Schiavo autopsy released

steve319

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2005
Posts
1,170
Media
0
Likes
2
Points
183
Location
North Carolina
Sexuality
90% Straight, 10% Gay
Gender
Male
Originally posted by madame_zora@Jun 16 2005, 03:04 PM
I'm not ready to take on the whole religous right over this...
Neither am I. I'm not sure this is really a "religious right" so much as one they co-opted for political gain. Having a right to die without governmental interference sounds very right wing on the surface, doesn't it?

But yeah, I know that personal religious beliefs inform this. That's yet another reason why it should be a personal/family choice (as has traditionally been the case?) rather than a governmental one.

How do you guys feel about our "right to die" out of personal choice when pain or quality of life becomes "unbearable" for us? (Paging Dr. Kevorkian...)
 

mindseye

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2002
Posts
3,399
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
258
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Originally posted by steve319@Jun 19 2005, 09:29 PM
How do you guys feel about our "right to die" out of personal choice when pain or quality of life becomes "unbearable" for us? (Paging Dr. Kevorkian...)
[post=322278]Quoted post[/post]​

I don't think even 'pain or quality of life' should be a qualifier; the right to die -- IMO -- is unconditional. The government doesn't give life; why do they think they have any business regulating it? Just because something's a bad idea doesn't mean the government ought to interfere with it.
 

major_7

Just Browsing
Joined
May 9, 2005
Posts
211
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
161
Age
63
Location
Florida
Originally posted by mindseye+Jun 19 2005, 10:57 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mindseye &#064; Jun 19 2005, 10:57 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-steve319@Jun 19 2005, 09:29 PM
How do you guys feel about our "right to die" out of personal choice when pain or quality of life becomes "unbearable" for us? (Paging Dr. Kevorkian...)
[post=322278]Quoted post[/post]​

I don&#39;t think even &#39;pain or quality of life&#39; should be a qualifier; the right to die -- IMO -- is unconditional. The government doesn&#39;t give life; why do they think they have any business regulating it? Just because something&#39;s a bad idea doesn&#39;t mean the government ought to interfere with it.
[post=322288]Quoted post[/post]​
[/b][/quote]

I agree. In my ripe old age of (nearly) 45, I have known several people who have chosen to end their lives. Two of them were because of health issues. I do feel that this is a personal choice, however, I&#39;m sure that our government would try to press charges against the deceased if they could . LOL
 

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,609
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
Originally posted by major_7+Jun 20 2005, 12:45 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(major_7 &#064; Jun 20 2005, 12:45 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
Originally posted by mindseye@Jun 19 2005, 10:57 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-steve319
@Jun 19 2005, 09:29 PM
How do you guys feel about our "right to die" out of personal choice when pain or quality of life becomes "unbearable" for us? (Paging Dr. Kevorkian...)
[post=322278]Quoted post[/post]​


I don&#39;t think even &#39;pain or quality of life&#39; should be a qualifier; the right to die -- IMO -- is unconditional. The government doesn&#39;t give life; why do they think they have any business regulating it? Just because something&#39;s a bad idea doesn&#39;t mean the government ought to interfere with it.
[post=322288]Quoted post[/post]​

I agree. In my ripe old age of (nearly) 45, I have known several people who have chosen to end their lives. Two of them were because of health issues. I do feel that this is a personal choice, however, I&#39;m sure that our government would try to press charges against the deceased if they could . LOL
[post=322463]Quoted post[/post]​
[/b][/quote]
Please be careful. This administration will have a proposed contitutional amendment to do just that at the next election. Don&#39;t give them ideas. :evilgrin:
 

txquis

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2003
Posts
1,682
Media
0
Likes
69
Points
368
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
:p WOW&#33;
My diagnosis of Shaivo, just from seeing her on tv, was the same as the
autopsy.......so, i&#39;m a step ahead of that doctor.

All of this was a circus,
and done for politics and
and grandstanding and it was appalling.
I dont believe for a minute that any of those politicians gave a shit
about that woman, other than making their stance on the issue plain.

"Go out there and hold a glass of water up to the hospital window&#33;
Show &#39;em where you stand so they&#39;ll reelect yuh"

UGH :grr:
 

GottaBigOne

Cherished Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2004
Posts
1,035
Media
13
Likes
255
Points
303
Age
42
Location
Dallas (Texas, United States)
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Originally posted by mindseye+Jun 20 2005, 02:57 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mindseye &#064; Jun 20 2005, 02:57 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-steve319@Jun 19 2005, 09:29 PM
How do you guys feel about our "right to die" out of personal choice when pain or quality of life becomes "unbearable" for us? (Paging Dr. Kevorkian...)
[post=322278]Quoted post[/post]​

I don&#39;t think even &#39;pain or quality of life&#39; should be a qualifier; the right to die -- IMO -- is unconditional. The government doesn&#39;t give life; why do they think they have any business regulating it? Just because something&#39;s a bad idea doesn&#39;t mean the government ought to interfere with it.
[post=322288]Quoted post[/post]​
[/b][/quote]
The grey area that we have here is not that the government is in the business of regulating life, but murder, and thats where that argument stood. The government should be in the business of protecting people from murderers.
The thing about this case is that terri shiavo was not on life support (unless you count food as life support, id say sustenance) she was alive on her own, her heart beat on its own, her lungs breathed, her higher brain functions were just gone. But she could not feed herself, or do anything for that matter, but she was alive on her own so it wasn&#39;t about "pulling the plug" it was "pulling the spoon." Terri chiavo died because of dehydration, not because any plug was pulled. This case wouldn&#39;t have been so complicated if she had just had a LEGAL document stating what her wishes were if she ever was in that condition, she did have one, but her husband said she had confided in him that those were her wishes, to be allowed to die. Should we allow people to die just because someone says that they once said thats what they&#39;d want? Its a little wishy washy there with me, they could be lying you know. Of course she was never going to recover, and she probably wasn&#39;t even cognizant enough to be called "alive" in my or other people&#39;s eyes, but does that mean we should starve the seriously retarded because they can&#39;t feed themselves? Is there a basic quality of life that if not met should mean no quantity of life? Who is to decide this standard? Do i think she should have been starved? No, if michael schiavo wanted to be done with taking care of her, he could&#39;ve given over her care to her parents who obviouslyt wanted hewr to live. If he wanted to be able to get a divorce, then the government could&#39;ve done that. I know he says he wanted to just fulfill her wishes and put her out of her misery but without a legal document, id have to say "too bad". I know its harsh, but think of it this way: How can you experience misery when you&#39;re in a "Persistent Vegatative State"?
 

jonb

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2002
Posts
7,578
Media
0
Likes
65
Points
258
Age
40
But there is the indignity of being on fuckin&#39; national TV&#33; That&#39;s gotta count for something. If we don&#39;t want to respect the dead, we can stop with the funerals and start with the soylent green.
 

jay_too

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2002
Posts
789
Media
0
Likes
5
Points
236
Age
44
Location
CA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
The not-so-competent Dr. Frist now says, "I never made the diagnosis. I would never make a diagnosis based on a videotape."

In March, Frist, a doctor, said on the floor of the Senate that "that footage, to me, depicted something very different than persistent vegetative state." Newsweek, 6-27-05.

Damn, it is hard to pander to the fundamental base of the Republican Party and remain technically credible and HONEST.

jay
 

KinkGuy

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2004
Posts
2,794
Media
0
Likes
156
Points
268
Age
70
Location
southwest US
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Originally posted by jay_too@Jun 21 2005, 06:56 PM
Damn, it is hard to pander to the fundamental base of the Republican Party and remain technically credible and HONEST.
jay
[post=322862]Quoted post[/post]​

I think they have proven, over and over and over, that credibility and honesty have nothing to with anything.
 

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,609
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
Originally posted by KinkGuy+Jun 21 2005, 11:19 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KinkGuy &#064; Jun 21 2005, 11:19 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-jay_too@Jun 21 2005, 06:56 PM
Damn, it is hard to pander to the fundamental base of the Republican Party and remain technically credible and HONEST.
jay
[post=322862]Quoted post[/post]​

I think they have proven, over and over and over, that credibility and honesty have nothing to with anything.
[post=322953]Quoted post[/post]​
[/b][/quote]
I was not aware that the fundie wing of the Republican party knew the words credible and honest. Those words are not in their dictionary.

We can say though that those rightwing fundies are consistent. So are polar bears when in contact with humans. Polar bears love the taste of human flesh. Polar bears are consistent. Those rightwing fundies are consistently wrong.
 

madame_zora

Sexy Member
Joined
May 5, 2004
Posts
9,608
Media
0
Likes
52
Points
258
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Oh Freddie, they also lie consistantly, manipulate the facts consistantly, misinterpret everything consistantly, then consistantly claim moral highground while looking down their noses at others. Great representation of the Christian faith, eh? It makes me sick, I remember a time when Christian fundamentalists were not judgemental and rude to others. They kept to themselves a lot more and used the theory of attraction rather than promotion. No one can fault people for believing as they do and acting accordingly, it&#39;s just this new and ever so innapropriate blend of mixing religion with politics that does a disservice to both. I actually have a soft spot for fundies as I knew them in my youth, many were honest and wholesome people who did not see it as their place to judge others. I wonder what decent fundies think of this new breed?
 

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,609
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
Originally posted by madame_zora@Jun 22 2005, 01:32 AM
Oh Freddie, they also lie consistantly, manipulate the facts consistantly, misinterpret everything consistantly, then consistantly claim moral highground while looking down their noses at others. Great representation of the Christian faith, eh? It makes me sick, I remember a time when Christian fundamentalists were not judgemental and rude to others. They kept to themselves a lot more and used the theory of attraction rather than promotion. No one can fault people for believing as they do and acting accordingly, it&#39;s just this new and ever so innapropriate blend of mixing religion with politics that does a disservice to both. I actually have a soft spot for fundies as I knew them in my youth, many were honest and wholesome people who did not see it as their place to judge others. I wonder what decent fundies think of this new breed?
[post=322991]Quoted post[/post]​
Jana,

My father was a Baptist preacher, though he was very much a moderate in many ways. Many times my mother and my other brothers and sisters as well as I have said that we are glad he did not live to see what has happened to the church he loved so much. I saw what was coming down the pike 30 years ago and became United Methodist.

I agree that some who believed then as well as some now believe in a complete literal interpretation of the Bible are sweet, sincere, honest Christians. Most of them believed that religion shouldn&#39;t be injected directly into the government policies.

But the reality is that I believe some frauds have come in and hijacked some of the conservative fundamentalist movement. Some right wing politicians discovered that they could stir up the fundamental Christians and get votes to win.

The sad part is that the powers in control of the Republican Party couldn&#39;t care less about all these religious laws they are fighting for. The poor fundies have lost greatly under Bush and won&#39;t recognize it.

The people who really control the Republican Party haven&#39;t been inside a fundie church more than once or twice. Reagon was a Presbyterian, one of the most liberal denominations in America, certainly not close to fundievile. H.W. Bush is Episcopalian which is as liberal as it gets in Christianity. No fundies are in the
Episcopol Church. George Bush is United Methodist. United Methodist are not as liberal as a group as the Presbyterians or the Episcopol Church, but the United Methodist Church has never been accused of being being fundie. The United Methodist Church has lost members for beiing "too liberal" So let the record show what churches these Republican leaders attended. Bill and Hillary Clinton and George and Laura Bush both attend the same United Methodist Church in Washington D.C., Foundary United Methodist Church. Though Bill&#39;s official membership was still in a Little Rock, Arkansas Baptist church last I heard. And some leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention wanted to excommunicate that church from the Convention for having Bill&#39;s name on the roll.

Interesting information.
 

Dr. Dilznick

Experimental Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Posts
1,640
Media
0
Likes
4
Points
183
Age
46
Sexuality
No Response
You thought American conservatives were ALL God-fearing Christians? Many conservatives, if they ever plan to run for office, will need to take a couple bible study classes and learn some Christianity. LOL it&#39;s true though.
 

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,609
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
Originally posted by Dr. Dilznick@Jun 22 2005, 01:21 PM
You thought American conservatives were ALL God-fearing Christians? Many conservatives, if they ever plan to run for office, will need to take a couple bible study classes and learn some Christianity. LOL it&#39;s true though.
[post=323094]Quoted post[/post]​
True, they will need some education about fundie religion. Not sure they will need a Bible though. The fundies can teach them what they "want" them to know with a few pre-selected passages without resorting to Bible as a book.
 

prepstudinsc

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
May 18, 2004
Posts
17,050
Media
440
Likes
21,697
Points
468
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Verification
View
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Originally posted by Freddie53@Jun 22 2005, 01:31 PM
The people who really control the Republican Party haven&#39;t been inside a fundie church more than once or twice. Reagon was a Presbyterian, one of the most liberal denominations in America, certainly not close to fundievile. H.W. Bush is Episcopalian which is as liberal as it gets in Christianity. No fundies are in the
Episcopol Church. George Bush is United Methodist. United Methodist are not as liberal as a group as the Presbyterians or the Episcopol Church, but the United Methodist Church has never been accused of being being fundie. The United Methodist Church has lost members for beiing "too liberal" So let the record show what churches these Republican leaders attended. Bill and Hillary Clinton and George and Laura Bush both attend the same United Methodist Church in Washington D.C., Foundary United Methodist Church. Though Bill&#39;s official membership was still in a Little Rock, Arkansas Baptist church last I heard. And some leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention wanted to excommunicate that church from the Convention for having Bill&#39;s name on the roll.

[post=323085]Quoted post[/post]​

The Presbyterian Church is more than just one church. There is the Presbyterian Church (USA), there is the Presbyterian Church in America, the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church (General Synod), the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, the Bible Presbyterian Church, the Cumberland Presbyterian Church and the list goes on. Some of these denominations of the Presbyterian family are among the most ultra-conservative and very evangelical churches around. Even within the PCUSA, there is a large contingent of churches that are part of the "Confessing Movement" which is the evangelical branch of the PCUSA which has been taking root. It is sweeping through that church as a great revival, because people were seeing the need for a return back to Biblical foundations.

As to Foundry UMC in Washington, DC, it is close to the White House, so that is why the President attends there. Many of the Episcopalian presidents have attended St. John&#39;s Church, Lafayette Square, because it is across from the White House. President Carter and his family were members of First Baptist Church of Washington, DC, which is triply aligned with the Southern Baptist Convention, the American Baptist Churches-USA, and the Progressive National Baptist Convention, which is an African-American group of churches.

Each of these denominations has churches which span the gamut from being very conservative to very liberal. I know some United Methodist churches down in my area that stay true to their Episcopalian roots and others that hold fast to their holiness/revival heritage, being closer to their offshoot Pentecostal churches. The ones that are more "Episcopalian" or high-church in style tend to be more liberal, while the "Holiness" Methodists are definitely conservative--very conservative.

The same holds true with Baptist churches. I have been associated with some that are very traditional and conservative, while others I know that might be termed more "intellectual" and be in university towns would definitely be in the liberal camp. They can all be in the Southern Baptist Convention, but at polar ends of the spectrum in worship styles, in doctrinal interpretation, etc.

To say there are no fundies are in the Episcopal church is way off, too. Some of the largest (and growing&#33;) Episcopal churches in the US are the ones that are the evangelical ones. St. Martin&#39;s Episcopal Church, Houston, TX; Truro Church, Fairfax, VA; St. Philip&#39;s Church, Charleston, SC; St. Helena&#39;s Church, Beaufort, SC; St. Bartholomew&#39;s, Nashville, TN; St. James, Newport Beach, CA, just to name a few that are fundamental/evangelical (some even charismatic) and proud of it.

It&#39;s wrong to paint such a broad stroke about churches that whole denominations are all conservative or liberal.
 

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,609
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
Originally posted by prepstudinsc+Jun 22 2005, 05:51 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(prepstudinsc &#064; Jun 22 2005, 05:51 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Freddie53@Jun 22 2005, 01:31 PM
The people who really control the Republican Party haven&#39;t been inside a fundie church more than once or twice. Reagon was a Presbyterian, one of the most liberal denominations in America, certainly not close to fundievile. H.W. Bush is Episcopalian which is as liberal as it gets in Christianity. No fundies are in the
Episcopol Church.  George Bush is United Methodist. United Methodist are not as liberal as a group as the Presbyterians or the Episcopol Church, but the United Methodist Church has never been accused of being being fundie.  The United Methodist Church has lost members for beiing "too liberal" So let the record show what churches these Republican leaders attended. Bill and Hillary Clinton and George and Laura Bush both attend the same United Methodist Church in Washington D.C., Foundary United Methodist Church. Though Bill&#39;s official membership was still in a Little Rock, Arkansas Baptist church last I heard. And some leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention wanted to excommunicate that church from the Convention for having Bill&#39;s name on the roll.

[post=323085]Quoted post[/post]​

The Presbyterian Church is more than just one church. There is the Presbyterian Church (USA), there is the Presbyterian Church in America, the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church (General Synod), the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, the Bible Presbyterian Church, the Cumberland Presbyterian Church and the list goes on. Some of these denominations of the Presbyterian family are among the most ultra-conservative and very evangelical churches around. Even within the PCUSA, there is a large contingent of churches that are part of the "Confessing Movement" which is the evangelical branch of the PCUSA which has been taking root. It is sweeping through that church as a great revival, because people were seeing the need for a return back to Biblical foundations.

As to Foundry UMC in Washington, DC, it is close to the White House, so that is why the President attends there. Many of the Episcopalian presidents have attended St. John&#39;s Church, Lafayette Square, because it is across from the White House. President Carter and his family were members of First Baptist Church of Washington, DC, which is triply aligned with the Southern Baptist Convention, the American Baptist Churches-USA, and the Progressive National Baptist Convention, which is an African-American group of churches.

Each of these denominations has churches which span the gamut from being very conservative to very liberal. I know some United Methodist churches down in my area that stay true to their Episcopalian roots and others that hold fast to their holiness/revival heritage, being closer to their offshoot Pentecostal churches. The ones that are more "Episcopalian" or high-church in style tend to be more liberal, while the "Holiness" Methodists are definitely conservative--very conservative.

The same holds true with Baptist churches. I have been associated with some that are very traditional and conservative, while others I know that might be termed more "intellectual" and be in university towns would definitely be in the liberal camp. They can all be in the Southern Baptist Convention, but at polar ends of the spectrum in worship styles, in doctrinal interpretation, etc.

To say there are no fundies are in the Episcopal church is way off, too. Some of the largest (and growing&#33;) Episcopal churches in the US are the ones that are the evangelical ones. St. Martin&#39;s Episcopal Church, Houston, TX; Truro Church, Fairfax, VA; St. Philip&#39;s Church, Charleston, SC; St. Helena&#39;s Church, Beaufort, SC; St. Bartholomew&#39;s, Nashville, TN; St. James, Newport Beach, CA, just to name a few that are fundamental/evangelical (some even charismatic) and proud of it.

It&#39;s wrong to paint such a broad stroke about churches that whole denominations are all conservative or liberal.
[post=323227]Quoted post[/post]​
[/b][/quote]
Monty,

You do have a point. However, in the case of the Episcopal Church the overwhelming majority is not remotely fundie.

I consider myself evangelical. I am sympathetic to both the Episcopal heritage of the Methodist Church and the holinest heritage of the Methodist Church. One could be fundie and be either. One could not be fundie and appreciate both heritages.

I was pointing out the irony of what churches the past Republican Presidents have been members of. And the of the past Democratic Presidents Truman, Carter and Clinton have been offically Southern Baptists. Johnson was Disciples of Christ.

Nixon was Quaker. Eisenhower was Presbyterian as I recall. Kennedy was Catholic and I don&#39;t remember what Ford is. Rosevelt was Episcopalian. Past Rosevelt I don&#39;t know the denomination of many of the Presidents.

Monty, you have to see the irony of it all George Bush the fundie is United Methodist. Bill Clinton the great liberal is Southern Baptist. It is interesting to say the least.
 

KinkGuy

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2004
Posts
2,794
Media
0
Likes
156
Points
268
Age
70
Location
southwest US
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Originally posted by Freddie53@Jun 22 2005, 06:36 PM
you have to see the irony of it all George Bush the fundie is United Methodist. Bill Clinton the great liberal is Southern Baptist.  It is interesting to say the least.
[post=323283]Quoted post[/post]​

gw and company would probably admit to satan worship if it delivered the votes and the money.

I am NOT amused.

Someone has sold their soul to someone................or something.
 

madame_zora

Sexy Member
Joined
May 5, 2004
Posts
9,608
Media
0
Likes
52
Points
258
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Originally posted by KinkGuy+Jun 23 2005, 12:43 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KinkGuy &#064; Jun 23 2005, 12:43 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Freddie53@Jun 22 2005, 06:36 PM
you have to see the irony of it all George Bush the fundie is United Methodist. Bill Clinton the great liberal is Southern Baptist. It is interesting to say the least.
[post=323283]Quoted post[/post]​

gw and company would probably admit to satan worship if it delivered the votes and the money.

I am NOT amused.

Someone has sold their soul to someone................or something.
[post=323285]Quoted post[/post]​
[/b][/quote]


If that were only true. Unfortunately, they&#39;ve sold OUR souls.
 

MASSIVEPKGO_CHUCK

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2003
Posts
41,226
Media
0
Likes
41,778
Points
718
Location
New Jersey, USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Originally posted by madame_zora+Jun 23 2005, 07:55 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(madame_zora &#064; Jun 23 2005, 07:55 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
Originally posted by KinkGuy@Jun 23 2005, 12:43 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Freddie53
@Jun 22 2005, 06:36 PM
you have to see the irony of it all George Bush the fundie is United Methodist. Bill Clinton the great liberal is Southern Baptist.  It is interesting to say the least.
[post=323283]Quoted post[/post]​


gw and company would probably admit to satan worship if it delivered the votes and the money.

I am NOT amused.

Someone has sold their soul to someone................or something.
[post=323285]Quoted post[/post]​


If that were only true. Unfortunately, they&#39;ve sold OUR souls.
[post=323397]Quoted post[/post]​
[/b][/quote]
Yeah, dig it. And they&#39;ve tossed away the receipts.