Hookabelly
Well-Known Member
Sarah Sliverman is not as funny as she once was…Saw her this past summer live. All she could talk about was anal sex. She's a better writer than stand up comedian now. (list not withstanding)
sarah silverman's handy rape prevention tips
- Thread starter UncleBuck
- Start date
TBoneJack
Well-Known Member
Sarah and anal sex seem to go together...I'm just sayin'...
Hookabelly
Well-Known Member
Yeah, but it got boring after 15 minutes of that bit. I know she has other funny stuff...
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
it's odd that someone who constantly argues to allow skin color based discrimination now wants to foster civility.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I want to "allow" people to make their own choices about their own bodies and their property, and not force those choices on others
You do not, you think using force to make others choices for them is acceptable.
Which of those kinds of people is not fostering peace? Hint- you.
I win again!!!
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
so you think denying goods and services to people based on skin color or sexual orientation fosters civility, but civil rights do not.
RAPE!
Hookabelly
Well-Known Member
That's a turn off…unseemly.
Last edited:
Pinworm
Well-Known Member
Her stand up doesn't do much for me either. I think her show was better. Definitely well written. And, the cast was funny as shit, too.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
If you're a Rolling Stone reporter/editor, don't make up a rape story and get caught bull shitting the country. If you march around with a mattress on your back protesting a rape that didn't happen, apologize and rethink your naivety.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
there we go!
i was just waiting for you to come by in order to mock and belittle rape victims.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
]
There was no rape victim in the RS fiction. Hard to belittle a victim that does not exist.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
no one ever gets raped, they were all just asking for it and making it up because they regretted it, eh?
that's the message you constantly go with.
i don't think that anyone is surprised that a white supremacist homophobe is also a rape apologist.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I think dictating to others how they will use their own bodies and their property under threat of force is not a civil act.
I think forcing people to integrate or forcing them to segregate is not a civil act.
I think whenever people have to use force to facilitate an interaction, civility is not part of the equation.
I think all people have the right to chose their interactions free from threats.
I think you shit your pants again too.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i think you are a bigot, and so does everyone else on this forum. the only support you get are from fellow bigots.
have you told your gay son that you think he is inferior and deserves to be barred from stores because he is gay?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
You are free to draw the wrong conclusions about a person, me, that has consistently advocated voluntary and peaceful human interactions. I don't think my son is inferior. I think he understands that he has no right to force anybody to interact with him that prefers not to.
Neither he or I, have to agree with a person to understand that we have no right to run their life for them or use force to avail ourselves of someone else property. You seem to ignore conversation about that part. You find it acceptable to threaten people that don't want to interact with you. I don't.
see4
Well-Known Member
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
You believe in the following:
This is the basis of your entire argument.
No it isn't. You are implying I approve of the choices people make about their own property, when I am simply recognizing if it truly is their property, it's not my business to tell them how to use it or the business of anybody else. I feel the same way about a person and their body. It's not up to me to run others lives, until they try to run my life or deprive me of my property.
You are creating a position for me that doesn't exist. That means you're losing.
see4
Well-Known Member
By this statement alone, we can conclude you think statutory rape, by definition is not actually rape, and is ok.
You state, specifically, that anything consensual requires the consent of involved parties, you are state, specifically, that nobody should be forcibly coerced into making a decision they do not want to make. Therefore, you are saying statutory rape is ok.
You are one sick fuck.