The Atheism Thread - Part 6

Status
Not open for further replies.
PW, this is a thread for Atheists and you clearly aren't one. You get mad at atheists for posting in the Jesus Christ thread and then you come into here and post. Do yourself a favor and just stay away from this thread.
Actually, the thing that separates this thread from the Jesus Christ appreciation thread is that we welcome and encourage participation from those with opposing viewpoints. I've got to disagree with your sentiment here.
 
Actually, the thing that separates this thread from the Jesus Christ appreciation thread is that we welcome and encourage participation from those with opposing viewpoints. I've got to disagree with your sentiment here.

It just seems ironic to me. Plus, a lot of times PW is just proselytizing.

Opposing viewpoints is one thing, preaching is another.
 
The anti-religion, UK thought-police strike again. With the POSSIBLE exception of vandalizing some paid public advertisements (e.g., billboards), which already had ordinances against such vandalism that he could have been charged with, this guy was NOT breaking ANY LAWS!

Oh wait, he is/was a religious zealot, and since being a religious zealot was NOT against the law in the UK, the anti-religion, UK thought-police had to actually INVENT a law (i.e., create new legislation) so as to be able to "legally" charge this guy with something.

I cannot wait to see what comes next from a nation that literally already has more security cameras than citizens subjects within its borders? Hey, maybe they'll make posting opposing views on the internet thread such as this one against the law...

BRB, someone is pounding on the door... I wonder whom?


I'd agree with your sentiment at least, if it weren't for the fact that the guy takes part in 'patrols', in which essentially he'd go around in groups and bully and intimidate people in public for not conforming to 'sharia law', whether those people are muslim or not.

They'll tell you that you can't drink in the area. If they think you're gay, for example, they'll literally tell you to leave the area.

They'll get on their mega phone or whatever it is, and tell women they're not allowed to dress a certain way in the area.

I mean it really crosses the line of a freedom of speech issue and into straight up harassment. These guys have NO business trying to impose sharia law.

Check out these videos.

[YT]ZQvaZDrh1y8[/YT]

[YT]Rc_K-0EAJZA[/YT]

Sometimes the patrols turn violent.

[YT]Im__OeIUfrY[/YT]
 
The anti-religion, UK thought-police strike again. With the POSSIBLE exception of vandalizing some paid public advertisements (e.g., billboards), which already had ordinances against such vandalism that he could have been charged with, this guy was NOT breaking ANY LAWS!

Oh wait, he is/was a religious zealot, and since being a religious zealot was NOT against the law in the UK, the anti-religion, UK thought-police had to actually INVENT a law (i.e., create new legislation) so as to be able to "legally" charge this guy with something.

I cannot wait to see what comes next from a nation that literally already has more security cameras than citizens subjects within its borders? Hey, maybe they'll make posting opposing views on the internet thread such as this one against the law...

BRB, someone is pounding on the door... I wonder whom?

Something tella me either you aren't British, or don't know what an ASBO is.

BTW there's 11x more people than security cameras. A simple google could have helped you there.
 
Yeah, the man didn't break any laws, you're right.

Hence not being charged for doing that.

Also, someone this ignorant of British citizenship law should really just be quiet.
 
I didn't realise that you had xenophobic and racist tendencies as well as harbouring the religious delusion, but they do often go hand in hand.
 
"He is also restricted from entering educational establishments and forbidden from promoting Sharia law, distributing unsolicited material and damaging public adverts."

I'd think that it's more of a ban on being a public nuisance as he runs around with a megaphone yelling at people and harassing people he believes to be something he doesn't like, along with damaging property.
 
Yeah.................................. they had to create a new law...

An ASBO is not charging with crime, it's being charged with, and try and stay with me:

Anti
Social
Behaviour
Order

A civil, not criminal, order. And they were legislated in 1998, 16 years before this incident.


I'm personally referring to someone in the UK, which by the way is NOT Britain exclusively, but rather is four different countries altogether. Notably, the entirety of the UK is governed under the auspices of IMPERIALISM.

>attempting to explain the UK to a British person
>not knowing 3/4 countries comprise Britain (island)
>all my shiggy

Since 1707, under the Act of Union between the kingdoms of England and Scotland everybody from the Kingdom of Great Britain (later the United Kingdom following the Act of Union 1800 between kingdoms of Great Britain and Ireland) the correct term for the people who come are of those nations is "British", hence "British governement". Northern Irish are British, seriously, check their passports.

Oh, and btw, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland all have their own devolved legislatures, while officially a unitary state in the sense there is only one "sovereign" legislature, the UK is a quasi federalised nation. Northern Ireland and Scotland have procedures in place for secession (Scotland Act and Endinburgh agreement has scheduled a referendum where the citizens of Scotland choose wether to stay within the Union. The Good Friday Agreement has scheduled that, whenever the majority of Northern Ireland and Ireland wish to unite, they can do so). Doesn't sound to imperialistic to me.

This could be a good time to point out, I'm British and currently studying History & Politics in Westminster.

Someone so blatantly ignorant of geography and or the paradigm of an individual in the UK, OR BRITAIN, being called a citizen while only being treated as a subject, quote, "should really just be quiet," unquote.


>u wot m8

You do realise you just called someone from the UK ignorant of individual Brits?

For instance, back in the day, for an individual to receive assistance from the authorities, one had to be a "citizen" of the crown, but one could only be a "citizen" if that one agreed to remain living in the same place for at least five years. I wouldn't call that person a citizen, but rather a subject under an imperialistic rule.

What? You mean back in the day when the extent of Westminster's sovereignty covered 25% of all land area and 20% of all humans? And was known as the British Empire?

You're shocked they were imperialistic? Well, colour me shocked.

Btw, every British citizen can travel the world, due to the Commonwealth it's actually one of the most reapected passports in the world.

Next year I can move from Florida to Honduras, stay for 3 years, move back, and NEVER lose my citizenship. I guess we disagree on the semantics, which I will agree to disagree.

This is not a matter of opinion. Fortunately, I'm right (as per the laws of many countries), and I'll explain why.

Being a "subject" of the crown has not existed in the sense you are putting forth since 1949. The Empire was crippled, and the "wind of change" meant the process of responsible decolinisation had to take place.

The foundations of citizenship can be found in beginning in 1935 when the Irish Free State created their own "Irish citizenship" despite the term "British subject" still being applicable (though ceasing in 1949 under the abolishing of the Irish crown). Over the next 15 years, during the transition from empire to commonwealth, the other dominions created their own citizenship and in 1949 the United Kingdom created citizenship of the "United Kingdom & Colonies" and the term "British subject", although not repealed was beginning to be replaced with "Commonwealth Citizen". British subject was finally repealed from all statute books throughout the Commonwealth by the 80's in favour of Commonwealth citizen.

However, the UK, with it's near millennia long constitution so although the term may be there in regards to some (before 1983) it now only applies to people who are connected to Ireland and born before 1949. The terms is non-hereditary, applicable to less than 3,500 people and will die out soon.

I say tomato, not 'tomawto,' because it is a tomato. :cwink:

I say toh-mah-toe.

#Boom
#shotsfired
#REKT
 
Last edited:
Llama brought the drama. I'm awaiting a proper response with baited breath.
 
[
An ASBO is not charging with crime, it's being charged with, and try and stay with me:

Anti
Social
Behaviour
Order

A civil, not criminal, order. And they were legislated in 1998, 16 years before this incident.




>attempting to explain the UK to a British person
>not knowing 3/4 countries comprise Britain (island)
>all my shiggy

Since 1707, under the Act of Union between the kingdoms of England and Scotland everybody from the Kingdom of Great Britain (later the United Kingdom following the Act of Union 1800 between kingdoms of Great Britain and Ireland) the correct term for the people who come are of those nations is "British", hence "British governement". Northern Irish are British, seriously, check their passports.

Oh, and btw, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland all have their own devolved legislatures, while officially a unitary state in the sense there is only one "sovereign" legislature, the UK is a quasi federalised nation. Northern Ireland and Scotland have procedures in place for secession (Scotland Act and Endinburgh agreement has scheduled a referendum where the citizens of Scotland choose wether to stay within the Union. The Good Friday Agreement has scheduled that, whenever the majority of Northern Ireland and Ireland wish to unite, they can do so). Doesn't sound to imperialistic to me.

This could be a good time to point out, I'm British and currently studying History & Politics in Westminster.



>u wot m8

You do realise you just called someone from the UK ignorant of individual Brits?



What? You mean back in the day when the extent of Westminster's sovereignty covered 25% of all land area and 20% of all humans? And was known as the British Empire?

You're shocked they were imperialistic? Well, colour me shocked.

Btw, every British citizen can travel the world, due to the Commonwealth it's actually one of the most reapected passports in the world.



This is not a matter of opinion. Fortunately, I'm right (as per the laws of many countries), and I'll explain why.

Being a "subject" of the crown has not existed in the sense you are putting forth since 1949. The Empire was crippled, and the "wind of change" meant the process of responsible decolinisation had to take place.

The foundations of citizenship can be found in beginning in 1935 when the Irish Free State created their own "Irish citizenship" despite the term "British subject" still being applicable (though ceasing in 1949 under the abolishing of the Irish crown). Over the next 15 years, during the transition from empire to commonwealth, the other dominions created their own citizenship and in 1949 the United Kingdom created citizenship of the "United Kingdom & Colonies" and the term "British subject", although not repealed was beginning to be replaced with "Commonwealth Citizen". British subject was finally repealed from all statute books throughout the Commonwealth by the 80's in favour of Commonwealth citizen.

However, the UK, with it's near millennia long constitution so although the term may be there in regards to some (before 1983) it now only applies to people who are connected to Ireland and born before 1949. The terms is non-hereditary, applicable to less than 3,500 people and will die out soon.



I say toh-mah-toe.

#Boom
#shotsfired
#REKT

Llama just dropped the mic!

nxrabw9
 
So someone screaming at people with a megaphone doesn't count as harassment? Or insisting that people who he doesn't like leave the public area they're at?he's done it repeatedly and none of it took so they took it a step farther.

I don't see a problem there.
 
I realize I merely quoted you and reiterated your condescension. I guess I was being a bit brit-ish.


One question (you know, from an ignorant Yank): Does the British Crown (i.e., The Imperialistic Throne), or the Royal Family in Britain, still exist? The answer is either yes or no. Well?

This reminds me of that clip from family guy dealing with Brians puppies and the lawyer asking Peter inane questions that had little to do with anything. I can't seem to find it on YT.

"Which sounds more like Brian? Problem drinker or African American Haberdasher?"
 
This reminds me of that clip from family guy dealing with Brians puppies and the lawyer asking Peter inane questions that had little to do with anything. I can't seem to find it on YT.

"Which sounds more like Brian? Problem drinker or African American Haberdasher?"

:funny: :funny: :funny:

I know which episode you're talking about.

I agree.
 
I admit that without the video it doesn't give much context but I couldn't find it on YT anywhere. :(
 
I realize I merely quoted you and reiterated your condescension. I guess I was being a bit brit-ish.


One question (you know, from an ignorant Yank): Does the British Crown (i.e., The Imperialistic Throne), or the Royal Family in Britain, still exist? The answer is either yes or no. Well?

My favorite part was when you completely ignored all of his points and tried to look smart with your silly response.
 
PW, I think you and Glenn Beck, who I am sure you are either aware of or are a fan of, have the same issue. You both think you are doing what a Jon Stewart or a Colbert does, but you have neither the inherent talent or ear for actual humor of them, so instead of coming off as insightful or a master of sarcasm, you just seem oblivious and tone deaf, or worse to the rest of us.
 
#259, Inductive thinking (i.e., reasoning)... try it sometime.

What the cuss do you even mean? Seriously? Welp, you just go on thinking you are being so incredibly insightful, morally superior and all around the most brilliant guy there is with a direct line to supernatural wisdom and knowledge. Like I stated before: You and Glenn Beck. Two peas in a pod.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"