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.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#35206 Aug 10, 2012
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Wanna bet your post here will lead to 1 of 3 possibilities:
1. Some reference link to the Discovery Institute or other religulous propaganda.
2. Ad hominem attack
3. Totally ignore due cognitive dissonance, i.e., turn a blind eye
I’m betting on number 3 because he’s tried number 2 on me several times and does not like the consequences and number 1 is just laughed at

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#35207 Aug 10, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
You can be as sure of your guesswork as you feel you need to make you cream whan you masturbate.
I have to be the one to break it to you but persons with penises masturbate.

Not everyone with a mouth, however, applies it the way you do.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#35208 Aug 10, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Bullsh!t.
The round table cost $10.
Ah... as I recall. It might have cost around $10.
As I said round is a general description that can describe anything with at least 1 circular dimension. But it is not a accurate description and to fully describe anything it takes modifiers. Using a single word to describe a planet, sphere , globe and ball are better descriptions than round. Round is 1 dimension period.

For instance the Earth is shaped like a round.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#35209 Aug 10, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> As I said round is a general description that can describe
I am not interested in your definitions, I speak English better than do you and have already supplied the definition above.

Pearls before swine... I understand you have to continue talking.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#35210 Aug 10, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I have to be the one to break it to you but persons with penises masturbate.
Not everyone with a mouth, however, applies it the way you do.
So do people with clitorises, or is that something you were unaware of? I know your mum must have told you it was dirty and you would go to hell if you played with yourself but surely you must have the guilty secret… you must have tried it… just once?, Go on, you are kidding right… never… I am astounded, no wonder you are a frustrated and lonely old fart

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#35211 Aug 10, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's remember:****YOU**** were the one that contradicted me, BOOBY.
You should have known from past experience you must have been wrong before you cleared your throat.
I do remember that. I'm considering therapy.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#35212 Aug 10, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
A billard ball is not as round as the Earth.
The earth is round.
(most) Balls are round.
ENGLISH LANGUAGE.
A football: not round.
BB: round.
Did you, like ... escape from the mathematical world of Flatland or something?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#35213 Aug 10, 2012
This comment was deleted by the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#35214 Aug 10, 2012
Khatru wrote:
This comment was deleted by the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea
Yup, I was just responding to a post, clicked rely and the bloody thing had disappeared, such a pain.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#35215 Aug 10, 2012
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I understand the process very well.
I also understand reality - the record is in conflict with Darwinian theory.
I could explain exactly why this is so, but it would be lost on you because you have a child's grasp of the subject.
I will also not explain what "efficient" means.
Look it up. "My kind" know what it means.
Darwin did not base his theory on the fossil record. He based it upon observation of living, distinct species in the "natural laboratory" that presented itself in the Galapagos Islands (as well as other stops of the HMS Beagle). You probably could NOT come up with a theory regarding evolution strictly by studying fossils, anymore than you could guess the picture on a 10,000,000 piece jigsaw puzzle by looking at a handful of pieces.

Fossils and their positions in the so-called "geologic column", allow you to develop an idea of the flora & fauna extant during the time and place the fossil was formed. Paleontologists dig 'em up and classify them, Geologists help by providing an approximate time frame. It's really not Rocket Science there, Mr Buck.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#35216 Aug 10, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I would suggest (and said several times now) that spending 200 billion dollars for something that doesn't work doesn't make the USA any safer.
Once the USA figures out how (if it can ever figure out) how to use a laser (or parasitical beam or any other Star Wars toy) how to shoot down one of its own test missiles (that have in the past been painted red and in past test the people pulling the trigger know exactly when and where the missile has been fired): a belligerent will spend the $50 to paint their missiles a different color, to coat the nose cone with rubber, or to employ another low tech solution to foil the silly 25 year nonsense we know as SDI.
Maybe efforts should be made in keeping people from getting angry with the USA to fire missiles at us.
Just a thought.
With rubber?!?!? LOL!!! We're not trying to make them quieter!! The Russkies spent a lot of money on Particle Beams ... I was actually starting to get jealous. Particle beam weapons don't suffer some of the same problems laser weapons have (the color or reflectivity of their target for instance)... but you got to build something like the Super-Conducting Super-Collider to get enough energy on target, and build enough of them to protect a giant country. We couldn't even afford to build one.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#35217 Aug 10, 2012
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you, like ... escape from the mathematical world of Flatland or something?
Lol

Flatland as so eloquently described by Carl Sagan.

Oh yeah, I've had a message from Arch Stanton. He wants to know who's been messing around with his grave.
bohart

White Pine, TN

#35218 Aug 10, 2012
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
Darwin did not base his theory on the fossil record. He based it upon observation of living, distinct species in the "natural laboratory" that presented itself in the Galapagos Islands (as well as other stops of the HMS Beagle). You probably could NOT come up with a theory regarding evolution strictly by studying fossils, anymore than you could guess the picture on a 10,000,000 piece jigsaw puzzle by looking at a handful of pieces.
Fossils and their positions in the so-called "geologic column", allow you to develop an idea of the flora & fauna extant during the time and place the fossil was formed. Paleontologists dig 'em up and classify them, Geologists help by providing an approximate time frame. It's really not Rocket Science there, Mr Buck.
Oh Good Lord! Darwin saw finches that had longer beaks than others,then took that and surmised that long ago in the ancient past some ape humped an unknown primate that turned into a man, some science.You are right though about Darwin not basing his comic theory on the fossils, because they showed no such evidence.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#35219 Aug 10, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
So do people with clitorises,
I am sure you are very fond of your four D cell battery flashlight but I really don't care, Sweetie.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#35220 Aug 10, 2012
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you, like ... escape from the mathematical world of Flatland or something?
Earth = round.

I go with standard English dictionaries, let me know if you find one that confines 'round' to two dimensional shapes.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#35221 Aug 10, 2012
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh Good Lord! Darwin saw finches that had longer beaks than others,then took that and surmised that long ago in the ancient past some ape humped an unknown primate that turned into a man, some science.You are right though about Darwin not basing his comic theory on the fossils, because they showed no such evidence.
Not only are you telling lies , you're telling them badly.
You are a product of evolution...get over it!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#35222 Aug 10, 2012
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
With rubber?!?!? LOL!!! We're not trying to make them quieter!! The Russkies spent a lot of money on Particle Beams
Gosh, Booby, I did not suggest that idiocy was confined to the USA- and since the object of the arms manufacturers was to get contracts (and contracts that did not actually compel them to provide a working model): who is to say the arms manufacturers (on either side) are the idiots?

I point to the people who spent the hundreds of billions of dollars for 20th century alchemy.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#35223 Aug 10, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Earth = round.
I go with standard English dictionaries, let me know if you find one that confines 'round' to two dimensional shapes.
The only thing I'm sure of ... if I had said the world was "round" you would have said it was an "oblate spheroid".

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#35224 Aug 10, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Earth = round.
I go with standard English dictionaries, let me know if you find one that confines 'round' to two dimensional shapes.
We don't care what you go with as long as you go.
Go round and round if you want. lol

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#35225 Aug 10, 2012
RHill wrote:
Particle beam weapons don't suffer some of the same problems laser weapons have (the color or reflectivity of their target for instance)..
Do give me a jingle when the USA knocks down an ICBM with one (after they finish building the nuke plant to power one) and find something to ever so briefly disrupt the earth's magnetic fields to get that clear shot.

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 Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 min USAsince1680 1,404,304
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 2 min Herman Thee German 233,047
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 2 min Dr Guru 219,485
News Booker hits on economic inequality in conventio... 5 min Swedenforever 14
News Melania Trump Speech Used Same Passages as Mich... 5 min Chilli J 133
News Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 5 min Talkin To IBdaNight 35,559
News Why would Russia interfere in the U.S. election... 7 min He Named Me Black... 2
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 9 min Cheech the Conser... 391,270
News Sarah Silvermana s rebuke to the Bernie-or-bust... 12 min He Named Me Black... 33
News Hacked emails show Democratic party hostility t... 28 min Trumping On 176
More from around the web