For our foreign, particularly American, friends: the Catholic and Protestant churches in Germany are financed via a tax. As such they are state churches. Like many other denominations in the West, they have long ago replaced Christianity with an incoherent mix of leftists pieties and climate worship.
Ah, the good ol' Kirchensteuer, or church tax, brought to you courtesy of the second-best Germany of all time, the Weimar Republican constitution of 1919. In my home country (Austria), it was imposed after the Anschluss of 1938 (and never abolished). Here's the Wikipedia link:
And that's my 'favourite' snippet of wisdom from that piece:
Every recognized religious group in Austria can collect church tax at a rate of 1.1%, though currently only the Catholic and Protestant churches make use of that opportunity. Church tax is compulsory for Catholics in Austria [!!!].
This tax was introduced into Austria by the German government in 1939 after the 1938 Anschluss (annexation of Austria into Germany). After Austria received national independence again after World War II the tax was retained in order to keep the churches independent of political powers [sic].
Considering that everything is quantum-offensive, maybe he didn't want to be obvious about it, while still >technically< adhering to a certain commandment?
Or he simply didn't realise what he was saying, possibly in an act of subconscious self-defense against realisation.
Tangent: Isn't it funny, given how hate-speech laws are written, that you can say whatever you please about a certain "race" that resides east of Poland, but not about certain other "races" no matter what they get up to?
Oh, for the opportunity to bring that up in a lecture or a panel/hearing and point to hundreds, if not thousands, of examples of private citizens, orivate media and state media violating hate-speech laws all over the place, as long as it against this specific group. Their reactions... oh, my - it would be a sight, it would.
I was at a conference in Vilnius the past few days: the most rabid Russophobes and agit-prop peddlers were my esteemed colleagues who couldn't get enough warmongering done over lunch or dinner. All is fine as long as it's against 'ze Rooskies'.
Someone should check the CO or radon levels at the conference facility. Your colleagues appear to be suffering from some type of impairment.
Anyway, I assume they will be on the front lines then? Going over the top for Ursula von der Leyen and waving the EU flag? Or is dying in a muddy trench for the children of 'undesirables' like the people who keep their electricity running?
I can understand polacks, baltics and finns - especially those of ages 45ish and older; lot of bad history.
What I refuse to understand is our academics - it is as if all the hatred, fear and anger at what the non-white migrants do and have been doing for decades, the emotions and knowledge and words they have had to doublethink away for the sake of their careers, suddenly was given an outlet.
"Hating arab that engages in human traficking and child rape equals racism equals bad"
That's also my conundrum--it's as if the Nazi-era hatred of 'ze rooskies' never went away…
Also, academics rarely talk to non-academics (a point driven home painfully the past couple of days while I was attending a conference), even less so to those on the lower socioeconomic rungs. The disconnect is massive, it's the same with journos™, and together with politicos™, we academics all reside in Plato's Cave, which most take at face-value and base their actions and analysis on the shadows on the wall.
For our foreign, particularly American, friends: the Catholic and Protestant churches in Germany are financed via a tax. As such they are state churches. Like many other denominations in the West, they have long ago replaced Christianity with an incoherent mix of leftists pieties and climate worship.
Ah, the good ol' Kirchensteuer, or church tax, brought to you courtesy of the second-best Germany of all time, the Weimar Republican constitution of 1919. In my home country (Austria), it was imposed after the Anschluss of 1938 (and never abolished). Here's the Wikipedia link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_tax
And that's my 'favourite' snippet of wisdom from that piece:
Every recognized religious group in Austria can collect church tax at a rate of 1.1%, though currently only the Catholic and Protestant churches make use of that opportunity. Church tax is compulsory for Catholics in Austria [!!!].
This tax was introduced into Austria by the German government in 1939 after the 1938 Anschluss (annexation of Austria into Germany). After Austria received national independence again after World War II the tax was retained in order to keep the churches independent of political powers [sic].
See? The Anschluss wasn’t all bad.
In Germany you can at least opt out.
Oh, well, you can opt out in Austria, too, provided you're (a) Catholic and (b) file a declaration of leave-taking with the state.
Do you require any more comment on 1938 at this point?
Yes. What about those dirty Protestants? Also, is May 1st a public holiday in Austria? Because if so, you know whom to thank for…
Of course 1 May is a public holiday in Austria while Lutherans don't have Reformation Day off…
Why did he need to re-phrase 'Si vis pacem, para bellum'?
Because it may be deemed offensive™ to the brainwashed masses consuming (choking) on state propaganda?
Considering that everything is quantum-offensive, maybe he didn't want to be obvious about it, while still >technically< adhering to a certain commandment?
Or he simply didn't realise what he was saying, possibly in an act of subconscious self-defense against realisation.
Tangent: Isn't it funny, given how hate-speech laws are written, that you can say whatever you please about a certain "race" that resides east of Poland, but not about certain other "races" no matter what they get up to?
Oh, for the opportunity to bring that up in a lecture or a panel/hearing and point to hundreds, if not thousands, of examples of private citizens, orivate media and state media violating hate-speech laws all over the place, as long as it against this specific group. Their reactions... oh, my - it would be a sight, it would.
I was at a conference in Vilnius the past few days: the most rabid Russophobes and agit-prop peddlers were my esteemed colleagues who couldn't get enough warmongering done over lunch or dinner. All is fine as long as it's against 'ze Rooskies'.
Someone should check the CO or radon levels at the conference facility. Your colleagues appear to be suffering from some type of impairment.
Anyway, I assume they will be on the front lines then? Going over the top for Ursula von der Leyen and waving the EU flag? Or is dying in a muddy trench for the children of 'undesirables' like the people who keep their electricity running?
Well, I may only speak for myself here: I doubt any of my academic colleagues will be in the front lines, let alone volunteer for any of this.
I can understand polacks, baltics and finns - especially those of ages 45ish and older; lot of bad history.
What I refuse to understand is our academics - it is as if all the hatred, fear and anger at what the non-white migrants do and have been doing for decades, the emotions and knowledge and words they have had to doublethink away for the sake of their careers, suddenly was given an outlet.
"Hating arab that engages in human traficking and child rape equals racism equals bad"
"Hating Russians because Ukraine equals good"
Something something Orwell something.
That's also my conundrum--it's as if the Nazi-era hatred of 'ze rooskies' never went away…
Also, academics rarely talk to non-academics (a point driven home painfully the past couple of days while I was attending a conference), even less so to those on the lower socioeconomic rungs. The disconnect is massive, it's the same with journos™, and together with politicos™, we academics all reside in Plato's Cave, which most take at face-value and base their actions and analysis on the shadows on the wall.
We need to be fit for war... civil war. Take it to them. They are on the back foot hence all the revelations being broadcast.
That 'civil war' might look more like 'The Purge' than, say, whatever civil war used to mean, I think…
So did the bishop talk about Jesus at any point or...
Pope is barely in the ground and bishops going wild, agitating for war. What a time this is.
Well, I suppose the bishop did, but I don't know.