In response to
"I'd consider tattoos to be more of an identification than an enhancement."
by
Guy
|
Don't even try it. You made a statement, then it bit you in the ass.
Posted by
Trish (aka Trisha)
Jun 11 '09, 15:37
|
The fact that tattoos came from tribal branding is irrelevant, it's still a permanant body change whether you want to admit it or not. You were happy and excited to do it, unless you're the long lost member of the cockneck tribe.
Say you have a baby born with a cleft lip and palate, are you against them having surgery too? I mean you're changing their appearance from the way god made them.
|
Responses:
-
forgive me, i did not answer your other question...
-
Guy
Jun 11, 15:50
-
hey, look, its not like i rally against this. I don't chair an organization. its my own personal philosophy.
-
Guy
Jun 11, 15:45
5
-
"Well, how do you recognize one of the tribe?" "They are generally tall, wide-bodied...and the distinct penis-marking on the neck." -- nm
-
Will Hunting
Jun 11, 15:43
4
-
Seriously. Guy: Repeat after me. "On further reflection, I was overbroad in my initial statement, and I am reconsidering my position. -- nm
-
Reagen
Jun 11, 15:39
11
|
Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.
|
|