Tuesday, December 02, 2008

Scientology is Solutions: Your Human Rights

Scientologists want a better world. We try to use what we know of Scientology to achieve that. To someone who understands the basics of Scientology, the need for human rights in this world is very obvious.

When a government feels it has a perfect right to pick up a citizen of another country who is not charged with any crime and transport him to third country so he can be tortured, when slavery is still going on in the world and when other human rights abuses are occurring all over the world, then there is no true security for anyone.

Donations from the International Associations of Scientologists have
So, Scientology not only supplies solutions within the scope of a single individual, but also in the broader scope of solutions for mankind.


Grahame said...

A person with an objectionable posting name said: Didn't Hubbard say that anyone below 2 on the tone scale should have no civil rights whatsoever? Science of Survival, if I'm not mistaken...

You are mistaken. Clearly you have never read the book. You just read what someone else said and they'd probably never read it either.

Grahame said...

FYI - to anyone who is not familiar with the book Science of Survival, it is a book about how to spot where people are spiritually so you can help them no matter how well off or badly off they are.

Knowing the data in this book you can help the good, the bad and the ugly.

It is a large book of several hundred pages. Its intention is clearly to help people and anyone reading it will clearly see that.

In the book L. Ron Hubbard (the author) makes academic style comments here and there that people who don't like helping others have taken out of context and twisted to try to make him look bad. I think you could probably do this with anyone. Even Mother Teresa could be made to look like a monster by someone hell-bent on "proving" it.

SomethingNice said...

Ahhh, the dangers of the misunderstood word...

The reference does exist, but is often misinterpreted out of context.

"Civil Rights" are not the same as "Human Rights".

"Civil" refers to a citizen and "Civil Rights" refer to rights of a citizen under a particular government or set of laws. They can change with the level of citizenship or when the government or the law changes or when the person violates laws of that country. Civil rights also change from state to state, country to country.

Human Rights refer to rights every human being has naturally, that cannot be taken away by any government. These are basic rights that everyone has, regardless of their age, race, gender, where they are from or what they've done.

Children under 18 have human rights, but not the same civil rights as people over 18, for example.

Convicted criminals in prison also have human rights, but not the same civil rights as others, such as the right to walk out of prison (or the right to serve on jury duty!).

Sometimes these terms are confused with each other, but looking at the _context_ of the article, Ron specifically mentions such things as serving on a jury, which would be a mistake to give to someone who is dishonest and lies most of the time (someone under 2.0 on the Tone Scale).

"...any person from 2.0 down on the Tone Scale should not have, in any thinking society, any civil rights of any kind. Because by abusing those rights, they bring into being arduous and strenuous laws which are oppressive to those who need no such restraints. And particularly none below 2.0, chronically or acutely, should be used as witnesses or jurors in courts of law, since their position in regard to ethics is such as to nullify the validity of any testimony they might assay or any verdict they might offer. ..." LRH, Science of Survival, Book One, Chapter 21, "Ethic Level", 2007 edition: page 152.

acute: brief or having a short course
arduous: hard to endure; full of difficulties and hardships
assay: examine or analyze something
chronically: lasting a long time or recurring often
strenuous: requiring great effort or energy

SomethingNice said...

I agree that, even correctly defined and in context, that comment doesn't represent the bulk of the material in Science of Survival, much less in Scientology, which is about helping people.

As a personal note: A friend recently finished studying Science of Survival, and next week we're getting together to try out some of the helpful processes that the book is actually about. We're both looking forward to that.

But first we're contributing to a multi-religious celebration of the 60th anniversary of Human Rights Day (December 10th). http://www.un.org/events/humanrights/2008/