Your troll game has fallen off
[Opinion from NYT] Dogs are People, Too
- Thread starter Type Username Here
- Start date
I don't know what ur saying about my partner n all that...... and i don't remember about the kid rape thing, but if I was joking about something then it was funny and I don't take it back. It was probably not how u make it seem, lol. In any sense, in whatever thread that is I'm sure my point is also correct there and I'm also sure that you could not dispute it.
but both points I made here were relevant. The first point is the most relevant point in the thread (realistically, as usual)... the second point relevant to recent events and convos.
Dusty Bake Activate
Fukk your corny debates
at resident gay sex-obsessed homophobes @Blackking and @Hiphoplives4eva reading the article and instantly thinking out loud about people having sex with dogs. 
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2012
- Messages
- 42,423
- Reputation
- 3,805
- Daps
- 152,090
- Reppin
- black love, unity, and music
Shouldn't you be working on your next SONY is the GREATEST or M$ is trash thread?
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2012
- Messages
- 42,423
- Reputation
- 3,805
- Daps
- 152,090
- Reppin
- black love, unity, and music
Didn't your ugly miserable ass claim you would stop posting here with us simpletons? I know you educated liberals turn the ad hominem route when your own twisted logic is used against you.
Since liberals love to cite some "study" as proof of whatever outrageous assertions their feeling, its obvious the entire premise of this article is to somehow grant "personhood" to animals. Even in California, your liberal paradise if you will, dogs are already considered "Dependents" with their owners classified as "guardians." Meaning, they hold the same rights as children essentially in those states!
Soon enough, hitting a dog could end of getting child abuse charges levied against you.
So i'm sure your thrilled that bullshyt scientific articles like this are being created, so that in a few years morons like your self will reference the "hundreds" or articles stating that dogs ARE in fact human, and how we need to respect this "alternative bestiality lifestyle" since we have no business dictating what goes on in the bedroom on two consenting humans.
We see the road you "educated" leftists are heading towards, and we want no parts of it.
And i notice you failed to comment on the question at hand in this thread, but instead chose to attack me with a weak insult. And even though i know liberals like yourself don't believe in having children, humor me for a second. Do you plan on injecting your non existent son with female hormones the day he inevitably decides to start wearing dresses?
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2012
- Messages
- 42,423
- Reputation
- 3,805
- Daps
- 152,090
- Reppin
- black love, unity, and music
Dusty Bake Activate
Fukk your corny debates
So why are you thinking about people having sex with dogs?Didn't your ugly miserable ass claim you would stop posting here with us simpletons? I know you educated liberals turn the ad hominem route when your own twisted logic is used against you.
Since liberals love to cite some "study" as proof of whatever outrageous assertions their feeling, its obvious the entire premise of this article is to somehow grant "personhood" to animals. Even in California, your liberal paradise if you will, dogs are already considered "Dependents" with their owners classified as "guardians." Meaning, they hold the same rights as children essentially in those states!
Soon enough, hitting a dog could end of getting child abuse charges levied against you.
So i'm sure your thrilled that bullshyt scientific articles like this are being created, so that in a few years morons like your self will reference the "hundreds" or articles stating that dogs ARE in fact human, and how we need to respect this "alternative bestiality lifestyle" since we have no business dictating what goes on in the bedroom on two consenting humans.
We see the road you "educated" leftists are heading towards, and we want no parts of it.
And i notice you failed to comment on the question at hand in this thread, but instead chose to attack me with a weak insult. And even though i know liberals like yourself don't believe in having children, humor me for a second. Do you plan on injecting your non existent son with female hormones the day he inevitably decides to start wearing dresses?
I don't think dogs are people, but I strongly support the case for better ethics in our treatment with animals. I think the title of the article is sensationalist, to draw in readers, but other countries have also used the term "personhood" apart from "human." Like India recently jumped on the bandwagon of several European countries by banning the capture and confinement of dolphins in the country, because of scientific evidence showing that they were incredibly smart and self-aware. The argument was that they had "personhood" (defined as sentience/self-awareness and individual identities,) though obviously not humanity, and so they deserved rights and protections associated with that personhood, though that doesn't mean they get all the specifically human rights or are treated like humans.
When did you say this?
I am the one that brought that up,
I'm sure you can make the connect as to why. Reading any article I think of what it states (in this case some str8 BS) , then what it's trying to say (humans eventually should be granted personhood), and what the future implications could be in relation to current convos and events ( well, u see how that played out)
The easy thing to say in response i guess would be........... "well ur a fakkit"
Dusty Bake Activate
Fukk your corny debates
Nah I really can't make the connection. I read this article yesterday afternoon, before it was posted here, and thought about it, and formed my own conclusions of it. Between then and reading your post this morning, and I can say that people having sex with dogs was not a thought that entered my mind at any point. Sorry.
Box Cutta
Bumbling Sidekick
Cacs care about dogs more than minorities....
I see replies all the time that I don't agree with, many aren't even relevant.
I'm not sure y if someone makes a connection or point that u don't agree with y we most discuss it soo much. Just move on.
It would have been better if you simply posted ur conclusion on the OP
Propaganda
Superstar
did you really expect anything else from those guys? i'm just surprised they beat mowgli to the punch.
