The anonymous WordPress bloggers are at it again, attempting to slam me simply because I chose to sometimes participate in discussions with Scientologists, attempting to imply that this means I have not “abandoned” Scientology. It is obvious from reading the discussions that precisely the opposite is true. I left and fully repudiated Scientology 35 years ago. However I have not stopped caring about helping people who are still trapped in Scientology. Hence, the discussions to see if I can show them other perspectives. I spend only a very small portion of my time doing this.
Additionally I have a strong interest in studying and investigating how it is that people come to adopt belief systems that most people would consider strange and improbable. Contrary to popular myth that I have discussed elsewhere, evidence shows that most people who get involved are not mentally ill or misfits. On the contrary, cults target people to recruit who are stable and who will represent the group well and thus be able to attract more new members. This is especially relevant to my interest in criticizing pseudoscientific mental health practices. Having discussions directly with people who hold such beliefs is helpful to me in better understanding what is going on and may be helpful to me in generating new hypotheses that could be used in future research I may conduct.
Ironically, in recent years participants on the discussion group alt.religion.scientology (which is a discussion board consisting mainly of critics of Scientology) have complained about most of my postings being “off topic” due to the fact that the smear campaigners have been posting lies about me to that group on a regular basis for the past two years that have nothing to do with Scientology and everything to do with the criticism I have been involved in with regard to attachment therapy, coercive restraints and other similar therapies. Had I not been spending so much time criticizing that and had it been true that I was “fixated” on Scientology, these attacks on me would never have occurred.
What we have here is another rather lame attempt on the part of the smear campaigners to trash me for wanting to help others through rational dialogue. What the person decides to do as a result, is up to that person but there are people such as Tory “Magoo” Christman who had been in Scientology for 30 years and actually feels she was helped by some of the discussions she had with people she met through alt.religion.scientology such as Scientology critic Andreas Heldal-Lund, who she considered to be instrumental in her ultimately deciding to leave in 2000 because he cared enough about her to have discussions with her. Previously, she had been conditioned to believe that people like Andreas were evil incarnate, but through the discussions she had, she found out otherwise. This isn’t all that different from the followers of certain therapy gurus who have been conditioned to believe that I am evil incarnate. Having reasonable discussions can sometimes help people to see otherwise.
The most absurd part of the posting is that I am having a debate with someone on topics that are “far removed from the field of social work”. So what? I have studied and am interested in a number of subjects. Where is it written that I should only discuss social work topics just because that’s what my PhD is in? Newsflash: It isn’t written anywhere.
Also, the lie is being repeated that I was involved in a sexual relationship with Quentin Hubbard. Although there would be nothing wrong with it if I had been (he was nothing like his father), this is false. Quentin and I were never anything more than friends, as I clearly stated in my written account of my experiences. I also, contrary to the false propaganda, have not subscribed to any conspiracy theories about his death and continue to believe that, as reported, he committed suicide. This is yet another example of how low the smear campaigners would sink, that they would use the death of a dear friend to attack me.
It seems the anonymous smear campaigners are really having trouble to come up with material on me. Thus, they either fabricate lies or choose to slam me for having a dialogue with someone and make out as if it is some kind of huge violation that I have to answer for. The absurdity of that speaks for itself.