The "god" that asshole believes in is nothing more than a spoiled brat with anger issues and super powers.  It would be less of a hassle to go straight to Hell rather than spend an eternity trying to stay on the good side of such an irrational being.

fnord wrote:

The "god" that asshole believes in is nothing more than a spoiled brat with anger issues and super powers.  It would be less of a hassle to go straight to Hell rather than spend an eternity trying to stay on the good side of such an irrational being.

That's the part that these good little Christian boys and girls don't even begin to fathom.  If their god is truly the psychopath they say he is, what do they think he'll do to them?  Could you see a heaven where everybody is ducking for cover and hiding curled up in the fetal position afraid because god is on another rant and he's looking to tear some of them a new (spiritual) asshole?

Sounds like logic right out of Friday the thirteenth century.

I'm in agreement with the repubicans on this one, but replace the word "God" with "Nature." Nature is fond of rape, if one judges by its prevalence amongst the kingdom animalia. Our momentary delusion that "rape is bad" makes no sense at all in the face of the overwhelming evidence. Rape, my friends, is a natural way to spread your sperm - bless the little fellows. If the repubes win your election, perhaps High-Street should market a Repubican Rape Kit (I'm assuming that repubican women enjoy being raped more than democrunt gals). I'm not sure what all I'd put in there, but certainly:

A nice soft rope
A ball-gag
A blindfold
A collapsible spreader-bar
Benzodiazapine (Roofies make it easier on everybody)
Plastic cable ties (11" multi-coloured should do the trick for all but the fattest, strongest victims)
Lube (she'll thank you for it!)
Some small gauge tubing to break the vacuum-lock if she goes into vaginismus
A bible, and maybe some Chick tracts
A thank-you note for not aborting your baby
A gift of tiny clothing - pink and blue for either eventuality
A small frame for a signed photo of yourself (so your kid will know who his daddy is)
Five bucks (she might need a drink when she wakes up)

ah Rape.  What a lovely subject these days when a woman can change her mind halfway through consensual sex and have you jailed (and I don't mean "wrong hole" kind of halfway through).

The right-wing have over-played the "Pro-Life" concept so far that this is where we are, makes one desire to vote with his feet and spend a couple of decades in Bavaria or even Ireland.

Fucking fundamentalist, they won't be happy until we're all dead...

Being gay is wonderful!  Outside of prison, rape is rare because it isn't necessary in order to get laid if you're halfway presentable!

phreddy wrote:

I've wondered about that.  They say rape isn't about sex. It's about domination, anger, and other fucked up emotions.  There really aren't that many rapists per capita and I would bet that there are just as many angry dominating homosexuals as their are hetero ones.  I would also speculate that homosexual rape goes unreported much more often than does hetero rape.  Any thoughts on that?

Damn dude - you are really playing the closet fundamentalist now...    ...we had absolutely no idea you harbored a submissive rape fantasy.


What's next, airport bathrooms?

Tall Paul wrote:

Supreme Court releases alleged rapist because victim did not fight back enough.

Shit, we haven't impeached anybody for years now! How about starting with Scalia and Uncle Thomas?

that ruling has been overturned by the Connecticut Supreme Court

Umm... not to be picky, but the last time I looked Scalia and Uncle Tom were working for the US Supremes, not Connecticut.

This whole argument has been tainted over the years by the usual PC bullshit, which wishes to bludgeon plastics into steel and Einstein into Moses, much to the detriment of discourse, civility and logic. In my wildly speculative opinion there is a difference between rape and the stealing of innocence. Sweetness should be left to abide; sourness or preternatural female-foulness should be treated as an invitation to strip, spread and sweeten with the magical froth of fruition. Still, and I stress this, some cunts are not all cunts, and should not serve as the basis for broad legislation. My inner caveman, one of my more blunt and guileless personalities, assures me that some cunts deserve to be raped, and that some cunts beg to be raped, but that most cunts are sweet and sacred, and should be put back on the pedastal from whence they came.

Last edited by WilberCuntLicker (2012-10-28 17:53:44)

Tall Paul wrote:

whosasailorthen wrote:

Tall Paul wrote:

Supreme Court releases alleged rapist because victim did not fight back enough.

Shit, we haven't impeached anybody for years now! How about starting with Scalia and Uncle Thomas?

that ruling has been overturned by the Connecticut Supreme Court

Umm... not to be picky, but the last time I looked Scalia and Uncle Tom were working for the US Supremes, not Connecticut.

You're right, my mistake, but are you saying it's a bad idea anyway?

No, just make sure your gun for this one is pointed in the right direction.

Shit, we haven't impeached anybody for years now! How about starting with Scalia and Uncle Thomas?

Last edited by peter9091 (2012-11-05 07:20:00)

I can't disagree with Peter.

phreddy wrote:

How about Peter, Paul, and Kitty read the constitutional standard for impeachment.  Making rulings which give you heartburn does not rise to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors".

If you want to impeach someone, how about we take Obama out for refusing to send military aid to our ambassador and the others pinned down in Benghazi because it would mean admitting we still have a problem with al qaeda, even after he personally killed Bin Laden.

Edit:  Oh wait, that's what we are doing tomorrow.

Damn Phred - how about we take out your buddy Boner for cutting off funding for security at our Embassies?  What the hell did you expect to happen when you de-fund security??  Were Obama and Clinton supposed to take their old asses down there to reinforce the security detail?  And what do you propose to do with the regional security commander who gave the "stand by" order.

And why weren't you there to drive the Marine Strike team from the Benghazi airport to the Consulate??

So many questions without answers, please Mr. MondayMorningQB, tell us how you would have done it.

Hey Phred - What ever happened to "No more Vietnams"?

Taint wrote:

butt-pals?

Heh-heh!  Taint mentioned "butt-pals"!!

Taint wrote:

phreddy wrote:

How about Peter, Paul, and Kitty read the constitutional standard for impeachment.  Making rulings which give you heartburn does not rise to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors".

If you want to impeach someone, how about we take Obama out for refusing to send military aid to our ambassador and the others pinned down in Benghazi because it would mean admitting we still have a problem with al qaeda, even after he personally killed Bin Laden.

Edit:  Oh wait, that's what we are doing tomorrow.

How about we take Bush, Rumsfeld, and Cheney out for putting hundreds of thousands of American soldiers in harm's way in Iraq in a movie which did little more than leave a couple thousand US soldiers dead, thousands more maimed, kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and rake in huge profits for Bush and Cheney's butt-pals? All on the basis of faulty, fully discredited "intelligence"?

Did I miss something, or aren't we still waging that war?  Oh, I forgot, Obama claimed victory and his butt-buddies in the press are pretending it's over.  And, of course, Afghanistan is the "right war" because we're still there.  One more day and this idiot is a lame duck.

phreddy wrote:

One more day and this idiot is a lame duck.

(click da pic for more)

Auto-edited on 2020-08-02 to update URLs

hat of a hat of a hat.

What's interesting, though, is the degree of the shock at the loss. NPR did this really interesting story about the lead-up to the election and how those who wished could simply not be exposed to any information suggesting that the president would get re-elected--what we're seeing in those pictures are a bunch of people who never even saw this coming.

The other interesting thing is the number of posts there equating this with the death of America. I have no theory about this hysteria, but it's a pattern. Mandate health insurance the same way we've mandated auto insurance for years? That's communism. He's raised taxes significantly less than Reagan, but Obama is the TAX MONSTER. Passed or suggested exactly zero laws about more gun control--HE'S COMING TO TAKE OUR GUNS AWAY OH SHI-

George Orr wrote:

ah297900 wrote:

Passed or suggested exactly zero laws about more gun control--HE'S COMING TO TAKE OUR GUNS AWAY OH SHI-

All the rest is just the usual BS--a bit more hyperbolic this cycle, I admit--but the gun thing has always perplexed me.  A vocal segment of the nutbag right has been banging that drum since 2008, and a number of people seem to believe in it with unshakable conviction.  Where did this notion come from, and why does it still have legs?

Unfortunately they've been banging that NRA drum since the '80s (as far back as I go), stupid fucks can't take YES for an answer.

Last edited by Emmeran (2012-11-09 21:01:46)

Emmeran wrote:

George Orr wrote:

ah297900 wrote:

Passed or suggested exactly zero laws about more gun control--HE'S COMING TO TAKE OUR GUNS AWAY OH SHI-

All the rest is just the usual BS--a bit more hyperbolic this cycle, I admit--but the gun thing has always perplexed me.  A vocal segment of the nutbag right has been banging that drum since 2008, and a number of people seem to believe in it with unshakable conviction.  Where did this notion come from, and why does it still have legs?

Unfortunately they've been banging that NRA drum since the '80s (as far back as I go), stupid fucks can't take YES for an answer.

Yeah, these days the NRA seems to mostly exist,  to ensure that the NRA exists. I hear that in the old days they were a decent organization, promoting hunter safety and responsible gun ownership. When I had a membership for one year in the 80s, they mostly begged for money. There were a few parts of their magazine that was interesting though.
Back to the election: I was to take possession of a new Remington 870 Tactical on election day. When the dealer called the feds, they put the sale on hold. It took two more days before they would allow him to release the gun to me. The reason given, according to them, this election day had the most gun sales in recorded history and they were swamped*. Of course I heard it second hand, and they probably have kept records on this only as long as they have been doing the background checks, but still, what does that say about these citizens if true? 





*Or maybe that's what they told him to say, so as not to alert me that I'm on a list somewhere.