In America, atheists are still in the closet

Apr 11, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Spiked

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.

Comments
43,101 - 43,120 of 47,724 Comments Last updated Sep 4, 2013

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.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#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

Andover, 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

Andover, 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

Sheffield, 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?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#44705 Dec 13, 2012
SupaAFC wrote:
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.
You are a m/f, c/s liar.

But then, we knew that already, eh, SuperFag?
SupaAFC

Sheffield, UK

#44706 Dec 13, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't know who he was until I reminded you
If you want to play "let's make up our own facts", then sure, I am game.

Barefoot doesn't know who Lionel Ritchie is.

Back to you, manchild.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
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 have to keep reminding you that you get your responses mixed up with the posters you "debate" with on these forums. I have never claimed that the PM is elected by MPs; the PM gets his position by virtue of being the leader of the party in government.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I know: I am only 'technically' correct because I am using 'actual' facts.
I know: Barefoot refuses to go below the surface of his arguments because he knows that the practical machinery of British politics flatly contradicts his outdated version on how it supposedly functions.

If you want to believe that this is the medieval world and Queen Elizabeth is planning to launch an armada, then by all means be my guest; just let us know when you want to join us in the 21st century.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
PS: Queen Elizabeth was under NO obligation to talk to a soul when SHE decided to appoint Macmillian.
Elizabeth did nothing but rubber stamp a decision made by Conservative party elites. That you outright refuse to accept this simply shows how far you will go to refuse to admit that you are simply wrong when it comes to the Queen's influence in British politics.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Appoint. A- p- p- o- i- n- t.
Ceremony. C-e-r-e-m-o-n-y.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
And there was NO election involved, no vote.
Well of course not, at that time the Conservatives had no system of selecting leaders under an active government.

I'm glad we can finally agree on one thing, even if you only stumbled into this by accident.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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 forgetting the meaning of freedom 8 min Jaimie 57
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 40 min Eagle 12 226,378
The myth of the angry atheist 1 hr _Bad Company 1
The Ultimate Evidence of God 2 hr Patrick 61
I left Creationism! Ask me anything! 2 hr Patrick 7
100% Faith Free 3 hr CunningLinguist 14
Should Uninformed Opinion Be Respected? 3 hr CunningLinguist 39
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••