Gathering Minds

Doing What Is Right

The acknowledgement of the existence of other viewpoints is a worthwhile endeavor. Not only does it validate the thetan who is carrying that viewpoint, but it also validates one’s own viewpoints. The existence of viewpoints is undeniable as is the existence of a thetan. Together, agreements become the common bond of ‘friendship’.

Addressing the Being, whether in ‘friendship’ or not, is called the ‘right thing to do’. In fact, it clearly defines the difference between ‘right’ and ‘wrong’.

For those viewpoints with which we may have difficulty accepting, this ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ outlook becomes of prime importance. It is like keeping one’s own ethics in. The Golden Rule must not be broken.

When in doubt, address the Being.

Confusing a Being with their viewpoint is the same as ‘taking it personal’. When a thetan takes something personal what that thetan is doing is merging Beingness with a viewpoint and thereby creating a new viewpoint of ‘not there-ness’. With this resulting ‘not there-ness’, one’s environment becomes that much more filtered, or narrowed, in scope.

Here is an example:

Extracts from the tape transcript, "Anatomy of the theta body", by LRH, were posted to Mike Hunsaker’s discussion board, with no additional comments by the poster.

The post is completely removed from the discussion board by Mike H.

The reason, Mike H. writes, is: "I did not object to what was posted, only who posted it."

In other words, Mike H. took it personal. By invalidating the Beingness of the poster, Mike H. broke the Golden Rule.

It would have been fine to remove the communication of an undesired viewpoint. It would have also been fine to remove the tape transcript extracts, saying that they were inappropriate for the discussion board, or any other reason for that matter. But to say that the poster’s Beingess is found objectionable is not something that a Scientologist would even think about saying.

Mike Hunsaker is not a Scientologist per this crime of Beingness invalidation.

Viewpoints can be invalidated, suppressed, validated, encouraged, enforced, etc., and they can also be used and abused to no end. They are just things.

A Being is not a ‘thing’. It is the most precious gift in this universe, and beyond.

Implanting, created as a method for dealing with ‘undesirable’ viewpoints, is the scourge of the universe. But above that, there is a methodology of implanting that has, and is, being used against the being itself.

Any thetan which places itself in the position of destroying beingness can be considered an Agent of Destruction.

The philosophy of Scientology is pointed on the fact that the being, not the ‘things’ which are attached to the Being, but it is the being itself which is being addressed. The end result: a Free Being.

Mike H. has demonstrated that he does not wish for the poster, which he has found to be personally objectionable, to become Free.

That is the definition of a Suppressive Person and no other. Eradification of others.

For some, this universe is a fight to see which thetan can be the last to ‘survive’. It is a false viewpoint and clearly in error.

Don’t make the same mistake that Mike H. has. If you find a viewpoint unacceptable, then it is your right to refuse communication. It is not your right to deny Beingness.

And that is the difference between ‘right’ and ‘wrong’.