“We’ll explain this taken out of context statement here, this was a SEA ORGANIZATION Executive Directive, meaning that the Sea Org doesn’t have the correct means to provide to certain people of orientation (they would like to) but it’s something they’ll probably plan in the future.”
—@ExposeNetwork, Twitter, June 17th, 2019
This incredible statement is @EN’s attempt to explain away a picture of a section of the Executive Position Application form which states that in order to qualify one cannot be a homosexual. Further this statement is listed under the heading of “Crimes”. (Screen caps to follow)
What are “the correct means” to “provide to certain people of orientation”?
Members of the LGBT community are not handicapped. They don’t need special parking.
How does one, exactly, plan for the inclusion of gay people?
Are there special permits?
Does one need to hire an architect?
Perhaps, since @EN is referring to the SeaOrg, it has to do with sailing or water? Do LGBTs get seasick more than straight people?
The statement from the application was not taken out of context. This is a go-to accusation used by @EN every time someone posts something he cannot handle.
Engaged in a back and forth with someone we’ll call Coco the @EN posted a pic of Tom Cruise and John Travolta stating that neither was part of management.
Coco mentioned the rumor that John Travolta was gay. In response @EN blocked her posting “They are against religion, race, background, lifestyle, and it’s really getting old.”
Coco then posted with a second account the aforementioned picture of the application pointing out that if anyone was discriminatory it would be Scientology.
The first ridiculous accusation @EN then made was “We actually don’t even think this is legitimate though, because what happens with the opposition is that they’ve mastered the “skill” of copying exactly how these policies are written and they type them the way they want to and “publish them”.
Still a little sketchy…”
Here’s a question, why not spend a few minutes and look it up yourself? After all, Scientology purportedly has every document at their disposal. Why not counter with a copy of the unadulterated item?
This was immediately followed by the opposite assertion-by-inference that the picture was real but it was applicable only to the SeaOrg. As if this somehow minimizes the fact that it clearly discriminates.
Poor kid can’t seem to make up his mind. It’s a faked copy but it belongs to the SeaOrg.
Which brings us back to the original statement, that the SeaOrg does not seem to have the proper accommodation for gay people.
Since this is something they will probably plan for in the future, one cannot help but wonder how the SeaOrg will go about addressing the issue.
Will there be a focus group? Perhaps a poll? Questionnaire?
To all “Certain People of Orientation”, what adjustments need to be made to accommodate you?
Certain People of Orientation.
Sounds like a group of logistically stubborn people who refuse to face North.