Smedley_buzkill wrote:
Not when it is used to describe retards. Then it's simply factual.
Simple logic prevails every time. ๐
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
It's on the list of pet names I use for my daughter...
Along with stinker and stegosaurus brain
When my grandchildren ask for something to eat, I always tell them they can have some luke-warm water/stale bread...we then usually settle for pancakes/pizza
bluefish wrote:
It's still a forbidden word.
Only a retard or a retarded incorrect 'political correct' fanatic would think there are forbidden words. There are no forbidden words. Words have a meaning. Check your dictionary if you don't know the meaning. And when used in the context of their meaning, they can be appropriate and often the most appropriate word to use. Now some people might not like there general usage, but when appropriate, they are appropriate.
reยทtard
verb
1. delay or hold back in terms of progress, development, or accomplishment: "our progress was retarded by unforeseen difficulties"
noun
1. a person who has an intellectual disability (often used as a general term of abuse)
If that is to hard for the retarded to understand, explain it to them, slowly, Now. lets retard this conversation and move onto more important topics.
bluefish wrote:
It's still a forbidden word.
Forbidden by who, exactly?
son of witless wrote:
Are you talking just about the context of using it on OPP ?
i think its ok as long as it is true. Especially when discussing engine timing and fire fighting chemicals.
RandyBrian wrote:
Forbidden by who, exactly?
Hey Randy. Same question I asked. I think we should defund the word police.
archie bunker wrote:
Just curious. It was a while back, it seems.
Not if the punishment fits the crime it doesn't! Biden is bringing the word back because he can't put two sentences together without stumbling over his words!
JFlorio wrote:
Hey Randy. Same question I asked. I think we should defund the word police.
Yep....sorry. I saw yours after I had tossed my response out.
AuntiE
Loc: 45th Least Free State
Object of the preposition
by would be whom, not who.
Yes, I am
archie bunker wrote:
Just curious. It was a while back, it seems.
Only if you are thin skinned!!
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.