OtherkinPhenomena: Forum

Full Version: The evils of Catholicism (and other Judeo-Christian fun)
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Nic Wrote:I think Kreyas mistook you for being an American.

That's kinda random, but I'll take it as a compliment.

(I'm actually British, specifically Northern Irish, so Republic of Ireland events are somewhat local to me.)
Archer Wrote:
Nic Wrote:I think Kreyas mistook you for being an American.

That's kinda random, but I'll take it as a compliment.

(I'm actually British, specifically Northern Irish, so Republic of Ireland events are somewhat local to me.)

Oh, okay. So not some American debating the politics of some far-away land they probably couldn't find on a map... well then that's a good thing <!-- sBig Grin --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_biggrin.gif" alt=":D" title="Very Happy" /><!-- sBig Grin -->.

Quote:"Not having fights" is a bad thing when there is blatant injustice. When there is injustice, fights about it are GOOD. Civil unrest in an unjust situation is a sign that things are working properly.

Again, misunderstanding. I never said it was morally RIGHT. I just said it was quieter. I've never seen you be this iffy and "in-your-face" on werelist (if you ARE the same Archer), so why are you jumping down my throat here?

And I do know where Ireland is on the map, as well as Iraq and Iran and whatever else other country people say Americans can't find, thank you very much.
WhiteFox Wrote:
Quote:"Not having fights" is a bad thing when there is blatant injustice. When there is injustice, fights about it are GOOD. Civil unrest in an unjust situation is a sign that things are working properly.

And I do know where Ireland is on the map, as well as Iraq and Iran and whatever else other country people say Americans can't find, thank you very much.

As do I. However, I've seen the sad state of our public education firsthand, and the stereotype is unfortunately truer than not.

Nic Wrote:
WhiteFox Wrote:
Quote:"Not having fights" is a bad thing when there is blatant injustice. When there is injustice, fights about it are GOOD. Civil unrest in an unjust situation is a sign that things are working properly.

And I do know where Ireland is on the map, as well as Iraq and Iran and whatever else other country people say Americans can't find, thank you very much.

As do I. However, I've seen the sad state of our public education firsthand, and the stereotype is unfortunately truer than not.

It is true, unfortunately. I guess I just don't like getting lumped in with that, seeing how I'm trying hard to pay for college....and the fact that geography's one of my favorite classes ><
WhiteFox Wrote:
Quote:"Not having fights" is a bad thing when there is blatant injustice. When there is injustice, fights about it are GOOD. Civil unrest in an unjust situation is a sign that things are working properly.

Again, misunderstanding. I never said it was morally RIGHT. I just said it was quieter. I've never seen you be this iffy and "in-your-face" on werelist (if you ARE the same Archer), so why are you jumping down my throat here?

You simply said it was quieter, I simply said that it was a bad thing to be quieter; I fail to see how this is jumping down your throat or "iffy".

Yes, I am the same Archer as on Werelist, however I very rarely post and with a higher fluff quotient than I usually like because I'm not overly interested in many of the on-topic conversations.

Quote:And I do know where Ireland is on the map, as well as Iraq and Iran and whatever else other country people say Americans can't find, thank you very much.

Is this addressed to me or Kreyas (the person who first suggested there were two Americans arguing about Ireland, or somesuch)?

Regardless, given Irish-American relations I would be amazed if most Americans couldn't point to Ireland on the map. However given that most of the people of the rest of Europe don't have any more than a vague clue about the internal politics of either Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland, I would be very pleasantly surprised to meet any American, except a relatively recent immigrant of this island, who had much of an in depth knowledge of active political questions here and there.

Re my specific comment, "most Europeans have long since given up on the RoI (oooh look, current affairs reference! Hilarity!)" - this was in reference to the recent Irish "no" vote in relation to the proposed European constitution, and the near immediate attempts by mainstream European politicians to marginalise the Republic of Ireland.

Quote:I fail to see how this is jumping down your throat or "iffy".

No, I was just referring to your writing tone, it sounded rather snappy. Oh well, everyone's got one of those days.

Quote:Is this addressed to me or Kreyas (the person who first suggested there were two Americans arguing about Ireland, or somesuch)?

To Kreyas.
And I heard about that no vote. I'm not surprised. I wonder why a European constitution is needed anyway, I thought the union was mostly trade relations.
WhiteFox Wrote:And I heard about that no vote. I'm not surprised. I wonder why a European constitution is needed anyway, I thought the union was mostly trade relations.

As far as I am aware the point of the European constitution is to guarantee various human rights for all member citizens and to democratise the process (very roughly speaking). As it stands the EU is representative, but not democratic. The problem is that different countries have different needs for what are considered fairly basic rights - eg the EU Working Time Directive (I think that's the one!) does not apply to the UK, because it would prevent junior hospital doctors working mammoth 72 hour shifts.

Implimenting it would mean largely reforming the medical profession in the UK - but on the other hand, that the UK opted out means I don't have the right to sick pay. Nice.

Re the EU being mainly trade relations . . . well, this is a complex thing. Basically the point of the EU, ultimately, is to do whatever is necessary to prevent another war in Europe (whether the Germans start it or not). To that end people have freedom of movement and freedom of work, discrimination based on nationality is outlawed, etc etc. There are limits as to what rules can be placed on import regulations within the EU. The main economic aspect to the EU is the single European currency, which several countries (including my own) have opted out of - through a combination of desire to control one's own economy, and "you can have my pounds sterling when you prise them from my cold dead fingers" mentality.

EU law is not something that I am especially interested in and it is horrendously complicated, but as far as the average person goes, what the EU does is promote freedoms (I can go get a job anywhere in Europe) and protect rights (eg with sex discrimination laws). The EU also does things like guaranteeing people the right to a fair trial, which actually crops up on a regular basis in my work (cries of "Oh shit, I think we just violated that guy's Article 6 rights!" are not entirely unheard of).

Ha, one of my friends also said that (the cold dead fingers quote).
It certainly sounds nice enough, considering how small European countries are (relative to the US I mean), I just question how they're gonna effectively enforce it, with sovereignty issues and all. Time will tell if it works.
WhiteFox Wrote:Ha, one of my friends also said that (the cold dead fingers quote).
It certainly sounds nice enough, considering how small European countries are (relative to the US I mean), I just question how they're gonna effectively enforce it, with sovereignty issues and all. Time will tell if it works.

Well sovereignty in the UK at least is to an extent now a moot point.

Roughly in the UK there is a doctrine called "parliamentary supremacy", which basically states that any law passed by Parliament is absolutely binding on everything *other than* later laws passed by Parliament.

In other words, Parliament can pass any law and it is absolutely binding (even in some cases retrospectively, such as the War Damages Act) - *except* any law which would restrict future parliaments. So while for example the US Constitution is a set of laws that lists some things that the US government can never do, in the UK such a thing is impossible. The benefit of this is, roughly, that constitutional law can easily change according current needs or desires.

Anyway - as a member of the EU, all UK law is subservient to EU law (again, simplified version). This means that Parliament is no longer supreme, or sovereign. So Parliament can pass a law, but if it contracts a European law, tough luck, the EU law is the one that takes precedence.

This is funny because the politicians who freaked out and went mad about this the first time it had a practical effect, are also the same politicians who said nothing when parliament passed a law saying "We're now in Europe."
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Reference URL's