Kid Rock confirms Michigan Senate run

[Adam Lambert]

I'm on your side man calm down. I too enjoy anal and think those who think it should be illegal are re ed.

You just seem very passionate about the subject so I wanted to know how much anal a person with your passion is getting a month to see where I stack up. Like I said earlier, I get anal around once every 2 months. How much anal are you getting in a month?

im not passionate about it at all, yall just keep asking me about it. ive had anal a handful of times in my life, i prefer the vag and the mouth.

its not about me. its a fundamental example of how republicans claim to be about personal freedom but are still the party that gets up in peoples most personal business more than the others.

where you put your .
what you do with something thats growing inside your body.
whether you can regulate your period a certain way.
what bathroom you can use
what gender you can marry
whether you can smoke one thing but not the other.
when you can buy booze.

[Trill Clinton]

This thread got pretty gay

[TSA]

im not passionate about it at all, yall just keep asking me about it. ive had anal a handful of times in my life, i prefer the vag and the mouth.

its not about me. its a fundamental example of how republicans claim to be about personal freedom but are still the party that gets up in peoples most personal business more than the others.

where you put your .
what you do with something thats growing inside your body.
whether you can regulate your period a certain way.
what bathroom you can use
what gender you can marry
whether you can smoke one thing but not the other.
when you can buy booze.

You must have really really liked anal. I've had it many more times than you and I'm still not as passionate

This may come as a shock to you but the only thing we disagree on from your list is bathroom use. I'm of the opinion that if you have a , you piss in the men's room, and vice versa. I'm also of the opinion that there should be an additional option for a unisex bathroom at the same location.

[sickdsm]

im not passionate about it at all, yall just keep asking me about it. ive had anal a handful of times in my life, i prefer the vag and the mouth.

its not about me. its a fundamental example of how republicans claim to be about personal freedom but are still the party that gets up in peoples most personal business more than the others.

where you put your .
what you do with something thats growing inside your body.
whether you can regulate your period a certain way.
what bathroom you can use
what gender you can marry
whether you can smoke one thing but not the other.
when you can buy booze.

Agree with the use the pisser if you got a comment.

Other than that, I don't think anyone has an issue with what you do with your liver, bladder, heart, cancer growing inside your body. I think the issue is when there is another life inside ones body.

[sickdsm]

You must have really really liked anal. I've had it many more times than you and I'm still not as passionate

This may come as a shock to you but the only thing we disagree on from your list is bathroom use. I'm of the opinion that if you have a , you piss in the men's room, and vice versa. I'm also of the opinion that there should be an additional option for a unisex bathroom at the same location.

I'm assuming that its more about the freedom than the act.

[Adam Lambert]

then glad to see you both agree with me that this question is re ed

So how are republicans intervening into you and your womans ? Is their something beyond they won't let me get high ?

[Quadzilla99]

How much white trash is there in Michigan? I mean does he have a chance?

[SnakeBoy]

then glad to see you both agree with me that this question is re ed

The question served it's purpose just fine.

intervention into my and my womans .

its not about me.

[spurraider21]

forget all my ideals, i vote democrat for the buttsecks

-lambert

[DarrinS]

forget all my ideals, i vote democrat for the buttsecks

-lambert

Thanks for making me spit perfectly good beer.

[RandomGuy]

Does that mean we should be dropping more bombs in the Middle East?

Ok, so you don't agree with the proposition that we should have reducing human misery as goal?

[RandomGuy]

"unwanted babies"

How exactly do you hold someone accountable for that?

Doesn't that punish a child for something their parent did?

(edit)

Is *that* moral?

Unwanted pregnancies more specifically. If they don't want to have to give birth or raise a child because of inconvenience, it shouldn't be up to an irresponsible person to decide to kill a child, that is immoral. But the mother and father who want to murder their responsibility are "miserable" because their child doesn't fit into their plans right now.

Killing is immoral in anyway. Defining what life is to justify murder is even sicker. The irresponsible parents can stop being "miserable" in 9 months by delivering the baby and giving it up for adoption AND they do the right, moral thing while being held accountable for their actions.

So your solution is forcing parents who "can't afford" to have kids to give up their kids for adoption? Essentially force women to be pregnant?

If they can't afford to take care of themselves, or don't know how to, you risk women going through pregnancy and doing things that harm the living baby anyway, such as drugs/alcohol, or even as simple as not eating right.

Your solution is having the government:
1) Force women to be pregnant.
2) Force those women to give birth (a dangerous medical procedure)
3) Force these women to give up children for adoption.

What happens to the children who will be born with severe developmental problems that no one wants to adopt?

What would you do with those kids?

[RandomGuy]

Forgot to say thanks for that interview. Very interesting indeed and is must read for all of the "lol deep staters" here.

You're welcome.

[RandomGuy]

Eh. Nice try but I've got little sympathy for Paula

Did Paula finish college? If so what was her degree in?

Each little difference sneaks by unnoticed.

[Blake]

Each little difference sneaks by unnoticed.

Rich kids have it easier. Always have, always will. Things we know.

Lol the cartoon almost seems like it's pro-voucher

[RandomGuy]

Rich kids have it easier. Always have, always will. Things we know.

Lol the cartoon almost seems like it's pro-voucher

Sure we know it.

Now, what do we do about this knowledge?

What should we?

[Blake]

Sure we know it.

Now, what do we do about this knowledge?

What should we?

Not sure based on the limited info given.

Would do you think we should do?

[SnakeBoy]

2) Force those women to give birth (a dangerous medical procedure)

lol you have him in a corner but like all libs you can't help but exaggerate your case with some bull

[tlongII]

Ok, so you don't agree with the proposition that we should have reducing human misery as goal?

So you think we should be dropping more bombs in the Middle East. Got it.

[RandomGuy]

So you think we should be dropping more bombs in the Middle East. Got it.

I am merely trying to establish a baseline here by asking what you think. Whether or not you can be honest is on you.

If you don't want to be honest about something that simple, when asked respectfully, what does that say about you as a person?

[tlongII]

I am merely trying to establish a baseline here by asking what you think. Whether or not you can be honest is on you.

If you don't want to be honest about something that simple, when asked respectfully, what does that say about you as a person?

And I'm telling you that the answer to the question has far reaching implications. For example, would you agree that human misery is rampant in the Middle East and North Korea? What would you propose to do about that?

[RandomGuy]

And I'm telling you that the answer to the question has far reaching implications. For example, would you agree that human misery is rampant in the Middle East and North Korea? What would you propose to do about that?

You were merely trying for yet another strawman attack on me. Again, says more about you and your ideology than anything else, which I contend is morally and intellectually bankrupt. When you can't answer straightforward questions on morals, you make my case on that for me.

Sometimes I use your (and DarrinS ) posts as teaching points for my own boys. They aren't very impressed with the quality of your arguments, nor your intellectual honesty, when I explain to them what that is. You are better than many, even so. They were really put off by vy65 saying that he would prefer that the poor children should "starve". Some of their classmates are pretty poor, so they know what poverty is firsthand.

The answer to your questions:

Yes and yes.

NK would require a destructive war, which would cause far more misery than letting them suffer. A moral calculation there says we do nothing that would start a war.
The middle east (north Africa, and south east asia) requires investment and economic development. Oddly enough China seems to be taking the lead there in some ways. Go them. Personally, I would be all for a basic living allowance for all of them.

[RandomGuy]

https://www.google.com/search?q=romanian+orphanage

Read up. This is the result of policies that Republicans want to push on us. No abortions, no social safety net, no taxes to pay for anything. Republican nirvana, writ in an actual country.

[tlongII]

You were merely trying for yet another strawman attack on me. Again, says more about you and your ideology than anything else, which I contend is morally and intellectually bankrupt. When you can't answer straightforward questions on morals, you make my case on that for me.

Sometimes I use your (and DarrinS ) posts as teaching points for my own boys. They aren't very impressed with the quality of your arguments, nor your intellectual honesty, when I explain to them what that is. You are better than many, even so. They were really put off by vy65 saying that he would prefer that the poor children should "starve". Some of their classmates are pretty poor, so they know what poverty is firsthand.

The answer to your questions:

Yes and yes.

NK would require a destructive war, which would cause far more misery than letting them suffer. A moral calculation there says we do nothing that would start a war.
The middle east (north Africa, and south east asia) requires investment and economic development. Oddly enough China seems to be taking the lead there in some ways. Go them. Personally, I would be all for a basic living allowance for all of them.

Well I'm glad you can use my posts as teaching points for your kids.

I am not morally bankrupt though regardless of your opinion. I just don't think you have an accurate world view.

[RandomGuy]

Quote Originally Posted by RandomGuy

2) Force those women to give birth (a dangerous medical procedure)

lol you have him in a corner but like all libs you can't help but exaggerate your case with some bull

Childbirth is incredibly dangerous based on what I have read, especially historically. Our evolution has given us heads that are often too big for the pelvic girdle.

If you think this is an exaggeration, prove me wrong. Show me mortality data here. State-wide, national, and globally. How dangerous is it really?











or, just be lazy and continue to be ignorant.

Personal responsibility (see for yourself), or laziness (blanket assumption I am wrong). There is a third option, personal responsibility with intellectual dishonesty. You could find out the information, realize it wasn't much of an exaggeration, and decide not to put the information here, and admit you are wrong. (find out the information, and be dishonest enough not to admit fault)

The decision is yours.