This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - ΚΑΤΑΝΑΛΩΤΗΣ
Pages: 1 ... 686970 7172 ... 256
2071
« on: February 24, 2016, 06:42:30 PM »
I could see why you'd delete evidence, even if it could save them from a harsher punishment. Basic logic: "If I completely remove myself from this, I can't get in trouble, hooray!"
I suppose he can't exactly get in trouble for owning CP if he deleted it, right?
He's a minor himself so I'm not sure if that comes into play.
I'm fairly certain they can both potentially be charged for CP, actually. Might depend on the state.
2072
« on: February 24, 2016, 06:41:03 PM »
I was looking for a weather-resistant backpack after having my notes ruined by torrential rain soaking my daypack today, and looking for reviews on some until I came to this fucking asshole. http://www.feedthehabit.com/outdoors/patagonia-black-hole-25l-backpack-review/When I arrived, I wasn’t disappointed. With almost frightening regularity, the dark cumulonimbus clouds gathered over Gallatin National Forest every afternoon, precisely when I got off work. I would look out the window, grit my teeth and then hop on the bike to commute home through the storm. More often than not I would stop at the local co-op for a jug of fresh kombucha or perhaps some quinoa salad from the salad bar. I trusted the Black Hole to keep this, along with my laptop and other valuables, safe from the storm. But we’re getting confused here – remember that the Black Hole is designed to be highly weather resistant, but you shouldn’t expect to be able to chuck it in one of Bozeman’s many potholes and let it stew while you grab a triple-shot latte at Wild Joe’s. Fuck these people.
2073
« on: February 24, 2016, 04:24:24 PM »
You guys sit here on your high horses and act like you never tried to get a girl to send you nudes. The kid is 13, give him a break.
I've never tried to get a girl to send me nudes.
What are you, gay?
2074
« on: February 24, 2016, 11:04:09 AM »
They don't care.
I've had exposure to the blue collar workforce. If they vote, it's for their union. Generally, they don't even care. Urban laborers and black laborers will vote dem, rural ones will vote republican.
They're not going to come out in droves to vote without major incentive (like the Obama election).
2075
« on: February 24, 2016, 04:03:38 AM »
If it were the other way around you would be 100% on their side.
2076
« on: February 24, 2016, 03:01:28 AM »
I'm going to bed.
Anyway Door--your personal inability to either grasp the concept of an objective system of ethics, or your refusal to acknowledge the authority of said system, unfortunately does not preclude the system's objectivity. The thing about objective facts is that they're true regardless of whether you're willing to believe them or not. I still haven't seen any of these arbitrary values justified except by appealing to the authority of more arbitrary values. You can keep saying it's true all you want but I'm not impressed. You're no different than a creationist who denies evolution, and claims that it's "just a theory," or anyone who denies any scientific theories just because we cannot reconcile the epistemological vs. the ontological. There we go again with these arbitrary values. In this case it's science and his father empiricism. This comparison means nothing. You're just holding me to your values that are supposed to be universal because they make you feel good and shit. You deny it--and that's your choice, but in my opinion, you're sort of putting yourself at an intellectual dead-end.
I see it as a kind of liberation. Remember when you first became sure there was no god, and no consequences for defying god, since god didn't exist? This is what I feel like, times ten. All the old gods are dead to me. They have no power short of calling each other for help, with each wave of reinforcement as powerless and feeble as the last. We can keep going up the ladder of ghosts to invoke, but I have yet to meet one with any real power.
2077
« on: February 24, 2016, 02:53:58 AM »
You mean it's only natural to dislike what You dislike. No, because morality is objective. If it were subjective, it would be pointless to even debate about it.
Haha, now We is starting to sound like a pretty strong egoist. I don't think you know what that word means.
If anything, you're the egoist--because you're the solipsist. You're the one asserting that you're the only one who matters. You're the one who is confused as to why you should care about anyone else other than yourself. You function based on self-interest alone, and you do not recognize the importance, or the authority, of any objective ethical system. You're the egoist.
I only hope that you're playing devil's advocate, for something--because if you didn't believe in god, I'd really have to hope that you don't actually think this way.
Of course I don't. I don't like violence or coercion or human suffering at all. These are the things I hate most. But at the same time I do not pretend there is some mystical logic that makes everything I value inherently valuable, beyond myself. I also believe in God, and it is my goal to even further remove myself from things like violence and manipulation that violate His will and are contrary to His love for mankind. I just really like smashing these other gods I used to venerate. Humanity as an inherent collective, for example.
2078
« on: February 24, 2016, 02:50:47 AM »
No they're not. In one scenario, my leg is broken. In the opposite, some other asshole's leg is broken. Explain to me the difference.
I feel one, and dislike the pain. I do not feel the other, and while I would want to help, it is only because I like helping, and serving God, who also likes me helping, not because I owe him assistance. I wouldn't claim that my broken leg, if I had one, is more urgent than anyone else's. Why should I? Up to you whether to care or not. If my leg was broken I'd be pretty upset, but if you don't care you don't care. From where does Ethics derive his authority? Why should I listen to him? From the fact that if you don't, you will suffer.
There we go. Self-interest. Your family will suffer. Your country will suffer. Humanity will suffer. I like these things, love them even. This is why I feel it is good for me to practice certain behaviors. Not for the sake of ethics, not for the sake of my family, or country. But because I WANT them not to suffer, and I act to fulfill this desire. You're getting to the root of it now. Everything we do is in service to our Ego, whether we realize it or not. I make the right. If it is within my power, and I can resist a countering force, it is my right. But how? This time, actually explain how. Do not just simply restate your initial proposition.
Because I can. It's the all I need. A fistful of might is more powerful than a mountain of right. No, I'm right here, and I think your authority is bullshit. I'll recognize my own, thanks. If your authority is so great, come demonstrate it. Neither of us alone have any authority. Humanity is made up is 7.2 billion people. I've never asserted that I alone have any authority.
You're projecting your desires onto a made up, multifaceted deity. There is no Humanity. There are only individual creative nothings, Selves. Their number and genetic makeup means nothing to me, because those too are arbitrary and lacking in inherent value. I don't recognize that We is sentient. I have no reason to believe in or care about We. Are you a solipsist?
No, I recognize the existence and consciousness of God and all other beings I see and do not see. I am all I can be sure of by the standards of Empiricism, but I do not bow to that deity and do not care about his standards. What makes ethics so special? Probably that it creates happy, comfortable lives, instead of one happy, comfortable life.
More, less, these are valueless without Me or God to instill value in them. You'll find that your own comfort and happiness is often contingent upon the comfort and happiness of others--it's in our nature, and if you deny it, you're either lying or mentally ill.
Right. My comfort and happiness, because I get to see things I like happen. I like others being happy. It pleases ME. This is the only justification. This is your only justification, as well. It is sufficient. Accept it.
2079
« on: February 24, 2016, 02:27:49 AM »
This is literally all just shit you don't like. It's only natural to dislike that which is objectively immoral.
You mean it's only natural to dislike what You dislike. As far as why you should care what the human species thinks--it really doesn't matter.
It's not a matter of whether you should or shouldn't care. Decisions will be made regardless. I'm not terribly concerned with whether you care or not. Haha, now We is starting to sound like a pretty strong egoist.
2080
« on: February 24, 2016, 02:25:31 AM »
I'm not gonna answer that if there's even the slightest chance you become Muslim because of anything I say.
I already know Orthodox Christianity is the truth, so it doesn't matter much.
2081
« on: February 24, 2016, 02:24:40 AM »
Why should I care about the negative sensations of another? Why should another care about mine? Because there is no difference between you having your leg broken, and someone else having their leg broken. Those two scenarios are exactly the same thing. One is not more important or urgent than the other. They are both equally valuable.
No they're not. In one scenario, my leg is broken. In the opposite, some other asshole's leg is broken. You apply the golden rule.
If I wouldn't want to have my leg broken, I wouldn't want anyone else to have their leg broken, either.
Ethics 101. I mean, I don't particularly want any legs broken. But that has nothing to do with bullshit ethics, I just don't want it. From where does Ethics derive his authority? Why should I listen to him? It is, if I have the capacity to make it happen. Explain to me how that gives you the right.
I make the right. If it is within my power, and I can resist a countering force, it is my right. I don't recognize the authority of this "we". I'm certainly no part of it. Unless "We" is this elusive god of yours, Humanity, that somehow is god without being god. If We can establish his authority, and explain why I should care what he says, I'll think about it. We establish our authority simply by virtue that there is nobody else to do so.
No, I'm right here, and I think your authority is bullshit. I'll recognize my own, thanks. If your authority is so great, come demonstrate it. We recognize that we are sentient, and have the capacity to not only suffer, but to alleviate our suffering--from there, we can work out that this "suffering" mechanism ought to be mitigated. I don't recognize that We is sentient. I have no reason to believe in or care about We. Because it kinda sucks, and it deters us from doing the things we enjoy. I don't care how We feels, and I don't care whether or not We is able to do what he wants. If you can't tell me why I should care what good or bad are, I have no cause to care. The capacity to care for others, when it does not impel you to do so on a personal level, is basically the very definition of ethics.
What makes ethics so special? If you'd rather be unethical, that's your choice. But don't pretend as though you're anything else. I don't recognize the authority of Ethics in the first place. I don't see why it matters what he thinks. "There is no god." "We are god." You realize these are two conflicting notions, yes? The statements are meant to be chronological.
There is no god, so we assume the responsibilities of a god (e.g. constructing a system of morality that functions as a means of achieving our goals as a species).
Who died and made We king of the universe? Obviously it wasn't God. Honestly, this We guy sounds like a completely self-centered douche who seeks to control me based on his own Self-Interest. I invite him to do so, if he thinks he has the strength to take me on. Might be hard though, considering he only exists as a collectivization of all the individual organisms whose genetic code puts them within the arbitrary scientific definition of the Homo Sapiens species. I have no idea why He thinks existing as a scientific category makes him a person, but whatever.
2082
« on: February 24, 2016, 02:09:50 AM »
I would never practice slave theology. LOL
It neither serves my Ego nor allows me to transcend it. Islam is trash.
Because Christianity is so pure and good.
The Orthodox idea of deification allows one to work to become close to God. This is what I, the Self, want. It also allows me to transcend the Self in service to that which is higher, which is funnily enough what the Self wants, too. I am both embracing my Ego and transcending it by practicing Christianity and servitude to the highest cause of all. Does Islam offer me anything similar?
2083
« on: February 24, 2016, 02:06:47 AM »
I think if you were to argue that there are no objective "goals" in a godless universe, I'd agree with you there. The goals are what the Self makes them. But once we establish a goal, whatever it may be, the rules we come up with under that framework are going to be manufactured in such a way that would best lead us to that goal. Are you speaking of us when you say "we", or are you speaking of "Humanity"? I have thus far seen no real demonstration of the authority or legitimacy of this deity. Currently, I believe This is the only part that should matter to you. I believe there to be an objective set of rules that would allow us to fully realize this goal. What does it look like? I'm not 100% positive. Part of it, for me, involves the cessation of all human reproduction. Part of it involves destroying the meat & dairy industry, ending the global holocaust of millions of sentient beings that's been going on for centuries. Those are the two biggest ones for me, and there's a lot of smaller bits and nuance as well.
We can argue and debate on what the best set of rules is, but ultimately, there IS a set of rules that would work best to achieve that goal. It's not subjective--one of us is right, and the other is wrong. Or maybe both of us are wrong.
But there is a right answer.
This is literally all just shit you don't like. Is We you? WHO THE FUCK IS WE AND WHY SHOULD I LISTEN TO HIM
2084
« on: February 24, 2016, 02:00:31 AM »
I give it a few months before Door joins ISIS
I would never practice slave theology. It neither serves my Ego nor allows me to transcend it. Islam is trash.
2085
« on: February 24, 2016, 01:56:04 AM »
Why is that bad. Because pinch yourself and tell me how good it feels.
Because imagine putting a knife to your wrist and estimate how good that would feel.
Because negative sensation is just that--negative.
Why should I care about the negative sensations of another? Why should another care about mine? Removing someone from society entirely is simply not up to you to decide. It is, if I have the capacity to make it happen. Why does their consent make it good. It doesn't make it "good"--it makes it permissible.
It makes it permissible because we, as the gods of the universe, have deemed it so.
I don't recognize the authority of this "we". I'm certainly no part of it. Unless "We" is this elusive god of yours, Humanity, that somehow is god without being god. If We can establish his authority, and explain why I should care what he says, I'll think about it. Doing things without people's permission causes discomfort, unrest, and imbalance in society. Maintaining comfort, peace, and balance in society is of utmost importance, because bad sensations are bad and good sensations are good, and consent-based decisions are far more likely to produce good sensations.
Why is harming others bad. See above. lmao. Good and bad mean fucking nothing. You've hit a wall here. If you can't tell me why I should care what good or bad are, I have no cause to care. What on earth gave you that idea? What on earth gave you your silly conception of god?
A sincere and divine inspiration that left me with a sense of knowing, as well as my self-interest determining that I would be better off with it. There is no god, so we take up the mantle instead. We make the rules of the universe. We are god. "There is no god." "We are god." You realize these are two conflicting notions, yes? Killing people wantonly instead of cooperating is probably not conducive to most goals. Exactly.
Right. It does nothing for me that I want. I have no need for it.
2086
« on: February 24, 2016, 01:41:18 AM »
It should be stated that moral objectivity and collectivism are inextricably intertwined.
If you're not a collectivist, your entire conception of morality is fucked. No discussion on morality is going to go anywhere.
If you can't concede that you aren't the center of the universe, then of what philosophical use are you? "How is it with mankind, whose cause we are to make our own? Is its cause that of another, and does mankind serve a higher cause? No, mankind looks only at itself, mankind will promote the interests of mankind only, mankind is its own cause. That it may develop, it causes nations and individuals to wear themselves out in its service, and, when they have accomplished what mankind needs, it throws them on the dung-heap of history in gratitude. Is not mankind's cause—a purely egoistic cause?" All you've done is declared Humanity to be the center of the universe- and on no grounds at all. Your god is a vain and selfish one. You wanna talk about spooks--individualism is one of the spookiest spooks out there.
You're right about this. Self-interest is the final spook. It is the one I'm struggling to defeat right now, in service to God. Only He can bring it down, and allow me to transcend my egoism.
2087
« on: February 24, 2016, 01:34:56 AM »
Because killing is immoral, Why.
Because you're imposing your will on another sentient, and harming them in the process.
Why is that bad. Unless you're not. If you're killing someone with their permission (e.g. euthanasia), then it's obviously perfectly okay. Why does their consent make it good. There's other scenarios you can paint to easily justify killing, but generally speaking, 99.99% of the time, it's wrong to kill. See above. Why. Because no one's getting hurt. Any scenario you can color where an individual is not harming others (in any way, physically, mentally, or otherwise), then it's moral. In other words, if it's not immoral, it can be no other thing than moral.
Why is harming others bad. You talk about how if there is no god, morality is up to our interpretation. It isn't morality. It's self-interest. I'm literally saying do or say what you want, just recognize that it's just because you want it. What you fail to realize is that we are our own gods--tasked with the duty of alleviating all our suffering.
We are god, and that is our goal. What on earth gave you that idea? Killing people wantonly, instead of cooperating to achieve peace, is not conducive to this goal.
Killing people wantonly instead of cooperating is probably not conducive to most goals. I don't get why this one is so special that everything counter to it is bad not only to you, but to ME as well.
2088
« on: February 24, 2016, 01:29:27 AM »
I like how you can't make an argument like we're not on 4chan. Get the fuck out with this reeeee bullshit. Makes you look like a fucking retard. Pretend like you're an adult for a second.
Everything Republicans do is about controlling the people. Abortion. War. Gay marriage. Spying. Try to justify it all you want, but it conflicts with their claim that they want smaller government and freedom.
"I'm not going to even think about what you've said. Instead I will attack you for explaining things in simplistic and creative terminology because it comes from a website I dislike, and restate the claims that you refuted".
You're easily our worst poster.
But what you said is fucking wrong. If Republicans didn't want to control people, they wouldn't support policies that control people, retard.
They don't see it as control, in fact they see it as securing freedom and fighting control by other forces.
You refuse to even consider other perspectives while decrying them as the highest of evils.
Just because "they don't see it as control" doesn't mean it isn't control.
I just made most of the arguments explaining why it isn't control, and controlling people isn't what they want. Unless you want to refute each of them, I'm not impressed by your "nuh uh"
2089
« on: February 24, 2016, 01:13:21 AM »
I like how you can't make an argument like we're not on 4chan. Get the fuck out with this reeeee bullshit. Makes you look like a fucking retard. Pretend like you're an adult for a second.
Everything Republicans do is about controlling the people. Abortion. War. Gay marriage. Spying. Try to justify it all you want, but it conflicts with their claim that they want smaller government and freedom.
"I'm not going to even think about what you've said. Instead I will attack you for explaining things in simplistic and creative terminology because it comes from a website I dislike, and restate the claims that you refuted".
You're easily our worst poster.
But what you said is fucking wrong. If Republicans didn't want to control people, they wouldn't support policies that control people, retard.
They don't see it as control, in fact they see it as securing freedom and fighting control by other forces. You refuse to even consider other perspectives while decrying them as the highest of evils.
2090
« on: February 24, 2016, 01:11:33 AM »
Because killing is immoral, Why. and a consent-based exchange of goods is moral. Objectively.
Why.
2091
« on: February 24, 2016, 01:10:34 AM »
The fact that people's morals differ is exactly why objective morality doesn't exist.
Morality exists because there is a God who dictates them.
lawl. Which god? Your god, right? The one, true God? Because why would you waste your time worshiping a god that wasn't the one true god - that's dumb.
I know He is, yeah. I've done plenty of searching, and found what I know is right. I'm not even going to bother asking you to entertain the notion- you're too busy praising reason and empiricism to be open-minded about other deities. If there is no god then morality is simply what you want it to be. Yes, that is exactly what is going on.
Then why don't you act like it? You tell yourself you don't bow to any god, but you let "the greater good" and "rights" dictate your values and actions for you. You're delusional.
2092
« on: February 24, 2016, 01:06:12 AM »
I like how you can't make an argument like we're not on 4chan. Get the fuck out with this reeeee bullshit. Makes you look like a fucking retard. Pretend like you're an adult for a second.
Everything Republicans do is about controlling the people. Abortion. War. Gay marriage. Spying. Try to justify it all you want, but it conflicts with their claim that they want smaller government and freedom.
"I'm not going to even think about what you've said. Instead I will attack you for explaining things in simplistic and creative terminology because it comes from a website I dislike, and restate the claims that you refuted". You're easily our worst poster.
2093
« on: February 24, 2016, 01:03:43 AM »
The fact that people's morals differ is exactly why objective morality doesn't exist.
Morality exists because there is a God who dictates them. If there is no god then morality is simply what you want it to be. Diversity of opinion matters not here.
2094
« on: February 24, 2016, 01:02:29 AM »
Morality based on arbitrary ideas that have no objective basis and simply make you feel good about yourself.
Which would be totally okay if you'd just admit that they're arbitrary and just make you feel good.
You can't get much more objective than that post I just made.
It's pretty arbitrary to be honest. All you've done is made up an ought based on an is, and projected your feelings on the matter into a worldview you expect others to bow to. I don't and shouldn't care what you or anyone else feels he is owed for existing. On what basis do you make these demands, short of "I need them to continue living" and "I like having these things"? What does your continued life mean to me? Objectively nothing (although I like having you around and talking with you, so I would choose to give you food and water and help you out, for my own benefit). You have no rights but those you can take and defend. All of these values you appeal to are false gods, spooks of the mind that you worship without realizing it. The things you want are already your property, you simply lack the power and capacity to control them. The same is true for myself and everyone else. You fail to realize the egoistic nature of your own desires, so you project them onto the world. It is okay, in fact healthy, to have wants. Just stop pretending they're anything greater than your wants. Your will is great enough.
2095
« on: February 24, 2016, 12:50:59 AM »
Is there a purpose in using """"""""""free"""""""""" repeatedly?
Because it isn't and cannot be truly free. The burden of cost is simply moved directly onto the shoulders of those who do not directly benefit from it.
It's as free as a car bought with stolen money. Really, as free as a stolen car.
Oh my bad, I didn't realize you were one of those "taxes are theft" folks.
There's nothing wrong with that notion. It is totally accurate.
I just don't care about the morality of it anymore. It is arbitrary, spooked morality.
What the fuck is "spooked morality"? Is this a meme you're trying to force?
Morality based on arbitrary ideas that have no objective basis and simply make you feel good about yourself. Which would be totally okay if you'd just admit that they're arbitrary and just make you feel good.
2096
« on: February 24, 2016, 12:49:58 AM »
Because everyone is entitled to an education. It's a fundamental birthright of all people.
Just like everyone is entitled to a comfortable home, water, electricity, an Internet connection, and a decent life.
Everything that is required for you to live on this planet should be free, and anyone who disagrees should probably die.
None of us asked to be here, so we are owed everything on a silver platter. Total utopic perfection, or nothing.
2097
« on: February 24, 2016, 12:44:43 AM »
Wars give the government more power to control the American people. That's a conservative's wet dream.
Conservatives in America today decry government policies that have major impacts on the lives of Americans. Something tells me they don't have wet dreams about the things they categorically oppose.
They SAY they don't want government control over the people, but their actions indicate otherwise.
We're not clear on who "they" are here, but let's say you're talking about a generic republican. Pro foreign war: Pretty consistent. Enforces American dominance of geopolitics and the global economy. Anti abortion: They believe fetuses are in fact persons, and that the destruction of a person is wrong. In this sense they want to protect American lives. Unless you can refute the claim that fetuses are persons without resorting to arbitrary crap, shoving the "muh reproductive rights" card does nothing. They want to protect the right to life of what they see as young Americans. For decentralized government power: More power to the states means more power for individuals within those states, and less control over the people in a general sense (although blue states would end up running more aspects of American lives than in the past, under this trend) Spying: has little to do with control, the point is to ensure safety from harm, reinforcing individual freedoms. Having your shit seen does not equate to having your life controlled. Can this be abused to remove political and personal autonomy? Absolutely, but the INTENT is positive. The practice may be different, but that is in the hands of governmen agents, not conservatives. Against centralized healthcare: pretty straightforward. "Government get out reeeeeeeee" For limiting the welfare state: Again, straightforward. "government stop making poor people dependent on you thereby limiting their agency and capacity/desire to make a decent living for themselves reeeeeeeeeeeeeee" I think I hit the major points, but feel free to tell me if I missed one.
2098
« on: February 24, 2016, 12:34:51 AM »
Is there a purpose in using """"""""""free"""""""""" repeatedly?
Because it isn't and cannot be truly free. The burden of cost is simply moved directly onto the shoulders of those who do not directly benefit from it.
It's as free as a car bought with stolen money. Really, as free as a stolen car.
Oh my bad, I didn't realize you were one of those "taxes are theft" folks.
There's nothing wrong with that notion. It is totally accurate. I just don't care about the morality of it anymore. It is arbitrary, spooked morality.
2099
« on: February 24, 2016, 12:32:49 AM »
Of course you don't - conservatives love wars. I am not a conservative. Wars make them money. Wars make you money. Imperialism and international hegemony is the reason the United States is as successful and safe as it is. It is hypocritical of you to decry these "evils" while you enjoy the benefits of cheap gas, security, and a strong economy. You even demand more- more from the state, more democracy, while denouncing the forces that grant you these things in the first place. You have become complacent and greedy because you are so removed from the violence of the world. This distance is only present because of the constant warfare and manipulation. You can be a victor, or you can be a victim. There is no middle ground. Wars give the government more power to control the American people. That's a conservative's wet dream.
Conservatives in America today decry government policies that have major impacts on the lives of Americans. Something tells me they don't have wet dreams about the things they categorically oppose.
2100
« on: February 24, 2016, 12:26:12 AM »
=Reminder that the people that vote are old, racist, white people. No way they'll vote for Community Sanders or Criminal Clinton. Trump has this election locked up.
Well by that logic, how did Obama win?
If the democratic party actually gets excitement, they'll win, but it seems from the turnout polls, and history in general, that a Republican will win. Unless it's Cruz.
Because black people, who don't normally vote, voted for Obama. If Obama was white he would have lost.
I'm not so sure about that. The entire country was fed up with Bush and the republicans in the white house.
And here we are, nearly 8 years later, fighting the stupid wars that we hated back then, soo...fat lot of good that did us.
Well, war*
We completely abandoned Iraq. Afghanistan is almost entirely done, so we basically lost two wars in the same decade.
Afghanistan has been a victory. The Afghan government is capable of dealing with the Taliban today, it will be okay when US troops pull out. Iraq was unwinnable. Sykes-picot assured that. There will be violence until and only until a massive conflict (like the current one) leads to that non-country being divided into polities that are not full of internal tension and hate. Iraq cannot be sustained. But peace can be found.
Pages: 1 ... 686970 7172 ... 256
|
Show Posts