Path: rambo.bobo.net!xs4all!xs4all!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!newsfeed.concentric.net!207.155.183.80.MISMATCH!global-news-master
From: inFormer@informer.org (Rev Dennis Erlich)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: "Shattered" minds
Date: 20 Nov 1998 19:17:48 PST
Organization: inFormer Ministry [a 501(c)3 non-profit, religious organization] "... in service of cult victims and their families."
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <365819b1.2007675@news.concentric.net>
References: <36434818.32145259@news.tiac.net> <36526d02.43779474@news.tiac.net> <71ur44$n4n@enews2.newsguy.com> <3654234e.33527137@nntp.ix.netcom.com> <3655d896.2083312@news.concentric.net> <733ojd$kn@enews1.newsguy.com>
Reply-To: informer@informer.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: ts034d40.lax-ca.concentric.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
X-No-Archive: yes
Xref: rambo.bobo.net alt.religion.scientology:146341

"Rebecca Hartong" <hartong@erols.com>:

>>   It's not she thinks we don't matter, 3.  It's that she thinks we
>>were "cult bait."  (BTW, I don't necessarily disagree.)
>
>Right, Dennis.

   Overly susceptible marks.  Whatever.

>>   Altho her model could be roughly translated to "you pulled it in",
>>blamethevictim thinking.
>
>What model?

   The model implicit in your shattered minds statement.

>Whatever.  

   Don't you EVER say "whatever" to me again.

>"You pulled it in" yes--in a sense.  You pulled it in by not
>being psychologically prepared for the effects of membership in this type of
>organization.  

   If, by psychologically ill-prepared for membership, you mean our
failing to realize another being could be so two-faced evil as to hide
an all-encompassing need to control and enslave us and twist our
minds, with careful mislabeling; to dress the whole scam up as
"spiritual therapy," and sell it as a cure for all mankind's ills,
then yes.

   We pulled in.    

>I think the big questions are:  Why were you unprepared?  Was
>it simply a lack of exposure to the proper inoculants in childhood?  

   What do you think I needed that I didn't get from my childhood?  I
certainly don't deny there certain aspects lacking.

>Or was
>there some sort of psychological instability present which made it possible
>for you to be so much more profoundly affected by the experience than are
>most people?

   Marriage and two children at 21 without adequate guidance.

>You see, I think the responsibility can lie within the individual without
>the individual being "to blame" in a punitive sense.

   IC, we pulled it in, but not by karma or any "fault" of our own
creation.  

   Blamelessness is a desirable state in cult recovery.  But perhaps
you draw a distinction between blame and responsibility for being
vulnerable to cultic manipulation.

   If so, I'd like to hear your take on the differences as it relates
to cultic involvement.

   Rev Dennis Erlich  * * the inFormer * *
           <inForm@primenet.com>
            <inForm@newsguy.com>