In America, atheists are still in the closet

[barefoot2626]

SupaAFC wrote:

<quoted text>
Let's take two examples from your list - absolute and elective.
Are they the same? Yes or no?

Are they both monarchies?

Yes or no?

Here's a hint: absolute monarchy and elective monarchy.

Best of luck with your English lessons.

Now are kangaroos and goats mammals?

But they are NOT the same!

WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

[barefoot2626]

SupaAFC wrote:

A Constitutional monarchy is a kind of monarchy.?

A constitutional monarchy is a monarchy.

[barefoot2626]

SupaAFC wrote:

<quoted text>
Did the mean SupaAFC say compy-cated things

Not complicated at all.

SupaAFC wrote:

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.

[barefoot2626]

SupaAFC wrote:

<
Speaking of quotes, are you going to show the Macmillan source yet?

Actually, are you going to put up or shut up?

Buck buck buck buckALLLL!

[barefoot2626]

barefoot2626 wrote:

The federal republic (in the USA) is a kind of democracy.
The monarchy in the UK is a monarchy.

So we all know I posted it already.

[Say the Truth]

stinkfoot0000 wrote:

<quoted text>
A constitutional monarchy is a monarchy.

Were you born stupid or was it all the weed you smoked in junior high that got you to this point?

[barefoot2626]

Say the dong is in my rear wrote:

Were you born stupid

Did you have your teeth removed so you could bring pleasure to men or did they rot back due to the high protein diet?

[SupaAFC]

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
Are they both monarchies?
Yes or no?
Here's a hint: absolute monarchy and elective monarchy.
Best of luck with your English lessons.

Are they the same? Yes or no?

A crucial question you cannot answer - even when framed just the way you like it.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
Now are kangaroos and goats mammals?
But they are NOT the same!
WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Likewise neither are Constitutional, absolute or elective monarchies the same despite being "kinds of" monarchies.

A child can understand this analogy. You seem determined to remain ignorant.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>A constitutional monarchy is a monarchy.

Then why do you include "kind of" with the other "kinds" of monarchy but not when it comes to Constitutional?

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>Not complicated at all.

Care to explain, then, why you ignored the argument and posted playground insults instead, then?

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>Actually, are you going to put up or shut up?

Buck buck buck buckALLLL!

Translation: Barefoot lied about not getting the Macmillan quote from Wikipedia.

Thank you, my manchild friend, for your indirect admission.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>So we all know I posted it already.

Oh, right. So the USA can be both a republic -and- a democracy, but the UK cannot be a (Constitutional) monarchy -and- a democracy.

So: you can violate your own rules to your heart's content (ie, things can only belong to one term and things can only be defined by one word, refuse to answer "yes or no" questions), and still be right, but whether anybody else plays by your rules or not, they are automatically wrong, no matter what.

What a very fair and esteemed standard you play by.

[barefoot2626]

SupaAFC wrote:

Likewise neither are Constitutional, absolute or elective monarchies the same despite being "kinds of" monarchies.

They are are monarchies.

Don't make me responsible for your rants.

A goldfish is different from a salmon but they are both fish.

A bat has wings but is not a bird.

A robin flies but a penguin swims and a penguin isn't a fish.

A Constitution monarchy is a monarchy.

A monarchy is not a democracy.

No matter how hard you stomp your feet.

[barefoot2626]

SupaAFC wrote:

Translation: Barefoot lied about not getting the Macmillan quote from Wikipedia..

Translation: the bet to put up or shut up has been on the table for two weeks.

You won't put up.

[barefoot2626]

SupaAFC wrote:

Likewise neither are Constitutional, absolute or elective monarchies the same despite being "kinds of" monarchies.

Show us all- show everyone- the quote of me saying that they were the same.

They are all monarchies.

[barefoot2626]

SupaAFC wrote:

<
Is the USA a republic? Yes or no?

Do see my quote long long long long time before you asked.

[barefoot2626]

SupaAFC wrote:

Don't you just hate it when your own stupid logic is used against you?

It's your stupiod logic, SuperFAG, and you try to foist it on me.

I demand you show everyone the quotes... and you come up with paraphrases and the conclusions to which you jump.

You are by definition: a troll.

Put up or shut up.

You are British- clearly, a coward. Is it in your DNA?

[SupaAFC]

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
They are are monarchies.
Don't make me responsible for your rants.

And Constitutional monarchies overlap with democracy.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
A goldfish is different from a salmon but they are both fish.
A bat has wings but is not a bird.
A robin flies but a penguin swims and a penguin isn't a fish.
A Constitution monarchy is a monarchy.

You are doing it again. You happily acknowledge that there are differences between animals, even if some belong in the same family (and thus branch off into different families), but when you come to Constitutional monarchy, you simply say "monarchy".

You refuse to go below the surface because you know that a Constitutional monarchy is also democratic.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
A monarchy is not a democracy.
No matter how hard you stomp your feet.

Why? How do you define democracy?

"Because I said so" does not a fact make.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>Translation: the bet to put up or shut up has been on the table for two weeks.

You won't put up.

Of course not because I have nothing to stake here.

You made a claim. You are refusing to back it up.

Conclusion: you lied.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>Show us all- show everyone- the quote of me saying that they were the same.

They are all monarchies.

I keep asking you to declare that these "kinds" of monarchies are different and you refuse to. You do not have to say anything to make a point; your silence on issues speaks volumes.

Although, you are more than welcome to explain why Constitutional is not a "kind of" monarchy.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>Do see my quote long long long long time before you asked.

I have seen it. You have pretty much stated that you are free to break your own rules and contradict yourself to suit your circumstances, and you will always be right, yet no matter what anyone else does - plays by your rules, uses actual arguments - they are wrong because you say so.

You, my manchild friend, are a deceitful hypocrite.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
It's your stupiod logic, SuperFAG, and you try to foist it on me.

You are the one making the arguments. I simply play by your own rules to illustrate the silliness and hypocrisy of your logic.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
I demand you show everyone the quotes... and you come up with paraphrases and the conclusions to which you jump.

Your silence on issues are much more telling than any quotes I can ever provide.

Case in point: you cannot show me your original Macmillan source because you lied about it.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
You are by definition: a troll.

So says the 80-posts-a-day manchild.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
Put up or shut up.
You are British- clearly, a coward. Is it in your DNA?

Show me how to be a big boy by defining democracy and showing where you got your Macmillan quote from.

Then perhaps you can explain why America can be both a republic and a democracy, but Britain cannot be a Constitutional monarchy and a democracy.

[barefoot2626]

SupaAFC wrote:

<quoted text>
And Constitutional monarchies overlap with democracy.

Is the United KING_dom a monarchy?

Yes or no?

[barefoot2626]

SupaAFC wrote:

You are doing it again. You happily acknowledge that there are differences between animals,

I don't pretend a fish is a mammal.

And I don't have a single problem ever acknowledging a that salmon is a fish.

And you have had a problem acknowledging that the UK is a monarchy.

And I don't have to make up thinks that you might say, or insist that this is how you think.

And I am still waiting for you to put your money where your mouth is, but you are a coward with very tiny seeds where most men have grapes.

I guess it is part of your national heritage: you are a nation of pu88ies. Maybe it comes from having a queen as HOS.

[SupaAFC]

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
Is the United KING_dom a monarchy?
Yes or no?

Is the USA a republic? Yes or no?

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't pretend a fish is a mammal.

Not the point. The point is that by your logic all fish are the same.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
And I don't have a single problem ever acknowledging a that salmon is a fish.

Again, not the point. The point is that by your logic all fish are the same.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
And you have had a problem acknowledging that the UK is a monarchy.

You have a problem acknowledging that having a monarch does not mean that a country is subsequently undemocratic for the same reason that America being a republic does not mean that it is not a democracy.

In other words, you have a problem realising that things can belong to more than one family - unless it sutis your circumstances.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
And I don't have to make up thinks that you might say, or insist that this is how you think.

All you have to do is cherry-pick what to ignore and what to respond to, even if it means cutting off quotes mid-sentence.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
And I am still waiting for you to put your money where your mouth is, but you are a coward with very tiny seeds where most men have grapes.

So says the manchild who refuses to define democracy or admit he lied about not getting a quote from Wikipedia.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
I guess it is part of your national heritage: you are a nation of pu88ies. Maybe it comes from having a queen as HOS.

Show me how to be a big boy and define democracy.

[barefoot2626]

SupaAFC wrote:

<quoted text>
Is the USA a republic? Yes or no?

I'll point to my quote above defining the US as a republic long before you even asked.

And remind you that no matter how much you huff and puff: the United King_dom is still a monarchy.

[barefoot2626]

SupaAFC wrote:

The point is that by your logic all fish are the same.

The point is: you are m/f c/s liar, a coward, and the only way you can get me to "say" something is to make it up and insist it is "my" logic.

Troll.

[SupaAFC]

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
I'll point to my quote above defining the US as a republic long before you even asked.

Nope, you have to play your own game and simply answer yes or no. You yourself said that we must pretend that we are computers and answer yes or no, true or false, 0 or 1.

So, come on, let's play Barefoot rules:

Is the USA a republic? Yes or no?

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
And remind you that no matter how much you huff and puff: the United King_dom is still a monarchy.

Then the USA is just a republic.

barefoot2626 wrote:

<quoted text>
The point is: you are m/f c/s liar, a coward, and the only way you can get me to "say" something is to make it up and insist it is "my" logic.
Troll.

Your logic is derived from your posts. Unless you are claiming that you are not Barefoot2626, but actually a sock puppet made by myself in order to argue with myself, then I am not making anything up in the slightest.

Don't cry when people play by your rules. You want to play "yes or no" questions, you want to play with one-definition words, you want to pretend that everything within umbrella terms are the same.

Suck it up, manchild. Put on your big boy pants and think up arguments that would actually pass at high school level at best.