jennypie's ****hole - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- jennypie's ****hole
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Posted by AnotherWay83 on Sep-06-2009 09:37:

jennypie's ****hole

over the last couple weeks i have spent a good deal of face-to-face time with jennypie's bunghole, so i have gotten to know it on an intimate level. i now know its needs and wants, what bothers it, what it likes/dislikes, what pisses it off, what pleases it and so on

any questions just ask

Posted by Akridrot on Sep-06-2009 10:06:

Little girl assholes are sweeter, more erotic and delicate.

Posted by KilldaDJ on Sep-06-2009 10:09:

i thought this thread was going to be good because it had *s in the title.

Posted by Halcyon+On+On on Sep-06-2009 10:23:

quote:
Originally posted by Akridrot
Little girl assholes are sweeter, more erotic and delicate.

You know you can get v& for saying shit like this on a public forum, right?

Posted by Akridrot on Sep-06-2009 10:39:

quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
You know you can get v& for saying shit like this on a public forum, right?

It was a play on words. I meant "Little girls who are assholes," not the actual asshole of the little girls.

Posted by KilldaDJ on Sep-06-2009 10:43:

quote:
Originally posted by Akridrot
It was a play on words. I meant "Little girls who are assholes," not the actual asshole of the little girls.

ur sig is pedobear certified.

Posted by iTranscendence on Sep-06-2009 11:30:

Posted by Joss Weatherby on Sep-06-2009 14:38:

quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
You know you can get v& for saying shit like this on a public forum, right?

Why?

Posted by Halcyon+On+On on Sep-06-2009 14:44:

Scared?

Posted by Joss Weatherby on Sep-06-2009 14:58:

quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Scared?

No, I want to know why you think what he wrote constitutes a crime.

Posted by Halcyon+On+On on Sep-06-2009 15:00:

No you don't.

Posted by Joss Weatherby on Sep-06-2009 15:02:

quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
No you don't.

I wouldn't have asked otherwise.

Posted by Halcyon+On+On on Sep-06-2009 15:05:

You would if you were trying to bait me into allowing you to make some sort of point.

Posted by Joss Weatherby on Sep-06-2009 15:07:

quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
You would if you were trying to bait me into allowing you to make some sort of point.

Or call you out on making a ridiculous claim.

Posted by Halcyon+On+On on Sep-06-2009 15:11:

No "or", that's the point you've desired so long to share with us all. Now then, don't you feel better?

Posted by Joss Weatherby on Sep-06-2009 15:11:

quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
No "or", that's the point you've desired so long to share with us all. Now then, don't you feel better?

Yes.

Posted by Halcyon+On+On on Sep-06-2009 15:12:

Who the hell would I be to argue with you over child pornography laws anyways?

Posted by Joss Weatherby on Sep-06-2009 15:23:

quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Who the hell would I be to argue with you over child pornography laws anyways?

Its not a child porn law you half-wit, its a 1st Amendment issue, which is sort of a hobby of mine anyways having grown up with my father.

Posted by Akridrot on Sep-06-2009 15:30:

I love this forum sometimes

Posted by Halcyon+On+On on Sep-06-2009 15:34:

It's not about what incriminatory, it's open claims that can lead authorities to more involved methods of surveillance - I was obviously responding to Akridrot tongue-in-cheek, implying that he actually has something to more to hide, something actually incriminatory.

But we're all very interested in your father. Please do go on.

Posted by Joss Weatherby on Sep-06-2009 15:46:

quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
It's not about what incriminatory, it's open claims that can lead authorities to more involved methods of surveillance - I was obviously responding to Akridrot tongue-in-cheek, implying that he actually has something to more to hide, something actually incriminatory.

But we're all very interested in your father. Please do go on.

I get that it was tongue and cheek. Like you said, I was baiting you.

Just to note on my father, he has appealed a free speech case to the supreme court and won. It was actually a case on limiting the free speech rights of students in public school. This case is taught in law school along side decisions such as Tinker v. Des Moines and Morse v. Frederick (a case where my fathers decision was actually cited in the Supreme Courts opinion).

Posted by Silky Johnson on Sep-06-2009 15:50:

Lol, Tinker.

Posted by shaw on Sep-06-2009 16:01:

quote:
Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
I get that it was tongue and cheek. Like you said, I was baiting you.

Just to note on my father, he has appealed a free speech case to the supreme court and won. It was actually a case on limiting the free speech rights of students in public school. This case is taught in law school along side decisions such as Tinker v. Des Moines and Morse v. Frederick (a case where my fathers decision was actually cited in the Supreme Courts opinion).

aclufag

Posted by Joss Weatherby on Sep-06-2009 16:03:

quote:
Originally posted by inconspicuous
aclufag

Actually he was against the ACLU, who was representing the student.

It is funny because my dad is about the most liberal person you could ever meet otherwise (an intelligent liberal, not like Krypton... )

Posted by shaw on Sep-06-2009 16:35:

quote:
Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Actually he was against the ACLU, who was representing the student.

It is funny because my dad is about the most liberal person you could ever meet otherwise (an intelligent liberal, not like Krypton... )

^5

Krypton's not welcome in our camp, either. Don't worry.

Pages (2): [1] 2 »