Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hypocrisy of Hating Homosexuality, While Ignoring Cohabitation and Adultery
Christian Newswire ^ | 05/02/07 | Phil Magnan

Posted on 05/02/2007 4:41:20 AM PDT by Phil Magnan

Hypocrisy of Hating Homosexuality, While Ignoring Cohabitation and Adultery

Contact: Phil Magnan, Director, Biblical Family Advocates, 011-36-1-246-2587, phil@bfamilyadvocates.com

BUDAPEST, Hungary May 2/Christian Newswire/ -- Statistics show that 25% of unmarried "born again" Christians are living together. This reveals an apparent hypocrisy in condemning homosexuality, while not condemning heterosexual immorality. Sad to say, co-habitation is on the increase and its participants also include the Catholic and Christian community.

BFA believes there is also a need to condemn not only adultery in its blatant form of cheating on a spouse, but its camouflaged form by easy divorce to pursue second and third marriages. This has been done by those who describe themselves either as Catholic, Evangelical and even more startling the born again Christian.

"There is no doubt that homosexuality is immoral before God, we see that in the scriptures, but the very same scriptures hate the immorality of unbiblical divorces and cohabitations. God does not wink at sin just because it's a heterosexual committing it" says Phil Magnan, Director of Biblical Family Advocates. "Apparently heterosexuals are setting the example for the homosexual community thinking that if you are 'loving and monogamous,' it must be acceptable before God."

"How can we as Christians have any moral credibility before God and man when we are practicing the very thing we condemn in the form of immoral marital practices? Until we show as much hatred for our own sin in our churches and demand repentance we will continue to destroy the sanctity of marriage, even more than same sex marriage proponents. We have not been a very good example of morality or godliness before God and man."

BFA is pleading with the Christian community to begin times of repentance and reflection as we take up the banner of morality and righteousness in Christ's name. If the Christian community cannot show true repentance and transformation in their own churches, how will they be able to offer Biblical and loving help to those who wish to escape their own bondage of sin?


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: adultery; bfa; celebrateperversity; cohabitation; divorce; homosexualagenda; homosexuals; marriage; moralabsolutes; morality; perverts; samesexmarriage; slipperyslope
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-206 next last

1 posted on 05/02/2007 4:41:23 AM PDT by Phil Magnan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan

Heterosexuality doesn’t shave 20 years off your life, last I checked.


2 posted on 05/02/2007 4:42:36 AM PDT by dirtboy (JimRob's 12th Commandment: Thou shall not trash actual pubbies on FR to pimp false pubbies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
Heterosexuality doesn’t shave 20 years off your life, last I checked.

You haven't met my ex-wife. (symbols crash). ;-)

3 posted on 05/02/2007 4:48:44 AM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan
Cohabitation and adultery while immoral, is not an agenda being pushed into public policy for forced acceptance. The squeaky wheel comes to mind.
4 posted on 05/02/2007 4:48:59 AM PDT by WorkerbeeCitizen (Anti Islam and a Global Warming denier - piss on Islam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan
Does God require a judge or preacher to confirm what he has joined together?

Did David commit adultery when he took another mans wife? What about when he took many wives? Which ones did he commit adultery with or against? Did Jacob commit adultery against Leah or Rachel or maybe against both their servant girls. Its so confusing.

5 posted on 05/02/2007 4:52:43 AM PDT by nativist (Weigh into them!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WorkerbeeCitizen

Exactly, the Adultry lobby isnt in the media daily demanding we accept their lifesytle as normal and healthy.


6 posted on 05/02/2007 4:56:11 AM PDT by Bulldawg Fan (Rest of the Story, My bad that this didnt print with the first part.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bulldawg Fan

that’s pretty naive!!


7 posted on 05/02/2007 4:57:21 AM PDT by babble-on
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan
They (the authors) are not wrong it is just as evil to cohabitate or soil the marriage bed as it is to act on homosexual impulses.

**BUT**

I don't See parades and kids books pushing unmarried couples as a good and healthy thing..

8 posted on 05/02/2007 4:58:01 AM PDT by N3WBI3 (Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan

“Biblical Family Advocates” needs to examine the cost of divorce to understand why this is going on. The real sin here is covetousness, one of the “Big Ten” as I recall.


9 posted on 05/02/2007 4:59:07 AM PDT by GadareneDemoniac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan
Not a bad article except for asking “ How can we as Christians have any kind of moral credibility...?” Please, that shows a very poor biblical understanding of our real need of salvation. We are corrupt and sinful whether we condemn cohabitation or not. Who cares what non-Christians think?
10 posted on 05/02/2007 4:59:29 AM PDT by zeller the zealot (Are Republicans the Party of Life, or is that too risky?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan

When was the last “Cohabitation Pride Day”?

When was the last time that public schools taught kids to explore their sexuality to discover if they are “cohabitators”?


11 posted on 05/02/2007 4:59:54 AM PDT by Mr. Brightside (Rudy Giuliani is just another "Empty Dress Republican")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan

That being said, I have gone round and round with posters here like Ol’Sparky who thinks that the Constitution and American history allow for the execution of homosexuals.


12 posted on 05/02/2007 5:01:20 AM PDT by Mr. Brightside (Rudy Giuliani is just another "Empty Dress Republican")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan

repentance means changing your heart ie behavior, so homo’s need to repeat and change their behavior.


13 posted on 05/02/2007 5:05:36 AM PDT by stockpirate (Al Qaeda is in the United States, they are in the House and Senate, Democrats all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan
Does not the Bible say ‘judgment’ will begin at the House of God???? Now if the preacher/priest class keeps finding themselves involved in these sins, they hardly are in the position to teach Biblical instruction.

Did not Christ have something to say about the law of Moses? Matthew 23:2.

I keep getting told that as Christian that I should love the sinner and hate the sin. Hmmmm.... yet at the same time I am told by many that homosexuality is who these people are....

14 posted on 05/02/2007 5:13:32 AM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan
What you have is to many so called preachers and churches promoting a watered down Gospel.

Cohabitation and Adultery will send you soul to hell just a fast as Homosexuality.

years ago that would have been the lesson from every pulpit in the nation. already we can see many false churches accepting the homosexual while still in a homosexual relationship. For many churches God is is just a way to make a dollar.

15 posted on 05/02/2007 5:14:55 AM PDT by bremenboy (Just Because I Am Born Again Doesn't Mean I was Born Again Yesterday)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan
This has long been my argument. It isn't about homosexuality for me -- any sex outside of marriage is a sin and "Christians" who constantly condemn homosexuality while engaging in their own extra-martial practices are hypocrites.
16 posted on 05/02/2007 5:18:16 AM PDT by soccermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

At least the cohabitators and adulterers know where to put a penis.


17 posted on 05/02/2007 5:18:37 AM PDT by true_blue_texican (...against all enemies, foreign and domestic...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WorkerbeeCitizen
Of course it isn't being pushed anymore -- because it is already mainstream. Have you taken a look at welfare policies lately?
18 posted on 05/02/2007 5:19:47 AM PDT by soccermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bulldawg Fan
Exactly, the Adultry lobby isnt in the media daily demanding we accept their lifesytle as normal and healthy.

The reson the adultry lobby isn't in the media daily demanding we accept their lifesytle is that it is allready been accepted.

19 posted on 05/02/2007 5:20:45 AM PDT by bremenboy (Just Because I Am Born Again Doesn't Mean I was Born Again Yesterday)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan
From a "Christian" perspective, the article makes an obvious point. We are all sinners and none of us can live up to the moral standards of God. As Christians we should recognize that the behaviors described in the article are equally sinful.

Society however, for many reasons, may justifiably condom homosexuality as a greater evil than cohabitation.

20 posted on 05/02/2007 5:20:53 AM PDT by outofstyle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: N3WBI3

Did you forget the Murphy Brown debate?


21 posted on 05/02/2007 5:21:07 AM PDT by soccermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan

I seriously question that 25% of unmarried “born again” Christians engaging in fornication on a frequent basis are truly “born again.”


22 posted on 05/02/2007 5:21:12 AM PDT by MBB1984
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
Hypocrisy of Hating Homosexuality, While Ignoring Cohabitation and Adultery

One is not blatantly exposed to "Cohabitation & Adultery" in thousands of public restrooms across the country!

23 posted on 05/02/2007 5:21:36 AM PDT by ExSES (the "bottom-line")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bremenboy

bingo!


24 posted on 05/02/2007 5:21:57 AM PDT by soccermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: nativist
Did David commit adultery when he took another mans wife? What about when he took many wives? Which ones did he commit adultery with or against? Did Jacob commit adultery against Leah or Rachel or maybe against both their servant girls. Its so confusing.

Yes David did commit adultery, and furthermore he in his guilt sent that husband out in front of the battle to erase him. There was a price to be paid for what David did.

What was the law when Jacob had to work 14 years for the woman he loved Rachel? Moses the law giver had not yet been born when Jacob worked for Laban to earn the right to take Rachel as his wife. I think what took place with Jacob and his marriages is self evident as to what to expect if one were to engage in such. However, there is to my knowledge no specific law regarding how many physical wives Jacob could have. Although Christ did speak to that woman who had been married many times regarding who her husband would be after the death of the flesh.

However, we are instructed to obey the 'laws' wherein we live, and in our nation we have laws against more than one wife, no they are not always enforced.

25 posted on 05/02/2007 5:24:59 AM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: soccermom
"Of course it isn't being pushed anymore -- because it is already mainstream."

Of course you are correct however, I don't notice that much in my world - I have no TV and all my friends are married.

My ex-wife committed adultery though.

26 posted on 05/02/2007 5:26:34 AM PDT by WorkerbeeCitizen (Anti Islam and a Global Warming denier - piss on Islam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ExSES
One is not blatantly exposed to "Cohabitation & Adultery" in thousands of public restrooms across the country!

Very true. You make a valid point. However, we are exposed to it everyday in the media. Television sitcoms, novels, magazines etc... are all competing to show how "hip" they are by promoting the idea that sex outside of marriage, "living together", and promiscuity is normal, desirable, doesn't hurt anybody, and everybody that disapproves of it is a hateful, backward bigot.

27 posted on 05/02/2007 5:30:02 AM PDT by Drawsing (The fool shows his annoyance at once. The prudent man overlooks an insult. (Proverbs 12:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: soccermom

Minor compared to the homosexual agenda pushing through the schools..


28 posted on 05/02/2007 5:34:19 AM PDT by N3WBI3 (Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: WorkerbeeCitizen

I think the “agenda” is asking to be treated like a married couple when you are not willing to get married.

I don’t see a big difference between heterosexual or homosexual romantically linked couples living together. They should both raise the same flags on the moral offense meter. For the most part this is a private matter between the couples and their families.

A big difference would be those homosexual couples who would get “married” or a legally recognized equivalent, but can’t. I have no problem with legal protection for homosexual domestic partners for medical, inheritance and financial reasons. They don’t have the option of getting “married” which would automatically protect them.

I’m not sure what “forced acceptance” is. Who you chose to live with, and whether or not it is a sexual relationship is for the most part not my business. This goes for my neighbors, co-workers and even family. If your private affairs affect me, like having to socialize with your husband or wife while knowing your lover from work, then I’m bothered. Otherwise, I’m not “accepting” (or even giving much thought about) your private matters.

And I did live with my husband for about 6 years before we married. Didn’t really give it that much thought, both leases were up, I was 19, in college, and it was convenient and cheaper to maintain one apartment. I probably wouldn’t discourage my kids from doing it either. I think marriage is more special, should be considered carefully, and should be more than just a matter of convenience.


29 posted on 05/02/2007 5:39:22 AM PDT by YankeeGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan

Sin is sin. Whether it is homosexuality, adultery, stealing, cheating on your taxes, abusing your body or even gossiping - it is all sin. Christians need to pull the logs out of their eyes and get back to this. Even if we don’t like it, we are still role models and people are watching our (Christian’s) behaviour to justify their own.

This is what is wrong with churches today - too busy trying to build their membership rolls and rake the money in - don’t want to offend anyone in their congregation with sermons that might hit too close to home.

Of course adultery is as sinful as homosexuality - God will judge us all with the same standards.


30 posted on 05/02/2007 5:41:17 AM PDT by alicewonders (I like Duncan Hunter for President in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan
Hypocrisy of Hating Homosexuality, While Ignoring Cohabitation and Adultery

The author makes a good point, but this is only "hypocrisy" if one hates homosexuality on religious or moral grounds based on a monogamous foundation for marriage. Someone can hate homosexuality for other reasons, too -- namely, the depraved, disordered nature of it.

31 posted on 05/02/2007 5:44:10 AM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan

Actually, most Christians ignore homosexuality and cohabitation. For some reason, adultery seems to still be frowned on, at least a little bit. Maybe people understand the idea of being cheated on.


32 posted on 05/02/2007 5:44:17 AM PDT by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan
How can we as Christians have any moral credibility before God and man when we are practicing the very thing we condemn in the form of immoral marital practices?

Not I.

33 posted on 05/02/2007 5:52:17 AM PDT by Rightwing Conspiratr1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan

Schools are not teaching kids to experiment with cohabitation and adultery.

Companies are not being blackmailed to provide dependent coverage for unmarried heterosexual partners and for adulterous partners.

Churches are not being coerced into celebrating the partnerships of two unmarried heterosexuals living together or those together in adultery.

There is no “Flaunt It” Pride parade for unmarried heterosexual couples nor for adulterers.

We all sin. Some of us don’t champion our sins as a moral choice.


34 posted on 05/02/2007 5:54:41 AM PDT by weegee (Libs want us to learn to live with terrorism, but if a gun is used they want to rewrite the Const.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: soccermom

This is the crux of it, isn’t it? My daughter is a lesbian. It is torture for me as she was raised in church and has a good foundation. I have to remind myself, her and all around us that when my other children have sex outside of marriage that they are committing no less of a sin than she does. The issue is that this is a lifestyle, not a fling and that a marriage for her will never be sanctioned by God. That means that she has to chose to be alone for the rest of her life. She has, several times, tried to have normal relationships but she cant tolerate being touched by a man. It’s really quite tragic.


35 posted on 05/02/2007 5:56:59 AM PDT by mpackard (Proud mama of a Sailor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: alicewonders
Sin is sin. Whether it is homosexuality, adultery, stealing, cheating on your taxes, abusing your body or even gossiping - it is all sin.

And we all know what the wages of sin are...

As we continue to ignore the sins of ourselves and others, the world we live in continues to decay morally. I expect that someday we will learn to live with seeing violent murders happening everyday, not just on TV, but in front of our very eyes. We will learn to accept that those who murder others have a right to do so and that their feelings need to be protected just as much as the feelings of homosexuals.

36 posted on 05/02/2007 5:57:53 AM PDT by Dixie Yooper (Ephesians 6:11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: outofstyle

Sex Positive advocates seek to end all moral judgements over sexual pairings. But that day has not come yet.

For now, it is just the Homosexual Agenda advocates who insist the homosexual acts are not sinful.

It is this denial that what they do is “sin” that separates them from fornicators and adulterers.


37 posted on 05/02/2007 5:58:32 AM PDT by weegee (Libs want us to learn to live with terrorism, but if a gun is used they want to rewrite the Const.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: N3WBI3

I think that’s the point of the article. The adultery and fornication lobby isn’t shoving its agenda down our throats because unfortunately we’ve already swallowed it hook, line and sinker. Just looking at recent times one could go back to the late 19th century free love movements, even women’s suffrage in the 20th century had as a part the idea of love without rules. It does continue to some extent today with the abortion debate, and one only need look at the first writings of the Planned Parenthood bunch to see those beginings.

Medieval people, who in my opinion had a closer understanding as a culture of how to give over their lives to God, would have been very confused by our separation of homosexual acts and adultery and fornication. Any sex act that was purely for pleasure (and therefore not the traditional “missionary position”) was considered wrong.


38 posted on 05/02/2007 6:00:51 AM PDT by Burkean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan

This article is like comparing OIL to WATER. All BS.


39 posted on 05/02/2007 6:02:05 AM PDT by Pit1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan

Sin is sin. There is a double standard in our society.


40 posted on 05/02/2007 6:07:36 AM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weegee
It is this denial that what they do is “sin” that separates them from fornicators and adulterers.

I agree with that statement. I have often wondered why that is the case. It is possible that these are the cases that we observe. Perhaps, those who practice homosexuality, and who do acknowledge its sinfulness, simply remain in the closet.

41 posted on 05/02/2007 6:14:36 AM PDT by outofstyle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: nativist
Did David commit adultery when he took another mans wife? What about when he took many wives? Which ones did he commit adultery with or against? Did Jacob commit adultery against Leah or Rachel or maybe against both their servant girls. Its so confusing.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

42 posted on 05/02/2007 6:17:18 AM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan
The issue with cohabitation is simple: conception happens.

Once conception is discovered, the cohabitors are tempted, maybe more than if they were married, to abort the pregnancy. This leads us to the first clash of personal action with Christian values: the unnecessary destruction of human life.

If the child is “allowed” to be born alive (as opposed to being birthed in pieces during the abortion), a cohabiting couple has a far less stable domestic environment in which to raise the child. It is far easier for cohabiters to dissolve their household and to form another one with a different cohabitor. This family turmoil not only erodes the confidence and stability of young children, it sets the stage for sexual abuse especially of girls by cohabiting adult males.

Christians who cohabit are just as disqualified from entering into salvation as are those who practice homosexuality. That is the clear language of Rev. 22:15 as dictated by the Alpha and Omega to John.

If you are acting like you are married and living like you are married, and conceiving children like you are married, why not just get married?

43 posted on 05/02/2007 6:19:23 AM PDT by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theBuckwheat

“If you are acting like you are married and living like you are married, and conceiving children like you are married, why not just get married?”

Because, even after all that, some people have a deep-seated fear of making a commitment. (Although, in our litigious society, they may have a point, legally.)


44 posted on 05/02/2007 6:24:34 AM PDT by BikerJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Phil Magnan

Last I checked the real meaning of the commandment against adultery is to be happy with what you have.


45 posted on 05/02/2007 6:27:11 AM PDT by yldstrk (My heros have always been cowboys--Reagan and Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bulldawg Fan
Exactly, the Adultry lobby isnt in the media daily demanding we accept their lifesytle as normal and healthy.

ditto

46 posted on 05/02/2007 6:27:53 AM PDT by latina4dubya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777
Sin is sin. There is a double standard in our society.

I'm a bit hazy on why it's ok to eat shellfish now - where in the New Testament is the selective repealing of assorted rules in the Old Testament?

47 posted on 05/02/2007 6:37:37 AM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: BikerJoe
>>
Because, even after all that, some people have a deep-seated fear of making a commitment. (Although, in our litigious society, they may have a point, legally.)
<<

I certainly understand, but the issue of “commitment” was sealed the moment a new human life was conceived. Any loving and responsible person must understand their commitment to help this new life grow to be a responsible and morally capable adult (at least as responsible and morally capable as they are).

Part of that commitment must be a stable home. And that is the exact reason that God designed marriage and defined it as the environment in which sexual relationships take place. He further protected marriage in two of the Ten Commandments. Anyone who has read even part of the Bible cannot be ignorant of these truths, no matter how the modern legal system either helps or hinders how people harmonize their actions with them.

48 posted on 05/02/2007 6:46:22 AM PDT by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

>>
I’m a bit hazy on why it’s ok to eat shellfish now - where in the New Testament is the selective repealing of assorted rules in the Old Testament?
<<

It didn’t.


49 posted on 05/02/2007 6:47:36 AM PDT by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist
The confusion you have is because the bible discusses three separate body of laws:

1. Laws before Moses and applicable to all nations. (sometimes called Noahide)

2. Laws only for God's chosen which were a gift not given to any other nation.

3. Christian's which are free from the law of moses, yet subject to the law's written in our hearts and to the minimum requirement specified in Acts 15 (which includes immorality).

Acts 15:28

8 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.[g] If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well.

So, the honor of having a law to refrain from shellfish is only given to those Hebrews who accepted the Law of Moses.

50 posted on 05/02/2007 6:49:08 AM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-206 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson