In America, atheists are still in the...

In America, atheists are still in the closet

There are 51437 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

Corvallis, OR

#48134 Apr 8, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
Are you seriously trying to portray me as saying that our Queen does not exist?
PS: another straw man, Aunt Sally.

Since: Feb 11

Corvallis, OR

#48135 Apr 8, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
What we do not have is a monarchy as a government.
hahahaahahahahahah!

stop... you're killing me!

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#48136 Apr 8, 2013
Seems every time I poke my head in the door of this thread, you guys are still engaging in the same boring, pointless, and trivial argument. I can't help but wonder why anyone stays. I'll keep looking in from time to time, though, just in case someone writes something of interest. Bye again for now...

Since: Feb 11

Corvallis, OR

#48137 Apr 8, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
Seems every time I poke my head in the door of this thread, you guys are still engaging in the same boring, pointless, and trivial argument.
I always why someone who doesn't care keeps coming around to tell us he doesn't care.

“Sweden more democratic thanUSA”

Since: Jun 12

Södertälje, Sweden

#48138 Apr 8, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
FACT: Monarchy definition, a state or nation in which the supreme power is actually or nominally lodged in a monarch.
Point to the part that is wrong, meatball.
fact the king have no political power (the constitution say so)

F A C T

All POWER proceeds from the PEOPLE. This is the foundation of parliamentary DEMOCRACY in Sweden

Since: Feb 11

Grants Pass, OR

#48139 Apr 8, 2013
Mikko wrote:
the vatican isn't a country!
You are so stupidly clueless that a amoeba is smarter than you
You can add this to your other cut and paste, Meatball.

You know... that Sweden isn't a monarchy, and the Vatican isn't a country.

Since: Feb 11

Grants Pass, OR

#48140 Apr 8, 2013
Mikko wrote:
F A C T
Is Vatican City a country, Meatball?

Since: Feb 11

Grants Pass, OR

#48141 Apr 8, 2013
Mikko wrote:
<quoted text>
fact the king have no political power (the constitution say so)
F A C T
He is the head of state.

FACT.

Guess what that means, Meatball?

Since: Feb 11

Grants Pass, OR

#48142 Apr 8, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
So, Barefoot: if you do not define Sweden as a monarchy based on its name, then why did you go at pains to stress it's name within the same page of the thread?
Have you stop sexually abusing the neighborhood children, SuperFAG?

Since: Feb 11

Grants Pass, OR

#48143 Apr 8, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
Let's zoom in:
"... has a monarchy".
Closer:
"HAS"
Let's continue.
<quoted text>
And thus the strawman has been committed. I shall stick a pin here.
<quoted text>
Once again, let's zoom in:
"If Britain is a monarchy..."
Closer:
"is a monarchy..."
Ever closer:
"IS"
How sad for Aunt Sally.

Now defining "is-is".

Since: Feb 11

Grants Pass, OR

#48144 Apr 8, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
Is, has. Two completely different claims. Nobody, not even I myself in the quote-mine, is denying that we -have- a monarchy
SuperFAG writes: "Nobody, despite your continual spin, denies that Britain has a monarchy"

Poor SuperFAG. He forgot he already denied Britian had a monarchy.

Let's see..
SuperFAG writes...
"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. "

+++

Now let's all watch as SuperFAG flips and flops and tries to say what he said exactly doesn't mean exactly what he said...

Popcorn, anyone?

Since: Feb 11

Grants Pass, OR

#48145 Apr 8, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
And the definition for democracy is?..
SuperFAG wrote:
"Thus, Britain's system of government is not a monarchy. "

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#48146 Apr 8, 2013
Siro wrote:
I made a statement about KittenKoder and asked if I was wrong in doing so.
You said I was wrong because KittenKoder is an atheist.
You gave no further explaination, and yet in the same post you coughed up this phlegm....
SupaAFC wrote, "<quoted text>
Nice try - but that is how your reasoning works. If person A is an atheist and person B is a Christian, then person B's arguments automatically refute person A's."

I could reply by changing a letter or word here or there just like you do when you 'counter' Barefoots replies....
Could reply? I will.....
If person A is an atheist and person B is a Christian, then person A's arguments automatically refute person B's.
.
How many umpteen times do I have to say that I am not a Christian for you morons to understand?
But lets examine the Topix atheists 'logic'......
If person A is not an atheist then that person becomes person B and is automatically a Christian.
You and Boob of QF really ride with this psychobabble.

SupaAFC wrote, "<quoted text>
I find your obsession of me very flattering, but superhero I am not."

Superhero you are not, but SupaFAG you are.

SupaAFC wrote, "<quoted text>
It is asimple demonstration of your own stereotype-driven strawman arguments.
Are you ever going to be able to debate with atheists like an adult or must you keep relying on strawmen? Does your deity tell you to lie?"

You were whining about 'Christianspeak' to me and I said I am not a Christian.
Now you are claiming that a statement is a strawman argument and that I'm lying.
Does my deity tell me to lie? No.
I am not telling lies when I say you are a brain dead crapclown or that Barefoot has consistently used your face as a mop in showing up your 'make it up as you go along' supposed 'arguments' which are really nonsense rants you spew so as to get the thumbs up from the Topix atheist peoples democratic collective because that to you is more important than winning an argument on merit and fact.
.
You crapclown
No nano.

How are you this fine day?

Well, I hope.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#48147 Apr 8, 2013
Siro wrote:
I made a statement about KittenKoder and asked if I was wrong in doing so.
You said I was wrong because KittenKoder is an atheist.
You gave no further explaination, and yet in the same post you coughed up this phlegm....
SupaAFC wrote, "<quoted text>
Nice try - but that is how your reasoning works. If person A is an atheist and person B is a Christian, then person B's arguments automatically refute person A's."

I could reply by changing a letter or word here or there just like you do when you 'counter' Barefoots replies....
Could reply? I will.....
If person A is an atheist and person B is a Christian, then person A's arguments automatically refute person B's.
.
How many umpteen times do I have to say that I am not a Christian for you morons to understand?
But lets examine the Topix atheists 'logic'......
If person A is not an atheist then that person becomes person B and is automatically a Christian.
You and Boob of QF really ride with this psychobabble.

SupaAFC wrote, "<quoted text>
I find your obsession of me very flattering, but superhero I am not."

Superhero you are not, but SupaFAG you are.

SupaAFC wrote, "<quoted text>
It is asimple demonstration of your own stereotype-driven strawman arguments.
Are you ever going to be able to debate with atheists like an adult or must you keep relying on strawmen? Does your deity tell you to lie?"

You were whining about 'Christianspeak' to me and I said I am not a Christian.
Now you are claiming that a statement is a strawman argument and that I'm lying.
Does my deity tell me to lie? No.
I am not telling lies when I say you are a brain dead crapclown or that Barefoot has consistently used your face as a mop in showing up your 'make it up as you go along' supposed 'arguments' which are really nonsense rants you spew so as to get the thumbs up from the Topix atheist peoples democratic collective because that to you is more important than winning an argument on merit and fact.
.
You crapclown
I meant "hi nano", not "no nano".

Since: Feb 11

Grants Pass, OR

#48148 Apr 8, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
The reason I bring up the United States and it being a republic is to simply
Did you say this, Aunt Sally?

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

“Sweden more democratic thanUSA”

Since: Jun 12

Södertälje, Sweden

#48150 Apr 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
He is the head of state.
FACT.
Guess what that means, Meatball?
and the constitution says

All POWER proceeds from the PEOPLE. This is the foundation of parliamentary DEMOCRACY in Sweden

Since: Feb 11

Grants Pass, OR

#48151 Apr 9, 2013
Mikko wrote:
<quoted text>
and the constitution says
Is Vatican City a country, Meatball?

Since: Feb 11

Grants Pass, OR

#48152 Apr 9, 2013
Mikko wrote:
<quoted text>
and the constitution says
Ask SuperFAG to come up with an excuse to explain how to get out of something you said exactly, like when he said no one ever said the UK was not a monarchy, and then I quoted him as saying the UK isn't a monarchy.

Here's a SuperFAG thought: the Vatican City's "system of" government is not a country...

Hmmmmm... I guess that would mean the USA's "system of government" would mean the USA itself isn't a republic... and we are still waiting for his explanation on how the sun doesn't "actually" rise in the east.
SupaAFC

Leven, UK

#48153 Apr 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Clearly you don't play chess any better than you do play the forum.
Clearly you cannot follow simple analogies.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Happy to prove you have a false analogy, you can keep it in your closet full of straw mans.
To prove the analogy wrong involves showing that Britain's monarchy is still a serious player in our politics thus refuting my argument that we are a democracy with a figurehead monarch who does nothing but wave at crowds, open shopping centres, and fulfil ceremonial obligations.

You gave that up long ago.

I again asked Barefoot to define democracy. His non-answer:
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Exact quote:
Does not define democracy.

I see the quote. I do not see the word "has". Why are you trying to quote-mine me?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>As predicted, when SuperFAG is nailed, he flippity flops.
As predicted, Barefoot is running with a strawman, ignoring my posts showing why it is a strawman, and copy and pasting the same strawman pretending that my posts do not exist.

As predicted, Barefoot is lying.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
SupaAFC wrote:
"Thus, Britain's system of government is not a monarchy. "

I don't have to portray something you said, Aunt Sally.

I quote you EXACTLY.
Creationists quote Darwin "exactly" all the time; it is called quote-mining. Until you show where the word "has" is in that, or any statement, then you are arguing only with yourself.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Aunt Sally does her little dance for Barefoot2626.
Barefoot said this to dance away from admitting that he specifically said England and not the UK. You have permission to laugh hysterically at his blatant hypocrisy.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Poor Aunt Sally: stuck inventing new English.

Is-is, dance, Aunt Sally, dance for the puppet master.
Simple English states that "is" and "has" have two completely different meanings. Why, for a manchild who stresses the importance of words and their meanings, are you deliberately trying to conflate the two?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>I've quoted not only EXACTLY what you said MANY times, I quoted the ENTIRE COMMENT in its entirety.
Well that is certainly a lie. The post where you keep taking the quote of me saying that nobody denies Britain has a monarchy went on to explain what the point of contention actually was - your subsequent argument that Britain having a monarchy means that we are not a democracy.

You continue to omit this from the post.

Thus, manchild, you do not remotely post the "ENTIRE COMMENT"! If you did then your quote-mine would lose its intended context.

That is because - shock of shocks - you are playing the same old fundamentalist game of quote-mining.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>PS: another straw man, Aunt Sally.
In other words, Barefoot could not answer the question.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Have you stop sexually abusing the neighborhood children, SuperFAG?
We are well aware that you do not understand what loaded questions are.

We are also well aware that you -did- try the lame argument that Sweden's official name reflected them being a monarchy, then tried to bluster your way out of admitting that by that same argument China and North Korea are democratic republics.

You got caught contradicting yourself within the same page. Hoisted by your own petard. And cannot admit as such.

That is why it is amazing that you are trying to accuse me of contradicting myself with a quote-mine. Simply, amazing.
SupaAFC

Leven, UK

#48154 Apr 9, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>How sad for Aunt Sally.

Now defining "is-is".
You evidently still cannot read the quotes you keep pasting.

One says has, the other is; the latter even stresses that "is" is in reference to Britain's system of government - not that we do not have a monarchy.

A child can understand this. By this stage it is evident that you know you are lying.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Poor SuperFAG. He forgot he already denied Britian had a monarchy.
Poor Barefoot. He claims to quote the "ENTIRE COMMENT" without realising that I remember full well where he got the quote from.

You are quote-mining. Another fallacy box ticked.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
SuperFAG wrote:
"Thus, Britain's system of government is not a monarchy. "
That is still not how democracy is defined. Start addressing what my posts actually say instead of running away with fallacies.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Did you say this, Aunt Sally?
Can you explain how that denies that Britain has a monarchy? Then perhaps you can post the paragraph you omitted from the quote of me stating what the point of contention actually is.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Ask SuperFAG to come up with an excuse to explain how to get out of something you said exactly, like when he said no one ever said the UK was not a monarchy, and then I quoted him as saying the UK isn't a monarchy.
Ask Barefoot to explain how "is" and "has" are the same as that is what he is consistently implying.

Also ask Barefoot to post the following paragraph he omitted from one of the quotes.

Then, perhaps, ask Barefoot to explain how Sweden's name makes it a monarchy, but China and North Korea's names do not make them democracies.

Contradicted himself within a page. Simply amazing.

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 "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 min Aura Mytha 40,796
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 5 min DanFromSmithville 16,286
A Universe from Nothing? 17 min ilovedesigirls 82
Who Is Satan The Devil? Is He Real? (Jan '16) 40 min Reason Personified 26
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 1 hr Eagle 12 256,086
For Atheists: Why do You Call Theories "Scient... 4 hr Into The Night 274
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 6 hr Mikko 3,771
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 9 hr _Susan_ 20,620
More from around the web