Poll: What is your opinion of Vaccines/Vaccine Policy?
Vaccines saved the world. Bring them on.
I don't entirely trust big pharma, but vaccines have done more good than harm.
Some vaccines are effective and useful. Some are not.
Vaccines are of questionable value, like many pharmaceuticals, but I might want one if an epidemic hits.
Vaccines cause more health problems than they prevent. Parents and individuals should have the right to refuse any/all of them.
Vaccines are part of a population-reduction conspiracy on the part of the global elite and are intended to sterilize/kill as many as possible.
[Show Results]
 
Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-05-2014, 12:29 AM (This post was last modified: 02-05-2014 12:47 AM by Magellan35.)
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(01-05-2014 10:44 PM)sporehux Wrote:  What I see :
Very transparent internationally agreed upon health endeavour along with, semi transparent big pharma companies that are forced to work within this framework and are subject to the exposure this entails.

Thousand of individual government agencies in power around the world at the whim of their voting public, that are bearing the responsibilty and blame for vaccination issues.
thousands of doctors that have the autonomy to reports issues to anyone, the press if need be.
thousands of scientists whose research is directly related or overlaps with the medical science in immunology working daily in the improvement and mitigation of adverse reactions.
Big pharma scientists that would value their lifetime reputation above corrupt science that could not escape exposure forever.
and a tiny % of exception to what I have stated above.

what magellan thinks; (strawman used for creative purposes)

it's an amoral cluster fu*ck with everyone out for self interest and profit, with all parties colluding with the big pharma.


which one of us is a conspiracy theorist ?
Yes, let me light fire to the strawman.

What I see:
A 240-year old paradigm that started with Edward Jenner, who did not know anything about microbiology. He literally scraped pus into the skin of people to see if the results were better than variolation.

Because people back then were justifiably terrified of communicable disease and his method was safer than variolation, it caught on and became the "transparent internationally agreed upon health endeavour" of which you speak.

Now, 240 years later, we have the ability to sequence the genome and digitally depict protein synthesis at work. We can look into a cell and determine how oxidization affects mitochondria and how genes lacking in methyl compounds turn off and cause dysfunction in tissues and organs, or worse, become cancerous. We can even chart the chemical pathways by which autoimmunity is induced, when there is the funding and the will to do so.

These are exciting times. In our lifetime (I hope) we will see the manner in which thousands of compounds interact with and affect genes and their expression. We will have the science to craft health advice for an individual that is genotype-specific, which will cause our great grandchildren to think that a one-size-fits-all approach to immunization, clumsy use of drugs, and shelves full of nutrient-free "food" were the results of severe mental retardation back in the 21st century.

Do I think big pharma is pure evil? Part of a cabal of the elite? Working for the grays?

For the most part, they are owned by wealthy families and industrialists who for many generations have done things in a regimented fashion (I explained this clearly in an earlier post) that by and large puts symptom-based treatment ahead of diagnosis of underlying factors that undermine a patient's health. Because of the need to protect their investment in new therapies from scrutiny by competitors - and in consideration of a number of drugs that were not recalled quickly even after they were known to be steaming vials of turd - I guess I would call them vaguely translucent, like the back windows of the CEO'S S-Class.

Big pharma companies spend more on lobbying and have more lobbyists in washington D.C. than any other industry, and work within a framework that is heavily influenced to support their goals and business methods. It is not a conspiracy; it is any Tuesday afternoon in the full light of day.

If you call me a conspiracy theorist for saying so, I'll call you Pollyanna. Labels don't change facts.

Is it all an "amoral cluster-fuck with everyone out for self interest and profit, with all parties colluding with big pharma?" Not exactly. It is innumerable people, most of them well-intentioned, who live their lives in little boxes, afraid of huge paradigm shifts and ever-aware of who they need to please if they want to stay funded. So yeah, self-interest comes into play.

I want more and more (and more) information from well-funded independent and/or diverse labs, telling us in minute detail how our environment (everything that enters or contacts our bodies) affects their function, communication, metabolism, replication, and energy production (to name a few processes). I want that information to change the food sold in the cereal aisle, the way industry handles pollutants, and the way soil is fertilized. I want it to change the way plastic bottles, household chemicals, vitamin supplements, cancer treatments, and vaccines are formulated as we learn how some people are more susceptible to unseen injury than others.

Anything that hinders that process of discovery - whether it be the securing of patents for natural processes and products that should be public domain, conducting media smear campaigns against anyone who disagrees with the old guard, fighting wars for oil rights, or obstructing science that reveals how an industry or product causes damage to us or the environment (melamine in Chinese milk products...delicious), or any of a million other callow animal behaviours that characterize our species - keeps us from realizing more than a fraction of our potential.

Some days I'm not sure we deserve anything better than to make way for a more dignified species. As far as I can tell, there is no conspiracy except the conspiracy to be a bunch of dumb, lazy apes who club each other and steal each other's shit, only played out in a bigger arena. We are on the cusp of having the science to do great and wonderful things (like a manned mission to Mars), but I doubt we have the maturity.

I just want us to grow up, and for that I am labeled a conspiracy theorist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 12:37 AM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(02-05-2014 12:01 AM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  It always strikes me how conspiracy theorists increasingly lose sight on proportionality and consequences the more rabid they become in their attacks against those who they view as the conspirators.

"It immunizes us from killer diseases? NOT WORTH IT CUZ CHANCE OF AUTISM!!!! GET MAD AT BIG PHARMA! GET MAD AT GOVERNMENT! SHEEPLE, TOOLS, DRONES, STOP TRUSTING ORGANIZATIONS UNRELATED TO BIG PHARMA BECAUSE THEY ARE OBVIOUSLY RELATED TO BIG PHARMA! TRUST IN SPURIOUS RESEARCH WITH NO PEER REVIEW CUZ IT ONLY STUFF NOT CONTROLLED BY ILLIMUNATI! Y U NO USE BRAIN?

Well I guess that's one way to make enough noise to get the whole inconvenient "it immunizes us from widespread, killer diseases" out of the way. God forbid we ever suppress killer microbes from entering our systems. We gotta focus on bigger things, like Big Pharma and minor flare-ups from vaccines which end up doing no substantial harm.
If this bullshit rant makes you sleep better at night, pleasant dreams. Read my last post.

Please evolve.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 12:41 AM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(02-05-2014 12:29 AM)Magellan35 Wrote:  
(01-05-2014 10:44 PM)sporehux Wrote:  What I see :
Very transparent internationally agreed upon health endeavour along with, semi transparent big pharma companies that are forced to work within this framework and are subject to the exposure this entails.

Thousand of individual government agencies in power around the world at the whim of their voting public, that are bearing the responsibilty and blame for vaccination issues.
thousands of doctors that have the autonomy to reports issues to anyone, the press if need be.
thousands of scientists whose research is directly related or overlaps with the medical science in immunology working daily in the improvement and mitigation of adverse reactions.
Big pharma scientists that would value their lifetime reputation above corrupt science that could not escape exposure forever.
and a tiny % of exception to what I have stated above.

what magellan thinks; (strawman used for creative purposes)

it's an amoral cluster fu*ck with everyone out for self interest and profit, with all parties colluding with the big pharma.


which one of us is a conspiracy theorist ?
Yes, let me light fire to the strawman.

What I see:
A 240-year old paradigm that started with Edward Jenner, who did not know anything about microbiology. He literally scraped pus into the skin of people to see if the results were better than variolation.

Because people back then were justifiably terrified of communicable disease and his method was safer than variolation, it caught on and became the "transparent internationally agreed upon health endeavour" of which you speak.

Now, 240 years later, we have the ability to sequence the genome and digitally depict protein synthesis at work. We can look into a cell and determine how oxidization affects mitochondria and how genes lacking in methyl compounds turn off and cause dysfunction in tissues and organs, or worse, become cancerous. We can even chart the chemical pathways by which autoimmunity is induced, when there is the funding and the will to do so.

These are exciting times. In our lifetime (I hope) we will see the manner in which thousands of compounds interact with and affect genes and their expression. We will have the science to craft health advice for an individual that is genotype-specific, which will cause our great grandchildren to think that a one-size-fits-all approach to immunization, clumsy use of drugs, and shelves full of nutrient-free "food" were the results of severe mental retardation back in the 21st century.

Do I think big pharma is pure evil? Part of a cabal of the elite? Working for the grays?

For the most part, they are owned by wealthy families and industrialists who for many generations have done things in a regimented fashion (I explained this clearly in an earlier post) that by and large puts symptom-based treatment ahead of diagnosis of underlying factors that undermine a patient's health. Because of the need to protect their investment in new therapies from scrutiny by competitors - and in consideration of a number of drugs that were not recalled quickly even after they were known to be steaming vials of turd - I guess I would call them vaguely translucent, like the back windows of the CEO'S S-Class.

Big pharma companies spend more on lobbying and have more lobbyists in washington D.C. than any other industry, and work within a framework that is heavily influenced to support their goals and business methods. It is not a conspiracy; it is any Tuesday afternoon in the full light of day.

If you call me a conspiracy theorist for saying so, I'll call you Pollyanna. Labels don't change facts.

Is it all an "amoral cluster-fuck with everyone out for self interest and profit, with all parties colluding with big pharma?" Not exactly. It is innumerable people, most of them well-intentioned, who live their lives in little boxes, afraid of huge paradigm shifts and ever-aware of who they need to please if they want to stay funded.

I want more and more (and more) information from well-funded independent and/or diverse labs, telling us in minute detail how our environment (everything that enters or contacts our bodies) affects their function, communication, metabolism, replication, and energy production (to name a few processes). I want that information to change the food sold in the cereal aisle, the way industry handles pollutants, and the way soil is fertilized. I want it to change the way plastic bottles, household chemicals, vitamin supplements, cancer treatments, and vaccines are formulated as we learn how some people are more susceptible to unseen injury than others.

Anything that hinders that process of discovery - whether it be knowledge of melamine in Chinese milk products, the securing of patents for natural processes and products that should be public domain, conducting media smear campaigns against anyone who disagrees with the old guard, fighting wars for oil rights, or obstructing science that reveals how an industry or product causes damage to us or the environment, or any of a million other callow animal behaviours that characterize our species - keeps us from realizing more than a fraction of our potential.

Some days I'm not sure we deserve anything better than to make way for a more dignified species. As far as I can tell, there is no conspiracy except the conspiracy to be bunch of dumb, lazy apes who club each other and steal each other's shit, only played out in a bigger arena. We are on the cusp of having the science to do great and wonderful things (like a manned mission to Mars), but I doubt we have the maturity.

I just want us to grow up, and for that I am labeled a conspiracy theorist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 12:47 AM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(02-05-2014 12:29 AM)Magellan35 Wrote:  
(01-05-2014 10:44 PM)sporehux Wrote:  What I see :
Very transparent internationally agreed upon health endeavour along with, semi transparent big pharma companies that are forced to work within this framework and are subject to the exposure this entails.

Thousand of individual government agencies in power around the world at the whim of their voting public, that are bearing the responsibilty and blame for vaccination issues.
thousands of doctors that have the autonomy to reports issues to anyone, the press if need be.
thousands of scientists whose research is directly related or overlaps with the medical science in immunology working daily in the improvement and mitigation of adverse reactions.
Big pharma scientists that would value their lifetime reputation above corrupt science that could not escape exposure forever.
and a tiny % of exception to what I have stated above.

what magellan thinks; (strawman used for creative purposes)

it's an amoral cluster fu*ck with everyone out for self interest and profit, with all parties colluding with the big pharma.


which one of us is a conspiracy theorist ?
Yes, let me light fire to the strawman.

What I see:
A 240-year old paradigm that started with Edward Jenner, who did not know anything about microbiology. He literally scraped pus into the skin of people to see if the results were better than variolation.

Because people back then were justifiably terrified of communicable disease and his method was safer than variolation, it caught on and became the "transparent internationally agreed upon health endeavour" of which you speak.

Now, 240 years later, we have the ability to sequence the genome and digitally depict protein synthesis at work. We can look into a cell and determine how oxidization affects mitochondria and how genes lacking in methyl compounds turn off and cause dysfunction in tissues and organs, or worse, become cancerous. We can even chart the chemical pathways by which autoimmunity is induced, when there is the funding and the will to do so.

These are exciting times. In our lifetime (I hope) we will see the manner in which thousands of compounds interact with and affect genes and their expression. We will have the science to craft health advice for an individual that is genotype-specific, which will cause our great grandchildren to think that a one-size-fits-all approach to immunization, clumsy use of drugs, and shelves full of nutrient-free "food" were the results of severe mental retardation back in the 21st century.

Do I think big pharma is pure evil? Part of a cabal of the elite? Working for the grays?

For the most part, they are owned by wealthy families and industrialists who for many generations have done things in a regimented fashion (I explained this clearly in an earlier post) that by and large puts symptom-based treatment ahead of diagnosis of underlying factors that undermine a patient's health. Because of the need to protect their investment in new therapies from scrutiny by competitors - and in consideration of a number of drugs that were not recalled quickly even after they were known to be steaming vials of turd - I guess I would call them vaguely translucent, like the back windows of the CEO'S S-Class.

Big pharma companies spend more on lobbying and have more lobbyists in washington D.C. than any other industry, and work within a framework that is heavily influenced to support their goals and business methods. It is not a conspiracy; it is any Tuesday afternoon in the full light of day.

If you call me a conspiracy theorist for saying so, I'll call you Pollyanna. Labels don't change facts.

Is it all an "amoral cluster-fuck with everyone out for self interest and profit, with all parties colluding with big pharma?" Not at all. It is innumerable people, most of them well-intentioned, who live their lives in little boxes, afraid of huge paradigm shifts and ever-aware of who they need to please if they want to stay funded.

I want more and more (and more) information from well-funded independent and/or diverse labs, telling us in minute detail how our environment (everything that enters or contacts our bodies) affects their function, communication, metabolism, replication, and energy production (to name a few processes). I want that information to change the food sold in the cereal aisle, the way industry handles pollutants, and the way soil is fertilized. I want it to change the way plastic bottles, household chemicals, vitamin supplements, cancer treatments, and vaccines are formulated as we learn how some people are more susceptible to unseen injury than others.

Anything that hinders that process of discovery - whether it be knowledge of melamine in Chinese milk products, the securing of patents for natural processes and products that should be public domain, conducting media smear campaigns against anyone who disagrees with the old guard, fighting wars for oil rights, or obstructing science that reveals how an industry or product causes damage to us or the environment, or any of a million other callow animal behaviours that characterize our species - keeps us from realizing more than a fraction of our potential.

Some days I'm not sure we deserve anything better than to make way for a more dignified species. As far as I can tell, there is no conspiracy except the conspiracy to be bunch of dumb, lazy apes who club each other and steal each other's shit, only played out in a bigger arena. We are on the cusp of having the science to do great and wonderful things (like a manned mission to Mars), but I doubt we have the maturity.

I just want us to grow up, and for that I am labeled a conspiracy theorist.

It's probably because the views you're expressing make you sound like a conspiracy theorist.

For what you're claiming to be true, the IANPHI, WHO, and CDC would have to be involved in
a global conspiracy not to prevent the spread of infectious diseases, but a global cover-up of illnesses caused by the methods used to prevent of the spread of diseases worldwide.

I'm not saying "trust big government" or "welcome our new reptilian overlords" as you seem to believe, but you are claiming the largest international groups worldwide who seek to present the spread of deaths caused by disease are involved in a conspiracy to knowingly cause disease.

And extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 01:05 AM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
Go back and read your own OP
Then tell us what issuses you have changed your opinion on.

If you have not changed your opinion on any thing and you still stand by this statement:::
"more people now die or suffer morbidity from vaccine-induced health problems than would die if we stopped vaccinating and encouraged better diet and exercise (which would not keep the medical industry massively profitable)."""

Then you are what the less patient ppl on the thread have been accusing you of, and deserving the doubleTaq attack. And a conspiracy theorist of the first order.

Do you still agree with your OP statement quoted above ?

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 01:40 AM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(02-05-2014 12:47 AM)rampant.a.i. Wrote:  For what you're claiming to be true, the IANPHI, WHO, and CDC would have to be involved in
a global conspiracy not to prevent the spread of infectious diseases, but a global cover-up of illnesses caused by the prevention of the spread of diseases worldwide.

I'm not saying "trust big government" or "welcome our new reptilian overlords" as you seem to believe, but you are claiming the largest international groups worldwide who seek to present the spread of deaths caused by disease are involved in a conspiracy to knowingly cause disease.

And extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Not a global conspiracy. Human nature compounded by what they see as a humanitarian agenda with a fragile public image, especially in the internet age.

It's like this: People working in public health, by and large, absolutely believe they are working for the greater good and that vaccines are what we often hear they are: Miracles of modern science that have saved us from the ravages of age-old infectious diseases. Very, very few of these people are aware of significant downsides to vaccines, and I imagine that those who are aware can't imagine a better way to manage the risk of communicable disease, so they swallow hard and press on.

Within the inner sanctums of vaccine manufacturing companies (as with most large corporations), I think there are people corrupt enough not to care (morally/ethically) about low efficacy rates or side effects (unless they are likely to hurt quarterly projections), as long as time-tested tools keep the product selling and reports of injury can be mothballed. But I think such people are relatively few.

Huge marketing arms and lobby efforts, along with heavy funding for public health agencies, initiatives, and their personnel, keep the wheels greased so that pre-licensure safety trials can be performed at lower than the double-blind, peer-reviewed, placebo-controlled standard for most scientific studies. After licensing - with an army of true believers situated in public health agencies and doctors who generally see the risk/reward ratio as favouring vaccines and rarely ask questions beyond what they read in package inserts - only time can tell what percentage of vaccinees will have adverse reactions, how severe they will be, how many will be accurately attributed to vaccine, how many will be reported to appropriate monitoring services, and whether or not those reports will gather sufficient momentum to force a change in formulation, timing of vaccination, a recall, and/or payouts from the Office of Special Masters of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

Because the motives of so many people in the industry are completely philanthropic, and the machine that creates and brings them to market is so effective, and the marketing verbiage and ads so well-crafted, and the wheels of state so well greased, when a researcher pops up and says, "Hey, that's all well and fine, but we're starting to see a lot of autoimmunity in the population and some other syndromes that come along as the vaccine schedule grows in doses and variety," the response is almost always going to be, "Shut the fuck up, you monster. you child-killer, can't you see that this is all for the public good?"

Human nature. Ain't it a bitch?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 02:12 AM (This post was last modified: 02-05-2014 02:15 AM by Magellan35.)
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(02-05-2014 01:05 AM)sporehux Wrote:  Go back and read your own OP
Then tell us what issuses you have changed your opinion on.

If you have not changed your opinion on any thing and you still stand by this statement:::
"more people now die or suffer morbidity from vaccine-induced health problems than would die if we stopped vaccinating and encouraged better diet and exercise (which would not keep the medical industry massively profitable)."""

Then you are what the less patient ppl on the thread have been accusing you of, and deserving the doubleTaq attack. And a conspiracy theorist of the first order.

Do you still agree with your OP statement quoted above ?
There's the rub. I'm well aware of what I wrote.

If you read my last post, you'll see how I believe the system works, and where it breaks down.

It is not a system that is about to lie down and say, "Shit, we screwed up."
It is a juggernaut, a supertanker - one that does not change course quickly in light of reports of unintended consequences - full of well-intentioned people who believe that criticism is tantamount to killing babies.
It is also a system (much like religion) predicated upon the repetition of certain dogmas/memes, such as: "Nothing has made as great a difference as vaccines in the war against infectious disease."

You may have noticed that I disagree with terror regarding microbes. Nothing has changed there. We need people to take better care of themselves. Diet. Exercise. Sleep. Reduce stress. Stay home when you're sick. Clean up after yourself. Don't work in a uranium mine. With those changes, most diseases can't get traction. There were tremendous declines for all infectious diseases in developed nations during the early to mid-20th century because of those measures, even for diseases that had no vaccine.

You may also have noticed that I take autoimmune disorders and diseases very seriously. I think there are a large number of factors that can and do contribute to autoimmunity, and that such diseases can occur in unvaccinated people. But I also understand how vaccines trigger inflammation, high cytokine counts, lingering presence of some antigens in the body, and high antibody titers with no target pathogen, all of which create ideal chemistry for development of self-targeted immunity.

Do I think this situation was knowingly created? No. Is there a massive, deliberate cover-up? No, because very few people think the problem outweighs the benefit of vaccination (in part because of terror of microorganisms), so adverse reactions become difficult to see, accept, or take seriously. Reporting services like VAERS don't get much respect from skeptics.

Where it starts to look fishy is when a researcher or scientist questions current practice. Things get a little cloudy for me when the juggernaut chews up and spits out those who question the dominant paradigm. Shareholders want their interests protected, public health agencies don't want their programs hindered, and no one wants to be the one to say, "Maybe we should make some major changes."

Not a conspiracy. Just weird. Kind of religious. Many popes, bishops, and priests were jaded and corrupt, but few believers were ever insincere.

As for the pharmaceutical industry ever giving up selling medicine and advising salad...Never gonna happen. Sick people make happy shareholders.

So, do I still agree with my above statement? I'm afraid I do. As I said elsewhere, it's a conspiracy, but only of a bunch of apes bashing each other and stealing each other's shit. For a great cause.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 02:21 AM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
(02-05-2014 01:40 AM)Magellan35 Wrote:  Because the motives of so many people in the industry are completely philanthropic, and the machine that creates and brings them to market is so effective, and the marketing verbiage and ads so well-crafted, and the wheels of state so well greased, when a researcher pops up and says, "Hey, that's all well and fine, but we're starting to see a lot of autoimmunity in the population and some other syndromes that come along as the vaccine schedule grows in doses and variety," the response is almost always going to be, "Shut the fuck up, you monster. you child-killer, can't you see that this is all for the public good?"

You have to question the logic of scientists making money out of vaccines when they could be making money out of much simpler conspiracies, say, by throwing something into the water and providing an antidote.

What makes you think that the elimination of vaccines would harm the industry? Many expensive drugs and treatments have been discontinued in the past with no problems. Safer, cheaper drugs become available in the market every day. Why would it be any different with vaccines?

Your argument also stands on the far-fetched premise that all scientists in the field and all doctors on the planet who can think for themselves and don't just "read package inserts" (excluding the anti-vaxxers) simply agree on killing people off for money.

That's pretty demeaning for all the toils and exhausting efforts these people go through throughout their lives just to keep you healthy.

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 02:21 AM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
I'm confused. Does the conspiracy have to do with preventative measures for restricting the spread of viruses causing more harm than viral infections themselves, or Big
Pharma deliberately conspiring to discredit holistic medicine?

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2014, 02:39 AM
RE: Vaccine (Public Health) Policy Needs to Be Challenged
I tried and failed Yet again. I'm starting to think its not me , its them Huh.

I give up,Facepalm any additional posts I'm outsourcing to Taq.Evil_monsterCensored

Theism is to believe what other people claim, Atheism is to ask "why should I".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: