Forced to stand up for the allliagence

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Ah, but SS is an American, and disagrees with you, that was her point.

You are trying to tell me I am wrong to think what I do because all Americans think that way. Aside from the basic premise there being untrue, the fact of it is also wrong. A very great deal of Americans do not think that way, and I find what they say far more convincing than you, and I find the facts agree with them.

Oh NO NO. Back the truck up there oh arrogant one. I never EVER said ALL Americans do anything.

Originally posted by Fire
Then atleast finaly a person who doesn't hide behind them and abuses them severly

Most people in the US have no idea what their rights really mean, and twist them totally out of proportion. Like the "right to bear arms"...people see that and think "but it says I can have a gun!" They don't realize that what it really means is that each state has the right to maintain their own militia.

In Illinois (and probably other states as well), you're required to take and pass a government class before you can graduate high school. And it's not like most classes where you can fail a test or two but still be okay if you get a passing final grade...you MUST pass EVERY test in that class. A good half of my class didn't pass and had to retake all the tests. That's sad.

Well, actually, when you brought my nationality into it, you did kinda imply that. And you made out that I could not disagree with what you said because you were a middle-aged American.

I am afraid that logic simply does not scan.

Originally posted by finti
ohh those found memories of Civics classes

I actually really loved that class -- I like politics (a lot), and my teacher was awesome. I found it very interesting...plus we debated a lot.

Originally posted by Silver Stardust
Most people in the US have no idea what their rights really mean, and twist them totally out of proportion. Like the "right to bear arms"...people see that and think "but it says I can have a gun!" They don't realize that what it really means is that each state has the right to maintain their own militia.

Ush, Im not going to get all hacked off. Your wrong in my opinion, and nothing you quote or bring as a statistic in here is going to change my mind. Give it up man. You are beating a dead horse.

Originally posted by Jedi Priestess
Yep, that was the original meaning. Im curious Lana. Do you agree with the last statement?

In these days, it is totally outdated, so I'd have to say that it's pretty pointless today.

I actually really loved that class -- I like politics (a lot), and my teacher was awesome.

Originally posted by Silver Stardust
In these days, it is totally outdated, so I'd have to say that it's pretty pointless today.

That'd be my take on it as well. But I know some people that consider the National Guard units of each state that very thing. Of course there are a few states that still have their own militias, even if they are in hiding.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
The UK flag scores full marks for being the most complexly developed, being basically four flags overlaid in each other, with the Welsh dragon totally removed- I would assume not to annoy them, but instead because it really wouldn't go on.

Union Flag origins

ROTFLMAO Corran! hysterical

Leave it to you to jump in at this moment with that post. You never cease to crack me up. hug

Fair enough!

SO Finti, lets talk about those Americans you know intimately? naughty

Glad to be of some assistance 😉

Aaaaaaand....thread is now likely derailed.

Originally posted by Corran
Glad to be of some assistance 😉

Well lets just move you into my house. You can provide my daily chuckle. 😉

SO Finti, lets talk about those Americans you know intimately

Aaaaaaand....thread derailed.

Yes, but it took 7 pages.

Originally posted by Silver Stardust
Aaaaaaand....thread is now likely derailed.

Dang Lana, Corran beat you to it this time. 😉

I tend to not derail threads I'm debating in 😉

Originally posted by Jedi Priestess
Ush, Im not going to get all hacked off. Your wrong in my opinion, and nothing you quote or bring as a statistic in here is going to change my mind. Give it up man. You are beating a dead horse.

Well, if you want to say it is your opinion that's fine, but earlier you stated it as fact. You have also stated it is arrogance which is hardly fair as I have spent the time and trouble to learn about this area and gather opinions, and the balance of ideas in this area does not, as far as I am concerned, agree with you, and others agree with me, and to see that as arrogant is... odd.

Bit late in the day to not get hacked off, I am afraid. But to bring itt
back to base- how do you explain the enormous and demonstrable anti-patrotism of times past, compared with your own view that it is only the younger generation that has ever signifcantly felt like this?