In America, atheists are still in the...

In America, atheists are still in the closet

There are 47707 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

#47049 Feb 6, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Do you have a blind spot for those words? You seem to IGNORE the convention every time it is brought up, why is this, because it screws up you preconceptions?
...may be subject to such formalities...

I.E.: not free.

2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

COMPARE:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
SupaAFC

Crieff, UK

#47050 Feb 6, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Other than the fact that I have listed the degrees by name and provided the link to back them up.
Instead of a broken link to nowhere, SuperFAG?
Still waiting, SuperFAG.
Put up.
Politics and International Relations at Aberdeen is unique in Scotland in bringing together these two cognate, but distinct, subjects as equal components. Teaching and research are both enhanced by this framework and many students feel there is a great benefit in being able to study the two side-by-side.
Why Aberdeen?
Politics and International Relations at Aberdeen continues to excel in the annual National Student Survey
The Department brings active research culture into its teaching, helping to take students to the forefront of contemporary debates and knowledge in the field
Areas of special expertise include Interest Groups, Public Policy, Comparative Political Parties and Elections, European Integration and Regionalism, Security Studies, Cross National Surveys, Scottish Politics, Regional IR, Modernity and Religion, Human Rights and Development Issues, Political Communication, Democracy and Democratisation and European Politics
The Department encourages students to spend their second year of study abroad. The University offers support centrally for taking a year abroad in Europe, Japan, Hong Kong or North America

http://www.abdn.ac.uk/courses/undergraduate/a...

PROGRAMME LENGTH
MRes 12 months full-time
Aims
The Masters in Political Research seeks to provide students with comprehensive, advanced-level methodological training in Politics and International Relations. It has a dual remit, equipping students with transferable skills for graduate employment, while also laying the foundations for research leading to a doctorate. The programme gives participants the knowledge, understanding and competence to deploy qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection and analysis in the conduct of theoretically informed research in Politics and International Relations. Students are required to present research results in the form of oral and written reports. A dissertation permits students to develop skills in an area of particular interest to them. The MRes programme is tailored to provide the methodological training and critical capacity for advanced research in Politics or IR.

http://www.abdn.ac.uk/prospectus/pgrad/study/...

What say you now?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You get a degree there too, SuperFAG?
Thank you ever so much for posting links to two universities that give out Politics degrees.

I recommend going to a doctor to address the gun-shot wounds in your feet.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Still waiting: put up or shut up, SuperFAG
Asked and received. You can now apologise for being wrong about universities not giving out Politics degrees.

Also, you STILL cannot admit that Britain is a Constitutional monarchy. Why is that if you so adamantly claimed that you have never claimed Britain is not one?
SupaAFC

Crieff, UK

#47051 Feb 6, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You ae already two challenges down, SuperFAG.

Put up or shut up.

I guess being yellow is part of the British DNA.
When people make claims, they are required to back them up.

You claimed that your Macmillan quote came from a non-Wikipedia source.

You have failed to back up this assertion.

Conclusion: you are lying.

Prove me wrong: be an adult and back up your claim.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
abominable snowman
n.
A hairy humanlike animal reportedly inhabiting the snows of the high Himalaya Mountains. Also called yeti.
Translation: Barefoot still cannot admit that he is flat out wrong about Britain not being a democracy, even when reputable sources state as such.

Nobody, not even your own sources, deny that Britain is not a democracy. Only you, in Fantasyland, where you are supreme expert on everything man has ever conceived, think that because Britain has a monarch then it is therefore not a democracy. Barefoot against the world.

Just like you think that because Einstein was a male, he was not German, not a scientist, not a genius.

In Barefootland, things can only be defined by one word. One, single, lonely, word.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
When the postman is finished, look up "rhetorical question".
Let me know when you have contradicted what SuperFAG has posted- that the UK is NOT a monarchy.
Another lie. I have never denied that Britain has a monarchy, I state that Britain is a Parliamentary democracy with a figurehead monarch at the top.
SupaAFC

Crieff, UK

#47052 Feb 6, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
...may be subject to such formalities...
I.E.: not free.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
COMPARE:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Key phrase: "carries with it duties and responsibilities"

And thus back we go to the fact that free speech has consequences. It can offend others. It can affect crime. It can affect national security. Etc, etc. Thus, the debate is on the extent to which we can accommodate extreme views without it being damaging on the overall community. The compromise is usually that such views can be tolerated if they are confined to the group involved, such as Sickipedia for sick jokes, or BNP party meetings for their views on immigration.

No crisis of freedom of speech in the slightest. And even if we do look at developments in American free speech, what do we see?

Criticisms of the presidency being considered as potential felonies;

The Patriot Act preventing groups such as Westboro from directly picketing funerals.

You are going down the same route as us whether you like it or not.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47053 Feb 6, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
Politics and International Relations at Aberdeen
Do let me know.

Burden of proof is on you, SuperFAG.

But we still wait for you to put up.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47054 Feb 6, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
Politics and International Relations at Aberdeen continues to excel in the annual National Student Survey
Yet... no degree in "politics".

But we still wait for you to put up, SuperFAG: you say I NEVER cite sources, I say I prove you wrong, and you fold up your tent.

Put up or shut up, SuperFAG.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47055 Feb 6, 2013
[QUOTE who="SupaAFC" Comparative Political Parties and Elections
[/QUOTE]

A:) "Comparative Political Parties and Elections" is a course- not a degree.

B) Still waiting... put up or shut up.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47056 Feb 6, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
Key phrase: "carries with it duties and responsibilities"
I've already provided the key phrase (putting aside that side deals you have with the European Union do not make for UK rights).

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47057 Feb 6, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
<
And thus back we go to the fact that free speech has consequences.
Has no bearing whatsoever on what I said.

Free speech would be something we are guaranteed here in the USA.

And a right you lack in the monarchy of the UK.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47058 Feb 6, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
When people make claims, they are required to back them up.
Except you, it seems.

Even after I have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are wrong, and that you lie, and no matter how many times I insist you back up something you claim for me to have said... you post what you assure everyone is what I meant to say.

Still waiting for you to put up.

Buck buck buck...buck-allllllllllllllll!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47059 Feb 6, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
And thus back we go to the fact that free speech has consequences. It can offend others. It can affect crime..
Absolutely don't care, has nothing whatsoever to do with the point, you must be lonely.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47060 Feb 6, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
The Patriot Act preventing groups such as Westboro from directly picketing funerals.
It doesn't.

You also forgot to explain in the example you gave of Denise Helms being arrested (according to you) for a post she made on Facebook.

Do I have to remind you several times a day before you get back to this?

Putting aside: it seems you are running away from that bet?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47061 Feb 6, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
Another lie. I have never denied that Britain has a monarchy, I state that Britain is a Parliamentary democracy with a figurehead monarch at the top.
SupaAFC
#46271
Tuesday Jan 15
barefoot2626 wrote:
Thanks for continuing to deny the United Kingdom is a monarchy.
It comes up all the time.
If Britain is a monarchy then the Queen should have legislative powers.

She does not.

Thus, Britain's system of government is not a monarchy.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47062 Feb 6, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
In Barefootland, things can only be defined by one word. One, single, lonely, word.
You like when you insisted that Macmillan had the UNANIMOUS support of his party, and then I proved that you were wrong, and then you said you made a "grammatical" error?

I shall say there are millions of examples when things can be defined as right or wrong based on one word.

Such as when Macsnoozum "quotes" me, removing one single word (not) out of the "quote" and insisting it still means the same thing?

Still waiting for you to put up, SuperFAG, in the meanwhile, answer me this:

Is the United King_dom a monarchy, yes or no?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47063 Feb 6, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
And even if we do look at developments in American free speech, what do we see?
Criticisms of the presidency being considered as potential felonies
You are a m/f c/s liar.

Of course, we knew that already.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47064 Feb 6, 2013
ChristineM wrote:
A major advance came through Operation Claymore, a commando raid on the Lofoten Islands on 4 March 1941. The German armed trawler Krebs was captured, including the complete Enigma keys for February, but no bigram tables or K-book.
"On March 4th 1941, during a Commando raid on the Lofoten Islands off Norway, the Royal Navy captured the German trawler Krebs, along with two Enigma machines and the current settings for use in home waters. This allowed another partial breakthrough, allowing some messages to be read. Donitz, whilst concerned by increased British naval successes, was assured by his cypher experts that Enigma was unbreakable, and tended to suspect that the problem was due to increasingly effective tracking by means of HF/DF signals."

++

From 1941 onwards, Bletchley’s experts focused upon breaking the codes used by German U-boats in the Atlantic. In March 1941, when the German armed trawler ‘Krebs’ was captured off Norway complete with Enigma machines and codebooks, the German naval Enigma code could finally be read. The Allies could now discover where U-boats were hunting and direct their own ships away from danger.

++

The first recorded capture of a Enigma I can find came in February 1941, with the capture of the German trawler named Krebs off Norway. On board were two Enigma machines and the Naval settings for the previous month. This allowed German Naval Enigma to be read, albeit with some delay at Bletchley. Then in the start of May 1941 a weather ship named the München was attacked and found with part of Enigma code-books for June. On both occasions the crew had started to destroy the Enigma machines. One code was not found the all important short code book, this allowed the U boats to shorten the messages sent. Without this Bletchley were unable to break the all important U boat code.
SupaAFC

Crieff, UK

#47065 Feb 6, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do let me know.
Burden of proof is on you, SuperFAG.
But we still wait for you to put up.
And the proof has been provided. You are now making up excuses.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Yet... no degree in "politics".
This may sound crazy, but degrees are generally named after the school that they are issued in.

Single Honours students in Politics will obtain a degree called Politics.

Joint Honours students in Politics and IR/any other subject will obtain a degree called Politics and IR/other subject.

What are you demanding now? That I get the Politics and IR department to personally send you a message confirming that they issue degrees?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
But we still wait for you to put up, SuperFAG: you say I NEVER cite sources, I say I prove you wrong, and you fold up your tent.

Put up or shut up, SuperFAG.
Nice try to pretend that I am still stating this -after- you finally start citing sources such as the university lists.

You have -still- not provided the citation for your Macmillan source.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text> Comparative Political Parties and Elections

A:) "Comparative Political Parties and Elections" is a course- not a degree.

B) Still waiting... put up or shut up.
Students kind of have to study courses in order to obtain their degrees.

The degree is called Politics (and IR/other subject if joint). Courses have their own names.

Do you need crayons and paper?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>I've already provided the key phrase (putting aside that side deals you have with the European Union do not make for UK rights).
Nope, you simply copy-pasted and left it at that. You are trying to ignore the obvious problems that free speech brings and how the Human Rights legislation tries to balance licence with limits.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Has no bearing whatsoever on what I said.

Free speech would be something we are guaranteed here in the USA.

And a right you lack in the monarchy of the UK.
Really? Then email the presidential office with the most extreme vitriol you can think of then picket the funeral of a soldier. See how your freedom of speech helps you there.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Except you, it seems.
Even after I have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are wrong, and that you lie, and no matter how many times I insist you back up something you claim for me to have said... you post what you assure everyone is what I meant to say.
Still waiting for you to put up.
Buck buck buck...buck-allllllllllllllll!
You can prove me wrong by defining democracy.

Oh wait - you don't - and we know why.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolutely don't care, has nothing whatsoever to do with the point, you must be lonely.
Except that it explains why hate speech is such a problematic issue when it comes to freedom of speech debate.

But then, we know how you act: freedom of speech, the umbrella term, and everything within it (including hate speech) are the same.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
It doesn't.
Yes it does. Because of the Patriot Act Westboro can only picket to a particular radius of the funeral. In other words, far away from the mourners.

If they try exercising their freedom of speech within the radius, they get arrested. Fact.
SupaAFC

Crieff, UK

#47066 Feb 6, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You also forgot to explain in the example you gave of Denise Helms being arrested (according to you) for a post she made on Facebook.
Do I have to remind you several times a day before you get back to this?
Putting aside: it seems you are running away from that bet?
How can I run away from a point that you did not bring up in your posts?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
SupaAFC
#46271
Tuesday Jan 15
<quoted text>
If Britain is a monarchy then the Queen should have legislative powers.
She does not.
Thus, Britain's system of government is not a monarchy.
Key phrase: system of government.

If our system of government is a monarchy, then show me the Queen making laws.

Good luck!
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You like when you insisted that Macmillan had the UNANIMOUS support of his party, and then I proved that you were wrong, and then you said you made a "grammatical" error?
What your quote means nothing until you provide us the source. You know, that you keep refusing to do.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I shall say there are millions of examples when things can be defined as right or wrong based on one word.
Strawman: the issue was not whether something is right or wrong but whether things themselves can only be defined by one word.

Your logic is that if X can be defined by Y, it cannot be defined by Z.

If Britain can be defined as a monarchy, it cannot be defined as a democracy.

If Einstein can be defined as male, he cannot be defined as German.

In other words, you use an exclusive kind of logic that makes absolutely no sense in social studies because you act as if there is only black or white.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Such as when Macsnoozum "quotes" me, removing one single word (not) out of the "quote" and insisting it still means the same thing?
Still waiting for you to put up, SuperFAG, in the meanwhile, answer me this:
Is the United King_dom a monarchy, yes or no?
Is Britain a Constitutional monarchy, yes or no?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You are a m/f c/s liar.
Of course, we knew that already.
Then email the White House with the most offensive anti-Obama vitriol you can think of. If I am lying then you have nothing to fear.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47067 Feb 6, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
And the proof has been provided. You are now making up excuses.
Proof?

You have asserted that I have never cited my sources.

I have offered to provide proof for which you will stop posting.

Buck buck buck.buckALLLLLLL!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#47068 Feb 6, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
This may sound crazy, but degrees
still no link...

Waiting... I prove cite, you stop posting.

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 Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 2 min Shizle 10,744
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 6 min Uncle Sam 244,840
Atheists should stop feeding the stereotypes 28 min Shizle 17
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 52 min Brian_G 20,577
Atheists and the "Moses Syndrome" 4 hr Anonymous1386 11
Santa vs. God: logic? Wed Shizle 2
Is the Christian god good? Wed Shizle 4
More from around the web