Page 55 of 190 FirstFirst ... 54551525354555657585965105155 ... LastLast
Results 1,351 to 1,375 of 4740

Thread: Homosexuality & Politics in the 21st Century

  1. #1351

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cipher View Post
    May I point out that the Corinthians list starts with "fornicators"?

    Guess we're all fucked.
    Lol. Funny. Word play. Talking about sex, then you use a naughty word for sex.
    Quote Originally Posted by SunnyC View Post
    It was based on another joke I heard about banning gay people from paying taxes. But you're right - pardon me for getting off topic. All the posts have to explcitly relate to the topic of homosexuality. I still want to hear mattj's take on the sin of effeminacy, though.
    Well, if they can't get married, and in some states not even have unions, etc. Why should they pay taxes?
    Goodbye friends. My Pokémon drive is reaching zero, so I'm gonna go do other stuffs. Love you all. c:

    -Alex

  2. #1352
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    A handful of dust
    Posts
    2,998

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ❤Lady Baltny❤ View Post
    Well, if they can't get married, and in some states not even have unions, etc. Why should they pay taxes?
    ... Because they use roads?

    Seriously, Jesus, look: I'm all about trying to actually point out the fallacies of major arguments for defending the lack of equality for homosexuals. But when you post quips this inane and ill-thought out, it's like an invitation for opponents to start tearing apart their absurdity rather than having to deal with the arguments that actually address their points and hurt their stances.
    Last edited by Cipher; 1st July 2012 at 4:07 AM.

  3. #1353
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Somewhere in the souther. U.S.
    Posts
    1,550

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ❤Lady Baltny❤ View Post
    Well, if they can't get married, and in some states not even have unions, etc. Why should they pay taxes?
    So, if anyone has a grievance, they should not pay taxes. That basically transforms into "since I don't recieve x benefit, I shouldn't have to pay taxes." Did you even comprehend your own statement?

    Sniped by Cipher.

  4. #1354
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Hiatus
    Posts
    7,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    Speak for yourself. I've never had sex with anyone that I wasn't married to. Those who do are ****s.
    Is this a serious comment? Because if it is, marioguy, you are sadly, sadly mislead. I can think of about twenty people off the top of my head who fit your criteria for prostitution and yet are anything but. I'm sure most everyone else here probably could, too. This is a rather immature standpoint if it's honest.

  5. #1355
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaiserin View Post
    There's a difference, to me, between having an adverse opinion but otherwise living and letting live, and being neutral to in favor of LGBT rights but just not saying or doing anything about it, and then wondering why the LBGT community thinks poorly of you. Armchair activism is one thing, but when you can do something in favor of equality and don't -- and frankly, the comparisons drawn to the civil rights movement are strikingly accurate -- then no **** people are going to think badly of you for it. Especially since "ignoring" is easier when, you know... you're not actively oppressed by certain majority groups of people.
    What I meant in a (much) less trying-to-make-a-contract-confusing-so-you-don't-know-you-can't-return-mercendice english is if EVERYBODY ignored LGBT stuff (what else could I could have writen here?) we wouldn't have the homophobia problem in the first place! During various points while reading the responses to my post I wanted to respond, but that would have been stupid, so I'm just going to try to answer all the content in this post (to everyone who thinks this is kinda random because this is a completly different page, that 1 page=1 day). To ❤Lady Baltny❤: I know I write very confusing sometimes, sorry. To SunnyC: It's unfortunate isn't it (I'm talking about your last sentance)? To ❤Lady Baltny❤ & mattj: Unfortunatly, I have to agree with mattj. I have the translation from the original ancient hebrew (shoulda just started out with that instead of constantly trying to translate the translation of the latin!) on Leviticus 18:22 right here in my hand. But, I don't plan on including it in this post.

  6. #1356
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    2,922

    Default

    The lack of gay marriage in some states does not warrant a tax rebellion. It's probably best to wait for the major political players (now including Obama) to do their job and open up those opportunities in a legal way.

    I agree FE21, it is very unfortunate.
    Last edited by CSolarstorm; 1st July 2012 at 12:03 PM.

    Quote Originally Posted by Albus Dumbledore
    Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic. Capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.

    My deviantART
    | Suggested Alternative News: The Juice Rap News and The Corbett Report

  7. #1357
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SunnyC View Post
    The lack of gay marriage in some states does not warrant a tax rebellion. It's probably best to wait for the major political players (now including Obama) to do their job and open up those opportunities in a legal way.

    I agree FE21, it is very unfortunate.
    I agree it isn't a reasonable thing to do, even if you want to pull such a thing, you should pay the same ammound a married couple would have to pay. (If I am right being married in the USA gives tax benefits) I would actualy consider such a thing to be far more reasonable then just not paying taxes at all because you still use other facilities provided by the government.
        Spoiler:- My latest challenge:

  8. #1358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cipher View Post
    But "fornicators" likely does. And whatever the proper, modern equivalent of "effeminate" might be, I doubt it's a quality you could justify discriminating.

    Which is why as gay anti-discrimination bills continue to pop up, and actually receive debate, across the country, the oft-cited idea that they somehow violate the religious freedom of employers is absurd. I mean, you can accept that argument, sure, but only if you're equally willing to accept someone should be legally protected for discriminating against "effeminate" people or those with normal sex lives. You can't cherry pick from the source if you choose to interpret one part literally; what the Bible says about homosexuals, it also says about the groups cited above.

    And then there's the whole notion of "Why Christianity?" I'm sure Scientologists put up with laws daily that somehow conflict with their religious views. The Book of Mormon is A-OK with polygamy, but the government isn't. Muslims can't always get their traditionally mandated prayer schedules into the work place or public schools.

    Religious liberty is the right to practice your beliefs without persecution. It does not mean government has to comply with every minutiae of your dogma, because, quite frankly, it can't.

    Just an aside, but I'd be seriously surprised if it didn't aslo include chronic masturbaters or even anyone prone to lustful or just sensual thoughts in this context. Hell, it's probably a stand-in for prioritizing sensory pleasure in general.
    who here supports any legal discrimination?

  9. #1359
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    2,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 7 tyranitars View Post
    I agree it isn't a reasonable thing to do, even if you want to pull such a thing, you should pay the same ammound a married couple would have to pay. (If I am right being married in the USA gives tax benefits) I would actualy consider such a thing to be far more reasonable then just not paying taxes at all because you still use other facilities provided by the government.
    ...that's actually a reasonable idea, in my mind! It would be interesting to see if that worked as effective protest tactic.

    Quote Originally Posted by mattj View Post
    who here supports any legal discrimination?
    We can talk/complain about people who are against gay marriage, even when they're not here. It's probably a little confusing for all the people who come in and out here to distinguish from your legal views and your religious views, that you don't actually object to gay marriage, but you still think that religiously speaking, homosexuality is a damnable offense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Albus Dumbledore
    Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic. Capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.

    My deviantART
    | Suggested Alternative News: The Juice Rap News and The Corbett Report

  10. #1360
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    An archive's alcove.
    Posts
    852

    Default

    Who cares what they do now, when we know they will suffer immeasurably for all eternity?
    __

    Is that supposed to be a respectable stance?
    Last edited by Zevn; 2nd July 2012 at 7:34 AM.
    "He that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom."
    Gandalf to Saruman

  11. #1361
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    414

    Default

    I'll just outline some verses that are relevant to what is going on, and again, there may well be translation issues at play here (so I'll mention which Bible version I'm quoting).

    Quote Originally Posted by 1 Corinthians Chapter 6: Lawsuits, verses 6-7 NET Bible
    Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God.
    It's probably best to analyse this in context, because there may not have been much consideration given to people who have natures that deviate from the norm. I believe such people would be offered an opportunity to be 'fixed' and to get into the kingdom of Heaven.

    There is also this, I quoted 2 verses due to significance, rather than just the 1.

    Quote Originally Posted by Romans 10:9-10 NET Bible
    because if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and thus has righteousness and with the mouth one confesses and thus has salvation.
    I'm going to go as far as saying you have to believe in his teachings for the righteousness, rather than simply 'believing' in Jesus, otherwise you're not going to get the righteousness/repentance needed for salvation.

    I do not think that people who are born with a specific nature are screwed, they'll be offered the chance to be fixed at some point. For the record, I'm going to say that I do not believe in a God that would allow someone to be screwed due to their nature, nor would I believe in eternal punishment from such a God, neither of those things make any sense, they just contradict his nature, and tbh, I find the idea of things like eternal punishment to be nothing short of blasphemy, IMHO.
    Last edited by JDavidC; 2nd July 2012 at 12:12 PM.

  12. #1362
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,245

    Default

    Well, CNN's Anderson Cooper is gay.

  13. #1363
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    INSIDE...
    Posts
    2,118

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FE21 View Post
    What I meant in a (much) less trying-to-make-a-contract-confusing-so-you-don't-know-you-can't-return-mercendice english is if EVERYBODY ignored LGBT stuff (what else could I could have writen here?) we wouldn't have the homophobia problem in the first place!
    If everyone ignored it, gays would still be unable to marry. And the fact they would be ignoring it would make things just as bad as they are through discrimination.

    So no, I disagree with that statement. Ignoring it would be sweeping the issue under the rug as opposed to arguing why they don't believe it should come to pass, even if they're shitty reasons from my perspective. Personally, I think that's worse, because at least by arguing back, the other side is obviously interested enough in engaging the issue.

    Apathy to it would make things even worse, in my opinion.


    SHINY RAINBOWS BECKON YOU TO THE ARTIST'S CORNER

    Trainer Name: Misha
    3DS FC: 5112-3720-5938
    Friend Safari: Fighting; Pancham, Machoke, Hariyama


  14. #1364
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    2,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaiserin View Post
    If everyone ignored it, gays would still be unable to marry. And the fact they would be ignoring it would make things just as bad as they are through discrimination.

    So no, I disagree with that statement. Ignoring it would be sweeping the issue under the rug as opposed to arguing why they don't believe it should come to pass, even if they're shitty reasons from my perspective. Personally, I think that's worse, because at least by arguing back, the other side is obviously interested enough in engaging the issue.

    Apathy to it would make things even worse, in my opinion.
    By 'everybody' ignoring it, I'm pretty sure he means the people who disagree with it as well. In fact if you recall, the people who disagree were the subjects of his question in the first place: he couldn't understand how anyone would be against homosexuality when it doesn't affect them. If nobody agreed or disagreed with homosexuality (minus gay people themselves) it's less of a 'evil men win when good people do nothing' scenario than a scenario where both the evil men and good men are doing nothing in the first place. If nobody had opinions to force on gay people, I think we'd have one of two situations: a perfect world where gay people could marry however they wanted, or a pre-20th century situation before they coined the word homosexuality, where you wouldn't be persecuted for homosexuality, but trying to marry in the open would still raise questions because of the familiarity toward heterosexuality.

    In a world where people mind their buisiness, perhaps we wouldn't know deconstructionism, and wouldn't know how to even explain the equivalancies that make life better today.

    Quote Originally Posted by Albus Dumbledore
    Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic. Capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.

    My deviantART
    | Suggested Alternative News: The Juice Rap News and The Corbett Report

  15. #1365
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Journeying through Hoenn
    Posts
    4,959

    Default

    Guys, seriously, please stay on-topic. :/


    Quote Originally Posted by mattj View Post
    I'll be the first to admit that I don't fully understand the difference between homosexuality and effeminate there. In our modern English they're usually synonymous to an extent.
    To get an idea of this, consider little girls who are tomboys. Plenty of female kids go through a tomboy stage, but that in no way dictates what their sexuality will develop into. While society expects them to grow out of this and become traditionally "feminine," there isn't anything wrong with a girl who doesn't like wearing skirts and playing with Barbies. A woman does not need to be feminine to be heterosexual. Unfortunately, some females are also just born with more "mannish" attributes that don't go away, but again, a girl's large shoulders or small breasts will not dictate her sexuality - you can't help what you're born with. Should they get sent to hell for this? The same applies to effeminate men.

    Also, you may be interested to know that there are entire groups of, for example, straight men who enjoy crossdressing. They get along fine in their day-to-day lives, and many have happy, if not supportive wives. You don't have to be of a certain sexuality to look or dress a certain way, nor do you have to be male to wear pants. Homosexuals dress the same way as heterosexuals do, just like women often dress in the same clothes men wear (meaning it's not always skirts and dresses and high heels).


    As a general note...why do I care about getting into heaven, anyway? I'm a straight gal, and I will sacrifice getting into heaven if it means I can do what I please in the sack. I would much rather live my life, do what I want and be happy than spend it bored to death in the hopes that it means getting into some place that may or may not exist when I'm dead. That's how I roll, and if you believe I'm going to hell, I would prefer if you just kept your thoughts to yourself, however well-meaning your intentions may be.

    Some of these translations are very weird, by the way. Like physical abusers can get into heaven fine as long as they don't use any verbal abuse? Are drug addicts allowed into heaven? Tomboys?


        Spoiler:- old response to Malanu:


    ~Psychic

  16. #1366
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SunnyC View Post
    By 'everybody' ignoring it, I'm pretty sure he means the people who disagree with it as well. In fact if you recall, the people who disagree were the subjects of his question in the first place: he couldn't understand how anyone would be against homosexuality when it doesn't affect them. If nobody agreed or disagreed with homosexuality (minus gay people themselves) it's less of a 'evil men win when good people do nothing' scenario than a scenario where both the evil men and good men are doing nothing in the first place. If nobody had opinions to force on gay people, I think we'd have one of two situations: a perfect world where gay people could marry however they wanted, or a pre-20th century situation before they coined the word homosexuality, where you wouldn't be persecuted for homosexuality, but trying to marry in the open would still raise questions because of the familiarity toward heterosexuality.

    In a world where people mind their buisiness, perhaps we wouldn't know deconstructionism, and wouldn't know how to even explain the equivalancies that make life better today.
    Yep, that's exactly what I was trying to say!

  17. #1367

    Default

    The only anti-gay arguments are either
    A. Some kind of fake religious testimony
    or B. A nonfactual scientific debate.

    Being gay is natural, and there's absolutely no reason why gays can't marry.
    Check out my YouTube channel, if you'd like

    http://www.youtube.com/skatingandgaming

  18. #1368
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skatingandgaming View Post
    The only anti-gay arguments are either
    A. Some kind of fake religious testimony
    or B. A nonfactual scientific debate.

    Being gay is natural, and there's absolutely no reason why gays can't marry.

    Straight out. The only reason people dont like homosexuals is because people dont understand it.
    People hate that which they cant understand

    I'd like to quote the anime full metal alchemist move: conqueror of shamballa, if i may:

    Dietlinde Eckhart:
    This land is completly foren, not like my world at all.

    Edward: Your wrong about that eckhart, people here laugh and weep just like you, live the same, die the same.
    Theirs one thing i wanna know, what made you start this attack, i thought the point was to use weapons of this world to conquer your own?

    Dietlinde Eckhart:
    I have to,This entire world must perish, opening a new door to a new world was thrilling at first, a utopia that could make us greater, but then i realize how different it was from our own then i got scared, this world is fare to strong to be trusted, i have to destroy it now before it conquers us.


    Most People just dont understand that their are things that can operate beyond the comprehension of theirselfs.
    Bug-Type Represent !

  19. #1369
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Route 124
    Posts
    1,205

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celestial Moth View Post
    Straight out. The only reason people dont like homosexuals is because people dont understand it.
    People hate that which they cant understand

    I'd like to quote the anime full metal alchemist move: conqueror of shamballa, if i may:

    Dietlinde Eckhart:
    This land is completly foren, not like my world at all.

    Edward: Your wrong about that eckhart, people here laugh and weep just like you, live the same, die the same.
    Theirs one thing i wanna know, what made you start this attack, i thought the point was to use weapons of this world to conquer your own?

    Dietlinde Eckhart:
    I have to,This entire world must perish, opening a new door to a new world was thrilling at first, a utopia that could make us greater, but then i realize how different it was from our own then i got scared, this world is fare to strong to be trusted, i have to destroy it now before it conquers us.


    Most People just dont understand that their are things that can operate beyond the comprehension of theirselfs.
    I would say that is not necessarily true. My reasons for opposing homosexuality are based in my religious convictions. I have no inherent dislike of homosexuals. I do take what the Bible says about homosexuality as a sin seriously. It does me no good to hate homosexuals merely for being effeminate or being attracted to the same sex. I don't approve of christians (or anyone for that matter) bashing homosexuals with derogatory remarks. There are people who dislike homosexuals merely for those reasons I previously stated. But please don't assume that all religious people hate homosexuals merely because we don't understand them. I have spent much thought about this subject before coming to the conclusions that I have.

    Alpha Sapphire --> Arceus is the Alpha pokemon --> Arceus is a generation 4 pokemon --> Sinnoh confirmed!!

    (Yeah, get used to it now, because this is what you're going to have to put up with for the next 5-7 years)

  20. #1370
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrexus View Post
    I would say that is not necessarily true. My reasons for opposing homosexuality are based in my religious convictions. I have no inherent dislike of homosexuals. I do take what the Bible says about homosexuality as a sin seriously. It does me no good to hate homosexuals merely for being effeminate or being attracted to the same sex. I don't approve of christians (or anyone for that matter) bashing homosexuals with derogatory remarks. There are people who dislike homosexuals merely for those reasons I previously stated. But please don't assume that all religious people hate homosexuals merely because we don't understand them. I have spent much thought about this subject before coming to the conclusions that I have.
    I say in somwhat shame that i misjudged you bro, as your logic is sound.
    Many people do obviosly hate for lack of knowledge. Though i will not dive into the psychological points of view.
    I understand that homosexuality from some points of view could be considered un-natural ( of the sorts) thus holding an affiliation
    of an insult towards the beings in which truly created everything, though all things were mirrored first before they could be materialized.
    If you hate homosexuality then your hating god's divine plan, as all possible equations and possibilities need to be actualized before all knowledge is harvested.
    Last edited by Celestial Moth; 17th July 2012 at 8:33 AM.
    Bug-Type Represent !

  21. #1371

    Default

    On the topic of homosexuality, there was a news piece on the boy scouts and how someone is trying to fight for gays to join. Those who don't know, they had this rule for quite some time that gays were banned from being in the boy scouts.

    What are you thoughts on it?

    Also my thoughts are that while I can understand that they are for the safety of the children (yes there ARE some creeps that are after young boys), I wish that they and others could know how easy it is for someone to lie about their sexuality. Like if someone were to ask me whether orally or on paper what my sexuality was, I'd say straight. If I was asked that on a job application, I'd say straight, tho that's not really... what I am. Well, it's easier for someone like me to say they are the norm but for others, it seems hard but in the end it's not that difficult. Can others actually lie about their sexuality in order to draw blood? etc
    岩根雅明=♡

  22. #1372
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Inna House... With Cable!!!
    Posts
    3,821

    Default

    The boy scouts were founded on what was once considered good wholesome values. That hasn't changed since their inception, what has changed is what we consider good and wholesome. Though it is inconvenient and inconsiderate not to mention dated, they have a right to set up guidelines for membership as they see fit. I was a cub scout leader for a minute with my son. I found their rules and "morals" confining and dated. So my son and I left the pack.

    So true!

  23. #1373
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gothitelle K View Post
    On the topic of homosexuality, there was a news piece on the boy scouts and how someone is trying to fight for gays to join. Those who don't know, they had this rule for quite some time that gays were banned from being in the boy scouts.

    What are you thoughts on it?

    Also my thoughts are that while I can understand that they are for the safety of the children (yes there ARE some creeps that are after young boys), I wish that they and others could know how easy it is for someone to lie about their sexuality. Like if someone were to ask me whether orally or on paper what my sexuality was, I'd say straight. If I was asked that on a job application, I'd say straight, tho that's not really... what I am. Well, it's easier for someone like me to say they are the norm but for others, it seems hard but in the end it's not that difficult. Can others actually lie about their sexuality in order to draw blood? etc
    I really don't get how protection of the boys is a valid rationale to ban gays from joining the Boy Scouts. Just because someone is gay doesn't mean that they are attracted to young boys anymore than being straight means that you're attracted to young girls. Even if you are attracted to someone, doesn't mean that you're going to rape them.

    It's also illegal to ask someone's orientation when interviewing them for a job.
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  24. #1374
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Creeping on your boyfriend
    Posts
    1,742

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gothitelle K View Post
    On the topic of homosexuality, there was a news piece on the boy scouts and how someone is trying to fight for gays to join. Those who don't know, they had this rule for quite some time that gays were banned from being in the boy scouts.

    What are you thoughts on it?
    That it's an incredibly disgusting practice and people who would endorse it should be ashamed.

    Also my thoughts are that while I can understand that they are for the safety of the children (yes there ARE some creeps that are after young boys)
    Those are pedophiles, not homosexuals. The terms are not mutually exclusive. Anybody who is attracted to a small child is a pedophile. If it's a man attracted to a young boy this doesn't make him gay, it still makes him a pedophile.

    I wish that they and others could know how easy it is for someone to lie about their sexuality. Like if someone were to ask me whether orally or on paper what my sexuality was, I'd say straight. If I was asked that on a job application, I'd say straight, tho that's not really... what I am. Well, it's easier for someone like me to say they are the norm but for others, it seems hard but in the end it's not that difficult. Can others actually lie about their sexuality in order to draw blood? etc
    I think this is a pretty good point. It's incredibly easy to lie about such a thing because there's no way that we can prove it unless we see it in the bedroom. I actually do plan on lying to donate blood (which is incredibly sad but that's for another time.)

    Star-Lord

  25. #1375
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moogles View Post
    Those are pedophiles, not homosexuals. The terms are not mutually exclusive. Anybody who is attracted to a small child is a pedophile. If it's a man attracted to a young boy this doesn't make him gay, it still makes him a pedophile.
    It makes him a gay pedophile.
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

Page 55 of 190 FirstFirst ... 54551525354555657585965105155 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •