FSTDT Forums

Rubbish => Preaching and Worship => Topic started by: Jacob Harrison on November 07, 2018, 03:40:51 pm

Title: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 07, 2018, 03:40:51 pm
For the past few days, when I have gotten off at the train station by my college, there have been Jehovah’s Witnesses promoting their false religion. I am very fucking angry about it because Jehavoah’s Witnesses are heretics for denying the Trinity and hell and for being unpatriotic traitors to America for not serving in the military and not saluting the flag. They should be banned for being unpatriotic.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Eiki-mun on November 07, 2018, 03:49:21 pm
So you're against freedom of religion and freedom of expression. I see.

Any other amendments you're against? The 14th? The 19th? The 26th?
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 07, 2018, 04:27:34 pm
So you're against freedom of religion and freedom of expression. I see.

Any other amendments you're against? The 14th? The 19th? The 26th?

The 14th, 19th, and 26th Amendments are good though the Supreme Court should overturn their horrible interpretation of the 14th that caused the legalization of perverted sodomite marriages. 

Another amendment that should be amended to adapt to modern times is the 5th Amendment because terrorists and major gangs should not have the rights to not have to answer questions in trial during cross examination. The Double Jeapordy Clause should be gotten rid of because of modern forensic science that can prove whether someone who is acquitted is guilty of a crime. OJ Simpson is an example.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Art Vandelay on November 07, 2018, 04:30:09 pm
I do agree that Jehova's Witnesses can go fuck themselves, though probably for completely different reasons that you do.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on November 07, 2018, 06:46:23 pm
So you're against freedom of religion and freedom of expression. I see.

Any other amendments you're against? The 14th? The 19th? The 26th?

The 14th, 19th, and 26th Amendments are good though the Supreme Court should overturn their horrible interpretation of the 14th that caused the legalization of perverted sodomite marriages. 

Another amendment that should be amended to adapt to modern times is the 5th Amendment because terrorists and major gangs should not have the rights to not have to answer questions in trial during cross examination. The Double Jeapordy Clause should be gotten rid of because of modern forensic science that can prove whether someone who is acquitted is guilty of a crime. OJ Simpson is an example.
Oh get bent you nosy little busybody! Other people's love lives or religions are none of your business.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 07, 2018, 07:30:07 pm
So you're against freedom of religion and freedom of expression. I see.

Any other amendments you're against? The 14th? The 19th? The 26th?

The 14th, 19th, and 26th Amendments are good though the Supreme Court should overturn their horrible interpretation of the 14th that caused the legalization of perverted sodomite marriages. 

Another amendment that should be amended to adapt to modern times is the 5th Amendment because terrorists and major gangs should not have the rights to not have to answer questions in trial during cross examination. The Double Jeapordy Clause should be gotten rid of because of modern forensic science that can prove whether someone who is acquitted is guilty of a crime. OJ Simpson is an example.
Oh get bent you nosy little busybody! Other people's love lives or religions are none of your business.

But perverted sodomite marriage is not true marriage because marriage is meant to be between one man as one woman for the purpose of procreation.

And Jehovah’s Witnesses are the government’s buisiness because they are unpatriotic traitors to America for not saluting the flag and being exempt from serving in the military.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: rookie on November 07, 2018, 10:09:01 pm
Off day? Usually you troll better.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Art Vandelay on November 07, 2018, 10:27:13 pm
And Jehovah’s Witnesses are the government’s buisiness because they are unpatriotic traitors to America for not saluting the flag and being exempt from serving in the military.
Everyone's exempt from serving in the military, genius. Conscription hasn't been a thing since Vietnam (and that's the way it fucking well should be).

Of course, I do agree that were conscription a thing, "my imaginary friend says so" should not be a valid reason to get out of it. But again, moot point seeing as it's not a thing and I very much want it to stay not a thing.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on November 08, 2018, 12:16:45 am
But perverted sodomite marriage is not true marriage because marriage is meant to be between one man as one woman for the purpose of procreation.

And Jehovah’s Witnesses are the government’s buisiness because they are unpatriotic traitors to America for not saluting the flag and being exempt from serving in the military.

1. Are you saying heterosexual couples who marry who can't conceive aren't? Because if you do it looks like a whole lotta incel sour grapes to me, well-the same goes for gay marriage.

2. Plenty of other Americans don't salute the flag or serve in the military, they're still citizens of that republic because you can still participate in and not betray a nation without doing either. Lots of people do things for their country that don't involve empty gestures like pretending to tip your nonexistent hat at a flag.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Skybison on November 08, 2018, 03:40:20 am
The trinity is a heretical idea.  Nothing in the bible supports it, it's just something heretics invented later to justify infecting Christianity with polytheism.  God will send you to hell for believing in it and his ADOPTED son Jesus will agree.

Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Skybison on November 08, 2018, 03:42:48 am
Oh and it's unpatriotic to say it should be illegal to be unpatriotic.  America was founded on freedom of speech/belief/conscious.  To be a patriot you must support such freedoms.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: dpareja on November 08, 2018, 03:50:16 am
You're all heretics.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/14/TST-baph-statue.jpg)
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Skybison on November 08, 2018, 04:05:30 am
There is only one God and he is The Demon Sultan Azathoth, the Blind Idiot God and Yog Sothoth is his gate.

(https://img.youtube.com/vi/xHAeJSwUbaw/0.jpg)
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on November 08, 2018, 04:20:10 am
Crikey, I've been reading that wrong for years. I thought it was Yog Sothoth is his mate and thought "aw, sweet. Shambling monstrosities bonding!"
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 07:52:31 am
But perverted sodomite marriage is not true marriage because marriage is meant to be between one man as one woman for the purpose of procreation.

And Jehovah’s Witnesses are the government’s buisiness because they are unpatriotic traitors to America for not saluting the flag and being exempt from serving in the military.

1. Are you saying heterosexual couples who marry who can't conceive aren't? Because if you do it looks like a whole lotta incel sour grapes to me, well-the same goes for gay marriage.

2. Plenty of other Americans don't salute the flag or serve in the military, they're still citizens of that republic because you can still participate in and not betray a nation without doing either. Lots of people do things for their country that don't involve empty gestures like pretending to tip your nonexistent hat at a flag.

1. They are validly married as long as they marry with the intent to produce children but then realize after having sex that they can’t conceive.

2. Art Vandelay made a good point on how everyone is exempt from the military unless there is conscription but that we’re conscription a thing, religion should not be an excuse to get out of it. However saluting the flag is a sign of respecting and honoring your country. Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t believe in doing that.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 07:54:38 am
Oh and it's unpatriotic to say it should be illegal to be unpatriotic.  America was founded on freedom of speech/belief/conscious.  To be a patriot you must support such freedoms.

The Constitution can be subject to Amendment if necessary and sometimes it is necessary to adapt to modern times. The Founding Fathers did not predict that there would be unpatriotic organizations such as Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 08:04:59 am
And Jehovah’s Witnesses are the government’s buisiness because they are unpatriotic traitors to America for not saluting the flag and being exempt from serving in the military.
Everyone's exempt from serving in the military, genius. Conscription hasn't been a thing since Vietnam (and that's the way it fucking well should be).

Of course, I do agree that were conscription a thing, "my imaginary friend says so" should not be a valid reason to get out of it. But again, moot point seeing as it's not a thing and I very much want it to stay not a thing.

There will probably have to be conscription when my secret society infiltrated the US government and has the US declare war on Britain to restore the true heir to the throne, because many Americans would not want to fight such a war.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on November 08, 2018, 02:59:11 pm
1. So what, call off the wedding if one or both are infertile? I'm sorry Jakey, it isn't a fertility license nor is there a legal prerequisite that there has to be. I'm not just talking about the US here, nowhere does that. Even Saudi Arabia doesn't do that.

Marriage is not defined by angry, fundie Incels!

2. Tipping imaginary hats... What the fuck ever!
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 03:20:23 pm
1. So what, call off the wedding if one or both are infertile? I'm sorry Jakey, it isn't a fertility license nor is there a legal prerequisite that there has to be. I'm not just talking about the US here, nowhere does that. Even Saudi Arabia doesn't do that.

Marriage is not defined by angry, fundie Incels!

2. Tipping imaginary hats... What the fuck ever!

1. The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines marriage as this,

1601 "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."

2. It is the object that the salute is towards that matters. That object is the flag.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on November 08, 2018, 03:29:48 pm
1. So what, call off the wedding if one or both are infertile? I'm sorry Jakey, it isn't a fertility license nor is there a legal prerequisite that there has to be. I'm not just talking about the US here, nowhere does that. Even Saudi Arabia doesn't do that.

Marriage is not defined by angry, fundie Incels!

2. Tipping imaginary hats... What the fuck ever!

1. The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines marriage as this,

1601 "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."

2. It is the object that the salute is towards that matters. That object is the flag.
Yes this is where Catholics get confused, their lil' book of excuses and equivocations is not the law anywhere except maybe in Vatican City which is populated by ostensibly celibate creepy old men and Swiss guards.

Also idolatry, must be ok if you're a wizard.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 04:14:56 pm
1. So what, call off the wedding if one or both are infertile? I'm sorry Jakey, it isn't a fertility license nor is there a legal prerequisite that there has to be. I'm not just talking about the US here, nowhere does that. Even Saudi Arabia doesn't do that.

Marriage is not defined by angry, fundie Incels!

2. Tipping imaginary hats... What the fuck ever!

1. The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines marriage as this,

1601 "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."

2. It is the object that the salute is towards that matters. That object is the flag.
Yes this is where Catholics get confused, their lil' book of excuses and equivocations is not the law anywhere except maybe in Vatican City which is populated by ostensibly celibate creepy old men and Swiss guards.

Also idolatry, must be ok if you're a wizard.

But it has been part of the law of Western Civilization since the Catholic Church was once dominant, so it is the basis for what the definition of marriage is in Western Christian Society.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on November 08, 2018, 04:17:54 pm
1. So what, call off the wedding if one or both are infertile? I'm sorry Jakey, it isn't a fertility license nor is there a legal prerequisite that there has to be. I'm not just talking about the US here, nowhere does that. Even Saudi Arabia doesn't do that.

Marriage is not defined by angry, fundie Incels!

2. Tipping imaginary hats... What the fuck ever!

1. The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines marriage as this,

1601 "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."

2. It is the object that the salute is towards that matters. That object is the flag.
Yes this is where Catholics get confused, their lil' book of excuses and equivocations is not the law anywhere except maybe in Vatican City which is populated by ostensibly celibate creepy old men and Swiss guards.

Also idolatry, must be ok if you're a wizard.

But it has been part of the law of Western Civilization since the Catholic Church was once dominant, so it is the basis for what the definition of marriage is in Western Christian Society.
In western secular societies it's mostly a civic partnership and it's mostly decorative anyway since most jurisdictions grant de facto couples the same rights.


Which is the way it should be.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Skybison on November 08, 2018, 04:24:29 pm
The Constitution can be subject to Amendment if necessary and sometimes it is necessary to adapt to modern times.

Passing such an amendment would be unpatriotic.

Quote
The Founding Fathers did not predict that there would be unpatriotic organizations such as Jehovah’s Witnesses.

There were plenty of other pacifist christian groups in their time ie The Quakers.  Therefore the founding fathers did know of such groups and wrote the constitution anyway.

Why do you hate america?
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 04:27:39 pm
1. So what, call off the wedding if one or both are infertile? I'm sorry Jakey, it isn't a fertility license nor is there a legal prerequisite that there has to be. I'm not just talking about the US here, nowhere does that. Even Saudi Arabia doesn't do that.

Marriage is not defined by angry, fundie Incels!

2. Tipping imaginary hats... What the fuck ever!

1. The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines marriage as this,

1601 "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."

2. It is the object that the salute is towards that matters. That object is the flag.
Yes this is where Catholics get confused, their lil' book of excuses and equivocations is not the law anywhere except maybe in Vatican City which is populated by ostensibly celibate creepy old men and Swiss guards.

Also idolatry, must be ok if you're a wizard.

But it has been part of the law of Western Civilization since the Catholic Church was once dominant, so it is the basis for what the definition of marriage is in Western Christian Society.
In western secular societies it's mostly a civic partnership and it's mostly decorative anyway since most jurisdictions grant de facto couples the same rights.


Which is the way it should be.

You admitted that secular society diminished the meaning of marriage making it decorative. We conservative Christians are fighting against secularists getting rid of what is sacred.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 04:33:03 pm
The Constitution can be subject to Amendment if necessary and sometimes it is necessary to adapt to modern times.

Passing such an amendment would be unpatriotic.

Quote
The Founding Fathers did not predict that there would be unpatriotic organizations such as Jehovah’s Witnesses.

There were plenty of other pacifist christian groups in their time ie The Quakers.  Therefore the founding fathers did know of such groups and wrote the constitution anyway.

Why do you hate america?

Such an amendment is not unpatriotic because the fact that the Constitution is subject to amendment shows that the First Amendment is not a permanent doctrine of the Constitution to be held for all times.

The Quakers were not a significant threat, while Jehavoah's Witnesses are a much larger religious group than the Quakers ever were. Therefore, the First Amendment needs to be amended for patriotism to be enforced.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Art Vandelay on November 08, 2018, 04:36:43 pm
You know what's even more unpatriotic and a general giant middle finger to everything America (supposedly) stands for? Kings. Aristocracy. Neo-feudalism in general. Forget not gesturing at a piece of cloth, your royalist beliefs are every bit as un-American as communism.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on November 08, 2018, 04:45:24 pm
1. So what, call off the wedding if one or both are infertile? I'm sorry Jakey, it isn't a fertility license nor is there a legal prerequisite that there has to be. I'm not just talking about the US here, nowhere does that. Even Saudi Arabia doesn't do that.

Marriage is not defined by angry, fundie Incels!

2. Tipping imaginary hats... What the fuck ever!

1. The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines marriage as this,

1601 "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."

2. It is the object that the salute is towards that matters. That object is the flag.
Yes this is where Catholics get confused, their lil' book of excuses and equivocations is not the law anywhere except maybe in Vatican City which is populated by ostensibly celibate creepy old men and Swiss guards.

Also idolatry, must be ok if you're a wizard.

But it has been part of the law of Western Civilization since the Catholic Church was once dominant, so it is the basis for what the definition of marriage is in Western Christian Society.
In western secular societies it's mostly a civic partnership and it's mostly decorative anyway since most jurisdictions grant de facto couples the same rights.


Which is the way it should be.

You admitted that secular society diminished the meaning of marriage making it decorative. We conservative Christians are fighting against secularists getting rid of what is sacred.
Beats the shit out of domestic slavery and horsetrading kids like cattle.

Funny how biblical literalists never cite polygamy or tape of prisoners of war as traditional marriage depsite the clear biblical precedents.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 05:47:43 pm
You know what's even more unpatriotic and a general giant middle finger to everything America (supposedly) stands for? Kings. Aristocracy. Neo-feudalism in general. Forget not gesturing at a piece of cloth, your royalist beliefs are every bit as un-American as communism.

But the difference is that America was founded as a Republic, while England was founded as a monarchy. The American system of government does not apply to England.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: davedan on November 08, 2018, 05:50:20 pm
You know what's even more unpatriotic and a general giant middle finger to everything America (supposedly) stands for? Kings. Aristocracy. Neo-feudalism in general. Forget not gesturing at a piece of cloth, your royalist beliefs are every bit as un-American as communism.

But the difference is that America was founded as a Republic, while England was founded as a monarchy. The American system of government does not apply to England.

No America was a colony and then they rebelled against their Lawful British Sovereign.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 05:51:50 pm
1. So what, call off the wedding if one or both are infertile? I'm sorry Jakey, it isn't a fertility license nor is there a legal prerequisite that there has to be. I'm not just talking about the US here, nowhere does that. Even Saudi Arabia doesn't do that.

Marriage is not defined by angry, fundie Incels!

2. Tipping imaginary hats... What the fuck ever!

1. The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines marriage as this,

1601 "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."

2. It is the object that the salute is towards that matters. That object is the flag.
Yes this is where Catholics get confused, their lil' book of excuses and equivocations is not the law anywhere except maybe in Vatican City which is populated by ostensibly celibate creepy old men and Swiss guards.

Also idolatry, must be ok if you're a wizard.

But it has been part of the law of Western Civilization since the Catholic Church was once dominant, so it is the basis for what the definition of marriage is in Western Christian Society.
In western secular societies it's mostly a civic partnership and it's mostly decorative anyway since most jurisdictions grant de facto couples the same rights.


Which is the way it should be.

You admitted that secular society diminished the meaning of marriage making it decorative. We conservative Christians are fighting against secularists getting rid of what is sacred.
Beats the shit out of domestic slavery and horsetrading kids like cattle.

Funny how biblical literalists never cite polygamy or tape of prisoners of war as traditional marriage depsite the clear biblical precedents.

Because that was done in the Old Testament. Jesus Christ made it so that marriage is between one man and one woman.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 06:34:54 pm
You know what's even more unpatriotic and a general giant middle finger to everything America (supposedly) stands for? Kings. Aristocracy. Neo-feudalism in general. Forget not gesturing at a piece of cloth, your royalist beliefs are every bit as un-American as communism.

But the difference is that America was founded as a Republic, while England was founded as a monarchy. The American system of government does not apply to England.

No America was a colony and then they rebelled against their Lawful British Sovereign.

But King George III was not the legitimate King as shown by my research on the true heirs, so rebelling against him was just.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: davedan on November 08, 2018, 06:44:08 pm
You know what's even more unpatriotic and a general giant middle finger to everything America (supposedly) stands for? Kings. Aristocracy. Neo-feudalism in general. Forget not gesturing at a piece of cloth, your royalist beliefs are every bit as un-American as communism.

But the difference is that America was founded as a Republic, while England was founded as a monarchy. The American system of government does not apply to England.

No America was a colony and then they rebelled against their Lawful British Sovereign.

But King George III was not the legitimate King as shown by my research on the true heirs, so rebelling against him was just.

But only to install the true heir, rather than establishing a Regicidal Republic.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on November 08, 2018, 06:52:35 pm
Citation needed, chapter and verse.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: davedan on November 08, 2018, 07:08:47 pm
Citation needed, chapter and verse.

Are you asking me Tol? I'm just trying to work within his own framework. Otherwise it would be perfectly just for the UK to become a republic.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: dpareja on November 08, 2018, 07:18:35 pm
Citation needed, chapter and verse.

Are you asking me Tol? I'm just trying to work within his own framework. Otherwise it would be perfectly just for the UK to become a republic.

Which it would be, if they voted for it.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 07:46:00 pm
You know what's even more unpatriotic and a general giant middle finger to everything America (supposedly) stands for? Kings. Aristocracy. Neo-feudalism in general. Forget not gesturing at a piece of cloth, your royalist beliefs are every bit as un-American as communism.

But the difference is that America was founded as a Republic, while England was founded as a monarchy. The American system of government does not apply to England.

No America was a colony and then they rebelled against their Lawful British Sovereign.

But King George III was not the legitimate King as shown by my research on the true heirs, so rebelling against him was just.

But only to install the true heir, rather than establishing a Regicidal Republic.

The legitimate monarchs of England never ruled at the time that the American colonies were established, so the American colonists didn’t need to install the true heir as their leader.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: davedan on November 08, 2018, 08:12:04 pm
You know what's even more unpatriotic and a general giant middle finger to everything America (supposedly) stands for? Kings. Aristocracy. Neo-feudalism in general. Forget not gesturing at a piece of cloth, your royalist beliefs are every bit as un-American as communism.

But the difference is that America was founded as a Republic, while England was founded as a monarchy. The American system of government does not apply to England.

No America was a colony and then they rebelled against their Lawful British Sovereign.

But King George III was not the legitimate King as shown by my research on the true heirs, so rebelling against him was just.

But only to install the true heir, rather than establishing a Regicidal Republic.

The legitimate monarchs of England never ruled at the time that the American colonies were established, so the American colonists didn’t need to install the true heir as their leader.

Yet according to you William the Conqueror was not the legitimate heir, so there was no legitimate Heir ever for England, or Britain. At most you're talking about the legitimate heir of Wessex. Why aren't the colonies also subject to the legitimate heir of Wessex
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 08:15:57 pm
You know what's even more unpatriotic and a general giant middle finger to everything America (supposedly) stands for? Kings. Aristocracy. Neo-feudalism in general. Forget not gesturing at a piece of cloth, your royalist beliefs are every bit as un-American as communism.

But the difference is that America was founded as a Republic, while England was founded as a monarchy. The American system of government does not apply to England.

No America was a colony and then they rebelled against their Lawful British Sovereign.

But King George III was not the legitimate King as shown by my research on the true heirs, so rebelling against him was just.

But only to install the true heir, rather than establishing a Regicidal Republic.

The legitimate monarchs of England never ruled at the time that the American colonies were established, so the American colonists didn’t need to install the true heir as their leader.

Yet according to you William the Conqueror was not the legitimate heir, so there was no legitimate Heir ever for England, or Britain. At most you're talking about the legitimate heir of Wessex. Why aren't the colonies also subject to the legitimate heir of Wessex

In my post I made today called Something Niam should know, I corrected my mistake because I found new information that indicated that William was the rightful King. Anyway, the colonies are not subject to the legitimate heir, because the legitimate monarchs never ruled the colonies.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: davedan on November 08, 2018, 08:18:57 pm
You know what's even more unpatriotic and a general giant middle finger to everything America (supposedly) stands for? Kings. Aristocracy. Neo-feudalism in general. Forget not gesturing at a piece of cloth, your royalist beliefs are every bit as un-American as communism.

But the difference is that America was founded as a Republic, while England was founded as a monarchy. The American system of government does not apply to England.

No America was a colony and then they rebelled against their Lawful British Sovereign.

But King George III was not the legitimate King as shown by my research on the true heirs, so rebelling against him was just.

But only to install the true heir, rather than establishing a Regicidal Republic.

The legitimate monarchs of England never ruled at the time that the American colonies were established, so the American colonists didn’t need to install the true heir as their leader.

Yet according to you William the Conqueror was not the legitimate heir, so there was no legitimate Heir ever for England, or Britain. At most you're talking about the legitimate heir of Wessex. Why aren't the colonies also subject to the legitimate heir of Wessex

In my post I made today called Something Niam should know, I corrected my mistake because I found new information that indicated that William was the rightful King. Anyway, the colonies are not subject to the legitimate heir, because the legitimate monarchs never ruled the colonies.

They were as subject to the legitimate heirs as the UK was. If the US isn't subject to the legitimate heir then neither is the UK, so that we can accept the house of windsor pull out some denim jeans and celebrate with some serious self abuse.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on November 08, 2018, 08:29:40 pm
Citation needed, chapter and verse.

Are you asking me Tol? I'm just trying to work within his own framework. Otherwise it would be perfectly just for the UK to become a republic.
No, I was asking the twit but if you ever run a Sunday school-put that shit on YouTube!
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 08:36:54 pm
You know what's even more unpatriotic and a general giant middle finger to everything America (supposedly) stands for? Kings. Aristocracy. Neo-feudalism in general. Forget not gesturing at a piece of cloth, your royalist beliefs are every bit as un-American as communism.

But the difference is that America was founded as a Republic, while England was founded as a monarchy. The American system of government does not apply to England.

No America was a colony and then they rebelled against their Lawful British Sovereign.

But King George III was not the legitimate King as shown by my research on the true heirs, so rebelling against him was just.

But only to install the true heir, rather than establishing a Regicidal Republic.

The legitimate monarchs of England never ruled at the time that the American colonies were established, so the American colonists didn’t need to install the true heir as their leader.

Yet according to you William the Conqueror was not the legitimate heir, so there was no legitimate Heir ever for England, or Britain. At most you're talking about the legitimate heir of Wessex. Why aren't the colonies also subject to the legitimate heir of Wessex

In my post I made today called Something Niam should know, I corrected my mistake because I found new information that indicated that William was the rightful King. Anyway, the colonies are not subject to the legitimate heir, because the legitimate monarchs never ruled the colonies.

They were as subject to the legitimate heirs as the UK was. If the US isn't subject to the legitimate heir then neither is the UK, so that we can accept the house of windsor pull out some denim jeans and celebrate with some serious self abuse.

The difference between the U.K. and the Colonies is that England was ruled by the legitimate monarchs while the colonies never were.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: dpareja on November 08, 2018, 08:49:52 pm
Yes they were, once Parliament passed the Act of Settlement the heirs of Sophia of Hanover became the sole legitimate heirs.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Skybison on November 08, 2018, 09:00:04 pm
America is founded upon the ideals of democracy and freedom of belief.  Your love of monarchy is unpatriotic. 

Why do you hate America?
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 08, 2018, 09:01:20 pm
America is founded upon the ideals of democracy and freedom of belief.  Your love of monarchy is unpatriotic. 

Why do you hate America?

I support democracy in the United States because it was founded as such. However England was founded as a monarchy.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on November 08, 2018, 10:27:46 pm
America is founded upon the ideals of democracy and freedom of belief.  Your love of monarchy is unpatriotic. 

Why do you hate America?

I support democracy in the United States because it was founded as such. However England was founded as a monarchy.
Meaning you don't support democracy in principle. If supporting hoary old claims is all you give a shit about why support the US at all? The American revolution was an insurrection specifically designed to deprive the British crown of its assets.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Skybison on November 08, 2018, 10:39:31 pm
And he opposes freedom of religion/freedom of conscious, a central concept of democracy.

Why does Jacob hate America?
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: dpareja on November 08, 2018, 10:58:23 pm
And he opposes freedom of religion/freedom of conscious, a central concept of democracy.

Why does Jacob hate America?

And freedom of speech--hates that you don't have blasphemy laws.

Probably freedom of the press as well--only good Christians should publish newspapers.

Freedom of peaceful assembly? Not if you're gathering in a mosque I bet.

And petitioning the government? Not if it's to get a church-state separation violation repealed.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 09, 2018, 07:28:53 am
America is founded upon the ideals of democracy and freedom of belief.  Your love of monarchy is unpatriotic. 

Why do you hate America?

I support democracy in the United States because it was founded as such. However England was founded as a monarchy.
Meaning you don't support democracy in principle. If supporting hoary old claims is all you give a shit about why support the US at all? The American revolution was an insurrection specifically designed to deprive the British crown of its assets.

Because the illegitimate tyrannical monarch King George III was oppressing the colonies.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 09, 2018, 07:32:02 am
And he opposes freedom of religion/freedom of conscious, a central concept of democracy.

Why does Jacob hate America?

I support freedom of religion as long as Christianity is the dominant religion promoted by the government which it was back in the good old days when the US was more Christian and there was prayer in public schools. So I want America to return to how it used to be.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 09, 2018, 07:35:09 am
And he opposes freedom of religion/freedom of conscious, a central concept of democracy.

Why does Jacob hate America?

And freedom of speech--hates that you don't have blasphemy laws.

Probably freedom of the press as well--only good Christians should publish newspapers.

Freedom of peaceful assembly? Not if you're gathering in a mosque I bet.

And petitioning the government? Not if it's to get a church-state separation violation repealed.

You have to put the First Amendment in the context of the time. At the time the First Amendment was written, the states had blasphemy laws so the First Amendment does not apply to blasphemy laws.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on November 09, 2018, 08:09:10 am
Because the illegitimate tyrannical monarch King George III was oppressing the colonies.
So? You're supposed to be a good little royalist. It's his divine right to tyrant his colonies.

If you're going to royally get rid of him you do it George RR Martin style. Plots, murders and some other toff who's got a claim to the throne because his daddy was related to someone important. You certainly don't start a rebellion that seeks to defy the divine right of kings.

Or you can try being consistent and allow the British people to have their freedom to vote and elect people to run things the way they want, given that you're all for those colonials getting a slice of theirs.
Title: Re: Heretics at the train station
Post by: Jacob Harrison on November 09, 2018, 08:24:59 am
Because the illegitimate tyrannical monarch King George III was oppressing the colonies.
So? You're supposed to be a good little royalist. It's his divine right to tyrant his colonies.

If you're going to royally get rid of him you do it George RR Martin style. Plots, murders and some other toff who's got a claim to the throne because his daddy was related to someone important. You certainly don't start a rebellion that seeks to defy the divine right of kings.

Or you can try being consistent and allow the British people to have their freedom to vote and elect people to run things the way they want, given that you're all for those colonials getting a slice of theirs.

It is not his right because he was not the rightful monarch. The colonials did not have to royally get rid of him, because the true monarchs never ruled over them. They therefore had the right to establish a new independent nation. However if the war continued, causing them to invade England, then they could have put the rightful heir on the throne of England.