Forums: Community: The Soap Box:
Wanking For Jesus
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for The Soap Box

Premier Sponsor:

 


blowboarder


Nov 14, 2006, 11:35 AM
Post #1 of 24 (2609 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 7, 2005
Posts: 681

Wanking For Jesus
Report this Post
Can't Post

Come on, I know I'm not the only one....


traddad


Nov 14, 2006, 11:40 AM
Post #2 of 24 (2597 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 14, 2001
Posts: 7129

Re: [blowboarder] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I feel the spirit coming (all) over me!


Partner tattooed_climber


Nov 14, 2006, 9:12 PM
Post #3 of 24 (2491 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 13, 2003
Posts: 4838

Re: [traddad] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

how much do you love jesus?


ddt


Nov 29, 2006, 7:42 PM
Post #4 of 24 (2142 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2005
Posts: 2304

Re: [blowboarder] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I'd like to remind folks in here of our forum rules, specifically regarding posts that are "blatantly or unnecessarily racist, sexist, homophobic, bigoted, pornographic, or otherwise offensive", or "posting inflammatory material specifically to provoke a negative response from someone".

Also,I have removed a post by joe from this thread (and the replies to it), which was in violation of the specific forum rule against references to pedophilia.

Daniel


fracture


Nov 29, 2006, 7:50 PM
Post #5 of 24 (2139 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2003
Posts: 1814

Re: [ddt] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ddt wrote:
I'd like to remind folks in here of our forum rules, specifically regarding posts that are "blatantly or unnecessarily racist, sexist, homophobic, bigoted, pornographic, or otherwise offensive", or "posting inflammatory material specifically to provoke a negative response from someone".

I don't like you.


stymingersfink


Nov 29, 2006, 9:12 PM
Post #6 of 24 (2129 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250

Re: [fracture] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

fracture wrote:
ddt wrote:
I'd like to remind folks in here of our forum rules, specifically regarding posts that are "blatantly or unnecessarily racist, sexist, homophobic, bigoted, pornographic, or otherwise offensive", or "posting inflammatory material specifically to provoke a negative response from someone".

I don't like you.
careful. don't piss off the landlord!

Believe in jesus! :snicker:


zozo


Nov 29, 2006, 9:29 PM
Post #7 of 24 (2123 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 3, 2004
Posts: 3431

Re: [ddt] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ddt wrote:

Also,I have removed a post by joe from this thread (and the replies to it), which was in violation of the specific forum rule against references to pedophilia.

Daniel

But you just referenced pedophilia - will you be banning yourself?


stymingersfink


Nov 29, 2006, 9:46 PM
Post #8 of 24 (2113 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250

Re: [ddt] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ddt wrote:
I'd like to remind folks in here of our forum rules, specifically regarding posts that are "blatantly or unnecessarily racist, sexist, homophobic, bigoted, pornographic, or otherwise offensive", or "posting inflammatory material specifically to provoke a negative response from someone".

Also,I have removed a post by joe from this thread (and the replies to it), which was in violation of the specific forum rule against references to pedophilia.

Daniel

Pedophilia references aside, i would like to respectfully inquire as to the nature of this forum classification. It is described as:

Community Forums wrote:
The Soap Box
Debate politics, guns, religion or whatever gets you fired up.


which would seem to go directly against your TOS reminder stating

TOS & ddt wrote:
"blatantly or unnecessarily racist, sexist, homophobic, bigoted, pornographic, or otherwise offensive", or "posting inflammatory material specifically to provoke a negative response from someone".

you can't have your cake and eat it too, as I'm often reminded, so one might expect a little more leeway with the interpretation of your forum rules as stated above (again, pedo references excepted).

Otherwise, perhaps we should re-label this the

"I'll wash your mouth out with a box of soap"

forum?




...or am i totally off base with this question?


ddt


Nov 30, 2006, 2:10 AM
Post #9 of 24 (2093 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2005
Posts: 2304

Re: [stymingersfink] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Please everyone, I'm not trying to spoil your fun, censor your opinions, or cramp your style.

Nevertheless, the forum rules apply here as they apply in any other forum. These rules are based upon the principles of tolerance and civility. We ask that you abide by those basic principles in order to use this service.

Daniel


robbovius


Nov 30, 2006, 4:24 AM
Post #10 of 24 (2081 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 20, 2002
Posts: 8400

Re: [ddt] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ddt wrote:
Please everyone, I'm not trying to spoil your fun... or cramp your style.

But, that's been the effect. the rockclimbing.com that was, is gone. this is some different site, with the same name.

better? worse? up to the individual I suppose. I can only speak for myself, but being used to the previous, this rockclimbing.com isn't as much fun.


(This post was edited by robbovius on Nov 30, 2006, 4:25 AM)


fracture


Nov 30, 2006, 6:34 AM
Post #11 of 24 (2064 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2003
Posts: 1814

Re: [ddt] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ddt wrote:
Please everyone, I'm not trying to spoil your fun, censor your opinions, or cramp your style.

Don't lie.


climbsomething


Dec 1, 2006, 4:33 PM
Post #12 of 24 (1996 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 29, 2002
Posts: 8588

Re: [ddt] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ddt wrote:
Please everyone, I'm not trying to spoil your fun, censor your opinions, or cramp your style.
Well, in a general sense, maybe it's not your INTENT but it's certainly been happening. Have you noticed how many times people nervously precede or follow a comment with "I hope this doesn't get me banned/tarpitted." They're not really joking. They didn't used to do that.

STILL, I have enough mod sense left in me that a truly explicit pedo post, especially one written with intent, is worth removing.


jh_angel


Dec 6, 2006, 10:29 AM
Post #13 of 24 (1943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 11, 2004
Posts: 232

Re: [blowboarder] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Back to the original topic. Wanking for Jesus is the best way to stay abstinent, which we are commanded to do by God and that's that.

-the Masshole


yanqui


Dec 6, 2006, 12:16 PM
Post #14 of 24 (1925 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 24, 2004
Posts: 1550

Re: [blowboarder] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Don't you realize doing that can make you go blind?

Although they tell me wanking for science helps prevent prostrate cancer.

My advice would be to eat more carrots, just to be on the safe side.


alx


Dec 7, 2006, 9:59 AM
Post #15 of 24 (1882 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 159

Re: [ddt] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ddt wrote:
Please everyone, I'm not trying to spoil your fun, censor your opinions, or cramp your style.

Nevertheless, the forum rules apply here as they apply in any other forum. These rules are based upon the principles of tolerance and civility. We ask that you abide by those basic principles in order to use this service.

Daniel

We have to be subject to people's religious views but people can't respond with opposing views? Is that fair and does it make sense? This stupid thread is a response to other stupid threads advocating religion. Let's just make a rule that religeon is a taboo subject. That IS fair but stupid as well. Legislating religion is a slippery slope.

I believe in a white hair, bearded being that loves me, accepts me and wants to give me what I want. This being also has amazing powers to grant me my wishes if I behave.

I'm starting a chapter of Climbers for Santa if anyone is interested.


ddt


Dec 7, 2006, 1:29 PM
Post #16 of 24 (1867 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2005
Posts: 2304

Re: [alx] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

alx wrote:
We have to be subject to people's religious views but people can't respond with opposing views?

This has nothing to do with the viewpoint that was expressed, and everything to do with the WAY in which it was done. Show me a post from the opposing view that is as blatantly in violation of the forum rules, and we will treat it the same way we treated the offending post here.

You can absolutely respond with your view or opposing view, however you cannot do it in a way that violates the forum rules.

DDT


rc86


Dec 7, 2006, 4:38 PM
Post #17 of 24 (1856 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 22, 2006
Posts: 273

Re: [alx] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Daniel wrote
"Let's just make a rule that religeon is a taboo subject. "


i can understand why some would want to taboo the subject but is it exactly fair to the people who dont believe in god...maybe they want to talk about it


(This post was edited by rc86 on Dec 7, 2006, 4:39 PM)


stymingersfink


Dec 7, 2006, 6:33 PM
Post #18 of 24 (1843 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250

Re: [ddt] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ddt wrote:
alx wrote:
We have to be subject to people's religious views but people can't respond with opposing views?

This has nothing to do with the viewpoint that was expressed, and everything to do with the WAY in which it was done. Show me a post from the opposing view that is as blatantly in violation of the forum rules, and we will treat it the same way we treated the offending post here.

You can absolutely respond with your view or opposing view, however you cannot do it in a way that violates the forum rules.

DDT

ALX:
it takes brains and creativity to be subtly offensive to the religious type... any tom, harry or dick can be blatently offensive.

The religious type, OTOH, are offensive to me merely by blathering their shit within earshot, so they fall into the blatently offensive category, even though they appear to most as the more subtle type. I, however, doubt they have the prerequisites to be subtle.

sound's like you've got some homework to do. (and by "you" I mean "WE"!


veganboyjosh


Dec 7, 2006, 10:29 PM
Post #19 of 24 (1830 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 21, 2003
Posts: 1421

Re: [tattooed_climber] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

tattooed_climber wrote:
how much do you love jesus?

All across the world
The holy armies on a tear
Ripping through the planet's faiths
Population's running scared
Christianity's all around
Zealots they abound
I wanna blow them to pieces
Cause I...I'm

Killing For Jesus
Killing For Jesus

With god on my side
The holy armies gonna ride
Go on a rampage
To rape, plunder and pillage
Insanity's everywhere
Must be something in the air
I wanna blow them to pieces
cause I...I'm

Killing For Jesus
Killing For Jesus

I'm never bored
When I'm killing for the lord
Now I've seen the light
Hail Mary! I've got Jesus on my side!

Insanity's everywhere
Must be something in the air
I wanna blow them to pieces
cause I...I'm

Killing For Jesus
Killing For Jesus

hot damn i love me some circle jerks.

(ironically, the one time i got to see them was on a weekend i was away at a church conference. somehow this seems to make this post in this thread fit on so many levels.)


collegekid


Dec 8, 2006, 9:49 PM
Post #20 of 24 (1804 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 6, 2002
Posts: 1852

Re: [ddt] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ddt wrote:
alx wrote:
We have to be subject to people's religious views but people can't respond with opposing views?

This has nothing to do with the viewpoint that was expressed, and everything to do with the WAY in which it was done. Show me a post from the opposing view that is as blatantly in violation of the forum rules, and we will treat it the same way we treated the offending post here.

You can absolutely respond with your view or opposing view, however you cannot do it in a way that violates the forum rules.

DDT

The difference between the blatantly offensive views of "people of faith" and the blatantly offensive views of "people with brains" is that those of faith are the loudest in the current US government and media, and hence have more power/control over what is considered offensive.

Since this website is international, international standards should be used to judge what is considered offensive:

Since offensive topics vary from nation to nation, and even person to person around the world, I say we base our judgements on a liberal European nation.


stymingersfink


Dec 9, 2006, 3:26 PM
Post #21 of 24 (1779 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250

Re: [collegekid] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

collegekid wrote:
Since this website is international, international standards should be used to judge what is considered offensive:

Since offensive topics vary from nation to nation, and even person to person around the world, I say we base our judgements on a liberal European nation.

Luckily, international standards do not apply, otherwise we'd have to cater to the lowest common denominator, but I like the way you think. As it is, (AFAIK) we must cater first to the seventh largest economy in the world... the Kingdom of California!


till this changes.... KEEP WANKING!


billcoe_


Dec 9, 2006, 9:24 PM
Post #22 of 24 (1761 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4658

Re: [ddt] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ddt wrote:
I'd like to remind folks in here of our forum rules, specifically regarding posts that are "blatantly or unnecessarily racist, sexist, homophobic, bigoted, pornographic, or otherwise offensive", or "posting inflammatory material specifically to provoke a negative response from someone".

Also,I have removed a post by joe from this thread (and the replies to it), which was in violation of the specific forum rule against references to pedophilia.

Daniel

Sh*t, I guess we're all done talking about fu*king sheep or anything else thats interesting now as well.


foreverabumbly


Dec 9, 2006, 11:46 PM
Post #23 of 24 (1747 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 7, 2006
Posts: 88

Re: [billcoe_] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Are you ridiculing my faith in God, or your lack of faith?

I would like to think that this thread is not designed to offend me or other Christians, but rather intended to make light hearted the fact that the posters DONT believe. If this is the case then i have no right to be offended as its not designed for me in mind.

ps. if im wrong then you guys are just really mean and i can take solice in the fact that you are, indeed, going to burn in hellAngelic


(This post was edited by foreverabumbly on Dec 10, 2006, 2:18 AM)


blondgecko
Moderator

Dec 10, 2006, 1:00 PM
Post #24 of 24 (1727 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666

Re: [foreverabumbly] Wanking For Jesus [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

foreverabumbly wrote:
ps. if im wrong then you guys are just really mean and i can take solice in the fact that you are, indeed, going to burn in hellAngelic

So, you take solace in the idea of people writhing in unspeakable torment for all eternity??? For the simple crime of poking a little fun?

Man, that really is disturbing.


Forums : Community : The Soap Box

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook