Register | Sign In

Understanding through Discussion

EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,352 Year: 3,609/9,624 Month: 480/974 Week: 93/276 Day: 21/23 Hour: 0/1

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Homosexuality and Evo, Creo, and ID
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 327 of 1309 (727446)
05-18-2014 11:12 AM
Reply to: Message 322 by Faith
05-18-2014 10:52 AM

Obeying all law is Christian
So sorry, we are not to support any law that violates God's law, we are obliged to refuse to obey it.
I guess that explains why US Christians are always protesting the Declaration of Independence. (Romans 13:1-5)
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by Faith, posted 05-18-2014 10:52 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 328 by Faith, posted 05-18-2014 11:14 AM Modulous has replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 329 of 1309 (727449)
05-18-2014 11:16 AM
Reply to: Message 328 by Faith
05-18-2014 11:14 AM

How regularly do you ignore St Paul, who gained his revelation direct from Jesus?
If the law says gays can marry
That means the law was effected by the authorities.
The authorities were instituted by God.
Therefore God says gays can marry.
But you know better than God, I assume?
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 328 by Faith, posted 05-18-2014 11:14 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 330 by Faith, posted 05-18-2014 11:25 AM Modulous has replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 333 of 1309 (727458)
05-18-2014 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 330 by Faith
05-18-2014 11:25 AM

Re: obedience
As I said, that is taken out of context.
Not really.
Obviously where there is no conflict with God's law we are to obey the secular law, but equally obviously where there is a conflict, in this case an egregiously direct conflict, we obey God and not man.
So was St Paul lying when he said 'The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good'? Should he have added 'unless you disagree with them'? Is that in a different version than I'm looking at?
Do you know better what God wants, than God who put those people in authority?
As I just quoted the apostles saying in answer to the Jewish authorities.
Oh, sorry. I didn't realize that Peter was more authoritative on God's will than Jesus. In any event, Peter was talking about obeying god over men. But I am talking about obeying God's servants, invested to do good by God.
Human law may call for the extermination of Jews. I m obliged to disobey that law.
But not by God, who may wish to exterminate the Jews (as he has wished before).
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 330 by Faith, posted 05-18-2014 11:25 AM Faith has not replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 339 of 1309 (727475)
05-18-2014 1:27 PM
Reply to: Message 337 by Larni
05-18-2014 1:12 PM

Re: obedience
Funny how it's in context when it agrees with you and out of context when it does not.
Indeed, I find it equally amusing that the correct and full context for Paul's letter to the Church in Rome when talking about the people that decide and enforce an empires/nation's/city-state's laws is a spontaneous speech act by Peter about people who don't.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 337 by Larni, posted 05-18-2014 1:12 PM Larni has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 340 by Faith, posted 05-18-2014 1:35 PM Modulous has replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 342 of 1309 (727479)
05-18-2014 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 340 by Faith
05-18-2014 1:35 PM

Re: obedience
Rome thanks you. When the Christians refuse to worship the next Caesar to come down the pike calling himself god, disobeying a law required of all of us, you can be comfortable in your conscience as you genuflect while we disobeyers of the law are rightly treated as the criminals we are.
When I disobey an immoral law, it doesn't put me at odds with my moral framework.
When you do, it does. I guess you need to choose between doing the right thing, and following Jesus' instructions. I'm glad to hear that in at least some circumstances you'd do the right thing. It's just a shame you can't be consistent.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 340 by Faith, posted 05-18-2014 1:35 PM Faith has not replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 343 of 1309 (727480)
05-18-2014 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 338 by Faith
05-18-2014 1:22 PM

nazis forcing Germans to be nice to gays
No more freedom of opinion is the point. I can be fined for mine.
Funny, I don't hear you complaining that I can be fined for firing someone because they are Christian, or not hiring someone because they are black or refusing to serve Jews.
. I think this is how it started in Nazi Germany too. Gradual diminishment of citizens' rights for those targeted by the powers that be.
Yeah, in Nazi Germany there were laws that meant you were forced to serve customers who were Jewish and homosexual. What was it Hitler said about homosexuals?
"the homosexual must be served!"
Remember the Night of the Long Chives? Ernst Rohm won't forget it. The night when Germans took to the streets and gave homosexuals lots of food products they had prepared.
You're on the right side though, you can be happy when the Christians, nasty evil bigots, haters and hypocrites we are, get our just desserts. Oh and we're cockroaches and vermin too, subhuman like the Jews and the Slavs and the Tutsis.
Oh, poor you! It turns out that persecuting black people is unpopular and will make sure people stop associating with you while calling you a bigot and a hater. Awww, poor racist Faith.
Oh wait. I mean gay people. And homophobic. Well, you get the idea.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 338 by Faith, posted 05-18-2014 1:22 PM Faith has not replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 353 of 1309 (727501)
05-18-2014 3:37 PM
Reply to: Message 348 by Faith
05-18-2014 3:06 PM

Christians have never abused power in the States!
Funny Christians have never thrown bricks through anybody's windows all the time we've supposedly been "in power" in America.
We'll just ignore the genocide and slavery shall we?
And we'll skip over the bit where black people were regularly called 'fucking nigger', the businesses thwarted, their windows smashed, their gardens ruined, their churches burned, and even white people who were sympathetic were attacked and murdered. All the while, the Christian authorities turning convenient blind eyes because they were so busy executing black people who were accused of raping white women.
We'll ignore detonating nuclear weapons on population centres too, I think.
In fact, it's probably best we ignore the entirety of American history. That way, your sentence might be construed as being accurate.
It's clear that if Christians can be fined for ACTING ON our Biblical views we are not the ones in power.
The Christians who think they can persecute members of society with impunity are certainly losing power in America, thankfully. They still have way too much, though.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 348 by Faith, posted 05-18-2014 3:06 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 362 by Faith, posted 05-19-2014 1:29 AM Modulous has replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 356 of 1309 (727507)
05-18-2014 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 354 by Faith
05-18-2014 3:39 PM

This is being punished for having a Biblical viewpoint, utterly against the founding freedoms of this nation.
Nope. If the couple had refused to bake the cake for a future gay marriage because of their Koranic viewpoint they would still have been fined.
And if they had refused to serve a Christian who was getting (legally) biblically married because of their atheistic viewpoint they would have been fined.
Maybe you UK people are so far gone into tyrannical political correctness you don't know anything about real freedoms any more, but America is going in the same direction.
They only place I've ever visited where I did not feel free was America. I felt very strongly that accidentally being honest could lead to bad things happening to me and a justice system that wouldn't do anything about it.
I remember once I was leaving a gay bar, the chap running it stopped me and had the cameras checked to make sure nobody was hanging around outside.
I guess when you have the freedom to persecute minorities, and you yourself are not a minority - it feels pretty free.
Clearly you are all in favor of this tyranny.
So if a Muslim shopkeeper refused to provide service to a Christian who was getting married to an apostate - that would be totally cool to you. And if Islam became the majority religion in the USA, and this behaviour was the norm rather than the exception - you'd be totally supporting this freedom?
I guess you are totally in favour of the freedom of Muslims to kill educated girls, apostates, Christians in countries were they are the majority?
I thought some of you might pull back somewhere in my attempt to make you see yourselves as the Nazis you really truly are, but no, you're farther gone than even I had imagined.
The world according to faith.... Martin Luther King: pastor, activist, Nazi.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 354 by Faith, posted 05-18-2014 3:39 PM Faith has not replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 397 of 1309 (727642)
05-19-2014 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 362 by Faith
05-19-2014 1:29 AM

persecuting the oppressors
You've bought an awful lot of evil propaganda.
I know. Treating Christians the same as Muslims and atheists is pure evil. Christians should be treated much better than those immoral degenerates. Because they are superior to those animals, right?
Well let's take a look at what nations Faith wants America to emulate, those nations that have not succumbed to the evil propaganda that we should treat each other decently and those that don't should be penalized (countries that don't have Anti-discrimination laws with regards to homosexuals):
South Sudan
Burkina Faso
Cte d'Ivoire
Sierra Leone
Central African Republic
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Equatorial Guinea
Republic of the Congo
So Tom and Prncipe
Antigua and Barbuda
Dominican Republic
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Sint Maarten
Trinidad and Tobago
Turks and Caicos Islands
Palestinian territories
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates
Sri Lanka
North Korea
South Korea
East Timor
Liechtenstein (hey look - Western Europe!)
San Marino
East Timor
Papua New Guinea
Solomon Islands
Marshall Islands
Cook Islands
Well I can see how that list is primarily composed of nations with completely fair and impartial education systems free of 'evil propaganda', so maybe you have a point.
So which nations have succumbed to evil propaganda?
South Africa
Saint Pierre et Miquelon
Puerto Rico
Saint Barthlemy
Saint Martin
United States Virgin Islands
French Guiana
Czech Republic
Vatican City
Isle of Man
United Kingdom
Northern Cyprus
Australia (et al)
New Zealand
New Caledonia
Northern Mariana Islands
American Samoa
Easter Island
French Polynesia
Pitcairn Islands
Wallis and Futuna
Those evil nazis! It's strange how the nations that Faith proposes have succumbed to EVIL propaganda are predominantly nations with a long history of Christianity (or territories thereof) while the nations that RIGHTLY allow discrimination against homosexual people often seem to have a history of Islam. I'm not sure what lesson Faith proposes I take from this, but I get the distinct impression that Faith has more in common with Islamists than Christians when it comes to what she thinks of people that make other people's lives hell.
So Faith, maybe you should move to Africa as I suggested yesterday in another thread. There are many places there where you'd be free to be a horrible person to homosexuals. Either that or you could become a Communist or Russian.
What you impute to Christianity is often not due to Christianity at all.
But sometimes it is? I'll take that. I am after all, either generalizing or referring to a specific subset that you happen to agree with that believe they should be able to break any law they like with impunity because Jesus said so.
"Persecute" is typical lying propaganda designed like all the rest of the namecalling on this thread to smear Christians just as the Nazis smeared the Jews and others.
If you can't defeat someone by remaining reasonable and polite - just accuse them of being lying Nazis. We're all very impressed by this original and devastating comeback. Honestly - how can I compete with such a giant of wit and rhetoric as this?
Refusing to make a wedding cake for a gay wedding is not persecution, but fining the Christian baker for that refusal IS persecution.
Thanks for that. So now we have established that your objection is not one of magnitude, but target.
So let me just clarify:
If the German Volk refused to serve Jews in their shops.
If the German Volk declined to provide medical assistance to Jews who require it.
If the German Volk randomly attacked Jews on the streets.
If the German Volk fired people who it was discovered were Jews.
If the German legislature criminalised being Jewish.
This is not persecution.
However, if Paul von Hindenburg made it a criminal offence to treat Jews like this THAT is persecuting the German Volk.
Is that the ridiculous position you want to convince me is the correct way of interpreting things?
If your beloved bakers had refused to serve someone because they were Black, Hispanic, Jewish, atheist or the wrong type of Christian - you would defend them and would be outraged at the people that think this behaviour should be punished? That 1920s America was the epitome of freedom because white people could get away with everything from making black people feel like second class citizens up to and including murder? This was good in your view?
So if I raped you - and I went to prison - am I the victim?
If a Muslim is fined for refusing to serve Christians - who is being persecuted?
If an atheist doctor lets a Christian die from an easily rectified medical problem, loses her job and faces criminal charges and a large civil lawsuit - which group is facing oppression?
How is treating Christians the same as atheists and Muslims and Hindus, persecution of Christians?
Who am I kidding. You're not actually going to answer that, or deal with anything I said substansively. That would be difficult and force you to confront things you would rather not. But it was fun writing it anyway.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 362 by Faith, posted 05-19-2014 1:29 AM Faith has not replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 399 of 1309 (727647)
05-19-2014 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 388 by Faith
05-19-2014 5:44 AM

sexual aberrations
You are making a false moral equivalent between an aberrant sexual condition and a legitimate natural classification of human beings such as race or sex.
So it's OK to be awful to Canadians? Nothing about that is a legitimate natural classification like race or sex.
And it's OK to be treat rape victims worse than upstanding Christians? Some of them have 'aberrant sexual conditions' such as frigidity. What about chubby chasers? White people that like black people? Ginger lovers? Foot-fetishists? Celibates like St Paul? Men who like older women? The impotent? Intersex individuals? Dyspareunia sufferers? Frotteurism sufferers? Masochists? Sadists? Women with Vaginismus? Adulterers (including people that married more than once)? Victims of FGM? HSDD? SAD? Psychotic people with intrusive sexual thoughts?
Or is it just fags?
The only person in history that I know of who ever said homosexuals could marry was the crazy perverse Caesar Nero.
When did he say that?
He married a young boy. And oversaw a wedding between two men. He was hardly unique in the pre-Christian world in this regard.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 388 by Faith, posted 05-19-2014 5:44 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 400 by Faith, posted 05-20-2014 10:35 AM Modulous has replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 409 of 1309 (727764)
05-20-2014 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 400 by Faith
05-20-2014 10:35 AM

inconsistency and avoidance
The subject is gay marriage
Except we're talking about a law which prohibits discrimination of race, religion, sex, and sexual preference. It just so happens in this one case, the discrimination came about when the discriminators heard the discriminated were going to have a homosexual marriage.
It isn't about people at all really
Except in the fact that its about one group of people refusing to provide service to another group of people because a third group of people recognize their relationship and provide the same rights to both parties.
it's about a misapplication of marriage
Some people are signing a contract which conveys rights upon them given by a government. This does not mean they are bound in holy matrimony by the Lord God. I know, its confusing because they both use the word marriage to describe it. English does that sometimes, I would have thought you'd have grown used to it by now. Churches don't decide who gets to sign contracts, Mosques don't get to decide what words the government chooses to call its contracts.
What is happening is that the government uses the word 'marriage' to describe the contractual agreement and you think this is remotely related to your personal theological definition. But since the marriage contract does not, as a matter of fact, make any assertions about God's opinion, I fail to see what it has to do with your religious view.
and what ought to be my right to refuse to honor it
You have that right. You can refuse to honour mixed-race marriages too. Entirely within your rights. But if you are operating a for profit business, you have to follow the rules of the government that governs the economy. You want the right to own a business? You have to play by the rules - and nobody's religious views should give them exemptions to the law (though it regularly does, if you have the right kind of religious views that are sufficiently acceptable to the Christian lawmakers).
Nobody is forcing anybody to call two married gay people 'married'. You can call them sinners, perverts, aberrations all you like. Absolutely in your rights to have whatever opinion you want. But you don't get to make up the rules of business, you have to vote along with the rest of the US.
What puzzles me is why you don't spend this much energy protesting the fact that the government calls 'second marriages', 'marriages' rather than the Christian word 'adultery'. Even if you don't believe this yourself, surely you recognize that it is the viewpoint of Biblical Christians who believe marriage is something only those who are uncontrollably lustful should enter into and that which God has joined, no man can tear apart.
All your nasty comparisons have nothing to do with this.
Here's the thing, Faith: You've been fighting for your rights to behave as your religion dictates, but even when confronted about it - you refuse to acknowledge the rights of other religious people to behave as their religion dictates. You won't address the fact that there are some behaviours that some religions proscribe which are currently illegal and have been for a long time.
Child sacrifice? A religious behaviour made illegal. Faith does not fight for their rights.
Inter-racial marriage? An abomination to some religious viewpoints. Faith does not complain that it is illegal to discriminate against such couples.
Furthermore, for all your complaining, you have abjectly refused to acknowledge that the law protects you as much as it protects homosexuals.
The way you have been talking Faith is that your personal religious viewpoint should be given special treatment. You have exhibited complete disregard for fairness.
And so, because of your obvious inconsistencies and hypocrisies, you are going to continue facing 'nasty comparisons' - which I interpret to mean 'comparisons that are completely accurate but that Faith can't deal with because she would have to admit she wants to her religious viewpoints to be acknowledged to be superior to everyone else's views.'.
Yes, being a racist is nasty. So is being a homophobe.
Here's the thing, everybody is a sinner. And many people sin without intervention from the government, and some sins are protected by law, including your own. It completely bamboozles me - God is judge, right? His justice is absolute and perfect, right? So why do Christians feel they have to make others suffer while they are alive? God's got this, Faith. Those homosexuals are going to be punished - so why must humans take things into their own hands on earth? I understand locking murderers away - they prevent other people from living happy and free. But why must homosexuals be punished just because they want to sign a government contract? It seems that because the government has its own form of union that they call 'marriage', you think this means you have to say that God has cemented the union, which you feel is oppressive. But you don't have to do that.
And finally - you are basically forcing homosexuals to be fornicators (1 Co 7) which means you want there to be more sin in the world, not less. So even if you win, even if you are right, you are making the world a worse place to live. As it turns out, you are losing, and most people think you are wrong and you and your kin (in viewpoint) are making the world a worse place to live. This might help explain why people are being 'nasty' to you.

As for me? I'm an atheist and I accept evolution. Homosexuality causes no harm in this world, and there are no others, but even if there were that does not justify causing harm to homosexuals. Homosexuals are people, descended from just as noble lineage as myself. Society is better off now that we aren't castrating and imprisoning good people for acting on desires that do not harm the involved parties.
ID of course has nothing to say about homosexuality, technically.
And creationists? Not universally, but close to it, they seem to take every opportunity to insult, denigrate, humiliate, scorn and mock homosexuals while trying to legislate against them at every opportunity. Historically that doesn't separate them much from Theistic Evolutionists, but as with every other social issue for the past 200 years, the creationists are always the ones who, unto death, will insist they get to act immorally. Fortunately, people like Faith are dying off quickly. When I was young the 'racist grandparent' was a common trope, but now it is becoming 'homophobic parent'. Soon, it will be grandparent, then they'll mostly be dead.
This is cultural evolution. And it terrifies creationists like nothing else on earth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 400 by Faith, posted 05-20-2014 10:35 AM Faith has not replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 423 of 1309 (727786)
05-20-2014 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 418 by Faith
05-20-2014 2:49 PM

equal rights, not just a good idea
What gays want is to persecute Christians for opposing gay marriage and calling homosexuality a sin.
Fortunately, the very laws you are protesting make this illegal.
They've set up their own relationships in many ways for years without anybody bothering them.
This is both false and irrelevant.
Now they've found a way they can take away the rights of Bible Christians by forcing us to validate gay marriage or take punishment.
That same thing takes away their rights by forcing them to validate Christianity or take punishment.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 418 by Faith, posted 05-20-2014 2:49 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 424 by Faith, posted 05-20-2014 3:18 PM Modulous has replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 426 of 1309 (727789)
05-20-2014 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 424 by Faith
05-20-2014 3:18 PM

Re: equal rights, not just a good idea
That is a lie. Homosexuals have had complete freedom for decades.
A) What is a lie? I said nothing in my post about homosexuals being free.
B) Prior to 1962, sodomy was a felony in every state, punished by a lengthy term of imprisonment and/or hard labor. Between 1962 and 1971 only one State in the US repealed this law. Many States wouldn't repeal these laws until the US Supreme Court decision in 2003. 2003 Faith. That's 11 years ago.
Question (that you won't answer) Why did you respond to my post as if I said something completely different while ignoring the point I made in my post?
Now they've found a way they can take away the rights of Bible Christians by forcing us to validate gay marriage or take punishment.
That same thing takes away their rights by forcing them to validate Christianity or take punishment.
It takes away the rights of atheists by forcing them to validate Christianity and Islam or take punishment.
It takes away the rights of the Ku Klux Klan by forcing them to validate black people.
It takes away the rights of anti-Semites by forcing them to validate jews.
It takes away the rights of misogynists by forcing them to validate females.
How is this only about Christians?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 424 by Faith, posted 05-20-2014 3:18 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 428 by Faith, posted 05-20-2014 4:07 PM Modulous has replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 444 of 1309 (727813)
05-20-2014 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 428 by Faith
05-20-2014 4:07 PM

Re: equal rights, not just a good idea
You said they are forced to validate Christianity and they are not
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 states
All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.
You define being asked to serve homosexuals as 'forcing us to validate gay marriage or take punishment.' The Civil Rights Act forces all homosexuals to provide goods, services, facilities, privileges advantages and public accommodation to Christians. Ergo, they are being forced to validate Christianity, by your own argument.
they are free of the kind of coercion the gay rights people are now bringing against Christians,
Except for at least the last 50 odd years - as the law coerced them to not discriminate against Christians.
making us choose whether we will validate gay marriage with a wedding cake or refuse and get fined
Homosexuals have been made to choose whether they will validate Christian marriage with a wedding cake or refuse and get fined.
And although the laws were on the books until the 60s they had not been prosecuted for a very long time.
The laws were on the books until the 2000s.
It still meant that homosexuals were not free, as they had to keep quiet unless some Draconian officials through the book at them.
Oh and John Lawrence and Tyron Garner. 1998. They were fined $200. for having sexual contact in the privacy of their bedroom.
(an interesting side note. The judge (a Christian) found them guilty of a misdemeanour and attempted to fine them an amount so small they couldn't legally appeal. Funny thing is, for this discrimination he faced little to no consequences and is still working as a judge and is the President of a Christian association. The people he victimized by betraying the US Constitution? Lost a days liberty, faced numerous public officials condemning them and had to pay over a day's wages to the very government that did this to them, and had to endure having 'sexual deviate' on their record for 5 years.
And the Christians who didn't bake the cake, how were they persecuted? They were told by the court not to do it again and fined $0. The Christians have it SO bad.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 428 by Faith, posted 05-20-2014 4:07 PM Faith has not replied

Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005

Message 447 of 1309 (727816)
05-20-2014 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 414 by Faith
05-20-2014 2:36 PM

How much?
Christians HAVE BEEN FINED for refusing to make a wedding cake for a gay wedding
How much were they fined?
Christians HAVE BEEN FINED for... refusing to take photographs at a gay wedding.
How much were they fined?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 414 by Faith, posted 05-20-2014 2:36 PM Faith has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024