In America, atheists are still in the...

In America, atheists are still in the closet

There are 51425 comments on the Spiked story from Apr 11, 2012, titled In America, atheists are still in the closet. In it, Spiked reports that:

So do many other interest and identity groups. Complaint is our political lingua franca: it's what Occupiers, Tea Partiers, Wall Street titans, religious and irreligious people share.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Spiked.

Since: Mar 11

Cuyahoga Falls, OH

#39203 Sep 28, 2012
What ifs do not matter what is does matter. We still have laws in some US states forbidding a non believer from holding office. Fact.

But believe whatever the voices tell you to.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>It's moot.

If the state of Alabama had a law saying it was legal to own slaves, do tell me: what would be the impact of such a law?
Fuddle

Burbank, CA

#39204 Sep 28, 2012
Listen to this crap that Obama is spreading about Athiests, this offends me ALOT!:

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#39206 Sep 28, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Hehehe.
Snap.
Lol

I know that the US federal system trumps the power of these state laws in very much the same way that our system trumps the power of the monarch.

I just posted the links to show the hypocrisy of barefoot.

He claims that our monarch's power is unchecked and that she can, of her volition, dissolve parliament without the consent of government. That's the same as me claiming that those state laws are unchecked and that they discriminate against atheists. Except that unlike barefoot, I'm not hypocritical enough to actually claim something like that.

Over many centuries, our system of laws and enactments have developed in various ways, one of which checks the power of the monarch. These days the Queen is little more than a figurehead that remains in place for reasons relating to tradition, culture and silly ceremony.

Of course the US constitution is there to protect America. Good job it's there, because without it the USA would probably become a theocracy.

We have no need of a constitution that keeps religion at bay. Levels of religion over here are nowhere near the fever pitch that they are in America.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#39207 Sep 28, 2012
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
And as the old saying goes, actions speak louder than words.
You know fully well what I mean with reality. In reality, outwith the words of the law, the Prime Minister pays lip service to a Queen who is nothing more than a figurehead. He, not her, decides when the Parliament will be dissolved.
But of course, based on your own logic, the Constitution of the United States, amendment twelve, clearly states that the Electoral College shall convene within their respective States to vote for the president and his running mate.
There is no mention of the people anywhere. Just the College.
Conclusion? The Electoral College vote for the president of the United States.
Interesting.

So who gets to be President is not determined by the votes of millions of Americans.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#39208 Sep 29, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol
I know that the US federal system trumps the power of these state laws in very much the same way that our system trumps the power of the monarch.
LOL.

The power of the Parliament does not trump the power of the Monarchy.

No matter how hard you stomp your hooves.

KowKow insisted the last mo0narch to dismiss the Parliament without their "consent" was beheaded; Edward VII dissolved the Parliament in 1910 and as of yet I cannot find where he was beheaded.

The fact remains: the power to dissolve the Parliament rests with the monarchy.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#39209 Sep 29, 2012
Khatru wrote:
Over many centuries, our system of laws and enactments have developed in various ways, one of which checks the power of the monarch.
And yet the fact remains the monarch can dissolve the Parliament for any reason whatsoever.

If that was not so, you would have posted proof five days ago.

This power is not "checked", it resides with the monarch.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#39210 Sep 29, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting.
So who gets to be President is not determined by the votes of millions of Americans.
It is.

AS we noted before: you have problems with the English language.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#39211 Sep 29, 2012
Khatru wrote:
We have no need of a constitution that keeps religion at bay.
Brits are subjects, not citizens. Subjects do not "need" a constitution because they serve the monarch and the government; as American citizens, our rights are defined and guaranteed and the government serves us.

If the Brits could keep religion at bay, they would not have a STATE RELIGION and they would not have a law requiring Christian collective worship in tax funded schools.

If Brits could keep religion at bay, their taxes would not go to pay for religious broadcast, and the state church would not be appointing members to their Parliament.

And their head of state would not be the head of the state religion.

The USA is of course a secular state where our constitution forbids the establishment of a state church.

The UK of course, is not; a state church is defined by law.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#39212 Sep 29, 2012
Fuddle wrote:
Listen to this crap that Obama is spreading about Athiests, this offends me ALOT!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =yPHQQzh17skXX
Not one word in there about Atheists ... watch it again. He was going after the Catholics like everyone else.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#39213 Sep 29, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually... I am not sure anyone knows what you mean.
I am a linear thinker, one thing follows the other in a straigh line.
It is the law that the monarch and only the monarch has the power to dissolve Parliament.
You waving your arms about doesn't change this law. There is no asterisks at the end saying "well... this law doesn't really count".
Pardon if I skip over stuff you have said fifteen times already today... I opened a five gallon can of paint...
Wouldn't pedantic and "linear thinker" mean pretty much the same thing?

Just Results

“Jesus is Love”

Since: Jul 12

Hutchinson, MN

#39214 Sep 29, 2012
Why do atheists insist on being dishonest with themselves?

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#39215 Sep 29, 2012
Just Results wrote:
Why do atheists insist on being dishonest with themselves?
I ask myself that all the time. Wait ... no I don't.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#39216 Sep 29, 2012
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
Wouldn't pedantic and "linear thinker" mean pretty much the same thing?
Imagine where you could have gone in life if you hadn't peaked in the ninth grade?

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#39217 Sep 29, 2012
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Interesting.
So who gets to be President is not determined by the votes of millions of Americans.
It is but isn't the winner of a state takes all the electoral votes
despite the fact the some of the counties voted for the other guy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_Colleg...

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#39218 Sep 29, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
It is but isn't the winner of a state takes all the electoral votes
despite the fact the some of the counties voted for the other guy.
That is how elections in democracy work: people chose. When winner takes all:(and this is the tricky part) they win all.

Compare to the "election" in the UK Parliament where members are APPOINTED, particularly, appointed by the Church of England.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#39219 Sep 29, 2012
[QUOTE who="Aura Mytha"...
despite the fact the some of the counties voted for the other guy..
[/QUOTE]

Imagine a state that votes 60/40 for a governor(s) and one gets to be governor... 60 percent of the time... the other 40...

If you are uncomfortable with the election concept, you should move to a country that appoints people to the legislature based on connections to the head of state... a hereditary basis... or what position they have within the state church.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#39220 Sep 29, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Imagine a state that votes 60/40 for a governor(s) and one gets to be governor... 60 percent of the time... the other 40...
If you are uncomfortable with the election concept, you should move to a country that appoints people to the legislature based on connections to the head of state... a hereditary basis... or what position they have within the state church.
Wth are you babbling about ?
All I did was give a link to how the electorate system works.
The only flaw to the system is when actual vote was higher for the loser. The only problem I have with it is when both candidates suck horse shit. It would like a choice between you and "just results".
Sure to be a shit eater elected.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#39221 Sep 29, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Wth are you babbling about ?
All I did was give a link to how the electorate system works.
I don't need to know how it works.

It is something I picked up in high school.

Now why don't you give us a link to how the House of Lords work, particularly when you insist that I am wrong about how they are APPOINTED.

Maybe you can post links to the definition of APPOINT and ELECTED so we can compare them?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#39222 Sep 29, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Imagine where you could have gone in life if you hadn't peaked in the ninth grade?
Haha, you call yourself a thinker. More like a religious drone.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#39223 Sep 29, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
More like a religious drone.
Show everyone your proof of my "theology".

I have asked you prove it every time you bring it up and funny how proof escapes you after these many months.

I guess when you talk out of your azz you don't have any room for proof...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 19 min yehoshooah adam 3,581
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Subduction Zone 67,795
Where have all the Atheists gone? 8 hr Sceptical-Mal 18
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 10 hr River Tam 28,721
News Unholy? Atheists should embrace the science of ... 23 hr Eagle 12 12
is it ever right to hate Christians as a group? Apr 25 superwilly 21
Atheist Humor (Aug '09) Apr 25 superwilly 462
More from around the web