scififilmnerd said:

http://www.ibka.org/artik...eugen.html

As you are sooo intelligent and informed, you won't have problems translating it to English, will you?

scififilmnerd said:

Thanks for justifying my post with your continuing aggression!

scififilmnerd said:

So, I may summarize:

Anyone who shares your opinion is nice and intelligent.

Any other people are ignorant, fanatic and not intelligent, and it obviously doesn't matter if they can back up their opinion or not.

Compared to you, that whole JW bunch seems pretty liberal...

EmancipationLover said:

Just in case of language problems:

http://www.jwhistory.net/...rt2005.htm

scififilmnerd said:

At least I know how to use google...

EmancipationLover said:

Well it says that the JWs are not a church, but as a public corporation has some privileges concerning taxes etc. As a consequence to that fact it asks the question if any church or any religious group who is not as agreeable for the state (here they are talking about the JWs) should have any more privileges like that at all.

Serious said:

That's because I found it on the website of an atheists association. That statement is the position of that association and not part of the decision of the court! The JWs being a public corporation puts them in a position comparable to those of the churches, protected by the German constitution.

Imo, it is very questionable if you can call a religious organization a "sect" that has the same privileges as i.e. the Roman-Catholic Church.

EmancipationLover said:

Well I was quoting the article you had googled
Like you said that article comes from a site that has no connection to any church/religious group. Still it makes a difference between churches and the JWs.
Anyway, isn't that trial just relevant for Berlin and not for the whole of Germany .
Just because there was not enough evidence that the JWs are dangerous for the state of Germany doesn't mean they are a church.
And as we are discussing Germany and the JWs here: I wonder how many people you will find in Germany who think the JWs are not a sect, I am very sure there are few .

Serious said:

If an international association of atheists is a non-religious group, could be topic of a discussion on its own.



Please watch the word "Grundsatzurteil"... (("principle decision" in English???)



Most of the people anywhere will also say that Prince is a washed-up crazy has-been who hasn't had released anything significant for ages. Public opinion aside: the question is if it is justified to call JWs a "sect". I'm not a JW nor am I a supporter, but I've dealt with their ideas. Some of them seem pretty strange to me, but that personal opinion of mine does not mean that they are a "sect". And I see that opinion backed up by the court decision mentioned above.

EmancipationLover said:

I am very fluent in German, thank you, and this doesn't "prove" anything. They are generally considered a sect everywhere, but in Berlin they have been allowed "Körperschaftsstatus" and das sei nicht eine Kirche.
[Edited 10/14/05 8:22am]

EmancipationLover said:

So now you resort to the Skywalker way of trying to win your audience by stating I am something even though I am not. Since when did become ?

Conclusion: You are a liar.

EmancipationLover said:

See above. How am I supposed to think of someone who does that as intelligent or even trustworthy? You have no debating skill and as such I respond in kind.

As a wise man said: "What you send out, you receive."
[Edited 10/14/05 8:21am]

EmancipationLover said:

Yes, you see what you want to see. I don't buy that you don't have an agenda. There is nothing objective about the manner in which you state your views.

Personally I just can't get into most of it it. I thought the last three songs were awesome. It is unique in his catalogue and I do like it better when he tries something different. Sometimes I don't like the results but it's better than the same old sound over and over again. Also, it's a tad on the long side. Might have been better if it were shorter.

scififilmnerd said:

That's why I initially wrote "some kind of church". Maybe "church-like community" would have been the better expression. No court can call an organization a "church" of course as that is a self-chosen expression of that certain organization. All I wanted to point out is that, as the JWs are treated by German law like the big churches, I really doubt that it is justified to call that certain organization a "sect", as sects are treated totally different by law (in concerns of taxes etc.).

What really is strange is that I never wanted to support the JW ideas in any way. I'm not attracted by their theology. I just have the opinion that every human being has the right to find spiritual satisfaction on his or her own way. Some prefer an organized religion, some not, some are atheists. If some people choose to be in a religious community and you call that community a "sect", you automatically imply a certain negativity, so we should be careful with using that label. But to call a community a "sect" that has been given rights only major churches have, is a very questionable thing imo. So, if some small-sized musician from Minnesota decides to record a CD mainly inspired by the theology of such a community, it is a difference to say "inspired by a sect" or to say "inspired by that certain community". That was my whole point in discussing that album.

scififilmnerd said:

So, let me see... You had your little "fight" with skywalker and now with me...
Is it possible that's due to your "sent outs"???

scififilmnerd said:

Let me put it like this: I don't think that I became personal or offensive to you in my posts, while it is highly questionable to say the same thing about you vice versa. I did not start that whole "ignorant" or "not intelligent" thing! Come on, we don't know each other, we never met. Why do you want to judge people by what they post in an internet forum about a pop star???

Fuck the haters, The Rainbow Children kicks ass. And I ain't no JW either... It's better than Musicology, that's for damn sure.

EmancipationLover said:

Who threw the first stone? Was it you? Or wa it you?

I am but a mirror, sweetie.

I don't consider my arguments with Skywalker a fight, by the way. And with her intelligent argumetation, she did manage to make me concede to certain of her points.

Great album grows on me the more I hear it

scififilmnerd said:

1. Where did I throw the first stone?

2. Which of skywalker's points do you concede to?

all this debate over a cd i dont understand at all