I think your preamble to this question answered that. I think their criteria is to choose the one that gives them the best advantage.

Yes it's what they are doing right now, in practice, whichever gives them the advantage.

I think what I'm getting at is that no other religion does this that I know of (as is so often the case with scientology). A Catholic Priest takes a vow of chastity. This is a verbal "contract" with the Catholic church's governance. But if he breaks that vow of chastity, the Catholic church doesn't take him to court and sue him over breach of contract, for obvious reasons. Scientology clearly uses their contracts and legal teams to draft all kinds of contracts and paperwork, for what appears to be legal reasons. So are these contracts legal contracts? Or religious contracts? This is another example of a "religion" that is clearly operating exactly like a business. So does business law apply? Or religious law? They can't use the constitution (forever) to be protected at the same time as both a non-secular (religion) and at the same time a secular entity (business), enjoying their constitutional rights as a religion and a business while at the same time tromping all over and blatantly trying to extinguish the constitutional rights of all who come in contact with them, because apparently their religion says to do so, and so they are constitutionally "protected" in doing so. I see this as the big picture and I don't understand why courts/judges don't see it. I think they get mired down in the complexity and details and need to step back and look at what they're dealing with. I know it doesn't help that CoS continually lies, obfuscates, and tries to confuse. But at this moment in time this should be obvious imo.

I'm hoping we get to hear Debbie's full story. Does anyone know if she wrote it up? Is she writing a book?

I'm just curious because, from what I've briefly heard, her story is exceedingly harsh.

I would think stories of Debbie's abuse would finally create the backlash that ousts the Douchebag.

No, she hasn't, and I doubt she will anytime soon. She's still drunk on the kool aid, and is determined to pretend all the documented crimes & abuse in Scientology over the last 40 years, are all one man's fault, that without Miscavige, everything in Scientology would be rosy & transparent.

Debbie refuses to be accountable for her own crimes, and unethical behavior, for the 25+ years she spent in Scientology. There are many victims of her direct abuse toward them, that have not forgiven her. Maria Pia Gardini, who was, personally, pressured by Debbie Cook to donate $1 million to the cult, remains unforgiving of her. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Pia_Gardini.

In the Tampa Bay Trib video, she says she wishes Scientology's walls were made of glass, that there was absolute transparency to the means which the cult makes it's money. There is documented evidence how the cult makes it's money and it's not admirable.

Let's remember that Scientology was on the FBI's radar BEFORE Miscavige took power. LRH was an unethical sociopath, who moved from house to house, to evade what he perceived was the FBI wanting to arrest him. Does this sound like someone who believed in honesty & transparency?

You make a good point...and it's actually even worse. A vow of chastity is one thing, but a vow to keep your mouth shut about abuses you experienced or saw is another. How do they get away with this sh%t?

One only has to look at the tens of millions of dollars the Catholic Church has paid out in settlements for sexual abuse by priests that occurred decades ago.

http://www.snapnetwork.org/priest_abuse ... for_victim

Proof that the wheels of justice move incredibly slow.

I want to discuss this aspect of Debbie Cook's situation. Would that be relevant to this thread or would a new one be better for that?

I think this is a great place for that discussion.

I'll start.

I'm really saddened by Debbie's seeming willingness to participate in the cover up of the abuse up until this point.

Average recovery time after leaving the criminal organisation known as the "church" of $cientology is reckoned to be 10 years. Debbie has been out (and that's apparently out of the Damnation Navy but still a victim in good standing) for less than half that.

This is all very well, but the thing that makes Debbie Cook interesting is her e-mail and the lawsuit which is following. I guess the reason that her recovery makes a difference is that it's tied to her intention towards the organisation itself.

At the moment, I'm happy to observe (and to have given a donation to her defense). Debbie Cook is clearly not doing what I would like her to do (and would like every $cientologist to do - leave, document crimes, extract maximum compensation so as to stop the organisation breaking the human rights of everyone whose life it touches - as if anyone cared).

But then again, Debbie Cook is not my personal army

Marty wants to pony onto the DC media train. Does anyone think DC will align herself with the indie 's? I imagine DC already has a large support system (fellow scientologists) that are still in the main church. Question is what if anything will happen if in fact DC is acquitted of violating a gag and NDC ? From this wogs perspective the M&M defections have not really produced much in the way of either reformation which I see as an impossibility as Hubbard made that unattainable or anything of real legal value. How will DC,s case add or subtract to what our goals here are?

Control of the cash cow will only be pried from the cold dead hands of DM by another acolyte once he has passed. My guess is a possible reform or disbanding of the SO. The mother church? Not much as the basis for the whole organization is the continued flow of money up the pyramid to feed the machine.

Someone please enlighten me: If the cult takes the stand that their dispute with Debbie is purely an eclesiastical matter over which a court has no jurisdiction, how do they expect to enforce the NDA? What am I missing here?

Good question. Thing here is an NDA was signed by both parties. That little piece of paper and it's wording will be the deciding factor in the judges eyes. In my opinion any added oh the cult is bad bawling on Debbie's part will not aid in her allegedly violating the NDA. Bad as this sounds thats the deal she struck with the devil. She took the money offered did she not?

The cult isn't using the ecclesiastical argument in the Debbie case, but they are using it in the Headley cases and the Schippers cases that are happening at the same time, thereby contradicting themselves. This has been referred to as the "estoppel" that could be a problem for CoS. In Debbie's case, they are saying it is strictly a legal (business) contract issue.

You have no way of knowing whether Debbie refuses to be accountable or not. You have no way of knowing if she feels remorse, if she regrets, or if she has apologized privately to anyone.

When you sit in judgement this way and fly off the handle with this kind of statement, as if you "know" this, you lose my respect. At least have the decency to label it your opinion.

Contracts signed under duress/coercion are not legally binding. The judge will be considering the evidence of this when making her decision. The cult probably ended the temprary injunction because the more Debbie talked, the more it would be guaranteed that the judge would see that she signed under duress. The only way the cult could shut Debbie up this time, was to withdraw.

Why do you think that [people here]* continue to post that wonderful photo of the razor wire atop the fence at Int Base?

The difference between this case and say the Gerry Armstrong case is that Debbie was being held prisoner when she signed. She couldn't leave. She told her own mother, if they do not release me within 3 days, call the police. Gerry A. had been a free man for years when he accepted his hush money from the cult.

[edited to remove Gumby's name because it was an inaccurate statement]