.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
]
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
]
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to DestroyYouAlot NLI.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="DestroyYouAlot%20NLI:352794"]Christina said:[QUOTE]It is crazy fucks like you that are over-analyzing the constitution and coming up with fucked up things like “Well, the constitution doesn’t say that gays can’t marry.”[/QUOTE] Well, not to get all "crazy", but it, er, you know, [i]doesn't[/i]. I mean, technically. [QUOTE]You think that our Forefathers (and you fucking Marxist pigs want to call them Framers to be PC – fuck you!) blah blah blah hysterical FOX news watcher-ese[/QUOTE] I suppose if they had fucked some willing female legal document, and nine months later the aforementioned document spewed out a mewling little baby document, and they all passed around cigars, then forefathers would be more appropriate then framers. And if the natural evolution of the language or the way it's used had anything to do with the mythical "PC", then that would apply, too. (Oops, sorry, "intelligent design" of the language would be equally as valid, don't want to get your feathers all in a ruffle.) Anyway, I'm sorry, I was busy making sense, you were saying...? [/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.004 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][