Does the thread now make more sense, or less sense?
Just curious.
King James VI and I was very much against that kind of fag: he wrote A Counterblaste to Tobacco in 1604.
What part was a lie?
I mean, sure it’s kind of dickish to tell kids there’s no santa claus, but it’s not a lie.
I kept seeing this thread and I kept not clicking.
And then I clicked.
You people are weird as fuck.
Would that be a good (rolling around on a bearskin rug in front of a huge fireplace in a mountain lodge stocked will all of your favorite food and drinks with the object of your heart’s desire) fuck, or a bad (passed out drunk in a cramped dorm room on a vomit-stained mattress with the pimpled roommate of the person across the hall who isn’t of your sexual gender preference) fuck?
Just wondering.
Um. I’ll have to think on that one.
Perhaps more of an “I’m not gay, I’m in the imprisoning chains of my monarchy!” fuck.
A “Help, help, I’m being repressed” fuck?
The big size 7 part.
So, you’re saying that Argent Towers really does believe in God, but doesn’t want us to know about Him? Otherwise, I don’t think you can say that’s a lie.
…a Monkees fan.
AT didn’t say he didn’t believe in God, he said there is no god. Since this is unknowable , there has to be a little prevarication there somewhere.
Nope. To prevaricate, you have to say something that you know is not true. So, he could be wrong, but he couldn’t be lying.
This probably goes double if all available evidence supports or fails to refute his claim.
This is all remeniscent over the arguments about whether Bush lied or just didn’t know. Whatever the case, screaming in bit black bold letters that there is no God carries zero weight as any sort of statement of fact. It is a premise, and flies in the face of my own experience. And so, I reject it.
The premise that there is a God flies in the face of my own experience. (Subject, of course, to which God you’re talking about. It seems to vary. Lighting isn’t forged by Hephaestus, in my experience…)
I seem to recall that you don’t believe in the Christian God, who allegedly interfered mightily with the world many times and would have left undismissable evidence behind. That God doesn’t exist.
Sodomy and the lash, please.
I really, sincerely hope you realize that the big black bold letters proclaiming “there is no god” was a joke. It was not an attempt at actually trying to debate the issue of atheism. I was joking about how this thread had turned into a debate about atheism, remember?
But dude, it was an assertion, and we’re in GD, and in GD any assertion is a serious… wait, hold on a moment.
Um…
Can’t we dish the atheists and get back to the hot man-on-monarch action? And speaking of fags, kings and the Bible… (may not be safe for work, contains classical image of male nudity)
Seriously, that’s what I’ve been trying to say for the past 2 days. There are enough threads about atheism. I want to talk about homosexual kings and their humpy young boy-toys.
Speaking of which, I present Rudolf II, Holy Roman Emperor. (Codpieces were pretty common during that period but I don’t think I’ve ever seen one which curved so far upwards, protruding above the hem of the jerkin.) Wikipedia says:
“During his periods of self-imposed isolation, he reportedly had affairs with his court chamberlain, Wolfgang von Rumpf, and a series of valets, one of whom, Philip Lang, ruled him for years and was as a result hated by those seeking favor with the emperor.”
Wolfgang von Rumpf. That’s a wonderfully gay name. Although…
It seems that later in life he preferred the “bear” look.
I’m left wondering how a guy could NOT be gay in the times of James I. Just look at the fashions! Hosen and codpieces and ruffs around the neck… and then they started wearing wigs and patches on their faces and velvet coats and such.
I think we should vote the 17 and 18th centuries the Gay Years. When men were men and women were left in peace. 
And jsgoddess is right: there is no place weird in an ordinary way than this place. Well done, all!