Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-12-2013, 12:40 PM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(10-12-2013 07:00 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  For any believers out there. First off, I don't believe for an instant that the Adam-and-Eve story actually happened. That said, if it were to have happened, it seems incredibly unjust, especially the curses placed upon Adam and Eve and their descendents. Can someone explain how all of this is just?<SNIP>

Thanks Reltzik. You've hit the major ethical problems that I've always had with the whole notion of original sin. It's a notion that was cooked up by the church so they could blame the blameless and find the innocent guilty. After all, there isn't much point in a savior if you don't need saving. My favorite criticisms of original sin aren't the ethical ones, theists have never seen the point in an ethical deity, but the biblically literal ones:
  1. God Lies Genesis 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
  2. The Serpent Tells the Truth Genesis 3:4-5 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
  3. The Real Reason God Banished Adam and Eve from Eden Genesis 3:22-24 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

Not only does god leave innocents unattended within arms reach of spiritually-altering flora but he lies to them about its nature, compounding negligence with fraud. When everything goes wrong god banishes Adam and Eve from Eden not for sin or for disobedience, neither of which is mentioned, but because he doesn't want them to achieve immortality.

It's no wonder that god didn't want them eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil because a critical reading of Genesis 2 and 3 pretty quickly shows who's wearing the black hat in that story. I view the entire thing as an excellent parable on why the ethics of a modern civilization shouldn't be based on the mistranslated oral traditions of neolithic herdsmen.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Paleophyte's post
12-12-2013, 01:49 PM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(12-12-2013 12:40 PM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(10-12-2013 07:00 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  For any believers out there. First off, I don't believe for an instant that the Adam-and-Eve story actually happened. That said, if it were to have happened, it seems incredibly unjust, especially the curses placed upon Adam and Eve and their descendents. Can someone explain how all of this is just?<SNIP>

Thanks Reltzik. You've hit the major ethical problems that I've always had with the whole notion of original sin. It's a notion that was cooked up by the church so they could blame the blameless and find the innocent guilty. After all, there isn't much point in a savior if you don't need saving. My favorite criticisms of original sin aren't the ethical ones, theists have never seen the point in an ethical deity, but the biblically literal ones:
  1. God Lies Genesis 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
  2. The Serpent Tells the Truth Genesis 3:4-5 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
  3. The Real Reason God Banished Adam and Eve from Eden Genesis 3:22-24 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

Not only does god leave innocents unattended within arms reach of spiritually-altering flora but he lies to them about its nature, compounding negligence with fraud. When everything goes wrong god banishes Adam and Eve from Eden not for sin or for disobedience, neither of which is mentioned, but because he doesn't want them to achieve immortality.

It's no wonder that god didn't want them eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil because a critical reading of Genesis 2 and 3 pretty quickly shows who's wearing the black hat in that story. I view the entire thing as an excellent parable on why the ethics of a modern civilization shouldn't be based on the mistranslated oral traditions of neolithic herdsmen.

That's a very clear visualization. Thank you!

It also strikes me as suspicious that after the "crime", rather than simply removing the temptations altogether, he removes his finest creation from the garden, and puts a (single??) flaming sword to guard the whole mess. Are the trees more valuable to him than his humans? Why wasn't there a flaming sword guarding the whole mess to begin with?

And why, in so many discussions of this story, do the theists always seem to skirt the question of where in the heck did the serpent come from anyway? Don't they believe that everything in the universe was created by their creator?

EDIT: The whole thing seems eerily similar to one of the techniques from "To Train Up A Child".

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2013, 02:17 PM (This post was last modified: 12-12-2013 02:43 PM by Raptor Jesus.)
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(12-12-2013 12:27 PM)Alla Wrote:  Adam had body "flesh and bones" and so do Gods. But they do not have body "flesh and blood"
In the Scriptures mortal man called "flesh and blood" NOT "flesh and bones" But immortal man has body of flesh and bones according to the Scriptures. Adam said that Eve is flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones. Resurrected God Son has body "flesh and bones"
Gods have body "flesh and bones" and this is how Adam was created "flesh and bones"
Good, so we’ve established that your belief, and the way in which you choose to decipher scripture, is that “God” (“Gods”?) have flesh. I showed by your logic that “God” does, and you’ve stated that you have no problem with that as that is what you believe. Now what about this?

(11-12-2013 06:26 PM)Alla Wrote:  Adam was created in the image and likeness of God and he did NOT have earthly parents(was not created in the image of men/flesh and blood). God has no flesh.
How do we know this? NO flesh and BLOOD can inherit or be in the kingdom of God.(See 1Cor 15:50)
You’ll note, I substituted out blood for flesh in the colored part, but the argument for either does not change. I'm okay with you simply dropping this particular argument, as it holds no water. But if you do, you need to also drop this as the bases of your the argument that Adam and Eve had no blood before the fall.

But even if you are willing to drop that argument, that still leaves the question of, how does “God”, made of flesh, exist in “the kingdom of God”, when this passage you presented says, flesh cannot be in the kingdom of "God"?
Is this entire passage in error, or is “God” not actually made of flesh? Or is it something eles?

I don't actually need you to answer what I put in blue, unless you want to, as it will get us on a tangent if we spend too much time on it. I want to keep this focused.

(12-12-2013 12:27 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(12-12-2013 10:47 AM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  i]And getting back to my original question[/i], what would any of that have to do with having a child anyway. If Adam and Eve did not need blood to deliver oxygen and nutrients to their brains, and body tissues, and regulate their core temperatures, and the other vital functions it performs, then why would it be necessary for giving birth? And where in the bible does it say, this is the reason they could not give birth? Or where in the bible does it even say they could not have children, prior to the fall?
In Genesis 1:28, “God” says to Adam and Eve, “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth” This was said prior to the fall, indicating, straight from “God’s” mouth, that they were capable of baring children prior to the fall.
Those are good questions and points.

I don't remember in which post I said that I ASSUME that they couldn't have children because they didn't have blood. My assumption can be wrong.
It is wrong. But that’s because none of it is real. But even going by your view of the bible, that “ASSUMPTION” is still unwarranted, bases on the bible itself. So you need to drop that assumption.

(12-12-2013 12:27 PM)Alla Wrote:  Scriptures doesn't say why they wouldn't have children before fall. But I have another ASSUMPTION why they wouldn't have children.

Probably their bodies had capacity to have children but here I see the problem.
Remember that they didn't realize that they were naked? It reminds me innocent children who do not see their nakedness. Do you think they would have a desire to have sex?

Do you think their "blood" would "boil" when they saw each other naked?

What happens to you when you see sexy and beautiful naked woman next to you and who is your wife?

What happens to me when I see naked and handsome guy next to me and who is my husband?

I guess we both know.

But Adam and Eve were like innocent children, they even didn't know they were naked. I can ASSUME they didn't care about sex.

“God” told them to be fruitful and multiply, prior to the fall. Prior to them realizing they were naked. You cannot “ASSUME” based on this that they could not have sex, as “God” “himself” knew they could, and said so. It’s in the bible. “God” “knows” they can have sex, he says as much. Why ASSUME you know something that “God” does not?

My dogs don’t “know” they are naked. I could have made the ASSUMPTION they didn’t care about sex because they didn’t “know” they were naked. But my ASSUMPTION would have been in error because believe me, regardless of not having knowledge of their nudity, they still got it on a couple times before I had a chance to get them fixed.

(12-12-2013 12:27 PM)Alla Wrote:  What do you think/assume?
I think your assessment/ASSUMPTION of the situation is wrong, and requires reexamining under a more critical light, with less ASSUMPTIONS, and more evidence.
/
I make no assumptions. I weigh evidence.

(12-12-2013 12:27 PM)Alla Wrote:  I can ASSUME …
Stop doing that.

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Raptor Jesus's post
12-12-2013, 03:23 PM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(12-12-2013 02:17 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  Good, so we’ve established that your belief, and the way in which you choose to decipher scripture, is that “God” (“Gods”?) have flesh.
I don't decipher Scripture when I say that God has body of flesh and bones. According to the Scriptures God Son Himself says that His body is "flesh and bones".
Luke 24:
39 behold my hands and my feet...handle me and see; for a spirit hath not FLESH AND BONES, as ye see me HAVE.
Adam didn't say about Eve:" this is now blood of blood" but he mentioned only "flesh of my flesh and bone of my bones".
God has body of flesh and bones but not body of flesh and blood.
"Flesh and blood" is reference to mortal/fallen men only. And mortal/fallen men(flesh and blood) can not be where God is.

(12-12-2013 02:17 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  But even if you are willing to drop that argument, that still leaves the question of, how does “God”, made of flesh, exist in “the kingdom of God”, when this passage you presented says, flesh cannot be in the kingdom of "God"?
I never said that "flesh" can not enter. I always say "flesh AND bones" or 'flesh AND blood". God is NOT just flesh and Adam was not just flesh and Eve was not just flesh BUT God is "flesh AND bones", Adam was "flesh AND bones" Eve was flesh of Adam's flesh AND bone of Adam's bones.
Just "flesh" without bones or just flesh without blood can not be a Man/man
(12-12-2013 02:17 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  “God” told them to be fruitful and multiply, prior to the fall. Prior to them realizing they were naked.
Yes. God told them before fall. He HAD to. For the reason that Adam could have a CHOICE -
1)not partaking of the fruit when Eve offered to him (obey second law)
or
2)by partaking to obey first law to cleave onto his already MORTAL/FALLEN wife who had to be cast out and multiply and replenish WITH HER.

(12-12-2013 02:17 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  My dogs don’t “know” they are naked.
Men are not dogs. OK. I have a question. What do you think God was trying to tell you when He said that Adam and Eve didn't know that they were naked/their eyes were NOT opened?

(12-12-2013 02:17 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  ALLA:I can ASSUME …
Stop doing that.
Why? What is wrong with that?

English is not my native language.
that awkward moment between the Premortal Existence and your Resurrection
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2013, 03:30 PM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(12-12-2013 03:23 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(12-12-2013 02:17 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  Good, so we’ve established that your belief, and the way in which you choose to decipher scripture, is that “God” (“Gods”?) have flesh.
I don't decipher Scripture when I say that God has body of flesh and bones. According to the Scriptures God Son Himself says that His body is "flesh and bones".
Luke 24:
39 behold my hands and my feet...handle me and see; for a spirit hath not FLESH AND BONES, as ye see me HAVE.
Adam didn't say about Eve:" this is now blood of blood" but he mentioned only "flesh of my flesh and bone of my bones".
God has body of flesh and bones but not body of flesh and blood.
"Flesh and blood" is reference to mortal/fallen men only. And mortal/fallen men(flesh and blood) can not be where God is.

(12-12-2013 02:17 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  But even if you are willing to drop that argument, that still leaves the question of, how does “God”, made of flesh, exist in “the kingdom of God”, when this passage you presented says, flesh cannot be in the kingdom of "God"?
I never said that "flesh" can not enter. I always say "flesh AND bones" or 'flesh AND blood". God is NOT just flesh and Adam was not just flesh and Eve was not just flesh BUT God is "flesh AND bones", Adam was "flesh AND bones" Eve was flesh of Adam's flesh AND bone of Adam's bones.
Just "flesh" without bones or just flesh without blood can not be a Man/man
(12-12-2013 02:17 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  “God” told them to be fruitful and multiply, prior to the fall. Prior to them realizing they were naked.
Yes. God told them before fall. He HAD to. For the reason that Adam could have a CHOICE -
1)not partaking of the fruit when Eve offered to him (obey second law)
or
2)by partaking to obey first law to cleave onto his already MORTAL/FALLEN wife who had to be cast out and multiply and replenish WITH HER.

(12-12-2013 02:17 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  My dogs don’t “know” they are naked.
Men are not dogs. OK. I have a question. What do you think God was trying to tell you when He said that Adam and Eve didn't know that they were naked/their eyes were NOT opened?

(12-12-2013 02:17 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  ALLA:I can ASSUME …
Stop doing that.
Why? What is wrong with that?

Phar out, man.

[Image: a7c58acc2569c357a0ebee46b467ffad.gif]

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2013, 11:51 AM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(10-12-2013 07:00 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  For any believers out there. First off, I don't believe for an instant that the Adam-and-Eve story actually happened. That said, if it were to have happened, it seems incredibly unjust, especially the curses placed upon Adam and Eve and their descendents. Can someone explain how all of this is just?

Let me go over the points that strike me as unjust in the first place.

1) This is an old atheist standby. God put what was essentially schmuckbait in front of two people so ignorant of good and evil that they can only be described as schmucks, and then is angry when the schmucks take the schmuckbait. And maybe God planned on the schmucks taking the schmuckbait and then punishing the schmucks for doing exactly what God planned on the schmucks doing all along. I've got issues with this, but let's leave it aside. Dead horse.

2) God, who is supposedly infinitely just, curses them for it. (God also curses the serpent, but meh.) God curses Eve with labor pains (bad) and... well, it varies from translation to translation, but either sexual desire for Adam (that's a curse?) or slavery to Adam, and God curses Adam with ground that's hard to farm and thorny weeds. It's easy to see that these curses are unequally applied, because Eve also suffers from Adam's curse, but Adam doesn't suffer from Eve's. It's not like she wouldn't have trouble with hard soil and thorns if she herself tried farming, nor is it as if Adam will ever suffer from labor pains. Now, I utterly reject the idea that justice is all about punishment and nothing more. But I can see how someone caught up in that mentality might call this justice. And I can kinda wrap my mind around the idea (even if I ultimately reject it) that Eve was the principle offender and thus deserves to be punished worse. But I'll leave it aside, too, because that's not what's really bugging me.

3) God doesn't just curse Adam and Eve, but also curses their descendents. This is known as a crime of blood, a crime where the punishment applies not only to the offender but to the offender's family. It would be as if you were thrown into jail for, say, committing, say, robbery, and your ten-year-old son were thrown in jail with you as well, and your twenty-year-old daughter, and HER five-month-old baby, none of whom had committed any crime. Or if historians uncovered that your great-great-great-great grandfather was actually John Wilkes Booth, and so you and every member of your family descended from him was hung for assassinating Lincoln. How in the world is this a just punishment?

4) Finally, and this is where it really gets confusing, the descendents of Adam and Eve are also punished unequally. Women still have to deal with thorns when gardening, and men still don't suffer from labor pains. At this point, we've lost even the fig leaf of justification for punishing Eve worse than Adam. Why are women cursed worse then men? Is it because women are descended from Eve... and men aren't? How in the world does this make any sense at all?

First, there's a better way to sum the curses since they both can apply to men and women alike in different times and in different ways: 1) You will need to work for shelter, food, etc. 2) Child rearing and raising, not just birth labor, will also require work, sacrifice and pain.

Now look at the many blessings of work, prosperity and raising children and we can see the providence--life isn't easy but can provide rich rewards. Satan was cursed, and the ground was cursed, not Adam and Eve.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2013, 06:08 PM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(18-12-2013 11:51 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
(10-12-2013 07:00 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  For any believers out there. First off, I don't believe for an instant that the Adam-and-Eve story actually happened. That said, if it were to have happened, it seems incredibly unjust, especially the curses placed upon Adam and Eve and their descendents. Can someone explain how all of this is just?

Let me go over the points that strike me as unjust in the first place.

1) This is an old atheist standby. God put what was essentially schmuckbait in front of two people so ignorant of good and evil that they can only be described as schmucks, and then is angry when the schmucks take the schmuckbait. And maybe God planned on the schmucks taking the schmuckbait and then punishing the schmucks for doing exactly what God planned on the schmucks doing all along. I've got issues with this, but let's leave it aside. Dead horse.

2) God, who is supposedly infinitely just, curses them for it. (God also curses the serpent, but meh.) God curses Eve with labor pains (bad) and... well, it varies from translation to translation, but either sexual desire for Adam (that's a curse?) or slavery to Adam, and God curses Adam with ground that's hard to farm and thorny weeds. It's easy to see that these curses are unequally applied, because Eve also suffers from Adam's curse, but Adam doesn't suffer from Eve's. It's not like she wouldn't have trouble with hard soil and thorns if she herself tried farming, nor is it as if Adam will ever suffer from labor pains. Now, I utterly reject the idea that justice is all about punishment and nothing more. But I can see how someone caught up in that mentality might call this justice. And I can kinda wrap my mind around the idea (even if I ultimately reject it) that Eve was the principle offender and thus deserves to be punished worse. But I'll leave it aside, too, because that's not what's really bugging me.

3) God doesn't just curse Adam and Eve, but also curses their descendents. This is known as a crime of blood, a crime where the punishment applies not only to the offender but to the offender's family. It would be as if you were thrown into jail for, say, committing, say, robbery, and your ten-year-old son were thrown in jail with you as well, and your twenty-year-old daughter, and HER five-month-old baby, none of whom had committed any crime. Or if historians uncovered that your great-great-great-great grandfather was actually John Wilkes Booth, and so you and every member of your family descended from him was hung for assassinating Lincoln. How in the world is this a just punishment?

4) Finally, and this is where it really gets confusing, the descendents of Adam and Eve are also punished unequally. Women still have to deal with thorns when gardening, and men still don't suffer from labor pains. At this point, we've lost even the fig leaf of justification for punishing Eve worse than Adam. Why are women cursed worse then men? Is it because women are descended from Eve... and men aren't? How in the world does this make any sense at all?

First, there's a better way to sum the curses since they both can apply to men and women alike in different times and in different ways: 1) You will need to work for shelter, food, etc. 2) Child rearing and raising, not just birth labor, will also require work, sacrifice and pain.

Now look at the many blessings of work, prosperity and raising children and we can see the providence--life isn't easy but can provide rich rewards. Satan was cursed, and the ground was cursed, not Adam and Eve.

Wait, why was Satan cursed? What did he do?

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2013, 06:29 PM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(18-12-2013 11:51 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
(10-12-2013 07:00 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  For any believers out there. First off, I don't believe for an instant that the Adam-and-Eve story actually happened. That said, if it were to have happened, it seems incredibly unjust, especially the curses placed upon Adam and Eve and their descendents. Can someone explain how all of this is just?

Let me go over the points that strike me as unjust in the first place.

1) This is an old atheist standby. God put what was essentially schmuckbait in front of two people so ignorant of good and evil that they can only be described as schmucks, and then is angry when the schmucks take the schmuckbait. And maybe God planned on the schmucks taking the schmuckbait and then punishing the schmucks for doing exactly what God planned on the schmucks doing all along. I've got issues with this, but let's leave it aside. Dead horse.

2) God, who is supposedly infinitely just, curses them for it. (God also curses the serpent, but meh.) God curses Eve with labor pains (bad) and... well, it varies from translation to translation, but either sexual desire for Adam (that's a curse?) or slavery to Adam, and God curses Adam with ground that's hard to farm and thorny weeds. It's easy to see that these curses are unequally applied, because Eve also suffers from Adam's curse, but Adam doesn't suffer from Eve's. It's not like she wouldn't have trouble with hard soil and thorns if she herself tried farming, nor is it as if Adam will ever suffer from labor pains. Now, I utterly reject the idea that justice is all about punishment and nothing more. But I can see how someone caught up in that mentality might call this justice. And I can kinda wrap my mind around the idea (even if I ultimately reject it) that Eve was the principle offender and thus deserves to be punished worse. But I'll leave it aside, too, because that's not what's really bugging me.

3) God doesn't just curse Adam and Eve, but also curses their descendents. This is known as a crime of blood, a crime where the punishment applies not only to the offender but to the offender's family. It would be as if you were thrown into jail for, say, committing, say, robbery, and your ten-year-old son were thrown in jail with you as well, and your twenty-year-old daughter, and HER five-month-old baby, none of whom had committed any crime. Or if historians uncovered that your great-great-great-great grandfather was actually John Wilkes Booth, and so you and every member of your family descended from him was hung for assassinating Lincoln. How in the world is this a just punishment?

4) Finally, and this is where it really gets confusing, the descendents of Adam and Eve are also punished unequally. Women still have to deal with thorns when gardening, and men still don't suffer from labor pains. At this point, we've lost even the fig leaf of justification for punishing Eve worse than Adam. Why are women cursed worse then men? Is it because women are descended from Eve... and men aren't? How in the world does this make any sense at all?

First, there's a better way to sum the curses since they both can apply to men and women alike in different times and in different ways: 1) You will need to work for shelter, food, etc. 2) Child rearing and raising, not just birth labor, will also require work, sacrifice and pain.

Now look at the many blessings of work, prosperity and raising children and we can see the providence--life isn't easy but can provide rich rewards. Satan was cursed, and the ground was cursed, not Adam and Eve.

Why would the ground be cursed? Doesn't compute.

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-12-2013, 09:14 AM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
The fruit of the ground.

And if you don't know what Satan did, you likely should avoid discussing Christianity on threads like these.

Thanks.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-12-2013, 09:41 AM
RE: Can a believer explain the justice of the original sins curses?
(23-12-2013 09:14 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  The fruit of the ground.

And if you don't know what Satan did, you likely should avoid discussing Christianity on threads like these.

Thanks.

Well, I find the fruit of the ground perfectly good. No curse there, we should all eat more of it.

So, what did Satan do? I guess I am missing parts of the fairy tale here...

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: