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

Skip to comments.

SCOTUS strikes down Texas sodomy ban
FOXnews

Posted on 06/26/2003 7:08:23 AM PDT by Thane_Banquo

SCOTUS sided with the perverts.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 0amanreapswhathesews; 0bedroomkgb; 0godwillnotbemocked; 1aslimmeyslope; 1scrotus; 1slimmeyslope; 3branchesofgovt; activistcourt; activistsupremecourt; ageofconsentlaws; aides; aidesincreasetaxesup; aidesintheusa; aidesupinsuranceup; aidsalert; antibiblecountry; antichristiantrolls; antirelgiontrolls; antireligion; antireligionbigots; antireligiontroll; aregayapparel; arroganceofscotus; ascrotus; assthumpingidiots; biblethumpingmorons; biggovernmentcorrupt; bluenose; blueoyster; bohica; bowtothesecularstate; bowtothewelfarestate; bugger; buggered; buggerer; buggery; busybodieslose; buttpirate; buyvaselinestock; catsdogsmice; celebratesin; chickenlollipoppers; christianbashing; civilrights; clintonlegacy; constitutiontrashed; crazyfundies; culturewar; davidsouterisafaggot; deathoftheusa; deathofthewest; degeneracy; depravity; destructionofusa; devianceuptaxesup; deviantsex; donwenow; downourthroats; downwenoware; druglaws; endofcivilization; evilinactivistcourts; evilinrighttoprivacy; falalafalalalalala; falalalalalalalala; farkinqueers; fecalcontact; fools; fudgepackersdelight; fundiesinthecloset; fundyhysteria; gay; gayagenda; gayarrogance; gaybashing; gaycheese; gaycivlrights; gaydar; gaygestapo; gaykeywords; gaymafia; gaymarriage; gaymoose; gaynarcissist; gaypride; gayrights; gaysarevictimtoo; gayscelebrate; gaysholdusacaptive; gaysoutofcloset; gaysremakeamerica; gayssuppressthetruth; gaystapo; gaytrolldolls; gaytyrants; gayvote; getoutofmyroom; goawaymrsgrundy; godless; godsjudgement; godswrath; governmentschoolsex; hatecrimelegislation; himom; hitlerywins; homeschoolnow; homoapologists; homophobes; homosexual; homosexualagenda; homosexualagendawins; homosexualvote; hyperventilating; ihavearighttosin; ihaverights; incestlaws; indoctrination; itsjustsex; itsunatural; jeebuslovesgays; keywordwarsaregay; kitcheneducation; kneepadbrigade; lawrencevtexas; legislatinghate; legislatingsin; legislaturemakeslaws; lewinksys4all; lewinsky; lewinskys; liars; liberalagenda; libertariansareevil; libertines; lotsdaughters; lpcausesbo; makejeebuscry; manboylove; manboyloveassoc; manholeinspectorjoy; menwithmen; moralrelativism; moralrelativistinusa; msgrundypatrol; mycousinknowsclay; nambla; namblawillwinnext; onepercentrulesusa; oralsex; ourgayapparel; paulwellstone; pcdecision; pederasty; peepingtomgovt; perversion; perverts; preverts; prisoners; privacyprotection; prostitutionlaws; publichealthhazard; puritanslose; readtheconstitution; relgionbashing; religionbashing; romans1godswrath; rosieishappytoday; rosietypes; rumprangers; samesexdisorder; samesexmarriage; samesexmarriages; scotusknowsbest; scotusmakeslaw; scotustrumpsgodslaw; scotustrumpstate; scotustyranny; scrotus; sexeducation; sexindoctrination; sexpolice; sin; singlorified; slimmeyslope; slipperyslop; slipperyslope; slouching; slurpslurp; snitchonyourneighbor; sodomandgomorrah; sodomites; sodommites; sodomy; sodomylaw; sodomylaws; spyinthebushes; statesrights; stronginthesouth; supremecourt; swalloworspit; talibanintheusa; talibannedtrolls; texassodomylaw; thefunpolice; thegayelite; thegayvote; thisisevil; tisseasontobeunhappy; tistheseason; tobejolly; usathirdworldcountry; vicesnowvirtues; victimlesscrime; victimsofaids; victimsofhepatitus; weakinthehead; whatstatesright; womenwithwomen; zscrotus; zslimmeyslope; zzgoodruling
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 551-600601-650651-700 ... 1,701-1,734 next last
To: LanPB01
A man's gotta know his limitations- Dirty Harry
601 posted on 06/26/2003 10:06:58 AM PDT by ffusco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 578 | View Replies]

To: Thane_Banquo
RE-ELECT G.W.
GET A
FILIBUSTER-PROOF
CONSERVATIVE
SENATE!

REPLACE THE SCOTUS LIBERALS NOW!

Work hard, but most important: Pray for the people in this nation, and be an example, as Christ was the Supreme Example!

602 posted on 06/26/2003 10:07:28 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlackjackHF
Wrong. They said what was and what wasn't moral. They defined morality.

uh... no they didn't.

will you please stop posting until you've actually read the opinion of the court?

603 posted on 06/26/2003 10:07:43 AM PDT by jethropalerobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 512 | View Replies]

To: Liberal Classic
The diet ones can develop almost religious fervor. I haven't seen one on dogs, though.

I have a good impression of Atkins type diets, fwiw.
604 posted on 06/26/2003 10:07:43 AM PDT by Sam Cree (Democrats are herd animals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 558 | View Replies]

To: OWK
into the refuge of reason

WHOSE reason? John Doe's reason? Richard Roe's reason?

605 posted on 06/26/2003 10:07:55 AM PDT by The Red Zone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 580 | View Replies]

To: LizardQueen
Pedophilia is illegal,as it should be, because children cannot make an informed consent.

If children can be forced to go to church they can be forced to have sex with adults. End of story. /sarcasm
606 posted on 06/26/2003 10:08:37 AM PDT by johnb838 (Understand the root causes of American Anger.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 554 | View Replies]

To: jimt
There will be enormous pressure to make gays.

The media is already talking about HUGH and SERIES victory for gay rights.
607 posted on 06/26/2003 10:08:40 AM PDT by fooman (Get real with Kim Jung Mentally Ill about proliferation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies]

To: Thane_Banquo
If the Supreme Court can invent a right to sodomy, the Constitution is meaningless.

Any guesses as to the actual year our nation lost its status as a constitutional republic? I vote 1973.
608 posted on 06/26/2003 10:08:44 AM PDT by Antoninus (In hoc signo, vinces )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Trace21230
Exactly. Just because one doesn't like what someone is doing behind closed doors, the government shouldn't be allowed to break down the doors and arrest people.

609 posted on 06/26/2003 10:08:47 AM PDT by renosathug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 523 | View Replies]

To: BlazingArizona
This is a black day for busybodies nationwide.

But it is a very white day for germs and diseases nationwide.

610 posted on 06/26/2003 10:09:08 AM PDT by The Red Zone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 584 | View Replies]

To: Liberal Classic
A new category is about Staffordshire Terriers, aka Pit Bulls that seems to be gaining popularity.

Totally off topic, but you should see the movie "Best in Show". Freakin' hilarious.

611 posted on 06/26/2003 10:09:14 AM PDT by tdadams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 558 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
Is incest a crime or a taboo (or both)?
612 posted on 06/26/2003 10:10:26 AM PDT by ffusco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 600 | View Replies]

To: Thane_Banquo
Indeed. Mark my words: This decision will be used by NAMBLA and other child molestors and child pornographers to challenge bans on sexual abuse of children.

Yessirree - everyone is going to drop what they're doing and run right out to have sex with dogs!

613 posted on 06/26/2003 10:10:30 AM PDT by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Liberal Classic
I tend to think the SCOUS was right for the wrong reasons.

I'm leaning that way, too, but this would have been a ground-breaking decision no matter which way it was decided. The main reason that I think I support the decision is because I'm uncomfortable saying that the states may tell consenting adults what particular positions are acceptable and which are not. I'm all for states' rights, but putting the government at any level in my bedroom is not exactly a good idea. They'd learn far too much! ;^)

The drawback is that gays marriages are now FAR more likely to be supported, since it uses the same logic: consenting adults of the same gender should be allowed to do the same things as mixed gender couples. A very strong, simple, and supportable Equal Protection argument.

Had the Court gone the other way, I would have been happy that states' rights were starting to be respected more, and would have been hopeful that it would be a trend for the future. I need to read the dissents to get more insight into why this decision is a bad one, though, because I trust Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist far too much to think that this is the only thing that was lost today.

614 posted on 06/26/2003 10:11:04 AM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 574 | View Replies]

To: rintense
Most gays believe they have the *right* to have sex anywhere, not just in the privacy of their own home.

Would you be so kind as to provide some information about this? Where did you get this information?

615 posted on 06/26/2003 10:11:07 AM PDT by huck von finn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
Good thing we've got all those Republicans on the court.

Kennedy, Souter and Sundried O'Connor voted pro-sodomy. These people are a disgrace.
616 posted on 06/26/2003 10:11:10 AM PDT by Antoninus (In hoc signo, vinces )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: nravoter
The logical conclusion of your line of thinking is that the government can regulate your brother-in-law's diet and exercise regimin, lest he die early and leave your sister a destitute burden on society. Once you begin to walk down that proverbial road, there is nothing the government can not and should not regulate.

A red herring. There is nothing that governnment cannot regulate or at least attempt to, in human behavior. One only has to change the Constitution, for example, to take away constitutional "rights."

"Slippery slope" is fallacious here as in most places in my humble o.

617 posted on 06/26/2003 10:11:30 AM PDT by unspun ("Do everything in love.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 509 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
The Constitution is whatever 9 "Justices" say it is. The sheeple won't care enough to remove the "Justices" who enshrine pervsion as a "fundamental right". The nation rots.
618 posted on 06/26/2003 10:11:47 AM PDT by tomahawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 608 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
A consenting adult is 16. My daughter is 17. Can I have sex with her ?

No, but for reasons totally unrelated to those espoused by the moralists in their crusade against gay people.

The main reason incest is criminalized is because children from incestuous unions are more likely to be deformed, mentally retarded, and generally undesirable.

There is no such risk with consensual gay sex.

I concede that there were undoubtedly religious and moral beliefs that motivated the anti-incest laws when they were first passed.

Even though these reasons are inappropriate grounds for passing laws limiting personal behavior, there are other legitimate bases for outlawing incest, noted above.

I'm just wondering when the simpletons here will realize that consensual gay sex is not incest. Nor is it pedophilia, nor is it bestiality. The concept is not a difficult one to grasp.

Trace

619 posted on 06/26/2003 10:11:53 AM PDT by Trace21230 (Ideal MOAB test site: Paris)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 600 | View Replies]

To: BlazingArizona
Wheelbarrow pooch alert
620 posted on 06/26/2003 10:12:31 AM PDT by ffusco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 613 | View Replies]

To: dubyaismypresident
Should the SCOTUS void a states anti-nose picking law, hypothetically? Or do states have the right to pass silly laws?

SCOTUS really should have that "Stupid, but Constitutional" ink stamp.

621 posted on 06/26/2003 10:12:50 AM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 587 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
I don't know about your history, but none of the 10 Amendments is particularly offensive. The fictiticious "Privacy Amendment" is a tad annoying, however.
622 posted on 06/26/2003 10:13:06 AM PDT by HumanaeVitae (Catholic Epimethean)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 448 | View Replies]

To: Trace21230
The main reason incest is criminalized is because children from incestuous unions are more likely to be deformed, mentally retarded, and generally undesirable.

So, If I put my 17 year old daughter on the pill we can then have sex.

623 posted on 06/26/2003 10:13:23 AM PDT by VRWC_minion (Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and most are right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 619 | View Replies]

To: Thane_Banquo
I hope that the SCOTUS uses the same 'privacy' logic to apply to 2nd Amendment issues based on the 5th & 9th Circuit Courts' recent decisions, should the high court ever stop ignoring the issue.

Everywhere in the USA, consenting adults can keep their sexual relations private. What's not to like?

624 posted on 06/26/2003 10:13:45 AM PDT by The KG9 Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone
"OK, so Texas fix the anal intercourse ban so it applies to all genders. Problem solved."


In case it hasn't already been pointed out, it's not just anal -- it includes oral sex. So you want the state to also outlaw oral sex between consenting heterosexuals???
625 posted on 06/26/2003 10:13:47 AM PDT by kegler4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317
SCOTUS really should have that "Stupid, but Constitutional" ink stamp.

I tend to agree.

626 posted on 06/26/2003 10:14:05 AM PDT by NeoCaveman (Ohio Chapter. Original White Devil for Sharpton!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 621 | View Replies]

To: Trace21230
We're not "simpletons" to believe that the Constitution doesn't prohibit laws on the books for 140 years that say that buggery is illegal. We're constitutionalists.
627 posted on 06/26/2003 10:14:11 AM PDT by tomahawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 619 | View Replies]

To: 88keys
The right to keep and bear arms is a Constitutional right, unlike "privacy rights" or various other "rights" that have been more or less "judicially legislated" under the guise of protecting "life, liberty" etc...
The point is, if it's not a guaranteed specific "right", then it's under the law, and the judiciary is not supposed to be making laws.
568 -88k-



The 14th addressed our specific rights to 'life liberty, and property':

Neither the Bill of Rights nor the specific practices of the States at the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment marks the outer limits of the substantive sphere of liberty which the Fourteenth Amendment protects.
[See U.S. Const., Amend. 9.]

As the second Justice Harlan recognized:
    
"The full scope of the liberty guaranteed by the Due Process Clause `cannot be found in or limited by the precise terms of the specific guarantees elsewhere provided in the Constitution.

This `liberty´ is not a series of isolated points pricked out in terms of the taking of property;

the freedom of speech, press, and religion;

the right to keep and bear arms;

the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures; and so on. 

It is a rational continuum which, broadly speaking, includes a freedom from all substantial arbitrary impositions and purposeless restraints, . . .
and which also recognizes, what a reasonable and sensitive judgment must, that certain interests require particularly careful scrutiny of the state needs asserted to justify their abridgment."



628 posted on 06/26/2003 10:14:12 AM PDT by tpaine (Really, I'm trying to be a 'decent human being', but me flesh is weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 568 | View Replies]

To: Belial
It always strikes me as odd that the heartland is the center of gay activism, and not SF, NYC or LA. I'm sure it's a plot or something.

It's all part of the gay conspiracy. You can look it up in the "American Gay Agenda, 3rd Addition" on page 467.

629 posted on 06/26/2003 10:14:18 AM PDT by Grando Calrissian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: Thane_Banquo
What this idiotic decision says, basically, is that the Founding Fathers who wrote the constitution then went home and created unconstitutional anti-sodomy laws.

All hail the Supreme Court! Our fearless cultural dictators!
630 posted on 06/26/2003 10:14:22 AM PDT by Antoninus (In hoc signo, vinces )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
"If their behavior isn't infringing on my Rights, then why the hell should I care what they do? If they are committing force, fraud, or theft against me... then they will have to answer to my personal protection equipement first. If they survive that, then I will go before the courts to have them prosecuted."

To an extent I agree, but a reality check tells me we don't really want unlimited 'rights'....but what do I know? This decision came frome the same bunch of people that just decided it was OK to discriminate against white people.
Heck, I thought that was wrong too!

631 posted on 06/26/2003 10:14:35 AM PDT by bk1000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 579 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317
A very strong, simple, and supportable Equal Protection argument.

Which wasn't elucidated by the court.

632 posted on 06/26/2003 10:15:04 AM PDT by The Red Zone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 614 | View Replies]

To: BlazingArizona
Yessirree - everyone is going to drop what they're doing and run right out to have sex with dogs!

hehehe, we better guard the mortuaries too, not to mention the slaughterhouses

They're very shrill today, aren't they?

Trace

633 posted on 06/26/2003 10:15:12 AM PDT by Trace21230 (Ideal MOAB test site: Paris)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 613 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
It may have set the stage for an amendment to the constitution.

I'm ready. It's time for a Marriage Amendment. Is there any doubt it would pass???

Let's get moving on it!
634 posted on 06/26/2003 10:15:22 AM PDT by Antoninus (In hoc signo, vinces )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: The KG9 Kid
Don't count on it. The ACLU's agenda is in control of the majority of the "Justices".
635 posted on 06/26/2003 10:16:16 AM PDT by tomahawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 624 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
is that the Founding Fathers who wrote the constitution then went home and created unconstitutional anti-sodomy laws.

As well as unconstitutional laws denying women and blacks the right to vote and perpetuating slavery.

636 posted on 06/26/2003 10:16:19 AM PDT by CholeraJoe (White Devils for Sharpton. We're bad. We're Nationwide)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 630 | View Replies]

To: Trace21230
The main reason incest is criminalized is because children from incestuous unions are more likely to be deformed, mentally retarded, and generally undesirable.

But what if she takes the pill? Then is it OK?

637 posted on 06/26/2003 10:16:45 AM PDT by The Red Zone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 619 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone
But it is a very white day for germs and diseases nationwide.

Criminalize the common cold now!

638 posted on 06/26/2003 10:16:47 AM PDT by OWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 610 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
No, it's the whole truth. Libertarians are cheering the usurpation of the legislative powers reserved to the states by an all-powerful federal governmental body. The federal leviathan has spoken through SCOTUS and the libertarians are applauding.

What the majority is saying is that there are certain personal rights that no government, on any level, can infringe. It is not a matter of liberal political correctness or favoritism to one group, since you are just as free to dislike homosexuality and/or refuse to engage in "sodomy" as you were before. Because the decision expands individual freedom, it's a huge victory for conservatives. It limits government intrusion into our private lives.

639 posted on 06/26/2003 10:16:57 AM PDT by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: huck von finn
Have you visited public restrooms recently? Have you visited public parks? I've seen them doing it there.
640 posted on 06/26/2003 10:17:09 AM PDT by tomahawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 615 | View Replies]

To: tomahawk
We're not "simpletons" to believe that the Constitution doesn't prohibit laws on the books for 140 years that say that buggery is illegal.

If you can't see the difference between adult consensual sex and pedophilia/necrophilia/bestiality then yes you are a simpleton.

Trace

641 posted on 06/26/2003 10:17:27 AM PDT by Trace21230 (Ideal MOAB test site: Paris)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 627 | View Replies]

To: Trace21230
Don't forget the inherent possibilities of abuse of power and trust as well as the manipulation that goes along with incest - which is why it is deemed a criminal act.
642 posted on 06/26/2003 10:17:39 AM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine (Winning flame wars on the net is like winning a medal at the Special Olympics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 619 | View Replies]

To: Those_Crazy_Liberals
I would support that. He's never going to ride the sodomy card into the CJ's chair.

Definitely. Outside of the homosexuality cases, he's nowhere near liberal enough for the RATs, and his open support for them kills his chances of being elevated by a Pubbie.

643 posted on 06/26/2003 10:18:16 AM PDT by steveegg (Close only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, air-burst artillery and thermonuclear weapons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 566 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
I'm ready. It's time for a Marriage Amendment.

Isn't your marriage a covenant between yourself and your spouse, and potentially your God?

Or are you also married to the state?

644 posted on 06/26/2003 10:18:22 AM PDT by OWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 634 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
I'm ready. It's time for a Marriage Amendment. Is there any doubt it would pass??? Let's get moving on it!

I think some members of this SCOTUS would find the amendment to be unconstitutional.

645 posted on 06/26/2003 10:18:37 AM PDT by The Red Zone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 634 | View Replies]

To: OWK
Criminalize the common cold now!

When you outlaw colds only outlaws will.....nevermind.

646 posted on 06/26/2003 10:18:41 AM PDT by NeoCaveman (Ohio Chapter. Original White Devil for Sharpton!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 638 | View Replies]

To: Paradox
Thats not neccessarily true. The guy who washes my car is a Libertarian, however, the car hasn't been running all that well, I wonder if he has been sodomizing the exhaust pipe...

See. This is precisely the slippery slope that is caused by this SCOTUS ruling. Soon libertarians will be sodomizing gutters, mail boxes, and even vending machines.

647 posted on 06/26/2003 10:18:49 AM PDT by Grando Calrissian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
You're a little sick to be personalizing it that way.

I'd never talk about my daughters like that.

You might reconsider how that makes you look.

648 posted on 06/26/2003 10:19:10 AM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine (Winning flame wars on the net is like winning a medal at the Special Olympics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 623 | View Replies]

To: Trace21230
The main reason incest is criminalized is because children from incestuous unions are more likely to be deformed, mentally retarded, and generally undesirable.

I beg to differ. The main reason against incest and rather obvious is the detriment to the child being sexually abused or used by the adult parent. I'm not aware of any cultures outside dog cultures that endorse parent/child incest.

649 posted on 06/26/2003 10:19:24 AM PDT by wardaddy (DIVERSITY IS BEST SERVED EARNED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 619 | View Replies]

To: nravoter; unspun
The logical conclusion of your line of thinking is that the government can regulate your brother-in-law's diet and exercise regimin, lest he die early and leave your sister a destitute burden on society.

I think communist regimes like China and North Korea do this based on such a reason of "obvious" government interest.

650 posted on 06/26/2003 10:19:49 AM PDT by GraniteStateConservative (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 509 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 551-600601-650651-700 ... 1,701-1,734 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