To: dfwgator
“Sam didn’t want his sexuality to be a distraction.”
Sexuality? He’s a damn dung puncher (or punchee). That is not sexual...that is purversion. He’s a pervert.
105 posted on
05/10/2014 5:30:35 PM PDT by
GGpaX4DumpedTea
(I am a Tea Party descendant...steeped in the Constitutional Republic given to us by the Founders)
To: GGpaX4DumpedTea
would they treat him the same if he had a sexual relationship with his dog?
107 posted on
05/10/2014 5:31:52 PM PDT by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: GGpaX4DumpedTea
if he didnt want it to be a distraction - we wouldnt know about it.
118 posted on
05/10/2014 5:36:43 PM PDT by
GeronL
(Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson