Wikipedia

User:Jayen466/Sandbox

< User:Jayen466

Scientology sources

edit

[1]

  • deChant/Jorgensen (in Neusner, Jacob (2003). World Religions In America. Westminster John Knox Press. ISBN 9780664224752.)]
  • Wilson
  • Melton: The Church of Scientology (2000, Signature Books) (I have a copy of that book and can contribute more material from it)
  • Chryssides
  • Gallagher
  • Wallis
  • Black
  • Bromley & Cowan 1
  • Bromley & Cowan 2: Cults and New Religions: A Brief History
  • Rothstein in Lewis/Hammer (eds.)
  • Lewis (ed.) (upcoming, Feb. 2009; this will be a major publication in this field)
  • Zellner/Petrowsky (eds.): Sects, Cults, and Spiritual Communities: A Sociological Analysis. Praeger 1998 (available to subscribers on questia.com)
  • Zellner William W. ( 1995). Countercultures: A sociological analysis. New York: St. Martin's Press
  • Paul Finkelman: Encyclopedia of American Civil Liberties
  • Brigitte Schön (scholarly paper on the Germany controversy, conflicting frames etc.)
  • Urban: Fair Game: Secrecy, Security, and the Church of Scientology in Cold War America
Derek Davis New Religious Movements and Religious Liberty in America, Baylor University Press, 2004 ISBN 978-0918954923

[4], [5],[6], [7], [8], [9], "No New Religious Movement has been a subject of more public interest and of more heated discussions in Germany during the last two decades than Scientology" (Marco Frenschkowski, Universität Mainz), [10]. Gale webcitation link [11]

Waste Books

edit

The Waste Books (German: Sudelbücher) are a celebrated collection of aphorisms by the 18th-century German polymath Georg Christoph Lichtenberg (1742–1799).

The history of the Waste Books

edit

Lichtenberg was one of the most prominent physicists, mathematicians and astronomers of his day – he discovered the electric principles underlying the modern photocopier – and was also a noted art and literature critic. Throughout his life, he kept informal notebooks in which he jotted down ideas as they occurred to him. The title Sudelbücher was Lichtenberg's translation of "waste book", a bookkeeping term no longer in current use, defined in the OED as a "rough account-book ... in which entries are made of all transactions (purchases, sales, receipts, payments, etc.) at the time of their occurrence, to be 'posted' afterwards into the more formal books."[1] In the same way, Lichtenberg wanted to record ideas and observations as they occurred to him.[1]

He kept his Sudelbücher from his student days until the end of his life. Each volume was accorded a letter of the alphabet from A, begun in 1765, to L, which broke off at Lichtenberg's death in 1799. The notebooks first became known to the wider world after Lichtenberg's death, when the first and second editions of Lichtenbergs Vermischte Schriften (1800-06 and 1844-53) were published by his sons and brothers. Some time later, notebooks G and H, and most of notebook K, were destroyed or disappeared. The missing notebooks are believed to have contained sensitive materials. The manuscripts of the remaining notebooks are today preserved in Göttingen University. An English version published in

Reception

edit

Lichtenberg's Waste Books drew praise from many of Europe's greatest thinkers, among them Tolstoy, Freud, Einstein, and André Breton, and were acknowledged as an inspiration by such philosophers as Wittgenstein and Nietzsche, who deemed Lichtenberg Germany's greatest aphorist. Schopenhauer greatly admired Lichtenberg for what he had written in his notebooks, calling Lichtenberg a Selbstdenker, someone who thought for himself.[1] The Chinese scholar and wit Qian Zhongshu quotes the Waste Books in his works several times.[2]

Lichtenberg's own feelings on what was destined to become his most famous work varied. When he felt downcast, he referred to their contents as Pfennigs-Wahrheiten – "penny-truths" – while at other times he felt certain that he had "scattered seeds of ideas on almost every page which, if they fall on the right soil, may grow into chapters and even whole dissertations."[1]

Notes

edit
  1. ^ a b c d Kimball, Roger (2002). "G. C. Lichtenberg: A "Spy on Humanity"". New Criterion. 20 (9). Foundation for Cultural Review: 20 .
  2. ^ For example, in his essay Zhongguo Shi Yu Zhongguo Hua (中国诗与中国画 "Chinese poetry and Chinese paintings").

Further reading

edit
  • Joseph Peter Stern (1959) Lichtenberg: A doctrine of scattered occasions, reconstructed from his aphorisms and reflections
  • Ralph W. Buechler (1991) Science, Satire, and Wit: The Essays of Georg Christoph Lichtenberg (Studies in Modern German Literature)

Falun Gong

edit

Pro persecution

edit

BBC

German gov't

Contra persecution

edit

Ambiguous

edit

Godesburg

edit
 
Die Ruine der Godesburg
 
Die Zerstörung der Godesburg 1583
 
Die Godesburg vor der Zerstörung (Merian-Stich von 1646)
 
Die Godesburg und der Aufzugsturm

The Godesburg is a castle in Bad Godesberg wurde vermutlich als Fliehburg bei Bad Godesberg am Rhein – heute Stadtbezirk von Bonn – von den Franken erbaut. Die Spitze des Bergfrieds der heutigen Burgruine befindet sich auf 122 Metern ü. NN, die dortige Plattform ermöglicht einen einzigartigen Blick über das Rheintal.

Geschichte

edit

Die Burg liegt auf einem in vorgeschichtlicher Zeit erloschenen Vulkan. Eine bereits römische Besiedlung wurde durch einen in die Godesburg eingemauerten Altarstein nachgewiesen. 722 wurde der Berg als ubische Kultstätte Woudensberg (Wotansberg) urkundlich erwähnt.

Am 15. Oktober 1210 legte der Kölner Erzbischof Dietrich I. von Hengebach den Grundstein für einen Neubau. Erzbischof Konrad von Hochstaden erweiterte die Burg 1244 um die ersten fünf Geschosse des Bergfrieds. Erzbischof Walram von Jülich erhöhte diesen auf 32 Meter und ließ die Vorburg erbauen.

Während der Reformationszeit verstieß der Kölner Erzbischof Gebhard I. von Waldburg gegen den Augsburger Religionsfrieden, als er sich mit Gräfin Agnes von Mansfeld vermählte und zum Calvinismus übertrat. Er löste damit den Truchsessischen Krieg aus. Truppen des neu gewählten Kurfürsten Ernst von Bayern belagerten die Anlage 1583. Zerstört wurde die Godesburg durch die Sprengung der Mauer im Zuge eines Angriffes. Erobert wurde sie am 17. Dezember 1583 durch einen katholischen Söldner, der durch den Abort in die Burg gelangte. Auf gleichem Weg folgten ihm weitere seiner Kameraden, so dass sich die Besatzung, von Feinden innerhalb und außerhalb der teilweise zerstörten Mauern umringt, letztendlich ergeben musste.

1891 schenkte Kaiser Wilhelm II. die Ruine der Stadt Godesberg.

1959 wurde die Burg nach Plänen von Gottfried Böhm umgebaut. Eine Erweiterung beherbergte zu Beginn ein Hotel-Restaurant, heute ist nur noch das Restaurant in Betrieb. Der ehemalige Hoteltrakt ist, aufgeteilt in kleinere Wohnungen, vermietet.

Auf dem Burgfriedhof bei der Michaelskapelle befinden sich viele reich gestaltete Grabstätten des Großbürgertums aus dem 19. Jahrhundert. Auch der Filmschauspieler Paul Kemp fand hier seine letzte Ruhe. Der Burgfriedhof ist heute Nordrhein-Westfälisches Kulturerbe.

In den letzten Jahren wurde die Godesburg in großen Teilen saniert. Bis 2003 wurden durch die Stadt Bonn 2,7 Millionen Euro für den Umbau der Gastronomie ausgegeben. Im Juni 2006 wurde die Sanierung des Bergfrieds abgeschlossen, in dem ein kleines Informationszentrum zur Geschichte der Burg eingerichtet wurde. Im Juli 2006 ließ die Stadt Bonn an der Aussichtsplattform auf der Turmspitze Orientierungstafeln in allen vier Himmelsrichtungen anbringen. Der Burghof der Godesburg ist über einen Aufzug zu erreichen.

 
Panoramasicht auf Bad Godesberg von der Godesburg aus

Votivstein

edit

thumb|upright|Der Äskulapstein Seit 1981 ist im Burghof die Nachbildung eines römischen Votivsteins aus der Zeit um 200 n. Chr. aufgestellt. Er war den Heilgöttern Äskulap und Hygia geweiht und wurde 1583 auf der Godesburg gefunden.

edit
 
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Jayen466/Sandbox.

{{Navigationsleiste Burgen und Schlösser im Mittelrheintal}}

50°41′6.42″N 7°9′2.43″E / 50.6851167°N 7.1506750°E / 50.6851167; 7.1506750

TPRF

edit

http://www.causes.com/ http://apps.facebook.com/causes/381473 http://www.parade.com/contests/givingchallenge/2009/index.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_Foundation#Initiatives http: //www.associatedcontent.com/article/2392432/join_causes_on_facebook_support_the_pg2_pg2.html?cat=48 (non RS)

Neil Cooper

edit

Neil Cooper sources

edit

http://www.popmatters.com/music/reviews/l/laswellbill-book.shtml

http://www.nytimes.com/1994/11/20/magazine/what-s-new-york-capital-now-reinvention-corner-permanence-change.html

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/gossip/1996/04/11/1996-04-11_hurley-burly__hugh_s_girl_ha.html

Domradio

edit

http://www.webcitation.org/5oEioKQ0A

Univox

edit

Sources for Univox:

Dick Anthony

edit

Dick Anthony is a forensic psychologist noted for his writings on brainwashing, and one of the most prolific researchers of the social and psychological aspects of involvement in new religious movements.[1][2]

Academic career

edit

Anthony holds a PhD from the Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, California.[3] He has supervised research at the Department of Psychiatry of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and at the Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, and is a former director of the UC Berkeley-affiliated Center for the Study of New Religions.[4][5] His work has received support from government agencies including the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Drug Abuse and the National Endowment for the Humanities, and he has frequently testified or acted as a consultant in court cases involving allegations of religious coercion or harm resulting from involvement in a religious group.[6] He authored or co-authored a large number of scholarly articles on the topic and co-edited several books.[3]

Views

edit

Anthony has been "a leading opponent of brainwashing theories", characterising them as "a pseudo-scientific myth", and spearheaded efforts which from 1990 onward led to the general rejection of brainwashing testimony as unscientific in United States courts, asserting in the Washington Post that "no reasonable person would question that there are situations where people can be influenced against their best interests, but those arguments are evaluated on the basis of fact, not bogus expert testimony."[7] Dismissing the idea of mind control techniques, he has defended new religious movements, and argued that involvement in such movements may often have beneficial, rather than harmful effects: "There's a large research literature published in mainstream journals on the mental health effects of new religions. For the most part the effects seem to be positive in any way that's measurable."[5]

Reception

edit

David G. Bromley and Anson Shupe, writing in the Encyclopedia of Religion and Society (1998), have credited Anthony and his co-author, sociologist Thomas Robbins, with authoring "the most articulate critique" of the anti-cult movement's perspective on brainwashing.[8]

Publications

edit

Book chapters and articles

edit

Books

edit

Notes

edit
  1. ^ Dawson, Lorne L.. Cults in context: readings in the study of new religious movements, Transaction Publishers 1998, p. 340, ISBN 9780765804785
  2. ^ Robbins, Thomas. In Gods we trust: new patterns of religious pluralism in America, Transaction Publishers 1996, p. 537, ISBN 9780887388002
  3. ^ a b Zablocki, Benjamin; Robbins, Thomas. Misunderstanding Cults, University of Toronto Press 2001, p. 522, ISBN 9780802081889
  4. ^ Barkun, Michael. Millennialism and violence, Routledge 1996, p. 176, ISBN 9780714647081
  5. ^ a b Sipchen, Bob (1988-11-17). "Ten Years After Jonestown, the Battle Intensifies Over the Influence of 'Alternative' Religions", Los Angeles Times
  6. ^ Lewis, James R. (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements. Oxford University Press 2004, p. xi, ISBN 0-19-514986-6
  7. ^ Oldenburg, Don (2003-11-21). "Stressed to Kill: The Defense of Brainwashing; Sniper Suspect's Claim Triggers More Debate", Washington Post, reproduced in Defence Brief, issue 269, published by Steven Skurka & Associates
  8. ^ Swatos, William H.; Kivisto, Peter. Encyclopedia of Religion and Society, Rowman Altamira 1998, p. 62, ISBN 9780761989561. Retrieved 2010-06-20.

John A. Saliba

edit

John A. Saliba is a Jesuit priest, a professor of religious studies at the University of Detroit Mercy and a noted writer and researcher on new religious movements.

Life and work

edit

Saliba has been teaching at the University of Detroit Mercy since 1970.[1] Born and raised in Malta, he studied philosophy, theology and anthropology in England and completed his doctorate in Religion and Religious Education at the Catholic University of America in Washington, DC.[2] Saliba is a Roman Catholic priest and a member of the Society of Jesus (Jesuits).[2] His main teaching focus has been on comparative religion, and his research and publications have mostly been about new religious movements.[2][3] Saliba contributed to a three-year study of new religions for the Vatican conducted by the International Federation of Catholic Universities.[4]

Views

edit

In Understanding New Religious Movements, Saliba "assumes that the appeal of new religions is mostly to young adults who are not grounded spiritually" and argues that "whatever critiques of new religions must be rendered by scholars of various disciplines, dialogue is a more useful response than diatribe".[4] He notes that "all that the heated denunciations of the new religions do is to reinforce the attitudes and beliefs of both their members and detractors. Apologetic debates rarely lead unbelievers or apostates to convert; they do not succeed in persuading renegade Christians to abandon their new beliefs to return to the faith of their birth. Harangues against the new religions do not lead their members to listen attentively to the arguments of zealous evangelizers. On the contrary, they drive them further away and elicit similar belligerent responses."[5] Saliba advocates treating new religious movements as forms of religion, much like those that have arisen at all times throughout history, rather than as "cults" or a social problem specific to recent decades.[4] Noting that new religions often appeal to young people who lack spiritual grounding, he has argued that involvement in such movements is not necessarily a dangerous departure from the path to adulthood, but can also serve as a temporary haven in a materialistic and selfish society, providing "an alternative therapy to many young adults as they are faced with making momentous decisions at important junctures in their lives".[4][6] He has stated that many members of new religions appear to be healthy and happy, and that in many cases they move away from alcohol and drug use, gaining "a degree of intellectual security, emotional stability and organised behavioural patterns that contrast sharply with their previously confused and chaotic existences".[6] Given that new religions appear to fulfill a need that the mainstream churches are unable to address, he states that there is a need for "some soul-searching on the part of the mainline churches".[4] He also emphasises that membership in new religious movements is often short-lived, with over 90% of members leaving within 24 months of joining.[6]

Saliba is critical of the anti-cult movement and has remarked that "the neutral stance of the social sciences is a stance which has often been interpreted as favoring the NRMs".[7] In 1985, Saliba published a two-part critique of Margaret Singer, a key proponent of the brainwashing hypothesis, in the American Psychology Bulletin,[8] finding numerous faults with the documentation and conclusions of her research.[9] He criticized her sources – deprogrammed ex-members and their friends and families – arguing that they lacked impartiality and objectivity and did not form a representative or statistically significant sample.[9] He maintained that Singer lacked relevant academic background or even interest in the study of religion, and that she failed to consider the possibility that new religious movements might have a genuine religious or spiritual dimension; he thought she was unaware of legitimate forms of Eastern religion, as evidenced by her considering Zen Buddhism to be a cult, and took generally a far too negative view of new religious movements.[9]

Commenting on the Vatican's doctrine on new religious movements disseminated in 1991, Saliba stated that it "... respects the religious freedom of individuals, even though their choices are deemed doctrinally erroneous and their behavior morally unacceptable."[10]

Reception

edit

Mary F. Bednarowski, reviewing Saliba's Understanding New Religious Movements in the Journal of Ecumenic Studies, described the book as "a significant contribution to conversations about this too-frequently-contentious subject", noting that "the author attributes to the study of new religions the complexity it deserves" and that "his overall contention is that it is more profitable to study new religions constructively than belligerently. New religions, says Saliba, should be looked upon as 'both partners and rivals in the religious quest'."[4] She said she had used the book in one of her own courses on new religious movements and "found it very helpful for the background it offers, the multiplicity of perspectives and methodological approaches it engages, and its exploratory and nondefensive tone."[4]

Publications

edit

Books

edit
  • Psychiatry and the Cults: An Annotated Bibliography
  • Sociology and the Cults: An Annotated Bibliography
  • Christian Responses to the New Age Movement
  • Understanding New Religious Movements

Book Chapters and articles

edit

Notes

edit
  1. ^ Lewis, James R. (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements. Oxford University Press 2004, p. xiv, ISBN 0-19-514986-6
  2. ^ a b c Saliba, John A. Understanding new religious movements, Rowman Altamira 2003, p. 293, ISBN 9780759103566
  3. ^ Lewis, James R. (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements. Oxford University Press 2004, p. 436, ISBN 0-19-514986-6
  4. ^ a b c d e f g Bednarowski, Mary F. Understanding New Religious Movements Journal of Ecumenical Studies, Volume: 35, Issue: 3-4, p. 529, Gale Group 1998, p. 529.
  5. ^ Saliba, John A. Understanding New Religious Movements, p. 220, quoted in: Morehead, John. W. [http://www.cesnur.org/2009/slc_morehead.htm "From 'Cults' to Cultures: Bridges as a Case Study in a New Evangelical Paradigm on New Religions", CESNUR (conference paper presented at the 2009 CESNUR Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, June 11-13, 2009)
  6. ^ a b c Vallely, Paul (1998-12-12). "Spirit of the Age: Inside the cult of `The Street'", The Independent. Retrieved 2010-07-03.
  7. ^ Tydings, Judith Church. [http://www.icsahome.com/logon/elibdocview_csjvol.asp?Subject=Shipwrecked in the Spirit: Implications of Some Controversial Catholic Movements, "Shipwrecked in the Spirit: Implications of Some Controversial Catholic Movements", Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 16, No. 02, 1999
  8. ^ Saliba, John A. "Psychiatry and the New Cults", Parts I and II, American Psychology Bulletin, Spring, 1985 and Winter, 1985, pp. 39-55 and 361-75
  9. ^ a b c Streiker, Lowell D.; Sherry, Paul H.; Elliott, David H. Smith's Friends: A 'Religion Critic' Meets a Free Church Movement. Praeger Publishers, Westport, CT, 1999, pp. 157–158
  10. ^ Jacobs, Janet L. "Anti-cult Movements in Cross Cultural Perspective – Book Reviews", Sociology of Religion, Winter, 1996
edit

Buzzine

edit

Buzzine (aka Buzzine Networks) is an entertainment and pop culture magazine and website.[1]

Content

edit

Buzzine creates and distributes original print, photography, audio, and video content on film, music and culture topics, including interviews with top Hollywood stars, leading rock musicians and other celebrities.[2][3] The magazine accepts advertising.[3]

History

edit

Buzzine was founded as a website in 1996 by radio personalities Aaron Stipkovich and Steph Sanchez (aka “Stephanie Rose”).[3][4] It later expanded to include a print magazine appearing on a monthly, then bi-monthly basis, and a radio show.[2][3][4] Formerly located in Encino, California, it is presently based in Hollywood, Los Angeles.[3] Since 2009, Buzzine Networks has been owned and operated by the Elfman family.[2]

Personnel

edit

Film director Richard Elfman started writing for the magazine in 2004 and became its editor[1] in 2008. Today, he is the magazine's CEO and editor-in-chief; his wife Lauren Elfman is Director of Content; his son Louis Elfman is publisher and Chief Technical Officer; and novelist "Clare" Blossom Elfman is senior literary editor.[3][5][6] Since early 2010 Stefan Goldby, formerly VP of Programming at ManiaTV!, has managed day-to-day operations and overseen development.[7]

Buzzine also publishes an India edition, Bollywood.Buzzine.com, which is managed and edited by the attorney and journalist, Parimal Rohit.[8]

References

edit
  1. ^ a b "Return to the sixth dimension", San Francisco Bay Guardian, 29 May 2007
  2. ^ a b c "The Mystic Knights of Oingo Boingo", mlive.com, May 17, 2010
  3. ^ a b c d e f Gale Directory of Publications & Broadcast Media 142. Thomson Gale. January 2007. p. 133. ISBN 9780787682231. Retrieved 23 July 2010.
  4. ^ a b Benn's media. Benn Business Information Services. 1 January 2006. ISBN 9780863825767. Retrieved 23 July 2010.
  5. ^ "Muskegon hits Los Angeles, goes around the world", mlive.com, June 02, 2010
  6. ^ "Staff", buzzine.com
  7. ^ "Stephan Goldby", buzzine.com
  8. ^ "Parimal M. Rohit", buzzine.com
edit

Elisabeth Arweck

edit

Elisabeth Arweck is a noted scholar of new religious movements and mixed-faith families, a full-time research fellow for the Warwick Religions and Education Research Unit at the University of Warwick, and co-editor, with Peter B. Clarke, of the Journal of Contemporary Religion.

Academic career

edit

Arweck was associated with the Centre for New Religions at King's College London from late 1980s until 2003, when the centre closed. She completed her PhD at King's College London in 1999, with a thesis titled Responses to New Religious Movements in Britain and Germany, with Special Reference to the Anti-Cult Movement and the Churches. From January 2004 to May 2006 she served as a research fellow at the University of Warwick's Centre for Educational Development, Appraisal and Research (CEDAR). She is presently a full-time research fellow for the Warwick Religions and Education Research Unit (WRERU) at the University of Warwick and is co-editor, with Peter B. Clarke, of the Journal of Contemporary Religion.[1][2][3]

From 2000 to 2003, Arweck was Convenor of the BSA Sociology of Religion Study Group, and since 2005, she has been a member of the Council of the International Society for the Sociology of Religion (SISR/ISSR).[1][3]

Research

edit

[4]

Professional memberships

edit
  • BSA & BSA Sociology of Religion Study Group
  • British Association for the Study of Religion (BASR)
  • Society for the Scientific Study of Religion (SSSR)
  • International Society for the Sociology of Religion (SISR/ISSR)
  • Religious Research Association (RRA)
  • Association for the Sociology of Religion (ASR)
  • Association of University Lecturers in Religious Education (AULRE) (until 2008)
  • International Seminar in Religions, Education and Values (ISREV)

Notes

edit
  1. ^ a b Dr. Elisabeth Arweck at the website of the Warwick Religions and Education Research Unit, University of Warwick
  2. ^ Robert Jackson (2003). International perspectives on citizenship, education and religious diversity. Routledge. pp. 13–. ISBN 9780415274401. Retrieved 16 July 2010.
  3. ^ a b Christopher Deacy; Elisabeth Arweck (March 2009). Exploring Religion and the Sacred in a Media Age. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. pp. 9–. ISBN 9780754665274. Retrieved 16 July 2010.
  4. ^ Lynne Hume; Kathleen McPhillips (30 June 2006). Popular spiritualities: the politics of contemporary enchantment. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. pp. 16–. ISBN 9780754639992. Retrieved 16 July 2010.
edit

Editnotice

edit

Editnotice templates

edit

India

edit
  • Anthonyhcole, Ched Davis, Macwhiz, SlimVirgin, Coren, Reo_On
  The Admin's Barnstar
{{{1}}}

Interracial marriage

edit
Married couples in the United States in 2010 (thousands)[1]
White Wife Black Wife Asian Wife Other Wife
White Husband 50,410 168 529 487
Black Husband 390 4,072 39 66
Asian Husband 219 9 2,855 28
Other Husband 488 18 37 568

Citogenesis

edit
 
Mirror calligraphy
  1. ^ "Table FG4. Married Couple Family Groups, by Presence of Own Children In Specific Age Groups, and Age, Earnings, Education, and Race and Hispanic Origin of Both Spouses: 2010 (thousands)". U. S. Census Bureau.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jayen466/Sandbox&oldid=1163597356"