Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 32.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
4 minutes ago, mchookem said:

i felt my first wood at church...heathen catholics so we had youth dances and Brian R. was definitely 'happy to see me' as we danced to Open Arms 😆

1*G3lwR5SgLq90OQaH1f0ojw.gif

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, mchookem said:

i felt my first wood at church...heathen catholics so we had youth dances and Brian R. was definitely 'happy to see me' as we danced to Open Arms 😆

[Brisketexan, Catholic school kid of similar vintage, checking his ID to confirm his name wasn't "Brian R."]

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
1 hour ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

Yep. Now church is exclusively for lame people who aren't even interested in sex. At least not unless you want to marry them or something. It's truly sad what religion has turned into.

My first heavy petting session was with my gf at an MYF function…thought there really was a god for a few adolescent minutes.

  • Haha 2
Posted
5 hours ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

We get rid of trump when he dies.  That's it.  He'll be POTUS until his  death.   Hopefully,  that happens before 28.

28 of this month, hopefully. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
19 minutes ago, mchookem said:

i felt my first wood at church...heathen catholics so we had youth dances and Brian R. was definitely 'happy to see me' as we danced to Open Arms 😆

I'll bet Father Brian was happy to see you. At least he was into chicks. That progress for the Catholic Church.

  • Haha 3
  • Drool 1
Posted
1 hour ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

Yep. Now church is exclusively for lame people who aren't even interested in sex. At least not unless you want to marry them or something. It's truly sad what religion has turned into.

I went to a large church in suburban Dallas in the 90's and 2000's.  (You can probably guess which one.)  I slept with at least five women I met there.  They weren't that different from other women.  The only difference is they'd want to get married NOW.

  • Haha 2
Posted
49 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

What these fucking moronic, idiotic, brain-dead FUCKING ASSHOLES don't get is what we've been telling them for fucking years: when these fascists say they're gonna just dispense with constitutional rights for "the other," you fucking morons think you're part of the in-group. Nope.  In fascist regimes, literally EVERYONE eventually becomes "the other."  And once you've established that constitutional rights are disposable, don't count of keeping any of yours, you pieces of shit.

If rights aren't universal, they aren't rights.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, bolverk said:

If rights aren't universal, they aren't rights.

And they JUST.  DON'T.  GET THAT.

They think they can simultaneously wave around the "I'm a constitution-loving conservative" flag while also waving (in practice) the Wilhoit's Law flag (in-groups the law protects but does not bind, vs. out-groups that the law binds but does not protect).  Once you create and iimplement the Wilhoit dichotomy, it's all over but the shoutin'. 

Well, fellas, it's all over but the shoutin'.  Your precious Second Amendment means precisely as much to this admin as MY First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, etc.  When you decided to light the whole fucking thing on fire, don't be fucking surprised when everything burns.

Edited by Brisketexan
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, CooterBrown said:

Much ado about nothing.  So, 24% of young people attend church...a number that is barely higher than current Millennials and Gen Xers that have already given up on organized religion.  By the time these kids are 40, they'll have the lowest church attendance of any generation.

According to survey data from the Barna Group, a Christian research organization, Gen Z-ers who go to church are more frequent attendees than churchgoers from older generations. Twenty-four percent of Gen Z-ers go to church every week (a slightly higher rate than for millennials and Gen X-ers).

 

I understood it to be it’s a similar number, but they are more radical and drawn to the shittiest parts of religion like misogyny and oppression. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Man, that guy had the feels deep inside.  He just went of all improvisational.  Plus, he was 100% correct.  I wanted to laugh but my allergies acted up, AGAIN.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Jesus Christ 

 

Jesus, the whiny tittybaby white persecution complex is in full bloom.

These people are the most pathetic, candyass snowflakes in American history.  I mean, they're also liars (seriously....find me the case of "criminal consequences for N word were greater than criminal consequences of murder of white person."  I'll wait).

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 2
Posted
3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

And they JUST.  DON'T.  GET THAT.

They think they can simultaneously wave around the "I'm a constitution-loving conservative" flag while also waving (in practice) the Wilhoit's Law flag (in-groups the law protects but does not bind, vs. out-groups that the law binds but does not protect).  Once you create and iimplement the Wilhoit dichotomy, it's all over but the shoutin'. 

Well, fellas, it's all over but the shoutin'.  Your precious Second Amendment means precisely as much to this admin as MY First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, etc.  When you decided to light the whole fucking thing on fire, don't be fucking surprised when everything burns.

This is tangential, but did y'all know that the Frank Wilhoit who originally said that line is not the political scientist, but another Frank Wilhoit who was posting a comment to a blog post? This Slate article goes into it more, but it's such a weird coincidence.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Run that dude for office.  Preferably a powerful one.  I'll scratch out a check to candidate "I fucking call it like I see it."

"What's that good sir?  You said that if a motherfucker steps to you, stand your ground and hit em in the fucking mouth.  That sounds like you support continued Israeli attacks and occupation of Gaza.  You have just failed Democrat Purity Test #837....good day"

  • Drool 1
Posted
58 minutes ago, The Ace of Aces said:

SCOTUS is gonna strike down the voting rights act, they announced this evening 

i assume Louisiana and/or assface admin filed the suit... in these cases who argues for the defendants, or whatever the other side is? like, a private entity? or are these cases just one sided? i honestly don't know how these cases work...

Posted
1 hour ago, The Ace of Aces said:

From the article:

In 2013, Roberts wrote for the majority in gutting the landmark law’s requirement that states and local governments with a history of discrimination, mostly in the South, get approval before making any election-related changes.

“Our country has changed, and while any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions,” Roberts wrote.

I’d like someone to ask Roberts if our country has changed and legislation should be passed to speak to current conditions regarding the 2nd Amendment or are we still acting like it’s 1791.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
4 hours ago, ROFL BOX said:

Messenger_creation_ED811A8D-4FE8-432F-8C2B-738D9271A5E7.jpeg

I remember watching Hee Haw in the early 80s before hitting the age of awaking and thinking, "Some of these women make me feel funny."

 

hee-haw-honeys-660x1014.jpg

 

  • Haha 1
  • Drool 1


×
×
  • Create New...