Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Ankle Breaker Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-25-2014, 07:06 PM  
ChiefsandO'sfan ChiefsandO'sfan is offline
Alex Smith
 
ChiefsandO'sfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Casino cash: $1452500
NFL could pull Super Bowl if Arizona religious rights bill passes

Call it what you want -- anti-gay or religious rights -- but if Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signs a controversial bill, you might not be calling Arizona the home of the 2015 Super Bowl.

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act, S.B. 1062, is the current controversy du jour out of Arizona, and the National Football League is with the opposition.

“Our policies emphasize tolerance and inclusiveness and prohibit discrimination based on age, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation or any other improper standard,” NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told USA Today. “We are following the issue in Arizona and will continue to do so should the bill be signed into law, but will decline further comment at this time.”

Sign Up for the Politics Today newsletter!
The Arizona Super Bowl Host committee released a statement saying it disagreed with the bill and its impact on Arizona’s economy.

“On that matter we have heard loud and clear from our various stakeholders that adoption of this legislation would not only run contrary to that goal but deal a significant blow to the state's economic growth potential,” a committee spokesperson said. “We do not support this legislation.”

Arizona is currently slated to host the 2015 Super Bowl at Glendale’s University of Phoenix Stadium.

Opponents of the bill contend that it will allow Arizona businesses to refuse service to homosexual customers.

But, as with most bills in Congress, the attack ads have little to do with the actual legislation.

Proponents of the bill claim that no, businesses will not have carte blanche to refuse service to anyone they disagree with based on religious grounds.

Specifically, proponents claim that there is nothing in Arizona’s current laws that prevent businesses from discriminating against anyone — and yet, strangely enough, discrimination isn’t happening.

Apparently, businesses in Arizona have wanted to discriminate but have just been waiting for a bill to allow them to do so — which this bill does not. Also, what business would quietly wait to discriminate?

“Business owners do not want to deny service to gays,” the Christian Post wrote. “This is not because they fear government sanction. Rather, it is because: 1) Their religious, ethical or moral beliefs tell them it is wrong to deny service; and/or, 2) the profit motive — turning away customers is no way to run a business.”

Sounds like the opponents — and the NFL — need to take a knee.


http://washingtonexaminer.com/nfl-co...rticle/2544606
Posts: 16,557
ChiefsandO'sfan is too fat/Omaha.ChiefsandO'sfan is too fat/Omaha.ChiefsandO'sfan is too fat/Omaha.ChiefsandO'sfan is too fat/Omaha.ChiefsandO'sfan is too fat/Omaha.ChiefsandO'sfan is too fat/Omaha.ChiefsandO'sfan is too fat/Omaha.ChiefsandO'sfan is too fat/Omaha.ChiefsandO'sfan is too fat/Omaha.ChiefsandO'sfan is too fat/Omaha.ChiefsandO'sfan is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 12:25 PM   #196
GloryDayz GloryDayz is offline
Good luck KC Chiefs...
 
GloryDayz's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lee's Summit, MO
Casino cash: $139298
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
Here's a podcast by an Austrian economist, Skip Oliva, showing how football is not really a private institution; how it's granted monopoly status with no other competing pro-leagues, subsidies and hook-ins with govt at every level leading to non-market distortion of prices with little dividing between govt and private left etc.

How leagues call their head executive "commissioner" which is a govt title. Private companies don't use that term. You don't have to agree with all of Lew's comments to get something out of it. The history is interesting, as regulation of sport began with Teddy Roosevelt.

Football: Another Government Institution


http://www.lewrockwell.com/podcast/3...t-institution/
I think the more the sports leagues infuse themselves into political situations, the faster they're going to find they have questions in other areas to answer as things are reconsidered.

I'd love to see that actually, and that was long before the NFL made this move.
Posts: 20,635
GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 12:28 PM   #197
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $473455
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 View Post
If this begins to extend into more basic goods and services, and God forbid, financial products, then it is absolutely limiting to one's freedom to have equal access to things based on a lifestyle choice that has nothing to do with the product being sold. If we are talking about wedding photography, fine. But this has potential to be far reaching to a frightening extent.
No it doesn't. The type of discrimination we're talking about is permissible today but we almost never hear about anyone acting on it. When we do hear about a case of a photographer or a cake baker refusing to participate in a same sex wedding, it's almost universally the result of an activist plaintiff searching for a case. There's zero chance of this law leading to frightening levels of far reaching exclusion of homosexuals from basic goods and services.
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 12:46 PM   #198
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $108250
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
No it doesn't. The type of discrimination we're talking about is permissible today but we almost never hear about anyone acting on it. When we do hear about a case of a photographer or a cake baker refusing to participate in a same sex wedding, it's almost universally the result of an activist plaintiff searching for a case. There's zero chance of this law leading to frightening levels of far reaching exclusion of homosexuals from basic goods and services.
The bold part is accurate and happens more often than people know. Roe v Wade was such an activist case as Norma McCorvey, ( jane Roe) the plaintiff, admits today she was used by activists attorneys.
__________________
“Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” — James Madison
Posts: 56,263
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 12:49 PM   #199
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $108250
I doubt I said the following and sounds like another cosmos strawman or his poor comprehension again aka out of context to twist it to suit his antagonism.

Quote:
...but I do clearly remember her stating that slavery was a good thing for blacks because it taught them skills and discipline. - cosmos
I also said, just because the Constitution allows some things, doesn't mean I think some of those things are good.
__________________
“Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” — James Madison
Posts: 56,263
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 12:55 PM   #200
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $108250
Cosmos is a LIAR. That's standard operating procedure for progs and commies.
__________________
“Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” — James Madison
Posts: 56,263
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 02:09 PM   #201
listopencil listopencil is offline
sic semper tyrannis
 
listopencil's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Partibus Infidelium
Casino cash: $1129820
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
Mainstream Mormons aren't interested in polygamy.

The law prevents the state from interfering with individual's free exercise of religion UNLESS:

1. It is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest. AND

2. It is the the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.

Polygamy isn't going to pass that test, but even more importantly, polygamy requires affirmative action on the part of the state (i.e. a polygamous marriage law) and nothing in this law requires the state to take any action.
I assume that the link I posted leads to the actual bill. It seems to, and the url looks legit. If anyone can find a better link that contradicts the one I posted I sincerely and honestly would ask them to post it. I'd rather discuss this with correct information available to everyone participating in the thread. Going forward I am assuming that the link is to the actual text. With that in mind the language frees up someone not only to refuse to perform an act but to engage in action that they consider to be in line with their sincerely held religious beliefs. Like I said, I'm not a lawyer. I won't claim to be proficient enough in the terminology to claim absolute understanding of this. But...can it be shown that denying polygamy is furthering a compelling government interest and that blocking polygamous marriages is the least restrictive way to further that interest?:

2. "Exercise of religion" means the
PRACTICE OR OBSERVANCE OF
8
RELIGION, INCLUDING THE
ability to act or refusal to act in a manner
9
substantially motivated by a religious belief, whether or not the exercise is
10
compulsory or central to a larger system of religious belief.


__________________
"As I walked out the door toward the gate that would lead to my freedom, I knew if I didn't leave my bitterness and hatred behind I'd still be in prison."


Posts: 27,890
listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 02:22 PM   #202
AustinChief AustinChief is offline
Administrator
 
AustinChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Austin
Casino cash: $1701582
Haven't read the thread so I apologize if this has been covered already... but

Since religion is a "protected class" and sexual orientation isn't (yet).. it would seem that religious freedom should have priority already. Not sure what the purpose of the law is except to emphasize that fact.

That being said, it is beyond stupid for religion to be a protected class. Protected classes should be limited to things you ARE inherently not things you choose to do, be, associate with...

I should be free to discriminate against any person whose beliefs I find reprehensible.. regardless of whether they label it their "religion" or not.
Posts: 14,343
AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 02:24 PM   #203
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $473455
Quote:
Originally Posted by listopencil View Post
I assume that the link I posted leads to the actual bill. It seems to, and the url looks legit. If anyone can find a better link that contradicts the one I posted I sincerely and honestly would ask them to post it. I'd rather discuss this with correct information available to everyone participating in the thread. Going forward I am assuming that the link is to the actual text. With that in mind the language frees up someone not only to refuse to perform an act but to engage in action that they consider to be in line with their sincerely held religious beliefs. Like I said, I'm not a lawyer. I won't claim to be proficient enough in the terminology to claim absolute understanding of this. But...can it be shown that denying polygamy is furthering a compelling government interest and that blocking polygamous marriages is the least restrictive way to further that interest?:

2. "Exercise of religion" means the
PRACTICE OR OBSERVANCE OF
8
RELIGION, INCLUDING THE
ability to act or refusal to act in a manner
9
substantially motivated by a religious belief, whether or not the exercise is
10
compulsory or central to a larger system of religious belief.


A mere law can't force a future legislature to act in the way a Constitutional provision could. Licensing of polygamous marriages is something that requires a legislative act. So this law can't force polygamous marriage on a state.
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 02:31 PM   #204
listopencil listopencil is offline
sic semper tyrannis
 
listopencil's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Partibus Infidelium
Casino cash: $1129820
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
A mere law can't force a future legislature to act in the way a Constitutional provision could. Licensing of polygamous marriages is something that requires a legislative act. So this law can't force polygamous marriage on a state.
Suppose a clergyman performs a group marriage because his religious beliefs dictate that polygamy is fine. The state (little s) doesn't have to recognize it of course. But under this bill I don't see how anyone involved in the ceremony is committing a crime, and that could be a problem.
__________________
"As I walked out the door toward the gate that would lead to my freedom, I knew if I didn't leave my bitterness and hatred behind I'd still be in prison."


Posts: 27,890
listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 02:31 PM   #205
cosmo20002 cosmo20002 is offline
Debunking your bullshit
 
cosmo20002's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: KC area
Casino cash: $122046
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
That being said, it is beyond stupid for religion to be a protected class. Protected classes should be limited to things you ARE inherently not things you choose to do, be, associate with...

I should be free to discriminate against any person whose beliefs I find reprehensible.. regardless of whether they label it their "religion" or not.
Technically, this actually makes sense. But as a practical matter, society could be pretty ****ed up if this was followed given the predominance of one particular faith in the US.
Posts: 17,392
cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.cosmo20002 is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 02:38 PM   #206
AustinChief AustinChief is offline
Administrator
 
AustinChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Austin
Casino cash: $1701582
Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20002 View Post
Technically, this actually makes sense. But as a practical matter, society could be pretty ****ed up if this was followed given the predominance of one particular faith in the US.
Yeah I can see that.. but I absolutely hate the logical inconsistencies of the current law.
Posts: 14,343
AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 02:44 PM   #207
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $108250
Polygamy is an exception to the rule and rare. Thus is not a good basis for this.
( Although I can see how denying it does infringe on religious freedom--if the feds do it.)

What we have today is a corruption of civil rights by demanding equality of results and by compelling others to take your business or be persecuted by the state as a criminal. It falls under Cultural Marxism -- not freedom.

The Christian photographer in the NM case, said she would be happy to supply gays with portrait photography--but not do their weddings. They weren't harmed by her refusal to do that. There's loads of other photographers who would have done it. Talk about being butt hurt.
__________________
“Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” — James Madison
Posts: 56,263
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 02:55 PM   #208
listopencil listopencil is offline
sic semper tyrannis
 
listopencil's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Partibus Infidelium
Casino cash: $1129820
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
Polygamy is an exception to the rule and rare. Thus is not a good basis for this.
( Although I can see how denying it does infringe on religious freedom--if the feds do it.)

What we have today is a corruption of civil rights by demanding equality of results and by compelling others to take your business or be persecuted by the state as a criminal. It falls under Cultural Marxism -- not freedom.

The Christian photographer in the NM case, said she would be happy to supply gays with portrait photography--but not do their weddings. They weren't harmed by her refusal to do that. There's loads of other photographers who would have done it. Talk about being butt hurt.
I picked polygamy because it is rare. The text of the bill said that it will not deal with minor situations. De minimis non curat lex is what I assume the text "de minimis" refers to in this part of the bill:

the term substantially 33
burden is intended solely to ensure that this article is not triggered by
34
trivial, technical or de minimis infractions
__________________
"As I walked out the door toward the gate that would lead to my freedom, I knew if I didn't leave my bitterness and hatred behind I'd still be in prison."


Posts: 27,890
listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 02:56 PM   #209
listopencil listopencil is offline
sic semper tyrannis
 
listopencil's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Partibus Infidelium
Casino cash: $1129820
You'll have to forgive the goofy formatting of my quotes. I am copying and pasting from a pdf of the bill and it's messing me up.
__________________
"As I walked out the door toward the gate that would lead to my freedom, I knew if I didn't leave my bitterness and hatred behind I'd still be in prison."


Posts: 27,890
listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.listopencil is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2014, 03:28 PM   #210
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $473455
Quote:
Originally Posted by listopencil View Post
Suppose a clergyman performs a group marriage because his religious beliefs dictate that polygamy is fine. The state (little s) doesn't have to recognize it of course. But under this bill I don't see how anyone involved in the ceremony is committing a crime, and that could be a problem.
No, I don't think anyone would be committing a crime. Why is that a problem? It could happen today. There's no reason to prevent churches from holding their own ceremonies for polygamous relationships and it would be a violation of our constitution if we tried to.

Churches were holding gay marriage ceremonies before same sex marriage became law.
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
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 On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.