On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 08:06:14 -0400, lab~rat >:-) wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:10:34 GMT, Strife767
> puked:
>
>> On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 08:50:22 -0400, lab~rat >:-)
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 22 Sep 2006 18:08:15 GMT, curtsybear
>>> puked:
>>>
>>>> ["Followup-To:" header set to alt.politics.homo.uality.]
>>>
>>> Header returned, chickenshit.
>>>
>>>> On 2006-09-22, lab~rat >:-) wrote:
>>>>> On 21 Sep 2006 12:39:30 -0700, ProfilerCA@... puked:
>>>>>> What amazes me is that if the airlines had "strict" policies on
>>>>>> overt
>>>>>> affection, every plane would be diverted.
>>>>>> Hetero.ual couple do the same things but it is "OK" ,when a gay
>>>>>> couple does it its "wrong"?!
>>>>> My guess is that if someone complained about the normal couple, they
>>>>> would be asked to stop as well. Do you disagree with me?
>>>>
>>>> I'll try it on my next flight. Every five minutes I'll ring the
>>>> call and when the FA comes over, I'll complain about some opposite-.
>>>> couple who is sharing their pretzels or sitting too close or doesn't
>>>> have the armrest down to separate them. Perhaps I'll just complain
>>>> loudly about a fat woman and say that I don't need to keep seeing
>>>> pregnant women shoving their . lives in everyone's faces and could
>>>> she be covered up with a blanket for the duration of the flight or
>>>> something.
>>>
>>> Of course that isn't the same thing as making out.
>>
>> The way things currently are, they are practically the same since they
>> are
>> all non-.ual.
>
> Yeah, and Bill Clinton thought blow jobs were on the order of
> handshakes,
No, he didn't. He was just trying to save face, obviously.
Regardless, oral . is ., kissing is not. |