In America, atheists are still in the closet

Apr 11, 2012 Full story: Spiked 47,713

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

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#46448 Jan 18, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Aw, you're flirting with me, how cute.
Get some D-cells, Chubby.

“There is no god!”

Since: Jun 12

Sweden

#46449 Jan 18, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Stalin was an atheist.
Mao was an atheist.
Pol Pot was an atheist.
If you want to study the numbers of people in the last 100 years or so, it looks like the atheists are still winning the humans killed.
If you want to insist it was about religion...
nope
nope
nope

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#46450 Jan 18, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Get some D-cells, Chubby.
You take batteries? This is interesting, and kinky.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#46451 Jan 18, 2013
What's all this talk about the Enigma being undecipherable? It was little more than a character scrambling electric typewriter. Why are we mucking about with Quantum Cryptography if the Nazis already invented an unbreakable code generating machine? Undecipherable? Hogwash! Maybe back in those days. How often did they change the 'key'? Could it even be changed or was it hardwired (geared?) into the device?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#46452 Jan 18, 2013
RHill wrote:
How often did they change the 'key'? Could it even be changed or was it hardwired (geared?) into the device?
All the time.

The big break came when someone got sloppy and reused the same one.

It was... "LIKE" an IBM Selectric typewriter and had... four "balls" "elements" in IBM-eese and they were selected from a box of elements and you had to have the right elements (aka rotors, so now you can shift to the IBM Wheelwriter, aka daisy wheels) in the machine to decypher the message.

So... if you want to stretch the metaphor to a strict "substitution" code (A=K, K=P), not only would you have to figure out the substitution, you'd have to do it for three (early versions) random rotors (and the Germans added more rotors to each new version)... because (A=K, K=P, then P=Q... then Q=B)

And the rotors the radioman would put in... he'd selected disk from a... "deck"...

The most critical enigma would have been the last one captured by the Americans (U505) as the Germans were aware of the British's capture of the early models of the code machine...

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#46453 Jan 18, 2013
Mikko wrote:
<quoted text>
nope
nope
nope
Of course, Meatball: you don't acknowledge the Kingdom of Sweden is a monarchy...
Lincoln

United States

#46455 Jan 18, 2013
RHill wrote:
What's all this talk about the Enigma being undecipherable? It was little more than a character scrambling electric typewriter. Why are we mucking about with Quantum Cryptography if the Nazis already invented an unbreakable code generating machine? Undecipherable? Hogwash! Maybe back in those days. How often did they change the 'key'? Could it even be changed or was it hardwired (geared?) into the device?
This is not a mystery.
Extensive writing on this subject.
Poland role impressive
Lincoln

United States

#46456 Jan 18, 2013
A high percentage of atheists seem to be agnostics?
SupaAFC

Crieff, UK

#46457 Jan 18, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
mon·ar·chy
[mon-er-kee]
noun, plural mon·ar·chies.
1. a state or nation in which the supreme power is actually or nominally lodged in a monarch. Compare absolute monarchy, limited monarchy.
2. supreme power or sovereignty held by a single person.
++
de·moc·ra·cy
/di&#712;mäkr&#601;s &#275;/
Noun
A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
A state governed in such a way.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Swallow, SuperFAG.
mon·ar·chy
[mon-er-kee]
noun, plural mon·ar·chies.
1. a state or nation in which the supreme power is actually or nominally lodged in a monarch. Compare absolute monarchy, limited monarchy.
2. supreme power or sovereignty held by a single person.
How does pasting a dictionary definition refute the fact that the monarchy has not refused assent to a bill for over 300 years?

I can only conclude that you think that dictionaries literally define reality. If a duck was defined as having flippers, then ducks all over the world would magically grow flippers.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean the larger half of the UK Parliament?
Gosh, you mean when I say more members of the UK Parliament are appointed, I am right again!
OH MY!
Wipe your chin, SuperFAG!
Nobody has claimed otherwise, but if I could only claim victory by arguing with red herrings, I suppose that is your best option.

Lords, do nothing. Queen, does nothing. Conclusion? Britain is a representative, parliamentary democracy with a figurehead monarch at the top.

Define that, manchild.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Moving the goalposts, again, SuperFAG?
Like when you insisted ALL PMs were elected and I proved you wrong - that Macmillian was not elected... and you wanted another example?
Of course: I only have actual facts and actual laws on my side...
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Moving the goalposts, again, SuperFAG?
Not at all. You keep saying "Already refuted" for points you have never attempted to refute in the first place as a get-out for actually doing anything. You claim that you have refuted the Queen rubber-stamping bills...

... but have done nothing to demonstrate as such.

Those goalposts have remained firmly in place for over 300 years. You shot wide and claimed victory anyway.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Like when you insisted ALL PMs were elected and I proved you wrong - that Macmillian was not elected... and you wanted another example?
Of course: I only have actual facts and actual laws on my side...
Macmillan was elected as an MP like any other Prime Minister, first representing Stockton then being Bromley's MP for many years.

Like all MPs in the Commons, he was democratically elected. You -think- he was unelected purely because the Conservatives at the time had no system for replacing PMs in a sitting Parliamentary session, so had to recommend one to the Queen.

Only you seem to think that the Queen acted independently in this issue, which is why you would rather find a case over 50 years old instead of look at the Conservative leadership challenge to Thatcher in 1990, when they did have a system in place.

Regardless, Macmillan was elected just like any other Commons MP. So, whatever victory you think you had, you don't. Accept it, little boy.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Wipe your chin, SuperFAG.
United KING_dom, monarchy, YES OR NO, BOY!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Barefoot has gone into meltdown again - someone fetch him his blankie.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAH!
Funny how it makes a difference if dare I call the UK Britian, FUNNY HOW THAT IS.
I guess the NotBots have being pedantic trademarked.
Nope, couldn't care less as demonstrated in my posts - not your head.

Does my manchild need his nap now? You have gone all grouchy-wouchy.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#46458 Jan 18, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
A high percentage of atheists seem to be agnostics?
Actually it would be more accurate to state that a high percentage of atheists are agnostic.

A-theism is literally "not-theism". So everyone is either a theist or a not-theist (atheist).

Theism is a category to define all people who believe in the existence of one or more deities. Atheism is a category for everybody who does not fit into the category theism.

Agnosticism deals with the question of knowledge, not belief.

“There is no god!”

Since: Jun 12

Sweden

#46459 Jan 18, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course, Meatball: you don't acknowledge the Kingdom of Sweden is a monarchy...
Sweden is a democracy and more democratic than usa will ever be and you hate that!

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#46460 Jan 18, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
A high percentage of atheists seem to be agnostics?
Agnostics are wimps with commitment issues.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#46461 Jan 18, 2013
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
Agnostics are wimps with commitment issues.
Theist agnostics, perhaps. But atheist agnostics, we're just honest enough to say "we don't know." ;)

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#46462 Jan 18, 2013
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
Agnostics are wimps with commitment issues.
Either that or require proof lest they look no better than the people they make fun of for committing to things that cannot be proved.

Or disproved.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#46463 Jan 18, 2013
Mikko wrote:
<quoted text>
Sweden is a democracy
~stomp stomp stomp~

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#46464 Jan 18, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
But atheist agnostics,
No such thing.

Like agnostic Christians.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#46465 Jan 18, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
de·moc·ra·cy
United Kingdom is a monarchy.

Thanks for the continual denial.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#46466 Jan 18, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually it would be more accurate to state that a high percentage of atheists are agnostic.
That is rather stupid but of course not surprising assertion considering the source.

Atheism is the *DISBELIEF*, not the lack of belief.

Agnostic atheist is no different - no less nonsensical- than agnostic Christian.

Almost pregnant?

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#46467 Jan 18, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
No such thing.
Like agnostic Christians.
Deists are considered agnostic theists. I am an agnostic atheist, so you are saying that I am a figment of your imagination, interesting. If you think one label can describe anyone, then you are more deluded than I had suspected.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#46468 Jan 18, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
Deists are considered agnostic theists.
Only by idiots who don't speak English.

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
"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 51 min Subduction Zone 14,510
Christianity Created Hitler 5 hr Uncle Sam 172
why? 6 hr Uncle Sam 13
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 7 hr Joe fortuna 234,531
Richard Dawkins needs to get a life 17 hr thetruth 24
The Consequences of Atheism 17 hr ChristineM 68
Our world came from nothing? (Jul '14) Mon thetruth 1,233
More from around the web