| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Fredric L. Rice" |
| Date: |
10 Aug 2005 02:33:16 PM |
| Object: |
Science in America takes back seat to occultism |
American know-how hobbled by know-nothings
Scientific and educational needs of the nation take back seat to religious
minority
Cynthia Tucker - Universal Press Syndicate
08.09.05 - Whatever happened to good old American know-how? What became of
those twin emblems of our national character -- ingenuity and
resourcefulness?
The nation could use a bit of those right now. Even as global petroleum
reserves peak, we have no national program for developing alternative
energy sources; NASA's shuttle program has been suspended indefinitely for
fear of another disaster; and the South Koreans and others are outstripping
us in vital genetic research.
The Pentagon is so desperate to attract a new generation of scientists and
engineers that it is sending mid-career researchers to screenwriting
school, hoping they'll write movies depicting scientists as flashy heroes.
But that won't help much if President Bush is going to declare war on
science.
Just last week, the president poked a sharp stick in the eye of modern
biology, telling reporters that high schools should teach "intelligent
design." This view challenges evolution by inserting a divine force into
scientific theories about the origins of life.
According to The Washington Post, Bush, in an Oval Office meeting with a
group of Texas reporters on Monday, said, "Both sides ought to be properly
taught ... so people can understand what the debate is about. ... Part of
education is to expose people to different schools of thought."
Like so many Americans who misunderstand scientific consensus, the
president seems to think there are two valid scientific views about
evolution. There are not. There is a side that teaches science -- that
which can be tested and retested against the evidence at hand. And there is
the side that favors teaching religion in high school biology classes. (No
matter how much proponents of "intelligent design" try to clothe their
views in the apparel of science, it is what it is: religion. Whose
intelligence? Whose design?)
Bush also reiterated his opposition to broadening federal funding for stem
cell research, despite growing Republican support for funding for less
restrictive research. This nation used to be exuberant about scientific
achievement, confident (even arrogant) about our ability to solve any
technological challenge, comfortable with the possibilities of scientific
research. When the Soviets stunned the world with the launch of Sputnik in
1957, the United States rushed to the barricades with money for science
labs and math classrooms. There was no conflict among mainstream Christians
about promoting scientific advancement.
But that was then. Now, this country is led by a cult of religious
fundamentalists who wish to impose their narrow thinking on the rest of us.
The dogma advanced by Bush and his ilk disputes more than a century of
scientific thought that relies on the foundations of Darwin's theories. It
discounts the pain of countless sick and handicapped citizens, who might
benefit from advances in stem cell research. It ignores the growing
scientific prowess of other nations, including China and South Korea,
where, just last week, scientists announced the successful cloning of a
puppy -- a stunning development.
Never mind that millions of Christians, including me, are quite comfortable
with the teaching of evolution, since it neither attempts to confirm nor
deny the existence of a Creator. Never mind that countless believers
support broadening research on donated embryos that would otherwise be
destroyed. The absolutes of a narrow minority rule the day.
If the great story of the last century was the conflict among various
political ideologies -- communism, fascism and democracy -- then the great
narrative of this century will be the changes wrought by astonishing
scientific breakthroughs. What seemed science fiction just yesterday will
become an overnight reality: cures for Alzheimer's and spinal cord
ruptures, the development of advanced robots and nanotechnology, an
incredible lengthening of the human life span.
The United States stood in the vanguard of the fight against communism and
fascism, ensuring that democracy survived the last century and would
flourish in the next. But in the race for scientific hegemony, we've tied a
white lab coat to a stick and are waving it at Asia: We surrender.
http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=19455
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://www.rightard.org/ http://www.thedarkwind.org/
http://www.spaink.net/cos/warhero/
.
|
|
| User: "Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: Science in America takes back seat to occultism |
10 Aug 2005 04:08:08 PM |
|
|
An excellent article on Bush's puerile leadership of this country.
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11fklolo8tpg5d4@corp.supernews.com...
American know-how hobbled by know-nothings
Scientific and educational needs of the nation take back seat to religious
minority
Cynthia Tucker - Universal Press Syndicate
08.09.05 - Whatever happened to good old American know-how? What became of
those twin emblems of our national character -- ingenuity and
resourcefulness?
The nation could use a bit of those right now. Even as global petroleum
reserves peak, we have no national program for developing alternative
energy sources; NASA's shuttle program has been suspended indefinitely for
fear of another disaster; and the South Koreans and others are
outstripping
us in vital genetic research.
The Pentagon is so desperate to attract a new generation of scientists and
engineers that it is sending mid-career researchers to screenwriting
school, hoping they'll write movies depicting scientists as flashy heroes.
But that won't help much if President Bush is going to declare war on
science.
Just last week, the president poked a sharp stick in the eye of modern
biology, telling reporters that high schools should teach "intelligent
design." This view challenges evolution by inserting a divine force into
scientific theories about the origins of life.
According to The Washington Post, Bush, in an Oval Office meeting with a
group of Texas reporters on Monday, said, "Both sides ought to be properly
taught ... so people can understand what the debate is about. ... Part of
education is to expose people to different schools of thought."
Like so many Americans who misunderstand scientific consensus, the
president seems to think there are two valid scientific views about
evolution. There are not. There is a side that teaches science -- that
which can be tested and retested against the evidence at hand. And there
is
the side that favors teaching religion in high school biology classes. (No
matter how much proponents of "intelligent design" try to clothe their
views in the apparel of science, it is what it is: religion. Whose
intelligence? Whose design?)
Bush also reiterated his opposition to broadening federal funding for stem
cell research, despite growing Republican support for funding for less
restrictive research. This nation used to be exuberant about scientific
achievement, confident (even arrogant) about our ability to solve any
technological challenge, comfortable with the possibilities of scientific
research. When the Soviets stunned the world with the launch of Sputnik in
1957, the United States rushed to the barricades with money for science
labs and math classrooms. There was no conflict among mainstream
Christians
about promoting scientific advancement.
But that was then. Now, this country is led by a cult of religious
fundamentalists who wish to impose their narrow thinking on the rest of
us.
The dogma advanced by Bush and his ilk disputes more than a century of
scientific thought that relies on the foundations of Darwin's theories. It
discounts the pain of countless sick and handicapped citizens, who might
benefit from advances in stem cell research. It ignores the growing
scientific prowess of other nations, including China and South Korea,
where, just last week, scientists announced the successful cloning of a
puppy -- a stunning development.
Never mind that millions of Christians, including me, are quite
comfortable
with the teaching of evolution, since it neither attempts to confirm nor
deny the existence of a Creator. Never mind that countless believers
support broadening research on donated embryos that would otherwise be
destroyed. The absolutes of a narrow minority rule the day.
If the great story of the last century was the conflict among various
political ideologies -- communism, fascism and democracy -- then the great
narrative of this century will be the changes wrought by astonishing
scientific breakthroughs. What seemed science fiction just yesterday will
become an overnight reality: cures for Alzheimer's and spinal cord
ruptures, the development of advanced robots and nanotechnology, an
incredible lengthening of the human life span.
The United States stood in the vanguard of the fight against communism and
fascism, ensuring that democracy survived the last century and would
flourish in the next. But in the race for scientific hegemony, we've tied
a
white lab coat to a stick and are waving it at Asia: We surrender.
http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=19455
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://www.rightard.org/ http://www.thedarkwind.org/
http://www.spaink.net/cos/warhero/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "I dont believe in atheists" |
|
| Title: The History Channel Steps into Fantasy-Ape-to-Man. |
10 Aug 2005 03:05:25 PM |
|
|
The History Channel Steps into Fantasy
Aug 5, 2005
On the evening of August 7, the History Channel will air a very
unhistorical, Hollywood-inspired program entitled Ape-to-Man.
The website (http://www.historychannel.com/apetoman/) heralds this program
by displaying a corruption of Michelangelo's Creation of Adam. Instead of
Adam's finger touching God's, an ape's finger is held inches from the
Creator's. Such is the clear, anti-Biblical slant of the broadcast.
The director of Ape-to-Man admitted that he was telling "the story of the
story of human evolution." "Re-creations of the distant past were key,"
states the website trailer, adding that the human actors were transformed
"into their own living, breathing ancestors." It should be obvious that
imagination will be a key part of this program. We urge that viewers record
the number of times imagination is used or alluded to. Empirical science is
what we can observe, test, and repeat. Ape-to-Man will necessarily leave
this field and enter the imprecise realm of conjecture and imagination,
thanks to human actors.
ICR wonders if the program will address scientific roadblocks involved with
human evolution. These include the clear disagreement between molecular
biology (DNA and protein) and the older, well-established fossil record
(paleontology). As one anti-creationist stated,
[T]he verdict on human origins from molecular biology is unequivocal: all
modern humans shared a common ancestor a few hundred thousand years ago, and
all human diversity has developed since that time. Unfortunately, this
conclusion flies in the face of the fossil evidence.
Trefil, James.1996. 101 things you don't know about science and no one else
does either. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Is the molecular record of human origins "unequivocal"? Hardly. Evolutionist
Peter Forey of London's Natural History Museum said when it comes to
macroevolution (such as the strange ape-to-man transitions), the molecular
biology evidence is "fraught with difficulties of interpretation" (2003."Reviews."
Journal of Paleontology 77(1)).
As in all fields of macroevolution, human origins will continue to be
hounded by science. The thoughtful viewer will observe in Ape-to-Man that
where science
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woden" |
|
| Title: Re: The History Channel Steps into Fantasy-Ape-to-Man. |
10 Aug 2005 04:58:16 PM |
|
|
"I don't believe in atheists" <Athiests@Fool.com> wrote in
news:06tKe.1096$hv5.3673@news.uswest.net:
The History Channel Steps into Fantasy
Aug 5, 2005
On the evening of August 7, the History Channel will air a very
unhistorical, Hollywood-inspired program entitled Ape-to-Man.
The website (http://www.historychannel.com/apetoman/) heralds this
program by displaying a corruption of Michelangelo's Creation of Adam.
Instead of Adam's finger touching God's, an ape's finger is held
inches from the Creator's. Such is the clear, anti-Biblical slant of
the broadcast.
Considering that there is no scientific evidence supporting the biblical
myth of creation, and that (in fact) the scientific evidence clearly
refutes the biblical story, then it is little wonder the program would be
considered "anti-biblical".
The director of Ape-to-Man admitted that he was telling "the story of
the story of human evolution." "Re-creations of the distant past were
key," states the website trailer, adding that the human actors were
transformed "into their own living, breathing ancestors." It should be
obvious that imagination will be a key part of this program. We urge
that viewers record the number of times imagination is used or alluded
to. Empirical science is what we can observe, test, and repeat.
Ape-to-Man will necessarily leave this field and enter the imprecise
realm of conjecture and imagination, thanks to human actors.
ICR wonders if the program will address scientific roadblocks involved
with human evolution. These include the clear disagreement between
molecular biology (DNA and protein) and the older, well-established
fossil record (paleontology). As one anti-creationist stated,
[T]he verdict on human origins from molecular biology is unequivocal:
all modern humans shared a common ancestor a few hundred thousand
years ago, and all human diversity has developed since that time.
Unfortunately, this conclusion flies in the face of the fossil
evidence.
And how does any disagreement over the theories surrounding molecular
biology versus fossil evidence lead one to the conclusion that some
magical "goddidit" explanation?
Trefil, James.1996. 101 things you don't know about science and no one
else does either. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Is the molecular record of human origins "unequivocal"? Hardly.
Evolutionist Peter Forey of London's Natural History Museum said when
it comes to macroevolution (such as the strange ape-to-man
transitions), the molecular biology evidence is "fraught with
difficulties of interpretation" (2003."Reviews." Journal of
Paleontology 77(1)
And did Mr Forey claim that this difficuly of interpretation means that
"goddidit" is the only other explanation?
As in all fields of macroevolution, human origins will continue to be
hounded by science. The thoughtful viewer will observe in Ape-to-Man
that where science
conflicts with ancient myths, there will still be fools around who
continue to believe and continue to push their ancient fantasies as real.
(I took the liberty of finishing that sentence for you.)
--
Woden
"religion is a socio-political system for controlling people's thoughts,
lives and actions based on ancient myths and superstitions, perpetrated
through generations of subtle yet pervasive brainwashing."
.
|
|
|
| User: "I dont believe in atheists" |
|
| Title: Re: The History Channel Steps into Fantasy-Ape-to-Man. |
10 Aug 2005 05:41:22 PM |
|
|
"Woden" <woden@charter.net> wrote in message
news:Xns96AEB76FB5309wodencharternet@69.28.186.121...
"I don't believe in atheists" <Athiests@Fool.com> wrote in
news:06tKe.1096$hv5.3673@news.uswest.net:
The History Channel Steps into Fantasy
Aug 5, 2005
On the evening of August 7, the History Channel will air a very
unhistorical, Hollywood-inspired program entitled Ape-to-Man.
The website (http://www.historychannel.com/apetoman/) heralds this
program by displaying a corruption of Michelangelo's Creation of Adam.
Instead of Adam's finger touching God's, an ape's finger is held
inches from the Creator's. Such is the clear, anti-Biblical slant of
the broadcast.
Considering that there is no scientific evidence supporting the biblical
myth of creation, and that (in fact) the scientific evidence clearly
refutes the biblical story, then it is little wonder the program would be
considered "anti-biblical".
The director of Ape-to-Man admitted that he was telling "the story of
the story of human evolution." "Re-creations of the distant past were
key," states the website trailer, adding that the human actors were
transformed "into their own living, breathing ancestors." It should be
obvious that imagination will be a key part of this program. We urge
that viewers record the number of times imagination is used or alluded
to. Empirical science is what we can observe, test, and repeat.
Ape-to-Man will necessarily leave this field and enter the imprecise
realm of conjecture and imagination, thanks to human actors.
ICR wonders if the program will address scientific roadblocks involved
with human evolution. These include the clear disagreement between
molecular biology (DNA and protein) and the older, well-established
fossil record (paleontology). As one anti-creationist stated,
[T]he verdict on human origins from molecular biology is unequivocal:
all modern humans shared a common ancestor a few hundred thousand
years ago, and all human diversity has developed since that time.
Unfortunately, this conclusion flies in the face of the fossil
evidence.
And how does any disagreement over the theories surrounding molecular
biology versus fossil evidence lead one to the conclusion that some
magical "goddidit" explanation?
Trefil, James.1996. 101 things you don't know about science and no one
else does either. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Is the molecular record of human origins "unequivocal"? Hardly.
Evolutionist Peter Forey of London's Natural History Museum said when
it comes to macroevolution (such as the strange ape-to-man
transitions), the molecular biology evidence is "fraught with
difficulties of interpretation" (2003."Reviews." Journal of
Paleontology 77(1)
And did Mr Forey claim that this difficuly of interpretation means that
"goddidit" is the only other explanation?
As in all fields of macroevolution, human origins will continue to be
hounded by science. The thoughtful viewer will observe in Ape-to-Man
that where science
conflicts with ancient myths, there will still be fools around who
continue to believe and continue to push their ancient fantasies as real.
(I took the liberty of .....)
<smack>
Distorting the truth for you
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sasha" |
|
| Title: Re: The History Channel Steps into Fantasy-Ape-to-Man. |
11 Aug 2005 08:01:00 AM |
|
|
<Uppercut>
And you waste your life believing in something that doesn't exist - not
to mention sounding like a narrow-minded idiot in the process.
Congratulations - you're well below average.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jez" |
|
| Title: Re: The History Channel Steps into Fantasy-Ape-to-Man. |
11 Aug 2005 03:27:56 PM |
|
|
"I don't believe in atheists" <Athiests@Fool.com> wrote in
news:covKe.25$_T5.1148@news.uswest.net:
"Woden" <woden@charter.net> wrote in message
Snippage........
conflicts with ancient myths, there will still be fools around who
continue to believe and continue to push their ancient fantasies as
real.
(I took the liberty of .....)
<smack>
Distorting the truth for you
You fucking assholes wouldn't know truth if it was to come up and bite
you on the arse!
--
Jez, MBA.,
Country Dancing and Advanced Astrology, UBS.
'Realism is seductive because once you have accepted the reasonable
notion that you should base your actions on reality, you are too often
led to accept, without much questioning, someone else's version of what
that reality is. It is a crucial act of independent thinking to be
skeptical of someone else's description of reality.'- Howard Zinn
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woden" |
|
| Title: Re: The History Channel Steps into Fantasy-Ape-to-Man. |
11 Aug 2005 07:34:42 PM |
|
|
"I don't believe in atheists" <Athiests@Fool.com> wrote in
news:covKe.25$_T5.1148@news.uswest.net:
"Woden" <woden@charter.net> wrote in message
news:Xns96AEB76FB5309wodencharternet@69.28.186.121...
(snip)
conflicts with ancient myths, there will still be fools around who
continue to believe and continue to push their ancient fantasies as
real.
(I took the liberty of .....)
<smack>
Distorting the truth for you
Wow. You would distort the truth. How very typically xian.
--
Woden
"religion is a socio-political system for controlling people's thoughts,
lives and actions based on ancient myths and superstitions, perpetrated
through generations of subtle yet pervasive brainwashing."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woden" |
|
| Title: Re: The History Channel Steps into Fantasy-Ape-to-Man. |
10 Aug 2005 08:57:51 PM |
|
|
"I don't believe in atheists" <Athiests@Fool.com> wrote in
news:covKe.25$_T5.1148@news.uswest.net:
"Woden" <woden@charter.net> wrote in message
news:Xns96AEB76FB5309wodencharternet@69.28.186.121...
"I don't believe in atheists" <Athiests@Fool.com> wrote in
news:06tKe.1096$hv5.3673@news.uswest.net:
The History Channel Steps into Fantasy
Aug 5, 2005
On the evening of August 7, the History Channel will air a very
unhistorical, Hollywood-inspired program entitled Ape-to-Man.
The website (http://www.historychannel.com/apetoman/) heralds this
program by displaying a corruption of Michelangelo's Creation of
Adam. Instead of Adam's finger touching God's, an ape's finger is
held inches from the Creator's. Such is the clear, anti-Biblical
slant of the broadcast.
Considering that there is no scientific evidence supporting the
biblical myth of creation, and that (in fact) the scientific evidence
clearly refutes the biblical story, then it is little wonder the
program would be considered "anti-biblical".
The director of Ape-to-Man admitted that he was telling "the story
of the story of human evolution." "Re-creations of the distant past
were key," states the website trailer, adding that the human actors
were transformed "into their own living, breathing ancestors." It
should be obvious that imagination will be a key part of this
program. We urge that viewers record the number of times imagination
is used or alluded to. Empirical science is what we can observe,
test, and repeat. Ape-to-Man will necessarily leave this field and
enter the imprecise realm of conjecture and imagination, thanks to
human actors.
ICR wonders if the program will address scientific roadblocks
involved with human evolution. These include the clear disagreement
between molecular biology (DNA and protein) and the older,
well-established fossil record (paleontology). As one
anti-creationist stated,
[T]he verdict on human origins from molecular biology is
unequivocal: all modern humans shared a common ancestor a few
hundred thousand years ago, and all human diversity has developed
since that time. Unfortunately, this conclusion flies in the face of
the fossil evidence.
And how does any disagreement over the theories surrounding molecular
biology versus fossil evidence lead one to the conclusion that some
magical "goddidit" explanation?
Trefil, James.1996. 101 things you don't know about science and no
one else does either. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Is the molecular record of human origins "unequivocal"? Hardly.
Evolutionist Peter Forey of London's Natural History Museum said
when it comes to macroevolution (such as the strange ape-to-man
transitions), the molecular biology evidence is "fraught with
difficulties of interpretation" (2003."Reviews." Journal of
Paleontology 77(1)
And did Mr Forey claim that this difficuly of interpretation means
that "goddidit" is the only other explanation?
As in all fields of macroevolution, human origins will continue to
be hounded by science. The thoughtful viewer will observe in
Ape-to-Man that where science
conflicts with ancient myths, there will still be fools around who
continue to believe and continue to push their ancient fantasies as
real.
(I took the liberty of .....)
<smack>
Distorting the truth for you
Yes, we're quite aware of your continuing attempts to distort the truth.
Where's the evidence supporting your claims? Still can't provide can
you!
--
Woden
"religion is a socio-political system for controlling people's thoughts,
lives and actions based on ancient myths and superstitions, perpetrated
through generations of subtle yet pervasive brainwashing."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: The History Channel Steps into Fantasy-Ape-to-Man. |
10 Aug 2005 04:05:23 PM |
|
|
"I don't believe in atheists" <Athiests@Fool.com> wrote in message
news:06tKe.1096$hv5.3673@news.uswest.net...
The History Channel Steps into Fantasy
Aug 5, 2005
On the evening of August 7, the History Channel will air a very
unhistorical, Hollywood-inspired program entitled Ape-to-Man.
The website (http://www.historychannel.com/apetoman/) heralds this program
by displaying a corruption of Michelangelo's Creation of Adam. Instead of
Adam's finger touching God's, an ape's finger is held inches from the
Creator's. Such is the clear, anti-Biblical slant of the broadcast.
It is not "anti-Biblical, it merely emphasises the "fact" that the stories
in the Bible are myths
and fiction and do not provide scientific and factual information on the
progress of man in
the Universe.
Wake up. The Bibles are impossible and implausable stories that never
occurred. They are
not a factual history of evlution or the progress of mankind.
The director of Ape-to-Man admitted that he was telling "the story of the
story of human evolution." "Re-creations of the distant past were key,"
states the website trailer, adding that the human actors were transformed
"into their own living, breathing ancestors." It should be obvious that
imagination will be a key part of this program. We urge that viewers
record the number of times imagination is used or alluded to. Empirical
science is what we can observe, test, and repeat. Ape-to-Man will
necessarily leave this field and enter the imprecise realm of conjecture
and imagination, thanks to human actors.
ICR wonders if the program will address scientific roadblocks involved
with human evolution. These include the clear disagreement between
molecular biology (DNA and protein) and the older, well-established fossil
record (paleontology). As one anti-creationist stated,
[T]he verdict on human origins from molecular biology is unequivocal: all
modern humans shared a common ancestor a few hundred thousand years ago,
and all human diversity has developed since that time. Unfortunately, this
conclusion flies in the face of the fossil evidence.
Trefil, James.1996. 101 things you don't know about science and no one
else does either. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Is the molecular record of human origins "unequivocal"? Hardly.
Evolutionist Peter Forey of London's Natural History Museum said when it
comes to macroevolution (such as the strange ape-to-man transitions), the
molecular biology evidence is "fraught with difficulties of
interpretation" (2003."Reviews." Journal of Paleontology 77(1)).
As in all fields of macroevolution, human origins will continue to be
hounded by science. The thoughtful viewer will observe in Ape-to-Man that
where science
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "James" |
|
| Title: Re: The History Channel Steps into Fantasy-Ape-to-Man. |
10 Aug 2005 11:51:59 PM |
|
|
"I don't believe in atheists" has to be some sort of Bizzaro Jesus.
He's created more atheists than Nietzsche.
--
James B
aa #944
"A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence."
-David Hume
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Agki" |
|
| Title: Re: The History Channel Steps into Fantasy-Ape-to-Man. |
11 Aug 2005 07:25:16 AM |
|
|
The website (http://www.historychannel.com/ apetoman/) heralds this program
by displaying a corruption of Michelangelo's Creation of Adam. Instead of
Adam's finger touching God's, an ape's finger is held inches from the ...
Hey, Doofus! Get it right. In the painting, Adam's finger does NOT
touch God's.
Agki
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "chibiabos" |
|
| Title: Re: The History Channel Steps into Fantasy-Ape-to-Man. |
10 Aug 2005 09:52:52 PM |
|
|
In article <06tKe.1096$hv5.3673@news.uswest.net>, I don't believe in
atheists <Athiests@Fool.com> wrote:
You and the ICR are an embarassment to Americans everywhere.
-chib
--
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
