Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Church and State      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Bladesmith81801
Joined: 10/30/2010
Msg: 126
Church and StatePage 6 of 14    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14)

The notion that all through this country, sexually repressed religious scolds are trying mightily to make their backward views law, is laughable.


Yeah, and Rick Santorum is the #2 contender on the GOP ticket. I agree it's laughable, nut for different reasons.

To get where he is, Santorum had to get a lot of those "sexually repressed religious scolds" to vote for him. His campaign has been one long rant of christo/sexual scolding and what he's going to do to enforce his views on America.

When a loon like him gets that close to the big chair, we're right to be worried.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 127
view profile
History
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 11:56:41 AM

Changing the topic, looking to consolidate behind a future thread of shiriah law, while interesting doesn't dispose of the issues of one group trying to inflict their view on us all.


Then I'm going to have to say that this is because entirely because there just isn't anyone in the political arena that has the ability to pull it off and that is sad.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/19/us/19beliefs.html

But only in the 1970s did the Republican Party became more identified with religiosity than the Democrats. In recent years, conservative magazines and talk radio have increased their cheerleading for religion, while two magazines with religious roots, First Things and Commentary, have become more conservative in their politics.



The problem isn't conservatives. It is time. It is that whole thing known as zeitgeist.

I don't really give religion much more than 20 years life span as a great social influencer. It makes sense to me that it is such a big deal now and has become so much of an issue in the recent past. Religion was embraced in America as a defense against communism. So, that opened the door to religion that acceptance leads to more than just friends. It has only been in the recent past that science has put such a tremendous spotlight on the views of religion and religion isn't going to stand up to the pressure of science. This resurgence is an act of defense from extinction. It will never die completely but the ability to hold governance will not last. Santorum won't be the nominee. He will in fact take the brunt of the religious movement with him and that will leave only one candidate remaining. Other than some flip flops on positions that remaining candidate will be relatively outside of the religious and women’s rights debates.

I look forward to the day that there is an atheist conservative running for president. I actually do not see why one wouldn't have been able to be elected this year other than there is no one that seems bold enough to try.
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 128
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 1:53:57 PM
"I don't give religion much more than 20 years life span as a great social influencer."

Ahhh, we have heard that one before many times! Stalin couldn't eradicate it, Hitler tried with one particluar group and counldn't do it either. Religion itself, has little to nothing to do with the actual views of any government or group of people. As long as mankind has a conscience, feels guilt for what they do, whether it stops them or not, there will be religion to embrace for forgiveness. As long as mankind fears death and what is to follow, there will be religion to reassure them.

Zeitgeist will only influence those who will allow science, current events, changing social norms to influence them. Others no matter how 2 faced, will publicly adhere to their doctrinal beliefs, even as they embrace affairs, money and power as their true gods. There will always be those who actually ARE religious, and demonstrate daily their adherence to the good in man. They embrace the spirit in which the bible was written, rather than the garbage spewed hate others who label themselves christians do.

As long as they, as a group represent a significant part of the population, there will always be Mitts, newts and santorum type hucksters there trying to cash in on their faith.

As for an atheist running for president, don't hold your breath. Whether he be normal, bold more intelligent than alternatives, he would still be an atheist, and those who's stock and trade(religion) would damn him.
 mungojoe
Joined: 11/15/2006
Msg: 129
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 1:56:00 PM
I was pointing out the left support of it by saying nothing about it. Ignoring it. Pretending it doesn't exist while at the same time chastising catholics for not wanting to pay for birth control while at the same time accusing the tea party of attempting to install a thocracy but totally ignoring that under sharia a womens word is only half the value of a mans.

Pointing out...? Don't you mean "creating a red herring"...? That is, after all, what you are doing... You see, there is NOTHING to acknowledge here because Sharia ISN"T THE LAW on this continent, at all, anywhere... AND, there is NO legislative effort to make it the law...

The right-wing whackjobs' efforts to curtail womens rights either ARE the law (where they have managed to get their woman-hating legislation passed) or 'in the works' (as in trying to get it passed)...

It's just arbitration.

That's right... It is JUST arbitration... and that means it is the woman's CHOICE since arbitration CANNOT, by law, be forced on another... You did see that point, right...? That it is HER CHOICE to go to arbitration...

In other words, this is just another area where liberals support a WOMAN'S CHOICE, no matter how much we disagree with it... Quite unlike the right-wing whackjob efforts to remove a woman's choice BECAUSE they don't agree with it when it runs contrary to THIER religious views...

"I don't give religion much more than 20 years life span as a great social influencer."

Well, you are off by about 15 years... this move of the right and republicans to the religious whackjob end of the spectrum has been going on since AT LEAST 1980 with the election of Reagan through the support of the so-called "moral majority"...
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 130
view profile
History
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 2:18:02 PM
I'm sorry but I just disagree. I see nothing but blatant hypocrisy and supporting of torture and slavery of women. You can call it a red herring all you want. It is documented and true.

Not having the ability to determine the difference in intentions between funding for abortion and birth control compared to the beating and stoning of women is callous and hateful and only shows the real attitude behind the liberal sentiment that it is nothing but reckless and without actual principles.

Go ahead and play David against Goliath... Get your rocks off getting pissy about some current stupid legislation. Legistlation that you seem intent on not believing that some women may choose to favor. At least I know there are some people on the liberal side of the fence that are not this abjectly dishonorable in their views about human dignity and reasonable thoughts. I support them. Not this crap you try to play off as women’s rights.

VVVVMuslim people are not the problem. But you already knew that. It's just fun to pretend to not understand.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/why-jihad-watch.html
 OutofControlMan
Joined: 12/22/2011
Msg: 131
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 2:21:50 PM
the Muslims are coming! the Muslims are coming! run for your liiiiiiivessssssssssssssssssss -or shoot them all
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 132
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 2:29:18 PM

If the muslim man of the house is insisting on going to shariah arbitration in the first place, just how much weight do you think that he will give his wife's desire to NOT go to shariah arbitration? Do you really honestly think that he will give a fat rats ass what she wants or doesn't want? And you consider yourself as the one who stands up for women, knowing full well what muslim societies do to women all over the world.................

I'll type this as simply as possible.

1) They're getting divorced.

2) Arbitration requires that both - remember that word, BOTH - parties agree to arbitration.

3) If the husband goes by himself, it means nothing happens.

4) Arbitration requires both of them to go there.

5) The husband can't insist, because - wait for it - they're getting DIVORCED!
 mungojoe
Joined: 11/15/2006
Msg: 133
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 2:34:08 PM

Legistlation that you seem intent on not believing that some women may choose to favor.

I don't believe I ever said that there were no women who support the right-wing republican whackjob agenda... Quote it for me if I did, otherwise this is just ANOTHER of your 'red herrings'... In fact, I fully expect that some women are supportive, right-wing religious whackjobs can actually be gender non-specific...

At least I know there are some people on the liberal side of the fence that are not this abjectly dishonorable in their views about human dignity and reasonable thoughts.

Nothing dishonorable about it... supporting an individuals freedom to choose, despite one's personal objections to the choice is NEVER dishonorable... I also support any woman's right to choose "Christian Domestic Discipline" if she wishes to do so... This is quite unlike the right-wing republican whackjobs (and the radical Marxian feminists) who feel that "we" must protect those "poor dears" by dictating their choices to them since the "poor dears" are incapable of knowing what is in their own best interests...
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 134
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 2:38:20 PM
See I've met Muslims.

I know Muslims.

Their day to day life isn't any different than anyone else's.
 mungojoe
Joined: 11/15/2006
Msg: 135
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 2:41:00 PM
If the muslim man of the house is insisting on going to shariah arbitration in the first place, just how much weight do you think that he will give his wife's desire to NOT go to shariah arbitration?

It does not matter hjow much weight HE gives her desire... SHE MUST agree to arbitration or it WILL NOT HAPPEN... The LAW will prevent him from "taking her to arbitration"... Again, the weight HE gives her desire is irrelevant, it is the weight the LAW gives her desire that is important...

You STILL seem to be under the gross misperception that HE can demand arbitration regardless of HER wishes and the law on this continent will somehow support HIM over HER... This would be either a complete inability to understand this concept on an intellectual level or an indaction of being deliberately obtuse...

Do you really honestly think that he will give a fat rats ass what she wants or doesn't want?

And ONCE AGAIN... it doesn't matter what HE gives a rat's ass about.. HE cannot FORCE arbitration because the LAW doesn't allow him to...

knowing full well what muslim societies do to women all over the world


Just goes to show just how pitifully little do you know about the day to day life of muslims

What goes on in law in Iran or Indonesia or where-ever has ZERO bearing on what goes in in law on this continent... You did know that, right...? You did know that Iran or Indonesia or where-ever don't make the law here, right...? At least I certainly HOPE you know those little facts, you certainly have no business commenting on law anywhere if you don't...
 mungojoe
Joined: 11/15/2006
Msg: 136
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 2:55:13 PM
And this is the same LAW that justifys "Honor killings"................ because, that has never happened on THIS continent, has it?

Are you suggesting that the law on this continent justifies honor killings...? You must be because it is the law on this continent that would prevent HIM from forcing HER into arbitration and possibly even put HIM in jail if HE tried to force the issue through any means that runs contrary to the law on this continent...

Do you have any other obtuse and/or intellectually dishonest "points" (a.k.a. "red herring" and "strawman") to make on this...?
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 137
view profile
History
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 3:47:20 PM

Do you have any other obtuse and/or intellectually dishonest "points" (a.k.a. "red herring" and "strawman") to make on this...?


The real 'red herring' is that liberals give a rats ass about Women’s rights. The agenda is attacking states’ rights, increasing federal influence, and instituting a top down governing authority.

Why can’t any liberals denounce Sharia? Even if it isn’t here. The absolute refusal to denounce it, the level of acceptance it has achieved and supported by the British Government and the attacks on the British system of law only shows a complete and total disregard for the base liberal values of equality, freedom, justice, and human rights.

Change that opinion, stand up for real women’s rights. Make that public and watch support change for insignificant issues of who pays for birth control. What evidence is there that liberals have any real support for freedom, liberty, justice, or human rights. Congrats. You can prove me wrong simple enough. Just show me the support for women’s rights beyond who gets to pay for a pill.

Sharia is a huge proof of why a separation of church and state is not optional. But you can’t do that if you support sharia. Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris all have it right about this and they are being virtually ignored by the liberal establishment unless they are used as support against Christians. That isn’t right.

It isn’t a strawman argument. It is absolutely relevant and directly on target and answers the original question. Religion is important in the US for candidates because the irreligious don’t have a voice brave enough to stand out and the voices that do exist have a confused and weak base of principles to stand on.
 OutofControlMan
Joined: 12/22/2011
Msg: 138
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 4:16:21 PM

And this is the same LAW that justifys "Honor killings"................ because, that has never happened on THIS continent, has it?


there is no law that "justifies" honor killings anywhere in the world, to my knowledge, yes in some places these so-called 'honor' killings are not prosecuted to the extent I believe they should be.

they are not "justified" but they do happen, just like one spouse kills another in the USA, or Canada. are these killings "justified" in your way of thinking because they happen? they might be "justified" in the mind of the killer, but not to most rational people in our society. To extend your way of thinking, over 15,000 murders per year happen in the USA -is that because the law "justifies" or "allows" them to happen? no, they happen anyway

are you suggested that under the oh-so-strict laws of the USA as they are now, no husband ever kills his wife? (lol if you are)

but wow anythig that sounds like "Muslim" scares many people pantsless doesn't it?

BTW, I disagree with most Islamic dogma (as well as most 'Christian" or other dogma)

aries328 is right IMO-- much about Muslim society is messed up, and even sick, however as an alternative to tying up the courts for civil disputes (perhaps NOT including marital disputes, but just common property, contracts disputes, etc. ) I don't see 'sharia' law as necessarily 'scary'.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 139
view profile
History
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 4:29:12 PM

I don't see 'sharia' law as necessarily 'scary'.


You should. Doesn't make you a chicken with your head cut off. Just learn about it. Doesn't take long. It's called creeping sharia for a reason and we are watching it happen in many parts of the world.

I usually do not like pithy quotes but this Thomas Jefferson quote fits so much more appropriately in this case then any lame democrat/republican context.


All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.
Thomas Jefferson
 OutofControlMan
Joined: 12/22/2011
Msg: 140
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 4:29:27 PM
@ paulK


What you are refusing to acknowledge is that in those situations, the WOMAN is totally without any power at all, and has no say in whether she goes to shariah court, or state court. It is all up to the man to decide. Yet, you would have no problem if people were given the choice to go to a shariah court, instead of a state court? Shariah court has no business whatsoever in the USA, be it "voluntary" or not. When you come to live in this country, you agreed to abide by ITS laws, not some law that allows, and even encourages, fathers to kill their daughters.


OK we get it, the Muslim bogeyman scares you , they are all evil people, you hate them, they are here to take over everything

do you really think there haven't been plenty of cases where a North American, non-Muslim man has killed his wife, and/or kids because he is distraught at going to our standard, as-issued courts as they are now? I see your sharia =wife-murder as somewhat of a red herring issue, playing to base, racist emotional reactions and fear of the unknown/xenophobia.

here's another cute story for you (of dozens I just found on Google)

http://jezebel.com/5851591/man-kills-wife--two-children-friends-suggest-shes-at-fault-for-belittling-him

(dated Oct. 19,2011) : "On Monday night in Cross River, New York, Sam Friedlander beat his wife to death with a table leg, shot their two young children in their beds, then turned the gun on himself. It's an incredibly horrific crime, and you might be feeling pretty bad for the wife and the two kids right now — but first, you should consider all the facts. You see, according to Friedlander's friends, his wife was an emasculating ****, and that's probably what drove him to murder his entire family.

The Journal News, a local Westchester newspaper, put together an article that should go down in the annals of victim blaming. In the lengthy piece, the only comment about who Amy Friedlander was comes from a statement posted on the website of her tutoring service. Her business partner Deborah Bernstein wrote:"

last I checked, Cross River was in the USA, and Sam Friedlander was a NON-Muslim, American born & raised man.

does this suggest to you that current US law encourages men to kill their wives & families, because it happened? (this story and many, many others. why I bet FAR more non-Muslims have murdered their wives & families in the USA, than have Muslims!

but see it was OK--> because she was an "emasculating b1tch" to him, so it was "justified" under current American/USA culture
 OutofControlMan
Joined: 12/22/2011
Msg: 141
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 4:33:41 PM
@ PAulK:
Hey outof.........

Lets say that you and someone else have a dispute, and to take it to civil court would take longer than you want to wait, and that where you live, you could go to a shariah "arbitration" in a matter of days.

Would you opt for going to shariah court?

Paul K


that is a very good question (not just stalling for time)

because it's so new I'm not sure ( & theoretical it is NOT available where I am)

the answer would be that IF it were established and I knew something of their rulings, that I could have at least a good degree of confidence that they would be fair, yes I think I would.

going to the standard civil courts we have now, one must place faith in the hands of the presiding judge (or jury in some cases) that their rulings will be fair. they most likely generally are, but I wouldn't have 100% faith that they ALWAYS are, either . (could l be friends with one or the other of the lawyers int he case, etc. or have personal prejudices based on gender, age, race, etc.)
 mungojoe
Joined: 11/15/2006
Msg: 142
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 5:03:24 PM

It's called creeping sharia for a reason...

Yes, just as its called stealth jihad "for a reason"... That reason being, primarily, the delusional thinking of the Islamophobic right-wingnuts/"counter jihad whackjobs" and their overwhelming need for everyone else to be as frightened of "the sky falling" as they are...

Yes, we should all be afraid, very afraid, of "creeping sharia" replacing the "law of the land" and "stealth jihad" overthrowing the gov't, turning all us "kafirs" into their slaves (and killing those who dare to complain or refuse)...

Yep, hundreds of years of western progress will be undone, literally overnight... 'state' will become 'church' (or, rather, mosque), 'church' (or, rather, mosque) will become 'state' and all the sacrifices of the founding fathers and those who came after will be "wiped from the face of the earth" if those "scary muslims" aren't fought at every turn...

Meanwhile, the right-wing religious nutjobs are passing (or attempting to pass) law after law to accomplish the same goal (from a Christian perspective) but THAT is just a matter of "state's rights"...
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 143
view profile
History
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 5:28:55 PM
Phobic...

I am not concerned about it taking over here if it isn't allowed.
I am concerned what is occuring right in front of us.

It sounds like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75gZAJQwFSQ&feature=player_detailpage#t=54s

"Do not take the Jews or the Christians as your Allies."
"You shall cut his head off."

Listen to the whole thing. Then if you still don't think there could be an issue. It is your choice and thats it.
 Bladesmith81801
Joined: 10/30/2010
Msg: 144
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 5:39:01 PM
When Muslims in this country wield close to, or equal to, the amount of political power that these "Christians" do, I'll deal with it then. However, the Christian theocratic agenda is in our face right NOW, using all of it's monetary and political might.

It wasn't Islam that got Prop 8 passed in Cali, it was the Mormons. (Y'all can argue among yourself whether they're part of the bible banging club or not.)

It wasn't Muslims who assassinated Dr. Tiller, it was Christians.

It ain't Islam trying to force the military to march around singing "Onward Christian Soldiers".

One bunch of religious zealots to be dealt with at a time, thank you. Islam ain't the theologic threat to this nation that the Evangelical Fundie movement is.

What ironic is the usual suspects trying to shove off the concern onto the Muslims. You guys are fine with a Theocracy, as long as it's a Christian one.
 Doremi_Fasolatido
Joined: 2/14/2009
Msg: 145
view profile
History
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 5:39:54 PM
Most religions I have knowledge of all seem to have rules it's members must follow. Certain ceremonies, rites, ways of doing and not doing things. "Gods laws", I guess is what I am saying. Or, at least the way God wants the members of [insert favorite religion] to believe and act.

I've also noticed true believers in any particular religion usually feel that "their God" is right and their religion is the true path to enlightenment. After all, the original rulebook handed down and dictated from the almighty said so. In most faiths this miracle happened eons ago and people did things much differently back then. These rulebooks are usually rife with violence, death, inequality between the sexes , incest and human sacrifice. Through all this, I think early man tried to "civilize" themselves into a society. A society for the betterment of all and religions helped to better explain the world and how to treat others.

If one rigidly followed the dogma of most religions you'd eventually run afoul of the laws of man. I can't count the number of times over the years I've heard of someone doing what "his God" thought was right.Yes, this applies to any religion, if followed fervently. Plus, you toss in a bit of mental illness and or religious fanatacism and you've got the makings for all kinds of mayhem....
 mungojoe
Joined: 11/15/2006
Msg: 146
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 5:46:18 PM

It sounds like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75gZAJQwFSQ&feature=player_detailpage#t=54s

ROFLMAO...

The day I become frightened, sorry, "concerned", about the future of democracy over nutjob rants on youtube will be the day I ask my kids to take me in to be assessed for dementia...
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 147
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 6:02:06 PM
You guys really should get an academy award for the misdirection and acting in this thread! I love the:

"Not having the ability to determine the difference in intentions between funding for abortions and birth control compared to the beating and stoning of women is callous and hateful and only show the real attitude behind the liberal sentiment that is nothing but reckless and without actual principles."

WOW! Now that's a reallll load of garbage! Does this happen LEGALLY in America? Has anybody here, or any where else who is a LIBERAL,NOT CONDEMNED this treatment of stoning women? Does America have the right to change laws in other countries? If this HAPPENS in America, are those who do it, prosecuted to the full extent of the law? If not, WHERE DID THAT HAPPEN?

"Get your rocks off getting pissy about some current stupid legislation."

Yes we do, yes we will. It affect women who are CITIZENS of this country and SUBJECTED to it's laws.

"that some women may choose to favor"

OK fine, a number of women choose to favor it. Show me the poll by a legitamite source that has more women in favor of it and not against it. They may have voted for these dolts, I doubt they knew once elected they would pull this bait and switch. NO ONE not one of these jerks ran on this as part of their agenda of change.

"not this abjectly dishonorable in their views about human dignity and reasonable thoughts."

OK show me where conservatives have voiced their concerns about this? Show me a motion in congress introduced by republicans to condemn it? Show me ANYWHERE any republican male, who holds office and is concerned FIRST with women's rights world wide?

"I support them."

Fine and I admire for that, now explain how you support them? Do you donate money to the cause, demonstrate, write letters...what do you do? Clicking 'like' on your FB page is cute, but hardly qualifies as support.

This has been a bag of dung, foisted on us, by posters not willing to admit, this is purely an attack on something that they have made up, to attract votes from the christian conservatives. It is core to their agenda, perhaps they are this religious, although their choosen representatives are not. Newt's 3 marriages belie that, as does mr 999's multiple affairs, as a minister.

Please don't tell me you and the other poster, actually do something about changing, women's rights in the world.
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 148
view profile
History
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 6:05:01 PM

I'll type this as simply as possible.

1) They're getting divorced.

2) Arbitration requires that both - remember that word, BOTH - parties agree to arbitration.

3) If the husband goes by himself, it means nothing happens.

4) Arbitration requires both of them to go there.

5) The husband can't insist, because - wait for it - they're getting DIVORCED!


Where do you get this stuff? You understand nothing. Men are automatically granted a divorce. A woman has to make a case and convince about three male imams that she deserves a divorce.


While a husband is not required to go through official channels to gain a divorce – being able to achieve this merely by uttering the word “talaq” – Islamic law requires that the wife must persuade the judges to grant her a dissolution
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 149
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 6:20:13 PM
Appropriate user name.

Sure, if you say so. I won't even bother to check if you're talking out of you azz.

The thing is though, getting a piece of paper from some clergyman really doesn't cut much weight in North America. I'm pretty sure I still have the piece of paper making me a Bishop that I got in high school.

If the husband wants to have something that a Canadian or US court might sign off on, he has to convince his wife to go. If she doesn't want to, then they go through the regular court system, or some other arbitrator.

I'm just stunned by how much people here want to believe that Muslim women aren't regular human beings. I've known Muslim women. They've been a little less likely to take shit than secular women or Christian women.

They're really not Borg. Go talk to some. I know, it might shake up your precious magical belief system. But it kind of needs it.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 150
view profile
History
Church and State
Posted: 4/4/2012 6:41:06 PM
Did people notice and rebel when the Theocracy added "in god we trust" to the paper money, or "One nation, under god" to the pledge, in the incrimentel, march toward fasicsm? Like the frogs in the boiling water scenario, the Spanish Inquisition, and Witch burnings sneak up on us....the thousands of deaths of democracy via paper cuts from the extremes.

If we merely look at the thousands of paper cuts of recent legislations against women, minorities, other faiths, and-white old guys, it is pretty easy to see the pattern of changing demographics, panick, reactionary politics, Faux News echo chamber nonsense, and the" onward march of christian soldiers, marching as if to war,"

I marched to war...and found it unsavory.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Church and State