General Election June 8th

[Brown Nose]

No more weird than any other religious person.

I don't mind those that are overtly religious. At least they show you that their brains don't work so you can adjust your opinion of them immediately. A dog collar is akin to a swastika tattoo in that way.

It's those that pretend to be religious for convenience or offer some utter waffle about being spiritual that I can't abide. Agnostics are in this group too; the weak, gutless wankers.

If only the religious could discover what a waste of time their faith has been at the point of their death. That would amuse me greatly. But from the suicide bomber to the dear old lady being given the last rites, they all die ignorant deaths.

 

[Moose]

Nothing gutless about being an agnostic. It's clearly the most logical position to take given what is and isn't known at this point in time.

agnostic
aɡˈnɒstɪk/
noun

1. 1.
   a person who believes that nothing is known of the existence or nature of God.

 

[SwedeFox]

Well, tough titties. In my constituency, there are six candidates and a vote for any of these is less than appealing:

BNP = racist morons
UKIP = backward morons
Conservatives = cruel morons
Labour = incompetent morons
Lib Dems = fatuous morons
Greens = cuckoo-land morons

Which is the least bad option? Genuinely unsure but currently leaning towards the fatuous over the incompetent. Despite that twat Farron and his peculiar Christian weirdness and his bizarre anti-Brexit silliness. Second thoughts, I can't vote for them.

Back to square one.

I find your tirades quite entertaining, BN, but I couldn't help thinking of this post

https://www.talkingballs.uk/index.php?threads/random-news-article-thread.24538/page-78#post-1280554

 

[Jeff]

I find your tirades quite entertaining, BN, but I couldn't help thinking of this post

https://www.talkingballs.uk/index.php?threads/random-news-article-thread.24538/page-78#post-1280554

If you want to link to a specific post, the way to do it is to click on the number at the bottom right of that post, and it should pop up with a url to use.

I think the one you were trying to post is https://talkingballs.uk/index.php?posts/1280554/

 

[FIF]

No more weird than any other religious person.

People will vote for people who believe the same nonsense they do. That's why Corbyn won't admit to being an atheist, he thinks it will lose him votes.


Maybe one day a politician would come out and tell everyone they think religion is total bollocks and harmful to society. That they'll abolish our state religion, remove bishops from the house of lords, remove the special privileges religions and the religious currently have, and abolish religious schools.
The sooner people stop basing their life on an instruction manual from thousands of years ago the better. Religious people should have the same status in society as people who believe in fairies, or think that crop circles are made by aliens. The fact that it's seen as perfectly normal, even good, to believe in that nonsense is holding us back. Moderate religion is like a gateway drug, that some people will use on their way to fundamentalism.

I like .

Farron would put me off lib Dem which is a shame because this election should have seen them bounce back and become the opposition.

 

[Mawsley]

Well, tough titties. In my constituency, there are six candidates and a vote for any of these is less than appealing:

BNP = racist morons
UKIP = backward morons
Conservatives = cruel morons
Labour = incompetent morons
Lib Dems = fatuous morons
Greens = cuckoo-land morons

Which is the least bad option? Genuinely unsure but currently leaning towards the fatuous over the incompetent. Despite that twat Farron and his peculiar Christian weirdness and his bizarre anti-Brexit silliness. Second thoughts, I can't vote for them.

Back to square one.

BN is on a roll.

Free drugs. The magic sky pixie botherer is promising free drugs. If I do vote it'll be going to the free drugs party.

I really would like to hear a compelling argument for voting - I've yet to come across one.

 

[FIF]

BN is on a roll.

Free drugs. The magic sky pixie botherer is promising free drugs. If I do vote it'll be going to the free drugs party.

I really would like to hear a compelling argument for voting - I've yet to come across one.

Because you live in a free country with a possibility to vote. You should take advantage of that even if it's a white vote (or equivalent).

 

[Moose]

BN is on a roll.

Free drugs. The magic sky pixie botherer is promising free drugs. If I do vote it'll be going to the free drugs party.

I really would like to hear a compelling argument for voting - I've yet to come across one.

Obviously because of you don't vote you've wasted your opportunity to properly voice your views.

Let's be honest though people like you don't care, you're happy to have someone else to blame for all your failures. When you're given the opportunity and responsibility to contribute towards change you reject it, because then you'd have nothing and nobody else to blame but yourself, and that would take courage which you don't have.

 

[Ike O'Noclassed]

Obviously because of you don't vote you've wasted your opportunity to properly voice your views.

Let's be honest though people like you don't care, you're happy to have someone else to blame for all your failures. When you're given the opportunity and responsibility to contribute towards change you reject it, because then you'd have nothing and nobody else to blame but yourself, and that would take courage which you don't have.

Well said. I no longer get that worked up ab0ut it but I've long been convinced that the boneheads who take a perverse pride in not exercising their right to vote fall into two camps - those who lean to the left, who end up not voting, and those who lean to the right, who in the end go ahead and vote Tory.

 

[Brown Nose]

I don't think that you can criticise those that don't vote if there is no option of 'none of the above'.

I think that voting should be compulsory for anyone over the age of 16 with that proviso.

In an election without the above, and no attractive option, vote for a local candidate that seems most human.

I've just spent a few minutes reading a little about each of the candidates in my constituency and my field has narrowed.

The Tory is an Oxbridge **** that has no links or ties to this area whatsoever. The Labour fella is an annoying, Brummie, smart arse, student type. The UKIP and BNP candidates are what you'd expect - loathsome.

The other two seem like nice enough, local chaps. So I'm going Green or Lib Dem. Then there is the Farron factor to consider. I cannot bring myself to endorse that prick. So, Green Party it is.

That's certainly a new one for me.

 

[pork pie fox]

I don't think that you can criticise those that don't vote if there is no option of 'none of the above'.

There is that option, though. I've done it before and will do it again, if I see fit. The spirit of Monty Brewster is there, if you want to follow it.

 

[jb5000]

indeed, spoiled ballot papers must be shown to candidates and their agents at the count to be accepted as spoiled. If you can keep it brief and legible, it'll be read*






*and then most probably laughed at

 

[Brown Nose]

 

[TornadoShaunUK]

What do people think about Corbyn's remarks blaming terror attacks on Britain's foreign policy? He's obviously got a point, but I think to blame our presence in Syria over the murderous ideology of Isis is again a bit naïve. Assad stoked up a civil war in Syria, we're over there backing the rebels and you've got terrorist organisations using our presence there as an excuse for carrying out these 'revenge' attacks.

I guess ultimately you just have to look at what is the likely scenario in the event we pulled out of Syria? I would suspect it wouldn't necessarily make a great deal of difference. Isis is not just a problem in this country, or Europe - it's a world threat. Just today they've gunned down 26 innocent Christians in Egypt.

There's obviously also the issue of, whether it's really our business to be over there in the first place, and further more whether it's any of the western powers business - it's not like Britain is acting alone.

 

[FIF]

What do people think about Corbyn's remarks blaming terror attacks on Britain's foreign policy? He's obviously got a point, but I think to blame our presence in Syria over the murderous ideology of Isis is again a bit naïve. Assad stoked up a civil war in Syria, we're over there backing the rebels and you've got terrorist organisations using our presence there as an excuse for carrying out these 'revenge' attacks.

I guess ultimately you just have to look at what is the likely scenario in the event we pulled out of Syria? I would suspect it wouldn't necessarily make a great deal of difference. Isis is not just a problem in this country, or Europe - it's a world threat. Just today they've gunned down 26 innocent Christians in Egypt.

There's obviously also the issue of, whether it's really our business to be over there in the first place, and further more whether it's any of the western powers business - it's not like Britain is acting alone.

If we'd never have gotten involved in any of the "middle east" wars I'm guessing we wouldn't be targetted. The question is whether we should have gotten involved or not.

 

[Brown Nose]

If people from another part of the world came to my home and bombed me and my people and then told me how to live more like them and then put in a puppet government to rule over me, I think I'd be one of the first signing up for any movement to fight back. Irrespective of how twisted and fecked up the regime was that proceeded them.

I think that the UK tends to do exceptionally well internally and exceptionally badly externally all things considered. How anyone can argue with Corbyn's main point is beyond me.

It's absurd to think that the world is united in its values, beliefs and cultures. Maybe it will be one day and international organisations will have a worthwhile purpose, but we're a long way from that point. Sometimes you just have to wait for evolution to catch up.

 

[SwedeFox]

Would be an interesting experiment to obscure the origin of a quote or argument more often.

 

[TornadoShaunUK]

I think what a lot of the 'we shouldn't be over there' crowd tend to miss is that terrorist attacks have been around for years. Al Qaeda was around carrying out attacks in the early 90s, 9/11 was very much the straw that broke the camel's back and is the reason allied countries have been operating in these terrorist hot spots during this century. Terrorists are using our presence in other countries as fuel to encourage more attacks but what is the alternative? Pull out? Are we saying if we pull out of Syria in the like that these attacks will stop? I doubt it seeing as they were going on before we began intercepting in Iraq, Afghanistan etc....

 

[FIF]

I think what a lot of the 'we shouldn't be over there' crowd tend to miss is that terrorist attacks have been around for years. Al Qaeda was around carrying out attacks in the early 90s, 9/11 was very much the straw that broke the camel's back and is the reason allied countries have been operating in these terrorist hot spots during this century. Terrorists are using our presence in other countries as fuel to encourage more attacks but what is the alternative? Pull out? Are we saying if we pull out of Syria in the like that these attacks will stop? I doubt it seeing as they were going on before we began intercepting in Iraq, Afghanistan etc....

You are aware that Britain have been "interfering" in countries that have little or nothing to do with us since long before the 90's aren't you? Even the recent "first gulf war" started in 1990.

People are asking why the **** we put our noses into other country's business? We don't even want European countries having a say about ours when we are part of the EU.

 

[TornadoShaunUK]

The Gulf war came about as a response to Iraq invading Kuwait you flaming sectopod. So in the same manner as the current threat of jihadist groups, we went in to stick up for the good guys. World war 2... same again, standing up against a tyrant. Hitler was in Germany but it doesn't mean you can leave him to go about his business killing off all the Jews and spreading his reach.