In America, atheists are still in the...

In America, atheists are still in the closet

There are 51437 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: Feb 11

Location hidden

#40272 Oct 12, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Explain why US banks packaged the toxic debt
The European bank crisis is caused by the lack of regulations of European banks and the lack of stability in European countries is because they built their foundation on the instability of those banks.

The USA is not on the brink financial collapse; very few US banks have failed (and no one (ZERO) in the US has lost money who had accounts in those banks because we have regulations in place that assure that banks are properly capitalized.

And the Barclay's fraud (no matter how hard you try to divert) had nothing (zero) to do with US sub prime mortgages.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#40273 Oct 12, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Don’t work like that, we live in a global economy
The global economy which is taking hits because of the crappy foundation European banks have because of the lack of regulations that allow them to fail.

The global mess is of the **EU** making, not the US.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#40274 Oct 12, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The global economy which is taking hits because of the crappy foundation European banks have because of the lack of regulations that allow them to fail.
The global mess is of the **EU** making, not the US.
Armchair politician.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#40275 Oct 12, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the one crying about people coming here to argue when you come here to argue, Booby.
Golda Meir threatened to use nukes is a FACT. You having been crying about it for three days.
It is a fact.
Why you continue to stomp your feet and roll around and then you eventually say you don't care and move onto something else: it seems to me like you like to argue, you just aren't very good at it.
The possession of nuclear weapons is an implied threat. Meir clearly verbalized that threat ... I say WAY TO GO GOLDA!!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#40278 Oct 12, 2012
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
The possession of nuclear weapons is an implied threat. Meir clearly verbalized that threat ... I say WAY TO GO GOLDA!!
Of course Israel killed US Navy sailors on the USS Liberty in 1967.

Maybe people attached to backwater shore duty stations had a different perspective on it.

Those of us who served on US warships: not as forgiving.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#40279 Oct 12, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Armchair politician.
Wow- skewered, Septic, absolutely skewered...

cough...

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#40280 Oct 12, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
US bank failures since 2008
We have around 7,000 banks in the USA and even more savings and thrift institutions.

How many do you have?

Show us the list of people who had money in those banks who lost... let's say a nickle.

PS: In the US, bank failures doesn't mean there's an explosion and everyone is killed and all the money is burned up.

It means the bank doesn't meet with our stricter regulations and they are closed, almost always, the bank is bought up and incorporated by another bank down the street.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#40281 Oct 12, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The European bank crisis is caused by the lack of regulations of European banks and the lack of stability in European countries is because they built their foundation on the instability of those banks.
The USA is not on the brink financial collapse; very few US banks have failed (and no one (ZERO) in the US has lost money who had accounts in those banks because we have regulations in place that assure that banks are properly capitalized.
And the Barclay's fraud (no matter how hard you try to divert) had nothing (zero) to do with US sub prime mortgages.
Wrong

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#40282 Oct 12, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The global economy which is taking hits because of the crappy foundation European banks have because of the lack of regulations that allow them to fail.
The global mess is of the **EU** making, not the US.
Wrong

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#40283 Oct 12, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong
My head is swirling...

COUGH...

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#40284 Oct 12, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
We have around 7,000 banks in the USA and even more savings and thrift institutions.
How many do you have?
Show us the list of people who had money in those banks who lost... let's say a nickle.
PS: In the US, bank failures doesn't mean there's an explosion and everyone is killed and all the money is burned up.
It means the bank doesn't meet with our stricter regulations and they are closed, almost always, the bank is bought up and incorporated by another bank down the street.
Honey, those were not mergers or takeovers, they were bank FAILURES, hence the title of the page.

You see banking is far more strictly regulated in the UK and so far fewer institutions qualify to become banks, certainly we don’t have enough for 6.4% of them to go bust.

What brought on those “stricter US regulations” let me guess, was it fear of what would happen to the world economy, never mind the US economy, if the US bankers took it into their heads to screw the world again.

Honey I personally lost over £80K (not dollars but pounds so it’s around $128/129K at today’s prices) in the banking meltdown. Do you think I have not researched where that money went? Do you really think I have not researched the cause of the collapse? Do you really think that I will be investing in American banks again? Do you really think that everyone is as thick as you?

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#40285 Oct 12, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course Israel killed US Navy sailors on the USS Liberty in 1967.
Maybe people attached to backwater shore duty stations had a different perspective on it.
Those of us who served on US warships: not as forgiving.
It is apparently the policy of the United States to be forgiving and it is those policies our military are sworn to abide. You're thinking outside your pay grade.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#40286 Oct 12, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
My head is swirling...
COUGH...
Too much wacky baccy will do that to you, especially if you get the cheap crap they sell at the entrance to your trailer park

“Sweden more democratic thanUSA”

Since: Jun 12

Nykvarn, Sweden

#40287 Oct 12, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The European bank crisis is caused by the lack of regulations of European banks and the lack of stability in European countries is because they built their foundation on the instability of those banks.
Not where i live the eu wants us to give them our money for free

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#40288 Oct 12, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Honey, those were not mergers or takeovers, they were bank FAILURES, hence the title of the page.
SweetGums: the banks that fail were taken over by other banks, sometimes, literally, banks down the street.

There are over 7,000 banks in the USA and there are more savings and loans. Sometimes: they fail. They fail not because they aren't making a profit, they fail because they do not meet the requirements of the US government in holding what the US government considers *adequate* capital, that they have too much in the way of outstanding loans (or not enough on hand to cover them)- this occurred in over 97 percent of the bank failures.

You will note (if you could read):**NO ONE** lost money held in savings accounts in the USA.

You will note: the US banking system is not on the verge of collapse.

You will note: the USA is not on the verge of collapse, we aren't begging German to come pick up our tabs on bad investments.

PS: BARCLAY's!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#40289 Oct 12, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
<
Honey I personally lost over £80K (not dollars but pounds so it’s around $128/129K at today’s prices) in the banking meltdown.
You know how much US citizen's lost from savings accounts in failed banks?

Not a nickle.

Who's fault is it your government(s) don't do a better job of regulating your own banks?

PS: How many years was Barclay's inflating interest rates?

Since: Mar 11

Latonia, KY

#40290 Oct 12, 2012
Zing!
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Too much wacky baccy will do that to you, especially if you get the cheap crap they sell at the entrance to your trailer park
SupaAFC

Dunblane, UK

#40291 Oct 12, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
There are no citizens in Britain: You are subjects.
Now that is a FACT.
And as "subjects" we vote like you guys do, we shop like you guys do, we work like you guys do, we play sports like you guys do, we argue on internet forums like you guys do, we watch the same movies that you guys do, we hear about the same celebrities that you guys do, we have news stations like you guys do, we can protest like you guys do, etc, etc, etc.

So, for living lives as "subjects", we sure don't seem to have it anywhere near as bad compared to you "citizens".

Could it just be, Barefoot, that you are running with a big red herring?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
And I don't care how you interpret anything: I am not responsible for you jumping to conclusions.
Of course you are responsible. You are the one who wrote the post in vague language!
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
There are two houses in the UK parliament. It isn't my fault that you were not aware of this.
Members of the Commons are called MPs and members of the Lords are called Lords. It isn't my fault that you were not specific with which house you meant.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
No is it my fault that you had to LIE when you changed what I said to try to explain away how you got confused.
Not once did I "change" what you said. I read it the same way any British person would.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Lords who make up the House of Lords are members.
English.
And Lords are selected through numerous nominations or peerage systems, none of which include the CoE as the decision maker.

That includes the Lords Spiritual.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
It is not my fault you are so ignorant of your own government that you were unaware that the phrase "members of Parliament" include (and in fact, more likely since there are more members in the House of Lords than House of Commons) Lords, especially, Lords Spiritual.
Yes, how dare I stupidly believe that when you said "members of parliament" you were not talking about, you know, MPs, but about the Lords instead.

Nobody, Barefoot, buys that you "meant" the Lords. It is beyond obvious that you have changed your argument.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
And it is rather transparent when YOU CHANGED what I said ("members of Parliament") to (capitalized) "Members of Parliament" and then quickly added "MPs" and then insisted that I meant House of Commons.
If I have changed the capitalisation then show me my post where I have quoted you with the letters changed.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a liar.
You are the one still pretending that the Lords, including the Lords Spiritual, are appointed by the CoE.

You know, the central point of your red herring argument.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You can get all your NotBots waving banners but I want you know I am calling you out for the lying pusssy you are.
You can pretend that your ranting and raving about British politics and the CoE is true, let alone even relevant in 21st century society, but I want you to know I am calling you out for the lying pusssy you are.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#40292 Oct 12, 2012
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
And as "subjects" we vote like you guys do,
ya don't, and I don't have to keep reminding that you don't.

We here vote for the members of both of our houses, and we vote for the head of state.

You don't. You vote only for the members of the lower house, and you do not vote on who will be your PM.

And the members of the House of Lords are appointed or inherit their positions (and appointed by the monarch who is also the head of the state religion).

And the monarch can dismiss the government if she/he is so inclined.

Let me know when you come up with something new...

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#40293 Oct 12, 2012
SupaAFC wrote:
Not once did I "change" what you said.
Of course, you are a liar.

E.G.: changing "members of Parliament" to Members of Parliament (MPs).

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 "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 min ChristineM 40,262
For Atheists: Why do You Call Theories "Scient... 1 hr IB DaMann 182
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 2 hr ChristineM 255,905
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 3 hr emperorjohn 4,627
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 3 hr Richardfs 15,752
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 3 hr ChristineM 20,579
A Universe from Nothing? 4 hr Reason Personified 25
More from around the web