In America, atheists are still in the closet

Apr 11, 2012 Full story: Spiked 47,724

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.

Full Story
Thinking

Andover, UK

#43367 Nov 20, 2012
From the first line of the Wikipedia definition:

"Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human, and generally this state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide (such as manslaughter)."

Murder is premeditated. End of. I don't give a sh!t what your shyster lawyers say.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
English language does.
Odd that someone in a country with 60 million would declare the rest of the world (e.g., population 310 million here) parochial.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#43368 Nov 20, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
Wrong, there paten makes no claim to inventing the plane, the only thing that makes that claim is nationalistic liars like you
I'm not the one claiming someone who flew a toy invented the airplane.

I'm the one who claims that a man got that got something off the ground that he could control invented the airplane.

You denial is purely jingoistic: note your long list of other (ridiculous) claims.
Thinking

Andover, UK

#43369 Nov 20, 2012
No, I am a taxpayer.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are a parasite.
However: the fact remains the Concorde was not a commercial success.
Thinking

Andover, UK

#43370 Nov 20, 2012
Wrong, and they didn't have the US patent either (which you seem to find important).

I'm not denying they rightly(!) claim the first successful powered flight, but you really need to get your facts right.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sun rises in the east, sets in the west.
Wright Brothers invented the airplane.
I am not your husband, you fat hog, I get to say you are wrong.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#43371 Nov 20, 2012
Thinking wrote:
From the first line of the Wikipedia definition:
"Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought,
I read past the first line and don't use WIKI as a primary source.

Premeditated murder is one kind of murder, if there were not other kinds of murder, then word "premeditated" would not be needed to describe what kind of murder it is.

mur∑der [mur-der]
noun
1.
Law . the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#43372 Nov 20, 2012
Thinking wrote:
Wrong, and they didn't have the US patent either (which you seem to find important).
The Wright Brothers invented the airplane.

They had a host of patents.

Patents do mark a date as to define what came first when disputes arise, e.g., Skanque insisted (and brought up the patent) Whittle invented the jet engine. I (et al.) dismissed this, specifically, the first patent was not Whittle's.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#43373 Nov 20, 2012
Thinking wrote:
No, I am a taxpayer.
<quoted text>
All taxpayers in the UK (and France)paid for the Concorde flights whether or not they ever sat in the seat.
Thinking

Andover, UK

#43374 Nov 20, 2012
Why do you keep quoting US law, you muppet? I was talking about the real definition.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I read past the first line and don't use WIKI as a primary source.
Premeditated murder is one kind of murder, if there were not other kinds of murder, then word "premeditated" would not be needed to describe what kind of murder it is.
mur∑der [mur-der]
noun
1.
Law . the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).
Thinking

Andover, UK

#43375 Nov 20, 2012
Looking at the way the US funds their military suppliers you've also funded my civilian Boeing flights. Cheers!
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
All taxpayers in the UK (and France)paid for the Concorde flights whether or not they ever sat in the seat.
Thinking

Andover, UK

#43376 Nov 20, 2012
Safety upgrades caused by POS Continental DC-10 engineering, eventually found guilty in 2010.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
In boom years.
Tell us: did you skip over the part which described how the plane got into the air and how the "profits" came before they paid back the government's cut?
"Why is Concorde being retired?
It is all down to cost: the Airlines are not making back the money spent on the safety modifications and other upgrades. With some other big costs coming up (tens of millions, before any life extension programme), BA need to write off £84M now, rather than £150M in 3 or 4 years. Air France will write off a large sum of money too. "

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#43377 Nov 20, 2012
Thinking wrote:
Why do you keep quoting US law, you muppet? I was talking about the real definition.
<quoted text>
How parochial of you to insist on the British legal definition, spooge breath.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#43378 Nov 20, 2012
Thinking wrote:
Looking at the way the US funds their military suppliers
The Concorde was built and flown on the backs of British and French taxpayers.

I haven't flown in the F-3 you?

My taxes didn't go to building the jets that American companies fly and my tax money doesn't subsidize the tickets- as taxes did in the UK & France for the Concorde.

The Concorde was not a commercial success, no matter how hard you stomp your feet.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#43379 Nov 20, 2012
Thinking wrote:
Safety upgrades caused by POS Continental DC-10 engineering, eventually found guilty in 2010.
<quoted text>
Concorde: Couldn't turn a profit.

And an antique by 2000.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#43380 Nov 20, 2012
737's built without tax funding = 7,000+
Concordes built without tax funding = ZERO.
Including those built with British & French taxes (total)= 20.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#43381 Nov 20, 2012
Thinking wrote:
Safety upgrades caused by POS Continental DC-10 engineering, eventually found guilty in 2010.
<quoted text>
In a French court...

Shocking...

Pieces of its own rubber tires after running over a strip of metal caused the jet to catch fire, wow... let's blame the mechanic for not tightening the bolts of the metal strip.

After pieces of the tire punctured the tanks...the Concorde fuel tanks were retrofitted with Kevlar linings... after the horse was out of the barn...
Thinking

Andover, UK

#43382 Nov 20, 2012
Boeing would've gone bust without US military orders, so thanks for subsidising my 747 flights.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Concorde was built and flown on the backs of British and French taxpayers.
I haven't flown in the F-3 you?
My taxes didn't go to building the jets that American companies fly and my tax money doesn't subsidize the tickets- as taxes did in the UK & France for the Concorde.
The Concorde was not a commercial success, no matter how hard you stomp your feet.
Thinking

Andover, UK

#43383 Nov 20, 2012
Tell me where I said Concorde was a financial success, muppet?
But I got to fly it... you can't make me unfly it, no matter how had you stomp your clubbed foot.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Concorde was built and flown on the backs of British and French taxpayers.
I haven't flown in the F-3 you?
My taxes didn't go to building the jets that American companies fly and my tax money doesn't subsidize the tickets- as taxes did in the UK & France for the Concorde.
The Concorde was not a commercial success, no matter how hard you stomp your feet.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#43384 Nov 20, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Frank Whittle registered the patent in 1930 and had the first successful bench test April 1937. Hans von Ohainís design first ran in September 1937. However Ohainís engine was the first to fly in 1939. They are jointly accredited with inventing the Jet engine.
Christian Huelsmeyer was the first to discover the effect of radar in 1904, but radar was invented by three British scientists, Sir Robert Watson-Watt, A F Wilkins and H E Wimperis in 1935. Sir Henry Tizard put it to use in the War
Commercial flop? 27 years flying? Forget the US media hype. The ongoing benefits of Anglo French co-operation that started with Concorde are immeasurable and far outweigh the development costs. Certainly the BA Concordeís were operationally profitable. http://www.concordesst.com/retire/faq_r.html

The Concorde was a flop the same way the shuttle was for us.
It was not economically viable as planned.
It never turned a profit , and was a prestige symbol more than anything. It was however the most awesome public transportation
ever assembled.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#43385 Nov 20, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
Hey peeps. Can anyone here help me with a debate I am having in the office.
"Killer" and "Murderer" can sometimes be used as synonyms (e.g. the man's killer/murderer was his wife - both words work)... But they are not always the same thing, am I right?
Murder is unlawful killing of a human by a human. So if there are "lawful" killings, then it means that in some cases a killer and a murderer would not be the same thing?
Hunters are killers , but murder is breaking the law.
Seal team six are really good killers , but not usually considered murderers. Though they may murderlize the enemy.

Murder is unlawful killing, when a person is executed legally it's not murder.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#43386 Nov 20, 2012
Thinking wrote:
Murder is premeditated.
Are you getting US law definitions confused with reality?
<quoted text>
Are you confused that they are not? lol j/k
but we have proven it a couple times it is.

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
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 9 min ChristineM 2,376
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 55 min Joe fortuna 232,927
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 3 hr Thinking 23,201
A New Kinder, Gentler Atheism 3 hr Thinking 150
Yes, atheists can be fundamentalists 8 hr Thinking 3
Is 'naturalism' a bleak philosophical outlook? ... 18 hr Mikko 2
Christians More Supportive of Torture Than Non-... 19 hr Thinking 3
More from around the web