Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: 21st February 2017, 14:49

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Burden of Proof
#41
RE: The Burden of Proof
*Shrugs* Must be a belief of yours.
 “I can’t even go to a goddamn potluck without having to thank some space fairy for the broccoli casserole!” -Trae Crowder


Reply
#42
RE: The Burden of Proof
(20th August 2011, 20:07)padraic Wrote:
Quote: Atheistfreethinker Wrote: The men who wrote this infallible [sic] document were fighting against a totalitarian, despotic regime where the monarchy was, and still is, the head of the church.

Really, I didn't know that. I thought they rebelled against England,which in the eighteenth century was a constitutional monarch,hardly either totalitarian or despotic. Arrogant and unwise,certainly.

The American evolution was fomented by a bunch of well-off,slave owning white men who felt hard done-by over taxes. It was about money and power,not freedom.

Wars are never about moral principle, except perhaps for some of the poor dumb bastards who do the actual dying. Hard to tell,when most countries fill their ranks by conscription and bare faced lies in times of war.

The English monarch is the titular head of The Church Of England,just as she is the of head of state. However,she has no actual power,religious or political.

Yes I suppose that 18th century England had a Parliament, but it would be very naive to believe that King George didn't rule the country. The Parliament did whatever the king wanted just like the days of the Tudor dynasty.
Reply
#43
RE: The Burden of Proof
Quote:but it would be very naive to believe that King George didn't rule the country.

Well, he didn't actually,he had influence,but no real power, A constitutional monarchy means the monarch reigns but does not and cannot rule.

The other reason he did not and could not rule is because he was barking mad a lot of the time. Modern doctors think the poor guy suffered from acute intermittent porphyria.(one of the symptoms is blue urine)

England became a constitutional monarchy with Charles the second in 1660. George the third became king a hundred years later, in 1760.
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Quote:Constitutional monarchy (or limited monarchy) is a form of government in which a monarch acts as head of state within the parameters of a constitution, whether it be a written, uncodified or blended constitution. This form of government differs from absolute monarchy in which an absolute monarch serves as the sole source of political power in the state and is not legally bound by any constitution.

Most constitutional monarchies employ a parliamentary system in which the monarch may have strictly ceremonial duties or may have reserve powers, depending on the constitution. Under most modern constitutional monarchies there is also a prime minister who is the head of government and exercises effective political power.


Quote:Contemporary constitutional monarchies include Australia, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Bahrain, Cambodia, Canada, Denmark, Grenada, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Monaco, Morocco, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, Tuvalu, and the United Kingdom.
Man is not so much a rational animal as a rationalising one.
Reply
#44
RE: The Burden of Proof
(23rd August 2011, 02:14)padraic Wrote:
Quote:but it would be very naive to believe that King George didn't rule the country.

Well, he didn't actually,he had influence,but no real power, A constitutional monarchy means the monarch reigns but does not and cannot rule.

The other reason he did not and could not rule is because he was barking mad a lot of the time. Modern doctors think the poor guy suffered from acute intermittent porphyria.(one of the symptoms is blue urine)

England became a constitutional monarchy with Charles the second in 1660. George the third became king a hundred years later, in 1760.
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Quote:Constitutional monarchy (or limited monarchy) is a form of government in which a monarch acts as head of state within the parameters of a constitution, whether it be a written, uncodified or blended constitution. This form of government differs from absolute monarchy in which an absolute monarch serves as the sole source of political power in the state and is not legally bound by any constitution.

Most constitutional monarchies employ a parliamentary system in which the monarch may have strictly ceremonial duties or may have reserve powers, depending on the constitution. Under most modern constitutional monarchies there is also a prime minister who is the head of government and exercises effective political power.


Quote:Contemporary constitutional monarchies include Australia, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Bahrain, Cambodia, Canada, Denmark, Grenada, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Monaco, Morocco, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, Tuvalu, and the United Kingdom.
The point was keeping religion out of politics. Anybody who denies that religion in politics is not a bad idea need only look at N. Ireland.
Reply
#45
RE: The Burden of Proof
(23rd August 2011, 02:39)Atheistfreethinker Wrote:
(23rd August 2011, 02:14)padraic Wrote:
Quote:but it would be very naive to believe that King George didn't rule the country.

Well, he didn't actually,he had influence,but no real power, A constitutional monarchy means the monarch reigns but does not and cannot rule.

The other reason he did not and could not rule is because he was barking mad a lot of the time. Modern doctors think the poor guy suffered from acute intermittent porphyria.(one of the symptoms is blue urine)

England became a constitutional monarchy with Charles the second in 1660. George the third became king a hundred years later, in 1760.
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Quote:Constitutional monarchy (or limited monarchy) is a form of government in which a monarch acts as head of state within the parameters of a constitution, whether it be a written, uncodified or blended constitution. This form of government differs from absolute monarchy in which an absolute monarch serves as the sole source of political power in the state and is not legally bound by any constitution.

Most constitutional monarchies employ a parliamentary system in which the monarch may have strictly ceremonial duties or may have reserve powers, depending on the constitution. Under most modern constitutional monarchies there is also a prime minister who is the head of government and exercises effective political power.


Quote:Contemporary constitutional monarchies include Australia, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Bahrain, Cambodia, Canada, Denmark, Grenada, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Monaco, Morocco, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, Tuvalu, and the United Kingdom.
The point was keeping religion out of politics. Anybody who denies that religion in politics is not a bad idea need only look at N. Ireland.
My next question is: Of what use is a constitutional monarchy? I would say that democracy and the inalienable right of people to be free has rendered monarchies useless just as it has religion. There are for sure credulous masses that would disagree with me. Only because of their want or need to be serfs.
Reply
#46
RE: The Burden of Proof
(24th August 2011, 07:35)Atheistfreethinker Wrote: My next question is: Of what use is a constitutional monarchy?

Keeping the aristocracy fat, rich and happy?
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Muslims are using this NASA video as proof that islam is true and that allah exists LetThereBeNoGod 10 162 16th February 2017, 21:32
Last Post: LetThereBeNoGod
  Near death experiences are not biblical and the bible itself debunks them (Proof) LetThereBeNoGod 0 67 16th February 2017, 16:10
Last Post: LetThereBeNoGod
  Christians are using this real nasa picture with a cross as proof of christianity... LetThereBeNoGod 31 717 20th January 2017, 07:55
Last Post: Gawdzilla Sama
  Proof of God B0B 33 651 19th January 2017, 11:49
Last Post: Minimalist
Sad I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing? Mariosep 1101 32120 12th December 2016, 12:21
Last Post: Asmodee
  I am a pixieist, what do you think of my proof that universe creating pixies exist? Simon Moon 69 2413 13th November 2016, 09:16
Last Post: Expired
Wink 100% proof why atheism is True!!! Edward John 89 2776 10th November 2016, 12:48
Last Post: Mister Agenda
  Proof Of Creator (Miracles) z7z 1 534 24th March 2016, 22:38
Last Post: ApeNotKillApe
Question Atheists: would proof of the resurrection matter to you? robvalue 55 4396 19th July 2015, 06:40
Last Post: robvalue
  Help: jumped on for seeking scientific proof of spiritual healing emilynghiem 55 9838 21st February 2015, 02:54
Last Post: JesusHChrist



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)