First | Prev || Next | Last
¿Question #4698?
Kyleroconnor: Are you not against not having antidisestablishmentarianism?

pricero1: Totally irrelevant in the US as you don't have an established church, unlike England, unfortunately.
Woelf: You don't even know what that means.
Jbrady: My head just exploded
Corran Horn: I'm not against not having nothing.
Barminator89BE: come again :D
senorcoo: Uh...no?
aleo09: i don't know what that is.
Leezer: I don't not know what you don't mean.
TMuscle: It really depends.
catosulla: Not when Hugh Laurie is trying to say it :)
virre: no
Impr3ssion: .... definitely maybe.
ltux: Ask Ralph Kramden.
dmomo: gaaaaaaa
DHEK: Yeah.
kmcdougan: yes
TheArchAngel: In English, please
scriptorum: You know even know what that means, BIG WORD USER.
tdyck: reworded, am I for having establishmentarianism? depends on the establishment.
MightyMike: or ask a real question
interhawk: No
yoodle: I'm all for it
KentuckyKid: I'm not against not having to spell it, yes (or no, as the case may be).
BarrageFan: What ever answer's right
rawdawg: ok
Nandalfnarcoleptic: NO
dragonewtking: am I not against having opposition to the disestablishment of the Church of England? No, I don't really care one way or the other
Dorque: Nope.
hacksword: Mark Vincent
Platinum Dragon: I dunno. I suppose establishmentarianism's bad. I don't care all that much really.
djlg: Only on Thursdays.
Kazin: I am not against not answering double-negative questions.
crimsonlady: negative
billgoode: I couldn't tell you. What I CAN tell you I'm against is confusing questions with too many double-negatives.
jasta6: I think I am!?
MDettmer81: Fight the power, and the negatives.
puffinge: give me a few seconds here
POvidiusNaso: Definitely.
Belash: yes
davedanger: not anti, but probably pro, or con.
GrandpaDave: What does that word even mean?
skrutsch: umm...maybe
jttm: Absolutely
Lord_Prussian: indeed
chaddyboy_2000: Whatever that means, sure.
CDRodeffer: Uh, I think not.
skelebone: wooo.. that's completely nonsensical.