Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Townhall)   As we have sanitized our public schools from prayer, from displays of the Ten Commandments, from any teaching that can be associated with biblical sources, we've put government monopoly power behind moral relativism   (townhall.com) divider line 179
    More: Obvious, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, moral relativism, Ten Commandments, secretary of education, Randi Weingarten, American Federation of Teachers, National Education Association, Christian Morals  
•       •       •

1093 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 May 2012 at 12:18 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



179 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-14 01:12:11 PM  
Good, I am glad prayers are out of schools. When I was in elementary school my cousin and I got a neverending stream of shiat from the other students because we were jews and didn't pray along with the christians. It is inherently discriminatory to have school prayer.
 
2012-05-14 01:14:34 PM  

Karac: Question: if it's OK to give funding to planned parenthood, which would mean the government indirectly funding abortion, why isn't it OK for the government to arrange vouchers for kids to go to Catholic schools, which would mean indirectly funding the catholic church?


Funding abortion is not an endorsement of a religion or a religious institution. Separation clause does not apply.
 
2012-05-14 01:15:27 PM  

Karac: Question: if it's OK to give funding to planned parenthood, which would mean the government indirectly funding abortion, why isn't it OK for the government to arrange vouchers for kids to go to Catholic schools, which would mean indirectly funding the catholic church?


Because abortion isn't a religion.
 
2012-05-14 01:17:12 PM  

Arachidonic: Good, I am glad prayers are out of schools. When I was in elementary school my cousin and I got a neverending stream of shiat from the other students because we were jews and didn't pray along with the christians. It is inherently discriminatory to have school prayer.


My "aha" moment when I decided to home school my children came as I was taking my first grader to school late one morning. We got caught in the school wide Pledge of Allegiance, so we stood there together and said it. It was the strangest feeling that I've ever had, to stand there with my kid and say things things, pledging allegiance to something, under God and all that, it was so spooky, so Hitler Youth. In boot camp we said prayers but everyone had the option of not praying along, as though that's not going to make you stick out. I was raised Christian, so there's no reason that crap should bother me, but it always has. I've always opted out, not because I'm not Christian or because I'm anti-Christian, but because for some reason I feel like someone has to. That probably doesn't make any sense.
 
2012-05-14 01:17:27 PM  

Nishu: Diogenes: James!: There are free market solutions to this Christians. Send your kid to a private school.

Not if I'm paying for it.

Norquist tried to pull that crap on last week's Real Time with Bill Maher. "Obama's cruel because he doesn't believe in school vouchers, but still sends his girls to private school." I don't care if you send your kid to a private school. But not on my dime.

/tangential rant

Vouchers are still tax payer funded and I believe they're just as expensive as public school to the taxpayer, so I don't get the conservatives fascination with them.

Seriously, public education is a tax payer funded social program. I don't understand why people just don't home school or put their kids in private school if this crap bothers them so much. It reminds me of a book that I tried to read by some conservative pundit, and one of the first things he was talking about was how school supplies were being pooled in the classroom so that the kids didn't keep them at their desk. This was such a huge issue for this dude.... It was an introduction to communism, the indoctrinating of our youth. So basically, this guy sends his kids to public school, which was paid for by the taxpayers, single people, people with no kids, people who home school or pay for private school, people with fewer kids than him, people who have grown kids... They all pay for the education that this guy couldn't be troubled to provide for his own kids, but the day little Timmy goes to school and gets asked to share his crayolas, red lights and buzzers go off in his brain and he's all "HEY! HOLD UP!"

Public education is the great hypocrisy of conservatives. Raise your own damn kids if this shiat bothers you. It bothers me. I'll be damned if my kids ever attend a school that gives any time at all to 'intelligent design.' And I worry about overzealous conservatives and Christians trying to indoctrinate my kids while I'm not looking. If anyone's going to indoctrinate these little monsters, it's going to be.


The conservative fascination is that vouchers allow the funnelling of public funds to private institutions, who can make their own rules. They want public funding but no public accountability. It's little more than
 
2012-05-14 01:17:42 PM  
California, for instance, has a new law mandating teaching gay history in public schools. A similar mandate to teach Christian history would be challenged constitutionally.

christianity is a choice.
 
2012-05-14 01:18:29 PM  

SisterMaryElephant: California, for instance, has a new law mandating teaching gay history in public schools. A similar mandate to teach Christian history would be challenged constitutionally.

christianity is a choice.


While true, I'm not really sure how that's relevant.

And regardless, we do teach Christian history - it's called "European History".
 
2012-05-14 01:18:30 PM  
Well at least it wasn't another one of those articles from that fat kid that likes to have his picture taken with Victoria Jackson.
 
2012-05-14 01:19:59 PM  

DamnYankees: RexTalionis: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: RexTalionis: blood tofu

Blood tofu?

Sorry, but the Jews may be right on this one.

[listfav.com image 500x375]

You know you want it.

What the hell is that.


i1.ytimg.com

KILLER TOFU
 
2012-05-14 01:22:20 PM  
Is there a way out? I only see one. Universal school choice. Liberate parents and kids from government and union controlled schools. In a free America, parents who don't share Arne Duncan's values shouldn't have them forced on them.

They should have christian values forced on them!!!

YOUR SIDE -BAD, VERY BAD
MY SIDE - GOOD, VERY GOOD

/my children's value came from ME, not some schoolteacher. And I managed that despite the libliblibibieral and scary schoolteachers.
 
2012-05-14 01:23:38 PM  

Diogenes: James!: There are free market solutions to this Christians. Send your kid to a private school.

Not if I'm paying for it.

Norquist tried to pull that crap on last week's Real Time with Bill Maher. "Obama's cruel because he doesn't believe in school vouchers, but still sends his girls to private school." I don't care if you send your kid to a private school. But not on my dime.

/tangential rant


This is how I feel about tax credits and deductions for kids. I don't care if you send your kid to public or private school. But not on my dime. They are your kids. YOU pay for them.

/tangential rant
 
2012-05-14 01:28:29 PM  
Stop trolling, Drew.
 
2012-05-14 01:32:38 PM  
"Policies that are inclusive of all people are still exclusive of Christians."

This is what religious conservatives actually believe.
 
2012-05-14 01:33:15 PM  
Hmm. Moral relativism... bad. Mythological moralism... good.

Ok, got it.
 
2012-05-14 01:34:12 PM  

DammitIForgotMyLogin: The judeo-christian god is about as far from being an arbiter of what is good and moral as it's possible to be. He's not nice, he's not loving, he's a raging farking psychopath who, if he actually existed, would be more deserving of our scorn and disgust than our worship.


That's why he didn't want his slaves learning the difference between good and evil.
 
2012-05-14 01:38:00 PM  
What happens when fundies are allowed to dictate to schools:
i49.tinypic.com

Where there are fundies, fun dies.
 
2012-05-14 01:39:05 PM  

DamnYankees: SlothB77: They could teach kids about gay history and about religious history without advocating for one or another.

Teaching about gay history without condemning it would be the equivalent of condoning it, in their eyes.



Yup... That's even the problem with "comparative religion" type classes. They advocate for those classes because they think it's a backdoor to getting relgion taught in school, then either:

a.) Fundie teachers immediately start abusing it by proselytizing, and get called on the carpet for it.

or, more commonly...

b.) Fundie parents go apeshiat because Christianity and Islam are being taught side-by-side without anyone pointing out the clear truth that Islam is a false religion born of the deceiver and that Christianity is the one true faith, and all students had better kneel before Zod God immediately, if they know what's good for them.

There's NO middle ground with these people, because we've already got the middle ground... that being... nobody's religion is promoted and everyone gets to live as they choose. But, that's not what they want.

They will forever try to make their beliefs the official state-sanctioned correct beliefs, and consider freedom of religion to mean "we won't kill or arrest you for being a godless heathen or devotee to a false deity... yet."
 
2012-05-14 01:42:58 PM  

umad: Diogenes: James!: There are free market solutions to this Christians. Send your kid to a private school.

Not if I'm paying for it.

Norquist tried to pull that crap on last week's Real Time with Bill Maher. "Obama's cruel because he doesn't believe in school vouchers, but still sends his girls to private school." I don't care if you send your kid to a private school. But not on my dime.

/tangential rant

This is how I feel about tax credits and deductions for kids. I don't care if you send your kid to public or private school. But not on my dime. They are your kids. YOU pay for them.

/tangential rant


Good luck, enjoy your dystopia.
 
2012-05-14 01:45:31 PM  

RexTalionis: It's blood tofu. Essentially, pig's or duck's blood that's cooled and congealed until it has the consistency of silken tofu (or Jell-O). You cook it in soup.


What's the point of flavoring tofu with blood? Might as well just cook up some Blutwurst.
 
2012-05-14 01:47:42 PM  

The Name: RexTalionis: It's blood tofu. Essentially, pig's or duck's blood that's cooled and congealed until it has the consistency of silken tofu (or Jell-O). You cook it in soup.

What's the point of flavoring tofu with blood? Might as well just cook up some Blutwurst.


Oh wait, I didn't even read your post very carefully.

Well, I'm an idiot . . .
 
2012-05-14 01:48:32 PM  
Considering all the blood, torture, murder and rape that has come from the spread of Christianity, I don't understand where they get off thinking that they can do any better job teaching morality than anyone else.

Even the Bible shows that being a believer doesn't in any way improve your chances of being a better person. Cain and Judas were believers and first-hand witnesses to God's power, but they still did terrible things regardless.

So even the Bible shows that morality doesn't come from belief. So fark off.
 
2012-05-14 01:52:15 PM  
Fundies: Don't tell out kids where babies come from, but we want to tell your kid how to act.
 
2012-05-14 01:55:17 PM  
Ten Commandments?

That's that sign we hang up so we know where the pedophiles hang out, isn't it?
 
2012-05-14 01:56:45 PM  

Serious Black: urbangirl: How have we gone from a nation where our first president, George Washington, admonished that religion and morality are "indispensable" to 'political prosperity" to one, today, in which our president says "same-sex couples should be able to get married?"

Maybe because most people believe that being gay is not an issue of either religion or morality?

You got that right:


sas-origin.onstreammedia.com

[sas-origin.onstreammedia.com image 560x664]

It's amazing how much damage Karl Rove caused with his 2004 Bush campaign and that it took 8 years to overcome.
 
2012-05-14 01:59:42 PM  
This world once showed so much promise...

olgaluz.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-05-14 01:59:59 PM  
I'm surprised to say that, as far as the "no religious stuff on public grounds, especially schools" policy is concerned, I agree with the Christians. And I'm not happy saying that sentence. I've been sick recently, and memories of each bucket-filling heave returns when I think that I agree with Christians on a matter of public policy. But it makes no sense. Ownership of a territory does not make you culpable for instigating or supporting activities that take place on that property. Most people have a religion, and allowing them to practice on public property makes sense since they *are* the public. While I think erecting memorials to religious tenants or mythologies (i.e. bronze relief sculptures of the Ten Commandments in a court house) is over the line, it's just as unconstitutional to prohibit the practice of a religion as it is to promote any one particular religion.

/Rastafarian band classes ftw.
 
2012-05-14 02:01:18 PM  

serpent_sky: ManateeGag: serpent_sky: They don't want to pay for something they're not using.

I hope I never have to use the fire department for its intended purpose, but I'm glad to pay taxes to help fun it.

There was that story about the private fire department that let a house burn because the people didn't pay. There are many reasons certain services should simply be available and taxpayer funded. That is absolutely one of them.


that absolutely disgusted me. even while his neighbor was there offering to pay they pretty much refused payment.
 
2012-05-14 02:02:32 PM  

Aracnix: I'm surprised to say that, as far as the "no religious stuff on public grounds, especially schools" policy is concerned, I agree with the Christians. And I'm not happy saying that sentence. I've been sick recently, and memories of each bucket-filling heave returns when I think that I agree with Christians on a matter of public policy. But it makes no sense. Ownership of a territory does not make you culpable for instigating or supporting activities that take place on that property. Most people have a religion, and allowing them to practice on public property makes sense since they *are* the public. While I think erecting memorials to religious tenants or mythologies (i.e. bronze relief sculptures of the Ten Commandments in a court house) is over the line, it's just as unconstitutional to prohibit the practice of a religion as it is to promote any one particular religion.

/Rastafarian band classes ftw.


Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be
 
2012-05-14 02:07:25 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: This world once showed so much promise...


What the what??
 
2012-05-14 02:08:41 PM  

James!: There are free market solutions to this Christians. Send your kid to a private school.


They don't even have to do that. There is a church on nearly every corner in this country, and most of them have some sort of Sunday school for kids. They can learn all about their religion for free. Just because public schools are secular doesn't mean kids don't have access to their religions.
 
2012-05-14 02:12:14 PM  

indylaw: Kar98: RexTalionis: What exactly is wrong with the idea of moral relativism?

The Jews believe that circumcision (based on their religion and tradition) is a good thing and demonstrates a covenant with YHWH. They also come from a tradition that pork, shellfish and blood is bad.

I come from a tradition that goes "WTF, this seems unnecessary" when it comes to circumcision. And we love our pork, shellfish, and blood tofu.

Neither of us are absolutely right. Neither of us are absolutely wrong. The choices we make are only right and wrong relative to our backgrounds and traditions. So, seriously, why is moral relativism such a bad thing?

Because there ARE things that are absolutely wrong, as opposed to things that wrong only because some legends told by bronze age goat shaggers say so.

OK, like what?

Murder? Sure.
Theft? Yeah.
Fraud and perjury? Absolutely.

How about drinking? Lots of cultures have alcohol taboos. Is alcohol absolutely wrong?

How about blow jobs? Premarital sex? Pornography? Astrology? Gambling? Worshiping gods other than YHWH or the Holy Trinity?

How about gay marriage?

Lots of taboos are common. That doesn't mean that they are absolute.


I'm glad I've got my point across, because that's precisely what I meant.
 
2012-05-14 02:13:13 PM  
Moral absolutism means that in every relationship, at every moment, there is one best choice of path, and that wavering from that is the road to lesser good. That has nothing to do with rules, and everything to do with clear vision and the refusal to compromise, because compromise means living a lie.
 
2012-05-14 02:19:29 PM  

barefoot in the head: Moral absolutism means that in every relationship, at every moment, there is one best choice of path, and that wavering from that is the road to lesser good. That has nothing to do with rules, and everything to do with clear vision and the refusal to compromise, because compromise means living a lie.


Yeah, but no. Moral absolutism means I don't excuse savage behavior with "well, that's OK, he's had a bad childhood, and he's following a book dreamed up by bronze age goat shaggers", but that there are some principles that do NOT get violated no matter what.
 
2012-05-14 02:21:42 PM  
Point me to a country that has Biblical stuff all over their schools that isn't a theocratic nightmare.
 
2012-05-14 02:23:29 PM  

Aracnix: I'm surprised to say that, as far as the "no religious stuff on public grounds, especially schools" policy is concerned, I agree with the Christians. And I'm not happy saying that sentence. I've been sick recently, and memories of each bucket-filling heave returns when I think that I agree with Christians on a matter of public policy. But it makes no sense. Ownership of a territory does not make you culpable for instigating or supporting activities that take place on that property. Most people have a religion, and allowing them to practice on public property makes sense since they *are* the public. While I think erecting memorials to religious tenants or mythologies (i.e. bronze relief sculptures of the Ten Commandments in a court house) is over the line, it's just as unconstitutional to prohibit the practice of a religion as it is to promote any one particular religion.

/Rastafarian band classes ftw.


Never Happen. They would have to open it to all religions. Do you really want your Statehouse to be plastered over with the "SisterMary's Jesus - for those with excellent taste" sign, posted next to the "aborted babbies are yummy" cheapo decal, which is posted next to the gilded "Jews so juicy" sign.

Our statehouses would look like graffiti'd subways.

/they already stink like them
 
2012-05-14 02:23:33 PM  

Diogenes: Norquist tried to pull that crap on last week's Real Time with Bill Maher. "Obama's cruel because he doesn't believe in school vouchers, but still sends his girls to private school." I don't care if you send your kid to a private school. But not on my dime.


And of course, Norquist is being disingenuous as usual. The Obama girls were in public school in Chicago, and Barack and Michelle wanted to send them to public school in DC, but were talked out of it... by the Secret Service. The girls went go to Sitwell Friends, which the SS knows well because Amy Carter and Chelsea Clinton went there, and the rest of the student body is made up of the kids of the politically important and wealthy in DC.

In other words, Obama's daughters are in private school for security reasons, because they're the daughters of the President of the United States and therefore a target.
 
2012-05-14 02:26:26 PM  

Kar98: barefoot in the head: Moral absolutism means that in every relationship, at every moment, there is one best choice of path, and that wavering from that is the road to lesser good. That has nothing to do with rules, and everything to do with clear vision and the refusal to compromise, because compromise means living a lie.

Yeah, but no. Moral absolutism means I don't excuse savage behavior with "well, that's OK, he's had a bad childhood, and he's following a book dreamed up by bronze age goat shaggers", but that there are some principles that do NOT get violated no matter what.


Then you are part of the problem. Your principles are yours. What is best is what is best.
 
2012-05-14 02:37:04 PM  
Of the 10 Commandments, let's see which ones are actually relevant in our current societal morals:

1) No other Gods before me. Completely unconstitutional.
2) No graven images. Also completely unconstitutional
3) No taking name of God in vain. Unconstitutional.
4) Maintain the Sabbath. Unconstitutional.
5) Honor thy father and mother. Not in the legal system.
6) No murdering. Ding! First actual law!
7) No adultery. Not in the legal system.
8) No stealing. Okay, we're at two!
9) Not bear false witness. Only in instances of perjury. Let's call it half valid.
10) No coveting. 100% opposed to all free market/capitalist systems.

So out of the 10 commandments, only two (maybe two and a half) are in any way valid with the current legal or official moral system of the United States. The "moral relativism" happened way earlier, when sane people realized you couldn't found a government on these principles and intentionally decided to leave most of them out.
 
2012-05-14 02:39:44 PM  

jaerik: Of the 10 Commandments, let's see which ones are actually relevant in our current societal morals:

1) No other Gods before me. Completely unconstitutional.
2) No graven images. Also completely unconstitutional
3) No taking name of God in vain. Unconstitutional.
4) Maintain the Sabbath. Unconstitutional.
5) Honor thy father and mother. Not in the legal system.
6) No murdering. Ding! First actual law!
7) No adultery. Not in the legal system.
8) No stealing. Okay, we're at two!
9) Not bear false witness. Only in instances of perjury. Let's call it half valid.
10) No coveting. 100% opposed to all free market/capitalist systems.

So out of the 10 commandments, only two (maybe two and a half) are in any way valid with the current legal or official moral system of the United States. The "moral relativism" happened way earlier, when sane people realized you couldn't found a government on these principles and intentionally decided to leave most of them out.


Depends on the state.
 
2012-05-14 02:39:52 PM  

Lumpmoose: It's amazing how much damage Karl Rove caused with his 2004 Bush campaign and that it took 8 years to overcome.


Jesus. As recently as 2004, a slim majority of people thought gay sex itself should be illegal. That makes me weep for our country.
 
2012-05-14 02:42:42 PM  

meat0918: jaerik: Of the 10 Commandments, let's see which ones are actually relevant in our current societal morals:

1) No other Gods before me. Completely unconstitutional.
2) No graven images. Also completely unconstitutional
3) No taking name of God in vain. Unconstitutional.
4) Maintain the Sabbath. Unconstitutional.
5) Honor thy father and mother. Not in the legal system.
6) No murdering. Ding! First actual law!
7) No adultery. Not in the legal system.
8) No stealing. Okay, we're at two!
9) Not bear false witness. Only in instances of perjury. Let's call it half valid.
10) No coveting. 100% opposed to all free market/capitalist systems.

So out of the 10 commandments, only two (maybe two and a half) are in any way valid with the current legal or official moral system of the United States. The "moral relativism" happened way earlier, when sane people realized you couldn't found a government on these principles and intentionally decided to leave most of them out.

Depends on the state.


Yep, it can and has been beneficial during divorce proceedings here in N.C.
 
2012-05-14 02:43:13 PM  
All morality is relative.

It's just that some people like to draw a golden circle around their particular moral convictions and then call the contents of that circle absolute.
 
2012-05-14 02:45:53 PM  
Got about halfway through before I stopped and asked, "why am I reading this biased, contentless garble?"

Example:
The struggle in our public spaces is about competing world views. Not neutrality.

As one court ruling after another has purged religious expression from our public spaces, we have unfairly suppressed traditional values in favor of promoting alternative secular views.


All I see is boo-farking-hoo I can't hoist my Christian morality on people anymore, and that's not fair!! It's really telling when these "competing world views" he speaks of are the rights of Christian fundementalists to oppress anyone they do not agree with versus the idea that everyone should have equal rights under the law.
 
2012-05-14 02:51:37 PM  
Moral absolutism, hmmm...Are you even sure such a thing is possible?

Is killing always wrong (the word murder already presupposes wrongdoing)? We have pretty standard exceptions for defense of self and the innocent.
Is lying always wrong? What if you're lying to protect someone's life?
Is stealing always wrong? Loaf of bread, starving family, yadda, yadda...

I'm more of a fan of universal morals rather than absolute morals. There are too many unique situations in life for a rigid "always X" to be the moral action, but those same (not quite absolute) guidelines should apply to everyone equally (ex. I shouldn't be able to get away with something just because I'm the king).
 
2012-05-14 02:52:10 PM  

Karac: Question: if it's OK to give funding to planned parenthood, which would mean the government indirectly funding abortion, why isn't it OK for the government to arrange vouchers for kids to go to Catholic schools, which would mean indirectly funding the catholic church?


Because Planned Parenthood isn't a church.


/moran
 
2012-05-14 02:52:45 PM  
It's not trivial that Duncan, the man who oversees this massive enterprise molding the minds of our nation's youth, publicly rejects the traditional definition of marriage in favor of one saying it just takes two (so far) warm bodies of any gender combination.

Oh shut the f*ck up you stupid f*cking nimrod. You reject the traditional definition of marriage too, unless your father-in-law was adamant about getting a dowry from your father before you even met the young boy who you were forced to marry and you are peachy-keen with how that all went down.

Notion of love being integral to marriage are, historically speaking, new. The idea that you have a say in whom you get married to is, again historically speaking, new. Don't you dare get indignant because someone else is bucking the tradition of marriage between one man and one woman when you yourself are bucking several traditional concepts of marriage.

As one court ruling after another has purged religious expression from our public spaces, we have unfairly suppressed traditional values in favor of promoting alternative secular views.

No, we haven't. We have simply removed the religious baggage from many of the traditional values which are still valuable so that people not of that religion can share in them, and have removed the traditional religiously-based values which are NOT valuable any more. Otherwise, ma'am, you would be owned by someone right now and unable to have written this massive pile of trite, ignorant, garbage. Be thankful that there are many people in this country who maintain a critical eye over our traditions to make sure they are valid, are moral, are appropriate, or not, because a black woman has benefited more from challenging tradition than most other groups in the United States.
 
2012-05-14 02:54:23 PM  
1. Watching paint dry
2. Sitting in a waiting room
3. Opera
4. Crap about putting up the ten commandments for the kids
 
2012-05-14 02:58:59 PM  
I refuse to give Townhall any more clicks. Fool me a half dozen times, shame on you... etc.

Schools are cutting back on the arts, music, physical education, all sorts of important and worthwhile things. Worry about that why don't you? Your religious beliefs can be taught at home and in church and don't need to impose upon the already limited resources of the public school system.
 
2012-05-14 03:05:21 PM  
Actually if we taught the bible in all schools we'd have less people taking it out of context to support their own bigotry, greed, and sins.
 
2012-05-14 03:08:35 PM  

Citrate1007: Actually if we taught the bible in all schools we'd have less people taking it out of context to support their own bigotry, greed, and sins.


People take the books currently assigned out of context to support their worldviews. What would change, besides opening the doors to even more blatant proselytizing in public schools?
 
Displayed 50 of 179 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report