Page 7 of 7
Re: Marriage should have no legal significance.
Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 11:56 pm
by Philosophy Explorer
bobevenson wrote:Holy shit, a couple of assholes making one stupid comment after another!
Holy shit, Booby is a Biggy (married to two people at the same time).
PhilX
Re: Marriage should have no legal significance.
Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2015 11:59 pm
by bobevenson
Hey, isn't it time for your Pablum?
Re: Marriage should have no legal significance.
Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2015 12:19 am
by Obvious Leo
Arising_uk wrote: So once more bob, are you married'?
Bob has consistently revealed himself to be an auto-eroticist, although in most of the English-speaking world the more prosaic term "wanker" is generally preferred.
Re: Marriage should have no legal significance.
Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2015 12:33 am
by bobevenson
Obvious Leo wrote:Arising_uk wrote: So once more bob, are you married'?
The more prosaic term "wanker" is generally preferred.
Now I know the mistake I made, assuming an Australian could break away from the delusion of a British Empire.
Re: Marriage should have no legal significance.
Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2015 1:02 am
by Obvious Leo
Have you figured out yet that Australia is not in Europe, Bob? Stick around and I'll teach you lots more stuff you don't know.
Re: Marriage should have no legal significance.
Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:30 pm
by bobevenson
Obvious Leo wrote:Have you figured out yet that Australia is not in Europe, Bob? Stick around and I'll teach you lots more stuff you don't know.
Why don't you learn your own stupid history?
Case Study 2 background: Living in the British empire - Australia
The history of British rule in Australia is the story of some very different groups, whose stories are linked to each other.
Source: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/educ ... tm#bullet1