Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012
What they were answering
badasimo · 2 points
Well, if you had an elephant you'd be able to feed your family for quite a while with a big enough freezer
u/MisterYouAreSoDumb
That would be killing for food, not participating in animal cruelty. That I would be able to justify.
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · -31 pts
I would withhold my cruelty, even in the worst of times! I would be physically unable to participate in animal cruelty, even if feeding my family relied upon it. There is always another way!
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · -1 pts
Somewhat granted. But you have no idea where my life has taken me. I may be on the internet now, with the ability to make these type of claims to you. However, I have also been in very different circumstances. I have bee
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · -1 pts
You are incorrect about that sir.
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · 0 pts
Yes. We are not talking about killing an animal for food here, we are talking about animal cruelty. I would find another way.
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · 2 pts
My username is just that, a moniker. I did not pick it to insinuate anything about the posters that I reply to.
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · -4 pts
That is a blanket statement. India is a 3rd world country, yet people are taught to respect all life, including animals.
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · 4 pts
ALMOST! My line ends at animal cruelty! I would kill to protect, even kill to provide food. However, cruelty would not be on the table for me.
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · 3 pts
I was not condemning their actions. I was merely stating that I would be unable to participate in that action. My reply was geared toward the notion that anyone would do this to feed their family, which is not the case.
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · 0 pts
Well time will tell on that one, won't it? I seem to have brought myself up from the bottom to run my own worldwide telecommunications company. And I have done all this using my own morals and personal set of values. You
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · 0 pts
Your claim that natural selection will eventually take me was the reasoning for my reference. Call it bragging if you will, but that can be said about any personal reference in positive light. My point was there is neve
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · 1 pts
Granted that there are subjective distinctions on where the line is drawn. I think most people would include hanging a dog in a bag off the back of a truck as past that line though. If you do need to resort to taking a l
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · 0 pts
Nowhere did I say that I was morally superior. It's the same as if I was saying that I would not wear a certain color because I did not like it. I am not condemning the people in question, as I have stated many times. I
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · 1 pts
Well my personal views would dictate that they can feel pain and fear, so I would not want to subject them to that. Again, that is a socialized notion based upon my upbringing, but that is what I have to work with!
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · 0 pts
The implication of moral superiority is subjective you moron! It is subjective based upon your inference, not mine. There was no intentional implication on my part, thus my statement "Any implication otherwise is not int
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · 0 pts
You are arguing semantics. I could call you stupid, while also considering myself stupid. The two are not mutually exclusive. Again, the implication is subjective. You are assuming that there are only two options. The "
Comment · Wed, May 2, 2012 · 0 pts
I too wish you a good life, and perhaps the ability to find a way to not lace condescension into your discussions with people. I hope you find happiness somewhere, because it seems to me that you are a very unhappy, cyni
Replying to Pickledpaws · But it can't put out the fire... in my heart.
That's because the fire in your heart is a Class B. That requires Mountain Dew Code Red sprayed from a My Little Pony spray bottle.
Replying to chagspop · And here's the [video](http://www.jokeroo.com/videos/extreme/horrible-motorbike-and-suv-frontal-crash.html), but it's the same thing. Low FPS, no audio.
Holy crap, the driver of the bike is moving at the end of the video!
Replying to 0Simkin · Wouldn't it just be erotic-asphyxiation? I thought the auto part meant it's a solo performance.
It means you get off to blocking off the intake of Fords.
Replying to dont_knockit · The speed of progression is downright scary. At least if you lose it, it's just your pinky. Sorry if that's a dim bright side, but you know it would be much worse if it were your…
Or ballsack, like the post from the other week. I tell myself that often. At least you don't have necrotizing fascists on your ballsack!
Replying to WorldPeaceIsSoMetta · It's a general anesthetic which is essentially a tranquilizer, in layman's terms. Enough of it and you'll pass out. Recreational users use enough to produce a strong high based ar…
> Recreational users use enough to produce a strong high based around sleep resistance/ a reversing of the mechanisms used in MDMA. What? It's an NMDA receptor antagonist. It blocks the action of glutamate, preventing t
Replying to tooshaytooshay · It's because Mel is, along being a belligerent, abusive drunk like Baldwin, also a racist bigot.
An antisemite in a town run by Jews. I wonder why he doesn't get any parts anymore...