Welcome Guest ( Log In · Register · Change Skins )
Global PokedeX Plus
Lab · Shelter · Main · Dex · PC · Shop · Stats · Help · Rules · Users Online · IRC Chat
GPX+ GPXPlus Forums Member Options
X   Site Message
(Message will auto close in 2 seconds)
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
"Under God" in the Pledge
Larzsi
post Sep 24 2011, 05:21 PM
Post #21


zzz
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 158
Joined: 21-June 11
From: USA
Member No.: 143 835

Friends



QUOTE(Rainbow Kang @ Sep 17 2011, 05:19 AM) *
In My Perspective.

People from other countries and have different religion don't want to say it. That's fine by me.

But straight up Americans? No. Just No.

You say that like only people from other countries aren't christians e3e


--------------------

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

shou75
post Sep 25 2011, 01:08 PM
Post #22


Chillin Like a Villain
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 5-September 09
From: A magical land of none of your business
Member No.: 61 630

Burning clouds



it technically should stay because the country main religion is christian so thats why we say "under God" in the pledge.



--------------------

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

TwilitProphet
post Sep 26 2011, 08:05 PM
Post #23


Pokémon Trainer
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 14
Joined: 13-September 11
From: Indiana
Member No.: 150 417

Active Squad



Being the 'main' religion does not make it the one and only religion. It was only put in there to help prove how different we were than the godless communists, as my grandfather puts it.

I always hated saying the pledge as a child, mainly because I didn't really see a reason why I had to stand up, put my hand over my heart, and drone out the same paragraph every day for 13 years. In my last two years of high school I decided to become Wiccan, so I would either just stand with the rest of the class and not say the pledge at all, I would change it to 'under the Goddess', or I would say the pledge and just close my mouth when 'under god' came about.

I wasn't raised towards any religion growing up. Mom told me 'There's a god', and that's it. I was actually quite terrified whenever religion was mentioned because all I ever heard was "You're going to hell if you weren't baptized", "You're going to hell if you don't believe what I do", or "You're going to hell because god just doesn't like you!".

I honestly don't understand why we need to mention him in everything we do. We have to swear under god in courts (this is a big 'why?' to me because what are we supposed to do if the person swearing to tell the truth does not believe in god?), we have him in our pledge to a sheet of fabric, and we have him on our money. Why do we have him on our money? Why would god care about what we have stamped on a coin that he has no use for?

Why would it be a problem if we removed 'god' from all these things? I really don't understand why it's such a big deal to have 'god' in there, or to remove it. I understand the whole 'phasing out the old when there are people who are used to it' but didn't we still remove Pluto from the list of planets? It's basically the same kind of thing to me.


--------------------

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Larzsi
post Sep 26 2011, 08:14 PM
Post #24


zzz
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 158
Joined: 21-June 11
From: USA
Member No.: 143 835

Friends



QUOTE(shou75 @ Sep 25 2011, 02:08 PM) *
it technically should stay because the country main religion is christian so thats why we say "under God" in the pledge.

facepalm.gif So I guess we'll just forget about those religions who aren't the 'main religion'. Religion and government should stay separate anyways, so it doesn't really mean anything if more people are christian/believe in God.

Like the person above me said(who I also fully agree with), we don't need it. So technically, it doesn't have to stay.


--------------------

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

BarkingChaos
post Sep 27 2011, 09:50 AM
Post #25


Gym Leader
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 662
Joined: 30-August 10
Member No.: 112 100

Sandshrew Army



Are people forgetting that "In God We Trust" is written on money? If we remove God from the pledge then the next step would be removing it from all money, which simply would not be possible. You can't print batches of new money without recalling and destroying all old money. it would be impossible to get everyone to turn in all their money for new money. Its just really implausible.

No, keep God in the pledge. It would start a horrible chain reaction. But at the same time, you should NOT be forced to say the pledge or "under God" if you do not want to. I think its rediculous that schools force the pledge on people. I know in my high school, it wasn't mandatory (but it varied by teacher. Most didn't care as long as you stood up), but I remember that students would get detention in elementary school if they didn't say it.

This post has been edited by BarkAtTheMoon: Sep 27 2011, 09:53 AM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Skins T
post Sep 28 2011, 01:35 AM
Post #26


Feel the Fire, Break your Vision
Group Icon

Group: +Donors
Posts: 61
Joined: 12-October 09
From: Australia
Member No.: 68 079

Favourite Pokemon



What's wrong with having money reprinted? There's no reason why the old stuff should be destroyed. It could simply be phased out.

I see no harm in doing that whatsoever.


--------------------


Click above for party~
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reyo
post Sep 28 2011, 03:15 AM
Post #27


I'm in space...space...spacespace
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1 327
Joined: 4-June 09
From: space
Member No.: 30 281

space team



QUOTE(Skins T @ Sep 28 2011, 01:35 AM) *
What's wrong with having money reprinted? There's no reason why the old stuff should be destroyed. It could simply be phased out.

I see no harm in doing that whatsoever.


I guarantee that those people who disagree with you, or just plain don't care would be inconvenienced. Sure, we'll just get the mints to start printing a new form of currency (which it would be) and then tell the banks to start giving THAT out instead of the old paper money. Then someone will have to go out and change all of the money that's already in every ATM around the country. And what about the "In God We Trust" that's on every coin? Go ahead, convince the government to use even more of the metals we do have just to start minting coins despite the only difference being half a sentence. Well just melt the old ones into raw materials? How would THAT trade off happen? A trip to the bank I'd rather not make because of a silly sentence fragment offending someone's lack of belief? The same thing can be said about bills, except we don't "melt" the bills down into raw bill printing material. they become "souvenirs" for people touring the mint, only who in their right mind would want remnants of a money tainted with "religion"? headache.gif

You'll have to convince the government to start wasting time and energy into a project to change half a sentence that barely anyone takes notice of until someone decides they want "under God" taken out of the pledge. Then again, they'll be too busy dealing with the religious uprising that was created from the fact that the mere notion that religion can yield currency as "unusable" sparking questions such as "What makes YOUR belief better than mine?" or "Why is the government wasting time on such an offensive project while education suffers?" Pretty soon businesses are refusing to take the new currency because it suggests that religion was somehow making it "inferior". So no, it's not "that bad", but given the choice of inaction with 0% chance of complication, or action with 100% chance of complication, what do YOU think the government would do?

Personally, I'd be inconvenienced by the gas money I'd be wasting just to get to the bank to trade in my cash and coins, all become some kid doesn't want to say 2 freaken words during a pledge I know he's not paying attention to anyway.

EDIT: SPACE!

This post has been edited by Reyo: Sep 28 2011, 03:18 AM


--------------------
space...spacespace...wanna go to space...I'm in space...are we in space...I wanna into space, are you space? Uh oh, space police, stay cool. Space..space..space space..ba ba, ba, ba, bababa, ba, ba space. Dad, are you space? Yes, now we can be a family again. Space space...need...space...need a rocket...wanna buy a rocket? It's for space...need one...buy one from space store...space store...space...space...space supplies...space ship...space rocket...rocket..space...soup...space soup...from space cafe...space waiter there's a space fly in my space soup...spacespace....must...


SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Lord Raven
post Sep 28 2011, 05:40 PM
Post #28


i need something to put here
Group Icon

Group: Global Moderators
Posts: 3 900
Joined: 2-July 07
From: Ellicott City, Maryland
Member No.: 34

Active Squad



QUOTE(BarkAtTheMoon @ Sep 27 2011, 10:50 AM) *
Are people forgetting that "In God We Trust" is written on money? If we remove God from the pledge then the next step would be removing it from all money, which simply would not be possible. You can't print batches of new money without recalling and destroying all old money. it would be impossible to get everyone to turn in all their money for new money. Its just really implausible.

No, keep God in the pledge. It would start a horrible chain reaction. But at the same time, you should NOT be forced to say the pledge or "under God" if you do not want to. I think its rediculous that schools force the pledge on people. I know in my high school, it wasn't mandatory (but it varied by teacher. Most didn't care as long as you stood up), but I remember that students would get detention in elementary school if they didn't say it.
This is not about money; this is about the pledge of allegiance. Removing "Under God" from our pledge will under no circumstance devalue our currency.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

BarkingChaos
post Sep 29 2011, 09:54 AM
Post #29


Gym Leader
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 662
Joined: 30-August 10
Member No.: 112 100

Sandshrew Army



No, you missed by point completely. If you remove Under God from the pledge, there is a good chance that it will start a chain reaction of people wanting God removed from everything. If "under God" is successful removed, then whats stopping people from taking it a step further? They dont want to say God, so why should they be forced to use money that says "In God We trust?"

Really, you dont see the chain forming? Someone gets cocky that the pledge was successfully altered, then tries to get money changed.

I'm not saying that removing God from the pledge will directly affect money, I'm saying that if they successfully won that, they are going to think they can remove God from everything that is government related.
I mentioned money because it was the most obvious example.

This post has been edited by BarkAtTheMoon: Sep 29 2011, 09:55 AM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Skins T
post Sep 30 2011, 02:27 AM
Post #30


Feel the Fire, Break your Vision
Group Icon

Group: +Donors
Posts: 61
Joined: 12-October 09
From: Australia
Member No.: 68 079

Favourite Pokemon



QUOTE(Reyo @ Sep 28 2011, 06:15 PM) *
-snip-


I think you missed the part about 'phasing out'.

New currency is released every so often. New prints, new colours, you name it, in every country in the world. The old style currency is not reduced in value, it is simply not circulated anymore and in time, eventually is destroyed. That is how new currency is introduced.

I would know, as I lived through a transition of new currency here in Australia. Every now and then, I still get old bank notes at work and whatnot and it's never a problem.

So I fail to see what would be such a big deal about phasing out currency.


--------------------


Click above for party~
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reyo
post Sep 30 2011, 02:50 AM
Post #31


I'm in space...space...spacespace
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1 327
Joined: 4-June 09
From: space
Member No.: 30 281

space team



QUOTE(Skins T @ Sep 30 2011, 02:27 AM) *
QUOTE(Reyo @ Sep 28 2011, 06:15 PM) *
-snip-


I think you missed the part about 'phasing out'.

New currency is released every so often. New prints, new colours, you name it, in every country in the world. The old style currency is not reduced in value, it is simply not circulated anymore and in time, eventually is destroyed. That is how new currency is introduced.

I would know, as I lived through a transition of new currency here in Australia. Every now and then, I still get old bank notes at work and whatnot and it's never a problem.

So I fail to see what would be such a big deal about phasing out currency.


1. Because they've already had a phase in currency here in America.
2. It's a bit more of a change than "OOH, the number 20 is flashy!"
3. You're asking they phase out EVERY bit of the currency. In the last one, they only phased the major bills.
4. Changing "In God We Trust" is a LOT more controversial than "It isn't just plain green anymore..."


--------------------
space...spacespace...wanna go to space...I'm in space...are we in space...I wanna into space, are you space? Uh oh, space police, stay cool. Space..space..space space..ba ba, ba, ba, bababa, ba, ba space. Dad, are you space? Yes, now we can be a family again. Space space...need...space...need a rocket...wanna buy a rocket? It's for space...need one...buy one from space store...space store...space...space...space supplies...space ship...space rocket...rocket..space...soup...space soup...from space cafe...space waiter there's a space fly in my space soup...spacespace....must...


SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Skins T
post Sep 30 2011, 04:22 AM
Post #32


Feel the Fire, Break your Vision
Group Icon

Group: +Donors
Posts: 61
Joined: 12-October 09
From: Australia
Member No.: 68 079

Favourite Pokemon



The currency here (as an example) had a fair bit of change done to it when the last one happened.

Yes, its indeed controversial, but not impossible, that's all I mean. ^^;


--------------------


Click above for party~
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

BarkingChaos
post Sep 30 2011, 08:14 AM
Post #33


Gym Leader
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 662
Joined: 30-August 10
Member No.: 112 100

Sandshrew Army



I realize my first post may not have been that clear in hindsight, but phasing money out is not my point. People want instant gratification. Older currency is still allowed to be used, and its been a while since we released the updated version. There is just too much currency to reprint and remint everything. Even just phasing it out, it will take decades. And you can't expect people to go to the bank and turn all their money in.

Its more about cocky "I dont believe in god so why should I be exposed to it" people who want god instantly removed from everything that are going to take the removal of god from the pledge and attempt to remove god from money. And they will probably not be satisfied with phasing out and want it done instantly, which is not possible.


I'm sorry I even brought it up -_-2.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reyo
post Sep 30 2011, 02:24 PM
Post #34


I'm in space...space...spacespace
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1 327
Joined: 4-June 09
From: space
Member No.: 30 281

space team



QUOTE(Skins T @ Sep 30 2011, 04:22 AM) *
The currency here (as an example) had a fair bit of change done to it when the last one happened.

Yes, its indeed controversial, but not impossible, that's all I mean. ^^;


What caught my attention was "I see no harm in doing that whatsoever."

Yes, there is very much harm that can come from doing it. Very much many harm. That's what I was pointing out.


--------------------
space...spacespace...wanna go to space...I'm in space...are we in space...I wanna into space, are you space? Uh oh, space police, stay cool. Space..space..space space..ba ba, ba, ba, bababa, ba, ba space. Dad, are you space? Yes, now we can be a family again. Space space...need...space...need a rocket...wanna buy a rocket? It's for space...need one...buy one from space store...space store...space...space...space supplies...space ship...space rocket...rocket..space...soup...space soup...from space cafe...space waiter there's a space fly in my space soup...spacespace....must...


SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

shou75
post Oct 1 2011, 12:19 PM
Post #35


Chillin Like a Villain
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 52
Joined: 5-September 09
From: A magical land of none of your business
Member No.: 61 630

Burning clouds



well for the most part , once you get into highschool most people just stand up they dont actually say the pledge.

The teachers dont make you say it either.


--------------------

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Horse Divorce
post Oct 2 2011, 06:59 PM
Post #36


Pokémon Trainer
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 5-September 09
From: Wisconsin
Member No.: 61 684

HURF DURF



I find the overall concept of the pledge overall pretty creepy. My main issue with it isn't "under God" or anything else, it's the age at which children are taught to recite it. Indoctrination starts at an early age. I certainly wasn't taught what it meant or what I was saying when it was drilled into my brain at the tender age of six. Children that young can't comprehend what pledging allegiance is, they barely have any concept of what nations are.


--------------------

This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with an Exploud but a Whismur.


Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

hashtag anthems
post Jan 18 2012, 04:57 PM
Post #37


Let the melody save me, Astoria.
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 16
Joined: 8-March 11
From: The United States of America
Member No.: 134 285

My Favorites



I, as a Christian, believe that it should stay in the Pledge of Allegiance. But as not everyone believes in the same things I do, I think people should not be required to say it. As part of our First Amendment rights, people should be allowed to say what they want, but don't officially remove it. Even if they did, I would say it anyway.


--------------------

Come face the music, Astoria.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

The Unholy Diver
post May 23 2012, 06:35 PM
Post #38


The asteriotypical one
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 103
Joined: 4-April 12
From: The wrong side of heaven and the righteous side of hell
Member No.: 161 989

Z's Team (so far)



Technichaly, most people believe in the same god, but worship different ways. the only religions that believe in a different god are polytheistic(many-gods) religions. I think it should stay because it is not so specific, so it can encompass all monotheistic(one-god) religions. Any polytheistic religion would believe we are under at least one god, and athiests can ignore it if they want. I really don't see anything wrong with it. The only religion it defys is atheism, but athiests should be used to putting up with religious people or at least be respectful.


--------------------
Thanks to the mobile site, I'm back on gpx!




I CAN CLICK BACK NOW


credit (click to show)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

NeonEspeon
post May 23 2012, 08:15 PM
Post #39


:D
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 286
Joined: 18-October 10
From: Flo-Rida
Member No.: 117 681

Beautiful Pokemon



Even though I'm Catholic, I think it should be removed. Not everyone believes in God. It should be "under the statue of Liberty" or something...(although not as smooth as saying under god XD ..)


--------------------
Ribbons (click to show)



Credit to Quiver Dance/Samoo


Groups (click to show)


Shiny(s)/Click Meh Partey (click to show)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

ImperialWhiteKni...
post May 24 2012, 01:56 AM
Post #40


Pokémon Trainer
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: 9-April 12
From: The United States
Member No.: 162 336

The Knights Party



QUOTE(Not A Moron @ Jul 12 2011, 10:45 PM) *
So, for awhile now I've been hearing that "Under God" has always been in the pledge of allegiance, or that it hasn't but should stay, or that it has and shouldn't stay, etc. What are your beliefs on it? Should it stay? Should it go? Does it or does it not violate the First Amendment?

By the way, for those of you who think it's always been there, it hasn't. It was added in the '50s during a communist scare, I'm pretty sure because one of the leaders was atheist. Not quite sure if it was cause of the leader, but it was added in the 50s.


--------------------------

Personally, I feel it should go. Not just because I'm atheist, but not EVERY religion calls their god, well, God.
I also believe that if it stays, it shouldn't be mandatory to say, as I have gotten in some minor trouble for simply staying quiet during the "Under God" part.


Q. If the First Amendment states there is to be a separation of church and state...

A. We suggest you read the article Separation of Church and State: A Diabolical Lie. Not just The Knights, but many historians and well known religious leaders and constitutional attorneys all agree that the United States was founded as a Christian nation. The Supreme Court has even ruled that indeed America was founded as a Christian nation. We are not trying to change America, but rather return it to it’s original form.

Also, while we are bringing up this subject we must discuss the Treaty of Tripoli. This is what naysayers like to point to when we say that the United States was founded as a Christian nation. It is the only thing they can point to, but as you will see, they have nothing to base their opinion on.

The 1797 treaty was one of several that America negotiated with Muslim nations in which five Muslim countries were using pirates to attack the property and interests of what they called the “Christian” nations, including America. Not only were their cargoes easy prey but the Barbary Powers were also capturing and enslaving “Christian” seamen.

The anti-American actions began under Washington and several times the U.S. had tried to reach settlements by paying the Muslims huge sums of money. But the Treaty of Tripoli was signed under the presidency of Adams. And both Jefferson and Adams were upset that U.S. merchant sailors were being viewed as wimps by the Muslims. While discussing the Barbary conflict with Jefferson, Adams declared:
The policy of Christendom has made cowards of all their sailors before the standard of Mahomet. It would be heroical and glorious in us to restore courage to ours.

If the treaty was signed by Adams, does this mean that Adams agreed that the United States was not a Christian nation? No. it was Adams who declared:
The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity. . . . I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature.

So then why would he sign a treaty that said differently?
Here is the part of the treaty that atheists refer to.
As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion as it has in itself no character of enmity [hatred] against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims] and as the said States [America] have never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

However, I do want to point out that in 1805 under Jefferson, that the treaty was renegotiated and the clause stating that “. . . the United States is in no sense founded on the Christian religion . . .” was deleted.

But back to the signing of the treaty and why would a devout Christian such as Adams who had said that the United States was founded on Christianity state otherwise?
The United States was not involved in a Holy War. The founding fathers believed in no entangling alliances with other nations. They looked for an expedite way to handle problems. The Muslim nations felt that my attacking the hated Christians, they would receive special favor from Allah.

To some it would seem that the authors of the treaty were being dishonest. After all, the state constitutions, laws, and writings of the founders clearly prove that Christianity was the prevailing faith of the land and that the common law upon which the laws of the states were founded were based upon Holy Scripture.

However, in dealing with these murderous Muslim nations, the treaty authors were quite clever. The Muslim nations, not understanding that the federal government did not constitute the government in its entirety were led to believe that they would receive no divine reward by plundering U.S. ships and murdering U.S. sailors.
The United States Constitution did not establish a religion. Why? Because the federal government was not intended to be the government. It merely represented the rights of the state governments. That is what “United States” in United States of America means. State governments came together and in essence pooled their resources and hired a security guard to protect their combined interests. That is the scope of the federal government – to provide for the safety of the state governments. The Bill of Rights DOES NOT say what the states can do. It says what the federal government CAN NOT do! They can’t establish a religion. Why? It is because the states had already established their religion; the Christian religion. No public office holder could be given a religious test – that is be tested according to denominational tenants. And not to interject something else into this discussion, but this is why states can not use state’s rights as an excuse for restricting gun ownership. The Bill of Rights speaks of unalienable rights. If the federal government can’t restrict gun ownership because it is a God given right, than obviously the states can’t restrict it either. There are some rights that are God given and no government whether state or federal can take it away.

The states which formed the United States understood the chaos that came out of Europe’s mandated denominational system. As Noah Webster explained:
The ecclesiastical establishments of Europe which serve to support tyrannical governments are not the Christian religion but abuses and corruptions of it.
Daniel Webster similarly explained that American Christianity was:
Christianity to which the sword and the fagot [burning stake or hot branding iron] are unknown – general tolerant Christianity is the law of the land!
The states would be Christian, but would allow each person to decide for themselves what particular sect they would belong to. And they acknowledged that no one would be forced to be a Christian. This was the idea of the liberty of conscience. This did not, however, mean that the laws would not be based upon Christian principles. What an individual may or may not believe does not interfere with the foundation of a governing body should that body be based upon certain guidelines

In fact, the Northwest Ordinance, signed by Washington as the first major federal bill was drafted at the same time as the First Amendment. The act stipulated that for a territory to become a State, the “schools and the means of education” in that territory must encourage the “religion, morality, and knowledge” that was “necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind.” Conforming to this requirement, numerous subsequent State constitutions included that clause, and it still appears in State constitutions today. Furthermore, that law is listed in the current federal code, along with the Constitution, the Declaration, and the Articles of Confederation, as one of America’s four “organic” or foundational laws.

General Eaton was the man who was finally given the duty by President Jefferson to end the attacks upon Christian sailors by the use of military means. Although the Treaty of Tripoli had used some fancy footwork by saying the United States government – as in the federal government – was not based upon Christianity, it did not work. The Muslim nations knew that the United States of America was a Christian nation, no matter what any treaty might say. It was all just semantics and they weren’t buying into it. The Muslims would continue to attack the Christian nation and the U.S. would not take decisive military action.

When General Eaton finally started his military action against Tripoli, his personal journal noted:
April 8th. We find it almost impossible to inspire these wild bigots with confidence in us or to persuade them that, being Christians, we can be otherwise than enemies to Musselmen. We have a difficult undertaking!

May 23rd. Hassien Bey, the commander in chief of the enemy’s forces, has offered by private insinuation for my head six thousand dollars and double the sum for me a prisoner; and $30 per head for Christians. Why don’t he come and take it?

All of the documentation surrounding the Treaty of Tripoli prove rather than disprove that the United States was a Christian nation and the war was between a Christian nation and Muslim nations.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post


3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th September 2019 - 11:26 PM
All content and images ©2007-2015 GPX.Plus and Shiny New Software, LLC. Powered By IPB 2.3.1 © 2019 IPS, Inc.
Optimal viewing in the latest version of Safari, Chrome, or Firefox, 1024x768+.