Ask a British Person.......
- Thread starter HeyFellas
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 'enry 'iggins best country in the world bollocks bonkers cheeky chesty brompton dumb yanks england great britain limeys limp wristers my arse scotland supreme race tea baggers the beatles hate you united kingdom wales wanker warm beer where are the dentist? where's my ear medicine? y-fronts rule!
Haha, i didn't realise that, oh the irony. Unfortunate mistake i do often if i type too quickly.
Did you miss the whole thesis of my post, moron? I said before the states drafted the Constitution. Also, EACH STATE had their own constitution's and many of them were very much based on the bible. There is nothing to refute these facts. America was, what....100 some years prior to the Constitution? That's a long fucking time and most (if not all) of the factors that created America were planted prior to the eighteenth century.
1797 is 100 years before the Constitution?
America existed as an English colony for a couple of hundred years before this.Much of the custom and practice passed on unchanged when independence was secured.
Ace Boobtoucher
Founder and Captain of the Douchepatrol
When can the world expect an apology for the UK giving us Lilly Allen and Amy Winehouse?
When the USA apologies for Billy Ray Cyrus, his achy breaky heart and his incredibly annoying daughter
well played sure well played rep points comming your way :hatsoff:
om3ga
It's good to be the king...
BNP wins European Parliament seat
Very depressing - especially after Saturday's ceremony remembering those brave souls who fought fascism 65 years ago...
I hope those "honourable" members who fiddled their expenses for porn films, duck houses, moat cleaning, etc are happy now...
Please, don't try to revise your statement when it's right there for everyone to read. You referred to the period "when she [America] was born and evolved into the Constitution". The timeframe is then the Colonial period right through to the Constitutional period.
Your comment afterwards about Madison and Jefferson reads as if to suggest that you're dubious about the growth of secularism at that point in time and want to sidestep it, preferring instead to focus on the theocratic aspirations of legislators in Colonial times, to use as proof of Christian doctrine being central to the foundation of America.
What you're completely failing to grasp when you fixate on this is that when people talk about the Judeo-Christian vs. the secularist heritage of America, no one actually gives a flying fuck about the laws of New England Puritans, any more than they give a crap about the laws of Spanish conquistadores or the Native American tribes who came before them. Religious laws calling for the conversion of all to Catholicism, or forbidding men from growing long hair were rendered obsolete by the time America (as we know it) was truly born - the late eighteenth century.
The treaty I referenced EXPLICITLY rejects the theory that the foundation of America was built on the Christian religion. This document was ratified by the Founding Fathers and their contemporaries. I'd say they were better placed to understand the birth of modern America than some ignorant white supremacist from the 21st century...
1) Why don't Brits debate UK politics (or EU politics) on Freeones?
2) Why aren't the Conservatives being hammered in the elections as much as Labour?
Weren't they just as guilty of expenses corruption as Labour members?
Is there another pressing issue serving to prop up the Conservatives?
Or is Labour's more complete demise simply due to the more intense feelings of betrayal that result from the inherent hypocrisy when the party that purportedly exists for good the working class poor, has been caught exploiting the poor.
2) Why aren't the Conservatives being hammered in the elections as much as Labour?
Weren't they just as guilty of expenses corruption as Labour members?
Is there another pressing issue serving to prop up the Conservatives?
Or is Labour's more complete demise simply due to the more intense feelings of betrayal that result from the inherent hypocrisy when the party that purportedly exists for good the working class poor, has been caught exploiting the poor.
BNP wins European Parliament seat
Very depressing - especially after Saturday's ceremony remembering those brave souls who fought fascism 65 years ago...
I hope those "honourable" members who fiddled their expenses for porn films, duck houses, moat cleaning, etc are happy now...
Despite how avaricious and untrustworthy our MPs have been revealed to be, I don't think this is something we can blame entirely on them - there's been a rising tide of xenophobia and bigotry in the UK in all areas over the last few years. The BNP have slowly been making strides for some while now. We aren't exactly as virulently racist as some in Russia, but community relations are worsening. Sad day indeed.
We need a complete revision of our political system, IMO, and we need to get on it before people forget their anger and lapse into docility all over again.
You sidestep the fact that many states themselves have Consitution's based on religious doctrine. Sorry to rain on your parade, but this is fact.
You sidestep the fact that many states themselves have Consitution's based on religious doctrine. Sorry to rain on your parade, but this is fact.
Rendered null and void, just like your antiquated Puritan laws.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Text
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Text
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torcaso_v._Watkins
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everson_v._Board_of_Education
In practice, I suppose extreme right wingers like yourself may get your own way rather often, because you don't respect secularism and there are simply so many of you around in the States these days.
Not as many of the Brits on the forum appear to be as interested in politics as the American members. I am, but I don't post all that often.
Plus, a lot of the views espoused on Freeones are so downright daft or extreme that it doesn't seem worth the effort most of the time. This is after all, a forum where nonsense about creationism, crypto-Muslim Obama, and a cornucopia of crazy conspiracy theories are regular topics.
They are the official alternative. When the ascendant party fucks up, there's a good chance some ground to the opposition, even if the opposition were guilty of similar wrongdoing.
More so, in many cases. The difference really is that David Cameron's response to the scandal has generally been seen to be swifter and more decisive.
Many reasons. They've been out of power for 12 years. They have a leader who looks like a regular human being, as opposed to someone who looks like the villain from a George Orwell novel: http://i.thisislondon.co.uk/i/pix/2009/05/brown-hair-415x525.jpg
However, the Liberal Democrats (the party I tend to vote for), have largely been found to be clear of wrongdoing, and have reaped a good deal of support, along with a few other smaller parties of various persuasions.
The Liberals have been a third party for a long time, but some polls are now indicating that they may rise to become the official opposition at the next election, pushing Labour into a truly shameful third place.
There may be some of that, but I think most people had already come to terms with the idea that New Labour had most of their socialist character excised from them a long time ago (see link below). They are now almost impossible to tell apart from the Conservatives, and this lack of choice is a source of enormous dissatisfaction with the electorate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clause_IV
1) I've seen odd bits of British political debate going on in some threads, maybe we need a dedicated "British Politics, Have Your Say Thread" but I'm not starting it!
2) That is indeed a very good question! I'm amazed the Conservatives (Tories) have done so well in Europe and local elections. All the political talk has been of a voting backlash over MP's expenses, its bad enough having 'Mr Average' shaft the British Tax Payer, but sickening when we're shafted by Millionaires! Unfortunately, I think the rot has well and truly set in with British politics, and we're going to see-saw back to the Conservatives just as we've always done. Maybe there's to many generations of 'new voters' to remember the 'Tory Sleaze' scandals that were going on at the end of the last Conservative government, and the devastation of British society that Margaret Thatcher created. We still live with her 'social ideal' of a person being recognised for 'what they own' rather than for 'who they are'. Lets not forget, Tony Blair admired her greatly and we ended up with 'New Labour' who were basically 'New Conservatives' and took the middle ground of politics. Now we're left with Gordon Brown who's unelected by the British public, presiding over the greatest economic and political scandals we've ever seen. There's not much doubt Labour will loose the next general election, but that doesn't create a victorious Conservative leader, what we'll get is another insipid clown desperately trying to tell people what he thinks they want to hear. Therefore we end up with political parties with no desire or belief in creating their own identity, just opportunists who'll paint the front door to look good, and ignore the rising damp that's all around them. Now you know why I'm not starting a thread
British Politics - Showbiz for the ugly
Except Caroline Flint if you're reading :thumbsup: Vince Cable for PM!
The only guy I hear who ever says anything sensible.I'm worried that you may be right. Public anger does not seem to be translating to a desire for wide-ranging reform.
I'd love to see a Reform Party which focussed on a shake-up of the House of Lords; proportional representation; a codification of hundreds years of statutes and case law into a single written Constitution, and so on. But when so much of the political class is entrenched in the grime of Westminster, it's hard to see where such a party could come from.
It'd all have to spring up right from the grass roots. I wish, like Martin Bell, I could see it as a time of potentially momentous change, but at the moment, I'm not seeing any green shoots in the barren wasteland of politics in our country.
British polotics just isnt as interesting as it is in the US.
There is no way we could have a "West Wing" style show over here because it just wouldnt be interesting enough. Its the mundane boredom of it all is why we choose to make satirical shows that are based on polotics instead. The Thick of It being a fine example.
Although in recent weeks it has livened itself up some what. But that will not last very long.
They are seen as an alternative by some. I really do not see why, both parties are so central politically they are basically the same. People I believe are using their votes to oust Labour in any way possible and the Conservatives are the most viable vote they have. Thats also the reason why some of the fringe parties such as the BNP are getting more votes than they ever would.
As I believe was said above, all parties have been guilty of this scandal. Not guilty in a legal sense because what they did was within the rules but they are guilty in the sense that they over stepped the mark in which this power grated to them is allowed. And just by voting another party into power is in no way going to sort this out. Parliment needs a complete overhaul with new legislation being put into place so that such issues cannot arise again.
I'm sure thats part of it.
But I think there are many issues, the financial scandal, the recession, Browns leadership, the lack of choice when it came time to choose a new PM after Blair left. And the way the cabinet are behaving are all contributing to their downfall.
