Home - News - What's New - Quick Map - Site Map - Search - Contact

Suri Cruise

Scientology Kids

For Scientology true believers, freeing themselves from the hold Scientology has on their mind is not easy. Tensions with their family who may not share their beliefs often constitute serious problems as well.  Now think what kind of crisis it can be for those who have been been born in Scientology or at a very early age and start to have doubts about it. It is somewhat similar to a situation where someone raised in a fervent Catholic or Muslim family wish to break away from it. The problems and tensions involved may sometimes seem insurmountable.

A fair amount of people who write me to congratulate and thank me for my web site are kids from Scientology parents or non-Scientology parents of Scientology members. My third way approach to the issue, with its reasoned criticism of Scientology in parallel with its stand against critics' exaggerations and abuses, goes a long way in calming their fears while encouraging a truly critical, peaceful, and respectful approach of the delicate questions involved in this issue.

Here is an example. It may seems long but really these are just excerpt of a long letter:

"I have been reading your site for the past few hours and I just want to cry with joy. I can't thank you enough for your amazing site about Scientology. I've been a Scientologist since my mother got in when I was 9 (I'm now 43.) ... I've been questioning the religion for the past few years, having witnessed a number of the things that the critics of Scientology speak of. These were minor things, mind you...nothing extreme, but enough to really question...what am I doing in this religion? ...

I had been reading a number of critic's sites on Scn and began to become more and more upset and, actually, became seriously afraid of saying anything to anyone like - "I'm not a Scientologist anymore." ... After reading a number of entries on your site, a sense of huge relief has replaced the fear. I can't yet say I would know how to answer my best friend if she asked me if I were still a Scn, but at least I wouldn't be shaking in my boots at the thought of being asked such a question. Reading your site has given me courage and at least a modicum of rehabilitation of my critical senses in regard to the subject. I had felt so paralyzed by everything I had read and hadn't really considered the fact that the critics might also be sort of "nutty". Your "third way" makes so much sense to me. ...

I also haven't finished reading your site, but was so filled with love and appreciation for what you've done, I just had to write. If you were here right now, I'd just give you a big ol' hug. ... You have done a remarkable thing. Finally! Some sanity on the subject!!!"

Below are examples of critics' abuses on this topic. Reading the debate I had with Tilman Hausherr who was supporting gross discrimination towards Scientology parents on the ominous assertions that "Scientologists do not love their children" may help you understand why over the years I turned "anti-critics". His project to picket Scientology schools is no less sickening. Read also the reaction of a Scientology kid to Tilman's "FAQ for Scientology kids" posted prominently on Operation Clambake, together with the no less offensive "What is Scientology" introduction which I already analyzed on another page (Mar 7, 2008 update: after ten years of being linked in the introduction section, the link to Tilman's FAQ has now been replaced to the exscientology.com (ESK) web site on Operation Clambake. A vast improvement, though the What is Scientology intro is till there. ESK's own FAQ for Scientology kids is is very good, ).

In contrast, the story of Sasha is a remarkably level-headed, intelligent, and a respectful criticism of the religion he was born and raised in. I have webbed these letters for the last nine years and I believe they have done more to get Scientologists question their involvement than many of the outrageous so-called "critical" web pages.

Another great story I can recommend is the one of Kendra Wiseman, and it is written like a novel that makes for great reading.

If you want to balance the above stories with positive personal perspectives from happy Scientology kids, check out these blog entries: Scientology and Children and Growing Up in Scientology, as well as Scientology and Kids - Children of Scientologists that shows an intelligent and loving way of raising Scientology children..

My one and only personal experience with Scientology kids is when I was in Copenhagen, at the European regional center for Scientology. I would like to recount a positive experience out of this one encounter but in all honesty I can't. The kids were allowed to do absolutely whatever they wanted, probably out of the assumption they had to be left "self-determined" or what. It was really very annoying. Extremely annoying. You just could not sit in the hallway if they were there. If you were trying to play the piano that was standing on the corner, they would come and close the piano cover on your hands. That sort of things. They were out of control and nobody was doing anything about it. Well, that was a very short-lived experience and maybe I was not lucky and this was not representative of all Scientology children but that's the only first hand experience I had on that subject.

Well, almost the only experience. I also know children of personal friends of mine who were Scientologists at the time they were raised (they are also ex-members now) and they are just normal kids like any other kids. The mother is working so hard and is making so many sacrifices to make them happy she deserves a medal, and she did exactly the same when she was a Scientologist. Scientologists do not love their children? What an hateful thing to say. Loving one's children and indoctrination in what the parents believe are good for them are two different things. I may not agree that imposing the scarf on girls is a good idea but I will never say the parents do not love their children because of this, nor will I ever support the even more despicable act of denying them adoption on that ground.

Debate with Tilman Hausherr
Answers for Scientology Kids
 School Pickets
The story of Sasha

Debate with Tilman Hausherr

To make the debate more readable, I combined the first three posts together.

Usenet post from the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology.

Source: Hollywood stars attack German's scientology policy>

Bernie@bernie.cncfamily.com (Bernie)

Mon, 28 Oct 1996 01:10:46 GMT

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Hollywood stars attack German's scientology policy
Message-ID: <327407f3.6427158@news.ping.be>

From: Bernie@bernie.cncfamily.com (Bernie)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Hollywood stars attack German's scientology policy
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 21:47:35 GMT
Message-ID: 32767aea.12287436@news.ping.be

From: Bernie@bernie.cncfamily.com (Bernie)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,soc.culture.german
Subject: Re: Hollywood stars attack German's scientology policy
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:17:01 GMT
Message-ID: <3277ac02.38361157@news.ping.be

>>- Scientologist Klaus Kempe and his wife attempted for 7 years to adopt a child, which was denied due to the fact that they were Scientologists. They fought for 7 years in the courts but by the end of that time, the issue became moot as both had passed the upper age limit allowed for adoption.

Tilman Hausherr:
>No discrimination. Kempe is a hard-core scieno. The concept of "adults in small bodies" is not compatible with the general view how children should be raised.

The irony in this paragraph is that you start by saying "no discrimination" and in the next sentence you are doing just that. There are hundreds and thousands of Scientologists around the world who are perfectly able to care about their children as well as anyone else. You are justifying the denial of human beings to adopt a child based on ~your~ interpretation of ~their~ belief. This is a perfect example of discrimination, and not a pretty sight, I must say.

>If these "hundred and thousands" people use scientology to "care" (or rather, "handle" since "care", "love", etc., is just a product of the reactive mind)

Please cite the reference on which you base yourself to assert that for Scientology "care" and "love" is just a product of the reactive mind.

>It is a logical assumption based on the concept that the reactive mind is the one that does the "spontaneous", "emotional", "silly" stuff, etc.

If this is a logical assumption, your logic must be false, or your information on which it is based must be false, since it isn't the case. This is the kind of misrepresentation you use to "explain" what Scientology really is to outsiders. Any Scientologist would just laugh at you. It isn't very effective therefore for exit-counseling either.

>You won't find "love" or "care" on the tone scale. True scientologists don't love, they "communicate", they "handle", they "postulate", etc.

No, they don't love of course, they aren't human.

>their children, then this means "hundred and thousands" children abused and deprived of their childhood, like Cassie Weigand or ??? Harthun.

Yea, Weigand and Harthun makes hundreds and thousands. For me it makes two. You like to portray the attitude of the majority of scientologists with the few exception. This of course gives a very truthful picture, doesn't it?

Furthermore, if you read my statement again, you will find out that I didn't say that they use scientology to care, I said that they are perfectly able to care for their own children just like any other human. Of course you do not consider Scientologists as human, that's another question.

>These two were two recent ones, from well-known scienos. Should I repost the affidavit of Yolanda Howell? Or the segment from "The road to Xenu"? Or the segment from Bruce Gilham who wrote a long success story after he had realized that it was a good idea to *talk* with his son?

Does the above nutcase making abusive phone calls, or the one shooting people outside orgs represent a behavior typical of the majority of critics? I don't think so, but the COS does. When you use a few cases to imply that the vast majority of Scientologists aren't able to love their own children, you are doing exactly the same. These cases show that abuses ~can~ happen, and in this sense they can be useful, but it is a misrepresentation to use them to paint all Scientologists with the same brush, and you are doing the same wrong as the cult-member to which you object to when you use these cases as a discrimination weapon against all Scientologists.

>I do consider scientologists to be human, but I do not consider "true" scientologists to be able to care for their children

Therefore, in actuality, you don't consider them to be human, because the very vast majority of humans do care for their children, even the most criminal ones.

Of course you cannot ~say~ that you do not consider them as human, or maybe don't even realize it, but in practice, you do not. What matters is what you do, and in this case you are supporting a clear discrimination case, all the while thinking that you are doing something "good". Cult members go through the same process.

>, and luckily the german adoption agencies see this so too.

That's why it is discrimination. If this can be proven in Court, the responsible would be condemned, and it would be fully deserved. If it turns out that they were enticed in doing so by an outside informant, this person could be indicted too, and should.

>Luckily some scientologists are smart enough not to use it against their children.

You don't understand what Scientology is, Tilman, you only have ideas about it.

>Sure, I should enter scientology and waste a few years to be allowed to discuss about it.

No, although it would help :-) especially if during that time you are the direct recipient of discrimination, so that you could have at least the taste of it.

>You should start looking for the rights of the children instead of the rights of those who abuse them by indoctrinating them in this system.

"Indoctrination" is only your interpretation, Tilman. Others call it teaching in what they belief to the best of their knowledge. Are children being abused because they are "indoctrinated" in the Christian, Muslim or Buddhist view? It is their ~right~ Tilman, just as it is your right to teach your children whatever crap you think is true.

>No it ain't when it's scientology. And german, english and american courts see this like me.

What exactly do they see like you? That you can't teach Scientology to your children? Do they all backup your assertion, like in the sentence "german, english and american courts"? Which German, English and American cases can you cite?

>Scientology cannot be compared to Christian, Muslim or Buddhist religions.

That's another question. The point is that a Scientologist believes in Scientology the way a Christian believes in the Bible and a Muslim in Islam. Naturally, he will teach his kids in what he believes, since for him that is what is best. The fact that the philosophy sustaining these beliefs is correct or not is not for the State or one of its agency to decide or interfere with.

The same goes for discrimination in the business area, and your Federal State reminded its citizen about their civil duties in the most judicious way by stating that

"only economic considerations are to be taken into account when deciding who can enter into a public contract with the government. It can not be used as a means to dispense sanctions or as a control mechanism in pursuit of socio-political aims."

>Your definition of discrimination seems to include also the prosecution of mafia members. Hey, they are just people who don't believe in the current rules of acquisition.

It does not. If they engage in crime, they should be prosecuted. But note that even for the mafia this has to be ~proven~. Such is the civil and judiciary law, whether you like it or not.This is valid for Scientologists, or anyone else, as well. I always said that Scientologists should be pursued to the full extent of the law if there are proof that they violated the law and engaged in criminal activities. But to support, as you do, the denial of potential parents to adopt a child for the mere fact of ~your~ interpretation of ~their~ belief is discrimination, and an abhorrent one at that.

>Sure, give scientology all the children they want.

I didn't say that. They should go through the same procedure as anyone else, not less, not more.

>And while we're at it, give a few to the Mooniex, the AUMies, Thakar Singh, etc.

If they live in a communal setting and they don't earn enough to sustain themselves and their children, then this is an objective element that could play against them in the procedure. But if they meet all the criteria required for anyone else, then their belief is not an element that can be held against them.

>Let's just wait until the children get 21. And if they don't complain, then we won't prosecute.

There are some very stringent criteria for the follow up as well, I believe. If there is any objective elements for prosecution, then they should be pursued, just like for any other person.

>I'm getting tired of so-called "ex-scientologists" (actually, it's only you) who use all their energy to support the rights of this contemptouus cult. What are you - a stepson of Gordon Melton and Eileen Barker?

To tell you the truth, I am getting tired too. I would prefer to criticize the COS. The problem is that I don't find the time for it because I have to spend it against those things I find even more contemptuous and dangerous, such as the matter at hand.

Supporting injustice, all in the name of the Holy Jeehad, is not the way to go about fighting the COS. It is counter-productive and a waste of everybody's time.



Tilman then answers with yet another post filled with incredibly stupid statements, and with a load full of irrelevant cases references. I realized that there really was no point debating with him, so I just snipped the whole thing and made a last post to put an end to this absurd discussion, and at the same time an end to any further debate with him.

Usenet post from the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology.

Source: Hollywood stars attack German's scientology policy

Bernie@bernie.cncfamily.com (Bernie)


Subject: Re: Hollywood stars attack German's scientology policy
Message-ID: <3278156f.65346414@news.ping.be>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,soc.culture.german

>>There are some very stringent criteria for the follow up as well, I believe. If there is any objective elements for prosecution, then they should be pursued, just like for any other person.

Tilman Hausherr:
>Yeah, but prosecution is "discrimination" again.

No it's not, but what is the use to explain the whole thing again? You didn't get it and you probably won't, or you are deliberately twisting things around, or both.




Answer for Scientology Kids

Tilman Hausherr is also the author of a page entitled "Answers for Scientology Kids", mainly aimed at turning children from Scientologists against their parents. Needless to say, this page is rote with false and sick statements, such as, again, telling the kids their own parents don't love them. The page is used prominently on the Operation Clambake, one of the most referred to critical site (Mar 7, 2008 update: after ten years of being webbed, the link to Tilman's FAQ has now been replaced with the link to the exscientology.com web site. Their own FAQ for Scientology kids is, contrary to that of Tilman, very good). The following is an example of a reaction from the son of a Scientologist to Tilman's page, as reported by a friend of his.

dantemp640@aol.com (DanTemp640)

2 Nov 1997 05:53:27 GMT

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: "Answers for Scientology Kids"
Message-ID: <19971102055300.AAA01478@ladder01.news.aol.com>

hello ars group

I am NOT a Scientologist. When I found out that my new friend, who I will call “Roger” was a Scientologist I did some research on usenet and the internet. I found this article by "Tilman Hausherr" and a few other things, printed them out and showed them to Roger. He was pissed. I mean royally PISSED! His face actually turned red and the veins stood out on his neck like in a cartoon.

We sort of talked it over and sort of got over it but he was realy hung up on some of the stuff in the “answers for kids stuff.” I wished I had never gave him the stuff because we are friends and it really screwed up our friendship.

I told him he should answer the worst stuff that he swears are just stupid lies and I would format it and post it back for him. I hope this comes out okay. I put it together in MS Works.

I will check for responses in a couple of days and give them to him but I don’t want to get in the middle of a flamewar forever.

Danny T.

Everything from here down is his words not mine.

>Answers for scientology kids

>3. My parents almost never have time for me. Why?

>Your parents may be fooling themselves about what is important. Many scientologists believe that unless they devote their time to scientology they will lose all their friends or get sick. Maybe your parents have even been *forbidden* by scientology to care about you because they are not "upstat" (= having worked very hard). Scientology does not have a concept that children are special in the way that they need love and care. They are just "thetans in small bodies" that have to be turned into small scientologists.

I don’t know why somebody would say such a thing and broadcast it to the whole world via the internet. My parents have always put me and my sisters first. My parents and I are all Scientologists ... does not compute... I know for sure that they put us ahead of not only Scientology but if the choice were forced on them they would choose to be hurt themselves rather than see us hurt and would for sure be willing to take a bulltet if it meant we would live. Parents have these concepts that children need love etc not because they are a particular religion but because they are good caring people. (hopefully) How stupid would you have to be to believe that Scientology teaches parents not to love their kids? Pretty damn stupid, right? How big a jerk would you have to be to post such a stupid opinion on the info superhigway?

My sisters and I spend far more time with our parents than most kids our age and I just don’t get why somebody would dream up this stuff. I know what “upstat” means and it does not mean “having worked very hard.” I reread what was written here and I just get pissed all over again! The idea that Scientologists treat their kids like little robots and don’t love them or something is so incredibly dumb that I sit here amazed that this Tilman jerk so obviously believes what he writes. (or is a very good liar) I don’t know if any who read this can understand how disgusted, pissed and upset just this part makes me. Not to mention the rest of this thing which is mostly just as bad. I live in the world Tilman is trying to write about and he is so full of it that his eyes are unnaturally brown! I also wonder if he would have the gutts to say these things to my face!

>5. But scientology is the most ethical group on the planet!

>Says who? Scientology itself. If you look in the "ethics" book, you will see that in scientology the word is synonymous to scientology itself, and also means to "getting things done".

Tilman needs to study some Scientology next time before he shoots his mouth off. He should have came to some kind of an understanding about what Scientologists are talking about when they are talking about “ethics.”

Ethics is a personal thing. It has to do with the choices we make for ourselves which effect how well we do in life. It has to do with knowing the difference between right and wrong and acting accordingly. It is not something enforced by an outside person. It is something that must come from inside each of us. But I'm not going to spend anymore time trying to teach a stupid jerk about ethics.

>6. How are other schools different from scientology schools?

>You learn a lot of different stuff, like language, science, art, sport, etc. There is no "religion" in all these courses. You do not have to write a success story all the time. Good teachers answer your questions, instead of asking "what word have you not understood, go look it up".

And here too, Tilman doesn’t know what he is talking about. I went to a Delphi school up until a year ago when we had to move because of my Dad’s work. Of course I learned language, science, art, etc. I don’t understand what he even means in the part about “not having to “write success stories all the time.” Our CA State scores were avg three grade levels ahead of where they were expected to be. Stick that in your pipe and smoke IT, buddy! Again this stuff just makes you look stupid to anybody who has ever been around real Scientology.

I am now in a good private school and there are some fine teachers here. At first it was very strange to me that the other kids had not been taught how to study, and the teachers don’t even know the subject of “study tech”exists. I don’t know how they manage at all without it. I help them when I can.

>You don't write K/Rs ("Knowledge report" - other calls this spying) on other students - this is not cool.

Tilman would fit right in at the school I’m at now. Even though it is a very good school, if I wanted to I could buy drugs here and the kids who sell them get away with it because writing K/Rs is “not cool.” Although most here are pretty good kids, some think that cool = being out ethics.

>Exams are done so that you have to respond to questions or solve problems. You have only one round to go - and you will get a result depending how many you answered correctly. There is no "pink cheat sheet" so that you can take the exam again and again and again until you have 100%. This way you and the teachers can see how much you know, and if you have to work harder. But you have to learn quite a lot before an exam.

I don’t understand your point here. At Delphi, the entire curriculum was built around the idea that we should gain knowledge so we could use that knowledge in life. What is your objection to all students learning everything they should learn? I don’t get it unless you're saying it's good to stay a little stupid, and given your apparent smarts, that wouldn't surprise me!.

>Depending on the school, you have to do more or less homework. If you have difficulties to learn, you can get help from your parents, other students, the teacher or additional hired or volunteer "helpers" (aides and tutors)

I have far, far less homework here. Delphi’s requirements and standards were much tougher than this school’s. And I study on my own real well thanks to Delphi.

>In one case reported to me, children from a scientology school who transferred to a public school had to start over again from lover school levels.

This didn’t happen to me. It was just the opposite.

>In many places there are other kinds of schools also, but almost all of them teach what will help you work and think for yourself and your family, and deal peacefully with many different kinds of people besides scientology members.

The stupid assumption here, is that Delphi and other Scientology schools don’t do any of this. So crass and so stupid as to be almost beyond belief.

gt;10. Do other children have to work?

I’m not so pissed anymore, maybe because this stuff is starting to look funny to me. Does Tilman think that Scientology children are made to work like little slaves? More stupidity. If stupid = gunpowder then Tilman couild blow up the whole world with a sneeze.

There is so much else that I was going to respond to here but the hell with it. If you don't see what I'm driving at by now, what's the use.

Tilman is not only stupid, he is also a failure. The whole thing he wrote is intended for Scientology kids, but I can’t think of any Scientology kid who wouldn’t come to the same conclusion I did. Tilman is a jerk. In fact he is a stupid jerk. And that’s not just name calling. It is an observation based on the solid evidence of what he has written. Maybe Tilman should try observing and weighing evidence sometime. I’m sure it would be a new experience for him.

Tilman needs to get a lot smarter, stop being a jerk and learn at least a little bit about what Scientology and Scientologists are about before he wastes more of his time. (although I doubt if he will ever get past the barriers to learning he is stuck in)

If anyone knows how to get this for sure to "Tilman" I would be obliged if they would do so.




School Pickets

Here is yet another idea of Tilman, made a year and a half after the above debate. It shows that Tilman didn't change his position a bit, and is still completely oblivious to the feelings of parents and their children as long as they are Scientologists.

Usenet post from the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology.

Source:  <Houston picket opportunity

tilman@berlin.snafu.de (Tilman Hausherr)

Mon, 01 Jun 1998 07:35:13 GMT

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Houston picket opportunity
Message-ID: <35965434.88724743@news.snafu.de>

While reading "Rod Fletcher"s posts I had an idea - why not picket scientology schools. I suggest to start in Houston, where people have complained of not being able to picket:

    5714 Dolores Street

The advantage of picketing a scientology school is that you just need to picket one 30min window (morning) and one 15min window (afternoon). Some intelligence gathering needs to be done, to get the correct times. But in a successful picket you would get more "audience" per minute than in any other place. Leaflets should focus on Hubbard's bogus education instead of Lisa McPherson. You could make copies of the LA Weekly article as "2nd" leaflet, i.e. for people who approach you. Suggestions for signs:



    IS A

    RUN BY A



Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP4]


While some critics, like Keith Henson, approved of the idea to picket schools, a small handful of others disagreed with it. Tilman justifies it nevertheless on the ground that it constitutes "information" for the children, that it's not a school at all but a "brainwashing factory", and that "children's mind are hurt with thought-stopping technique of word clearing" (!!!)

Usenet post from the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology.

Source: Houston picket opportunity

tilman@berlin.snafu.de (Tilman Hausherr)

Mon, 01 Jun 1998 22:35:47 GMT

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Houston picket opportunity
Message-ID: <35ab225d.141517489@news.snafu.de>

In <3573071C.2FC2@idt.net>, jbwebb <jbwebb@idt.net> wrote:

>I am not sure how I feel about picketing at schools. My first inclination would be to say No. I'm not sure if the majority of children there are COS even. It's a very small school. I think the total enrollment is around 50 - all grades.

They are *all* scientologists by attending this school. Sometimes without their knowledge. We don't picket to annoy the children - but to inform them. These schools are not schools at all, these are brainwashing factories for children, to take away their ability to think critically.

>>Also, the school is in a weird, off the beaten tract location. Their would be NO advantage to picketing, except to scare little kindergarteners out of their minds.

We could hand out balloons!

>No, I don't think this is a good idea at all. I don't feel that involving innocent children is necessary.

Ask this the scientologists. They destroy these children's future.

>Plus - Tilman, do you have ANY idea of how fucking hot it is in Houston right now? Are you nuts?

ot on 8am, when the parents bring their kids to school. Maybe on 4pm, but we'll just picket naked:-)



Usenet post from the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology.

Source: Houston picket opportunity

tilman@berlin.snafu.de (Tilman Hausherr)

Wed, 03 Jun 1998 06:14:17 GMT

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Houston picket opportunity
Message-ID: <35d6e83f.257744829@news.snafu.de>

In<3574D6A2.5CC7@pop.a001.sprintmail.com>,SteveJebson naismith@pop.a001.sprintmail.com> wrote:

>I think picketing a school is a dreadful idea. It's rotten PR and likely to upset the kids and their families.

The same could be said about picketing an org. It is also "upsetting", and "rotten PR" (from the scientology viewpoint), since it is a "church". What I find upsetting is that these scientology schools are legal, schools where children's mind are hurt with thought-stopping technique of word clearing.

Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP4]


The Story of Sasha

Sasha Zbitnoff was born and raised within the CoS. As he grew older and started to think for himself, he gradually began to question the CoS' particular conditioning and, eventually, decided to leave Scientology. Over-zealed reactions on the part of some of his closest friend, as well as his own father, helped to precipitate his decision.

I find this story remarkable for several reasons:

1) Sasha's current approach isn't one of anger and resentment. Not only does he show a great deal of discernment for being able to question and free himself from a life-long conditioning, he also finds within himself enough strength and compassion to forgive his fellow Scientologists and try to understand their reaction. Knowing most of the critical litterature, he doesn't fall for the lurid aspect of the anti's side and is able to critically appreciate the respective value of both sides.

2) It shows that there is no such thing as unalienable conditioning, much less "brainwashing", as even someone born and raised within Scientology can break away from it - much like someone born and raised from within another religion, or from within a political system like Communism, may do.

3) It shows that Scientology isn't the dark and sinister system often painted out by critics, as Sasha acknowledge that he derived some good from it.  His mind doesn't seem to be very damaged either by the "thought-stopping technique of word clearing" he was supposedly subjected to for years in Tilman's "brainwashing factories". Que du contraire.

4) It shows that the CoS is populated with human beings like you or me, who love their children like any other human beings, even if some may sometime turn silly to the point of fanaticism, while others will refuse to break off their personal allegiance despite of everything.

5) For that matter, it shows that not all Scientologists react alike, even regarding disconnection, which was much of the point Claire Swazey, another Scientology kid, made in ARS.

6) It shows what can be wrong with Scientology and the cultic mentality: making up an ideologized, unreal, depiction of LRH (which is being mirrored by critics making a demonized, unreal, depiction of him), intolerance to dissent, and, sadly, the over-zealed reaction of certain Scientologists for whom the system has become all-important.

Hopefully, this may have a redeeming effect for Scientologists who may happen to read this story, while it will also show the gap between, on the one hand, actual excesses and abuses that may indeed happen, as recounted honestly and with a sense of proportion by Sasha, and, on the other hand, the generalizations and exploitation of these incidents by anti-cultists like Tilman Hausherr who, based in part on actual event, will bring these overboard and promote the kind of intolerance and discrimination illustrated on this page.

Sasha Story


Pro Scientology

Scientology and Kids - Children of Scientologists - An excellent description on the way a Scientology couple raised their children. Shows an intelligent, non-fanatical application of Scientology, leaving their children "self-determined" to make their own choices.

Scientology and Children - A second generation Scientologist (in fact the younger daughter of the writer above) view on successfully raising a third generation Scientology kids.

Growing Up in Scientology - A happy Scientology kid testimony

Anti Scientology

Growing Up a Scientologist - An excellent story on departing from Scientology by Kendra Wisemen, a grown up Scientology kid.

FAQ for Scientology Kids - At last a well balanced FAQ from Critics, that comes ten years after the disgraceful FAQ of Tilman Hausherr has been prominently featured on Operation Clambake.

Random Quote :

Disclaimer :

This web site is NOT created by a Scientologist. It is created by a Scientology EX-MEMBER who is critical of Scientology. However, this ex-member is ALSO critical of the anti-Scientology movement. This does not make him a Scientologist, nor a defender of Scientology.

Quick Map :

About Myths Bigotry Anti-Cultism Criticism Third Way Links
Site map
What's New














Who's Who



What Is?



The Tech








Scientologists Speak