maybe people could do to Ralph Davenport what Dan Savage did to Rick Santorum. Which is, turn the name into a disgusting sexual term. I think we could use “Ralph” and/or “Davenport” as a term for a sex toy or other form of Sexual stimulation. I think it would be hilarious to hear someone say that when they got home they, “Broke out the Davenport and Ralphed themselves sillly.”
Any ideas for what the names should be used for?
Yeah, but a Davenport is already a kind of couch. Imagine the confusion!
(what a dumb proposed law…and I’m pretty socially conservative!)
As if no one has ever used a Davenport for sexual purposes.
[QUOTE=wheelie]
Sure, they’ll be the ones with all of the sex toys. 
[/QUOTE]
You know, I wonder if telling someone in South Carolina “go fuck yourself” will constitute plotting a crime.
Here’s a more complete article. The law is designed to support South Carolina law enforcement, who are already busy raiding stores for violations of existing obscenity laws. How do they know what’s obscene? Well . . .
I’m guessing Spartanburg has no shortage of applicants for the position of public prosecutor.
On the bright side,
I’m sure someone will slip it in. Possibly through the back door.
We did just legalize tattoos and free-pour, BTW. I guess Rome wasn’t built in a day and all that.
[Bumper Sticker] You can have my vibrator when you pull it from my cold, dead…hand[/Bumper Sticker]
[QUOTE=Hypno-Toad]
I’m sure someone will slip it in. Possibly through the back door.
[/QUOTE]
Greasy palms will be involved.
[QUOTE=kanicbird]
But that beign said, WTF is wrong with sex toys?!?!
[/QUOTE]
Exactly. Whenever I see a law like this, all I can think is “Why?” Seriously, why is it not okay to enjoy sex? OMG!!1! You sold someone something that will give them an ORGASM! YOU BURN IN HELL AND YOU DIE! Interestingly, I’ve found that people who support this type of law are the people in most dire need of a good orgasm
Why is this even an issue? What a waste of time and resources! Don’t they have more important things to focus on than people’s private lives?
[QUOTE=Mrs Johnson]
Don’t they have more important things to focus on than people’s private lives?
[/QUOTE]
Like focusing on people’s privates? :eek:
[QUOTE=Mrs Johnson]
Why is this even an issue? What a waste of time and resources! Don’t they have more important things to focus on than people’s private lives?
[/QUOTE]
“Won’t somebody think of the children?” :rolleyes:
I’d like someone in South Carolina to start a petition to classify all 18"DHIBJD :eek: :eek: 's as weapons instead of sex toys.
If this thing passes, it’s the fault of the constituents for bending over and taking it from the legislatures.
[QUOTE=Mrs Johnson]
Why is this even an issue? What a waste of time and resources! Don’t they have more important things to focus on than people’s private lives?
[/QUOTE]
Once women have vibrators, it’s only a hop, skip and a jump to Nazis on dinosaurs.
What about Nazis riding dinosaurs with giant buttplugs in them?
(By the way, either the Nazis or dinosaurs are festooned with buttplugs. It’s your choice, humble reader.)
[QUOTE=Least Original User Name Ever]
What about Nazis riding dinosaurs with giant buttplugs in them?
[/QUOTE]
Wasn’t that a Spielberg flick? Up Jurrassic Park or Rump Raiders of Doom?
[QUOTE=Hypno-Toad]
Wasn’t that a Spielberg flick? Up Jurrassic Park or Rump Raiders of Doom?
[/QUOTE]
Starring Tom Cruise!
[QUOTE=Least Original User Name Ever]
What about Nazis riding dinosaurs with giant buttplugs in them?
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, I’m confused by an ambiguous modifying clause. Is it the Nazis that have the giant buttplugs, or the dinosaurs?
Oh, the hell with it. Buttplugs for all!