(Section 11 of Part 3 – Why I Left the Church)
I just wanted to say, before I go on, that I realize that there is the factor of quoting LRH policy with a certain point to be made and that sometimes this can be misleading. What I have given you here are certain policies that I think apply to the situations I am writing about. I fully understand the fact that people can quote certain policies in an attempt to prove their point, where they are missing the overall concept of the policy they are quoting, including how that policy fits in with other policies and the overall purpose of the organization itself.
So maybe you have read some things I’ve said here and then thought that the policy that I quoted, in relation to whatever point I was trying to make with it, does not really apply or does not include other important concepts that would nullify my point.
All I can say is that I have done my honest best here to use the policies that I am quoting in a spirit that leads to truth and to expansion and survival, and to exposing actions that are being taken that I feel are hindering expansion and survival.
All I can ask you to do is to look at what I am saying, try to look at all viewpoints, and to look past any fixed ideas you may have. If you still disagree with me, there is nothing I can do about it except to give your understandings and offerings of policy a fair shake, and try to look past any fixed ideas I may have, which is something I’ve sincerely tried to do during this whole time. Of course, you would have to be willing to have two-way communication with me before I could understand what your viewpoint is. And in that communication I would have to see that you are actually willing to look at all viewpoints before I would consider that your viewpoint could have any influence on mine.
I feel I should also say, though, to beware when you are being shown references by church personnel (or anyone for that matter) which they are using to explain why COB’s actions really are standard after all, to make sure that you see the actual relevance of the reference they are showing you to the specific concern that you have. For example, I read from one guy that he originated to someone at his org that the Ideal Org fund-raising program was off-policy, and that to explain how it was actually on-policy he was shown a policy about Gung-Ho Groups which stated something on the order of how monetary contributions can be part of the support for these groups. It was a policy specifically about Gung-Ho Groups yet in this guy’s “handling” it was being altered to justify donations that were not for a book or service being made to the actual orgs, which the policy had absolutely nothing to do with.
This willingness to look at all viewpoints was not what Sindy and I encountered when we approached HCO and OSA with our findings. Had we experienced that and had they shown us something we were missing, we might still be there. The lack of this only further indicates that there are no LRH policies that sanction what is going on. If there were, don’t you think they would have done everything they could to rescue us from the grips of our own misunderstandings? Certainly they wouldn’t want to lose two good staff members, one a 25-year, Flag trained veteran and the other a very good fundraiser.