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: Feb 11

Location hidden

#44685 Dec 12, 2012
SupaAFC wrote:
Have you stopped raping children? Yes or no?
Have you, SuperFAG?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#44686 Dec 12, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
Prove it cocksucker.
I point to the stains on your pillowcases, and to your sticky gums.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#44687 Dec 12, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
Tell me how many British children have been arrested for not attending “compulsory” worship?
How many times to I have to explain to you, Sticky, that the law in the UK requires "public" schools *provide* religious worship, not that it forces children to attend?

I understand it is beyond you- that having a school by law provide religious worship is government establishment of (in the UK ) state religion.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#44688 Dec 12, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
Prove it cocksucker.
Temper, temper!

Between the two of us, BTW, you are the one that notices the drips.
enquirer mind

Des Plaines, IL

#44689 Dec 12, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I point to the stains on your pillowcases, and to your sticky gums.
I point to the skid mark in your shorts in the front and back!! Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#44690 Dec 12, 2012
enquirer mind wrote:
<quoted text> I point to the skid mark in your shorts in the front and back!! Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!
I point to the skid marks running across your lips, top and bottom, and do not wonder why you aren't clever enough to stick to one alias.

“Live Love Laugh”

Since: Aug 07

Rings of Saturn Emporium

#44691 Dec 12, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Really?
Why is it that I can respond to the yes or no question: Is the United KING_dom a monarchy? without hesitation or difficulty?
You are a freakin' idiot.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#44692 Dec 12, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text>You are a freakin' idiot.
And you are a real freaking HO.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#44693 Dec 12, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Over here, bullshit is free.
And plentiful.
You do get more than you can swallow , for less than nothing even.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#44694 Dec 12, 2012
water_nymph wrote:
<quoted text>You are a freakin' idiot.
The funny bit is, he's the only one making the claims he's so noisily refuting.

That's not just a strawman, it's a straw village.
Thinking

Cirencester, UK

#44695 Dec 13, 2012
Anyone got a light?
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>The funny bit is, he's the only one making the claims he's so noisily refuting.
That's not just a strawman, it's a straw village.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#44696 Dec 13, 2012
Thinking wrote:
Anyone got a light?
<quoted text>
I was thinking more of the Wicker Man, and a real bonfire...
Thinking

Cirencester, UK

#44697 Dec 13, 2012
Well, it wasn't a brilliant harvest this year, was it?
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>I was thinking more of the Wicker Man, and a real bonfire...
SupaAFC

Epsom, UK

#44698 Dec 13, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
GOSH!
Let's try to remember which one of us who was saying that the monarch APPOINTED the prime minister!!!!
Let me check...
Oh, that was me!
Only that you referenced Macmillan because you thought that the Queen, on her own, selected him as PM. As the link showed, she did not - she fulfilled her ceremonial obligation of appointing a politician who was selected by the majority of elite Conservative figures.

So once again, Barefoot, you are simply wrong that the Queen is a serious political player in our system.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Wait, wait, that is that tricky definition of appointed that you (et al.) insisted was the "technically correct" meaning of the word...
Macmillian was a unique case because the Conservatives at the time had no system of replacing their leaders. They, not the Queen, decided that Macmillan would be the next PM. Just like Labour decided that Gordon Brown would replace Tony Blair.

It really is that simple to understand.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
And then you (et al.) INSISTED that the prime minister was ELECTED by the Parliament.
Wrong. Whenever you have brought up your dead horse about the PM's election I have simply restated that like the other 649 MPS, he is elected by his constituency voters.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
(putting aside, the PM is "elected" by part of the (sometimes) majority party of the hOUSE OF cOMMONS.
For the exact same reason that Democratic and Republican delegates select presidential candidates: to appeal to as many voters as possible.

Political campaigning 101.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
GOSH! there I go again... being..."factually" correct...
Translation: there Barefoot goes again finding a unique case where a PM was selected by party elites, but because the Queen did her usual role of rubber-stamping their decision, he believes that she must have therefore selected Macmillan all by herself.
why hah

Des Plaines, IL

#44699 Dec 13, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
And you are a real freaking HO.
Why do you's old guys always pissss down your own leg?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#44700 Dec 13, 2012
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
Only that you referenced Macmillan because you thought that the Queen, on her own,
You didn't know who he was until I reminded you and, you stupid DOLT, I had to remind you AGAIN that**YOU** are the one who keeps insisting the prime minister is "elected" by members of the Parliament.

I know: I am only 'technically' correct because I am using 'actual' facts.

PS: Queen Elizabeth was under NO obligation to talk to a soul when SHE decided to appoint Macmillian.

Appoint. A- p- p- o- i- n- t.

And there was NO election involved, no vote.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#44701 Dec 13, 2012
SupaAFC wrote:
Macmillian was a unique case because
Translation:
Barefoot2626... right again.
SuperFag: blah blah blah blah!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#44702 Dec 13, 2012
SupaAFC wrote:
Whenever you have brought up your dead horse about the PM's election I have simply restated that like the other 649 MPS, he is elected by his constituency voters.
Nope.

I instructed you (et al.) long long long time ago: the "prime minister" office is NOT an elected office.

You remember when you insisted that you voted for the PM? And I laugh and laughed and laugh and laughed and insisted that you tell us what election that was and you never got around to telling us which one because you had no involvement non ZERO with either of the last PMs.

And as I pointed out: I have as much involvement in the selection of the PM as you.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#44703 Dec 13, 2012
SupaAFC wrote:
For the exact same reason that Democratic and Republican delegates select presidential candidates
Vote.

I understand you don't understand the difference: why you confuse 'select','appoint' and 'vote' and use them, in error, interchangeably.

I.E.: you are a dolt, SuperFag.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#44704 Dec 13, 2012
SupaAFC wrote:
Translation: there Barefoot goes again finding a unique case
It wasn't a unique case.

I find another and you never post in this thread again, eh?

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 Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 9 min Subduction Zone 28,579
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 37 min Regolith Based Li... 3,517
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Science 67,076
is it ever right to hate Christians as a group? 18 hr superwilly 21
Atheist Humor (Aug '09) 18 hr superwilly 462
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) Apr 22 IB DaMann 5,975
News Unholy? Atheists should embrace the science of ... Apr 20 Eagle 12 9
More from around the web