186 pts ยท February 28, 2021
www.apasz.com
Nah, yeah yeah nah yeah nah, nah yeah nah nah yeah nah yeah yeah
That dog knows exactly what it's doing.
I dropped my thongs 50m just watching this...
It is. No said it'd be you having it...
Gotta be honest, it looks like fun, scary but fun.
Glory to our wife
Only needs some tubular bells.
Is it tho? If no other planets show up.
*affected
They'd play with you before killing you. They like tormenting their prey.
... fuck
The police need not search. The internet will deliver these human wastes to them.
Unlike the Doug situation, the homeless person isn't receiving any other charity.
Equally huh, would've thought you'd find it more appalling.
What would you do if I did ask?
Watch the video again, then read these comments again. If you still don't get it. Dunno what to tell ya mate. As for justification. She is brave. He doesn't want God/Jesus to be given credit for his donation. Or literally any other justification you can think of. Would I need to provide you justification for giving that homeless person on the street some money?
Swing and a miss... He's not getting it Jim.
Of course it matters, it's the difference between your best friend taking your insult as an insult, or as a demonstration of your level of friendship. Also your analogy doesn't fit, a better fit would be giving money to a homeless person on the street.
If we assume that the purpose was solely charity, therefor Doug is playing favourites. How does the commentary work now? I'll give you a hint, it doesn't. Hence why I said you're missing the point.
You're missing the point.
Yes. This is along the same lines as insulting your best friend. The action itself is insulting but the purpose is to show affection, trust, and comfort.
The act is charitable but the purpose was not. This small distinction is important. The purpose was to be humorous and be commentary on the default expectation to "Thank God" / be religious.
Donating money to someone in need would generally be considered a charitable cause. You're point.
In and of itself? No. It's simply a means to fund something, be it for charity or otherwise.
I read it as terrorist... was amused.
Nah, yeah yeah nah yeah nah, nah yeah nah nah yeah nah yeah yeah
That dog knows exactly what it's doing.
I dropped my thongs 50m just watching this...
It is. No said it'd be you having it...
Gotta be honest, it looks like fun, scary but fun.
Glory to our wife
Only needs some tubular bells.
Is it tho? If no other planets show up.
*affected
They'd play with you before killing you. They like tormenting their prey.
... fuck
The police need not search. The internet will deliver these human wastes to them.
Unlike the Doug situation, the homeless person isn't receiving any other charity.
Equally huh, would've thought you'd find it more appalling.
What would you do if I did ask?
Watch the video again, then read these comments again. If you still don't get it. Dunno what to tell ya mate. As for justification. She is brave. He doesn't want God/Jesus to be given credit for his donation. Or literally any other justification you can think of. Would I need to provide you justification for giving that homeless person on the street some money?
Swing and a miss... He's not getting it Jim.
Of course it matters, it's the difference between your best friend taking your insult as an insult, or as a demonstration of your level of friendship. Also your analogy doesn't fit, a better fit would be giving money to a homeless person on the street.
If we assume that the purpose was solely charity, therefor Doug is playing favourites. How does the commentary work now? I'll give you a hint, it doesn't. Hence why I said you're missing the point.
You're missing the point.
Yes. This is along the same lines as insulting your best friend. The action itself is insulting but the purpose is to show affection, trust, and comfort.
The act is charitable but the purpose was not. This small distinction is important. The purpose was to be humorous and be commentary on the default expectation to "Thank God" / be religious.
Donating money to someone in need would generally be considered a charitable cause. You're point.
In and of itself? No. It's simply a means to fund something, be it for charity or otherwise.
I read it as terrorist... was amused.