The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent
vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums
here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules
document is now in effect.
Filming of Tom Cruise movie banned in Germany
Posts
So you'd be cool with discrimination because someone wasn't religious.
If they arrived at their nonreligious belief for whacked out reasons? Yeah. It's more of a hatred of idiocy than anything else, and I know it's conceited/short-sighted/etc, and I also know that it's horribly unfair because it'd essentially be my interpretation of what's stupid and what's not, but I can hold out hope.
Plus I can definitely see Oldman as a turncoat Nazi.
What about cabbies who won't carry women without head scarves? or those who won't serve alcohol? I think their are reasons to discriminate against beliefs. Pretty much if your beliefs could come into conflict with your job role that's a good reason not to hire.
Man, you don't want to re-start the muslim cabi thread.
Hey, I'm a restaurant owner and I'm going allow these 30 other people to spend their money and eat, but not this one certain fellow because I hate him and we never get along.
Hey, I'm a restaurant owner and I'm going to allow these 30 other people to spend their money and eat, but not this one certain fellow because he is a Jew.
Guess which one is illegal.
And also, this whole line about Tom Cruise being a security risk for a military base is just fucking stupid. Does anyone actually believe Tom Cruise is really going to sneak off set and sabotage Germany? Get fucking real.
This has got to be the most absurd line of bullshit I've ever seen attain general acceptance on these forums.
Don't I?
And beyond being a religion, the Church of Scientology is a really fucked-up, at best semi-criminal organization. Denying someone who is an (apparently, high-ranking) member of a criminal organization access to sensitive material isn't unfair, illegal, or a violation of his rights; it's common fucking sense.
It would be more like you denying the Jew access to your restaurant because he's a member of the Mossad.
I sincerely doubt Cruise himself is a security risk, but you could very easily make the point that Cruise will bring his fuck-o friends that aren't celebrities, and given their history with the German government, they would be security risks. It wasn't too long ago that a bunch of stolen FBI, CIA, and general government files were confiscated from the Clearwater compound in Florida. It's not difficult to imagine the lengths they would go through to get some shit on a government that is actively and rightfully oppressing them.
edit: prominent
To update my comparision before if a grand wizard of the KKK was the star of a movie you think he'd be let in to shot a movie in a federal building?
We can, however, view religions from a more darwinist viewpoint. Some religions are beneficial to members and nonmembers, while other batshit insane religions are harmful.
Beliefs also have levels of truth. I see something like "Then was not non-existence nor existence: there was no realm of air, no sky beyond it." more truthful than "Xenu ruled the galaxy and flew his magical DC-8s through space", and "Inconceivably hot and dense, the state of the universe during the Planck epoch was unstable or transitory, tending to evolve and giving rise to the familiar manifestations of the fundamental forces through a process known as symmetry breaking." more truthful still.
If he was not a security risk, the movie had nothing to do with the KKK and he was also incidentally a famous actor with a career spanning decades, then yeah. I think he should he allowed.
And in what way is being a member of an anti-government organization not a security risk to a government?
The film studio pays for the movie, they figure out where the sets are and where they'll be shooting, they get authority from local government to block off streets, access buildings that would otherwise be restricted, etc. Who the actors and actresses are is completely irrelevant.
It doesn't matter if the star of the movie is a guy who boasts on talk shows about having sex with his neighbors' dogs when the neighbors are away - it has nothing to do with government at any level. If people find an actor distasteful, they'll talk with their wallets when the movie is released.
You mean the membership inherently, or are you supposing that Tom Cruise will actually threaten the ministry by being on the grounds somehow?
That's what I was trying to say. If they're banning all members of scientology from their bases (although as Hap points out it's not strictly a military base anyway, but hell) I don't see why Tom Cruise should get an exception, because, hey he's Tom Cruise and he's not going to pose a risk. This is kind of hypothetical though, because I don't know if there is a ban on scientologists serving in the German military.
I would suggest that the concepts contained within religion itself are ultimately harmful, regardless of specific doctrines. They all play into the same problem of antiskepticism and dogmatism, which is the breeding ground for the more harmful beliefs, religious or otherwise.
Certainly though, some beliefs are more innocuous (or harmful) than others. That said, a fantasy involving aliens, nuclear bombs, and spaceships doesn't strike me as being less reasonable than a story featuring a magical sky god.
Here in Germany Scientology is not recognized as a religion.
In 1995 the Bundesverfassungsgericht ruled that Scientology would not be granted the status of a religious community.
They were officially regarded a profitmaximizing commercial enterprise.
They are still allowed to call themselves a 'church' tho, because that title itself isn't protected.
Also nobody keeps them from practicing their 'believes'.
They even build a big center in Berlin a while ago.
Scientology is under supervilleins by the Verfassungsschutz because they are considered a dangerous brainwashing psycho cult.
Religious freedom is protected by the constitution. That doesn't mean we look kindly upon those that might pose a risk to our security or have openly shown themselves to be hostile towards the free democratic order.
We deal the same way with nazi organisations and muslim hate preachers etc.
I think our history allows us to be suspicious of anything that even smells anti democratic / constitutional.
I find it pretty presumptous that some people get all outraged because we don't turn a blind eye on every wacko organisation.
I know in America the Religious Neutrality goes pretty far - but here civil laws overrule religious ones.
For example homeschooling is against the law and you can't keep your child from attanding sex ed or biology classes on evolution just because your church tells you to.
The muslim cabby driver thing is actually a good example.
Refusing to transport non-veiled women will cost you your job
Aslong as you act within the law you can practice whatever religious / phylosophical believes you want but :
Status as a religious organisation and all the benefits like tax examption etc is not a right but a privilige, granted to those who show themselves to act bona fide and in the public interrest.
Just because anybody and their aunt can get that status in the states does not mean that same has to apply over here.
On Tom Cruise :
He is a spokesperson for a group that has tried to spy on our government.
Please excuse that we don't take such shit litely.
Also, our government can ban anyone from filming on federal ground for whatever reason they choose to.
Just like the American, or any other countries government can - and will.
He can still shoot the movie on public German soil - the goverment will simply not assist him in doing so.
Not neccessarily but doesn't the German government have the right to decide who they'd like to represent them? I think the core of this refusal is the German government has taken a stand against Scientology and does not want to implicitly be associated with one of it's most outspoken members.
If you allow yourself to be controlled by hatred, then the Scientologists have already won.
Dude, they've said that it's perfectly okay with them for this movie to set up shop on a soundstage or whatever. They just don't want to let them film at military historical sites. And given that they have apparently been rather stingy with granting clearance to do this in the past, I can understand how they might feel that granting clearance in this case could be viewed as tacit approval, particularly when they're dealing with Scientologists who are likely to claim that tacit approval (and who they think are crazy cultists that have tried to smear them internationally).
Hatred does up your Thetan count, I've been told.
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. What I had a problem with was the idea that a government should be policing what goes on in their country because they might be "associated" with some idea or policy. That's not (shouldn't be) government's job.
If the government line is "this guy is a member of an organization we don't trust, so he's not allowed on our secure facilities", I have no problem with that.
I like your moves, man. Would I let someone who does not believe in any private property and is cool with taking shit into my house? Nope. Funny enough, discrimination can actually be a good thing. and discrimination based on beliefs can be wholly appropriate so long as information is correct.
Came into the thread slightly pissed at the german government.
And then, y'know, fucking infiltration of world governments.
Ok, germany, it is cool. we are cool.
EDIT: Also apparently the "Church" tried to have him killed. They didn't succeed, mind you. They still tried, though.
Most addiction counselors used to be addicted.
Also, most addiction counselors are unliscensed hacks with no idea what they're doing that, in the words of Mr. Lecter, fumble at your brain like it's a prom dress.
He also has an alarmingly large arsenal of firearms. Though given his reported history, I'm not surprised.
they're a brainwashing cult not the fucking dark lords of the Sith
Click image for my huge backlog
I liked him in Collateral. That's about it.
Also:
So the question is why are we still arguing about it? I mean, that pretty much settled it for me. Go Germany. (I really need to learn more about this country...let alone the language.)
From Wikipedia, and sourced there:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy
So, why exactly is it wrong to discriminate against these guys again?
Most important questions of the whole thread. Thank you. And the answer is yes to both.
As I said before, the US does this regularly.