The Liberal Phalussee

Watch out for the liberals...er, homosexuals in here trying to liberate your rectum.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

You might not like what he says but he does know what he's talking about...Read it again it's logical.

Honey, why did you put talcum powder in my
underwear?" "It's not talcum powder. It's Miracle
Grow."

A guy walking down the street sees a beautiful girl approaching. When she gets near him he grabs her pulls down her skirt and underwear, he then starts to eat her pussy. When later arrested he claims he can’t be charged with an offence on religious grounds. You see he was a Christian and was only doing unto others as he would like them to do unto him. Love your logic.

Stadium of light and Urs Meier still couldn’t see.

The problem with your logic is you seem to be completely missing the ball on what Liberals think. Liberals never seem to want to put the blame on an individual, it's always something else. "Oh, it's not your fault your fat, it's corporate America selling you unhealthy food!" "Oh, it's not your fault you have 6 kids, no husband, and no job, it's inner city poverty!" "Oh, it's not your fault you got pregnant, it's your daddy issues! Here, have an abortion!" These are things Liberals say. I'd find it very hard to come to the conclusion that "Oh, it is your fault you were raped, you dirty slut!" can come next.

The problem with your argument is that you say a woman denying someone sex means that somehow she isn't treating him as an equal, even if she's a slut. That just isn't true and you know it. So then, by that logic, Liberals think that any woman who has sex with multiple partners must then have sex with every man they know? Come on now... You know that's not true.

Liberals, in that situation, wouldn't blame the woman and probably wouldn't blame the rapist (where the blame really goes). They'd probably make up some sh<b></b>it like "Oh, it's not your fault you raped that woman, it's because of your tough childhood!"

--
"There's more to life than profits."
<font color=red>"Like what?"</font color=red>
"Like, you know, Slurpees and stuff."
<A HREF="http://images.southparkstudios.com/media/video/707/slurpees.mov" target="_new">South Park</A>

And how would your propose that we talk about "things" without putting labels on them? BTW you are putting a label on us by calling us retards.

He that but looketh on a plate of ham and eggs to lust after it, hath already committed breakfast with it in his heart. -C.S. Lewis

OK point taken. I'll agree that labels should not be used unless everyone agrees on the definition.

He that but looketh on a plate of ham and eggs to lust after it, hath already committed breakfast with it in his heart. -C.S. Lewis

There is no such thing as a liberal. All Liberal governments are usaully more to the center than the left.

I agree with Ksoth here, that logic just doesn't seem to make sense. I understand the story and heck, I'd love to smack whoever uses that logic, but I just don't think it would exist in a liberal. Hate to say it but this time I'm going with the other people here.

--

<font color=red>NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
<font color=white>XXXXXXX<font color=green>S<font color=white>XXXXXXX
XXXXXX<font color=green>SSS<font color=white>XXXXXX
XXXXX<font color=green>SS<font color=orange>g</font color=orange>SS<font color=white>XXXXX
<font color=red>NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN</font color=green></font color=white>

There is no govrenment that is hardcore liberal. They are mostly in the center. Liberal is just an idea that was thought up a long time ago and the name just stayed.

Actually there WERE hippy societies where denying someone sex was considered wrong, and those WERE the leftist extremist of their day!

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

So you're not saying that left wing extremists are any worse than right wing extremists, are you?

Personally I think that both are crazy.

He that but looketh on a plate of ham and eggs to lust after it, hath already committed breakfast with it in his heart. -C.S. Lewis

<i>Edit - Ah, nm - you posted under me and pretty much answered.</i><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by confoundicator on 07/14/04 03:42 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

They both ARE crazy. It's just that liberal ideals are expressed more often than conservative ideals amoung our members, hence they're easier to play with

BTW, the whole "Rock the Vote" campain should be called the "Vote Liberal" campaign, because they believe the people they're reaching have been influenced effectively by their sociopolitical phillosophy. I'd LOVE to see it backfire and have a traditional moderate take office. That's right, traditional doesn't always mean conservative.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

------------------
LOL, You might find flaws in my logic, but more than likely you'll simply disagree, but I went to University for 5 years just so I could learn how whacky the left is. Had I wanted to learn how whacky the right could be, I would have went to seminary maybe.
-------------------

Heck the seminarys are some of the most screwed up liberal places there are. I am a Christian and frankly very few of the people I hear speaking are talking about anything close to Christianity. Look at the new episcopals taking on first women priest and then gay priests then a gay leader. Homesexuality is an abomination to GOD (and nature as well if you are one of those types of people). Look at the catholic church and the child molestors. Look at all the ivy league schools. It is a cultural "religion" that has nothing to do with Christianity. In my humble opinion at least about 90% of them are as liberal as one can get.



The thing that boggles my mind is how evil the world is. I mean the muslim extremists can suicide bomb routinely in Isreal and other places, hijack plans and run them into buildings killing everyone, take captives hostage and kill them..etc. Even the so called muslim "clerics" routinely issue hits on people whos philosophy the don't agree with. Yet the average person in this ungodly world would rather bash a Christian than be "intolerant" to any of these people. And I am not a hater. I do have muslim friends. As a matter of fact I work with recovering drug addicts most of whom are black. Due to malcomb x, ferricon and that crowd many of them consider themselves muslim now.

I say this though, Christians are routinely martyred daily over the world, and no one says a thing about it. The media and the academic institutions are for the most part very biased. People are always talking about the seperation of church and state in this country. People need to read the first amendment for themselves and see what it actually says. Many people who were the first white settlers of this country were fleeing religious persecutions in other lands. Many were Christians, some were Jews. The thing the founding father's feared was Rome ie the Roman Catholic Church having control over this country. That is precisely what the first amendment of the bill of rights adresses. It was freedom of religion. Freedom of Christian religion. Other people could come to this nation but they would see by our example this was what some have called the spiritual Isreal. This country was founded on Christian principles. The Declaration of Rights opens with this assertion. People need to read that as well. For all the faults of our nation and we have certainly had our share (nothing man has ever done ever has been or ever will be perfect) this is the greatest nation that has ever existed, blessed by GOD far beyond any other nation on the face of the earth in all of history (with the obvious exception of Isreal, birthplace of JESUS the CHRIST my LORD and SAVIOR).


People have fought and died for it for generations and now people are pissing and shiting all over it. Frankly it makes me mad as hell.

----------------------
I'm an opportunist...so I don't really give a care.

Do what you want.

As for that guy being rape, good for him. He deserved it for being a racist.
------------------------

I hope that is a joke and a bad one at that in very poor taste. Even it if it is it is still about the most ignorant thing I have ever read. These liberal democrats better quite rabble rousing and trying to harness the black man's anger to get the notorious black block vote. Some of them are getting smart enough to see through it once they get some education and fair treatment, and have some children that they want to grow up in a better world.

As for the rest of the blacks that are already tuned in to that vibe don't think they need much of a push to set off a race war. It is just lying there under the surface seething. They might kill me when it happens, as that seems to be what you want but they will get plenty of you too. Don't think just because you are some "bend over and take it in the ass liberal fag" they won't kill you just the same ergo mad max or natural born killers’ style.

And don't think it doesn't exist on the other side too. Not even talking about the racist and rabble-rousers I am talking about these average kids who go off and shoot up their school. My theory is that many of them are just average kids, not jocks so they don't get special treatment. Not black so they don't get special treatment. Not even perhaps the top students. They look around and see the jock, black and otherwise going with the best looking girl at school etc. They just seethe and get all twisted up inside, do some drugs, get more twisted up, live in this ungodly culture that does thinks like condone the murder of unborn children and get more twisted up and then something just breaks. People in the society have lost the ability to love is what it all boils down to.

And frankly, I'll go ahead and put it out there because I can hear the typical liberal fag comments already. I am not a hater. I don't believe the prejudiced man is going to heaven. And I do struggle with some prejudice in my own life despite the fact I know it is wrong. People are people and every person is unique with their own strengths and weaknesses. Some people have also been through many forms of what could be called "hell" on earth perhaps. Prejudice is simply laziness. That is all it is. Rather than take the time to evaluate someone on their own merits the prejudiced person just puts a whole group in the same "box". Personally, I don't like interracial relationships. I think people should be proud enough of their own race (whatever that race is) to preserve it. But the ungodly government of this nation wants a mulatto society so they don't have racial conflict. That came straight out of the think tank. Unfortunately, (for the idea at least) like many things man attempt to do, it backfired and blew up right in our faces. It just creates more hatred and mistrust for the most part. Maybe I am just bitter because I see the white race seeming to go the way of the cowboy. I shouldn't worry about it though. The world has become too ungodly to go on much longer anyway I believe.

-----------------------
A guy walking down the street sees a beautiful girl approaching. When she gets near him he grabs her pulls down her skirt and underwear, he then starts to eat her pussy. When later arrested he claims he can’t be charged with an offence on religious grounds. You see he was a Christian and was only doing unto others as he would like them to do unto him. Love your logic.
-----------------------
YOU have got to be f-ing kidding...I take it back about what the other guy said. These are the two most ignorant things I have ever seen written. "Joke" or not. And you are saying you "love (someone elses) logic"?????? Kid when you turn 15 and learn to think for yourself try reading a book and listening before you talk. And don't just listen to the liberal fags either. Learn to think for yourself instead of being (brain)washed around like driftwood.

<font color=black>yippie ki ya, m..........<font color=black>

My friend, you are fresh hot off the plate coming to this forum. Methinks you will be "shaped" juuuuuuuuust about right.

--

<font color=red>NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
<font color=white>XXXXXXX<font color=green>S<font color=white>XXXXXXX
XXXXXX<font color=green>SSS<font color=white>XXXXXX
XXXXX<font color=green>SS<font color=orange>g</font color=orange>SS<font color=white>XXXXX
<font color=red>NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN</font color=green></font color=white>

OK, we'll stop making fun of Eden.

Wait....no we won't!.

<font color=blue>War</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Eagle</font color=orange>
"I am not a role model." - Charles Barkley
{FTM}<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Auburn9698 on 07/14/04 10:11 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

Hey, I'm not here to argue religious principle. But there are several HUMANITARIAN principles which have been distorted to be anti-personal freedom based on their connectivity to religion. But I'll name a few:

Cheating on your wife: This is treated as a "religious" issue even though the humanitarian side is overwhelming: 1.) Men are forced to pay to raise a child that isn't their while the father goes free to do it again without consequence, even if the man later divorces his wife. 2.) The unknowing partner can get an STD, even AIDS, from the cheating partner. 3.) Jealousy by the scorned lover OR the new partner can cause violence or death! Etc, etc, etc. These things are mostly ignored by liberals because the commandment "though shalt not commit adultery" leads them to believe that tolerance of this behavior should be ENCOURAGED based on their anti-religious principles.

I'm sure as a RELIGIOUS person you can come up with some of your own examples, but most of the 10 commandments of the Christian Bible are given to strengthen society and protect people.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

Ahh the 21rst Century poster child for Christianity I see.

--

<font color=red>NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
<font color=white>XXXXXXX<font color=green>S<font color=white>XXXXXXX
XXXXXX<font color=green>SSS<font color=white>XXXXXX
XXXXX<font color=green>SS<font color=orange>g</font color=orange>SS<font color=white>XXXXX
<font color=red>NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN</font color=green></font color=white>

Nah, my point was basically that people who call themselves liberals don't even follow their own ideals. And part of that is they tend to do the following:

1.) Release a guy several times on fairly light sentences
2.) After they've had too much of the guys crimes, they start demanding harsher penalties for everyone.

Most of the people I see saying "Guys only serve 18 months on murder or rape these days" are fairly left leaning TV personalities. Fact is, in MICHIGAN people serve VERY harsh sentences. For example, if you steel money from the desk of a business, you get 4 years for "Larceny from a Building" (I know someone who did that). Now, if you get a 4 year sentence, you'll serve at least 40 months. If you're lucky enough to get a 1-4 instead of a 4 flat, your first parole date will be in 10 months, and you'll probably get denied. And because it takes so long for most people to reach trial, be processed, and get a parole hearing, they'll likely be jailed for at least a year before they even see the board, even though their 1 year minimum is really 10 months with "good time".

So "liberals" are split on this, some demanding harsher sentences just like the "conservatives" do, others demanding lighter sentences. And in MY state they don't even have a clue about how sentencing really works, they thing we're on California rules or something.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

-------------------
That is precisely what the first amendment of the bill of rights adresses. It was freedom of religion. Freedom of Christian religion.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Careful there. I don't remember it referring to any single religion.


-------------------
It's implicit, read my post in full. The point being is that the first amendment does not say "separation of church and state" in any way shape or form to the point that children shouldn't be allowed to pray in school. As a matter of fact the amendment itself (part of the bill of rights-the first 10) indicates nothing of the kind most people routinely reference it regarding. And technically you are correct, it does not mention any specific religion. If people knew the history and understood the backdrop they would realize the spirit of the law. Unfortunately, at least in part due to the fact that we have a glut of lawyers many of whom are dishonest and ungodly, usually court decisions are based on the letter of the law and not the underlying intent.

---------------------------
Ahh the 21rst Century poster child for Christianity I see.
---------------------------

Naw, just a voice crying out in the wilderness is all. If one person thinks and perhaps even seeks GOD because of any of the things I have written all the insults don't mean a thing. And even if not at least I have stood in my own integrity. After all, it doesn't take any kind of man to flame someone else on an annonymous chat site.

<font color=black>yippie ki ya, m..........<font color=black>

So who is God? You seem to know. Is he an agreeable fellow with a long flowing beard and hair and a golden crown? Is he an extra-dimensional being that we can't possibly concieve? Is he an image in the minds of primitives struggling to comprehend nature? Is he an ideal of perfection that we should all strive for?

Please clarify.

He that but looketh on a plate of ham and eggs to lust after it, hath already committed breakfast with it in his heart. -C.S. Lewis

-----------------------
I'm not implying anything about WHERE the commandments come from, I'm stating the simple fact that ...the 10 Commandments serve a purpose OUTSIDE religion, be it Christianity or Judism. And that purpose is to prevent civil unrest.
----------------------
Agreed. And I think that is the point. I see them as related and the same and I agree with MOST of your post. I would say of course they all do serve the purpose of giving us some much-needed guidance. The two things are not disconnected. That is what I believe they are intended for after all.

And Crash if you are getting fired up at me, don't. You have helped me a lot with my computer issues and I consider you a friend. I wouldn't purposely do anything to "hurt" or "disrespect" you even if I disagreed with you. Or at least if I did I would likely apologize for it later. It is a normal conversation at least as far as you are concerned. The thread was already 3 pages long when I found it. Since you started my first response was to your first post and so on.

As you can probably tell they are some issues I have given quite a bit of thought to. If I hadn't seen your post I would have probably started my own anyway.

<font color=black>yippie ki ya, m..........<font color=black>