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 (Page 2,250)

Showing posts 44,981 - 45,000 of47,734
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46673
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
The whole social science world continues to insist that Britain -has- a monarchy but it is not our political system.
Funny how often you insist that I insist that I am the only one who insists that the UK is a monarchy (has? a monarchy... yeah... you done graduated with two 'politics' degrees...) and to prove this you say The whole social science world continues to insist that Britain has [sic]a monarchy.

And you spend months denying that anyone denies the UK is a monarchy while denying the UK is a monarchy and insisting it is a democracy... though it fits no definition of democracy owing its fit to the definition of monarchy, i.e., a monarchy as head of state.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46674
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
Not exactly screaming "scholar" at me, to be honest.
I'm not the one claiming to be a "scholar" with two (cough) "politics degrees".

Still waiting for proof: where is that proof?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46675
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
One man, with no qualifications, no social skills, nothing whatsoever, who knows more about everything else than people who have spent years or are even paid to devote their lives to the subjects that you know nothing about.
Yet I slap the snot out of you, SuperFag. Daily.

You and your (cough) "politics" degrees.

Is the United Kingdom a monarchy, yes or no?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46676
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
We know you don't care about defining democracy; because it shatters your feeble argument.
The United KING_dom is a monarchy.

I don't care what a democracy is... or is not.

It is your strawman, not mine.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46677
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

[QUOTE who="SupaAFC"
Of course not, manchild, because the Conservatives had no system for replacing sitting PMs.[/QUOTE]

I don't care if they don't have a full deck of playing cards.

They did not elect him.

You do remember insisting all PMs were electing and rolling around demand an example of a PM that wasn't and I said Macmillan and you started to cry and urinate and then you wanted another example?

WAHHHHHHHHHHH!

which brings us back to the role of the monarch who APPOINTS the PM.

Anyone he/she wants.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46678
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
Review: Macmillan was the unanimous choice of the sitting Conservative cabinet
You have two degrees in "politics", you say?

So I am sure you can prove this assertion.

Just for fun, let me throw this out there:

"Although the media expected Butler would get the nod, a survey of the Cabinet done for the Queen showed Macmillan was the nearly unanimous choice, and he became Prime Minister on 10 January 1957"

Here's the thing: either something is unanimous, or... it isn't.

Right?

Or do you want to say you constantly being proved wrong is... a shade of grey?

“There is no god!”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46679
Jan 22, 2013
 
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
T'ain't.
I know, you struggle with English.
E.G.: non Dairy is not the opposite of nondairy.
yes you are
and you struggle with facts about sweden
glass is not the opposite to ice cream.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46680
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
Which does not refute what you pasted this in response to: the fact that the Commons, the big players of our system, are democratically elected.
I don't care.

The Reichstag was democratically elected.

Having a Parliament does not a democracy make.

Especially when the monarch selects most the members of that parliament.

PS: the word "especially" means in addition to, it isn't needed prove if the UK is a monarchy, yes or no.

You do note that I continue to say the UK is a monarchy?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46681
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
There is also an Electoral College. Thus if the Lords are influential purely because they exist, then the Electoral College likewise holds the presidency in their hands.
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...

And you say you have two degrees in "politics", eh?

" House of Lords

The House of Lords is the second chamber of Parliament and is also called the Upper House. Because it is not elected, it does not have the same powers as the Commons, but it retains the right to revise and scrutinise the Government's actions and legislation. Its independent minds and extensive expertise form a crucial check on the power of the executive in Parliament but it is much more likely to wield this power by asking Ministers to think again than to veto whole pieces of legislation."
SupaAFC

Larbert, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46682
Jan 22, 2013
 
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
A constitutional monarchy is a monarchy.
You are not the scholar you claim to be, SuperFAG.
With limits on the powers of the monarchy; limits that have, in 21st century Britain, turned the monarchy into a crown-wearing celebrity.
Go read a history book outwith the internet - one about the Magna Carta would be a start - then come back to us when you have learned about the development of democracy in British political history.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Once again, you are making things up I did not say.

The straw man is the most common soldier in the NotBot army.

A country is or is not a monarchy.

The UK is a monarchy.
The USA is not a monarchy.

Pregnancy works the same way.
Nope, that is literally how your argument works and why it explains nothing when applied to cases in social science. Your analogies, whether you are using coins or pregnancy, fail to apply because they are not social phenomena akin to establishing political systems; coins are physical objects that cannot be manipulated (and if they were then they would be flat-out refused as legitimate pieces of currency), and pregnancy is based on biology.

Your black-or-white logic stumps reason and encourages lazy thinking. I dare you, Barefoot, to do nothing but paste a dictionary definition in a Word document, then send it to a political science publication arguing why Britain is a non-democratic monarchy.

The next challenge would then be trying to find someone who would actually read it!
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>The UK does not have a constitution.

You can wander in any direction you like. Don't make me responsible for what you infer.
Yet your own source mysteriously calls us a Constitutional monarchy - why is that?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Straw man.
Nope, your own source calls us a Constitutional monarchy.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>A long list of many dictionaries often cited, diminishing returns, if you cannot google an exact quote - a lengthy exact quote- you shouldn't be here.
If you cannot cite your sources and can only cling to dictionaries, then you should not -

- oh, nevermind; you are arguing on an internet forum, not in a university political science setting.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Funny how often you insist that I insist that I am the only one who insists that the UK is a monarchy (has? a monarchy... yeah... you done graduated with two 'politics' degrees...) and to prove this you say The whole social science world continues to insist that Britain has [sic]a monarchy.

And you spend months denying that anyone denies the UK is a monarchy while denying the UK is a monarchy and insisting it is a democracy... though it fits no definition of democracy owing its fit to the definition of monarchy, i.e., a monarchy as head of state.
Of course Britain fits a definition of democracy - you don't like it so subsequently refuse to set out parameters for what is and is not a democracy. Your silence of this issue tells us more than your waffle ever does.

Furthermore, you claim we do not count as a democracy purely because we fit a definition of another word? Amazing. That is like saying that because Einstein fits the definition of "male", then he does not fit the definition of "German" by virtue of already qualifying for another word's definition!

Truly, Barefoot, it is a wonder how you come up such wacky logic.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>I'm not the one claiming to be a "scholar" with two (cough) "politics degrees".
Asked and delivered: University of Aberdeen, 2011 and 2012.
SupaAFC

Larbert, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46683
Jan 22, 2013
 
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Yet I slap the snot out of you, SuperFag. Daily.
So said the Monty Python Black Knight.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>The United KING_dom is a monarchy.

I don't care what a democracy is... or is not.

It is your strawman, not mine.
Britain is a democratic Parliamentary system of government with a figurehead monarch at the top.

You hate the word democracy because it blows your argument out of the water; get over it, little boy.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't care if they don't have a full deck of playing cards.
We are well aware that you will happily latch onto anything if it suits your purposes, no matter how irrelevant or dated it is.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
They did not elect him.
And 19th century Americans did not send man to the moon. Pretty easy to find cases to "refute" contemporary phenomena when you decide to go time-travelling.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You do remember insisting all PMs were electing and rolling around demand an example of a PM that wasn't and I said Macmillan and you started to cry and urinate and then you wanted another example?
This never happened. Again, Barefoot, you brought Macmillan up on your own accord, for your own argument.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
which brings us back to the role of the monarch who APPOINTS the PM.

Anyone he/she wants.
Nonsense. When your "best" case is going back over 50 years to latch onto a case that at the time Britain had never experienced before, to a case when the Conservatives had no system for replacing sitting PMs, then it truly does reek of desperation.

How about joining us in the 21st century? The Conservatives have moved on from 1957.
SupaAFC

Larbert, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46684
Jan 22, 2013
 
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You have two degrees in "politics", you say?
So I am sure you can prove this assertion.
Just for fun, let me throw this out there:
"Although the media expected Butler would get the nod, a survey of the Cabinet done for the Queen showed Macmillan was the nearly unanimous choice, and he became Prime Minister on 10 January 1957"
Here's the thing: either something is unanimous, or... it isn't.
Right?
Or do you want to say you constantly being proved wrong is... a shade of grey?
That's funny. I pasted your quote into Google and found that it came straight out of Wikipedia - you know, that source that only a week or two ago you were screaming about being an anonymous and subsequently illegitimate source for me and other posters to use.

Is this your new rule? Barefoot gets to use Wikipedia, but nobody else can? Do explain.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't care.
We know why, manchild, we know why.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Reichstag was democratically elected.
It sure was. Congratulations on being correct for once!
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Having a Parliament does not a democracy make.
Especially when the monarch selects most the members of that parliament.
Then what -does- make a democracy?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
PS: the word "especially" means in addition to, it isn't needed prove if the UK is a monarchy, yes or no.
You do note that I continue to say the UK is a monarchy?
And religious kooks on the street keep screaming that Jesus will be coming back to purge sinners and end the world. Does not make them right, and it certainly does not make you right.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...
And you say you have two degrees in "politics", eh?
" House of Lords
The House of Lords is the second chamber of Parliament and is also called the Upper House. Because it is not elected, it does not have the same powers as the Commons, but it retains the right to revise and scrutinise the Government's actions and legislation. Its independent minds and extensive expertise form a crucial check on the power of the executive in Parliament but it is much more likely to wield this power by asking Ministers to think again than to veto whole pieces of legislation."
How about looking at what the Lords - actual, physical people - do instead of simply stating what they can potentially do?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46685
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
With limits on the powers of the monarchy
Monarchy.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46686
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
Go read a history book outwith the internet - one about the Magna Carta
Not a constitution, and is the United KING_dom a monarchy, yes or no?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46687
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
Asked and delivered: University of Aberdeen, 2011 and 2012.
No proof, then?

PS: When did they start giving degrees in "politics".

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46688
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
Yet your own source mysteriously calls us a Constitutional monarchy - why is that?
A constitutional monarchy is - and this is the tricky part- a monarchy.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46689
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
Of course Britain fits a definition of democracy -
It fits the definition of monarchy.

Funny how no one refers to it as a "constitutional democracy".

Funny how that is.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46690
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
Your black-or-white logic stumps reason and encourages lazy thinking.
How would you know?

You don't even know that the United KING_dom is a monarchy.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46691
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
That's funny. I pasted your quote into Google and found that it came straight out of Wikipedia - you know, that source that only a week or two ago you were screaming about being an anonymous and subsequently illegitimate source for me and other posters to use.
You don't say?

So why don't you show EVERYONE where I uttered such nonsense.

PS: if you learn how to use the scroll button on your mouse, you would find that not always do quotes originate from Wikipedia.

And if you look at the little numbers on sections of Wikipedia, you will find where they came from.

E.G.:[50]

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46692
Jan 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SupaAFC wrote:
Your black-or-white logic stumps
Applies.

You've established you lack of intellectual prowess and honesty: e.g., your inviability to say that you are wrong even after it has been crammed repeatedly up your azz so far we can see it whenever you open your flatulent mouth.

Is the United King_dom a monarchy yes or no?

Watch this:

Yes.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 44,981 - 45,000 of47,734
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
•••