(January 17, 2014 at 1:05 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(January 17, 2014 at 1:00 am)Polaris Wrote: You. You talk more about it. It's easy to shove it on others, but when the posts are counted, it's you who has demonstrated a certain affinity for the posterior region. I have a whip if you like....

Unlike you, I actually have counted the posts. Some of Chad's are even in my hall of shame contributions. When I say Chad posted more about it, I'm not just doing so for, pardon the pun, shits and giggles. It's demonstrably factual.

Making your baseless, petty accusation profoundly lazy, I might add.

Not at all. The fact that his funny posts often make that thread does not factor into anal obsession. I could be completely drunk and talk about butt fucking the queen of England one night for a few posts and that still would not counter the amount of time you focus on the matter.

(January 17, 2014 at 1:13 am)Polaris Wrote: Not at all. The fact that his funny posts often make that thread does not factor into anal obsession. I could be completely drunk and talk about butt fucking the queen of England one night for a few posts and that still would not counter the amount of time you focus on the matter.

I have posted about the butt precisely one time, in this thread, and being that it was tongue in cheek, clearly it is exempt from contributing toward an obsession under your definition, if Wooters' "funny" posts are too. Now quit your bullshitting, get over yourself, and go back to simply being wrong about religion, okay?

(January 17, 2014 at 1:26 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(January 17, 2014 at 1:13 am)Polaris Wrote: Not at all. The fact that his funny posts often make that thread does not factor into anal obsession. I could be completely drunk and talk about butt fucking the queen of England one night for a few posts and that still would not counter the amount of time you focus on the matter.

I have posted about the butt precisely one time, in this thread, and being that it was tongue in cheek, clearly it is exempt from contributing toward an obsession under your definition, if Wooters' "funny" posts are too. Now quit your bullshitting, get over yourself, and go back to simply being wrong about religion, okay?

Yeah and a few other threads as well. I mean you wasted several posts mentioning about how Christians are so interested in anal sex.....as we tell Christians who like to talk about sin so much as being closet sinners, so the same with you.

(January 17, 2014 at 1:36 am)Polaris Wrote: Yeah and a few other threads as well. I mean you wasted several posts mentioning about how Christians are so interested in anal sex.....as we tell Christians who like to talk about sin so much as being closet sinners, so the same with you.

Ah, I see what you're referring to now: if you look real close in that thread, what you'll find is that my initial post there- and the only thing I actually spoke to within that thread- is how your argument against the thread OP (not written by me, by the way!) was very, very poor. That I brought up theists and anal sex at all was simply to show you that your position, such as it was, was incorrect.

Nice try though.