I came across an interesting (and old) blog entry from an anti-Marty site (apparently) run by a Church-going Scientologist, and I thought it gave an interesting view of how “public” Co$ Scientologists see Marty, the Independent movement, and “squirrels”.
Now, before I post the link, I have to clarify: These guys hate Marty, and they have no problem lying and making wild accusations about him. I don’t condone such behavior. I may disagree with Marty’s words and worldview, but everything I’ve written about him has been, to the best of my knowledge, true. I see no good reason to lie about Marty, the Church, Scientologists or Scientology. (Who needs to? The truth is juicy enough!)
I’m posting this blog entry because it presents some insight into how Scientologists view “squirrels” – much of which, by the way, is clearly Church-authored bullshit – and because it’s important to understand how our opponents think. I am not posting it because I support the authors or what they say, because I don’t. Preamble over; here’s the link:
NOTE: If the above link dies, please email me at caliwog(at)hotmail.com and I’ll paste in the original text. Thanks to FiFi LeToit for the tip!
ML,
Caliwog
Caliwog's Blog 
Cali, I just want to suggest copypasting the text instead of just linking. Because blog owners can delete whatever, whenever they want from their blogs. McClaughry’s blog is a case in point (it would appear that they’ve removed, or at least hidden, all controversial entries):
https://caliwog.wordpress.com/2010/06/26/not-every-independent-loves-mike-and-marty/
I don’t know if that’s feasible/appropriate blog etiquette, but anyway, thank you!
Excellent point, Fifi. I’ve got a copy of the text so I can post it in case the original blog goes down. Thanks!!
ML,
Caliwog
Despite what the other blogger writes, Metapsychology is still very much in practice and I’ve not gotten any word of them being malicious in any form or fashion. And for the record, people that belong to the same faith oftentimes disagree with and insult each other. It’s not unusual for there to be attacks, there are plenty on Christian and Satanic Church blogs just the same.
I doubt they discuss the validity of Jesus Christ. And the descrepancies in Scientology are about as large. Last i heard, churches in general do not have policies accessable to the public that speak of deducing world population by eliminating those that detest them, policies which create slave camps and that is just a start.
Christianity is a deeply complex, socially speaking. After varying periods of reformation, Christianity branched from boring to the bizarre. Amish people and Methodist people would partially agree with each other, as where Evangelicals would tell the two prior groups they are probably going to hell. Jehovah’s Witnesses would call all three goats and tell them there is no hell and they’re just gonna rot in a coffin.
You have a good point though, Aaron. However, I would like to point out that certain parts of the Evangelical church would prefer it if the entire LGBT community, atheists, Satanists, Devil Worshippers (there is a difference), Pagans, Muslims, Liberals, and some pop stars to be put in a concentration camps or just dead. Some branches of the Pentacostals feel the same way about the same groups. Yeah, they haven’t acted on it, but that’s only because the public at large wouldn’t let that happen.
This is why I love Anon and freedom of information. If people didn’t know how Evangelicals REALLY feel, Mike Huckabee could have been the US President.
I agree with you about the inconsistencies. History of Man is comedic in some passages, like about the clams. I almost pissed myself laughing. When I was trying to read Dianetics, I couldn’t stay awake. Not even drinking coffee and smoking camels could get me through that repetitive, poorly written book.