Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The "Harry Potter" Debate: The Witch-Hunt Continues
Fr. Pierre Ingram's homepage ^ | Fr. G. Pierre Ingram

Posted on 11/27/2001 8:41:52 PM PST by jrherreid

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last
Let the fireworks begin...
1 posted on 11/27/2001 8:41:52 PM PST by jrherreid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Aquinasfan; MadIvan; RnMomof7; JenB
Zap!
2 posted on 11/27/2001 8:43:21 PM PST by jrherreid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jrherreid
90% of posts on Harry Potter are posted by people trying to provoke others. I thought we were supposed to grow out of that by age 12.
3 posted on 11/27/2001 8:47:00 PM PST by Dat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jrherreid
Chistian fundamentalism? I can see both sides of this arguement, but find it as interesting to see people refer to Christians using the fundamentalism descriptor as other see it interesting to see the Potter fans refered to as the devil's disciples. If this debate can't be kept on the merits it isn't going to do either side any good.
4 posted on 11/27/2001 8:47:13 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dat
90% of posts on Harry Potter are posted by people trying to provoke others. I thought we were supposed to grow out of that by age 12.

Provocative statement, that.

5 posted on 11/27/2001 8:59:25 PM PST by jrherreid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jrherreid
No fireworks ... I think its actually more benign.

They're trying to send a message about the general scarcity of values in the modern mass media.
It's not so much anti-"Harry Potter" per se as it is just using the hype surrounding Harry Potter to get out their message ... good marketing, it gets people to actually read their opinions.

When the excitement surrounding HP dies down, you'll see the same opinions attached to anti-"Lord of the Rings" messages or whatever the next new "hot" movie or book is.

6 posted on 11/27/2001 9:01:10 PM PST by JPR_Boise_ID
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
From the article:
The "Harry Potter" debate is only one form of the ongoing conflict between Christian fundamentalism and secular Western culture.

As an assenting Roman Catholic, I would like to apologize for this poor-excuse-of-a-priest's bigoted religious slur against other well meaning Christians. Every apple basket seems to contain a few rotten ones. This one is just dressed in black.

7 posted on 11/27/2001 9:04:54 PM PST by Ronaldus Magnus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #8 Removed by Moderator

To: Ronaldus Magnus
I would like to apologize for this poor-excuse-of-a-priest's bigoted religious slur against other well meaning Christians.

Okay, okay, help me out. How did this priest slur us "well meaning Christians"?

9 posted on 11/27/2001 9:10:36 PM PST by Exigence
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
"Chistian fundamentalism? "

Yes exactly!!! As someone said not long ago it was Jack Chick who got the anti-Halloween bandwagon rolling. (Mainly to bash the Catholic Church's celebrating All Souls Day and All Saints Day.) And his outfit is typically fundamentalist. So much so that all of his screeds should be published in a book called, "Christianity for Dummies."

But fundamentalism is not just a Protestant phenomenon. There are Catholic Christian fundamentalists too. (Many Catholics get this way because they are trying to appease their Protestant friends. To which I say BAH!!! Don't apologise for ANYTHING!! ) And I think a common denominator among them is a morbid interest in the occult and the devil. Yes I said interest. Because they ARE interested in it although that interest is anti-occult. They are almost as superstitious as the people who are really into the occult.

I knew some fundamentalists who actually burned a little wooden statue of Buddah because they claimed it had demons hanging around it. Stuff like that does not even enter my mind. I got have better things to think about than demons!!! It's a wood carving in the same way that Harry Potter is a fairy tale.

10 posted on 11/27/2001 9:26:35 PM PST by Theresa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ronaldus Magnus
"I would like to apologize for this poor-excuse-of-a-priest's bigoted religious slur against other well meaning Christians"

Not me. I think he's right on the money.

11 posted on 11/27/2001 9:33:24 PM PST by Theresa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jrherreid
My problem with "Harry Potter" is that, even though it so blatantly rips-off "Star Wars", somehow the rip-off is such a stinker of a movie. It's almost as if they were so guilt ridden they were compelled to make another "Water World".

I guess it's not as easy as remove "Darth Vader", "Obi Wan Kenobi", "Luke Skywalker" and "Princess Lea", etc. and insert "Lord Voldemort", Headmaster Dumbledore", "Harry Potter" and "Hermione Grainger". "Jedi" out, "Wizards" in.

The lack of character development in this 2 1/2 hour debacle of a movie was ghastly.

Harry Potter critics have no fear. No magic here, at all. No talent either.

12 posted on 11/27/2001 9:37:40 PM PST by 4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ronaldus Magnus
Thanks for your comments. The Friar may actually have made some descent points, I just don't want to spend the time to argue this topic again tonight.

Folks, words like fundamentalist, zealots et al are used the same way liberals use the word conservative to tag Republicans at every opportunity.

For instance, a Republican on television will be introduced as a "Conservative" Republican when Democrat will NEVER be introduce as a "Liberal." These guys are simply playing the mind games of the socialist left. Mention the term conservative over and over in this manner and it becomes negative. This Friar may not even realize what he's doing, although I suspect he does. But make no mistake about it, there is a movement in this nation, and outside this nation, to lump all religions into one radical group.

Take special care to note how our religions are being besmirched by using some of the same tags as are being attached to the Taliban and Al Qaida. Note the term fundamentalist Muslem for instance. The word fundamentalist is being given a very bad conotation right now. And you can be certain that it will nearly always be applied to any religious person or group that supports what most of us would consider descent ideals.

Individuals and churches that view homosexuality and abortion in unfavorable light, will always be set up by the use of the word fundamentalist in their introduction or description of who and what they are.

The UN is rabidly anti-religion. We are buying into the globalist UN mentality. That's why religion is in for a tough time. I'd advise everyone to keep their eyes open.

This Friar's use of the word fundamentalist was a good example of what to watch for.

13 posted on 11/27/2001 9:52:22 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Theresa
If the term fundamentalist were to be used sparingly, I wouldn't have a problem with it. But it is beginning to be used to describe any and all religions that have stuck to the old values system. Good heavens, if Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson make some hair brained commment, they're roasted for months over it. However, that idiot Congressman Drynan was forgiven for decades worth of tripe uttered from a leftist socialist's point of view. And much of it made Falwell and Robertson look like choir boys.
14 posted on 11/27/2001 9:57:54 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Central Scrutiniser; Exigence; Theresa
If this fruit cake with a clerical collar wants to make unfounded assertions about conservative Catholics, it's an internal matter. However, when this representative of my faith starts making negative over generalizations about a class of other denominations, he is picking a fight he doesn't have the authority to start. Whether you agree with his viewpoint or not, it is irrelevant to my statement. He is being anti-ecumenical while speaking under the auspices of his official capacity. I am making it clear to the non-Catholics reading this that he is unauthorized to do so. Christian fundamentalists have done much to develop western culture during the last several hundred years, particularly in their role in the development of this country (perhaps even more than the members of my own faith).
15 posted on 11/27/2001 10:06:10 PM PST by Ronaldus Magnus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Good explanation of the new "f" word.
16 posted on 11/27/2001 10:20:29 PM PST by Ronaldus Magnus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Ronaldus Magnus
Thanks. And yes, I guess it is being turned into a new "f" word. That's too bad.
17 posted on 11/27/2001 10:25:52 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ronaldus Magnus
"However, when this representative of my faith starts making negative over generalizations about a class of other denominations,"

This from the Zogby site: American Catholics look more favorably on Muslims and Mormons than they do on fundamentalist Christians, according to a new poll on political, cultural and moral trends in Catholic life.

A nationwide phone survey of 1,508 Roman Catholics found 56% had a favorable impression of Islam. Similar majorities had a favorable view of Mormons (54%), Buddhists (57%) and Hindus (54%), but only 46% of Catholics had a favorable view of fundamentalist Christians.

18 posted on 11/28/2001 12:18:20 AM PST by Theresa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Theresa
harry potter is the devil...harry potter is bad harry potter is teaching kids magic

why dont they just leave it alone..my sister loves that movie and i dont see her practicing magic or trying to.

is there no end to the madness?

19 posted on 11/28/2001 12:24:18 AM PST by MetalHeadConservative35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jrherreid
Sounds like HLI gets it right as usual. I'll have to check out the review.
20 posted on 11/28/2001 3:39:30 AM PST by Aquinasfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ronaldus Magnus
Christian fundamentalists have done much to develop western culture during the last several hundred years, particularly in their role in the development of this country (perhaps even more than the members of my own faith).

Thanks for the kind words. I guess my point was that, as a fundamentalist, I didn't feel that the good father was knocking fundamentalists. In fact, I agreed with most of what he said.

21 posted on 11/28/2001 6:59:46 AM PST by Exigence
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
If the term fundamentalist were to be used sparingly, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Now here's a good point. This word is becoming as overused as "right," as in, "I have a right to..."

Plus, many fundamentalists are unsure about what it really means, so I'm darn sure the liberal press has no concept about it. Part of the press's concept seems to be that fundamentalists avoid all pop culture, including television and movies and popular fiction. Not true, not true.

22 posted on 11/28/2001 7:05:14 AM PST by Exigence
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: jrherreid
It appears that they would have us keep our children in a tightly controlled religious ghetto, reading only works by supposedly "safe," Christian authors, and presumably watching as little television as possible.

Interesting comment. And I certainly agree with "as little television as possible" for anyone.

While waiting on the next Harry Potter book, I've been reading the Left Behind series. While I do find the story line and interpretation interesting, the writing is pretty cheesy. Ironically the main "Christian" characters in the books survive (at least for now) because they are highly intelligent.

I'll be they read a lot and that they weren't limited to "Christian" books. The sad truth is that much of the Christian writing out there is considered wonderful because its "for the Lord" when a lot of it is drivel.

Limiting your reading to just those works is in fact limiting your mind. And it plays into the "world's" conception of Christians as being less intelligent. That's not to say that there aren't volumes of highly intelligent, thought provoking Christian works out there. They're just not the ones flying off the shelves.

23 posted on 11/28/2001 7:26:31 AM PST by Ward Smythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Freedom
My problem with "Harry Potter" is that, even though it so blatantly rips-off "Star Wars", somehow the rip-off is such a stinker of a movie.

Beyond the fact that Harry lives with an aunt and uncle who didn't think a lot of Harry's parents (Uncle Owen wasn't too fond of what happened to Anakin...) where do you make your comparisons?

Sorry you didn't like the movie. I was enthralled. Everyone I know who has seen it also loved it. If there's a shortcoming it's simply that, in a 2 1/2 hour movie, you can only include so much of the book. Which is why I would recommend anyone read the book before seeing the movie.

I'll bet we say the same thing about The Lord of the Rings.

24 posted on 11/28/2001 7:31:21 AM PST by Ward Smythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
"Good heavens, if Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson make some hair brained commment,"

Oh I agree. I really don't have a problem with these two guys. They are strong in thier opinions. But both are ecumenical and that's good. And they have taste. But it's the Paul Crouch types that REALLY turn off the liberals. So tacky. Sincere but tacky!!

25 posted on 11/28/2001 8:49:01 AM PST by Theresa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Theresa
I'm not familiar with Crouch. Is he a television evangelist?
26 posted on 11/28/2001 9:32:53 AM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Is he a television evangelist?

Yes. More recognizable by his wife Jan with big hair, really big hair...

27 posted on 11/28/2001 9:35:42 AM PST by Ward Smythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Comment #28 Removed by Moderator

To: Ward Smythe
Gotta tell ya, that TBN network is plum full of interesting people. (Tongue in cheek) IMO some of them contribute to a less than favorable image of what Christians should be.
29 posted on 11/28/2001 9:44:53 AM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: 4Freedom
The lack of character development in this 2 1/2 hour debacle of a movie was ghastly.

And that is why big chunks of the middle of the movie are such a yawn. The child "stars" are less then stellar as well. A lot of it is flat and seems to just be going through the motions of the book,

But hey, my kids thought it was the greatest. I had a few laughs and really enjoyed the first 20 minutes.

30 posted on 11/28/2001 9:55:00 AM PST by better_dead_then_red
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
IMO some of them contribute to a less than favorable image of what Christians should be.

Oh please don't get me started with my list...

31 posted on 11/28/2001 10:17:44 AM PST by Ward Smythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: better_dead_then_red; 4Freedom
The child "stars" are less then stellar as well.

You guys must be real muggles. I thought the kids were great.

Then of course I never grew up. It was that evil Peter Pan thing ("he's" a cross dresser you know).

32 posted on 11/28/2001 10:19:24 AM PST by Ward Smythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Ward Smythe
Cross dresser? He was a male impersonator when I saw Mary Martin at the Kansas City Starlight theatre. Heh heh heh. Cross dressing was the least of his problems, which started with outdoor plumbing...

Ha ha ha...

33 posted on 11/28/2001 10:23:04 AM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: jrherreid
A Very Interesting Related Link
34 posted on 11/28/2001 10:25:52 AM PST by meadsjn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
He was a male impersonator when I saw Mary Martin at the Kansas City Starlight theatre.

Have the TV version with Mary Martin on videotape (from the re-broadcast of course).

Saw it live with Cathy Rigby.

35 posted on 11/28/2001 10:28:52 AM PST by Ward Smythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Ward Smythe
How was it?
36 posted on 11/28/2001 10:31:20 AM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Pretty good, but she's no Mary Martin, but then who is?
37 posted on 11/28/2001 10:32:31 AM PST by Ward Smythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: jrherreid
Witch-hunt? Uh huh, sure. I guess some people can't handle it when their conscience gets pricked. Sorry, Harry, we're not buying your occultic BS. Go find some other sucker's brain to dump your trash in.

Note to Rowling: you made lots of money, but a C.S. Lewis you are not, unless you think of yourself as the darkside's version. That means, whereas C.S. Lewis used his imagination to support the greatness of our Lord Jesus Christ, Rowling does it to magnify the arts of Hell. It is no surprise, really. A C.S. Lewis could not simply exist in this day and age of anti-Christianity. But a Rowling fits perfectly. Rowling reflects the age we live in, and Rowling defenders/sympathizers/buyers/suck-ups/whatevers are simply professing their allegiance to the spirit of this age, and not the spirit of an age that gave us the anti-thesis to Rowling, namely, C.S. Lewis.

Light vs Darkness, Night vs Day, Good vs Evil. Piece of cake. This is not a witch-hunt, it is merely a simple observation of reality.

38 posted on 11/28/2001 10:38:44 AM PST by spoosman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ward Smythe
I touched on the comparisons in my post #12, but I'll be happy to flesh them out in a little more detail for you.

Harry is sent to live with his Aunt and Uncle, because Lord Voldemort has allegedly killed his birth parents and made an attempt on his life. The "Star Wars" audience is, at first, led to believe that Luke's situation is almost identical.

Once you get past Luke's Uncle Owen, Aunt Beru and Father, Anakin Skywalker and possibly his mother allegedly being killed by Darth Vader the rest of the comparisons come pretty quickly.

I say allegedly because it's revealed in later movie episodes that Darth Vader is Luke's father and in later books, "Shadows of the Empire" for one, that an organized crime boss, Prince Xizor, actually killed Luke's Uncle and Aunt and will make many attempts on Luke's life.

Prince Xizor is trying to get even with both Darth Vader and the Emperor, for killing his family, by killing Darth Vader's son while framing Vader with, Luke's, his own son's murder and goading the Emperor into striking Vader down for a murder he didn't commit, but I digress.

Harry learns from strangers that he is "the" wizard just like Luke learns he is "the" jedi.

Harry must study the ways of the wizards and grow in skill and wisdom before he can face the ultimate, inevitable confrontation of Voldemort/Vader.

The messenger owls are the message delivered by C3PO R2D2.

Obiwan Kenobi's part is a combination of Hagrid's and Headmaster Dumbledore's. Although, because of a lack of character development, I doubt either one of them would have been missed 1/2 as much as Obiwan was, even if Voldemort had destroyed them both.

"Hedwig the Owl's" role in "Harry Potter" is then very similar to the further role of R2D2 and C3PO in "Star Wars".

Hermione =, for all intents and purposes, the cocksure and know-it-all, Princess Lea.

Ron = Han Solo with all of his smart-alecky remarks, but grudging respect and ultimate crush on Lea/Hermione. Ron/Solo the unlikely heroes that in the end save the day at the near sacrifice of their own lives.

Ron's rat = Chewbacca, but in a very undeveloped way.

Wand = Jedi light saber.

Nimbus 2000 = X-wing fighter.

"Norbert the Dragon", I haven't figured out, yet, why they banished him from the movie. I imagine it's because this literary "genius", JKR, banished him from the book. That's not a good enough reason.

If that dragon would have wound up sleeping on Harry's pillow and then made a cute attempt to burn Voldemort's behind, during the final confrontation, in a valiant effort to defend Harry, on that diminutive dragon's part, that dragon would have been on every child's pillow come Christmas morning. That was a multi-million dollar, losing decision. Heads should roll over that one.

The comparisons are endless, really.

I didn't catch a ghostly voice whispering for Harry to "trust the stone" or "trust the mirror" like Luke was urged to "trust the force", but I was nodding off by then.

If you're a big "Harry Potter" fan you have to be excited by the prospect of a new "Harry Potter" episode for every "Star Wars" book that's out there and there's alot.

39 posted on 11/28/2001 10:40:52 AM PST by 4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: jrherreid
Maybe the only thing that needs to be said against Harry Potter is that it's just another distraction to keep us from reading the Bible and meditating on the biblical worldview.
40 posted on 11/28/2001 10:43:49 AM PST by 537 Votes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ward Smythe
I thought the kids were good, because they were just as I had imagined them while reading the book, especially the know-it-all Hermione. But I didn't take to the Draco Malfoy; I felt like something was missing. Maybe it was just because they trimmed his role to fit the time constraints.
41 posted on 11/28/2001 10:48:41 AM PST by alpowolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: spoosman
A C.S. Lewis could not simply exist in this day and age of anti-Christianity

Not paranoid are we?

Actually, since the claim is that Harry Potter leads to witchcraft, it is a witch hunt in a way. ;-)

42 posted on 11/28/2001 10:54:02 AM PST by alpowolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Ward Smythe
... in a 2 1/2 hour movie, you can only include so much of the book.

I would have made it longer. I suspect the DVD will have some additional scenes.

I'm used to Masterpiece Theater adaptations of novels, which can easily go to six hours.

In the books, Harry goes to school, and much of the charm of the books is in the descriptions -- not of the content of witchcraft -- but of the personalities and methods of teachers. This is what's so fascinating to kids of all ages.

43 posted on 11/28/2001 11:02:38 AM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: 4Freedom
I'll be happy to flesh them out in a little more detail for you.

I think you just have too much time on your hands. ;-)

But if you read much science fiction/fantasy you'll see that the patterns of setting up the good vs. evil are all very similar. It's the same story, it's a matter of how it's told. Kind of like John Grisham novels.

Still, I anxiously await the next installment of Star Wars and Harry Potter.

BTW - if you think Scabbers (Ron's rat) is like Chewbacca, you haven't read the fourth book...

44 posted on 11/28/2001 11:34:03 AM PST by Ward Smythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: js1138
I would have made it longer.

I just don't know how that could sell. In any book translated to the screen, you've got to lose something.

45 posted on 11/28/2001 11:35:46 AM PST by Ward Smythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Ward Smythe
I just don't know how that could sell. In any book translated to the screen, you've got to lose something.

Perhaps in theaters, but not necessarily in home video. I'll be willing to bet that the DVDs will be longer than the movies. Most of the stuff that Hollywood leaves out is character development, which is low budget.

46 posted on 11/28/2001 11:55:05 AM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: alpowolf
Not paranoid at all. Just stating a matter of fact. We live in the age of anti-Christianity. Rowling's Potter, and Potter's popularity, is merely a symptom of a dis-eased culture. It's been that way for a long time, and I expect it to be that way far into the future. I am used to it by now. I am just not buying into it, and advise others to make a better investment.
47 posted on 11/28/2001 12:06:28 PM PST by spoosman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: spoosman
I have to disagree. Christianity has endured far worse in past ages. More directly to your point, you have read C.S. Lewis, and so have many others. His works seem to be "existing" quite well.
48 posted on 11/28/2001 12:12:04 PM PST by alpowolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Ward Smythe
I haven't read the Harry Potter books yet. I will wait until all the HO-Ha has died down like I did with the Hobbit and Lord Of The Rings.

I am asking my family to get a Babylon 5 paperback, Invoking Darkness: The Passing of The Techno-Mages. The 3rd in a trilogy. Lots of character development.

49 posted on 11/28/2001 12:14:47 PM PST by TOMH1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: spoosman
That means, whereas C.S. Lewis used his imagination to support the greatness of our Lord Jesus Christ, Rowling does it to magnify the arts of Hell.

?? You read the books?

50 posted on 11/28/2001 12:19:04 PM PST by jrherreid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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