Same Sex Marriage Thread-Part 2 - Page 16 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-17-2012, 09:24 PM   #301
Blue Crack Supplier
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,555
Local Time: 01:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
As a matter of fact, I supported "No on 8."

I supported it because of my boss and his partner of 20+ years. I supported it because of my friends Heather and Tere who have been married for 10 years and are trying to make it work. I supported it because of every gay kid who's ever been bullied at school. I supported it because of all the dickheads who called me "fag" in high school. I supported it because of my friend Dave who committed suicide as a freshman rather than put up with the harassment, and my friend Brian who spent his entire high school experience in the closet. I supported it because of all the ignoramuses who have tried to co-opt the God I believe in and reduce Him to what they think is right.

But at the same time, I was damn conflicted. I was conflicted because of people who look down their self-righteous nose and snivel at everyone who doesn't agree with them. I was conflicted because of people who can't fathom anyone who thinks differently and who might want to live out their Constitutionally-protected right to freedom of speech and freedom of religion without being harassed or berated or mocked or stalked or derided. I was conflicted because I can't label who thinks differently from me a "hater."

I argue contrary points on this board sometimes. I do it because we're supposed to think different. I do it because we're supposed to empathize with the person on the other side of the table. I do it because we're supposed to see through someone else's eyes, not just our own. I do it because I hate group-think with a passion. I do it because the truth is more complicated than we like it to be. I do it because I like straddling the fence and trying to figure out how to bring people together.

Does that satisfy you? Or should I be smoother about it?

I understand a bit more, but I find it difficult to fence-sit about issues like this one.

I'll leave you alone.
__________________

martha is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 09:24 PM   #302
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 04:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500

In other words, "Keep quite or we can make things very difficult for you." Very recent cases in point:

1) Dan Savage's very public humiliation of Bible reading teenagers in front of their peers from his podium.

2) The totalitarian pronouncements regarding Chick-fil-a as a business entity in their cities from the mayors of Chicago, San Francisco and Boston.

3) The treatment of Mark Regnerus, who never argued against SSM in his research -- only dared to point out the flaws in earlier studies declaring children of gay couple to have equal or superior outcomes. Regnerus and the 'Liberal War on Science'

Two hundred academics have since issued a statement denouncing the study. Four colleagues on the sociology faculty at the University of Texas released their own statement at the HuffPost. "Pseudo-science that demonizes gay and lesbian families contributes to stress and is not good for children." A gay-rights activist has filed an ethics complaint requiring Regnerus to get a lawyer. Note to future social science researchers; "Incorrect" conclusions will not be tolerated. Design your studies appropriately.

4) Gay marriage activists in Maryland bully traditional marriage supporters - Baltimore County Republican | Examiner.com
The gays are bullying the straights? That's the argument you want to put up?
__________________

PhilsFan is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 09:30 PM   #303
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,741
Local Time: 04:17 AM
I don't think I intentionally come into a debate with the means to attack people. Sometimes I get carried away and get out of line, but overall I think I try my best to be civil.

Sometimes, things do get out of hand in FYM because we're discussing issues that have emotional ties to some people. That, or because all we see are words on a computer screen and not the actual people we are conversing with.

As for Nathan, I want to say to him that if I did sound like a bully to you, I apologize. I really did think you were avoiding my question, though. But I've never held anything against you and always liked your input in FYM. Also, your post where you explained your views made sense and I liked your honesty, which I don't think is easy to do on a public internet forum.

Finally, I would like to nominate Sean as the diplomat of FYM. Count on him for being the best at trying to calm the storms here!
Pearl is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 09:32 PM   #304
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,892
Local Time: 03:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
That's consistent.


Care to elaborate?


Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
In that case, your interpretation of what happened in the thread is radically different to mine.
There were several things that happened in the thread. I was referring to the exchange between BVS and Philsfan. I've already stated how I felt about the pile-on Nathan.


Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Isn't railroading a euphemism for bullying?
Yes. More than a euphemism, it is a synonym. I question whether there is an effort to bully certain people out of the thread. I'm not saying that bullying never happens, I am saying that I doubt it is part of an organized attempt to get rid of people on the forum.



Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
I think there is strong evidence that, actually, quite a few on your side don't.
Some people disagree with a fair amount vitriol. I don't think that means they are trying to get rid of people. Indeed, you have been rather vitriolic in some of your interactions with me from time to time. I have not appreciated that, but I've neither taken that as an indication that you're trying to force me out of the forum.

Granted, if a lot of people were to be that way towards me I guess I could understand how one might draw that conclusion though.

Still, some posters seem to rather enjoy tweaking the noses of all us earnest liberals in here, so to be honest, I don't feel as bad when people respond with impatience and irritation. I don't find those kinds of "opposing viewpoints" particularly enriching. It's a different story with nathan1977, who was not dropping Limbaugh-like bombs just to watch the lefties get all twitchy.


Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
But, instinctively, and leaving aside for the moment, specific points of view - and you're welcome, naturally, to disagree with this - I'd suggest that debate and argument - even at times, caustic debate - is more healthy than fake consensus, which if you don't mind my pointing out, seems to me to be the current mood of the FYM forum.
I don't disagree actually. As I said above, caustic commentary comes with the territory and isn't necessarily bad. I think debate and argument are more productive when it's conducted with mutual respect and courtesy. I don't think that has to mean false consensus though.
maycocksean is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 09:45 PM   #305
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,390
Local Time: 04:17 AM
It blows my mind that people can debate and argue over me and my life and my live.

And people wonder why gay kids kill themselves.

You would be hard pressed to find someone more fortunate than I. I know this, I am thankful every day that so much has been given to me.

And still, a thread like this makes me question my own self worth and wonder what it is about me that is so subject to question.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 09:51 PM   #306
Blue Crack Supplier
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,555
Local Time: 01:17 AM
It blows my mind as well.
martha is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 09:56 PM   #307
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,741
Local Time: 04:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
It blows my mind that people can debate and argue over me and my life and my live.

And people wonder why gay kids kill themselves.

You would be hard pressed to find someone more fortunate than I. I know this, I am thankful every day that so much has been given to me.

And still, a thread like this makes me question my own self worth and wonder what it is about me that is so subject to question.
And I feel sorry for you. I don't know how you can go through FYM or anywhere else online and see anti-gay comments without feeling terrible about yourself. I can't imagine what goes through your mind.
Pearl is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 09:57 PM   #308
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,892
Local Time: 03:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
It blows my mind that people can debate and argue over me and my life and my live.

And people wonder why gay kids kill themselves.

You would be hard pressed to find someone more fortunate than I. I know this, I am thankful every day that so much has been given to me.

And still, a thread like this makes me question my own self worth and wonder what it is about me that is so subject to question.
You've expressed eloquently what I'm realizing is one of the key differences between racial prejudice (which I've experienced my share of throughout my life--when my wife, who is white, and I got married it was especially painful as expressions of disapproval came unexpectedly from people we thought were our friends, and from both blacks and whites) and the discrimination you have faced.

In the case of racism, it's just a statement that "I don't like blacks", not a statement about my moral value.

In the case of homophobia, it's not just a statement of dislike but a statement that the person is fundamentally wrong or bad.

To me the latter can be much worse.

Irvine, I know it's easy for people to treat this issue carelessly when it doesn't affect us in the way that it does you. Forgive me if I've been cavalier in any way about this. I try to ever conscious that for you this is not just "Topic for Debate", it is your life. Indeed, I've been impressed with the patience you've shown considering that.
maycocksean is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 10:08 PM   #309
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,390
Local Time: 04:17 AM
When you are black, or Jewish, or Asian ... chances are, so is your family.

When you are gay, usually, you are on your own.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 10:27 PM   #310
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,892
Local Time: 03:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
When you are black, or Jewish, or Asian ... chances are, so is your family.

When you are gay, usually, you are on your own.
Another key difference. . .

And when you try to make a family of your own . . .

Take heart though, my friend. The tide is shifting irrevocably. In truth it really is all over but the shouting, and I believe that we will see marriage equality in our life time, and not just at the civil level but in religious institutions as well, even conservative ones.

maycocksean is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 10:30 PM   #311
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,892
Local Time: 03:17 AM
My cousin just posted this quote on Facebook. I thought it was appropriate here:

"Every society has its protectors of status quo and its fraternities of the indifferent who are notorious for sleeping through revolutions. Today, our very survival depends on our ability to stay awake, to adjust to new ideas, to remain vigilant and to face the challenge of change.”
~ Martin Luther King Jr
maycocksean is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 10:32 PM   #312
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,390
Local Time: 04:17 AM
I don't want to come across as self-pitying. Thought it might seem that way.

I don't lean up against a window and watch the rain and sigh, "I wish I was married."

But when someone identifies me as a threat, as someone who must be resisted, as someone who is despised and seen as a representative of something thatbjust be resisted and, aboe all, someone we don't want our children -- for God's sake, think of the children -- to become, how can you not take it personally?

I'm a nice person. I have done nothing to center myself in the midst of a social debate about "values." And neither has any other gay person.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 10:37 PM   #313
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,892
Local Time: 03:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
I don't want to come across as self-pitying. Thought it might seem that way.

I don't lean up against a window and watch the rain and sigh, "I wish I was married."
You don't come across that way as far as I'm concerned.
maycocksean is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 10:58 PM   #314
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 02:17 AM
Dana Milbank: Hateful speech on hate groups - The Washington Post

Quote:
By Dana Milbank, Published: August 16The Washington Post (edited by Indy500)

Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest gay rights organization, posted an alert on its blog Tuesday: “Paul Ryan Speaking at Hate Group’s Annual Conference.”

The “hate group” that the Republicans’ vice presidential candidate would be addressing? The Family Research Council, a mainstream conservative think tank founded by James Dobson and run for many years by Gary Bauer.

The day after the gay rights group’s alert went out, 28-year-old Floyd Lee Corkins II walked into the Family Research Council’s Washington headquarters and, according to an FBI affidavit, proclaimed words to the effect of “I don’t like your politics” — and shot the security guard. Corkins, who had recently volunteered at a gay community center, was carrying a 9mm handgun, a box of ammunition and a backpack full of Chick-fil-A — the company whose president recently spoke out against gay marriage.

Human Rights Campaign isn’t responsible for the shooting. Neither should the organization that deemed the FRC a “hate group,” the Southern Poverty Law Center, be blamed for a madman’s act. But both are reckless in labeling as a “hate group” a policy shop that advocates for a full range of conservative Christian positions, on issues from stem cells to euthanasia.

disagree with the Family Research Council’s views on gays and lesbians. But it’s absurd to put the group, as the law center does, in the same category as Aryan Nations, Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, Stormfront and the Westboro Baptist Church. The center says the FRC “often makes false claims about the LGBT community based on discredited research and junk science.” Exhibit A in its dossier is a quote by an FRC official from 1999 (!) saying that “gaining access to children has been a long-term goal of the homosexual movement.”


I took issue with Glenn Beck before his fall for stirring up the unstable by promoting conspiracy theories in the mass media; more than one Beck follower became violent. What the Southern Poverty Law Center and Human Rights Campaign have done isn’t close to the level of provocation Beck achieved, but that doesn’t justify their actions. The National Organization for Marriage, which opposes gay marriage, is right to say that the attack “is the clearest sign we’ve seen that labeling pro-marriage groups as ‘hateful’ must end.”

Gays and lesbians are winning the fight for equality by example and persuasion. Those who support gay rights will gain nothing by sticking inflammatory labels on their opponents, many of whom are driven by deeply held religious beliefs.
Which leads me to go back 5 or 6 years to my first posts on this subject. My mind hasn't been changed in that time and I never expected to change anyone else's mind. I'm just questioning SSM supporter's tactics, rhetoric and failure to recognize civil disagreement in a free society.
INDY500 is offline  
Old 08-17-2012, 11:01 PM   #315
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,390
Local Time: 04:17 AM
Opposing SSM does not qualify one as a hate group.

But the malicious, vicious lies the Frc spreads about the GLBT community absolutely does qualify them as a hate group.

Milbank got this wrong.

INDY your mind hasn't been changed ecause you see this as a issue of personal identity and where you fall in the culture wars.

It's hard to view an attack on one's existence as just another viewpoint or disagreement.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 08-18-2012, 12:00 AM   #316
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,715
Local Time: 03:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
I think there are people who decide to get married in church because that's what you do or it's a nice building or Mom wants us to get married at St. Stephen's, while missing the larger spiritual connotation. It's not a judgment call on anyone; I was simply pointing out that there is a religious connection (whether real or implied, intentional or not) by choosing to be married in a church.
To be fair to Nathan, this is how I interpreted that part of his post, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
For me, the primary issues underlying this debate are principles. How do we, as a secular nation, follow through on our commitment to the principle that all men are created equal, and subject to equal representation under the law? And how do we, as a secular nation, provide for the safe, free practice of all religious people? And how do we hold both those principles true at the same time, without sacrificing either, particularly when the government has muddied the water by gotten into the business of blessing marriage (a religious institution)?
See, this is why we need to make a decision across the board right now: Either we call all non-religious unions, gay AND straight, civil unions, and leave the marriage stuff to the church. Or if the government recognizes straight marriages as such, whether they're religious in nature or not, then we do the same for gay couples. We can't keep on having one labeled one thing and the other labeled something else.

Each church has the right to decide whom it will and will not accept, whose marriages it will and will not recognize. That's a personal thing, if I don't agree with the church I'm free to leave and find another one.

But the government shouldn't be in the business of discriminating like that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
The liberals on this forum are so aggressively insulting and dismissive against anyone that doesn't share their ideological viewpoint that I'm almost tempted to re-examine my pro-gay marriage stance.
I agree that sometimes the left can be really aggressive about certain things, but on this issue, can you blame us? No, I wouldn't say that everyone who's against gay marriage "hates" gay people, so to speak. I think some of the opposition is borne out of lack of proper understanding. Again, I refer to my grandparents here and the comparison to blacks and interracial marriage. They were disgusted by the KKK and groups of that ilk. They never threatened black people. But that doesn't mean their views were any less questionable. My maternal grandmother was known to say a woman was "pretty for a black girl". And she opposed interracial marriage because of "what it'd do to the children". My paternal grandmother went around closing the blinds one day when my dad brought home a black friend from school. Thankfully, my parents rejected those mindsets.

And as has been noted many, many times here, some people oppose gay marriage because they're opposed to marriage across the board. Some gay people don't support gay marriage, for their own set of reasons.

But for those who are supportive of marriage EXCEPT when it includes gay people, you may not hate gay people, but I can't figure out what other reason there would be for your opposition than some sort of unsettled reaction against homosexuality and all that goes with it. If it's not the fact that they're gay, then what is it? All the arguments that have been brought up against gay marriage have been shot down time and time again. So pardon us for getting frustrated-we've seen gay people get married in many places in recent years and none of the horrible things that supposedly were going to happen should gay marriage be legal have happened. Life's gone on about as good or bad as it did before.

So what are people still so worried about? WHY do people think they have the right to dictate and govern other people's love lives? I have asked the second question quite a few times in this thread and the last one recently and I still have yet to receive an answer, or at least, one that makes any sort of sense. We feel like we're going in circles on an issue that should've been done and decided a long time ago.

Besides that, listen to Irvine on this issue. I can't imagine how bizarre it'd be to sit here and listen to people make decisions about my personal life for me based on how it makes them feel. Who cares about what you think? Who cares about what I think? How about focusing on what Irvine and others like him think for once? He's the one who's the most directly affected by all this nonsense.

I like to believe I'm usually pretty good at looking at the other side of an issue and trying to understand where they're coming from. I'm pro-choice, but I certainly do understand where the pro-life side comes from. I'm anti-death penalty, but again, when I hear of a horrific sicko's crimes, I get the anger and the "to hell with him" attitude. I despise guns, but I also am aware that people do know how to be responsible with them, and don't think it's fair to punish them for what a nutcase does.

But this is perhaps the one issue I just cannot understand the other side of. There's nothing about being against gay marriage that I can make sense of. They're not bothering anyone. They're in love. They're of legal age. They're consenting. Leave them alone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Perhaps one of the reasons why America doesn't have gay marriage yet is that some of its advocates present their arguments in such an unappealing manner. Some of their advocacy seems at times to be almost designed to alienate Middle America.
Middle American right here.
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 08-18-2012, 08:20 AM   #317
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,170
Local Time: 04:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post

I think there are people who decide to get married in church because that's what you do or it's a nice building or Mom wants us to get married at St. Stephen's, while missing the larger spiritual connotation. It's not a judgment call on anyone; I was simply pointing out that there is a religious connection (whether real or implied, intentional or not) by choosing to be married in a church.

And for me personally that's a fraud, that makes me very judgmental I know. Standing in a church when there's no meaning or intent behind it, it's like you said-the larger spiritual connotation. Two people can stand in the middle of the woods and share deep spiritual beliefs, religious beliefs-whatever you want to call them. Two people can stand in a church and have none of that and be doing that because Mom wants it or it can hold the most people or it will impress people the most. That to me is the polar opposite of marriage being religious. The people involved make it so-not the building. Not the rules, not the institution. To me, without a doubt, the people in the woods have a marriage that is blessed by God. In the way that I personally interpret that.

My senior citizen Mom is old school in some ways. In others she's very "modern". I consider her to be a deeply religious person. To me she is in the best ways possible. She supports gay marriage. We've talked about it enough for sure, but I don't think she has ever once used that exact phrase out loud. I get exactly why that's difficult for her, and I don't think any less of her for it. I know all about her religious education and life growing up, she comes from a different era. The only thing she has ever really been vocal to me about is that she doesn't think it should take place in a church. As I explain to her, no one is forcing that. The govt isn't. I understand her completely and I don't think that makes her any less compassionate or any kind of a "hater". I know her heart and that's all that matters to me. I try to go by that, and unfortunately that's very difficult to get over an internet forum. This is about discussing things, and mostly that kind of things disappears. For many different reasons. Sometimes looking for it is like looking for a needle in the woods, but that's a different matter. I have zero hostility towards you and I'm sorry if it ever came across differently. I'm just trying to better understand what you're saying.
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 08-18-2012, 09:26 AM   #318
Paper Gods
Forum Administrator
 
KhanadaRhodes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: a vampire in the limousine
Posts: 60,684
Local Time: 03:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
I don't get how marriage can be considered to be strictly a religious institution when

1. Not everyone who gets married is religious-in any way that anyone defines what it means to be religious. I believe in defining that for yourself, that no one else can define that for you.

2. Not everyone who gets married is married in a place of religious worship, by a minister, rabbi, etc, in a religious ceremony. Someone who is legally authorized can just declare you legally married when you stand in front of them.

I consider myself to be a religious person, in the ways that I define that. But I don't define marriage as being strictly a religious institution. That somehow excludes people who believe differently than I do. If you do define it that way don't you have to then say that anyone married under other circumstances somehow has a different or less than marriage?
and there we go. i too consider myself to be a religious person but i also got married by a justice of the peace and it sure as hell wasn't in a church. i don't think my marriage is any less valid than my parents' who did get married in a church by a minister. and if i'm not married in god's eyes because i didn't get married in a church, then i guess i'm wrong about god. if i can pray at home and meet with people elsewhere and it mean the same as doing the same things in a religious building, a wedding should be the same. not to mention some people really don't care if god "recognises" the wedding or not.

so basically yeah, i'm all for same sex marriage. it doesn't make my marriage any less valid or change anything about mine, so what does it matter? if two men or two women who love each other want to get married, then they should be able to.
__________________
KhanadaRhodes is offline  
Old 08-18-2012, 11:40 AM   #319
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 03:17 AM
One just needs to throw a rock in the air to find stories of questionable tactics and bullying from the non-equal rights side. For some to be so blind is baffling to me.

And no one is bullying or railroading anyone out of this forum, that's just ridiculous.
BVS is offline  
Old 08-18-2012, 03:24 PM   #320
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 04:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KhanadaRhodes View Post
i too consider myself to be a religious person but i also got married by a justice of the peace and it sure as hell wasn't in a church. i don't think my marriage is any less valid than my parents' who did get married in a church by a minister. and if i'm not married in god's eyes because i didn't get married in a church, then i guess i'm wrong about god.
Totally agree. I also think that it's none of anyone else's business how or where a couple elects to get married. Church, no church, island, city hall, etc. Who cares? You worry about your wedding/marriage and everyone else can worry about theirs.
__________________

anitram is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×