McCain's VP choice

[Robert]

This type of hypocrisy can be found in all the other major religions too. The sad thing is the perpetrators are oblivious to it, which is where the absurdity comes in.

You mean the hypocracy of the athiest religon?

Hypocrisy? 'Atheist religion'?

You'll have to elaborate, since 'atheist religion' is an oxymoron.

You appear to have no idea what the word 'atheist' actually means.

Here is a hint:
If you are catholic, you are atheist - to all religions except catholicism.
If you are jewish, you are atheist - to all religions except judaism.
If you are muslim, you are atheist - to all religions except islam.
If you are atheist, you just believe in one less religion than any of the above.
Atheism simply means a lack of belief in a deity. It does not necessarily mean belief that there cannot be a deity of any kind.
Perhaps you see this as a subtle difference but it is a very important one.

 

[Robert]

This type of hypocrisy can be found in all the other major religions too. The sad thing is the perpetrators are oblivious to it, which is where the absurdity comes in.

You mean the hypocracy of the athiest religon?

Hypocrisy? 'Atheist religion'?

You'll have to elaborate, since 'atheist religion' is an oxymoron.

You appear to have no idea what the word 'atheist' actually means.

Here is a hint:
If you are catholic, you are atheist - to all religions except catholicism.
If you are jewish, you are atheist - to all religions except judaism.
If you are muslim, you are atheist - to all religions except islam.
If you are atheist, you just believe in one less religion than any of the above.
Atheism simply means a lack of belief in a deity. It does not necessarily mean belief that there cannot be a deity of any kind.
Perhaps you see this as a subtle difference but it is a very important one.

 

[Robert]

This type of hypocrisy can be found in all the other major religions too. The sad thing is the perpetrators are oblivious to it, which is where the absurdity comes in.

You mean the hypocracy of the athiest religon?

Hypocrisy? 'Atheist religion'?

You'll have to elaborate, since 'atheist religion' is an oxymoron.

You appear to have no idea what the word 'atheist' actually means.

Here is a hint:
If you are catholic, you are atheist - to all religions except catholicism.
If you are jewish, you are atheist - to all religions except judaism.
If you are muslim, you are atheist - to all religions except islam.
If you are atheist, you just believe in one less religion than any of the above.
Atheism simply means a lack of belief in a deity. It does not necessarily mean belief that there cannot be a deity of any kind.
Perhaps you see this as a subtle difference but it is a very important one.

 

[Robert]

This type of hypocrisy can be found in all the other major religions too. The sad thing is the perpetrators are oblivious to it, which is where the absurdity comes in.

You mean the hypocracy of the athiest religon?

Hypocrisy? 'Atheist religion'?

You'll have to elaborate, since 'atheist religion' is an oxymoron.

You appear to have no idea what the word 'atheist' actually means.

Here is a hint:
If you are catholic, you are atheist - to all religions except catholicism.
If you are jewish, you are atheist - to all religions except judaism.
If you are muslim, you are atheist - to all religions except islam.
If you are atheist, you just believe in one less religion than any of the above.
Atheism simply means a lack of belief in a deity. It does not necessarily mean belief that there cannot be a deity of any kind.
Perhaps you see this as a subtle difference but it is a very important one.

 

[Robert]

I was thinking that her primary asset was behind her, as McCain also apparently observed. Other than being corrupt and quick to lie and befuddled with bronze aged beliefs I couldn't see what made her particularly qualified but now we have photographic evidence of her patriotism!!!
Flag pic

Ahhhh.... that explains it.


Nice arse right enough though. ;-)

 

[Robert]

I was thinking that her primary asset was behind her, as McCain also apparently observed. Other than being corrupt and quick to lie and befuddled with bronze aged beliefs I couldn't see what made her particularly qualified but now we have photographic evidence of her patriotism!!!
Flag pic

Ahhhh.... that explains it.


Nice arse right enough though. ;-)

 

[Robert]

I was thinking that her primary asset was behind her, as McCain also apparently observed. Other than being corrupt and quick to lie and befuddled with bronze aged beliefs I couldn't see what made her particularly qualified but now we have photographic evidence of her patriotism!!!
Flag pic

Ahhhh.... that explains it.


Nice arse right enough though. ;-)

 

[Robert]

I was thinking that her primary asset was behind her, as McCain also apparently observed. Other than being corrupt and quick to lie and befuddled with bronze aged beliefs I couldn't see what made her particularly qualified but now we have photographic evidence of her patriotism!!!
Flag pic

Ahhhh.... that explains it.


Nice arse right enough though. ;-)

 

[Robert]

I was thinking that her primary asset was behind her, as McCain also apparently observed. Other than being corrupt and quick to lie and befuddled with bronze aged beliefs I couldn't see what made her particularly qualified but now we have photographic evidence of her patriotism!!!
Flag pic

Ahhhh.... that explains it.


Nice arse right enough though. ;-)

 

[Robert]

I was thinking that her primary asset was behind her, as McCain also apparently observed. Other than being corrupt and quick to lie and befuddled with bronze aged beliefs I couldn't see what made her particularly qualified but now we have photographic evidence of her patriotism!!!
Flag pic

Ahhhh.... that explains it.


Nice arse right enough though. ;-)

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Really? I'm as eager to vote for someone who believes in fictional fairy tales as someone who's been locked in a rubber room for 30 years. Personally, I'd prefer someone who's capable of free thought and can demonstrate it. A brainwashed religious nut doesn't fit that category.

I know what you mean but that would rule out voting for anyone from a major party in my country.

That's an interesting statement. In France about a third of the population is atheist (being the most atheist nation in the EU) but I'm sure the UK has a high percentage of atheists too, so there is a large chunk of the population unrepresented by the leadership. Perhaps atheists should NOT vote for these candidates and state clearly why not. If a small radical group of 5% can make talking about creation an election issue, or if a small and radical 5% can make support for Israel an issue, then a small 15% to 20% segment can certainly bring atheism into the debate if they would get together and demand it.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Really? I'm as eager to vote for someone who believes in fictional fairy tales as someone who's been locked in a rubber room for 30 years. Personally, I'd prefer someone who's capable of free thought and can demonstrate it. A brainwashed religious nut doesn't fit that category.

I know what you mean but that would rule out voting for anyone from a major party in my country.

That's an interesting statement. In France about a third of the population is atheist (being the most atheist nation in the EU) but I'm sure the UK has a high percentage of atheists too, so there is a large chunk of the population unrepresented by the leadership. Perhaps atheists should NOT vote for these candidates and state clearly why not. If a small radical group of 5% can make talking about creation an election issue, or if a small and radical 5% can make support for Israel an issue, then a small 15% to 20% segment can certainly bring atheism into the debate if they would get together and demand it.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Really? I'm as eager to vote for someone who believes in fictional fairy tales as someone who's been locked in a rubber room for 30 years. Personally, I'd prefer someone who's capable of free thought and can demonstrate it. A brainwashed religious nut doesn't fit that category.

I know what you mean but that would rule out voting for anyone from a major party in my country.

That's an interesting statement. In France about a third of the population is atheist (being the most atheist nation in the EU) but I'm sure the UK has a high percentage of atheists too, so there is a large chunk of the population unrepresented by the leadership. Perhaps atheists should NOT vote for these candidates and state clearly why not. If a small radical group of 5% can make talking about creation an election issue, or if a small and radical 5% can make support for Israel an issue, then a small 15% to 20% segment can certainly bring atheism into the debate if they would get together and demand it.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Really? I'm as eager to vote for someone who believes in fictional fairy tales as someone who's been locked in a rubber room for 30 years. Personally, I'd prefer someone who's capable of free thought and can demonstrate it. A brainwashed religious nut doesn't fit that category.

I know what you mean but that would rule out voting for anyone from a major party in my country.

That's an interesting statement. In France about a third of the population is atheist (being the most atheist nation in the EU) but I'm sure the UK has a high percentage of atheists too, so there is a large chunk of the population unrepresented by the leadership. Perhaps atheists should NOT vote for these candidates and state clearly why not. If a small radical group of 5% can make talking about creation an election issue, or if a small and radical 5% can make support for Israel an issue, then a small 15% to 20% segment can certainly bring atheism into the debate if they would get together and demand it.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Really? I'm as eager to vote for someone who believes in fictional fairy tales as someone who's been locked in a rubber room for 30 years. Personally, I'd prefer someone who's capable of free thought and can demonstrate it. A brainwashed religious nut doesn't fit that category.

I know what you mean but that would rule out voting for anyone from a major party in my country.

That's an interesting statement. In France about a third of the population is atheist (being the most atheist nation in the EU) but I'm sure the UK has a high percentage of atheists too, so there is a large chunk of the population unrepresented by the leadership. Perhaps atheists should NOT vote for these candidates and state clearly why not. If a small radical group of 5% can make talking about creation an election issue, or if a small and radical 5% can make support for Israel an issue, then a small 15% to 20% segment can certainly bring atheism into the debate if they would get together and demand it.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Really? I'm as eager to vote for someone who believes in fictional fairy tales as someone who's been locked in a rubber room for 30 years. Personally, I'd prefer someone who's capable of free thought and can demonstrate it. A brainwashed religious nut doesn't fit that category.

I know what you mean but that would rule out voting for anyone from a major party in my country.

That's an interesting statement. In France about a third of the population is atheist (being the most atheist nation in the EU) but I'm sure the UK has a high percentage of atheists too, so there is a large chunk of the population unrepresented by the leadership. Perhaps atheists should NOT vote for these candidates and state clearly why not. If a small radical group of 5% can make talking about creation an election issue, or if a small and radical 5% can make support for Israel an issue, then a small 15% to 20% segment can certainly bring atheism into the debate if they would get together and demand it.

 

[Robert]

In France about a third of the population is atheist (being the most atheist nation in the EU) but I'm sure the UK has a high percentage of atheists too, so there is a large chunk of the population unrepresented by the leadership. Perhaps atheists should NOT vote for these candidates and state clearly why not.

We can refuse to vote for people but the stating clearly why not part is a bit more tricky.

If a small radical group of 5% can make talking about creation an election issue, or if a small and radical 5% can make support for Israel an issue, then a small 15% to 20% segment can certainly bring atheism into the debate if they would get together and demand it.

Indeed but who would organise such a thing? I know I couldn't be arsed.

There's also another issue to consider: I'm more concerned by party policy than personal superstition when it comes to who I vote for.
I usually vote SNP, a party currently lead by a chap named Alex Salmond. I have no idea whether he is religious or not but he is certainly not publicly atheist. This is, however, of far less concern to me than his party's policies, the main one being extricating Scotland from the United Kingdom, which is important to me and I hope I live to see it happen.

Luckily religion doesn't play that much of a role in UK or Scottish (despite the best efforts of the newest Archbishop of Scotland who is off his head) politics at the moment. The rampant bible-thumping of the USA presidential candidates is not only hilarious but very frightening.

 

[Robert]

In France about a third of the population is atheist (being the most atheist nation in the EU) but I'm sure the UK has a high percentage of atheists too, so there is a large chunk of the population unrepresented by the leadership. Perhaps atheists should NOT vote for these candidates and state clearly why not.

We can refuse to vote for people but the stating clearly why not part is a bit more tricky.

If a small radical group of 5% can make talking about creation an election issue, or if a small and radical 5% can make support for Israel an issue, then a small 15% to 20% segment can certainly bring atheism into the debate if they would get together and demand it.

Indeed but who would organise such a thing? I know I couldn't be arsed.

There's also another issue to consider: I'm more concerned by party policy than personal superstition when it comes to who I vote for.
I usually vote SNP, a party currently lead by a chap named Alex Salmond. I have no idea whether he is religious or not but he is certainly not publicly atheist. This is, however, of far less concern to me than his party's policies, the main one being extricating Scotland from the United Kingdom, which is important to me and I hope I live to see it happen.

Luckily religion doesn't play that much of a role in UK or Scottish (despite the best efforts of the newest Archbishop of Scotland who is off his head) politics at the moment. The rampant bible-thumping of the USA presidential candidates is not only hilarious but very frightening.

 

[Robert]

In France about a third of the population is atheist (being the most atheist nation in the EU) but I'm sure the UK has a high percentage of atheists too, so there is a large chunk of the population unrepresented by the leadership. Perhaps atheists should NOT vote for these candidates and state clearly why not.

We can refuse to vote for people but the stating clearly why not part is a bit more tricky.

If a small radical group of 5% can make talking about creation an election issue, or if a small and radical 5% can make support for Israel an issue, then a small 15% to 20% segment can certainly bring atheism into the debate if they would get together and demand it.

Indeed but who would organise such a thing? I know I couldn't be arsed.

There's also another issue to consider: I'm more concerned by party policy than personal superstition when it comes to who I vote for.
I usually vote SNP, a party currently lead by a chap named Alex Salmond. I have no idea whether he is religious or not but he is certainly not publicly atheist. This is, however, of far less concern to me than his party's policies, the main one being extricating Scotland from the United Kingdom, which is important to me and I hope I live to see it happen.

Luckily religion doesn't play that much of a role in UK or Scottish (despite the best efforts of the newest Archbishop of Scotland who is off his head) politics at the moment. The rampant bible-thumping of the USA presidential candidates is not only hilarious but very frightening.

 

[Robert]

In France about a third of the population is atheist (being the most atheist nation in the EU) but I'm sure the UK has a high percentage of atheists too, so there is a large chunk of the population unrepresented by the leadership. Perhaps atheists should NOT vote for these candidates and state clearly why not.

We can refuse to vote for people but the stating clearly why not part is a bit more tricky.

If a small radical group of 5% can make talking about creation an election issue, or if a small and radical 5% can make support for Israel an issue, then a small 15% to 20% segment can certainly bring atheism into the debate if they would get together and demand it.

Indeed but who would organise such a thing? I know I couldn't be arsed.

There's also another issue to consider: I'm more concerned by party policy than personal superstition when it comes to who I vote for.
I usually vote SNP, a party currently lead by a chap named Alex Salmond. I have no idea whether he is religious or not but he is certainly not publicly atheist. This is, however, of far less concern to me than his party's policies, the main one being extricating Scotland from the United Kingdom, which is important to me and I hope I live to see it happen.

Luckily religion doesn't play that much of a role in UK or Scottish (despite the best efforts of the newest Archbishop of Scotland who is off his head) politics at the moment. The rampant bible-thumping of the USA presidential candidates is not only hilarious but very frightening.