who's down for some email voyeurism

I feel like I've been neglecting the ol' bloggy blog...but on the other hand I've not much to say. I remember the good ol' days of office IMs. Long time blog devotees of the blog will remember that, at my former job, I used to take screen caps of the IM convos, (if the banter was especially decent) and make it into my post. (example)

Unfortunately we have no IM system in our office at the VNA, and even if we did, I don't know if I could attain the same caliber banter we used to have at TDC. I've certainly befriended people at work, but not as closely as I did at the last gig...I don't have that same kind of rapport built up. I should tack a big"YET" onto that line and take into consideration that I was at TDC for 5 years and have been at the VNA only 1. (it was exactly 1 yr this past Tuesday, actually. I had a review that went so well it was unreal. My boss had only nice things to say about me--which makes me think she's not paying attention too closely. I may be getting a 3% raise but HR stamp of approval is pending..)

But in lieu of multi-party IM exchanges, Paul and I will usually have big email symposiums about various oddball topics. This past Monday, for instance, we got yakking about Scientology. It started in a discussion, he was saying how as a practical joke, a friend of his gave his mailing address to the church of Scientology and even though he's moved several times since, he still somehow gets mail from them, including invites (with hand written postscripts) to come to their Scientology 101 conferences in Philadelphia.

So because I'm lacking much else to say, and in an attempt to kinda recapture the IM posting fun of yore, I popped into my work email (thanx webmail!) and copied Monday's exchange. It's not as funny (and certainly not as rapid-fire) as those IMs, but *very* informative, because know-it-allPaul is an effing genius and an expert on EEEEVERYTHANG.

If bits of it seem repetitive, it's because Paul has this custom of copying bits of your email into your reply and writing his response to that particular snippet right under it. It's kind of weird, but very thorough. To hopefully clarify things, Paul's emails are in Times and I've put my input into courier font. The arial italicized is editorial comment...


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That South Park episode where they kept flashing “this is what scientologists really believe” at the bottom of the screen?

All of that was true.

Alien spaceships that look like DC-10’s, galactic rebellions against an evil alien emperor, the Hawaiian Islands being nuked in prehistory, humanity being reincarnated souls of the alien rebels after originally being incarnated in the bodies of a lost species of clam called the boohoo (and, some time after that, incarnated as Piltdown Man), and the psychiatric industry being run by the minions of the aforementioned evil alien emperor.

But until someone leaked those docs on to the Net, evidently one had to have been a member for a *long* time and paid a *lot* of cash to learn this.

Namaste',
Me

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yikes…not to be judgemental but…that’s uhhh.. bat guano loco. Sort of what one would expect from a religion whose founder wrote sci-fi pulp. Sounds as if he took a spare novel that he couldn’t get published (“ too implausible!” said the publisher “people can only suspend their disbelief so much”) and spun it into a religion. Way to repurpose..I’m impressed.

Still, knowing all that marvelous barmy goodness..I can’t believe you’re not tempted to go to one of their jamborees you keep getting invites for.

Oh, and the Suessical wedding vows? ( had just mentioned in conversation that if memory served me correctly, Scientologists have some kooky ass vows at their traditional weddings) I just tracked down an old msn article on the TomKat nuptials and according to that—

from the book “The Background Ministry, Ceremonies & Sermons of the Scientology Religion,” the site reports that the minister asks the bride: “And do you take/His fortune/At its prime and ebb/And seek/With him best fortune/For us all?/Do you?” The minister then tells the groom: “Now, (groom's name),/girls need clothes/And food and/Tender happiness and frills/A pan, a comb,/perhaps a cat/All caprice if you will/But still/They need them./Do you then/Provide?/Do you?”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Yikes…not to be judgemental but…that’s uhhh.. bat guano loco.

I’d be inclined to agree in full.


> Sort of what one would expect from a religion whose founder wrote sci-fi pulp. Sounds as if he took a spare novel that he >couldn’t get published (“ too implausible!” said the publisher “people can only suspend their disbelief so much”) and spun it >into a religion. Way to repurpose..I’m impressed.

That’s been my theory as well. There were rumours that he made a bet with, I think it was Robert Heinlein, regarding making money by founding a religion. Ironically, tho Hubbard founded a religion on purpose, Heinlein founded one by accident (and, to my knowledge, never took a personal role in his, or even supported it),


> Still, knowing all that marvelous barmy goodness..I can’t believe you’re not tempted to go to one of their jamborees you >keep getting invites for.

I know how they operate. If you take their personality test (which they offer to anyone who walks by, or sets foot in one of their buildings) and do poorly, you get offered a communications course to help develop your skills. If you do well, you get offered the same communications course so that you can help others.

(BTW, the correct answers to the course are available online)

Their famed drug rehab programme? Even if you have no history of drug abuse, if you’re a member you have to go through it anyway in case you’d ever done any drugs in a past life.


>Oh, and the Suessical wedding vows? I just tracked down an old msn article on the TomKat nuptials and according to that—

>from the book “The Background Ministry, Ceremonies & Sermons of the Scientology Religion,” the site reports >that the minister asks the bride: “And do you take/His fortune/At its prime and ebb/And seek/With him best >fortune/For us all?/Do you?” The minister then tells the groom: “Now, (groom's name),/girls need clothes/And >food and/Tender happiness and frills/A pan, a comb,/perhaps a cat/All caprice if you will/But still/They need >them./Do you then/Provide?/Do you?”

Yikes!

The bit for the groom sounds like pure Hubbard.


FTR, I started researching Hubbard because of his connections to John Whiteside Parsons, who, in his day job, co-founded NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratories, and in his off-hours, was a bit of a pioneer in certain Western Tantrik traditions.

(their friendship ended when Hubbard scammed Parsons out of a sizable amount of money, a boat and his girlfriend)

Namaste',
Me
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Oh yeah- that volcano that appears on the cover of every edition of “Dianetics”? Supposed to trigger ancestral memories of the aforementioned nuking of Hawaii. (no, I’m not kidding)

Most Scio cover-art is supposed to trigger other ancestral memories. I have no idea what the woman in the bear suit eating a turkey leg on the cover of “Creation of Human Ability” is supposed to represent, and I’m not sure I really wanna know.

Namaste',
Me
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Woman in a bear suit eating a turkey leg? Oh yeah..I have a lot of ancestral memories of that but my grandma did a lot of weird things when she was “in her cups” …some even odder than the bear suit/ turkey leg incident (as it came to be known in our family) if you can believe that.

Those wedding vows cracked me up. I thought it started to get particularly Suessy when it began itemizing all the fabulous prizes the bride is going to gain from this wackadoo union (did I say fabulous prizes? I meant arbitrary banal objects. ) /girls need clothes/And >food and/Tender happiness and frills/A pan, a comb,/perhaps a cat/All caprice if you will/But still/They need >them./

Sooo, that’s a definite on the pan (can’t have the groom going hungry, can we?) but just a “perhaps” on the cat (do Scientologists believe in allergies, is that what that means?) I don’t really consider food a “caprice” ….but that’s just me, I appreciate being fed from time to time. Also I don’t think that comb is an unreasonable request. Yes, that’s right, I’m imagining my nutty Scientology marriage and fast forwarding down the road 10 or 15 years and wondering how many times I can bring out the “tender happiness and frills” clause in an argument. Like if I get some grief for spending $50. on make-up…I’d be all “Oh, yes--eye shadow can certainly be classified as a ‘frill’!! And you made a SOLEMN VOW, Buster…”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Woman in a bear suit eating a turkey leg? Oh yeah..I have a lot of ancestral memories of that but my grandma did a lot of >weird things when she was “in her cups” …some even odder than the bear suit/ turkey leg incident (as it came to be known >in our family) if you can believe that.

I keep making jokes about how they have a whole series of books meant to imply that Hubbard possessed virtually every form of knowledge known to humanity “Ron the Botanist” “Ron the Sea Captain”, “Ron the Biologist” etc etc…

You never see “Ron the Furry”

But maybe that’s an in-house publication.


>Those wedding vows cracked me up. I thought it started to get particularly Suessy when it began itemizing all the fabulous >prizes the bride is going to gain from this wackadoo union (did I say fabulous prizes? I meant arbitrary banal objects. ) >/girls need clothes/And >food and/Tender happiness and frills/A pan, a comb,/perhaps a cat/All caprice if you >will/But still/They need >them./


Its “perhaps a cat” that really gets me…tho “a pan, a comb” wins for sheer surrealism.

>Sooo, that’s a definite on the pan (can’t have the groom going hungry, can we?) but just a “perhaps” on the cat (do >Scientologists believe in allergies, is that what that means?)

Not sure. There are certain mental and physical illnesses that they don’t believe in, tho.

>I don’t really consider food a “caprice” ….but that’s just me, I appreciate being fed from time to time. Also I don’t think that >comb is an unreasonable request. Yes, that’s right, I’m imagining my nutty Scientology marriage and fast forwarding down >the road 10 or 15 years and wondering how many times I can bring out the “tender happiness and frills” clause in an >argument. Like if I get some grief for spending $50. on make-up…I’d be all “Oh, yes--eye shadow can certainly be >classified as a ‘frill’!! And you made a SOLEMN VOW, Buster…”

There ya go.

I’m told that at a certain point, having kids becomes a no-no because they don’t want too many alien souls trapped in bodies, but I’m not sure of the veracity of that accusation. Scio’s pretty Gnostic in many areas, so it wouldn’t surprise me.


Oh yeah- more trivia. The Church of Scientology has the largest privately-owner fleet of ships (collectively called the “Sea Org”- sort of like a nautical monastic order) in the world. They’re banned from a number of ports because actual training somewhat lacks and there have been…incidents…involving accidental destruction of property (buildings, docks…). The Church blames the banning on religious discrimination.

Oh- FTR, I was never involved with the Church (some people have gotten the wrong idea because I know a lot about it), I’ve just done a lot of research in to it.

Namaste',
Me
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, duh. I KNOWS you’re not a Scientologist. After all, it’s established fact that you’re a…what was it…Satanist Nazi somethin’-er-other..oh drat, I can’t quite remember. I know it involved Satanism though.(This comment refers to Paul telling me how at various jobs really outlandish rumors have spread about him, usually perpetrated by coworkers too offput by his ..uhhh..eccentricity to even talk to him. He is fer sure an oddball and a HUGE dork, but I feel pretty certain he is not a Nazi Satanist psycopath etc. like he's told me he's been branded)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Well, duh. I KNOWS you’re not a Scientologist. After all, it’s established fact that you’re a…what was it…Satanist Nazi >somethin’-er-other..oh drat, I can’t quite remember. I know it involved Satanism though.

List is *way* too long to remember easily.


Oh, gosh…lessee… retarded misogynist gay Satanist Nazi stalker drug-addicted psychopath? (can’t recall right now if the “psychopath” bit was accurate- I remember it involved some sort of mental illness that implied a propensity for violent behaviour)

Strangely, to my knowledge, none of these rumours have followed me from NJ , and so far as I know, no new ones have taken their place (but perhaps ignorance is bliss?)


Namaste',
Me
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s right—RETARDED!! I forgot that you were retarded. Of course.