|
On June 12 2013 20:29 S:klogW wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 20:26 Christ the Redeemer wrote:
I was under the impression that neutrality and objectivity is important. But reading the op, it is obvious which side of the issue it already stands, thereby affecting the discussion. What about those who favor this law? OPs like this discourage a healthy discussion because they already manipulate the discussion to go on a specific way. But who would argue that being anti-gay is a good thing?
The only possible moral problem with being gay is the right to adopt children.
Don't get me wrong I'm not against gay marriage or gay people in general, far from it. Though I'm pretty sure it would be hard for a kid to have gay parents because that kid would have to put up with a lot of shit from other people, especially at school. Not only that, I feel good parenting comes from a mother and father. It's like... I don't think gay parents would be bad or anything. It's just that the mother has the role of the mother and the father the role of the father. It's not something that can be rationally explained, it's a kind of gut feeling you get. Interacting with mother isn't the same as interacting with father. It just isn't.
You can be for gay marriage etc, sure why not, but imagine two different scenarios. Your dad is cheating on your mother with a woman and your dad is cheating on your mother with another dude. Just try to imagine that, try to figure out how fucking weird that would be.
I don't hate gays, I'm friends with a few of them. I don't think they shouldn't be able to marry. But as of now, given the current state of things, I don't think they should adopt children. It's not hatred, it's just something else. You could say that it would be "wrong" to deny them the same rights as a straight couple, that there are straight couples who are absolute shit parents. I would agree with you. But the primary concern when it comes to adopting a child isn't the parent's well being or happiness. What's the most important is the children's.
|
On June 12 2013 21:14 fluidin wrote:
I'm not sure how to phrase this, but I too am tired of all the LBGT rhetoric, especially on the Internet, where it's impossible to discuss the subject objectively. See, I do support their fight for rights, and I have had gay friends.
However, why are some people glorifying the LBGT movement? TBH it's annoying me as much as the preachers that go about spewing whatever. I'm not even religious (maybe Agnostic), and yet I believe that the gift of human life, through consummation between a man and woman, is precious beyond belief. Both orthodox religion and homosexuality does kinda detract from the human race's progression IMO. Of course, I'm not demeaning all their contributions, just that I feel there's a fundamental flaw in the inability to produce a new human life.
To me, homosexuals are an unfortunate circumstance of how the world works. Yes, they absolutely should enjoy the same rights as everyone else, I'm all for that, but there's no need to go about glorifying it. It has been stated that homosexuality is not a disorder, I acknowledge that, but deep down I do wish that it was, and that it could be "cured".
This is my personal belief. It might offend many, but, well. :/
Nobody is glorifying it.
They are not unable to produce a new human life.
Plenty people capable of producing new human life do not.
So homosexuals are an unfortunate circumstance and deep down you wish gay people had a disorder so you could cure them?
Somebody give this guy a medal as his opinions are clearly well thought out and morally sound!
|
On June 12 2013 21:00 Reason wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 20:54 Christ the Redeemer wrote:On June 12 2013 20:50 DonKey_ wrote:On June 12 2013 20:37 Christ the Redeemer wrote:On June 12 2013 20:27 MasterOfPuppets wrote:
Nevermind, your name is Christ the Redeemer... -_- This is the bias I am talking about. FYI, Christ the Redeemer is a landmark in my country! For you not to even recognize that speaks volumes about your cultural ignorance. I have no problem if a person supports Satanism, unicorns, socialism, orthodox catholicism, believing in Catholic miracles, doing pagan rituals, whatever, but I have a problem when people are immediately disadvantaged in a discussion. The framing of this OP immediately puts the orthodox catholics at a disadvantage. Do you realize that by allowing someone to support intolerance you become a hypocrite to what you are saying? The problem with allowing someone to support an intolerant agenda is that they then censor, among other things, the group they are intolerant against. There is no "middle ground" where the hateful/intolerant and the tolerant can coexist. The hateful/intolerant actively seek to destroy the other group. The tolerant can tolerate the other. While the intolerant does not allow the other to even express its opinion. The discussion here except for the two Russians is intolerant of opposing views. Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 20:51 Christ the Redeemer wrote:On June 12 2013 20:45 Friedrich Nietzsche wrote:On June 12 2013 20:37 Christ the Redeemer wrote:On June 12 2013 20:27 MasterOfPuppets wrote:
Nevermind, your name is Christ the Redeemer... -_- This is the bias I am talking about. FYI, Christ the Redeemer is a landmark in my country! For you not to even recognize that speaks volumes about your cultural ignorance. I have no problem if a person supports Satanism, unicorns, socialism, orthodox catholicism, believing in Catholic miracles, doing pagan rituals, whatever, but I have a problem when people are immediately disadvantaged in a discussion. The framing of this OP immediately puts the orthodox catholics at a disadvantage. There are hundreds of years worth of discourse on this, and it is all under the bridge. Done. No further discussion necessary. Discriminating people because of their race, creed, and gender is morally indefensible. Society has grown much since the Inquisition, and we have become a more tolerant society. To even start to argue about religious justification of bigotry is worthy of hell, it's a shame it does not exist. Do your research, you have the power to liberate yourself from ignorance. So far in this thread, there are 2 Russians, and they are both in favor of the law, Can we at least listen to them Would you want to listen to 2 racist guys tell you why it's good to be racist? Somebody ban this troll please.
You are the exact opposite of your username, what a shame.
Ban me because I have a different opinion? I did not say racism or hate gay is ok, All I am saying is that for a healthy discussion, all sides should be given equal opportunity to express their opinion, and the way this OP is constructed is discouraging opposing opinion.
|
Russian Federation410 Posts
Couldn't find the copy of it, it will be published after Putin signs it. However, I did find, that it imposes fines on something called public "non-traditional sexual relations propaganda" (definition not available yet) via media, public events, Internet.
Includes:
1. Information that "enforces" the formation of non-traditinal sexual orientation in the underaged individual
2. Information that describes/advertises the appeal of non-traditional sexual orientation and relations
3. Informationt that is touting non-traditional sexual orientation.
The law doesn't say anything about educational information/programs, so it's unclear whether it fits any of the categories. IIRC sex ed is taught in 7th grade, that didn't change.
Translation may be a bit innacurate, - the best I could come up with so far.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On June 12 2013 21:23 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 20:29 S:klogW wrote:On June 12 2013 20:26 Christ the Redeemer wrote:
I was under the impression that neutrality and objectivity is important. But reading the op, it is obvious which side of the issue it already stands, thereby affecting the discussion. What about those who favor this law? OPs like this discourage a healthy discussion because they already manipulate the discussion to go on a specific way. But who would argue that being anti-gay is a good thing? The only possible moral problem with being gay is the right to adopt children. Don't get me wrong I'm not against gay marriage or gay people in general, far from it. Though I'm pretty sure it would be hard for a kid to have gay parents because that kid would have to put up with a lot of shit from other people, especially at school. Not only that, I feel good parenting comes from a mother and father. It's like... I don't think gay parents would be bad or anything. It's just that the mother has the role of the mother and the father the role of the father. It's not something that can be rationally explained, it's a kind of gut feeling you get. Interacting with mother isn't the same as interacting with father. It just isn't. You can be for gay marriage etc, sure why not, but imagine two different scenarios. Your dad is cheating on your mother with a woman and your dad is cheating on your mother with another dude. Just try to imagine that, try to figure out how fucking weird that would be. I don't hate gays, I'm friends with a few of them. I don't think they shouldn't be able to marry. But as of now, given the current state of things, I don't think they should adopt children. It's not hatred, it's just something else. You could say that it would be "wrong" to deny them the same rights as a straight couple, that there are straight couples who are absolute shit parents. I would agree with you. But the primary concern when it comes to adopting a child isn't the parent's well being or happiness. What's the most important is the children's.
There's a whole lot of real life experience and conclusive research which shows your gut feeling isn't worth much.
|
On June 12 2013 21:05 AxUU wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 21:03 marvellosity wrote:On June 12 2013 20:29 AxUU wrote:On June 12 2013 20:12 cloneThorN wrote:On June 12 2013 20:04 Sword of Omens wrote:On June 12 2013 19:42 Friedrich Nietzsche wrote:
The recent gay pride parade suffered a heavy and violent blow after people threw eggs and water at gay rights movement activists and participants of the parade. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/B5wkYTm.jpg) Got this from my feed this morning! This is beyond unbelievable! Wow... What kind of sick freak throws eggs at peaceful protesters, even aiming for their head at such a distance? They are just asking for equal rights, they are not trying to somehow magically convert people into gayness(?). Meanwhile, fanatic douschebags like the guy in this photo, are attacking them for no other reason than seeing the protesters as inferior creatures. Can't America "liberate" Russia? They have gas and oil you know  I don't think America actually is capable of doing that. But that aside, most gay people I have met have been friendly, and I have nothing against them, but they often go about parading how gay they are and how it's good to be gay which irritates me to death, they also seem to be offended when they ask me if I'm gay and I say that I'm not. Btw I laughed at the picture, don't even know why. But that aside, most straight people I have met have been friendly, and I have nothing against them, but they often go about parading how straight they are and how it's good to be straight which irritates me to death, they also seem to be offended when they ask me if I'm straight and I say that I'm not. Btw I laughed at the fact that you laughed at innocent, peaceful people being attacked, don't even know why. Most straight people don't go about parading how straight they are etc. Atleast I have NEVER heard anyone say that. You must be from reddit.
Really ?
You never heard of a guy telling the story of how he fucked this random hot chick the night before ? I think it describe very well "parading how straight/gay they are". People are completely fine with straight people acting like that, but as soon as someone gay does it, people act disgusted.
|
On June 12 2013 21:14 fluidin wrote:
I'm not sure how to phrase this, but I too am tired of all the LBGT rhetoric, especially on the Internet, where it's impossible to discuss the subject objectively. See, I do support their fight for rights, and I have had gay friends.
However, why are some people glorifying the LBGT movement? TBH it's annoying me as much as the preachers that go about spewing whatever. I'm not even religious (maybe Agnostic), and yet I believe that the gift of human life, through consummation between a man and woman, is precious beyond belief. Both orthodox religion and homosexuality does kinda detract from the human race's progression IMO. Of course, I'm not demeaning all their contributions, just that I feel there's a fundamental flaw in the inability to produce a new human life.
To me, homosexuals are an unfortunate circumstance of how the world works. Yes, they absolutely should enjoy the same rights as everyone else, I'm all for that, but there's no need to go about glorifying it. It has been stated that homosexuality is not a disorder, I acknowledge that, but deep down I do wish that it was, and that it could be "cured".
This is my personal belief. It might offend many, but, well. :/
When a group is persecuted, society needs to 'swing the other way' for a while in order to set things straight.
For example, in Britain we have systems designed to help women get into executive jobs. This is unfair to men, but we have to do this for a while until we get about half of these jobs occupied by women. Currently it's probably less than 5%, due to many factors and possibly some subconscious sexism.
This is not about glorifying anything but rather it is about fixing a problem. This is not an attack on you, but as long as there are a lot of people who wish that homosexuality could be cured then there will be a need for a strong LBGT movement.
|
Russian Federation1849 Posts
That awkward moment when you learn about something happend in Russia from TL
|
On June 12 2013 21:23 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 20:29 S:klogW wrote:On June 12 2013 20:26 Christ the Redeemer wrote:
I was under the impression that neutrality and objectivity is important. But reading the op, it is obvious which side of the issue it already stands, thereby affecting the discussion. What about those who favor this law? OPs like this discourage a healthy discussion because they already manipulate the discussion to go on a specific way. But who would argue that being anti-gay is a good thing? The only possible moral problem with being gay is the right to adopt children. Don't get me wrong I'm not against gay marriage or gay people in general, far from it. Though I'm pretty sure it would be hard for a kid to have gay parents because that kid would have to put up with a lot of shit from other people, especially at school. Not only that, I feel good parenting comes from a mother and father. It's like... I don't think gay parents would be bad or anything. It's just that the mother has the role of the mother and the father the role of the father. It's not something that can be rationally explained, it's a kind of gut feeling you get. Interacting with mother isn't the same as interacting with father. It just isn't. You can be for gay marriage etc, sure why not, but imagine two different scenarios. Your dad is cheating on your mother with a woman and your dad is cheating on your mother with another dude. Just try to imagine that, try to figure out how fucking weird that would be. I don't hate gays, I'm friends with a few of them. I don't think they shouldn't be able to marry. But as of now, given the current state of things, I don't think they should adopt children. It's not hatred, it's just something else. You could say that it would be "wrong" to deny them the same rights as a straight couple, that there are straight couples who are absolute shit parents. I would agree with you. But the primary concern when it comes to adopting a child isn't the parent's well being or happiness. What's the most important is the children's.
That's such a BS argument that gets thrown around whenever the issue of gay adoption comes up; how the hell would gay parents be worse than no parents at all? Kids will only have trouble at school if the parents of other kids are assholes that teach their children that being gay is unnatural, otherwise children have little trouble accepting new things as natural. The more common it is with children to gay parents, the less of an issue it will be - and considering there is no shortage of adoptable children that would most certainly be happier growing up in a caring home rather than an orphanage, I don't see how there's even an argument against gay adoption.
|
On June 12 2013 21:19 broodmann wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 21:15 mijagi182 wrote:Not to those who follow events in Russia. The country is less and less democratic According to Vtsiom 88 % support the new law. So the it's obviously the democratic will of people or at least 88 % of them which is more than enough to pass it.
You forgot (or didnt know) that apart from listening to majority, democtratic country is protecting its minorities.
|
Finland162 Posts
On June 12 2013 21:22 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 21:20 AxUU wrote:On June 12 2013 21:15 marvellosity wrote:On June 12 2013 21:09 AxUU wrote:On June 12 2013 21:06 marvellosity wrote:On June 12 2013 21:05 AxUU wrote:On June 12 2013 21:03 marvellosity wrote:On June 12 2013 20:29 AxUU wrote:On June 12 2013 20:12 cloneThorN wrote:On June 12 2013 20:04 Sword of Omens wrote:[quote] Got this from my feed this morning! This is beyond unbelievable! Wow... What kind of sick freak throws eggs at peaceful protesters, even aiming for their head at such a distance? They are just asking for equal rights, they are not trying to somehow magically convert people into gayness(?). Meanwhile, fanatic douschebags like the guy in this photo, are attacking them for no other reason than seeing the protesters as inferior creatures. Can't America "liberate" Russia? They have gas and oil you know I don't think America actually is capable of doing that. But that aside, most gay people I have met have been friendly, and I have nothing against them, but they often go about parading how gay they are and how it's good to be gay which irritates me to death, they also seem to be offended when they ask me if I'm gay and I say that I'm not. Btw I laughed at the picture, don't even know why. But that aside, most straight people I have met have been friendly, and I have nothing against them, but they often go about parading how straight they are and how it's good to be straight which irritates me to death, they also seem to be offended when they ask me if I'm straight and I say that I'm not. Btw I laughed at the fact that you laughed at innocent, peaceful people being attacked, don't even know why. Most straight people don't go about parading how straight they are etc. Atleast I have NEVER heard anyone say that. You must be from reddit. Nor do most gay people. The status quo is straight people 'parading' how straight they are. Look at practically all advertisements, tv shows, music, whatever you like. Sex does sell, and seeing as most people are straight, that's just a fact, making ads or w/e that appeal to straight people is more profitable than making ads that appeal to gay people. It is all about the money in advertisements, tv shows and music nowadays. I'm not disputing that, but your assertion is that gay people shove it in people's faces (by and large, we do not) whereas the reality is the other way round (which is fine, I'm not complaining about it). Groups of people talk about sex all the time, and almost always it will reference the opposite sex, because that's the majority. Gays don't complain about it because there's nothing to complain about, but it's rather irksome when straight people like you complain about having 'gay' shoved down your throat, when the converse is everyday reality for gay people. Please do note that I'm simply speaking from my own experiences, if most gay people aren't doing that in the UK, it's IMO a good thing, I don't have anything against being gay, but to some (not all) it does quite seem like a religion. Which is still all fine, but it occasionally gets out of hand, in Finland we do have anti-straight gay bars. Any minority group will have its 'activists' (which are to an extent necessary). Some are fairly militant. But it is a product of homosexuals living in a heterosexual-dominated world. Complaining about it when society is all about heterosexuality, catering to you, seems silly to me.
Sorry for being repetitive, but again, to start this I say, I don't have anything against homosexuals, some of my friends are bi/homo and it is totally fine. I don't complain exclusively about homosexuals being militant about it, it's also irritating when preachers are militant about their religion OR when a straight person makes a big deal about him being so straight and good for being straight. However I don't see a reason to get offended by any of this, there will always be annoying people, complaining people, concerned people and people who defend minorities to death.
I'm going to have to leave to get some dinner but I''l check back later.
|
On June 12 2013 21:25 Christ the Redeemer wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 21:00 Reason wrote:On June 12 2013 20:54 Christ the Redeemer wrote:On June 12 2013 20:50 DonKey_ wrote:On June 12 2013 20:37 Christ the Redeemer wrote:On June 12 2013 20:27 MasterOfPuppets wrote:
Nevermind, your name is Christ the Redeemer... -_- This is the bias I am talking about. FYI, Christ the Redeemer is a landmark in my country! For you not to even recognize that speaks volumes about your cultural ignorance. I have no problem if a person supports Satanism, unicorns, socialism, orthodox catholicism, believing in Catholic miracles, doing pagan rituals, whatever, but I have a problem when people are immediately disadvantaged in a discussion. The framing of this OP immediately puts the orthodox catholics at a disadvantage. Do you realize that by allowing someone to support intolerance you become a hypocrite to what you are saying? The problem with allowing someone to support an intolerant agenda is that they then censor, among other things, the group they are intolerant against. There is no "middle ground" where the hateful/intolerant and the tolerant can coexist. The hateful/intolerant actively seek to destroy the other group. The tolerant can tolerate the other. While the intolerant does not allow the other to even express its opinion. The discussion here except for the two Russians is intolerant of opposing views. On June 12 2013 20:51 Christ the Redeemer wrote:On June 12 2013 20:45 Friedrich Nietzsche wrote:On June 12 2013 20:37 Christ the Redeemer wrote:On June 12 2013 20:27 MasterOfPuppets wrote:
Nevermind, your name is Christ the Redeemer... -_- This is the bias I am talking about. FYI, Christ the Redeemer is a landmark in my country! For you not to even recognize that speaks volumes about your cultural ignorance. I have no problem if a person supports Satanism, unicorns, socialism, orthodox catholicism, believing in Catholic miracles, doing pagan rituals, whatever, but I have a problem when people are immediately disadvantaged in a discussion. The framing of this OP immediately puts the orthodox catholics at a disadvantage. There are hundreds of years worth of discourse on this, and it is all under the bridge. Done. No further discussion necessary. Discriminating people because of their race, creed, and gender is morally indefensible. Society has grown much since the Inquisition, and we have become a more tolerant society. To even start to argue about religious justification of bigotry is worthy of hell, it's a shame it does not exist. Do your research, you have the power to liberate yourself from ignorance. So far in this thread, there are 2 Russians, and they are both in favor of the law, Can we at least listen to them Would you want to listen to 2 racist guys tell you why it's good to be racist? Somebody ban this troll please. You are the exact opposite of your username, what a shame. Ban me because I have a different opinion? I did not say racism or hate gay is ok, All I am saying is that for a healthy discussion, all sides should be given equal opportunity to express their opinion, and the way this OP is constructed is discouraging opposing opinion.
I didn't suggest you should be banned because you have a different opinion.
You should be banned because you're a troll.
Opposing opinions on slavery or racism or homophobia, to name but a few, aren't really welcome, nor should they be.
If it was a religious, political, economical, philosophical or any number of different types of discussion then the OP shouldn't be biased and all opinions are of course extremely welcome.
This is not one of those cases.
|
I would love to read some insight from some russian members of the community.
|
lol evreone is so white knight on TL. No one actually agrees with Russia.
|
On June 12 2013 21:34 zul wrote:
I would love to read some insight from some russian members of the community.
It would be nice to hear something from them especially since sources seem to be saying slightly different things, also just to get a direct perspective.
Not sure how many Russians there are on TL O_O
|
I can't believe what the Russians did! I hope more countries follow suit.
|
On June 12 2013 21:34 sertas wrote:
lol evreone is so white knight on TL. No one actually agrees with Russia.
I don't think you understand what white knight means.
|
On June 12 2013 21:33 Reason wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 21:25 Christ the Redeemer wrote:On June 12 2013 21:00 Reason wrote:On June 12 2013 20:54 Christ the Redeemer wrote:On June 12 2013 20:50 DonKey_ wrote:On June 12 2013 20:37 Christ the Redeemer wrote:On June 12 2013 20:27 MasterOfPuppets wrote:
Nevermind, your name is Christ the Redeemer... -_- This is the bias I am talking about. FYI, Christ the Redeemer is a landmark in my country! For you not to even recognize that speaks volumes about your cultural ignorance. I have no problem if a person supports Satanism, unicorns, socialism, orthodox catholicism, believing in Catholic miracles, doing pagan rituals, whatever, but I have a problem when people are immediately disadvantaged in a discussion. The framing of this OP immediately puts the orthodox catholics at a disadvantage. Do you realize that by allowing someone to support intolerance you become a hypocrite to what you are saying? The problem with allowing someone to support an intolerant agenda is that they then censor, among other things, the group they are intolerant against. There is no "middle ground" where the hateful/intolerant and the tolerant can coexist. The hateful/intolerant actively seek to destroy the other group. The tolerant can tolerate the other. While the intolerant does not allow the other to even express its opinion. The discussion here except for the two Russians is intolerant of opposing views. On June 12 2013 20:51 Christ the Redeemer wrote:On June 12 2013 20:45 Friedrich Nietzsche wrote:On June 12 2013 20:37 Christ the Redeemer wrote:On June 12 2013 20:27 MasterOfPuppets wrote:
Nevermind, your name is Christ the Redeemer... -_- This is the bias I am talking about. FYI, Christ the Redeemer is a landmark in my country! For you not to even recognize that speaks volumes about your cultural ignorance. I have no problem if a person supports Satanism, unicorns, socialism, orthodox catholicism, believing in Catholic miracles, doing pagan rituals, whatever, but I have a problem when people are immediately disadvantaged in a discussion. The framing of this OP immediately puts the orthodox catholics at a disadvantage. There are hundreds of years worth of discourse on this, and it is all under the bridge. Done. No further discussion necessary. Discriminating people because of their race, creed, and gender is morally indefensible. Society has grown much since the Inquisition, and we have become a more tolerant society. To even start to argue about religious justification of bigotry is worthy of hell, it's a shame it does not exist. Do your research, you have the power to liberate yourself from ignorance. So far in this thread, there are 2 Russians, and they are both in favor of the law, Can we at least listen to them Would you want to listen to 2 racist guys tell you why it's good to be racist? Somebody ban this troll please. You are the exact opposite of your username, what a shame. Ban me because I have a different opinion? I did not say racism or hate gay is ok, All I am saying is that for a healthy discussion, all sides should be given equal opportunity to express their opinion, and the way this OP is constructed is discouraging opposing opinion. I didn't suggest you should be banned because you have a different opinion. You should be banned because you're a troll. Opposing opinions on slavery or racism or homophobia, to name but a few, aren't really welcome, nor should they be. If it was a religious, political, economical, philosophical or any number of different types of discussion then the OP shouldn't be biased and all opinions are of course extremely welcome. This is not one of those cases.
Why am I a troll? Because I have a different opinion? It really seems that you do not know how to use reason.
I extremely encourage opposing views on this case because as far as I read from the report, it is not even about being gay directly but in protecting minors what what their culture and society sees as a threat or whatever. I do not know about this threat or their culture, that is why I want to listen to opposing views.
|
On June 12 2013 21:31 mijagi182 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 21:19 broodmann wrote:On June 12 2013 21:15 mijagi182 wrote:Not to those who follow events in Russia. The country is less and less democratic According to Vtsiom 88 % support the new law. So the it's obviously the democratic will of people or at least 88 % of them which is more than enough to pass it. You forgot (or didnt know) that apart from listening to majority, democtratic country is protecting its minorities.
Political equality is a principle of democracy sure, but social equality is not required for a state to be democratic. Majority rule is a fact of democracy and in the end its about the will of the people, and its pretty obvious that the law passed is the will of the people.
|
On June 12 2013 21:34 zul wrote:
I would love to read some insight from some russian members of the community.
This is exactly what Im saying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
