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.

(Duluth News Tribune)   Catholic Priest in BFE donates money to a) NAMBLA b) hookers and blow c) coalition formed to oppose a one man-one woman marriage amendment to Minnesota's constitution. Wait, what?   (duluthnewstribune.com) divider line 90
    More: Spiffy, Catholics, Catholic priest, same-sex marriages, civil societies, good leader, NAMBLA, News Tribune, religious studies  
•       •       •

2201 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Sep 2012 at 5:43 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-03 05:17:28 AM
The Minnesota Catholic Conference, which describes itself as "the public policy voice of the Catholic Church in Minnesota" has given $400,000 to Minnesota for Marriage, one of the primary groups that supports the Marriage Amendment. The Catholic Conference's contribution appears to be the single largest of any group in the state.

That's money not spent on food, medicine, clothing and school supplies for kids, elderly care, child care, etc. All so they can keep homogays from getting married, which would absolutely NO effect on them

And where will the money go? To lawyers, political consultants, and other semi-humans.

I'm an atheist, but I am pretty damn sure that this is not what Jesus would do.
 
2012-09-03 05:42:54 AM
Lambert's contribution, and the reaction by members of his own parish, suggest that some Minnesota Catholics don't line up behind the church's position.

I'm shocked, shocked that the billion members of a 2,000 year old institution don't see eye to eye on everything.
 
2012-09-03 05:54:51 AM

Lionel Mandrake: The Minnesota Catholic Conference, which describes itself as "the public policy voice of the Catholic Church in Minnesota" has given $400,000 to Minnesota for Marriage, one of the primary groups that supports the Marriage Amendment. The Catholic Conference's contribution appears to be the single largest of any group in the state.

That's money not spent on food, medicine, clothing and school supplies for kids, elderly care, child care, etc. All so they can keep homogays from getting married, which would absolutely NO effect on them

And where will the money go? To lawyers, political consultants, and other semi-humans.


This is where you stop being a religion and start being something else. When you're lobbying government, its time to start paying taxes.
 
2012-09-03 05:56:04 AM
In Australia one of the first groups to help out Gay people with AIDS was an order of Catholic Nuns.
Not all Christians hate Gays. I can understand the Church being against Gay Marriage within its confines, it might not seem fair to a lot of people but it is their faith, but the second this crap started getting legislated is when it started to piss me off. Thankfully Australia is slowly getting there with regards to gay unions.

I sometimes find the idea of gay sex icky, but the thought of stopping two adults in love from being together legally is just sickening. So good on this guy and hopefully more people will stand up for it.
 
2012-09-03 06:05:54 AM

thisispete: Lambert's contribution, and the reaction by members of his own parish, suggest that some Minnesota Catholics don't line up behind the church's position.

I'm shocked, shocked that the billion members of a 2,000 year old institution don't see eye to eye on everything.


Strange, eh? Biden, Ryan and myself belong to the same Church, and all have different views. Free will,it's biatch.
 
2012-09-03 06:09:15 AM

Actor_au: Thankfully Australia is slowly getting there with regards to gay unions.


Haha... No. Both of our parties are anti-equality; we won't see it until after the USA does.
 
2012-09-03 06:09:52 AM

Actor_au: I sometimes find the idea of gay sex icky,


I always find the idea of two gay men having sex as icky and disgusting. Then again, the idea of most straight couples I pass on the street having sex is icky and disgusting.... So if they can get married....
 
2012-09-03 06:10:21 AM

Actor_au: Thankfully Australia is slowly getting there with regards to gay unions.


Over here in New Zealand the Parliament just had a conscience vote in support for gay marriage. The first reading passed by 80 votes to 40. There's another two readings before it becomes law, but it's pretty much a certainty.

Anyway, Australian law recognises New Zealand marriages, so once New Zealand passes gay marriage, there could conceivably be gay couples from Australia having their ceremonies in NZ and returning home with the full rights and privileges married couples enjoy. That should spur the Australian government into action.
 
2012-09-03 06:14:17 AM

thisispete: Actor_au: Thankfully Australia is slowly getting there with regards to gay unions.

Over here in New Zealand the Parliament just had a conscience vote in support for gay marriage. The first reading passed by 80 votes to 40. There's another two readings before it becomes law, but it's pretty much a certainty.

Anyway, Australian law recognises New Zealand marriages, so once New Zealand passes gay marriage, there could conceivably be gay couples from Australia having their ceremonies in NZ and returning home with the full rights and privileges married couples enjoy. That should spur the Australian government into action.


Strike that. I'm entirely wrong. But it may still give a political impetus.
 
2012-09-03 06:16:38 AM

thisispete: Actor_au: Thankfully Australia is slowly getting there with regards to gay unions.

Over here in New Zealand the Parliament just had a conscience vote in support for gay marriage. The first reading passed by 80 votes to 40. There's another two readings before it becomes law, but it's pretty much a certainty.

Anyway, Australian law recognises New Zealand marriages, so once New Zealand passes gay marriage, there could conceivably be gay couples from Australia having their ceremonies in NZ and returning home with the full rights and privileges married couples enjoy. That should spur the Australian government into action.


We will have the same confusion here in the States. Some states allow it, some refuse it. But our Constitution says that a contract valid in one state is valid in all states.
 
2012-09-03 06:18:46 AM
One interesting thing being that he is more likely to get in trouble for doing this with the senior members of the church than if he sexually abused a child.
 
2012-09-03 06:40:52 AM
It's okay for the Catholic Church to get involved in politics if they're doing something I like.

In other words, this guy needs to STFU and live his ministry - not try to legislate it.

/pro same-sex marriage
 
2012-09-03 06:44:22 AM
Minnesotans United For Family?

They went with MUFF?

Well played. Kudos, I say.
 
2012-09-03 06:51:23 AM
I wish there was some sort of signifier that priests had, whether they went directly into the ministry or lived a life outside the church before becoming one.

It'd just be instructive to know who's a bigot out of naivete, and who's full on derp. There are a lot of priests out there that are good men, and even logical thinkers.
 
2012-09-03 06:59:32 AM

Lionel Mandrake: The Minnesota Catholic Conference, which describes itself as "the public policy voice of the Catholic Church in Minnesota" has given $400,000 to Minnesota for Marriage, one of the primary groups that supports the Marriage Amendment. The Catholic Conference's contribution appears to be the single largest of any group in the state.


Can we make them pay taxes now?
 
2012-09-03 07:05:23 AM
i really thought it was going to be a)
 
2012-09-03 07:05:49 AM

Gulper Eel: It's okay for the Catholic Church to get involved in politics if they're doing something I like.

In other words, this guy needs to STFU and live his ministry - not try to legislate it.

/pro same-sex marriage


This dude quietly gave his own money on his own to a political cause, the Catholic Church had nothing to do with it. Only reason anybody found out about it is because of the donor reporting requirements, and he wouldn't talk to the press about it. It seems like what you're suggesting is that anyone involved in full time religious service shouldn't be allowed to give their own dime on their own time to political causes, which is absurd.
 
2012-09-03 07:06:26 AM
I regularly think "fark religion". And I still do. Religion has largely been a source for harm in this world, because it teaches us not to question what we are told, and that imaginary things and people are more important than real things and people.

That said, there are many, many religious people who are decent and don't want to oppress anybody. When they manage to attain power in their religious hierarchy, then you get "affirming churches", the civil rights movement etc. But it is far more often that their opposite numbers - the fanatics, the power-hungry and the witch hunters - gain religious power, because they will stop at nothing to attain it.
 
2012-09-03 07:08:39 AM

I_Am_Weasel: Minnesotans United For Family?

They went with MUFF?

Well played. Kudos, I say.


They're affiliated with Floridians United for Relationships' Place In Exaltation
 
2012-09-03 07:09:04 AM
Eller said the Duluth Diocese, along with others in the state, support the amendment for societal and biblical reasons.

"The amendment is needed to protect the civil institution of marriage, currently codified in Minnesota statutes, from active attempts in the state courts and Legislature to redefine it.


Now wait just one farking minute here. All I ever hear from these mouthbreathers is that marriage is a religious, not a civil institution. If they're finally admitting that marriage is the recognition of your relationship by the government, then they've just admitted that it can't be bound by religious exceptions.

And it makes sense that priests would turning against homophobia would start in Minnesota. It's the home state of Michele Bachmann, the state where kids can bully their gay classmates into suiciding themselves without the schools saying a word - because they're bound by law not to ignore all things homosexual; including beatings of students for being homosexual.
 
2012-09-03 07:13:10 AM

simplicimus: thisispete: Actor_au: Thankfully Australia is slowly getting there with regards to gay unions.

Over here in New Zealand the Parliament just had a conscience vote in support for gay marriage. The first reading passed by 80 votes to 40. There's another two readings before it becomes law, but it's pretty much a certainty.

Anyway, Australian law recognises New Zealand marriages, so once New Zealand passes gay marriage, there could conceivably be gay couples from Australia having their ceremonies in NZ and returning home with the full rights and privileges married couples enjoy. That should spur the Australian government into action.

We will have the same confusion here in the States. Some states allow it, some refuse it. But our Constitution says that a contract valid in one state is valid in all states.


Not exactly. The US constitution says:

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof

A gay-hating state would have to accept any marriage license from a state which believes in civil rights, except that Congress, in the Defense of Marriage Act, said explicitly that they don't have to, and that the federal government can't.
 
2012-09-03 07:19:19 AM
i337.photobucket.com
 
2012-09-03 07:21:48 AM
Individual priests aren't always as politically conservative as the institutional Church.

I went to a Jesuit high school. I remember having one Jesuit priest as a teacher who was a staunch and outspoken Democrat and pretty liberal.
 
2012-09-03 07:22:52 AM

blastoh: Actor_au: I sometimes find the idea of gay sex icky,

I always find the idea of two gay men having sex as icky and disgusting. Then again, the idea of most straight couples I pass on the street having sex is icky and disgusting.... So if they can get married....


Case in point:
upload.wikimedia.org
These two adults were allowed to legally marry, breed, raise their own children, and got a TV show. Meanwhile, my two elderly gay neighbors are unable to have South Carolina recognize their relationship and can't visit each other in the hospital because their families told the hospital not to allow them in the room.
 
2012-09-03 07:29:17 AM
donated $1,000 to Minnesotans United for Families

Ah, I think I see the problem. The rascals chose a name that it makes it sound like a pro-family organization.
 
2012-09-03 07:30:19 AM

Karac:

We will have the same confusion here in the States. Some states allow it, some refuse it. But our Constitution says that a contract valid in one state is valid in all states.

Not exactly. The US constitution says:

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof

A gay-hating state would have to accept any marriage license from a state which believes in civil rights, except that Congress, in the Defense of Marriage Act, said explicitly that they don't have to, and that the federal government can't.


Yeah, but DOMA would actually require a constitutional amendment to be legal, reason being that the Full faith and Credit clause basically addresses bookkeeping. Which is why, I think, that Obama instructed the Justice Department not to defend DOMA. He did, after all, teach Constitutional Law.
 
2012-09-03 07:33:18 AM

Lionel Mandrake: The Minnesota Catholic Conference, which describes itself as "the public policy voice of the Catholic Church in Minnesota" has given $400,000 to Minnesota for Marriage, one of the primary groups that supports the Marriage Amendment. The Catholic Conference's contribution appears to be the single largest of any group in the state.

That's money not spent on food, medicine, clothing and school supplies for kids, elderly care, child care, etc. All so they can keep homogays from getting married, which would absolutely NO effect on them

And where will the money go? To lawyers, political consultants, and other semi-humans.

I'm an atheist, but I am pretty damn sure that this is not what Jesus would do.


It's an odd fact, that atheists have a better understanding of Jesus's teachings than so many Christians.
 
2012-09-03 07:34:02 AM

Doc Daneeka: Individual priests aren't always as politically conservative as the institutional Church.

I went to a Jesuit high school. I remember having one Jesuit priest as a teacher who was a staunch and outspoken Democrat and pretty liberal.


Well, Jesuits aren't exactly Catholic. They're the brains of the organization, but there's never been a Jesuit Pope.
 
2012-09-03 07:40:03 AM

simplicimus: Yeah, but DOMA would actually require a constitutional amendment to be legal, reason being that the Full faith and Credit clause basically addresses bookkeeping. Which is why, I think, that Obama instructed the Justice Department not to defend DOMA. He did, after all, teach Constitutional Law.


DOMA is a shiatty law. Anyone with the slightest shred of decency and desire to stay out of other people's bedrooms knows this. But I don't think it would be unconstituional because of the full faith and credit clause; that clause says Congress can decide what makes state records legal enough to be recognized by other states, and it decided that two male names on a marriage license isn't up to snuff. When it gets overturned, it's going to be because of on equal rights basis. But whatever you think of it, a law that's been passed by congress and signed by a president is assumed to be and treated as constitutional until a court rules that it is not.

Your original statement was that one state has to recognize a contract made in another state, which in the case of gay marriages, obviously just isn't true.
 
2012-09-03 07:46:05 AM

Karac: simplicimus: Yeah, but DOMA would actually require a constitutional amendment to be legal, reason being that the Full faith and Credit clause basically addresses bookkeeping. Which is why, I think, that Obama instructed the Justice Department not to defend DOMA. He did, after all, teach Constitutional Law.

DOMA is a shiatty law. Anyone with the slightest shred of decency and desire to stay out of other people's bedrooms knows this. But I don't think it would be unconstituional because of the full faith and credit clause; that clause says Congress can decide what makes state records legal enough to be recognized by other states, and it decided that two male names on a marriage license isn't up to snuff. When it gets overturned, it's going to be because of on equal rights basis. But whatever you think of it, a law that's been passed by congress and signed by a president is assumed to be and treated as constitutional until a court rules that it is not.

Your original statement was that one state has to recognize a contract made in another state, which in the case of gay marriages, obviously just isn't true.


Well, does the IRS and Social Security recognize Gay marriages?
 
2012-09-03 07:51:19 AM

Karac: But whatever you think of it, a law that's been passed by congress and signed by a president is assumed to be and treated as constitutional until a court rules that it is not.


While this is true, I've never understood how DOMA could be considered even remotely constitutional under the 14th.

/Then again, I don't speak legalese.
//I guess the Constitution's a bit like the Bible; it can say whatever you want it to say.
 
2012-09-03 07:57:04 AM

Fluorescent Testicle: I've never understood how DOMA could be considered even remotely constitutional under the 14th.


It can't. There's a reason Obama issued a directive to the DoJ that if anyone challenges it in court, the DoJ is not to defend it.
 
2012-09-03 08:01:43 AM
Terry Mattingly, a religion journalist, came up with this Catholic voter matrix. Just something to think about, as it is a fairly accurate view of the 'Catholic vote' that the media likes to talk about. A lot of people assume that Catholics vote for the anti-abortion candidate or whatever, but that is a small section of the population.

* Ex-Catholics. While most ex-Catholics are solid for the Democrats, the large percentage that has left to join conservative Protestant churches (including some Latinos) may lean to GOP.

* Cultural Catholics who may go to church a few times a year. This may be an undecided voter - check out that classic Atlantic Monthly tribes of American religion piece - depending on what is happening with the economy, foreign policy, etc. Leans to Democrats.

* Sunday-morning American Catholics. This voter is a regular in the pew and may even play some leadership role in the parish. This is the Catholic voter that is really up for grabs, the true swing voter that the candidates are after.

* "Sweats the details" Roman Catholic who goes to confession. Is active in the full sacramental life of the parish and almost always backs the Vatican, when it comes to matters of faith and practice. This is where the GOP has made its big gains in recent decades, but this is a very, very small slice of the American Catholic pie.


I know this article was about the actions of one priest, but I thought this was somewhat relevant to the discussion.
 
2012-09-03 08:15:13 AM

Lionel Mandrake: The Minnesota Catholic Conference, which describes itself as "the public policy voice of the Catholic Church in Minnesota" has given $400,000 to Minnesota for Marriage, one of the primary groups that supports the Marriage Amendment. The Catholic Conference's contribution appears to be the single largest of any group in the state.

That's money not spent on food, medicine, clothing and school supplies for kids, elderly care, child care, etc. All so they can keep homogays from getting married, which would absolutely NO effect on them


And why are these farkers tax exempt?
 
2012-09-03 08:17:33 AM

blastoh: Actor_au: I sometimes find the idea of gay sex icky,

I always find the idea of two gay men having sex as icky and disgusting. Then again, the idea of most straight couples I pass on the street having sex is icky and disgusting.... So if they can get married....


This. Seriously, I can't believe the "icky" thing is ever put out there as though it's a legitimate argument. I can't think of many couples I know (straight or gay) that I would want to see naked, much less having sex with each other. You and your wife's love-making session may resemble 2 beached whales in a wrestling match, and while I may try to block from my mind even the notion that it happens at all, I'm not going to start campaigning to have your vile blubbery marriage made illegal.
 
2012-09-03 08:22:01 AM
Warning, true but citations needed:

That $400,000 donated by the diocese came out of raiding the pension fund. Maybe coincidence, but it is underfunded by the same amount as the donation.

Both sides got into a pissing war over disclosure of the donors. (see $1,000 mandatory disclosure law) this pissed of the anti gays because it was discovered that 95% of funding came from about 20 individuals and organizations. So they demanded the other side release theirs, and although there were a handful of big donors, 90% of their funding came from a 500 page document listing the $20 donors, lol.

This amendment is sunk.
 
2012-09-03 08:27:54 AM

heinekenftw: And why are these farkers tax exempt?


Non-profits (you can debate that term) can engage in issues lobbying and spending funds on legislative issues, to a certain point. For all I know, the Minnesota Catholic Conference could be a 501c4 Social Welfare organization, which changes everything.
 
2012-09-03 08:33:45 AM

kid_icarus: I can't believe the "icky" thing is ever put out there as though it's a legitimate argument.


Are you joking?

The icky thing is pretty much the ENTIRE argument. People don't like it because it's icky, so they pass laws against it.

So many laws are the same. Indecent exposure, for example. We're all naked under our clothes. If everyone looked like a model, no one would care about nudity. But we require clothes because some people aren't beautiful. They're icky. So we make everyone wear clothing and really only arrest the ones who are icky. No straight man ever called the cops on a hot blonde going topless in a bar.

Basically it boils down to people are just chimps with better elocution and less morality. Think of everyone like that and suddenly it all makes sense.
 
2012-09-03 08:33:50 AM

Noam Chimpsky: donated $1,000 to Minnesotans United for Families

Ah, I think I see the problem. The rascals chose a name that it makes it sound like a pro-family organization.


It is a pro family organization.
 
2012-09-03 08:34:01 AM
I don't care what anybody else says, if you don't own property equivalent to at least £200 in 1750 money, or you're not white, or male, or Christian, or free of all bonds of indentured servitude, or a recognized member of the Register of Citizens in Good Standing, you are not a person and have no rights before the law.

Severe conservatism!
 
2012-09-03 08:38:45 AM

Lionel Mandrake: I'm an atheist, but I am pretty damn sure that this is not what Jesus would do.


That. I'm an eveangelical Christian (who happens to be in favor of gay marriage) What do we need the money for? There are plenty of folks who will volunteer to work the streets, do petition drives, etc., and all of the public attention that is needed will easily be granted to the likes of Jerry Falwell to go on all of the big talk and news shows to voice the reasons for the opposition.

And there are PLENTY of Christian attorneys, surely you can find two or three who will do the legal work for free. They can count hours as hours donated to their church and claim the tax deduction, I'm sure.

Seriously. Where the fark does that money need to go? A significant portion of our children go without at least one meal a day unless school is in session. There is plenty of homelessness, families living in substandard housing, families that can't afford basic medical care, even WITH programs like Medicaid....either they can't afford to get to clinics, or they need specialized care that isn't covered...the list goes on and on.

But yeah....let's blow millions of dollars because we're freaked out that two consenting adults may stick their dicks in each other's asses.

Do I believe homosexuality is "wrong"? Biblically speaking, yes. The same as drunkness, gambling, gossip, etc. are wrong. Is homosexuality a choice? In most cases, I don't think so, and I think a good biblical argument can be made for why. But regardless......the place to have those arguments and discussions is the church house, not the state house, so long as it is not a matter of public safety or necessity.

Let them marry. Let them raise kids. Let them be farking HUMAN. Let's spend our money someplace that matters. This is farking insane.
 
2012-09-03 08:41:54 AM
This is what religion should be about: sharing peace and love with our fellow man, and making life on this crazy planet just a little bit easier for everyone. Kudos!
 
2012-09-03 08:42:23 AM

doglover: kid_icarus: I can't believe the "icky" thing is ever put out there as though it's a legitimate argument.

Are you joking?

The icky thing is pretty much the ENTIRE argument. People don't like it because it's icky, so they pass laws against it.


So drunk sorority girls make out at a bar to ick everyone out?

But seriously, I get your point. And you're right...I just wish more people would actually admit that was their real reasoning and stop trying to act like they hate gays for religious reasons (the scant scriptures in the bible are merely convenient).
 
2012-09-03 08:43:13 AM

xria: One interesting thing being that he is more likely to get in trouble for doing this with the senior members of the church than if he sexually abused a child.


I wish Fark had a "Sad" button because you are probably right.
 
2012-09-03 08:47:33 AM

Karac: my two elderly gay neighbors


They should come live up here in Connecticut with us. They'd be fine, they could get married, live together, and no one could tell them anything.
 
2012-09-03 08:55:19 AM

Fluorescent Testicle: While this is true, I've never understood how DOMA could be considered even remotely constitutional under the 14th.


Some people see it as a battle of amendments: 1 v. 14.

Having to recognize gay marriage violates their freedom to practice their religion.

Cool Story Time. I worked with a guy who was absolutely convinced that he was the victim of sexual harassment simply by having to work alongside a trans-gendered person. The mere presence of this person drove him barking-at-the-moon crazy.
 
2012-09-03 09:04:51 AM

rynthetyn: This dude quietly gave his own money on his own to a political cause, the Catholic Church had nothing to do with it. Only reason anybody found out about it is because of the donor reporting requirements


Then there's no such thing as giving "quietly" in that context.
 
2012-09-03 09:09:52 AM

jaytkay: Noam Chimpsky: donated $1,000 to Minnesotans United for Families

Ah, I think I see the problem. The rascals chose a name that it makes it sound like a pro-family organization.

It is a pro family organization.


No, it isn't. If it wants to keep gay people from farking having families, it's NOT a pro-family organization.
 
2012-09-03 09:13:42 AM

sgnilward: That $400,000 donated by the diocese came out of raiding the pension fund. Maybe coincidence, but it is underfunded by the same amount as the donation.

Both sides got into a pissing war over disclosure of the donors. (see $1,000 mandatory disclosure law) this pissed of the anti gays because it was discovered that 95% of funding came from about 20 individuals and organizations. So they demanded the other side release theirs, and although there were a handful of big donors, 90% of their funding came from a 500 page document listing the $20 donors, lol.


What you have to realize is that although the anti-gay funding only came from 20 places, it was collected from much more. That $400,000 that the Catholic Church gave was bundled from the collection plates and from every tithing Catholic in the state. Of course, they might have thought it was going to things like feeding the hungry and clothing the cold and might be upset to know where their donations went, but damn it - protesting consensual adult sex is just so much more Christian.
 
2012-09-03 09:14:40 AM

Actor_au: In Australia one of the first groups to help out Gay people with AIDS was an order of Catholic Nuns.
Not all Christians hate Gays. I can understand the Church being against Gay Marriage within its confines, it might not seem fair to a lot of people but it is their faith, but the second this crap started getting legislated is when it started to piss me off. Thankfully Australia is slowly getting there with regards to gay unions.

I sometimes find the idea of gay sex icky, but the thought of stopping two adults in love from being together legally is just sickening. So good on this guy and hopefully more people will stand up for it.


Nuns seem to be the one constant in the Catholic church, in that they seem to actually want to help out anyone that needs it, and will not push people away. It could be due to the way the men in the church treat them. Of course, I'm not sure if those outside of the US are treated the way they seem to be here in the states.
 
Displayed 50 of 90 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report