I am a British Citizen NOT an “English Subject”!!!

page: 11
18
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
A few points I wish to make, firstly I regard myself as a Scottish BritvI am from Scotland but whenever I have to declare my nationality I always say I am “British” (Scottish Brit is rarely an option). It is so frustrating when Americans or come to that any people for another country call me and my fellow countrymen “English” we are not.


Most Americans who would claim that are conservatives who eat Freedom Fries for breakfast. Their main source of news is FOX who can't even get Egypt or Iraq (who we are invading) right. Why expect them to know the difference of a Brit and an English person?





Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
Just like we are not all “English” we are not “Subjects” we are citizens, there are almost no true “British subjects” anymore we are all considered citizens of the United Kingdom of Great Brittan and Northern Ireland. The ignorant and snide remarks of “you are a subject, not a citizen” is hugely offensive it is like you do not recognise us as your equal, like you arrogantly think you are above us in some way.


Two words: American Exceptionalism. It's an excuse to justify any jerk behavior.



Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
What is also somewhat ignorant is you view on our laws, particularly when it comes to this odd believe that we live in a “Orwellian state”. There are some in the UK who will complain about “big brother” but for the most part the everyday Brit will never complain about it, we don’t mind it. I for one quite like the fact that there is CCTV at the ATM machine to deter a potential mugger or there is CCTV on a bus to catch out the idiots abusing the other passengers. There are limits, many parts of a true surveillance society I do not agree with but the point is this, the UK is not a “Orwellian state” we are free.


We are a tactile people in the US. We can watch our constitution get eroded with the Patriot Act and subsequent laws but, as long as we don't see the transgressions in the form of cameras, we are "free". Also, guns are a huge factor. As long as we have guns, Red Dawn fans like to hug tight the illusion of being able to take out a tank with an AR15. That's smells like freedom to many of us.



Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
The last point, we are not subject to Sharia law, I don’t know how this myth has started but really we are not it’s just factually incorrect I am the subject of Scottish Law not Sharia law.


That's ironic since most of the people who are afraid of Sharia Law would welcome with open arms their own version of Sharia Law. Christian dominionism is a fantasy that many of them have and their laws would be very similar.




posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   
It's become apparent over the last few day's that there are so many misconceptions between the British and the American people ( and I say British but I am English first and foremost ) but rather than address those misconceptions and actually learn something about each others countries and cultures, from us the PEOPLE and not tabloid crap and media hype and organizations with their own agenda....we instead get stuck in a mode of conversation that is fuelled by emotion and pride.
It's rather ironic considering the interests we all share by being on this place that we are so closed off and eager to accept misconceptions and stereotypes and buy into the crap we are ALL sppon fed, rather than accept the possibility that maybe we didn't know quite as much as we thought we did.
Most that read this will think it's a load of bollocks......because they have already made their minds up!



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


S&F friend ! no other could have said it better

we serve no one but our selfs , and i live in the uk and would never call myself english ,
im WELSH and proud of it


rascal



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


ok, but have you EVER in your life said God save the queen? sworn an oath to her majesty or in any way made a pledge of allegiance to the monarchy?


An oath of allegiance is an oath whereby a subject or citizen acknowledges a duty of allegiance and swears loyalty to monarch or country. In republics, modern oaths specify allegiance to the country's constitution. For example, officials in the United States, a republic, take an oath of office that includes swearing allegiance to the United States Constitution. However, in Canada, a constitutional monarchy, oaths are sworn to the Canadian monarch.

In feudal times a person would also swear allegiance to his feudal superiors. To this day the oath sworn by freemen of the City of London contains an oath of obedience to the Lord Mayor of the City of London.
en.wikipedia.org...

If so, you are subjugated by that feudal superior. And you are then his/her subjects.

I get what you are saying, but to them you are.
edit on 17-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)

I dont live in UK, but I live in a monarchy and have never ever sworn any allegiance to either the monarchs or anyone else.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by CyberTruth
reply to post by zedVSzardoz
 


Well In School starting at about age 5

We were all forced to pledge an allegiance to the flag of the US and the republic for which it stands. Kind of funny how nobody refers to the US as a republic anymore. We've been brain beaten into the idea that now we are a democracy.
edit on 17-12-2012 by CyberTruth because: (no reason given)

I guess that is what freedom is about eh? Being forced to do things against your will...



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   
I'm assuming that the people that say this to you are doing so because there is an idea they don't agree with you on, as if their perceived notion of your subjugation negates whatever argument you're trying to make. I'm also assuming that they don't generally address your argument at face-value?

All this would imply is they don't have an argument against you so they resort to personal attacks.

You should fight back by forcing them to address your points and arguments, and try not to get dragged into having to defend yourself. It's what they want so that you don't realize, and they don't have to admit, that you have a valid argument. It doesn't make your argument right, but it should give you confidence that it is sound.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by GrandStrategy
 


Your words are something that is common on ATS these day, utter disrespect for another views.

Ok your not religious that’s fine, I don’t have a problem with that

I do however take issue with you saying that the Catholic Church can fall over and die.

Its disrespectful, does not add to the debate and has no logic or reason behind it or a explanation for taking such a view.


Who is being disrespectful to whose views. Me for having a view, or you for repeatedly telling me that my view is ignorant and suggesting I'm an idiot for holding it?

This may come as a surprise to you, but repeating to the point of boredom that another persons views are illogical, that they're without reason, that they're ignorant, that's not in itself adding anything to a debate.

My comment about the church was supposed to be disrespectful - I respect neither. Being disrespectful is not in itself a bad thing. I bet if I was disrespectful towards the leaders of North Korea or the mullahs in Iran that you wouldn't be dismissing my views are disrespectful, despite the fact they would be to somebody. Does the disrespect really matter? I don't think it does. It only matters because you don't agree with my views, whether they're respectful or not is an afterthought.

These are cheap tactics you're using. First you bring the church into it as defence, then you try and deny me the right to have views on the church. Am I allowed an opinion on anything here. Ought I message you before posting in every thread, seeking out your approval to post first?

All you've done for the last two pages is belittle me and belittle my views. If you want a serious debate how about try being serious and being a little less hostile and dismissive of people.



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by GrandStrategy

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by GrandStrategy
 


If you are driven to argue that the great majority, who wish to retain the monarchy, are "mentally disturbed individuals " then you've lost it.



I suppose playful comments don't reach as such on the internet, even when followed directly by a wink smiley!


Great majority to one side, 30% of Britons still support the monarchy being abolished. I was just making an observation on the fact that people believing the Queen is doing a good job is not the same as people supporting the monarchy itself. I think the Queen is doing a good job, for what her job is, and yet I don't think her job should exist. The poll you referenced is designed in such a way so as to make the monarchy appear more popular than it is. Only putting it out there so people outside of Britain are clear on this.


Without disputing your figures of a 70% to 30% split, don't you think 70% is a "great majority" ?

UK governments are routinely elected on less than 50 %.


I'd just call it a majority myself. But a great majority I guess is whatever you want, if 70% opposed the monarchy on reflection I might be liable to call that a great majority so it's probably a bit silly for me to dispute the great bit



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 06:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 





Then, in 1997, I got internet access at home which changed everything as I was able to talk to real Americans on a near daily basis. It shattered a lot of illusions.


What were the illusions shattered?



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by zedVSzardoz
 


I'm not calling all Americans halfwits. Not at all. I said "the halfwit American" Which mean the American that IS a halfwit. If I would of called all of you halfwits I would of said something along the lines of " all those halfwit Americans"



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by XLR8R
 


fair enough.

cheers, dude.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by CyberTruth
 


That's right. Funny how history is selective in America....America? Ok, I have something ask here. It's not an attack. I'm just curious as to why Americans call their country America when the name America is clearly a name given to North, Central and South America as a whole. Is it to forget the fact their country has no name per se? Like calling Canada the United Provinces of America.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


ok, but have you EVER in your life said God save the queen? sworn an oath to her majesty or in any way made a pledge of allegiance to the monarchy?


An oath of allegiance is an oath whereby a subject or citizen acknowledges a duty of allegiance and swears loyalty to monarch or country. In republics, modern oaths specify allegiance to the country's constitution. For example, officials in the United States, a republic, take an oath of office that includes swearing allegiance to the United States Constitution. However, in Canada, a constitutional monarchy, oaths are sworn to the Canadian monarch.

In feudal times a person would also swear allegiance to his feudal superiors. To this day the oath sworn by freemen of the City of London contains an oath of obedience to the Lord Mayor of the City of London.
en.wikipedia.org...

If so, you are subjugated by that feudal superior. And you are then his/her subjects.

I get what you are saying, but to them you are.
edit on 17-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)


No, I can't think of any time a British person swears an oath to the Queen, with the possible exception of the armed forces. We don't swear an oath to our flag either. You do swear to tell the truth with hand on bible in court though unless you make it clear you follow a different faith or are an atheist when some other method is allowed, but I'm sorry, not sure what that is off the top of my head.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
It's pretty cut and dry to the rest of the world. You have a royal family, they live off your money.....You are their subjects.

If it is so hateful to you then revolt and get rid of them like we did........it feels great.....or should I say until idiots over here started to change our country into one.



My God, I'm sorry, this isn't a nationalist thing, but do you have any meaningful education? I don't mean Americans, I mean you, timetothink. I know you are female and pride yourself on your rifle prowess, but what do you think you know about our country that makes you think your opinion makes sense?

Royal Family costs less than a pound per person per year and yes, the profit to the economy fairly much wipes that out many times over - many Americans visited the UK this year alone for the Royal Wedding and the jubilee. I'll curb the rest of my comments because you just seem to be in rant mode so not really worth the effort.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by splitfamiliar
 


Then please explain to us simple Americans why you continue to support a monarchy if they have no power over you? Just for the fun of it? Because they are cute like puppies. (Eeeeww).? Please explain?


Why are you saying all Americans are simple? I think it's more a question about you. If it helps, a lot of people think Americans worship and treat like royalty the stars of Holywood and to be quite honest they probably fleece you of more money, but that may be for simple old you to think about.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by GrandStrategy
 


Ah, wow. I guess you missed Sharia Courts, and i don't know, the 21st century. It doesn't matter if you're atheist. I am dumb enough to be a Christian? Youre dumb enough to go to hell, that goes two ways.

Last i checked, America doesn't use Sharia Courts, Britain does. Last i checked, America isn't to afraid to go after Muslims, Britain is .. wait, it's because Britain is on the verge of being ran by Muslims.

Not to mention how militarily weak Britain is. If a rabbit invasion of Britain took place, you'd lose.

reply to post by Ph03n1x
 


I didn't know Bravery had an orgininality to it or is that what you tell yourself because of Scotland's submission to the British?
edit on 18-12-2012 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)


Sheeesh, Sharia law isn't recognised in the UK. If something is legal under UK law, fine, if not, it leads to arrests, if you really want proof of that and if I can be bothered I will find. "America isn't to afraid to go after Muslims" just what on Earth does that mean? Go after what? The faith of Islam is a recognised faith in America, what do you mean by 'go after'?



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 



What is also somewhat ignorant is you view on our laws, particularly when it comes to this odd believe that we live in a “Orwellian state”.


ATS is not a good representation of Americans.

ATS is full of hillbilly right wing extremists. Please do not get the idea that we are all like that.


I salute you, just a shame so many who post a view seem to have very little in the way of actual reality.



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


ok, but have you EVER in your life said God save the queen? sworn an oath to her majesty or in any way made a pledge of allegiance to the monarchy?


An oath of allegiance is an oath whereby a subject or citizen acknowledges a duty of allegiance and swears loyalty to monarch or country. In republics, modern oaths specify allegiance to the country's constitution. For example, officials in the United States, a republic, take an oath of office that includes swearing allegiance to the United States Constitution. However, in Canada, a constitutional monarchy, oaths are sworn to the Canadian monarch.

In feudal times a person would also swear allegiance to his feudal superiors. To this day the oath sworn by freemen of the City of London contains an oath of obedience to the Lord Mayor of the City of London.
en.wikipedia.org...

If so, you are subjugated by that feudal superior. And you are then his/her subjects.

I get what you are saying, but to them you are.
edit on 17-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)


For the majority the answer to that question would be an honest NO.

Even more so in Wales and Scotland.

Its quite possible to be raised in Britain and live your whole life without having to pledge allegiance to anything or anybody. There are no compulsory child pledges of allegiance in school for example. We just don't feel the need.

edit on 19-12-2012 by justwokeup because: typo



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   
sorry i am only on page 3 and this came to mind, maybe its been shared already lol

youtu.be...
edit on 19-12-2012 by meremortal because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


You are a subject of liz. Whether you like it or not. Push comes to shove they will save the queen and let you die.






top topics



 
18
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join