~~~ Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 All very good. Doesn't answer what McClean is banned from, "purely on religious grounds". Of course, the person who made that statement will never come back and justify it. Its already been answered. Now why would he stand and "show respect" for a song about the bigots in Buckingham Palace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 It clearly does, im assuming you werent dropped on your head at birth? So go on then. What was, McClean banned from, "purely on religious grounds".? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Its already been answered. Nope. Same question. What was, McClean banned from, "purely on religious grounds".? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Are you thick as pigshit or just a terrible troll? Go on then. Indulge me. What was McClean banned from, "purely on religious grounds".? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Im going to answer for him as im pretty sure he's referring to a centuries old law in the constitution of Britain that prohibits a catholic to be head of state, both the monarchy and government Tony Blair may be a war mongering scumbag but it was very interesting that he converted to Catholicism the week after he stepped down as PM. Rico wants to be the queen, aye OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Rico wants to be the queen, aye OK. That was similar to the post I deleted.....better we have The Ps&Ds tell us what "McClean banned from, "purely on religious grounds".?" Monarchy may well be involved here - much to our amusement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Not a clue what you mean. This is a baffling post. What is McLean barred from? I think it means that he's not allowed to marry Prince Harry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Which alias is the staff sergeant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 There is some doubt as to whether the rules forbidding the monarch or their heir marrying a Roman Catholic would or could actually be implemented in practice were they to be tested. In the case of a same sex marriage that isn't going to produce legitimate issue that doubt is heightened. Maybe McLean can be a princess after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 I think it means that he's not allowed to marry Prince Harry On the grounds of consanguinity? Did James Hewitt father both of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRob72 Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Red Rob could be Prince Phillip, a cringeworthy racist balloon So not only a bigot but a racist too now eh !? Jeezo you throw about meaningless unfounded insults like confetti. You tell me anything that I've ever posted on here that in any way could be considered racist. Get off the f*ckin bandwagon and start trying to do some thinking for yourself. F*ckin pathetic !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 Which alias is the staff sergeant? My gut feeling is that he's another Rico alias. The transition from one to the other was too smooth. No doubt a quick IP check will show I am wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 I think it means that he's not allowed to marry Prince Harry That only applies in Northern Ireland, he can marry Prince harry anywhere else in the UK, and, indeed, in the RoI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 That only applies in Northern Ireland, he can marry Prince harry anywhere else in the UK, and, indeed, in the RoI. Topical post. How did that "You can marry but you can't" thing work out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Topical post. How did that "You can marry but you can't" thing work out? The last vote in the Assembly voted "Yes" to equal marriage by 1 vote, with 1 abstention (Mike Nesbitt UUP leader) and 1 absentee (Albann McGuinness SDLP), but the DUP put down a petition of concern*, so the motion failed. * I'm not 100% sure what a petition of concern is, but it's a device to stop either side riding roughshod over the rights of the other side - how this impinges on Equal Marriage baffles me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 The last vote in the Assembly voted "Yes" to equal marriage by 1 vote, with 1 abstention (Mike Nesbitt UUP leader) and 1 absentee (Albann McGuinness SDLP), but the DUP put down a petition of concern*, so the motion failed. * I'm not 100% sure what a petition of concern is, but it's a device to stop either side riding roughshod over the rights of the other side - how this impinges on Equal Marriage baffles me. BBC Article on petitions of concern http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-23247074 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballymoneyyin Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Poppy season is fast approaching. What was once a sombre and respectful commemoration of Britain's war dead has been hijacked by the British far right and turned into a near month of militaristic jingoism. This is perhaps best (or rather, worst) exemplified by supporters of Rangers FC, a club which has long been the sporting wing of far right British nationalism both in Scotland and througout the UK. With that in mind, I'd like to highlight the following startling display of Ibrox hypocrisy (“Ibrocrisy”). Dr John Reid is contemptuously referred to as “Dr Death” by Rangers fans for his role in Britain going to war in Afghanistan and Iraq in the earlier part of this century. Now Reid, being a Catholic of Irish stock and a Celtic fan and former Chairman of that club, would scarcely need any further reason to earn the opprobrium of the Ibrox hordes. Nonetheless Rangers fans, presumably because they oppose these wars, have used his role in these wars as a further stick to beat him with. Here's the circle that can't be squared though; if Rangers fans, or any other citizens for that matter, want to vilify Reid for bringing Britain into these wars, that's fair game. If they want to call him “Dr Death” for the same reason, that’s fine too. But how can they honestly, with a straight face, condemn Reid for his role in starting these wars, which they presumably oppose, yet at the same time treat as heroes the Armed Forces who willingly, voluntarily and without duress signed up to fight these very same wars? You may grant a fool's pardon to the soldiers who were already enlisted at the time the wars began, but any soldiers who enlisted since those wars started knew full well what they were signing up for, all the information about bogus WMDs being used as a false pretence for the Iraq War was public record – and yet they STILL signed up in their droves to fight John Reid's wars. And, what's more, the Rangers fans love them for doing this! So, if the Armed Forces are heroes for fighting these wars then surely Dr John Reid is also a hero for helping to bring these wars about? Alternatively, if Reid is a villain for his role in starting these wars, then surely the Armed Forces who signed up to fight these illegal wars are villains too? Why can't Dr Reid parade amongst his troops on the Ibrox pitch and get the hero's welcome that he's surely due from the Rangers faithful? I've never heard John Reid being mentioned let alone being called Dr. Death. Tell you what though, Dr Death isn't even the catchiest phrase in there, Ibrocrisy is a belter. If you know who you copied this from tell them well done thats a belter How many of the soldiers involved in Iraq signed up for the armed forces specifically to fight in that conflict? Its never as simple as that. Media outlets giving a totally different story to what we know now. Do you think of these things when watching the game? Can you not just watch the football? Reid is called Dr death by the Celtic fans/green brigade. Shite copy and paste. This copy and paste is better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Half Rice Half Chips Posted November 9, 2015 Author Share Posted November 9, 2015 Is a Catholic allowed become Head of State in the UK? I'm not a royalist so I don't know how their racket works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Is a Catholic allowed become Head of State in the UK? I'm not a royalist so I don't know how their racket works.I'm a republican and I can tell you that's an essay question.Summary Officially no, in practice probably. But it would involve disestablishment of the Church of England Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.