Scientology Managment Style?

Question answered by honorarykid in Scientology

yertletheturtle asked this question on 8/8/2000:

My question here is basically why should one be obgligated, or practially left with no choice, but to have to fully accept the management style of LRH or David Miscagage in order to participate in Scientology?

Irregardless of all the points of view concerning the tech and it's benefits, this seems to be the main issue I see coming up again and again with those who might have some disagreement with Scientology.

honorarykid gave this response on 8/15/2000:

To the extent that the Scientology "technology" satifies people's religious yearnings, it should be available for people outside the CoS. They should be free to alter and modify as they will, so that they can make their own churches, churches which are not likely to rabidly sue, harass, and intimidate, jealously guarding every possible scrap of revenue and haranguing members to produce more income and more recruits.

The CoS uses intellectual property law to guard their materials, rabidly suing and harasssing everyone who tries to start an independent church, using the same or similar techniques.

This kind of aggression certainly belies Scientology's claims that they stand for religious freedom for everyone. They really only want to protect their own interests, and thoroughly oppose and squash competing religious interests that they believe would deny them revenues.

Money grubbing has always been a coarse and ugly thing. It's not a value upon which churches should be formed.

L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology, wrote in HCO PL of 3/9/72, that the purpose of Scientology organizations was "to make money," "make more money," and "make other people produce so as to make money."

You can read the "Governing Policy" HCO at

http://www.xenu.net/archive/CourtFiles/occf143.html

Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.