One thing that is really odd is the fact that a lot of Scientology critics and journalists say "I know everything in Scientology is fake and a fraud, and that it has harmed and deluded a lot of people, but it since it can't possibly be regulated, because people can believe whatever they want and will act on those beliefs. So if David Miscavige is stopped from disconnecting families, I don't care if people get auditing."
That's ridiculous to me in a few ways. It combines several false ideas. Just because people believe in something doesn't mean a behavior has to be legally allowed. There are millions of people that believe slavery is a good idea. In many countries their ideas are illegal as practices. Unfortunately there are probably millions of people that believe sex between adults and children is acceptable or desirable. Just because they believe and desire that doesn't make it legal. I am glad that practice is illegal in many situations and countries, and wish it was illegal in more situations and countries than it already is.
There are other practices like treating women and members of different races or religions as inferior beings that are unfortunately legal in some places but not everywhere that anyone desires.
There are several other beliefs that are regulated in practice and sometimes even outright denied under the law. It happens, people outlaw some behaviors.
With Scientology it would be difficult to enforce but it could be and importantly if say auditing and Scientology indoctrination were outlawed then actions taken with Scientology would be crimes and not able to hide behind the first amendment or legal protection reserved for legitimate business.
That would make a huge difference. Scientology could not require any contracts that support a criminal activity to be honored as such contracts are themselves illegal.
Furthermore a tremendous amount of evidence that auditing and Scientology indoctrination actually can be harmful to mental health while claiming to be a legitimate and scientifically validated therapy exists. There's tremendous evidence the alleged validation of Scientology never occurred and was all lies. That's a fraudulent claim. So, presenting this is false advertising.
Additionally, there have been numerous studies like the Anderson Report that consulted actual experts who time and again found Dianetics and Scientology indoctrination and auditing as dangerous, fraudulent and harmful.
In my opinion the presence of demonstrably false ideas like engrams, reactive mind, basic basic, locks, secondaries, overts, witholds, MUs, and hundreds of other ideas as the foundation of Dianetics and Scientology makes the use of it an activity in which a practitioner is doing things they don't understand in a framework that can't truly exist and is entirely fraudulent. This leads to beliefs that are delusional and the requirement of informed consent is to me impossible to satisfy.
How can an activity that is entirely framed by lies and represented with fraudulent claims be undertaken with informed consent ?
I don't think anyone understands all the harm such an activity can cause, but it has on occasion been significant. And is often noticeable. That's relevant and to me something journalists and Scientology critics should not ignore.
At the very least they should report the strong criticism actual psychologists and psychiatrists have given time and again. Both individual cult experts like Margaret Singer and Robert Jay Lifton and Jolly West, all of whom are experts on psychology or psychiatry, and panels and commissions of inquiry like the Anderson Commission have been extremely critical of Scientology auditing and indoctrination.
That's worth telling people as a fair warning.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.