Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Better watch your tongue


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Better watch your tongue Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 12:33:14 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

oh of course i agree.

i think julia said it perfectly.  Its where is imposes and or inplies some sort of "real" harm or danger to another.

i dont believe in absolute unrestrained freedom of speech as that negates the next persons freedom.



Now we're getting to the root of the issue. We agree in principle that there are limits to freedom of speech.

The question is, does the word "nigger" cross the boundary. You may not think it causes harm (the key point word in your post). I'm not sure how you would know as my guess is you're not black, I'm not black so can't say.

Hypothetically speaking, what would you say if the general view in the black community is/was they are sick and tired of that bollocks and as far as they're concerned it does cause harm for three reasons:

1) It is an insult designed to degrade.
2) It reinforces centuries of prejudice in the form of slavery and lynchings.
3) Derogatory terms reinforce society's divisions.

If the black community were adamant they believe it causes harm would you still support the rights of people to label members of the black community "niggers".


Like abortion.

Its one thing to say this is really a bad thing and we will not support you doing it with funding whatever.  It is entirely another to pass a law saying it is ok to have an abortion becuase it violates the constitutional right to life!

Calling someone a nigger is entirely different than than "i am going to kill you".

It is improper and it is eoffensive to the extreme but it is also a constitutional right like it or not.  The only way to legislate it is to legislate away our freedom under the constitution and i will never agree to that regardless of topic.

Therefore i support their right to call me a fucking honky ass motha fucka as much as my right to call the a nigga.  They can sue me and i can sue them, that is how the system was set up to work.

If its not clear that does not mean i condone it.  It means i do not want laws that violate our rights at the most fundamental levels.

The result is what we have now and that is government of the corporation.

< Message edited by Real0ne -- 1/26/2007 12:36:52 PM >

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 12:35:34 PM   
caitlyn


Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250
"Political Correctness" is not a "law" it was a term coined by Hillary Clinton in the early 90's.


From: http://www.wordorigins.org/wordorp.htm
(you have to scroll a little more than half way down ... text below)

Another urban myth of our times is that the concept of politically correct was invented in the 1990s by conservatives who wished to lambaste liberals. The term and the concept are both actually much older.

The original sense of politically correct was as a term used to address mixed bodies of people so as not to offend. In 1793, Justice James Wilson in Chisholm v. Georgia used the term to distinguish between the phrases United States and people of the United States (he believed the latter to be politically correct). In 1936, H.V. Morton's In the Steps of Saint Paul referred to the term Galatians as a politically correct way to address anyone subject to Roman rule. In 1955, a translator for Czeslaw Milosz, applied the term to orthodox interpretations of the holocaust in the English version of one of Milosz's works.

The second, and current, definition arose in 1970. This sense the OED2 defines as:

a body of liberal or radical opinion, esp. on social matters, characterized by the advocacy of approved causes or views, and often by the rejection of language, behaviour, etc. considered discriminatory or offensive.

The first cite of this second sense is in 1970's Black Woman by T.Cade. Other early cites include 1975's P.Gerber's Willa Cather and a Facts on File entry regarding lesbian politics. 1978 saw the National Journal use the term. In 1984 it was the Women's Studies International Forum VII that used the term. 1987 saw the Nation pick it up. 1991 it was the Village Voice and 1993 the Utne Reader. The OED2 does not even include a use of the term from a conservative source.

The converse politically incorrect first appeared in 1947, in Nabokov's Bend Sinister. In 1977 the Washington Post used it to paraphrase as statement by the African Liberation Day Coalition.

The abbreviation PC first appeared in the New York Times in 1986.

< Message edited by caitlyn -- 1/26/2007 12:36:37 PM >

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 12:36:02 PM   
starshineowned


Posts: 1551
Joined: 4/19/2005
From: Texas
Status: offline
quote:

If the black community were adamant they believe it causes harm would you still support the rights of people to label members of the black community "niggers".

Yes..because there are ways to deal with this already as I said. It is called "suing". That process where a individual or group of individuals feel they have been wronged, and take a person "offender in their eyes" to court.

If I feel wronged, and have spoken to alot of different caucasions over the years regarding this..that All of caucasions these days who had not a damn thing to do with the slavery in this country are being thrown into the mix ..attempts to make All caucasions guilty of what happened, and that All of America now must in some way pay restitution or give blacks more benefits or opportunitys over caucasions or you hear screamed at the top of the lungs..racism, discrimination is going on. Well yes I am sorry that did happen, but no I do not feel people who did not have anything to do with that era should be made to feel like it was their fault. I know this is not just a in my head mentality either because I've watched enough black people now on tv and in the news telling their own to stop with the whining and playing the race card, stop using history as a excuse for a free ride, get off their ass's and out into the world and make something of themselves.

So does this fall back into "all about me"? I don't know but still I disagree with trying to impose more law to solve problems that people make problems out of when none existed to any extent to cause real harm.

I don't allow such things as being called a bitch or slut or cracker or gringo get under my skin to any point of warranting a need for a law against it. I deal with it, and move on because that is life..good and bad.

Well Wishes
starshine
Happy slave of Master Delvin

< Message edited by starshineowned -- 1/26/2007 12:39:28 PM >

_____________________________

"And in the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years." --Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 12:51:16 PM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: starshineowned

quote:

If the black community were adamant they believe it causes harm would you still support the rights of people to label members of the black community "niggers".

Yes..because there are ways to deal with this already as I said. It is called "suing". That process where a individual or group of individuals feel they have been wronged, and take a person "offender in their eyes" to court.



So, in a nutshell, you're saying a member of the black community has to go through the hassle of suing someone (money, time, effort) because some idiot doesn't have the brain to deal with people in a respectful manner and because you believe the idiot has the right to be idiotic.

Where are the rights you talk of for the black community? Why should they have to go through the hassle of court because of the actions of others? Who gives you the right to say where and when the government should interfere to protect the rights of the black community and other ethnic minorities? You're not black so what do you know about the damage done?

I'm a firm believer in look at the policy, look at its intention and then make a decision. The policy is intended to protect the rights of the black community not to be abused by idiots - forget suing - why should they have to go anywhere near a court just to get some respect?


_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to starshineowned)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 12:58:35 PM   
starshineowned


Posts: 1551
Joined: 4/19/2005
From: Texas
Status: offline 		Think I have more than stated my feelings regarding this issue NG Sir. You don't agree..thats fine.

Well Wishes
starshine
Happy slave of Master Delvin

_____________________________

"And in the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years." --Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 1:01:02 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

So, in a nutshell, you're saying a member of the black community has to go through the hassle of suing someone (money, time, effort) because some idiot doesn't have the brain to deal with people in a respectful manner and because you believe the idiot has the right to be idiotic.


No.
She's saying the issue is already addressed without restricting anyone's speech.

quote:

look at its intention and then make a decision.

No look at the result and make a decision. Intentions are arbitrary and never realized.

quote:

You're not black so what do you know about the damage done?


You're not from the USA and yet...

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 1:02:01 PM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Its one thing to say this is really a bad thing and we will not support you doing it with funding whatever.  It is entirely another to pass a law saying it is ok to have an abortion becuase it violates the constitutional right to life!

Calling someone a nigger is entirely different than than "i am going to kill you".

Of course it is but the point remains you are not black so what do you know about the damage done? A racist slur aimed at you is not the same as a racist slur against a group of people who suffered hundreds of years of slavery and lynchings.
 
The question remains, if the majority of the black community were forthright in saying it caused them harm then what would you say? Crossing the line or not?

It is improper and it is eoffensive to the extreme but it is also a constitutional right like it or not. 

A constitutional right? I'm talking about a point of principle, a concept.

If its not clear that does not mean i condone it.  It means i do not want laws that violate our rights at the most fundamental levels.

I can see you don't condone it. What is not clear from your posts is do you or do you not believe people have the right to cause harm to each other? If the answer is no then would you support this policy if the black community claimed it was causing real harm?

The result is what we have now and that is government of the corporation.

Agreed but it is a massive mistake to think this is because of policies aimed at protecting the rights of the black community not to be abused by idiots. You have a corporate government because, just like us, you sat back and enjoyed the fruits of an economy bouyed by oil profits - no questions asked.



_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 1:13:02 PM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

So, in a nutshell, you're saying a member of the black community has to go through the hassle of suing someone (money, time, effort) because some idiot doesn't have the brain to deal with people in a respectful manner and because you believe the idiot has the right to be idiotic.


No.
She's saying the issue is already addressed without restricting anyone's speech.

quote:



No, the claim is that someone has to sue to deal with the problem in the courts. Time, money, energy down the drain because of some half-wit who can't keep himself together.

look at its intention and then make a decision.

No look at the result and make a decision. Intentions are arbitrary and never realized.

Irrelevant. How can you look at the result of a policy which is being proposed. Let's hear all about the result of the proposal in the link.

quote:



You're not black so what do you know about the damage done?


You're not from the USA and yet...

We're discussing a principle involving the rights of the black community. Britain has such a community too. What are you saying - only Americans have the right to discuss an issue inside the border of the US even though the same issue is played out in other countries? Don't you champion yourself as the individual rights and freedom man - in your mind, is there room for the freedom of a non-American to make point?



What about the rest of my post that you forgot to quote - who gives you the right to say racial abuse should be soaked up by the black community just because you hold an opinion that all government intervention is "bad"?

< Message edited by NorthernGent -- 1/26/2007 1:16:26 PM >

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 1:24:31 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline 		NG,
You continue to debate by contradicting yourself making all your arguments irrelevant. You have fun twisting, and self determining "irrelevance". Change the focus when a rationalization no longer works. You provide no concrete foundation for any position making argument impossible. Just look how in each instance your argument focused changed.

You'll have no further attempt on my part to dissuade you from your rationalizations. I admire your skill in this regard.

I'll enjoy our differences and simply point out when you contradict  yourself. 

Best wishes & Be well!

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 1:29:59 PM   
sleazy


Posts: 781
Joined: 11/23/2006
From: UK
Status: offline 		NG, as you correctly pointed out earlier it boils down to lines.

If the proposed law is passed, how long before another interest group demands the same, the chinese, the disabled, the elderly, the bald, people called fred, where should the line be drawn based on the fact there is already a plethora of legislation that covers harasment in its various forms? Shall the law only apply to that one word, will it only apply if said to a black by a non-black, what if as is common one black says it to another and it is Mrs Grundy from number 42 that makes the complaint. I think a town leader that thinks this is one of the biggest issues facing him should be voted out. Note that the story claimed 30% support, anyone want to place a bet that despite the majority not supporting it the statute books will get it anyway?

You ask why a black should have to sue, well that applies to all the groups I mention, and of course any more that can be imagined. I expect that if somebody was that offended they would sue, as it is the proposal says run to the sherrif, let him deal with it, after all he only has however many else other laws to uphold, and the costs of investigation, prosecution and trial might well be covered if the maximum fine is handed down. At the end of the day, it is a word, not an axe. Before anyone gets on their high horse I personally am a member of many persecuted minority groups, and I think some of the things done "on my behalf" are actually laughable.

_____________________________

Opinion is packaged by weight not volume, contents may settle during transit. Consult you medical practitioner. Do not attempt to stop moving parts by hand. Ensure all safety shields in place. Open this way up. Do not expose to temperatures exceeding 50C

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 1:36:19 PM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline 		Merc,

To sum up our brief, 3 post conversation:

1) You post to me stating my opinion is wide of the mark.

2) I reply to you in order to:

a) Defend my position.
b) Ask you why you (the self-proclaimed champion of individual rights) do not believe there is room for the opinion of a non-American.
c) Ask you why you didn't quote the rest of my post.
d) Ask you a question around your opinion on the rights of the black community.

3) You reply with a series of labels and accusations providing no insight into the concept and principles being discussed in this thread i.e. rhetoric providing no real analysis.

Tell you what, that was a fascinating exchange. Next time, be sure to warn me in advance of the impending enlightenment ahead so that I can bathe in a frenzy of anticipation.

Thanks in advance.


< Message edited by NorthernGent -- 1/26/2007 1:37:07 PM >

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 1:53:11 PM   
caitlyn


Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline 		I think Hillary Clinton is responsible for the argument between Merc and NorthernGent.
 
If not her, it's all the fault of the U.S. Goverment, due to unequal treatment of bald guys ... Merc got a skull cap, and NorthernGent didn't.
 
By the way ... is the 'N' word in question, Nancy Pelosi?

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 1:55:12 PM   
sleazy


Posts: 781
Joined: 11/23/2006
From: UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn
By the way ... is the 'N' word in question, Nancy Pelosi?


I was sort hoping it was "naughty-girl-go-to-my-room", but then I am just feeling that sort of person tonight

_____________________________

Opinion is packaged by weight not volume, contents may settle during transit. Consult you medical practitioner. Do not attempt to stop moving parts by hand. Ensure all safety shields in place. Open this way up. Do not expose to temperatures exceeding 50C

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 2:16:22 PM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

If not her, it's all the fault of the U.S. Goverment, due to unequal treatment of bald guys ... Merc got a skull cap, and NorthernGent didn't.
 


Not even a sniff of a skull cap......US officials have hearts of stone.....

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 2:45:29 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline 		It is just a thought, and a tad off topic, but if the black people do not like the term "nigger" maybe they should learn to set a proper example and refrain from using it themselves.  As much as I do not condone the use of the term it is bullshit telling everyone else they can not use it when they misuse it themselves (and indeed throw racial slurs in the direction of white people... How many times have I seen a black "comedian" do that for instance???).

Just a thought.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 2:46:42 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Where are the rights you talk of for the black community? Why should they have to go through the hassle of court because of the actions of others? Who gives you the right to say where and when the government should interfere to protect the rights of the black community and other ethnic minorities? You're not black so what do you know about the damage done? 


Do you think blacks are the only one discriminated against?

Do you think i have not been the target of racial slurs from blacks?

here is what i said before:
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
It is improper and it is eoffensive to the extreme but it is also a constitutional right like it or not.  The only way to legislate it is to legislate away our freedom under the constitution and i will never agree to that regardless of topic.

Therefore i support their right to call me a fucking honky ass motha fucka as much as my right to call the a nigga.  They can sue me and i can sue them, that is how the system was set up to work.


The point is here NG, if its not worth it to take it to court then what "real" damage has been done?  i mean if some drunk driver runs over your kid and he is paralysed that is "real" damage and you would not hesitate to take them to court.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
Of course it is but the point remains you are not black so what do you know about the damage done? A racist slur aimed at you is not the same as a racist slur against a group of people who suffered hundreds of years of slavery and lynchings. 


Again do you think i have not been the target of racial slurs from blacks?  What group of people did not suffer years of slavery from the hands of someone else?


quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
A constitutional right? I'm talking about a point of principle, a concept. 

yes i understand that and i am talking about a higher princple NG.  That is a principle that includes remedies for the princples you are talking about. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
I can see you don't condone it. What is not clear from your posts is do you or do you not believe people have the right to cause harm to each other? If the answer is no then would you support this policy if the black community claimed it was causing real harm?


Again i think the point is we do have a remedy for this and though you may not agree with it or it may on the surface seem inconvenient to you that does not mean there is no remedy for it.  There is, several have said it yyou sue them and if you in fact have a case you will be awarded damages.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
Agreed but it is a massive mistake to think this is because of policies aimed at protecting the rights of the black community not to be abused by idiots. You have a corporate government because, just like us, you sat back and enjoyed the fruits of an economy bouyed by oil profits - no questions asked.

The point being here that is why we are in the shit mess we are in with the corporations taking over our government.  That is why bush said i can do what i want i am the president.  blatant disregard for the constitution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
No, the claim is that someone has to sue to deal with the problem in the courts. Time, money, energy down the drain because of some half-wit who can't keep himself together.


let me answer with a quote that i totally agree with:
quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin
You (I speak of the public as a collective) know why they are taking away your rights?  Because you are not responsible with them.  You have no idea how to control yourselves and you abuse them.  Some pussy gets offended, the ACLU sees publicity and dollar bills and that is one more "freedom" down the drain.

If the public was not such a bunch of fucking cry babies and whiners and if you did not have the people on the opposite side of the fence that can not control that rattle trap in their puss then this is what you get.

Only you have the power to change it, but you are so selfishly concerned about "your rights" that you completely forget that your rights end where the next person's rights begin....  So you brought it on yourselves.  It will only get worse unless the collective starts thinking about their neighbor rather than their own self-gratification. 


Thats what it comes down to man.  you have to think in terms of "real" damages here, rather than mommy mommy jimmy is calling me names.

It seems to me that you do not like the remedy because it is an inconvenience but that in no way should negate the constitutional princples as a matter of convenience as SK said in the quote above.


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 2:54:52 PM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sleazy

NG, as you correctly pointed out earlier it boils down to lines.

Yes, there is no anti-government and pro-government distinction on these threads - the difference of opinion surrounds which issues/laws we consider to be justified government intrusion in our lives.

If the proposed law is passed, how long before another interest group demands the same,

I accept this point. It opens up the potential for further measures.
 
You have to consider whether or not racism aimed at the black community, in the context of slavery and lynchings, has a greater impact than calling me bald i.e. is this a unique case which deserves unique support.

At the end of the day, it is a word, not an axe.

To you and I it's a word.  What about the person on the receiving end of racism.
 
My point in this thread is really to say that the nature of the law should be considered before reacting with a blanket "they're trying to control us". The government have managed justice on our behalf for a long time so one more law is not going to change the fact that the government have always been in our lives and the lives of Americans (presuming the government is responsible for justice in the US).
 
I simply do not agree with those claiming "individual rights" while deciding for the black community what causes them harm. If invidual rights is such a big concern then let the black community make a decision on the harm caused by the word nigger i.e. don't tell them when they should feel harmed.



_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to sleazy)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 3:10:38 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
Yes, there is no anti-government and pro-government distinction on these threads - the difference of opinion surrounds which issues/laws we consider to be justified government intrusion in our lives. 

Thats not true in our case.  i have pondered the constitutuion often and the amount of forethought that went into it is remarkable.   Its very well thought out so we not only have guidlines but we have a contract with the government as to exactly where those lines are.  Anything beyond is settled in a court room as i said earlier on a case by case basis.
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
I simply do not agree with those claiming "individual rights" while deciding for the black community what causes them harm.


Let me give you another example.   Lets say green people ok,  Now we are living with matians among our community.

Taking your point to its logical conclusion i could say that just the sight of a green person causes the r1 community traumatic irreparable damage, therefore do we pass a law that green people are not allowe out of their houses when a r1 community member is about? 

then what if the r1 community members wants to travel around, do we next say that they have to watch for any r1 community member and quick run in thier house or they will be fined?

i mean you see it gets utterly rediculous when taken to its logical conclusion.

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 3:34:25 PM   
Vendaval


Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline 		Caitlyn,
 
Your research skills are quite remarkable! 
Are you planning on law school after college?
 
Thank you for sharing,
 
Vendaval



quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

From: http://www.wordorigins.org/wordorp.htm
(you have to scroll a little more than half way down ... text below)

Another urban myth of our times is that the concept of politically correct was invented in the 1990s by conservatives who wished to lambaste liberals. The term and the concept are both actually much older.

.


_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE


http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Better watch your tongue - 1/26/2007 4:04:57 PM   
Amaros


Posts: 1363
Joined: 7/25/2005
Status: offline 		Research this:

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-inferiorIQ.htm

Another pet delusion of the Wisconson crypto-fascist movement exposed.

http://www.psychpage.com/learning/library/intell/culture_iq_notes_2.html

Heh, PC makes people smarter...



< Message edited by Amaros -- 1/26/2007 4:07:42 PM >

(in reply to Vendaval)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Better watch your tongue Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125