soooo...soap is banned

[Pokulski-Blatz]

dam, all these pages just for penis.

Leave it to you to identify that as the wrong thing in Soap's actions. The penis was defiantly the culprit.

[lincolnboy]

dam, all these pages just for penis.

[SonicblueGT03]

Yes there is. Someone stealing an apple because they are starving is probably going to get a more lenient punishment that someone blowing up a bank vault. Your arguments on this subject are absurd.

My argument is spot on. Illegal is illegal, only the punishments vary. Which is exactly why the apple stealer gets less punishment than bank vault blower. Both acts are illegal, or contrary to the prevailing legal standards of the land. Simple as that.

[Mychael101]

Man, I consider myself lucky. I know I've posted some stuff that rode the line and rattled a few cages before. I still had to laugh at Soap's attempt. Some people are just really really good at seeing the line...and jumping right the hell over it.

[Pokulski-Blatz]

See my last response. You have seriously disappointed in this thread.

Oh man. I have disappointed someone, what shall I do to atone?

Should we reenact this scene? You can be Tom Green, Ill be the old farmer. I'll bet we could get Brit420 to be the cow.

There is no gray area when it comes to legality.

Yes there is. Someone stealing an apple because they are starving is probably going to get a more lenient punishment that someone blowing up a bank vault. Your arguments on this subject are absurd.

Actually, yes. The law sees it as either it is, or it isn't, correct? There are no varying levels of illegal, only of the punishments assessed. What happed with Soap was a matter of morality, not legality.

lol, all illegal acts aren't viewed exactly the same, otherwise the punishment would be the same for all of them. Get real man. Just because the word they are defined by is the same, doesn't mean there aren't different levels of that word being attributed. Get some grey area in your life. You need it.

[Cooter]

he was clearly banned for moral reasons, just like every other person who has been banned from this site was banned

it's not even a permaban, it's a fucking 5 day ban

Chili's knee-jerk reaction to say it was for legal reasons is because no sane person would imagine a world where that shit ISN'T illegal. So, while you got him on a technicality, your devil's advocate argument is worse than a lot of Racrguy's devil's advocate arguments.

There are absolutely varying degrees of illegal and immoral... I don't get pulled over for doing 6 over the limit, but if I do 200, I'm probably going to get locked up.

If I eat a few grapes at the grocery store, nobody gives a shit. If I break into your house and steal your baby, I'm probably going to do some time for it.

Gummy worms out of a prolapse-rose? meh

a baby calf suckin' a gypsy's dick? ban this psycho

[bcoop]

Actually, yes. The law sees it as either it is, or it isn't, correct? There are no varying levels of illegal, only of the punishments assessed. What happed with Soap was a matter of morality, not legality.

Semantics. I can argue all day long that there are varying levels of legality. Misdemeanors (a, b, c), felonies (1st, 2nd, 3rd), and then Federal of course.

[SonicblueGT03]

Really man. If you are into it that is your thing. I am sure it would excite Soap to have a partner in non-crime.

See my last response. You have seriously disappointed in this thread.

[SonicblueGT03]

Dude. Seriously?

We live in a world of grey. There is no black and white.

If you really want to see more cows sucking on dicks I am sure someone can hook you up with Soap's number. Y'all can go do it for real. I am sure he needs a new camera man after Henry balked at shooting a second film.

Losing traction in your argument already and resorting to ignoring what I actually said? I'm quite disappointed. You can do better.

[Pokulski-Blatz]

Where did I say I defended him? You are world class at putting words in someones mouth. I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the decision as it was based on legality. Soap was banned for moral reasons, and that's fine. But you can't ban someone for legal reasons and then praise a street race poster in the same breath. There is no gray area when it comes to legality.

Really man. If you are into it that is your thing. I am sure it would excite Soap to have a partner in non-crime.

[Pokulski-Blatz]

Damn Patrick, no matter our differences I really do feel for your family, dude. I can't even fathom that amount of sadness you and your family have been through...

It ain't a thing man. Just gotta stay tough.

[SonicblueGT03]

Dude, defending him for posting a video of a cow sucking a dick is almost as creepy as Soap posting it in the first place.

Where did I say I defended him? You are world class at putting words in someones mouth. I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the decision as it was based on legality. Soap was banned for moral reasons, and that's fine. But you can't ban someone for legal reasons and then praise a street race poster in the same breath. There is no gray area when it comes to legality.

[Pokulski-Blatz]

Actually, yes. The law sees it as either it is, or it isn't, correct? There are no varying levels of illegal, only of the punishments assessed. What happed with Soap was a matter of morality, not legality.

Dude. Seriously?

We live in a world of grey. There is no black and white.

If you really want to see more cows sucking on dicks I am sure someone can hook you up with Soap's number. Y'all can go do it for real. I am sure he needs a new camera man after Henry balked at shooting a second film.