I just left a group I joined a few weeks ago as I  have contributed not a sausage. I dont actually know why I joined as I am not against liberals or some liberal policy's

My leaning are socialist in nature barr a few right wing views which you could count on one hand.

My main  gripes are with religon, passive atheists, agnostic  sit on the fence lovlies and Glasgow celtic fans.

thats that then

i was listening the radiohead song creep


Views: 167

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

True, ignorance may more accurately reflect lack of knowledge about something that is at least potentially knowable, whereas agnosticism speaks specifically about that which is inherently unknowable.

But my point was that agnosticism makes no judgment; this is where I feel that the definition goes astray, and ventures into the realm of belief.
I think if there are beings out there, then perhaps they are receiving signals from Earth's satellites.
They might be receiving little tit-bits of films such as Terminator :-) I bet they will be thinking 'No way are we going to that planet. The inhabitants are brutal maniacs'
Lol! Just a silly little thought going around in my head :-)
Something interesting that I just realized recently is that our radio wave bubble is still tiny compared to the size of just our galaxy (say, about 80x2 light years across for the radio bubble with Earth at the center and the Milky Way is about 100,000 light years across with Earth on the outskirts). Another civilization might not pick up our transmissions until long after we have perished as a species, if they ever do at all.
thats what the bfight is all about, a biblical god not anything we may find out aboutbsome super duper intellegent fellow.

there is no biblical god, full stop
Yes, you are all wet and espouse some very ignorant views, not just about liberals, but about the world at large. And yes, I am aware of Pat Condell, I subscribe to him on Youtube, and I like him and his views very much. And I think the liberal that you say "sandbagged" you, whatever that means, was correct in calling you naive.

Firstly....2012? Really? Do you think this is the first time some nutjobs have predicted the end of the world?

they can't push the date forward any more, they will lose all the followers

Who are you talking about? Muslims? I think you have confused religious Muslims with Hollywood Producers who were marketing a movie. And what is your point about Israel testing air defenses? This all just comes across as incoherent babble.

Secondly, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Funny how when Conservatives were in power, he was merely a mouthpiece for those who truly held the reigns over Iran (the Council of Guardians and the Supreme Leader). Now that the Conservatives are marginalized, they hoot and holler about how Ahmadinejad is now an all powerful madman who has his finger on the button, just waiting for an excuse. And you repeat it here. I see it as evidence that you don't know very much about Iran, it's government, or it's people.

If the liberals have there way we will lose our guns just like you in the UK did, then it's all over.

Seriously, you need get better sources for your information. UK does have some of the toughest gun laws in the world. But why is this the inevitable result of "liberals run amok"? Because uninformed people merely repeat what they are told, that's why. Why don't you look into an even more progressive society like Switzerland, and report back to us on their liberal gun laws. And I do mean liberal in the sense that they are liberal and that they are Liberal. Switzerland has one of the highest gun ownership per capita in the world. Go ahead. Research it. The Conservative political machine points to England only because they are trying to scare the dimwits who, unfortunately, constitute the majority of the voting bloc.

I know Europe is hopping we don't let liberals do what they have done in the UK and Europe, but ours are so full of them selfs they will not even try to stop Islamic woman from being honor killed and raped, the now movement is no place to be found standing up for the woman of the Arab world.

Again. WTF? First, you say that Islamic women are being honor killed and raped. I don't really think that you believe that there are incestuous necrophiliacs running around en masse in the Islamic world, but aside from your sloppy phrasing, I do wonder if you even understand the situation at all.

So, what has been the non-liberal response to honor killings? I have heard from many conservative friends here in the States that the solution is to "turn the Middle East into a parking lot", a reference to killing everyone over there with nukes. But other than that, what is the non-liberal plan of action? Could you inform us liberal weenies?
Can we agree that would be in all our interests to have all religion END?

I agree. Sadly, it will not be something that will go away in our lifetimes. But, we must keep fighting the good fight. It's hard to tell, but we have been winning the battles despite the grim outlook of the war.
I signed the petition to stop, genital mutilation, have you?

You signed a petition? That is the non-liberal plan of action that will make whole cultures tremble and change their ways? A petition?

In Switzerland they all must go in the Army for 2 years and take the guns home for national defense reasons, & give each ( last I read ) citizen 100,000 dollars to be used for school or retirement or starting a business, so I do know about that Thanks.

Good job! Now why is it you use the UK as your litmus test for Liberal's and gun control?

I did not call you or anyone hear a liberal weenies, I was referring to the ones that did what they did in Europe and the UK.
I was asking A7 his opinion as one from Europe who likes it Loud and proud so I made the rant loud and proud, and you spin it out of context just as I predicted Would happen.

Oh, you meant those other liberal weenies. And where did you predict that I would spin this out of context? It is not my aim, but your overgeneralized statements either need to be clarified or more precisely stated to begin with.

See the best way to find out the real Bias of people in a forum is to give a loud rant, and just like a spelling mistake can bring out all the English Majors to puff them self's up ego wise. The same would work here on this topic, and thus we have 2 name calling twisted distorted replies, now I know.

Ah! You are so clever! And for the record, I ignored your spelling mistakes. But how quickly you turn this into something it is not. I disagree with your notions as you have stated them. Then you get mad that they are taken out of context. Well, fine. Try explaining yourself instead of moaning that people are biased. You are just being lazy, as far as I can tell. Try explaining yourself better and most people here will try to understand where you are coming from. This wouldn't be the first time that someone's initial post or opinion was misunderstood.

Just because I said a7 and I was the only right wingers, you assumed I was a GOP right winger, WRONG.

WRONG! I never assumed that and I never said it either. Just because I brought up American Conservatives, you assumed that I considered you one. WRONG! Perhaps you should also ask some intellectual questions about why I brought them up at all. Seems you are guilty of what you accuse others of.

My Point was if we end religion we will all be safer, if not the chance some holy type will push the button, who does it is not really important, is it?

Well, why don't you just drop the whole liberal rant and say that? As Neal pointed out above, it's silly to assume that liberal atheists want and love religion and it's influences.

So now I can see many here have the same types of biases that the religious have, and some feel they are all knowing.

More assumption? But I find it a bit contradictory that you say that, and then go on in the next freaking sentence to say:

I'm wise enough not to condemn anyone for one short rant, and I would want to know more and Talk about it, to see if some answers could be agreed upon.

Really? Read your two sentences together as you wrote them. Please explain the dichotomy here.

So thanks for proving me right, and Slamming me first with out even one question to clarify any point.

If that is what is important to you, being right, then by all means. But, you can go back to my post and read that there are questions there. You just have ignored them. Remember when I asked about the non-liberal answer? See? A question! And I said non-liberal because I knew you were not a GOP Conservative, but in your own steeped bias, you missed that one, didn't you?

Now if anyone wants to take this apart item by Item, you might find, I'm not all wet.
But then again I know taking that chance would require work, and effort, which is the real problem in America, it's your wrong I know better, slam fest and very little reasoned group thinking & discourse.

I began to take your overgeneralized statements apart. You got mad about it and accused me of "slamming" you. I guess next time, I will litter my post with smiley faces so your feelings won't get hurt? But seriously, I don't see how I was being mean to you. The tone of my post was no worse than yours and I would argue was actually more friendly. So what are you talking about being "slammed" for?
Any time you want to start over

How about right now?

For the record, I have no desire to make you look stupid and I agree with some of your sentiments, especially for atheists to be vocal. I have a strong reaction to certain things and you hit a couple of those with your initial post. But just so you know, many of my friendships started with a fight, especially in my hockey playing days.
hockey playing days. really man.
Who are you calling funny? Funny how? Am I here to amuse you?

Okay, end of my Joe Pesci impersonation.

I'm all about second chances. And third. Fourth. Fifth. Hell, I wouldn't be married right now if it wasn't for the spirit of forgiveness.
I haven't been drinking enough beer. I'm on a hiatus from the booze. Or, in other words, no hooch for the pooch.
well said man, no there is plenty of us out there, were waiting for someone to come out and say , too much is to fucking much.

pat condell is a good choice but i would rather have someone with more professional pulling power, say dawkins.

loud and proud man


© 2019   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service