Page 7 of 13

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2002 11:36 am
by smartguy240
Third base man Thrid Base...get it right ;)

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2002 11:45 am
by Andrew_Baker
SMG, yo momma so skinny she uses a Cheerio as a Hula Hoop.

Yo momma so ugly, she has to wear a pork chop to get the dog to play with her.

Yo momma so poor, she has a platinum LINC card.

I was going down on your momma and had to keep picking beef and corn out of my teeth. I told her I was going to get sick. "Funny," she said. "That's what the last guy said."

Yo momma so loose, I have to strap a board to my @$$ to keep from falling in.

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2002 11:53 am
by smartguy240
Yo mama so fat she looks like she's smuggling a Volkswagon!

Yo mama so fat God couldn't light Earth until she moved!

Yo mama so fat NASA has to orbit a satellite around her!

Yo mama so fat whenever she goes to the beach the tide comes in!

Yo mama so fat when she plays hopscotch, she goes New York, L.A., Chicago...

Yo mama so fat she's got Amtrak written on her leg.

Yo mama so fat even Bill Gates couldn't pay for her liposuction!

Yo mama so fat her legs is like spoiled milk - white & chunky!

Yo mama so fat I had to take a train and two buses just to get on the her good side!

Yo mama so fat she wakes up in sections!

Yo mama so fat when she goes to an amusement park, people try to ride HER!

Yo mama so fat she sat on a quarter and a booger shot out of george washington's nose.

Yo mama so fat she rolled over 4 quarters and it made a dollar!

Yo mama so fat when she lies on the beach no one else gets sun!

Yo mama so fat when she bunje jumps she goes straight to hell!

Yo mama so fat when she jumps up in the air she gets stuck!!!

Yo mama so fat she's got more Chins than a Hong Kong phone book!

Yo mama so fat that her senior pictures had to be arial views!

Yo mama so fat she's on both sides of the family!

Yo mama so fat everytime she walks in high heels, she strikes oil!

Yo mama so fat she fell and made the Grand Canyon!

Yo mama so fat she sat on the beach and Greenpeace threw her in!

Yo mama so fat even her clothes have stretch marks!

Yo mama so fat she has a wooden leg with a kickstand!

Yo mama so fat she has to use a VCR as a beeper!

Yo mama so fat she broke her leg, and gravy poured out!

Yo mama so fat when she rides in a hot air balloon, it looks like she's wearin tights!

Yo mama so fat she got hit by a parked car!

Yo mama so fat they have to grease the bath tub to get her out!

Yo mama so fat she has a run in her blue-jeans!

Yo mama so fat when she gets on the scale it says to be continued.

Yo mama so fat when she wears a yellow raincoat people say "Taxi!"

Yo mama so fat she got to iron her pants on the driveway!

Yo mama so fat she put on her lipstick with a paint-roller!

Yo mama so fat when she tripped over on 4th Ave she landed on 12th

Yo mama so fat when she bungee jumps she pulls down the bridge too

Yo mama so fat she steps on a scale & it goes one at a time please

Yo mama so fat she fell in love and broke it!

Yo mama so fat she jumped up in the air and got stuck!

Yo mama so fat she fell in love and broke it.

Yo mama so fat when she sits on my face I can't hear the stereo.

Yo mama so fat they use the elastic in her underwear for bungee jumping

Yo mama so fat when they used her underwear elastic for bungee jumping, they hit the ground.

Yo mama so fat when she back up she beep.

Yo mama so fat she jumped up in the air and got stuck.

Yo mama so fat she has to buy two airline tickets.

Yo mama so fat when she fell over she rocked herself asleep trying to get up again.

Yo mama so fat she influences the tides.


HHEH

SMG240

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2002 12:44 pm
by MagickPoultry
Joey wrote: im frightened now my smg. ;)

yah anyway, like i said (i think i said it) i dont really care we broke up. relationsships this young arent going to be too involved anyway.

btw: i dont plan to get to home base until college. ok, maybe high school. ;)
Okay, let me play the role of "square" for a moment...

Is love really dead? Are relationships becoming nothing more than a means to get to home base? I've gotten really disturbed about the direction the world is going in, at least regarding this particular issue. It seems to me that you should reserve a certain level of intimacy for when you are ready to truly say with certainty that you are in love with someone. And at that point, you should emotionally be ready to marry them. Theoretically, this means that you should only "hit a home run" with one person, perhaps another if the first is killed in a train wreck. In the real world, people make mistakes and err in regards to love, so the number might be two or three. But the philosophy is sound.

P.S. Other than first base and home, I don't know the whole baseball terminology. But I can assure you, by the seventh inning stretch, smartguy's mom was on the floor, gasping for breath, saying, "Forget about paying me!" after I'd broken Roger Maris's record.

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2002 1:06 pm
by smartguy240
Not in my position it isnt MakPtry

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2002 2:06 pm
by Andrew_Baker
Love ain't dead. But quite frankly, when I was just a shorty, I was so full of hormones, I couldn't see past my zipper. Now that I'm older, the deep meaning of a life long relationship is all that I seek.

P.S. That's strange, Poultry, she always charges ME!

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2002 2:11 pm
by smartguy240
Just as a side note...angelfire wont host pics...i would no...ya [email protected] pratically live there.

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2002 5:14 pm
by Andrew_Baker
Yeah, I know. I don't much care, though. Somebody posted a link that I could go through to make the deep-link invisible to angelfire... but there's that whole "not caring" thing.

BTW: Smartguy, you totally just copied those momma jokes, probably off www.yomomma.com or something. Namely, you repeated yourself.

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:52 pm
by Rich
Hmm.... I agree with you Magick, and I don't.

Making love is something you should do with someone you love. But they can be quite separate. I'd have sex with someone as just a physical thing from time to time, partly because it's in the blood. Biologically, we're best off to sleep with as many people as possible in order to both spread our own genes and to make the gene pool diverse.

The big thing I disagree with is that you should only ever sleep with one person. That's garbage. I think it warps your mind, and gives you little perspective. You can love someone and sleep with them, and then awhile later love someone else and sleep with them. And then repeat the cycle. I have honest to God loved more than one person in my life. To say we should only sleep with one person is a vary religious statement and one that I am offended by. That sentiment (or requirement depending on how you look at it), was thrown in religion and the bible back before the dark ages, just to try to keep people in line. It served as a form of brainwashing, keeping people sex deprived. On top of that, socially it served to keep a patrilineal line pure. See all the damage it's done to women? But in this day and age with pregnacy protection, it's just naive to still follow those rules. And to follow it for just the religious reason is admitting being brainwashed and totally stupid. So there you have it.

btw,

First base = kissing
Second base = feeling up breasts, starting to get naked
Third base = oral sex, fully naked
Home base = full on sex and penetration, baby

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2002 9:09 pm
by juncmodule
I think this whole masking the deep-linked thing is really cool. Nice to see someone fighting THE MAN.

http://invis.free.anonymizer.com/http://www.angelfire.com/games4/failrate/avatar.jpg

Image

-junc

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:18 pm
by MagickPoultry
Rich,
Frankly, I don't care if religious people hold the same basic opinion. Religion has nothing at all to do with my reasoning, seeing as how I am openly contemptuous toward it. Don't call me brainwashed.

Obviously your conception of love is much different from mine. You seem to think real love is a temporary, fleeting feeling that ultimately doesn't last. I believe (romantic) love involves a complete dedication to one person. If you start switching from one person to the next, it ceases to be special and ceases to be dedication. I don't see how it's love and not just a short-lived fondness for a person.

Your historical analysis is irrelevant. I'm not trying to force people to be monogamous. I'm just saying that the encouragement of relative promiscuity says a lot about our culture's values: temporary physical pleasure over a deep, life-long relationships. I'm not even saying this is immoral, just that meaningful love is dying a slow, excruciating death.

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:42 pm
by juncmodule
I would have to agree with Andrew. Both Rich and MagickPoultry are somewhat wrong. From the perspective of one who has experienced a lot of sex and grown older, Rich is wrong. From someone who is still somewhat young and still experiencing a lot of sex, Rich is right. You won't be able to convince someone otherwise. Had you told me that I should look for a long term relationship, because that is what matters, while I was screwing little hotties I would have told you to piss off. Now that I'm in a committed relationship and in love and all that, I know that love is what matters. It all depends on where you are at in your life. You could be 30 and still in that "have-sex-with-everything-that-moves"-phase. Or, you could be 17 and in love for the rest of your life. Whatever works for you is what works. Oh, and the idea that meaningful love is dying a slow death, sorry, but that's crap. Perhaps jaded crap? ;) Crap nonetheless.

heh,
-junc :-*

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2002 11:42 pm
by MagickPoultry
Of course I was overdramatizing about the slow death thing. I just meant that, from where I'm sitting, the sex-maniac attitude seems to be prevailing, and it conflicts with love, and that one has to evolve out of that attitude in order to experience what I consider meaningful love. Whether or not "love" is a worthwhile pursuit is entirely up to the individual.

God, this almost turned into another lengthy post.

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sun Nov 10, 2002 11:23 am
by smartguy240
Rich wrote: Hmm.... I agree with you Magick, and I don't.

Making love is something you should do with someone you love. But they can be quite separate. I'd have sex with someone as just a physical thing from time to time, partly because it's in the blood. Biologically, we're best off to sleep with as many people as possible in order to both spread our own genes and to make the gene pool diverse.

The big thing I disagree with is that you should only ever sleep with one person. That's garbage. I think it warps your mind, and gives you little perspective. You can love someone and sleep with them, and then awhile later love someone else and sleep with them. And then repeat the cycle. I have honest to God loved more than one person in my life. To say we should only sleep with one person is a vary religious statement and one that I am offended by. That sentiment (or requirement depending on how you look at it), was thrown in religion and the bible back before the dark ages, just to try to keep people in line. It served as a form of brainwashing, keeping people sex deprived. On top of that, socially it served to keep a patrilineal line pure. See all the damage it's done to women? But in this day and age with pregnacy protection, it's just naive to still follow those rules. And to follow it for just the religious reason is admitting being brainwashed and totally stupid. So there you have it.

btw,

First base = kissing
Second base = feeling up breasts, starting to get naked
Third base = oral sex, fully naked
Home base = full on sex and penetration, baby
Well you have to single be4 you can double or triple....

Re:... abuse of ...

Posted: Sun Nov 10, 2002 11:54 am
by Andrew_Baker
Thanks for the easy link to copy, juncmodule.

I don't think that I am "right", either. Reality is so subjective. I've met people who were incapable of love thanks to the abuse they had received at the hands of their parents. I've met people like me who were capable of loving practically everything and everyone.

I have fallen in love repeatedly in my life, like Rich. However, I don't think that it is a transitory thing. I don't believe Rich intended for his belief to be portrayed as transitory, either. I can't speak for him, but I still love everyone that I have ever loved. The love does change, though, based on time and experience.