What is a moral code?

A Blog About my Views and Scientology Activities


Blog For Free!


Archives
Home
2008 February
2007 October
2007 July
2007 May
2007 April
2007 March
2007 February
2007 January
2006 September

My Links
Scientology News
David Miscavige - Official Bio
Chairman of the Board Religious Technology Center
Religious Technology Center
CCHR
Official Scientology Site
Scientology Handbook
Scientology Effective Solutions
David Miscavige Interview on Scientology
Truth About Drugs
Volunteer Ministers
Scientology Against Drugs
Scientology Answers

tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images


Sponsored
Blog



What is a moral code?
05.04.07 (7:41 pm)   [edit]

In any activity in which people interact, moral codes are developed. This is true of any group of any size – a family, a team, a company, a nation, a race.

What is a moral code? It is a series of agreements to which a person has subscribed to guarantee the survival of a group.

Take, for example, the Constitution of the United States. This was an agreement made by the original thirteen states as to how they would conduct their affairs. Wherever that Constitution has been breached, the country is now in trouble. It first stated that there must not be any income tax. Later, that was violated. Then they changed another point in it, and another and another. And each time they have done this, it has caused problems.

Why are they in trouble? Because there are no agreements other than the basic agreement.

Man has learned that where he has agreed upon codes of conduct or what is proper, he survives, and where he has not agreed, he doesn’t survive. And so when people get together, they always draw up a long, large series of agreements on what is moral (that is, what will be contributive to survival) and what is immoral (what will be destructive of survival).

Moral, by these definitions, means those things which are considered to be, at any given time, survival characteristics. A survival action is a moral action. And those things are considered immoral which are considered contrasurvival.

When two or more persons have a mutual agreement, they act together – which we call coaction. Dancing with someone is a coaction; having a fight with someone is a coaction; working within an organization is coaction.

In naval experience, there is a known datum that a ship’s crew is not worth anything until they have braved some tremendous danger or fought together. You could have a ship sailing with a new crew and, even though they are trained for their duties, nothing works: the supplies never seem to get aboard, the fuel never seems to flow freely to the engines, nothing happens except a confusion. Then one day the ship meets a great storm, with huge, raging seas, and with every crew member aboard working together to bail the water out of the engine room and to keep the screws turning. Somehow or another they hold the ship together, and the storm abates (lessens, diminishes). Now, for some peculiar reason, we have a real ship.

Whether you have a group of two men in partnership or an entire nation which is being formed after the conquest of land from another race – it does not matter the size of the group – they enter into certain agreements. The longevity of the agreement does not have much to do with it. It could be an agreement for a day, an agreement for a month or an agreement for the next five hundred years.

People, then, in forming groups, create a series of agreements of what is right and what is wrong, what is moral and what is immoral, what is survival and what is nonsurvival. That is what is created. And then this disintegrates by transgressions (violations of agreements or laws). These transgressions, unspoken but nevertheless transgressions, by each group member gradually mount up to a disintegration.

In Scientology these transgressions and their effects have been examined in great detail. There are two parts which encompass the mechanism at work here.

A harmful act or a transgression against the moral code of a group is called an overt act. When a person does something that is contrary to the moral code he has agreed to, or when he omits to do something that he should have done per that moral code, he has committed an overt act. An overt act violates what was agreed upon.

An unspoken, unannounced transgression against a moral code by which the person is bound is called a withhold. A withhold is an overt act a person committed that he or she is not talking about. It is something a person believes that, if revealed, will endanger his self-preservation. Any withhold comes after an overt act. Thus, an overt act is something done; a withhold is an overt act withheld from another or others.


Man paying for fishing license
When a person agrees to follow a certain moral code . . .

Man fishing next to 'no fishing' sign
. . . but then violates those agreements, he commits what is called an overt act.

Man shying away from park ranger
When a person does not communicate about something he has done for fear of the consequences, this is called a withhold.


The only person who can separate one from a group is himself, and the only mechanism he can do it through is withholding. He withholds transgressions against the moral code of the group from the other members of the group and therefore he individuates (separates) from the group, and the group therefore disintegrates.

The social ills of man are chiefly a composite of his personal difficulties. The workable approach is to help the individual handle his personal difficulties for the betterment of himself and the society of which he is a part.


Justification
Blow-Offs
The Overt-Motivator Sequence
You Can Be Right

 


posted by: Zeratulss (reply)
post date: 11.13.07 (12:38 am)

24% of Americans believe that the Internet is able for a time to replace them with a loved one. For obvious reasons, such sentiments particularly prevalent among residents of the United States alone. Both men and women can replace the beloved, beloved trips to the World Network. However, the willingness to such transactions vary among followers of different ideologies: conservatives frowned relate to this idea, and the "progressive-minded" on the contrary, Nerkarat it.

Study company Zogby International also showed that every fourth resident of the United States have their own representation in the web-site or internet-stranichka. Creating internet-dvoynikov most passionate about young people (18-24 years of age) - 78% of them have personal Web page. In doing so, 68% of those surveyed said that the World Wide Web, they do not appear in its original capacity, their virtual overnight seriously different from the real.

Only 11% of Americans would agree implantable microchip in his brain, which would provide them with direct contact with the Internet. But the situation is changing, in the case of children. Almost every fifth resident of the United States would agree to equip their child safety device which would allow him to track the movement in space on the Internet.

10% of U.S. stated that the Internet brings them to God. " In turn, 6% are convinced that because of the existence of the World Wide Web God away from them.

And how you feel? Sorry bad English.



posted by: Assisgund (reply)
post date: 11.16.07 (2:44 am)

Two new studies show why some people are more attractive for members of the opposite sex than others.

The University of Florida, Florida State University found that physically attractive people almost instantly attract the attention of the interlocutor, sobesednitsy with them, literally, it is difficult to make eye. This conclusion was reached by a series of psychological experiments, which were determined by the people who believe in sending the first seconds after the acquaintance. Here, a curious feature: single, unmarried experimental preferred to look at the guys, beauty opposite sex, and family, people most often by representatives of their sex.

The authors believe that this feature developed a behavior as a result of the evolution: a man trying to find a decent pair to acquire offspring. If this is resolved, he wondered potential rivals. Detailed information about this magazine will be published Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

In turn, a joint study of the Rockefeller University, Rockefeller University and Duke University, Duke University in North Carolina revealed that women are perceived differently by men smell. During experiments studied the perception of women one of the ingredients of male pheromone-androstenona smell, which is contained in urine or sweat.

The results were startling: women are part of this repugnant odor, and the other part is very attractive, resembling the smell of vanilla, and the third group have not felt any smell. The authors argue that the reason is that the differences in the receptor responsible for the olfactory system, from different people are different.

It has long been proven that mammals (including human) odor is one way of attracting the attention of representatives of the opposite sex. A detailed article about the journal Nature will publish.



posted by: International Post OTIII Day (reply)
post date: 12.05.08 (4:06 pm)

The following is the sacred document in Scientology known as OTIII. Scientologists deny it exists as part of their Operating Thetan literature. It was written by L. Ron Hubbard in 1967. Hubbard wrote that if you read this document before you have achieved a level of scholarship, you will get pneumonia and die. The cost to get to that level: $360,000.

“The head of the Galactic Confederation (76 planets around larger stars visible from here) (founded 95,000,000 yrs ago, very space opera) solved overpopulation (250 billion or so per planet -- 178 billion on average) by mass implanting. He caused people to be brought to Teegeeack (Earth) and put an H Bomb on the principal volcanoes (Incident 2) and then the Pacific area ones were taken in boxes to Hawaii and the Atlantic Area ones to Las Palmas and there "packaged." His name was Xenu. He used renegades. Various misleading data by means of circuits etc. was placed in the implants. When through with his crime (R/)Loyal Officers (to the people) captured him after 6 years of battle and put him in an electronic mountain trap where he still is. "They" are gone. The place (Confed.)has since been a desert.” - Hubbard

See it in his original handwriting at xenu dot net. Learn more about the fight against the criminal cult of Scientology on whyweprotest dot net. Make a difference by copy-pasting this and posting it somewhere else as part of International Post OTIII Day and in honor of Lisa McPherson, who died on Dec 5 1995 after being starved to death by Scientologists.

Your Name:


Your Comment: