In America, atheists are still in the...

In America, atheists are still in the closet

There are 51414 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

#48528 May 3, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
Manchild claimed the people vote for the president.
SuperFAG claimed the citizens of the United States did not vote for President.

News to the 120+ million who did precisely that in November.

I guess not every- not ever- voting for any office of significance in his life makes him green with jealousy.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#48529 May 3, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
Now he claims that the Electoral College don't, and can't, vote for whoever they want.
The Electoral College is an is, SuperFAG.

There is ONE Electoral College.

Per election.

Wipe your chin, boy.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#48530 May 3, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
"The Queen, acting upon the advice of her government..."
Ah... so the Parliament gives the monarch there suggested choice, and the monarch can take that suggest...

Or not.

And she can ignore that suggest because she is the head of state.

In the United KING_dom... which is a monarchy.
SupaAFC

Stirling, UK

#48531 May 3, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
SuperFAG writes:
<quoted text>
++
SuperFAG writes:
<quoted text>
+++
I have refuted this lie already. Why are you still arguing that people like Jeff are cars?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>SuperFAG claimed the citizens of the United States did not vote for President.

News to the 120+ million who did precisely that in November.

I guess not every- not ever- voting for any office of significance in his life makes him green with jealousy.
News to the Constitution and the twelfth amendment.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>The Electoral College is an is, SuperFAG.

There is ONE Electoral College.

Per election.

Wipe your chin, boy.
And that ONE Electoral College elects the president.

You are not involved; your vote does not count. That is why all you can do is pounce on wordplay.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Ah... so the Parliament gives the monarch there suggested choice, and the monarch can take that suggest...

Or not.

And she can ignore that suggest because she is the head of state.

In the United KING_dom... which is a monarchy.
Yet funnily enough the Queen never seems to ignore the Parliament.

That is because, manchild, Parliament is elected based on the will of the people.

The Queen respects this and acts accordingly.

Does it not just hurt, manchild, when you think you have a breakthrough only to realise that even in cases such as that bill the Queen still acts in line with the government rather than vice versa?

Tell us again about how having a monarch means a country is not a democracy even when these monarchs seem to act completely in line with such principles.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#48532 May 3, 2013
[QUOTE who="SupaAFC"
I have refuted this lie already.
[/QUOTE]

I guess Topix must keep on deleting it.

Funny how they leave all the other cr@p you put up.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#48533 May 3, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
Why are you still arguing that people like
Why are you pretending anyone in this universe follows this line of defense?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#48534 May 3, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
News to the Constitution and the twelfth amendment.
The sun rises in the east and sets in the west.

And 120+ million voted in the last election for the US head of state.

What was the last year anyone in England voted for a head of state?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#48535 May 3, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
And that ONE Electoral College elects the president.
Americans elect the electoral college.

We have a Republic.

You have a monarchy.
drinK the Hive

Anonymous Proxy

#48536 May 3, 2013
Dude - U Need 2 Spend As Much Time As Possible Outside - Quit All Television & Internet - Work On Blacksmithing - Weed Hunt More - And Spend A Good Amount Of Time With U Doctor...

http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lfwu50iNiP1...

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#48537 May 3, 2013
drinK the Hive wrote:
Dude - U Need 2 Spend As Much Time As Possible Outside
I put in two raised beds, a patio for the swing chair, and cut down a tree.

What did you do?
SupaAFC

Stirling, UK

#48538 May 4, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess Topix must keep on deleting it.
Funny how they leave all the other cr@p you put up.
Or the most likely alternative is that you run away from it like a coward.

Claims to be paraphrased; never explains what he "truly" meant.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Why are you pretending anyone in this universe follows this line of defense?
Why can you not refute it?

I know why, you know why: because you are lying.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>The sun rises in the east and sets in the west.
And the twelfth amendment says what the twelfth amendment says...
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
And 120+ million voted in the last election for the US head of state.
... and it is not that the citizens elect the president.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
What was the last year anyone in England voted for a head of state?
Why waste time voting for an ornament?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Americans elect the electoral college.
Is the Electoral College the president? Yes or no?
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
We have a Republic.

You have a monarchy.
Therefore neither countries are democracies by your playbook.

Tell us again about how things can only belong to one family, be defined by one word, and so on, and so on.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#48539 May 4, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
<quoted text>
Or the most likely alternative is that you run away from it like a coward.
Cowardice is a British thing, honey.

Like bad teeth.

Your most famous 'battles' are retreats.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#48540 May 4, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
And the twelfth amendment says what the twelfth amendment says...
Look it up.

Over here in the USA, you can do that because we have a Constitution.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#48541 May 4, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
... and it is not that the citizens elect the president.
Is.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#48542 May 4, 2013
SupaAFC wrote:
Therefore neither countries are democracies by your playbook.
Funny how you can never find the quote.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#48543 May 4, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not the same as Canada.
I don't understand, and I don't know you, by that name, at least, what is the point you are trying to get across. I have never given a lot of thought to what role the Queen plays, other than I know she has nothing to do with the governing of Canada or England, other than the ceremonial, opening of Parliament, putting her signature on things that the government has decided on, and being a terrible expense to wherever she happens to be.

I think some people have become so accustomed to England having had monarchy for so many years, that it is just one of the things one identifies with that place, but in my opinion, it is more of a joke than some supreme power we need fear.

When we have elections in Canada and make comments about how our leaders are running the country, the queen or the Monarchy never enter into our thoughts, because in that context, she is a non-entity.

If people in England give her some sort of power over them, I guess that is their problem, as she would have no more power over me than an extremely rich jet set person, a famous movie actor, or the Pope had over me, as I would feel that they would expect from me some sort of particular way of approaching them, which I would not understand, and thus I would be uncomfortable. Also because they are exceedingly rich they would have the power with their money to have anything done to me, they so desired, because money talks.

It is all so artificial though.
SupaAFC

Stirling, UK

#48545 May 4, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Cowardice is a British thing, honey.
Like bad teeth.
Your most famous 'battles' are retreats.
Funnily enough the only person making retreats here is you.

For instance: you are asked to define democracy and you cannot.

Retreat some more, manchild.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Look it up.

Over here in the USA, you can do that because we have a Constitution.
I have looked it up - I have even posted it here, full text, for all to see.

Unsurprisingly, it does not say what an internet manchild claims it says.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Is.
"Santa Claus IS real, Daddy! Is is is is is!"

Twelfth amendment; I win. That is what happens when you take laws literally, manchild.
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>Funny how you can never find the quote.
Post a quote, manchild runs away.

Not post a quote, manchild runs away.

It makes no difference whatsoever, especially when you never go out of your way to deny such assertions regardless!

Can a country have a monarchy and be a democracy at the same time? Yes or no?
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#48546 May 4, 2013
boooots wrote:
<quoted text>
....
I think some people have become so accustomed to England having had monarchy for so many years, that it is just one of the things one identifies with that place, but in my opinion, it is more of a joke than some supreme power we need fear.
When we have elections in Canada and make comments about how our leaders are running the country, the queen or the Monarchy never enter into our thoughts, because in that context, she is a non-entity....
Same in England.

I'm inclined to think the UK should ditch the Monarchy, but UK republicans (nothing to do with US Reps) often sound rather ingorant in debates.

For instance, you seem to be making the assumption that the Queen is expensive. This has not been demonstrated. Arguably, she is cheaper than an elected figure-head for a number of reasons...
1. She has considerable personal wealth which is used in the service of the State. For instance, should there be a UK republic declared, then the British taxpayer may have to buy Buckingham Palace as it may (in law) be the Queen's own property. Then she wouldn't pay for it, the taxpayer would have to pay its running costs.
2. An elected figurehead will require a salary commensurate with their duties. The Queen gets about 400,000 a year from UKGov for expenses. An elected figurehead may cost more. Although her family get expenses too, they only get them for state duties. Others would normally replace them in such work. If they wouldn't a policy would have to be declared by the political parties about how ending things like Royal promotions of UK businesses would be affect the economy.
3. People think that security wouldn't need to be provided for the Queen or royals any more. Think again. She would still be Queen, whether instituted as such or not. The royal family might be a target for terrorists for generations, so security will need to be provided for the new 'president' in addition (not instead of) security for the royals.
4. Theoretically, there is no legal means of getting rid of them. According to tradition, Parliament exists by consent of the Monarch,(not the other way around). This tradition could probably be abandoned without causing any problems but the UK cannot do that by itself. The UK Monarch is head of the Commonwealth, so how that would be affected needs consideration. At the moment the UK taxpayer pays for most of the Head of Commonwealth expenses. A new agreement would be required as to how the new head would be elected and from what country should they be drawn.

All these issues (and very many more) will arise. These are just examples. Obviously it can all be done, but taxpayers need to think about the expense and disruption involved. Arguably, the UK Monarchy continues primarily because of the problems of getting rid of it. She is also head of state for Australia and New Zealand. It only makes sense for all of these countries to discuss and think-through the costs and consequences and make the necessary agreements before countries start taking unilateral action. So, though I would happily be a UK republican, I have yet to hear an informed one speak. The nearest we have is this...
http://www.republic.org.uk/What%20we%20want/i...
and, to be frank, they seem too daft and thoughtless. They don't answer the questions.

This was a hurried post and not thought-through. I'm just trying to point-out that ditching the UK's Monarchy isn't quite as straight-forward as it might appear.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#48547 May 4, 2013
EdSed wrote:
For instance, you seem to be making the assumption that the Queen is expensive. This has not been demonstrated.
You first have to say what is "expensive".

Perhaps as you see from above: the NOtBots here like to change the definition of words when they are proved to be wrong, redefining "monarchy" (for example), even after you have them (in quotes) insisting that the UK is not a monarchy... and then insisting in the next breath that no one claims that the UK is not a monarchy.

Perhaps you've seen this:

SuperFAG writes:
Thus, Britain's system of government is not a monarchy.
++

SuperFAG writes:
Nobody, despite your continual spin, denies that Britain has a monarchy. Or that it has "powers".
Putting aside I don't CARE if the UK monarch is expensive (the fact that the UK has a monarch is enough to prove (above idiots) wrong, if I had to waste more time comparing the cost of keeping the Queen in her fine feathery to (e.g.) the POTUS, I'd need a dollar figure.

Or we'd end up with the above idiot trying to argue that the 'Queen is a car', do let me know if you can figure out who Jeff is.
havent forgotten

Lamoni, IA

#48548 May 4, 2013
Mike N wrote:
Of course they are. Because believers are a danger to them. Believers do unspeakable things to those who don't think like them. Its bad enough that some humans are unkind to others but its worse when those humans use dark age mythology to justify it. Hopefully one day religion will cease in this world and people will operate on logic. That alone will change the world for the better.
I agree to some extent. However, if logic is combined with kind intentions, to serve good purposes, then it becomes trustworthy. Logic used to serve greed or sadistic impulses will not be helpful. It is not just the higher brain functions that matter, it is the emotions and the socalled lizard brain part that also need to be dealt with, in ways that make us more kind. I think some attention has to be paid to genetics, and a lot more to child-rearing practices. The proposed study of the brain needs to be done carefully, and its uses must be harnessed to make the world a better place, not to be more adept at manipulation. We all can suspect that the ad people will the the first to want to utilize results to better manipulate people's wants and purchases, for the sake of their profits.

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.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 7 min VetnorsGate 1,709,641
News Illegal immigrant pleads guilty and vows to sel... 16 min C Kersey 4
News Billy Graham: Pastor to presidents for more tha... 17 min OneWomynRiot 8
News 2 dead, 17 wounded in shooting at Kentucky high... 21 min javawhey 916
News The Latest: Angry students, parents confront Se... 26 min ShootCommiesOnSight 54
News Dem Sen Nelson: 'Let's Get These Assault Weapon... 36 min javawhey 288
News NORC Poll: Most have grim outlook on America's ... 37 min DR X 12
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 45 min Maria 60,404
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 2 hr unborn lives matter 330,856
News 'Get on the Right Side': Shooting Survivors Dec... 2 hr youll shoot your ... 398
News FBI in public fight with Trump over releasing R... 3 hr Lawrence Wolf 1,771
More from around the web