From: Kim Baker Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Subject: DOUBT ANNOUNCEMENT - FINAL Date: Fri, 16 Sep 1994 06:17:19 GMT I have finally reached a decision - and this will be a flame-bait! That's fine, I can stand the heat. I AM ON THE SIDE OF SCIENTOLOGY. No-one co-erced me, I am NOT a robot, and as the nature of my previous postings indicate, I am reasonably intelligent. My personal upset with Scientology was the PTS-ness that hung me up in doubt. I was married to someone who calls himself a Scientologist, but did not practice it in the marriage - the details are not important. This is not a justification, this is a fact. I had false data - I realised that his behaviour was not actually representative of Scientology. That was the reason I became involved with this newsgroup, although I did not see that at the time. Scientology is a body of knowledge. You get from it what you take from it - just that. People are people, and the people who are Scientologists are the same as everywhere - the good, the bad and the ugly. What I have done in Scientology (Student Hat, Key to Life, Life Orientation course, OEC Vol 0, Staff Statuses, PRO TR's, Upper Indoc TR's, Method One, Levels 1 through 2), PTS/SP course, I have found to be workable. Re the OT materials that "spun" me : nice try, guys, but that will not put me off. Re distributing copyrighted and confidential materials on the Internet - that SUCKS!! In South Africa, we have a newspaper called the Weekly Mail, which is available on the Internet, for a subscription fee. Cyber-pirates are distributing it for their own gain. The Weekly Mail is opposing this - so why should the Church of Scientology not oppose the illegal distribution of its copyrighted and confidential materials? Why should a religion copyright and sell its materials, you say? Simple. If you apply the philosophy of this particular religion, it works. If you alter it, it doesn't work. Simple as that. How rich is the Roman Catholic Church? How rich are the Christian Fundamentalists? For any group to exist, it needs money. In this world, to get something, you have to give something. It's called exchange. Sure, the Bhuddists don't take in money, operate as a charity, live simply - but I went into it in depth, and while they are good people, I have never seen anyone cured of a cold from applying Bhuddism. To those of you practising "altered Scientology", and charging for it, even if it is "cheap", I have only this to say: how the hell can you denigrade the author of that from which you derive your living, and still sleep at night? If you have a grievance, why do you not address the source of your grievance? Why go on and on about it in public? Why don't you be CAUSE over your grievance and address it? Well, that's your constitutional right, and you're welcome to it. What is NOT your constitutional right is the distribution of copyrighted and confidential material over the Internet. Personally, I am tired of this game - it is boring! There are better things to do than moan and groan the whole time. It's parasitic anyway - hell, if Scientology didn't exist, what would you occupy your time with? I am going to get on with life - the world is not in a good state, anyone can see that. There are more important things to spend time on, and place attention on, such as making the world a better place. The people of the world need education, there are wars going on, there is poverty, hunger - I am going to study further in Scientology so that I can increase my ability to help. To OSA (and Chris Hamilton): I apologise for my previous comments. I will make up for them. I know that I will still find actions and people that I disagree with - that's fine. I have yet to belong to a group where this does not occur. To the non-active readers of this group : seriously consider what I have said, and weigh it up against what you have read here. You know I am not a robot, nor is anyone able to co-erce me into following a system of thought. I reached this decision ENTIRELY on my own. Just bear this in mind : what is the PURPOSE behind the postings here? Is this purpose constructive? Do you come away feeling stimulated and good from meaningful dialogue? Will it help make the world a better place? If you have any questions, you have my e-mail address, feel free to e-mail me. Finally, to the active participants: I believe some of you are really good people. I have changed my viewpoint, so I no longer agree with you. I believe some of you may have been unfairly Declared. This is NOT irrevocable - you are the only ones making it so. It IS possible to address your grievance. Just look at this - are you Cause? Or Effect? If you have a legitimate grievance, you CAN get it handled. I will happily continue communicating with you in private, so long as you realise this: I am firm in the decision I have taken, and will not change back unless I find something to be untrue. I am interested only in Truth, and in that which is positive and constructive. That does NOT mean "sweetness and light" - that means facts, with the purpose of being constructive. And with that, I bow out of this newsgroup. I have a life to live! Kim Baker Cape Town South Africa 16 September 1994 -------------------