The Great Emancipator Said These ?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by pinoybaptist, Apr 3, 2007.

  1. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    FROM THIS LINK

    I can't believe it, at first. But then, politics is politics and politicians are politicians. There goes politically correct history, if these words were indeed spoken by the man to whom they are attributed.


    And these ?

     
  2. DeeJay

    DeeJay
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,916
    Likes Received:
    0
    Whats your point. That Lincoln was flawed, that his ideas were not fully developed and therefore everything he did was wrong. Are you saying that becasue he held onto some of the predgiduce that he was raised in that what he did do should be ignored.

    Often a person who begins a movement does not have every idea perfected. And most movements when they start are not fully evolved. It can not be denied that Lincoln started a movement to free slaves and fought for that cause. What lincoln started was refined and worked on for...........well it is ongoing. Just because Lincoln held onto some of the ideas he was born into does not mean what he did should be discarded.

    NOW for the artical you posted about the confederate flag. The conf. flag is from a group of people who were at war with THIS country. It is a flag of rebelion and stands for just that. It was flowen by those who did not want to be part of THIS United States.

    It is no different then the NAZI flag or the Rising Sun flag of Japan.

    The conf. flag is not in itself racist just as the Swastika is used in many cultures for many reasons. But both the conf. flag and the swastika have been adopted and used to reprisent racist groups and ideas.

    Even if the symbols are not used to denote hate. They can not mean anything else then allegance to a group that did not want to be part of this country. They stand for groups at war with this country.

    SO choose your flag. You want a confederate flag, I dont care, You want to fly a NAZI flag, I dont care. But you can not have it both ways. Replace you Stars and Stripes with the flag you choose.

    My grandfather fought for the Stars and Stripes AGAINST the Nazi flag. I have ancestors that fought for the Stars and Stripes AGAINST the Conf. flag. So dont pretend that you can now merge the two together and be proud of both. People bleed and died defending each of those flags and they were not on the same side.

    Every argument Mr. Baldwin makes for the conf. flag, I can apply to a Nazi flag.

    Lastly, people say that they can be proud of the conf. flag and not racist. That may be true. However know that when the majority of people see you fly the conf. flag you are labled as somebody who supports hate. If you value you Christian witness over what is seen as popular amoung your peers, then you must again choose. Because believe me, I am not going to sit in front of a confederate flag you are flying and listen to you tell me about Jesus.
     
  3. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    The civil war was internal between people of the same nation. They were all citizens of the same nation both before and after it was fought. Their states were all members of the same union before and after it was fought. That's not at all like the situation between the USA and its enemies during World War II.

    A wise choice for healing permitted the defeated to return home, retain pride in their service, and keep their battle flags. There remains only one national flag - that of the USA - yet we can still be proud of our ancestors for the stand they took.

    The South were not rebels but patriots who believed their states had the right to make their own choices. The merits of some of their choices on some issues - such as slavery - were certainly not fully correct.
    The winner writes the history. Yet the case could still be made today that they were correct regarding the rights of the states.
     
  4. DeeJay

    DeeJay
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,916
    Likes Received:
    0
    The civil war was an internal war between people of the same nation. However the object of that war was for the southern states to break away and form their own country. If they would have been sucessfull there would have been 2 countrys where there is now only one.

    That is two goverments, two flags, and two nations. Their intentions in this are un-deniable. They did elect their own president, Jefferson Davis. They choose a capital, a form of goverment. The conf. soldiers did not fly the Stars and Stripes. There was not confusion about what they wanted.

    The Confederate Goverment, military and supporters wanted one thing. To break away from the goverment that we now live in.

    That is how the goverments of Germeny, Japan and the Confederate States are alike. They have at one time been enemies of the USA.

    You say the south was not rebels but patriots. I dare say that billions of people disagree with you. Southern schools are named rebels. The flag we speak of is referred to as the rebel flag. You would be hard pressed to show anybody how the southern people do not consider the confederate states rebels.

    I do not disagree that they were patriots. But not patriots of the United States of America. They were patriotic to the Confederate States of America. The sad thing is that millions are still patriots to the CSA.

    I do not see how you could be proud of the stand the sothern people took. If the cause was alive today would you take that stand against the US goverment. Would you try to break off and form your own goverment for the purpose of keeping your "right" to hold people slaves.

    The CSA were enemies of the USA. The USA fought and won. The CSA was fighting for in immorral cause.

    I absolutly understand why people want to candy coat this. Nobody wants to think their ansestors fought against this country. Immagin if your ansestors fought for Hittler. It would be a little embarising. But they would have been wrong and so are the Conf. Soldiers. The Conf. Soldiers, goverment and supporters commited treason against the USA.

    They choose their flag and it was not the Stars and Bars. They were not confused, they did not think they were loyal patriots to the USA, they thought the USA wrong and they wanted out.
     
  5. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    They wanted to retain the rights they believed belonged to their states and, on that account, I believe they were correct.

    The external enemies of the USA were not fellow Americans. They are not the same.

    Yes, I do claim that and, yes, I'm sure plenty of people disagree although I don't know the magnitude but do know our present population isn't even a third of a billion.

    Yes, in the sense of a nickname like Yankees and Rebels, that's correct but in the sense of rebellion, no, that's not correct in the sense of rebels who seek to overthrow a legitimate government. The South was not interested in overthrowing the federal government. They just wanted to retain their rights to decide their own issues within their own jurisdiction. They didn't believe the federal government had the power to decide the matter for them.

    They were patriots of their states and joined together to form a new America that supported their same beliefs apart from the rest of America that chose a different path. It's great that many Americans still believe their states have rights that do not belong to the federal government. It's sad that so many Americans view their state government as a subdivision - provinces - of a superior federal government. You won't find any more - and perhaps fewer - supporters of slavery or other such immoral practices in the South than you would anywhere else in the nation.

    Yes, I am a strong advocate of the rights of states and do believe our federal government has far too much to say about what we do. I can't yet perceive a civil war to be a solution to the problem and don't advocate such. However, if things continue as they have, it wouldn't surprise me that future generations may have to deal with that problem. It wouldn't surprise me to see another chapter of civil war in our country perhaps inspired by the inaction of the federal government to exclude illegal aliens or by excessive taxation or some other significant matter. It would be far better if we could take corrective action and preserve the great republic we've fought so hard to establish, build, and defend.

    Slavery was indeed wrong but the rights of states was not. Slavery would have been resolved by all the states themselves in due time. It had been a practice in place around the world and in all our states for generations. It was the desire of some to force an end to it upon others who faced greater consequences from it that drove people to a divide. All, including those who fought against it, had repeated the profits of it. The war itself did not bring an immediate end to all injustice related to slavery. It's a shame a civil war was fought over it and the states lost so many rights because of it.

    There's no "candy coating" at all involved in it. Likewise, I understand why some people desire to villainize Southerners today because of their lineage back to the civil war. It's interesting that the people of the time understood much better than some do today the importance of permitting the South to retain its self respect. We were and are one people.

    No, I can't imagine my own ancestors having been Nazis although I do know that some were freedom fighters both here and abroad.

    Treason was not the action taken by the people. Secession from the union by the states was the action taken and people believed their first loyalty was to their state verses the union of states. The citizens of the states did not commit treason by fighting against the forces of the other states.

    Treason applies to acts such as those of Jane Fonda.

    It could have split the other way if the national capital had been in the South. The people of the South believed they were right and better represented the ideals of America than those of the North. But since the capital, and the government center extant there, was associated with the North they chose to form a new union of like minded states. They could have - albeit did not - chose to claim the Stars and Stripes as their own because they were as much Americans and those of the North.
     
  6. DeeJay

    DeeJay
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,916
    Likes Received:
    0


    No state or person has the right to enslave another human being. They believed they had that right. They were wrong. Their fight to keep an immorral beliefe was wrong. They choose to defend their beliefe in what they preseved as a right, over continued belonging to this country. That is fine, it was their choice. But they did not try to say that they could be both. Like I said they choose the Conf. flag over the Stars and Stripes. People today should make that same choice. Because anyway you cut it the CSA was an enemy of the USA.


    Can you be a "fellow American" while choosing to break away, form your own goverment, elect you own president, and go to war with your country to acheve these goals. Once the deleration of war was signed, they were no longer fellow Americans. They were Confederate citizens, by their own choice.

    OK over exageration on the billions. But do a google search on southern rebel. If you do not think of the civil war as a rebelion you are in the minority and you have a funny way or re-defining words.

    Lets look at the definition for rebelion.

    re·bel·lion [​IMG]
    –noun 1.open, organized, and armed resistance to one's government or ruler. 2.resistance to or defiance of any authority, control, or tradition. 3.the act of rebelling.
    Dictionary.com

    Fits like a glove. You say they have rebel in the sence of a nickname. There is a reason they got the nickname. Because of the rebellion they waged against the USA.

    Yes they were patriots of their states. Not the United States. And you make my point when you say they "joined together to form a new America" This makes them enemies of the old America. The America that won and that we now live in.

    I agree 100% about states rights. States should have the right to govern themselfs. As long as they do not part from the federal constitution. Slavery is clearly an issue that the Federal goverment has the right to govern. Even if it is not what the states want. The Federal Goverment has a duty to protect all of its citizens. That means Black people and the unborn. If the Federal goverment outlaws abortion to protect its unborn citizens most of us here would cheer. Even individual states do not want this.


    WAIT, you say slavery is wrong. BUT the rights of the states to enslave people is not. You can not have it both ways. If slavery is wrong then the states who promote slavery were wrong. Because the states were harming citizens of this country the federal goverment had a duty to protect.



    I have no problem with the sothern people. They are in no way responsable for what their ancestors did. I do have a problem with people waving a enemy flag. That extends to every corner of this country. I also have a problem with trying to justify what the conf. goverment did. They were wrong, their cause was wrong and they were enemies of the USA.



    trea·son [​IMG]
    –noun 1.the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
    Dictionary.com

    Does it fit. It does.


    Yes, sir.



    I am glad it worked out the way it did. They were Americans, in the sence that they lived on the continent. However they were not loyal to the United States of America. There is a reason they did not choose to adopt the Stars and Stripes. Because they did not want to be a part of the country that flag reprisented. That is like saying that the revolutionary goverment who broke away from England could have choosen the Brittish flag. They did not want to be Brittish so they choose a flag that would reprisent the goverment they wanted to form.
     
  7. DeeJay

    DeeJay
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,916
    Likes Received:
    0
    Lets take a hypothetical situation.

    Lets say that California passed a law tonight that states that starting tomorrow they will start killing all of their blond citizens and inprison anyone with blue eyes.

    Would this be an issue that the Federal Goverment should step in and stop. Or is this a states rights issue. Does California have the right to kill its citizens if it chooses.
     
  8. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    The legality of such a ridiculous law, if it were passed by a state legislature, would not be enforced by any state governor and would immediately be thrown out in state court. Most criminal law involving violent crime is state law with some exceptions. There is an increasing trend to the contrary - such as the "hate crime" laws - and for no good reasons. The citizens of states are responsible for their laws of their own states and can be trusted, in the long term, to do what is right. If they can not then we are hopeless. It is highly unlikely that process would not work in the hypothetical example given.

    The federal government is composed of no wiser or better or more accountable persons than those in each of the states. We have come to think otherwise. We send nearly all our tax money to the federal government so "wiser" people can give some of it back - less handling charges - according to what they decide we need. We demand they solve every social and economic problem we face. We submit to further regulation on a regular basis and beg for more of it at every sign of trouble. If we don't like something one state does verses another we demand federal law to override it in the interest of uniformity if nothing else. We've forgotten the principles of our union of states which included room for individuality much as among citizens themselves.

    Never the less, with respect to your example, our national Constitution would preclude such a state law as you described since it would "deprive" citizens of "life". It would be considered a "civil rights" violation and that would become the federal government's ultimate trump card.

    Slavery, for the more realistic example at hand, had been an accepted practice for generations. It was known even during the time of Christ and recognized as a fact of mankind's existence. It was not "illegal" by law in America although certainly still immoral. The two are not always a one for one match. Something can be "legal" but still wrong. Many things today are perfectly legal but entirely wrong. The point is that the law of the times didn't prohibit slavery and the matter was regulated by state laws. It's good that it came to an end, regrettable in many many ways that it
    ever started, and very sad that it continued so long. It is shameful what slaves endured from the time of capture by their own kin to their forced labor under the harsh hand of a strange and foreign master. None of us would desire to be a slave. You will get no acceptance of slavery from me. Yet you will get a realization that it was part of the life and times around the world. It was America that recognized it must end the practice in our land and did so.

    But, my point is that states also have rights - very important and often neglected rights - and those were thrown aside during the civil war and that, also, was a great price paid.
    [SIZE=+1] It established a new era of dominance by the federal government from which much regulation of the people was born. The civil war ended slavery - at least on paper - but it didn't solve every problem around slavery and created some new ones as well. Justice was given to some and taken away from others. The slaves were freed but they were not really free.

    I believe every state would have ended slavery on its own had it been given time - and it wouldn't have been too much longer either - to do so and, perhaps, the civil war could have been avoided. The pressure to do would have been moral sensibility if nothing else as well as the rapid mechanization of many labor intensive tasks for which the slaves were used. A tragic result of the civil war was the wide spread poverty that ensued in the South during and after reconstruction that set back the economic progress just on the horizon. This short coming kept several more generations in de facto slavery because of the slow economic growth and unavailable wealth generated by better jobs.

    The thinking that half the nation - the Northern half - was somehow morally superior to the other half - the Southern half - is a great untruth. One simply did not have the same need as the other and found it all to convenient to intercede in the name of what was right while failing to acknowledge their own origin in the same faults. The slaves of the North were freed but they were not really free. Both regions of America had failures of moral conscience to correct and still do.

    [/SIZE]
     
    #8 Dragoon68, Apr 4, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 4, 2007
  9. DeeJay

    DeeJay
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,916
    Likes Received:
    0


    There you go. Slavery deprives people of Liberty. Liberty is found in the same sentence right between Life and the pursuit of happiness. So it stands to reason that if the Federal Constitution protects life trumping the states rights to govern themselfs then the Fed Const also protects liberty.

    There is always a time to go back and right a wrong. Just because it was a practice does not make it right. When people realized that they set to work making it right. You admit it was immoral, so why defend the flag of those who fought so hard to keep that practice. I pray that some day we will set to work righting the wrong of abortion. When/if it happens are you going to defend the states right to practice abortion, because it was law and it has been practice.

    I agree, not perfict. But it was a just cause. Slavery needed to be stoped. I also agree that states rights are being trampled in alot if issues. But when the Feds are protecting peoples right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness they trump states rights. I agree with Lincoln, and Truman when he desegragated the schools by force. I will agree with who ever puts an end to abortion.

    [/SIZE][SIZE=+1]
    Jimmy Carter said in an interview that if the American reviolutionarys would have waited we would have been given our independance eventualy like Canada. He is wrong, so are you. People should not have to wait to be free. As soon as somebody realized that, it was the day to attempt to free them.

    I dont really care what the souths needs were. Slavery is immorral. I need somebody to clean my living room and mow my lawn right now. I can not abduct somebody to do it. It would be immorral, and wrong. In this issue the North half was fighting for the morraly superior cause. And just because they were not perfict does not distract from that cause. At least they were attempting to roll the right direction.
     
  10. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,406
    Likes Received:
    69
    I'm not defending or endorsing slavery or the Confederacy, but I think some clarification needs to be made.

    1) The Northern government was not fighting to abolish slavery. Lincoln held to a free-soil position prior to the war (i.e. no expansion of slavery into new areas, but no abolition where slavery existed at the time). If Lincoln could have saved the union without freeing slaves, he likely would have.

    2) The Northern government was fighting to preserve the union. I, for one, believe that the Emancipation Proclamation was more of a tool to incite slave rebellion against their confederate owners. After all, only those in confederate territory were declared free; therefore, no slave was actually freed at the time of the proclamation.

    3) I do not believe that the average union soldier or the average confederate soldier was fighting to abolish or to preserve slavery. Many were drafted, but many of them fought because they believed in their country. As has been said many times before, no Illinois farm boy is going to want to risk his life to set free a South Carolina slave. Many of the confederate soldiers had no slaves at all.
    ------

    IMO, the most culpable figures are those in the Southern governments. Prior to the war, their senators fought tooth and nail to preserve the status quo and to attempt to expand the institution of slavery into the new territories. They beat the war drums, and, out of fear that Lincoln, et. al., were going to attempt to abolish slavery (thereby destroying the southern economy), they were much more open to the idea of secession.
     
  11. Alcott

    Alcott
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    7,452
    Likes Received:
    93


    It is inevitable, then, that you think the feds must force all states to accept queer 'marriage' since that is their claim of "the pursuit of happiness."

    But whether you like it or not, Amendment 10 to the Constitution did declare the states to have the rights not forbidden them by the Constitution, and since the Constitution did not mandate an eternal relationship with the Union as one state therein, the right to sucession therefrom was consistent with the Constitution, and the US Government was not wilthin its enumerated powers to prevent this.

    Quite true, I'm sure. 'Not caring what the needs were' is the significant factor in the poverty, violence, and racial hatred that followed for over a century. To deliberately destroy the economy, to burn cities, railroads homes, to put illiterate freed slaves in statehouses and Congress, to lock up former officials and hold them for years without trials... yeah, I will believe you as you say were like those who "did not care what the needs were." Frankly I wish you and I could do some realistic role-playing, I as my great great grandfather, and you as the carpetbagger he helped to lynch.
     
  12. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,406
    Likes Received:
    69
    "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.
     
  13. NiteShift

    NiteShift
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    2,034
    Likes Received:
    0
    Coming from a border state, I had people on both sides during that war, and yes I am proud of them both.

    And southernors have proved their loyalty to the stars and stripes in every war since then, by serving in proportionally greater numbers than the other sections of our country.
     
  14. DeeJay

    DeeJay
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,916
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  15. DeeJay

    DeeJay
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,916
    Likes Received:
    0
    Again I have no problem with southerners. I have a problem with their ancestors who decided to break away from this country. And I have a problem with those who wave their flag like it is a patriotic great thing they did. Southernors, great people. They need to come to realistic terms with what the rebel flag stands for. It is the flag that belongs to the enemies of the USA.
     
  16. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is intense isn't it? It's almost as good as the war in Iraq!

    Slavery was wrong but the Southern states didn't invent slavery.
    Slavery was an accepted practice for thousands of years before the matter was settled in this nation. It touched us all. Those pushing the South to change immediately were culpable in the same offense. That didn't make it any less wrong but it does bear consideration in the whole timing and means of resolution.

    The issue that led to the war was the fundamentally the right of secession from the union. The matter of slavery certainly was a catalyst for the Southern sates to decide to secede. But the war was fought over secession rather than slavery itself.



    Which side were the real Americans? It was the CSA verses the USA. It was not foreigners verses citizens. Both sides were Americans. One side decided to secede from the original union - the USA - and reform the union - the CSA - because they believed they had the right to decide their own issues at the state level. That actually seems very American to me relative to a lot of on-going issues!



    I also suspect it depends upon which minority you poll. Where I'm from I'll bet I'd have more company than you might suspect. Even so,
    I'm often in the minority and it just doesn't bother me much. In fact, I frequently find comfort in that status knowing that sometimes - but not always - the masses get it wrong.



    They were patriots to their states and their states decided to withdraw from the old union. Yes, everyone refers to the Yank
    s and the Rebs.



    No, we're still living in the same place - the same states - but just rejoined to the original union. Both were and are part of America.



    I'm glad we agree about the rights of states! If we lived in a nation of provinces verses autonomous states I'd have no problem with the federal government - then the only one - making all the laws. However, since the Constitution left most law making to the states I do have a problem with the federal government making all the laws even if the causes are just.

    I abhor abortion, homosexuality, incest, murder, rape, theft, robbery, assault, and much more including slavery of any people regardless of race. However, federal law isn't needed nor was it intended for it to cover these matters. State law is the best means to cover these matters because it keeps it closer to the people. If they don't get it correct in their states then such state has a problem.

    Today's false thinking is that the federal government must solve all problems because the people and the states are incapable or unwilling to do so. They can and will solve their own problems if the meddlers just stay out of it. Forcing a solution upon the states just absolves them of the responsibility for taking care of their own problems. We see plenty of evidence of that these days with state governors pointing the finger of blame at the federal government more often than even a generation ago.



    Wrong! The states have constitutions and a governments who are obligated to adequately cover the basic rights of their citizens to a far greater degree than the federal government. The federal government's duty is to protect the nation primarily for external threats such as foreign enemies or illegal aliens and to regulate matters between the states. If they'd only concentrate on that and let the states deal with their own citizens thing would get along much better.



    I don't see it that way! I don't view the Confederate battle flag as a "enemy" flag. I see it as the flag of my ancestors who believed their state had the right to secede from the union if it so desired. They just flat didn't like being told what they could or couldn't do by people in the national capitol or other states far away from their homes. They were correct in this respect as the trend in never ending expansion of federal control proves. If it doesn't change the day may come when people will get so fed up with it they are ready to reform this nation based on its original intentions.



    If Jane Fonda couldn't be brought to trail for treason then not a single soldier of the CSA should be and most especially long after their passing! The nation at the end of the civil war knew better and that's why they all went home instead of to the gallows.

    [SIZE=+1]

    No, that's not a completely correct analogy. The British government was in place here in America and ruled it as a colony. We rebelled against them, overthrew them, and established a new government with the colonies becoming states and the states binding together into a union of states. All of them were then Americans. The states of the South then decided, for whatever reason, they no longer wanted to be in the same union with the states of the North. That didn't rebel against their government or seek to overthrow it. They were happy with their government - the states in which they lived - and wanted the others to let them be. That's why some people think of the civil war as the war of Northern aggression. They see the North as wanting to force their will open them.

    [/SIZE]
     
    #16 Dragoon68, Apr 5, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 5, 2007
  17. Alcott

    Alcott
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    7,452
    Likes Received:
    93
     
  18. Alcott

    Alcott
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    7,452
    Likes Received:
    93
    Do you have the same opinion of the various Indian tribes that have their own flags and symbols, which also were those of enemies of the USA? And how about in some of these recent rallies against immigration "reform" or further restrictions? Many wave the Mexican flag, another flag of enemies of the USA.

    Commence wriggling when ready.
     
  19. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Excellent point! What about that British flag flying next to ours here and there around the world? Doesn't it represent our oppression?
     
  20. DeeJay

    DeeJay
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,916
    Likes Received:
    0
     

Share This Page

Loading...