Posted today to Ex-Gay Watch’s former location at blogs.salon.com:
From: Frank Blakely
I will get straight to the point. This entire controversy of homosexuality exists solely because of a basic lack of understanding of Man and his basic purposes and goals. The argument that homosexuality is not a choice and that homosexuals are equal to, say, blacks (slavery) or women (suffrage) is a lie. Just because you don’t remember choosing proves nothing. Do you remember every choice you ever made; particularly the ones for which you didn’t want to take responsibility? I’m not trying to make you wrong. What is right about homosexuality? Knowing that there is a road out of this mess is a good thing; you don’t have to be gay. My saddest day was when I realized that I had no choice- I was gay, period. Once I discovered how to get back to my basic goals, it was the happiest day of my life. You don’t have to be gay. You DO have to use a workable technology. All these confusions about Mankind have been propagated by psychiatry (a complete and provable fraud (link): so its no surprise that people are in such a mess. Basically, the confusion is that you have been taught that you are an animal who has never been anyone before this life. If you had been going along just fine in female bodies for the last million years and suddenly you find yourself stuck in a male body, and DIDN’T REMEMBER IT, all those appropriate feelings you had as a woman would confuse you; until you had an explanation for it: GAY. I suppose if you believe that you are that slab of meat sitting in that chair then you might think, “How could I have existed before my body was made?” I am not going to argue the existence of the spirit, you can make up your own mind about that. I am simply letting you know that YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE GAY. There is something you can do about it: (link) (link) and look up the confusion formula of the ethics conditions: (link) Finally, the purpose of Marriage is Creation. The only thing homosexuals create are make-overs and really good broadway shows. : ) No, really, producing healthy, happy children to continue the human race is the primary creation of marriage. Incredible sex is just a bonus. Just because many fail at marriage just indicates a lack of workable technology in that area – (e.g. any church or counselor that uses psychiatry). This message is part of my own application of the condition formulas. I am no longer gay. I choose to join the (sexual) group that promotes the survival of the Human Race the most: heterosexuals who want to create a stable family.
I disagree with numerous assumptions and generalizations in Frank Blakely’s message. However, I give him brownie points for politeness and humor.
I’ve been involved with Scientology for several years and I still have the OUTMOST respect for both Dianetics and Scientology!
However, this newbie is regergitating information without quite thinking it through.
First of all, as far as Scientology is concerned, the fact that we have human bodies is an abberation of the spirit and all non “clear” people are abberated.
Homosexuality is an abberation by Scientology standards but atleast they don’t pick on gays in a hypocritical manner like Christian doctorines do.
The Church of Scientology is not our enemy. One thing this poster forgot is that in Scientology Truth is what you discover for yourself to be true and not what others tell you it is.
As for this person being ex-gay. Well, if he feels that way I wish him the best! He mentioned something about good sex being a bonus, that makes me wonder if he feels satisfied by his new found sexuality.
Dan
Am I reading this right? Being gay means that you chose the wrong body to be born in, but don’t worry, you can change your spirit to match the body you have?
Lynn, they are Scientologists. They don’t have to make sense.
Then again, when has religion made sense?
Then again again, as religions go, they are the most honest.
They tell you up front you have to buy your way into heaven…
Aye, Jody is right. Scientologists are disconnected with reality and have a extreme phobia towards psychiatry and psychology.
Depending on his psychobiology, there will be a time when reality will bite Blakely in the ass. We can only hope he won’t do something stupid after that happens.
In defense of Scientology I’d like to say the following:
1) What may seem as crazy ideas are no more crazy than what Christianity/Judaism/Islam have been feeding us for generations. Their views are closer to Buddhism actually and will never result in oppression!
2) During my years with Scientology I was never asked to stop dating men and when my partner and I found each other he was always invited.
3) If a staff member in Scientology ever appears to have a problem with another person because of sexual orientation or any other reason, that staff member is immediately dealt with by other staff.
Dan
I had a boyfriend once that did not want to be gay. I told him that he doesn’t have to be and that he can be whatever he wanted!
Gay and Lesbian people often feel threaten by someone changing their lifestyle but there is really nothing to fear as long as that is a personal decision not influenced by fear of eternal damnation.
Accepting yourself is a hard thing and if some people need to take some detours along the way, that is just fine. Nobody should pressure them to choose either way.
Dan.
Frank Blakely rehashes the same tired psychobabble that is put out daily by the “Christian” Right organizations, which never let legitimate research or the actual facts get in the way of their fear and hate driven agenda. It sounds like Mr. Blakely has been reading materials off Scott Lively’s “Abiding Truth Ministries” web site or the falsehoods disseminated by Focus on the Family. If Mr. Blakely wants to convince himself that he is “no longer gay” due to his religious beliefs or some other reason, fine. But I have a real problem when individuals who feel better playing a role and being in denial try to use their hang ups as a weapon against others.
I also have to candidly wonder how “cured” Mr. Blakely is in fact. Robert Spitzer’s 2001 study of 200 ex-gays who claimed they were “cured” of homosexuality found that 83% of the males still had homosexual attraction and 45% of the “cured” males were still masturbating to same-sex fantasies. (See psychologist Charles Silverstein’s review of the Spitzer study in the October 2003 issue of Out Magazine).Not exactly my definition of being “cured”- at best it’s conforming behavior to outside expectations and forces.
Additionally, in a Wall Street Journal (May 23, 2001) editorial, Spitzer stated “In fact, I suspect that the vast majority of gay people would be unable to to alter by much a firmly established homosexual orientation.” In a July 1, 2001, interview in the Advocate, Spitzer stated only ” a small minority – perhaps 3% – might have a malleable sexual orientation.” He laso stated in the Advocate interview that his research was being “twisted by the Christian right.”
Lastly, ex-gay apologist Warren Throckmorton in a June 2002 article in the APA Journal reviewed the few studies of ex-gay program success rates and found that even Joseph Nicolosi’s study (Nicolosi is the “high priest” of the ex-gay programs) revealed a failure rate of over 67%. The reality is that “conversion therapy” does NOT work even if individuals like Frank Blakely desperately want to believe that they have changed. In my view, the “Christian” Right continues to market these bogus programs for reasons of money, political maneuvering, and because their fragile faith cannot deal with the fact that God may have larger and different plans than they want to believe.
For further comments on the false anti-gay claims of the Christian right, I have attached a copy of a letter I sent to the City Editors at the Sacrament Bee and the San Francisco Chronicle urging that the individuals who hold themselves out as “experts” and mainstream Christians be exposed.
Michael B. Hamar,
Norfolk, Virginia
March 4, 2004
Mr. Stuart Drown
City Editor – Sacramento Bee
Mr. Jim Brewer
Politics and Government Editor
San Francisco Chronicle
Mr. Stephen Cook
Assistant Managing Editor for
Investigative Reporting
San Francisco Chronicle
Re: Scott Lively/Pro-Family Law Center- Demands for Arrest of Mayor Gavin Newsom
Dear Messrs. Drown, Brewer and Cook,
I have notice that various news articles from around the country concerning the on-going gay marriage debate and lawsuits filed against the city of San Francisco have quoted Scott Lively and his Pro-Family Law Center as if he/it was a credible source and organization. Just this evening I saw an article that referenced a news conference in Sacramento where Scott Lively and the leader of another religious right group were demanding that the Mayor of San Francisco be arrested. Specifically, Lively was quoted as saying:
He said Newsom and other San Francisco officials were “engaged in civil rebellion.” “He’s setting an example of anarchy for the entire nation,” Lively said. “He does not deserve to be sitting in the office he holds now. He does indeed deserve to be arrested for these crimes.
What I have sadly not noticed reported anywhere is any disclosure of Mr. Lively’s lack of real credentials or his irrational hatred of gays which can be easily documented. Lively is only too typical of the forces calling for Mayor Newsom’s arrest and/or removal from office. If the issue of gay marriage is to be honestly discussed, the public needs to know the full story about those who oppose it. The following is some information that should be shared with the reading public at large so that they can recognize Mr. Lively for the crack pot that he is:
Mr. Lively received his so-called law degree from Trinity Law School in Santa Ana, California, a non-ABA accredited law school with less than 100 full time students and a total of 6 full time faculty, affiliated with Trinity International University, a small fundamentalist educational institution that requires its students to concur in a fundamentalist Statement of Faith. On the Abiding Truth Ministries web site, Mr. Lively, admits he is a former an alcoholic and drug addict from the age of 12 until his “miraculous deliverance during prayer” at age 28. (NOTE: Janet LaRue, chief counsel to Concerned Women for America also holds her “law degree” from Trinity Law School and has previously admitted that he was sexually abused growing up). These individuals are NOT what they pretend to be or mainstream by any means.
In addition to holding a degree from a non-accredited law school (most states will not allow one to sit for the state bar exam unless one has graduated from an ABA accredited law school), Mr. Lively has authored two publications that suggest he has an irrational obsession with certain social issues, particularly homosexuality. In The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party, Mr. Lively maintains that homosexuals were responsible for the rise of Nazism and the guiding force behind Nazi atrocities, including the Holocaust. In published The Poisoned Stream: Gay Influence in Human History, Volume One, Germany 1890 – 1945, Mr. Lively purports to delve into the history of homosexuality in Germany and claims to reveal its “poisonous influence” not just in Second World War, but also World War I as well through the “intrigues of the Homosexual International.” Serious, legitimate historians have dismissed Mr. Lively’s theories in these books.
I encourage you to verify this information and make it public since Mr. Lively has made himself a public figure and his organization has sued the City of San Francisco.
Should you wonder why I am writing, I am an attorney in Norfolk, Virginia (I went to the University of Virginia School of Law) and I represented a local man in exposing Michael Johnston, a prominent”ex-gay” as a fraud (See: https://www.washingtonblade.com/2003/8-8/news/national/exgay.cfm). Johnston, who appeared in a national anti-gay TV campaign in 1998 sponsored by the same “Christian” Right organizations now decrying gay marriage, was anything but cured and was having frequent gay sex and trying to infect men in the Norfolk area with HIV. In doing my home work on this case I came to learn how fraudulent these organizations are in the false information they disseminate and how the majority of their “experts” lack valid credentials. I have set out a few examples as illustration.
Among the purported “policy experts” at the Family Research Council are Dr. Timothy Dailey, Senior Analyst Culture Studies, and Peter Sprigg, Senior Director Culture Studies. A review of Messrs. Dailey’s and Sprigg’s educational credentials and past career experience suggests that “expert” is not a term most educated individuals would afford to them.
Mr. Dailey, who works as Senior Analyst Culture Studies to counter the “homosexual agenda” and other issues threatening the institutions of marriage and the family, received his bachelors’’ degree in Bible and Theology from Moody Bible Institute, his M.A. in Theological Studies at Wheaton College, and his Ph.D. in Religion from Marquette University. Moody Bible Institute is a fundamentalist Bible college in Chicago, Illinois, that grants religious ministry degrees at the undergraduate level religious ministry degrees. After completing his Ph.D., in religion at Marquette University, Dr. Dailey spent eight years in “cross-cultural ministry” in Israel. Subsequently, Mr. Dailey taught in the Department of Bible and Theology at Toccoa Falls College in Georgia, a small fundamentalist Bible college with fundamentalist religious belief requirements for admission, and then moved to Washington DC to be Senior Editor for Break Point radio program prior to joining the Family Research Council in 1999.
Mr. Sprigg earned a bachelor of arts degree summa cum laude from Drew University (N.J.), with a double major in political science and economics. He received the master of divinity degree cum laude from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary (Mass.). For ten years Mr. Sprigg served as a professional actor and unit leader in Covenant Players, a Christian drama ministry based in California. He assumed the position of Senior Director of Culture Studies at the Family Research Council in July of 2001, and in such role, he oversees the Family Research Council’s efforts to analyze and influence American culture as it relates to religion; government; the arts; media and entertainment; the homosexual agenda; race and ethnicity; and drugs. Mr. Sprigg is an ordained minister in the American Baptist Churches USA, and most recently served as pastor of Clifton Park Center Baptist Church in Clifton Park, N.Y.
Clearly, the primary area of Messrs. Lively, and Dailey’s and Sprigg’s experience and expertise is in matters of religion and not in the areas of science and cultural matters in which they seek to influence legal and legislative policy.
Sadly, they are typical of those being paraded by the “Christian” Right as experts who specialize in claims and programs not supported y legitimate experts and research. Another good example is Focus on the Family which in November 2002 took out a full page advertisement in the Washington Post for its “Love Won Out” program which purports to be a “cure” program for homosexuals. On its web site, Focus on the Family advertises this program in part as follows:
“Focus on the Family is promoting the truth that homosexuality is preventable and treatable – . . . At the Love Won Out conference, you’ll hear from experts on homosexuality, learn how to respond to the misinformation in the public school system, change public opinion and much more. . . . ”
Despite the expert billing, a review of the credentials of the program presenters discloses that few of them have legitimate credentials in the subject area addressed Rather, the majority hold non-relevant degrees from and/or are affiliated with Colorado Christian University, the product of a merger between Rockmount College, formerly Denver Bible Institute, and Western Bible Institute in 1989. Colorado Christian University has less than 1,000 students, is extremely fundamentalist in it’s religious orientation, and does not admit faculty or students that do not concur with its Statement of Faith. The views espoused by the Love Won Out program are not accepted by either the American Psychological Association or the American Psychiatric Association which have labeled them potentially harmful and dangerous.
Candidly, I am at a loss as to why the mainstream news media does not expose these untruthful organizations. With the current uproar over gay marriage, the time would seem to be ripe for what I believe has the potential to be a huge story.
Sincerely,
Michael B. Hamar
AttorneyAt Law
Norfolk, Virginia
Michael – this may be a moot point, but Scientology (The Church of Scientology) is not part of the Christian Religious Right. Scientology is not Christian.
The whole emphasis and perspective between Scientologists and Christians dealing with homosexuality are completely different, although Frank’s post sounds very familiar. _IF_ you are unaware, Scientology and Christianity are very, very different. That’s all…
Bob, I realize there is a difference – however, Frank’s whole discussion sounds like a re-tread of the “Christian” Right song and dance. Hence, my comment.
Michael Hamar
My happiest day was when I realized that I was gay, period. That there was no changing. I could finally stop pretending.
What a freaking load off my mind.
It is perhaps worth noting that L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology, was a science fiction writer who had been a patient in a mental hospital. As far as I’m concerned, Scientology reflects both.
I don’t care what “religion” they are from – if they deny the naturalness and normality of homosexuality, at least for the small percentage of us born gay, they are bigots and enemies of the gay community.
As for the “purpose” of sex to be reproduction and the survival of the human race – there are many ways to contribute to the survival of the human race. As homosexuality has evolved in a huge number of animal species, there has to be a positive overall benefit to the species of having homosexual members, or we would not be here. It is highly likely we contribute to the survival of the species by not reproducing – thereby creating a small excess of adults who can raise orphaned young and provide additional hands to gather/raise/hunt food to feed the young in times of food shortages. Certainly if the percentage of gay members of a species were very high (like 40%), the species would be in trouble, but having a small percentage of gay members is likely an evolutionary advantage.
Here’s a good article about Gays and Scientology
“The argument that homosexuality is not a choice and that homosexuals are equal to, say, blacks (slavery) or women (suffrage) is a lie.”
How funny! I see Mr. Blakely neglected to put Jews in that list. Certainly, they could change if they felt enough motivation. Christians in the Middle Ages believed this, and change was achieved through the sword or ‘conversion.’ See, the dead are not around to vex one, and the newly converted, while maybe not gung-ho in their new religion, know better than to open their mouths.
Seems like the next logical step in the War on Homosexuality: they can offer us the same choice.
I like that article posted by fellow Scientologist, Keith Relkin (https://www.liveandgrow.org/fab-scn.html). I agree with him wholeheartedly. L. Ron Hubbard wrote an article called personal integrity ( https://www.whatisscientology.org/Html/Part01/Chp03/pg0138.html ). It is a good personal policy for anyone. My posting above was primarily to provide an unheard viewpoint and to apply the condition formula for myself. I said; “You don’t have to be gay.” I didn’t say; ” You should be stoned or banned from living the best way you know how.” L. Ron Hubbard, himself, was never fond of “hellfire and Brimstone” preachers, and I see no good coming from the Religous Right’s protests of gay marriage.
Should gays be allowed to marry? I really don’t care. We have more immediate problems. We allow psychiatrist to force drug children in public schools and if the parents don’t like it the State kidnapps them. We lost thousands on 9/11 because pychiatrist PRODUCE terrorist: ( https://PsychAssault.com ). You can’t afford health insurance as a direct result of psychiactric fraud. Schools have degraded educationally and become high security compounds thanks to psychiatric curriculum and “therapy”; they produced Columbine, and every other school shooting on record. ( https://www.cchr.com/publications/index.htm ). The list goes on, and on.
When I got into Scientology I discovered that being gay was not considered “pro-survival”. After seeing the results of this technology for myself, I decided that if being gay was an aberration then the technology would handle it. I wasn’t worried about it. I knew that this tech simply restored my own self-determinism. Since applying the tech it has indeed handled it. But it was handled by me, to my satisfaction within my personal integrity.
Before you make up your mind, at least LOOK. You can’t decide what’s true for you without even looking. And if you want to be gay, fine. You can still inprove your ability to learn. ( https://www.appliedscholastics.org ) You can get off drugs, completely. ( https://www.narconon.org ) You can increase your ability to communicate to your boss or loved one. ( https://www.scientologyhandbook.org/SH5_2.HTM ). No matter the problem in life, there is SOMETHING you can do about it.
Frank,
I do not wish for you to lose any of your wins and what I’m about to say does not come from 1.1.
As you know being gay is not always easy. Some struggle with it while others embrace it. It seems to me that your ruin was being gay. If you found your purpose I wish you the best!
I will tell you though that my partner (of over 10 years) has been incredibly pro-survival for me! The communication and the love that we share is not something I could ever duplicate with another man or another woman. The only part of the second dynamic that we’re not fulfilling is children and we’ll be looking into it soon.
The part about your note that upset me was not specifically what you said, but knowing how it will be perceived. Just like you don’t see Scientology staff open communication channels and invalidate people, I am questioning your use of the Normal condition (telling gay people that they mock marriage?!?!). I don’t know too much about the work of an ethics officer other than the fact that they get to hear the most amazing stories from people, but did you run this application of yours before him or her?
One more point, you mentioned gay marriage. The way I see it, the gay marriage movement is one that Scientologists should applaud! There is so much crap in society as a whole and the gay society in particular that placing committed couples as icons and heros is a wonderful thing that I believe is transforming the gay community.
Lastly, did you find the right woman for you? Is your attraction to women greater than your attraction to men? I’m asking out of curiosity because I never communicated with anyone that said the things you did.
Dan
Howdy folks!
I’m a gay Scientologist of 23 years, worked for the Church (staff) for 2.5 years. I have a boyfriend of one year, we walk down the streets holding hands and otherwise live our perfectly normal gay lives. 🙂 If things continue to go as well as they have been, we do hope to someday have kids, perhaps with a surrogate … maybe adopt. I know of another gay Scientology couple in southern California of over five years. They’re looking into adopting and/or surrogacy as well.
So, Scientology and being gay. Bottom line, it really is a personal decision. I met a bisexual Scientologist recently. Before meeting him, I have to admit, I always wondered if bisexuality was a just a “phase” on the way to realizing one was gay. But this guy has integrity, is clearly honest with himself … and basically, if he says he’s attracted equally to both men and women, I believe him. And heck, I’m a guy and am attracted to guys, why couldn’t someone just as validly be attracted to both men and women?
Frank, along with Dan, I don’t want you to feel like I am invalidating any of your successes and realizations in life regarding homosexuality using Scientology. I do agree that our actions in life are certainly our choice. However, I have found for myself that being gay is not the same kind of choice as say “Do I want to go to the beach today?” It’s more along the lines of “Do I really dislike lima beans?” And yes, I really do dislike lima beans … and frankly, don’t expect or want it to change! So, perhaps sexuality is malleable for some people. For me, it just is what it is — and frankly, I love being gay … and truthfully, the more I study Scientology, the more I realize and know that this is just who I am.
I do want to let folks know that, the Church of Scientology does not really enter the political debate about homosexuality, and just wants each individual to decide for themselves.
A reference you might find of interest Frank (and Dan), is a 3-Jan-1960 lecture by L. Ron Hubbard called “Your Case”, in which Ron goes into some detail on the subject of transvesticism and how we can sometimes switch bodies lifetime to lifetime. For any serious student of Scientology also interested in homosexuality, this is an excellent lecture. Among many other things, Ron says: “All right, this fellow decides that being a man fits his basic purposes and his basic personality, and so forth, yet 50 percent of the time he picks up female bodies. What’s he going to do with them? Just collapse at that point and everything he likes to do and so forth, and be a female for just a lifetime?” You can listen to the rest of the lecture to get the context of course. But bottom line, no one is trying to force you to be one thing or another. (It’s in the “State of Man Congress” lecture series if you’re curious.)
Anyway, yes there have been misunderstandings over the years inside and outside the Church regarding homosexuality, lesbianism, etc. And to be completely honest, probably in some quarters there still are. However, bottom line, the Church does not enter the political debate and does not take sides. Keith Relkin, the gay Scientologist (and friend of mine) who wrote that letter to Fab!, recently asked a Church official to give a concise statement on the Church’s position on homosexuality; the response was:
“We oppose discrimination of any sort and we practice a policy of inclusion among our parishioners. We are staunch defenders of human rights. At the same time, we oppose extremists on any side of the sexuality issue who seek to push agendas that could distract our Church staff or parishioners from their purpose of going free spiritually.”
And to put THAT in context, the Church sponsored a Human Rights event recently, which welcomed and included gay activists. There was a Church press release and it was also covered in Fab! Here are the links:
https://www.scientology.org/en_US/news-media/news/2002/021211.html
https://www.liveandgrow.org/images/fab_feb142003.jpg
And two final things. There is now a Yahoo support group for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Scientologists. It’s called ClearRainbow. You can get more information at:
https://groups.yahoo.com/group/ClearRainbow
All LGBT Scientologists and their friends and family are welcome. It currently has members from all over the world, including parishioners, church staff and Sea Org members (you might even meet your next boyfriend or girlfriend on there!)
Lastly, the Church, since 1967, has had a very clear policy (non-policy really) on Scientologists and sexual activities. The title of the policy is called “Second Dynamic Rules” (“second dynamic” = sex and families). In this policy, written by L. Ron Hubbard on 11-Aug-67, it states:
“It has never been any part of my plans to regulate or to attempt to regulate the private lives of individuals. Whenever this has occurred, it has not resulted in any improved condition… Therefore ALL FORMER RULES, REGULATIONS AND POLICIES RELATING TO THE SEXUAL ACTIVITIES OF SCIENTOLOGISTS ARE CANCELLED.” [Emphasis is in the original.]
With that kind of policy, it’s kind of hard to argue that the Church of Scientology requires or expects that one be one sexuality or another.
And after 23 years, currently taking courses at a large Church of Scientology in Los Angeles, and openly walking around West Hollywood (and even Times Square) holding my boyfriend’s hand, I can attest to that policy not only being known about, but also being applied.
Cheers!
Brian
neoisbrian@yahoo.com
Glad you’re happy Brian but your religion still scares the bejeezus out of me.
I hear ya Scott. All I can say is that things aren’t often as they appear. I’ve often felt that the net is missing a website which bridges the gap between the nay-sayers and the yay-sayers. Maybe I’ll work on something like that.
Brian
Here’s the thing:
Scientology is a self-improvement path.
As such a path, it’s a very subjective experience. A Scientology counselor is not there to tell you what is good or what is bad about you, he is there to help you through the process.
It is the person who decides which issues they want addressed.
In that sense, it is very different from Christianity, Psychology, Astrology or whatever you want to compare it with. It’s its own thing.
Anyway, suppose you have a person who is left-handed.
Suppose that person REALLY wants to overcome being left-handed.
They’ll come to Scientology, and in the course of processing, along with a bunch of other baggage, they will eventually get some insight as to where they stand about being left-handed.
And, maybe, they’ll become right-handed. Maybe they’ll be happier about being right-handed. Maybe they’ll be ambidextrous. Either way, they’ll get some stuff worked out, and they’ll feel freer and better.
Also, what is likely to also happen is that, at some point, during an interview, a Scientology counselor might say, “hey, how come you make such a big deal about the hand thing?” “Isn’t spiritual freedom the real focus?” 🙂
Anyway.
People bring their own baggage to their Scientology experience. And Man, we humans don’t travel light!!
So if someone is in anguish because they’re gay, or afraid they might be gay, then Scientology counseling may help alleviate that anguish.
And if someone is totally cool with being gay, doesn’t think there’s anything to fix, is in a committed relationship with a hunk of a guy, and the sex department is awesome, then Scientology counseling will likely focus on areas where they really DO need relief, like maybe work issues or their relationship with a family member, or anxiety about life’s goals, whatever.
Scientology counselors are taught to watch out for what is described as a “hidden standard”. For example, a guy gets migraines. He comes to Scientology and thinks it will make the migraines disappear. But Scientology is not a “migraine-fixer”, it is a spiritual path of self-improvement. So maybe the migraine will at some point be affected by the journey, maybe sooner, maybe later. The guy WILL get better. Better relationship with family, better job, better outlook on life, etc. But if the guy fixates on the migraine as a “hidden standard”, as the only yard-stick, then he might be levitating 10 feet off the ground and still say “this didn’t work, I still have a headache.”
So sometimes gay people come into Scientology and they have baggage with their sexuality. But Scientology is not a “gender-fixer” any more than it is a “headache fixer” or whatever.
Surely your spiritual journey in Scientology WILL make a change in your sexual outlook. WHAT change, hey, that’s your own individual thing.
Some people who feared being gay, after Scientology counseling, might realize that they *are* gay and, guess what? there is nothing wrong with that, and not be in anguish about it anymore.
Some people who thought they might be gay, but in reality were simply going through some other sexual conflicts that confused things, might realize that they’re straight after all. Or bisexual, or whatever.
Some people might be gay to begin with and gay still, only before they used to always sneeze when they got an erection, and now those involuntary sneezes are gone. Or they might have always felt depressed after an orgasm, and now after a climax they feel serene.
I hope that none of you are under the delusion that EVERY gay person out there has the same sexuality. Certainly that’s not the case with straight people! Every person has their own sexual hangups, compulsions, passions, fears and desires, and their own reasons why these are there.
ALL of us have sexual dysfunctions. I am not talking being straight or being gay. I’m talking about all the baggage connected with sex on every human being.
Scientology is not meant to make you straight anymore than listening to Cher is meant to make you gay.
All that Scientology will do is help you look inside, deal with some fears and anxieties and trauma, and end up a happier, more vibrant person.
(And by the way, I’m not saying everyone should rush to a Scientology center. That choice is yours to make. I’m just trying to clarify some stuff so that there’s more understanding and harmony.)
Big hug to all
Cisco
http://www.liveandgrow.org
Man you scientologists are scary. I worked in radio and these people harassed us when we did a critical story of their movement.
They actually have press monitors who will send letters and threats to media outlets who give them any bad publicity.
From the looks of the last post, they’re monitoring the web too.
Hi Scott;
Boy, the paranoia!
We Scientologists are scary?
You sound like some white folk from Mississippi talking about “them coloreds”. Give me a break.
It’s not a question of “they have people monitoring the web”. It’s a question of me, a private citizen, standing up for what I believe in, on my own dime and on my free time.
Gay activists defend gay rights, not because “they have people” but because consciencious individuals do what they believe is right.
The Jewish Anti-defamation league writes letters when someone mud-slings their community.
What is so goddam scary about getting a letter critizicing an article? Get some spine, man.
I find your message unfair and insulting.
For the record, I don’t believe in “ex-gays” (personally), and I actively support gay rights. And I am a Scientologist.
Could we all please stop being so damned scared of each other, of every other person on earth, and realize that we’re all in this together?
If you want to see what we oh so scary Scientologists stand for, how about you visit this page: https://www.liveandgrow.org/tsunami
and see our relief efforts in Indonesia, for example?
Man, this post pissed me off.
—
To Regan DuCasse:
Well said, Regan. FREE choice is the thing, to change, evolve, stay the same, try something different or keep doing what works for you.
Personally I think that trying to change someone else is ALWAYS a waste of time. Any change has to be self-determined, come from within – and I also agree with you that the question “Why should a person change at all?” is an important one.
My own two cents on that one: If a person desires change (of any kind), then they should seek to change things. If a person is happy the way they are (and I am NOT specifically referring to gender orientation, I mean anything) then they should stay as they are.
The most important thing, to me at least, is beign TRUE TO ONE’S SELF. To follow one’s heart.
And in that sense, I believe that Frank (the original post) does Scientology a disservice, in that he’s stating his personal experience, decisions and considerations as if they came from Scientology doctrine – which is not so.
Frank is of course free to believe and act as he wishes, it would just be good if he made it clearer that they’re HIS viewpoints – not that of “every Scientologist on the planet”.
best,
Cisco
http://www.liveandgrow.org
I’ve read he letters Cisco, I’ve also taken the phone calls from the followers, they’re scary, period.
Threatening with a team of lawyers at a radio talk show who happened to let on Ex-Scientologists on the air with their stories of escape is no way to run a religion, nor is it a way to run a “self-help” group.
You can dismiss my experience with the followers of L. Ron Hubbard all you’d like but it was quite frightening to myself and to everyone who happened to answer a phone or opened any mail at my workplace in the weeks after I had a show that mentioned this particular movement.
You know, a legal threat should not be scary to someone who is not engaging in libel. The correct response – assuming you’re not doing anything illegal – is ” call my lawyer.”
How come the mere mention of legal action had your radio station so scared? what were you you guys doing that you didn’t feel so confident legally about? I find that interesting.
You don’t think that the GLBT movement ever threatened legal action when discrimination or libel were being dished out? Geez.
And, incidentally, is that the whole of your experience with Scientology? Let me get this right: You put on a radio show that attacked the religion, and they wrote letters and placed calls protesting it. *That’s* your basis for passing judgment?
Have you ever attended a Scientology meeting? Have you ever set foot in a Scientology organization? Have you ever cracked open a book by L. Ron Hubbard?
We fear that which we don’t understand, my friend. And all you’re doing is showing your ignorance.
Sincerely,
Cisco
http://www.liveandgrow.org
Cisco,
So what you are saying is that Scientology uses the legal system to deal with perceived attacks on its “religion”? Did they teach you that? Is that part of the catechism? Is that why Tom Cruise sued the porn star a few years back? If you guys don’t like what people are saying, you are taught to sue?
As if law suits aren’t crazy enough in the US, now a “religion” is advocating using the legal system when they don’t like what they hear. Maybe Scientology is a self-help group for lawyers. Hmmmmm… Now that I understand!
Any group (self-help, religious or otherwise) that implies that I am somehow less of a person due to my sexual orientation is not a group with which I wish to be affiliated. I will not be made to feel like a second-class citizen (a “less than”). If that works for you, may your particular God/entity/spaceship go with you.
“Self-help” is intrinsically ethereal in nature — there are probably as many ways of improving the individual as there are individuals. To think that self-help can be boiled down to a specific, prescribed, dogmatic approach is laughable. Then again, if you convince enough people that psychology and psychiatry are the devil, those gullible enough to believe you will flock to your doors — voilà, instant religion! Don’t forget to send your tithe!
Rich
Rich, it’s perfectly fine to disagree with something. But it helps if you’re clear on what the heck you’re disagreeing with.
Scientology does not believe you’re any less of a person for being gay than I am for being left-handed. You must be thinking of Jerry Falwell.
And, in terms of suing, it’s a hell of a lot better than violence, and it’s the proper action to defend your civil rights. Ask the ACLU.
https://www.affinity-international.org/intheknow.html
Cisco,
Submitting a comment consisting of a single link to what may or may not be propaganda on a 2 year old thread is not debate or discourse. Further, XGW is not here to judge the merits of any faith per se, nor to proselytize for them. Please don’t do this.
David Roberts