American Family Association: Stone To Death Killer Whale Who Killed Trainer

[Syt]

It would be entertaining to watch these people gathered around in his tank and attempting to stone him to death.

FYP

[lustindarkness]

That would be a lot of stones.

Not really.  You only need the one stone, a central plaza in which to carry out the stoning, and forty minutes or so of time.

Actually, it would have to be many stones to fill up the tank before the whale is even in range of been hit.

Actually, the one stone breaks the glass on the tank, the water drains out into the plaza, and the whale overheats and dies.

If you could break the tank, yes, that would work.

[Grey Fox]

The one stone could also, with a very precise throw, block the whale blow hole.

[Eddie Teach]

One stone could crush his skull, given sufficient size and velocity.

[Syt]

Or it could just be a very large stone, dropped from  crane.

[lustindarkness]

Or it could just be a very large stone, dropped from  crane.

No fun.

[The Brain]

Or it could just be a very large stone, dropped from  crane.

A thundercrane?

[Syt]

Or it could just be a very large stone, dropped from  crane.

No fun.

But thorough. And final. Kind of a final solution of the whale question.

[garbon]

Why is it that the Families and Citizens are always so crazy?

[Malthus]

Why is it that the Families and Citizens are always so crazy?

Just wait until the AFA finds out that the killer whale is gay. 

[Martinus]

Ok after stuff like this, you guys have no right to ever laugh at the bunch of Polish freaks that wanted to make Jesus the King of Poland - your religious freaks are crazier.

Incidentally, I sometimes wonder whether groups like AFA actually are full of sleeper liberal, gay and feminist activists. I mean nothing shows how ridiculous it is, for example, to base the modern stance on gay rights on Leviticus than demands like this.

I don't think it's unreasonable to demand that the animal be put down, though the method of course is unreasonable.

Nor is it unreasonable to argue that Seaworld should held responsible for knowingly keeping a dangerous animal, though of course killing for people to be executed is unreasonable.

"Unreasonable"? This is fucking nuts. Tim, you are truly a retard.

[garbon]

...though of course killing for people to be executed is unreasonable.

Makes sense to me.

[garbon]

"Unreasonable"? This is fucking nuts. Tim, you are truly a retard.

Don't be unreasonable.

[grumbler]

...though of course killing for people to be executed is unreasonable.

Makes sense to me.

That's your problem, not mine.

[Josquius]

Just imagine stoning to death a whale...would it even feel anything?