Domain: lronhubbard.org
Stories and comments across the archive that link to lronhubbard.org.
Comments · 8
-
Re:While it would rock if this were the real thing
This guy sounds just like L Ron Hubbard: He found the cure for cancer, too.
http://www.lronhubbard.org/ -
Re:Purpose of PrisonOne someone is murdered it is great loss to the relatives, family and all persons connected or dependent of the victim, including the parts of society. Such loss shall be in some way, by my opinion, brought into just. But revenge and justice are not synonyms. By revenge it is to inflict harm in return for some injury, insult and to get satisfaction. Justice is about bringin equity. Don't mix those two, they are not same.
By having impacted loss, murder, shall not be punished in sense of sitting in some prison without doing anything. Such loss will not be "just" by spending time in prison or anywhere. The murderer shall be punished to reimbursment of the loss. Hereby I would like to cite the Penal Code, by L. Ron Hubbard from: http://humanitarian.lronhubbard.org/penal.htm
12. Loss of life by intent shall be deemed a capital crime and shall be actionable by a total reimbursement of loss of their interest to all financially involved persons and substitution insofar as possible by the offender and failing the latter shall be further disciplined as the judge of the court, after due unanimous findings by the jury, shall decree.
13. The death sentence shall not be part of any penal code of the country.
-
Re:I want to be a paperback writer
Somehow, I think there's somebody else you should be yelling at more than him.
:) What was it, an entire decology post mortem? -
Hubbard... I just know oneWhen I read the headline I thought Ron Hubbard asked Freebsd to rename the error for some religious reason. Oh well...
P.S. I use OpenBSD
-
Re:Battlefield EarthI don't know if all of his books sucked that bad
Yes.Actually, before he was deified, L Ron Hubbard wrote some good SF, published in Astounding in the 40s. See this site for instance (the "Golden Age" bit). Final Blackout, (1941) was particularly good, set in a Europe with WWII continuing for decades.
-
Nary a kind word for CoS?Let's get this out of the way: I am a Scientologist.
OK, the interesting thing here is that not a SINGLE ONE of these posts has had a kind thing to say about the Church. I understand that people have problems with the way the CoS has their equivalent of thithing set up. But has no one ever had a positive experience when it comes to the CoS?
I'm a college student, and I have always considered myself a Scientologist. (My parents became involved with the Church before I was born.) And while I have not paid for any services in many years, I still find that there are basic Scientology principles that help me out on a daily basis. Things like the ARC triangle. The definition of an engram. The book Dianetics clearly spells out how the mind works in a practical way. And it makes sense! I can't hope to explain everything contained in the entire body of LRH's work in this post, but I can point you to the Church's website, and specifically the What is Scientology portion of it.
There are portions of LRH's writings that are not accessible to someone who walks in off the street. And, as people have pointed out, there is a fee required for those services. However, I have it on good authority (my parents', as well as many Scientologists I know who have taken these courses) that you do get a tremendous amount out of the training or auditing for the money that is invested. I myself have had many hours of auditing, all of which have been beneficial to me at a very personal level. It's difficult to explain how good it feels to examine experiences in one's life that are non-optimal to say the least and figure out exactly what's wrong with the situation and what needs to be done to handle it.
I alluded to this earlier, but I didn't explicitly state it: there are plenty of books that you can get which will allow you to learn about and apply Scientology principles. There are even some (such as the Way to Happiness pamphlet) that are routinely handed out for free. Scientology is NOT "all about the dollar signs". At least I have not experienced it to be so.
All this is completely off-topic with regards to the closing down of the website. I am personally of the belief that information posted on the Internet should not be censored in ANY way. I believe that the Church of Scientology has been and, in this case, continues to be guilty of free speech violations. In short, I have a problem with the Church's actions in this regard. This story should never have happened.
This is not to say that I agree with anything posted on Xandu.com. The resposibilty of the reader is implied by the very libertarian stance I articulated above: people need to be responsible for the accuracy of anything they read online.
My advice to you is this: check it out. Pick up a copy of Dianetics at a library and read it. There are many more books to read from there, including Science of Survival , Scientology: A New Slant on Life and more than a hundred others. Read what LRH has to say. Then make a judgement call FOR YOURSELF.
This post is not being placed here as flamebait, although I may be attacked by someone. I am merely trying to balance the extremely one-sided view of the Church that the readers of the comments would have received without this note.LRH has said that only what is true for you is true. While this logic may be cyclic, it makes sense: if something doesn't make sense to you, or if you don't believe it, you will operate under the assumption that it is not, in fact, true. Once you have emperical proof that it is true -- *then* it will become true for you. As with anything else, Scientology is this way. Scientology's underlying doctrines (also see here) make sense. Period.
---Wouldn't you like to be a Pepper too?---
-
Nary a kind word for CoS?Let's get this out of the way: I am a Scientologist.
OK, the interesting thing here is that not a SINGLE ONE of these posts has had a kind thing to say about the Church. I understand that people have problems with the way the CoS has their equivalent of thithing set up. But has no one ever had a positive experience when it comes to the CoS?
I'm a college student, and I have always considered myself a Scientologist. (My parents became involved with the Church before I was born.) And while I have not paid for any services in many years, I still find that there are basic Scientology principles that help me out on a daily basis. Things like the ARC triangle. The definition of an engram. The book Dianetics clearly spells out how the mind works in a practical way. And it makes sense! I can't hope to explain everything contained in the entire body of LRH's work in this post, but I can point you to the Church's website, and specifically the What is Scientology portion of it.
There are portions of LRH's writings that are not accessible to someone who walks in off the street. And, as people have pointed out, there is a fee required for those services. However, I have it on good authority (my parents', as well as many Scientologists I know who have taken these courses) that you do get a tremendous amount out of the training or auditing for the money that is invested. I myself have had many hours of auditing, all of which have been beneficial to me at a very personal level. It's difficult to explain how good it feels to examine experiences in one's life that are non-optimal to say the least and figure out exactly what's wrong with the situation and what needs to be done to handle it.
I alluded to this earlier, but I didn't explicitly state it: there are plenty of books that you can get which will allow you to learn about and apply Scientology principles. There are even some (such as the Way to Happiness pamphlet) that are routinely handed out for free. Scientology is NOT "all about the dollar signs". At least I have not experienced it to be so.
All this is completely off-topic with regards to the closing down of the website. I am personally of the belief that information posted on the Internet should not be censored in ANY way. I believe that the Church of Scientology has been and, in this case, continues to be guilty of free speech violations. In short, I have a problem with the Church's actions in this regard. This story should never have happened.
This is not to say that I agree with anything posted on Xandu.com. The resposibilty of the reader is implied by the very libertarian stance I articulated above: people need to be responsible for the accuracy of anything they read online.
My advice to you is this: check it out. Pick up a copy of Dianetics at a library and read it. There are many more books to read from there, including Science of Survival , Scientology: A New Slant on Life and more than a hundred others. Read what LRH has to say. Then make a judgement call FOR YOURSELF.
This post is not being placed here as flamebait, although I may be attacked by someone. I am merely trying to balance the extremely one-sided view of the Church that the readers of the comments would have received without this note.LRH has said that only what is true for you is true. While this logic may be cyclic, it makes sense: if something doesn't make sense to you, or if you don't believe it, you will operate under the assumption that it is not, in fact, true. Once you have emperical proof that it is true -- *then* it will become true for you. As with anything else, Scientology is this way. Scientology's underlying doctrines (also see here) make sense. Period.
---Wouldn't you like to be a Pepper too?---
-
Nary a kind word for CoS?Let's get this out of the way: I am a Scientologist.
OK, the interesting thing here is that not a SINGLE ONE of these posts has had a kind thing to say about the Church. I understand that people have problems with the way the CoS has their equivalent of thithing set up. But has no one ever had a positive experience when it comes to the CoS?
I'm a college student, and I have always considered myself a Scientologist. (My parents became involved with the Church before I was born.) And while I have not paid for any services in many years, I still find that there are basic Scientology principles that help me out on a daily basis. Things like the ARC triangle. The definition of an engram. The book Dianetics clearly spells out how the mind works in a practical way. And it makes sense! I can't hope to explain everything contained in the entire body of LRH's work in this post, but I can point you to the Church's website, and specifically the What is Scientology portion of it.
There are portions of LRH's writings that are not accessible to someone who walks in off the street. And, as people have pointed out, there is a fee required for those services. However, I have it on good authority (my parents', as well as many Scientologists I know who have taken these courses) that you do get a tremendous amount out of the training or auditing for the money that is invested. I myself have had many hours of auditing, all of which have been beneficial to me at a very personal level. It's difficult to explain how good it feels to examine experiences in one's life that are non-optimal to say the least and figure out exactly what's wrong with the situation and what needs to be done to handle it.
I alluded to this earlier, but I didn't explicitly state it: there are plenty of books that you can get which will allow you to learn about and apply Scientology principles. There are even some (such as the Way to Happiness pamphlet) that are routinely handed out for free. Scientology is NOT "all about the dollar signs". At least I have not experienced it to be so.
All this is completely off-topic with regards to the closing down of the website. I am personally of the belief that information posted on the Internet should not be censored in ANY way. I believe that the Church of Scientology has been and, in this case, continues to be guilty of free speech violations. In short, I have a problem with the Church's actions in this regard. This story should never have happened.
This is not to say that I agree with anything posted on Xandu.com. The resposibilty of the reader is implied by the very libertarian stance I articulated above: people need to be responsible for the accuracy of anything they read online.
My advice to you is this: check it out. Pick up a copy of Dianetics at a library and read it. There are many more books to read from there, including Science of Survival , Scientology: A New Slant on Life and more than a hundred others. Read what LRH has to say. Then make a judgement call FOR YOURSELF.
This post is not being placed here as flamebait, although I may be attacked by someone. I am merely trying to balance the extremely one-sided view of the Church that the readers of the comments would have received without this note.LRH has said that only what is true for you is true. While this logic may be cyclic, it makes sense: if something doesn't make sense to you, or if you don't believe it, you will operate under the assumption that it is not, in fact, true. Once you have emperical proof that it is true -- *then* it will become true for you. As with anything else, Scientology is this way. Scientology's underlying doctrines (also see here) make sense. Period.
---Wouldn't you like to be a Pepper too?---