From: sdb@ssr.com (Scott Ballantyne)
Subject: Re: Who died?
Organization: ScotSoft Research
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 21:27:35 GMT

In article <920727224011.22e4627a@CCSUA.CTSTATEU.EDU> WENGERB@CCSUA.CTSTATEU.EDU (Brian Wenger, Asst Dir, Info Systems, CCSU) writes:

   Most non-Scientologists have much too much to learn about the _subject_
   of Scientology before criticisms of the Church would make any sense.
   But just so you know, "on the inside" Scientologists are very much
   expected to report misuses or abuses of Scientology policies or audit-
   ing procedures. Those that do "misuse or abuse" are taught the proper
   policy or auditing technique, in a way that improves the situation,
   and doesn't just leave the person feeling guilty.

I'm delighted that scientologists correct abuses. When can we expect
you to correct the abuses of the CCHR in it's reporting on psychiatry
and psychology, prozac and ECT?


   sdb:
   >It has been a simple matter for me to refute the charges of CCHR and
   >Mr. Wenger about ECT -- I simply presented the facts of the matter,
   >with the benefits and the risks clearly spelled out, as well as an
   >accurate and up to date description of the procedure. Mr. Wenger has
   >not been able to refute these.

   Mr. Wenger:
   I was hoping that we could end this ECT topic.

Then stop making comments about it.

   That would be nice, and there may have been (or are being) studies
   done of the Purif's safety and efficacy (i.e. besides the studies
   done by LRH). But I think the fact that an informed medical
   approval as a pre-requisite for the Purif is a sufficient safety
   precaution for now. Don't you?

No I don't. I also think it's highly unethical to advertise and charge
money to individuals undergoing an experimental treatment (the nicest
thing I can say about the Purif.

   >Rather than press his own case, Mr. Wenger has prefered to attack my
   >character.
   >Case closed.

   Please. Your attacks on peoples' characters could probably fill a
   40Meg harddisk. I think it is about time that you treated individuals
   on this newsgroup that happen to have gotten benefit from Scien-
   tology, with a little more tolerance and respect.

You would be hard pressed to find an attack of mine on anyones
character. You won't find it difficult to find me referring to some of
the dimmer bulbs on this newsgroups (such as yourself) in less than
dulcet tones (that means that yes, I have insulted you), but you can
also find past articles where I have expressed my great admiration for
individuals such as Dave Decot, who is still a believer in
Scientology.

   If you want to learn about Scientology and have questions, then fire
   away. But how about knocking-off the under-handed insults to people who 
   have found a philosophy that they feel is helping them do better in life.

When Scientology cleans up its act, I'll take my leave. Until then, I
think I just hang around asking my uncomfortable little questions,
like why scientology keeps spreading misinformation about ECT, drug
therapy, psychology, psychiatry or why is it scientology is charging
money for an abomination like the Purif.

sdb
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology