way or another by their trust in the CofS.

    CCI ran a smear campaign about me behind my back via the ethics dept., because I dared complain. This is a crime in the CofS, to actually complain about the evil things they do. Reports are used to gage who the “true believers” are and who might actually be thinking, not to sort out issues inside the CofS. That’s my experience.

    I’m proud of the PTS D order calling me insane and saying I refused help. When a sinister, dishonest and sinister cult calls you these things, you are doing well in life.

    We tried to get the order removed, because it was rather rude. The correspondence between the IJC (has he had a lobotomy?) and various others at the CofS is sooooo funny!!! Maybe I’ll post it someday. BTW – what “church” has an “International Justice Chief”?????? These people claim their authority by use of very dramatic titles. This order is an opinion and a generality, with no specifics that CC keeps showing to people, after they told me it didn’t exist. Nice, huh? Oh well, it wasn’t the first and won’t be the last time someone insults me behind my back.

    I’m working on my next level, the SP Declare. Geir. does OSA read this page??

    In 2013 I ran across the Debbie Cook story, which led to us reading, well, everything. Just finished “Going Clear”. It’s been an adventure, emotional at times, and led us to soul-searching of our own, and fully detoxing Scientology out of our lives.

    I got a lot out of what I did in Scientology, but I paid a price for that. It was a net gain for me, but not for many. This abusive, fake “church” is like a cancer that needs to be cut out. I’m glad to help with that surgery. I’m really enjoying the community of former members and critics. So many smart, literate and funny people. Here’s a poem I wrote:

    I was desperate when I joined Scientology
    I had a lot of fun in Scientology
    I learned a lot in Scientology
    I met my favorite friends through Scientology
    I put up with a lot of crazy in Scientology
    I never knew the truth of Scientology
    I couldn’t stand much of Scientology
    I saw people destroyed by Scientology
    I got spiritually creamed in Scientology
    I vowed never to return to Scientology
    I survived Scientology.

    And the ex-Scientologists are really quite fun.

    • 2013-08-29 at 07:20

      Wow. Lots of interesting information. & Welcome! 😀

      1) Yes, OSA reads my blog. In detail.
      2) It would be very interesting if you would publish that communication back-and-forth with the IJC.
      3) Please stay around and post more here – because your comment here shows you can have a role in helping others in similar situations.

      Thank you.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: