|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 9:21 pm
Sir_Cathl_Peabody You have some unrealistic ideas about the world. Relationships protect you from STDs? I doubt the probablities for getting STDs are significantly different for relationship sex or not if you're using protection. And you should be.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 9:30 pm
Chalda Sir_Cathl_Peabody You have some unrealistic ideas about the world. Relationships protect you from STDs? I doubt the probablities for getting STDs are significantly different for relationship sex or not if you're using protection. And you should be. Trust does not protect you, it makes you vulnerable. Besides, women have this habit of coming up with every excuse to avoid having sex. They think their commodity will appreciate in the eyes of their potential lover by withholding it. They wish to get concessions before they give up their v****a for use, concessions such as committed relationships. By your comment, it seems that you too would fit nicely into this mold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 9:31 pm
Or we have morals... sorry about that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 10:05 pm
xLaurelX ButterBalls xLaurelX Damn leprechauns... xp
I think we should blame everything on one person. But not Bush, that's to trendy.
If not, president Bush, then I blame his wife. Obviously Bush is not getting enough sex or it wouldn't have taken him 7 minutes to make a decision. Considering that guys think about sex every 5 seconds. So, get that woman in bed and spice her up or something.
Just to clarify I'd probably say the same thing for male spouses of the president.
In all seriousness though I'd have to say God. If the Right is going to blame everything good that happens on God then it's only fair to blame everything that's wrong on him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:01 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 11:30 am
That game was hard..... crying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 2:34 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 2:49 pm
Have you ever looked up the definition of conspiracy? Did you know you can be arrested for conspiracy?
*COUGHCOUGHWEAPONSOFMASSDESTRUCTIONCOUGHCOUGH.*
Someone just cough? No coughing in a library.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 2:57 pm
Conspiracy is a loose charge based around secretly planning an illegal act. I'm too lazy to look up the "real" definition, but that's what it's been applied to in the past. DeLay was charged with conspiracy because he secretly planned to launder moneies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 2:59 pm
Soleq Conspiracy is a loose charge based around secretly planning an illegal act. I'm too lazy to look up the "real" definition, but that's what it's been applied to in the past. DeLay was charged with conspiracy because he secretly planned to launder moneies.
Delay. Delay. That wrings bell. I think Tom DeLay was the main guy in the Schiavo case as far as media goes. Guy seems like a real son-of-a-b***h, literally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:02 pm
DeLay is an idiot, and its about time he was arrested.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:19 pm
Soleq DeLay is an idiot, and its about time he was arrested.
[For the sake of argument I'd like to back up another thing Tom DeLay did. When he put snippets of pictures and film from Schiavo's 4 hours of tape out into the media, it was illegal. From what I know, nothing happened to him. I wonder why.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 3:42 pm
Not to change the subject, but I was discussing religion today and remembered the following:
"Organized religion has been sane since two nudists have taken dietary advice from a reptile."
And it make me smile.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 4:54 pm
Chalda Or we have morals... sorry about that. That is another cop-out. You can redefine your morals at any time to be up to date with new information, unless of course you derive your morals from a religious source. In that case your excuse is even weaker. Aside from religion being completely ridiculous, you seem to be ok with having premarital sex, and this is not part of the code of any religion. Not only are you lying to yourself and others about your true motivations, you are a hypocrite by going against your own professions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:07 pm
Sir_Cathl_Peabody Chalda Or we have morals... sorry about that. That is another cop-out. You can redefine your morals at any time to be up to date with new information, unless of course you derive your morals from a religious source. In that case your excuse is even weaker. Aside from religion being completely ridiculous, you seem to be ok with having premarital sex, and this is not part of the code of any religion. Not only are you lying to yourself and others about your true motivations, you are a hypocrite by going against your own professions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
