Subject:
|
Re: God(tm)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.fun
|
Date:
|
Thu, 31 Jan 2002 06:28:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2504 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Matthew Gerber writes:
> > In lugnet.cad.dev, Brendan Powell Smith writes:
> >
> > > ...copyright infringement for using God(tm) without permission.
> >
> > These words strike me as EXTREMELY funny...
> >
> > But then again, what are the chances that some major religion
> > (Catholicism...I'm looking in your general direction!) uses this very phrase
> > in possible litigation within the next 25 years or so?
>
> Well, the religion Scientology (which, I state clearly and for the record,
> is absolutely NOT a wacko fringe cult founded by a hack SF author for the
> sole purpose of bilking money out of the credulous, the desperate, or the
> mentally ill, nor is it a manipulative and exploitive pyramid scheme to
> generate tax-free income at the expense of benighted aspirants) is famed for
> its litigiousness, and while "God" and "Christianity" might not be
> copyrighted, "Scientology" and certainly "Dianetics" already are. I grant
> you, Scientology (though not at all an insane throng of duped cultists)
> isn't a major religion in the sense that Christianity or Islam or Buddhism is...
Selfosophy! :) (paraphrasing from Millenium):
"Why are we being careful about these guys? We don't hesitate when fighting
the forces of darkness."
"The forces of darkness can't sue, Frank."
James
Card-carrying Supressive Person.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: God(tm)
|
| (...) Well, the religion Scientology (which, I state clearly and for the record, is absolutely NOT a wacko fringe cult founded by a hack SF author for the sole purpose of bilking money out of the credulous, the desperate, or the mentally ill, nor is (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
80 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
