It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

By Ejecting Press Secty Sarah Sanders - Red Hen Restaurant Hurt The Entire Town.

page: 7
67
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2018 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT

Your thinking is obtuse mate. A right to a religious belief is protected by law. Because the majority of the planet was driven by some fundamental religious belief and doctrine at some point in time be it the times when people idol worshiped, elemental worshiped, and on into mono theistic beliefs.

Kicking someone out of your restaurant because they work for someone you don't like is asinine. That's an assumption of guilt by association. By YOUR logic, if you have a pedophile as a family member then using your argument I have the right to infer you yourself are in fact a pedophile and/or support pedophilia. Guilt by association. See how that works?

The owner of the Red Hen made an assumption of guilt upon Sarah Sanders simply because of her job as a federal employee of the Executive Branch. There are 4 million employees as part of the Executive Branch and the head of the Executive Branch is the POTUS. So by YOUR logic every democrat who is an employee in the Executive Branch should not be allowed admittance to the Red Hen and in fact support the policies of Trump?

Of course not. The owner of the Red Hen made an assumption of guilt and was discriminatory towards Sarah Sanders. The owner of the cake shop had a life long and moral commitment to his religious beliefs that led him to a decision based upon that protected right to freedom of religion. The gay assholes knew this and like good liberal trolls they wanted to make an issue of it and did. The baker did not discriminate because of his right to freedom of his religion which whether you agree with it or not takes precedence over two gays who are looking to be assholes for a payday. His rights to his freedom of religion and his belief in his religion take precedence over 2 gays acting like assholes. Period.

You have to draw a line with morality. You liberals have NO LINES except when someone doesn't agree with you or abide by the liberal mindset.

Using YOUR logic once again you would argue that it should be completely legal for a pedophile to rape a child because if the pedophile were to be convicted then we as a society are really doing nothing more than discriminating against their sexual preference and nothing more. Right? Of course not and why? Because there are laws in place that protect children. You're saying the rights of gay men are greater than the rights of an individual's religious beliefs. Even though the rights of individuals worldwide to practice their religious beliefs without persecution under protection of law far supersede and predate any rights of gays.

You're such a hypocrite.

Why didn't the asshole gays just go to a gay friendly baker? You really think they HAD to have a cake baked by that guy? Hell no. Those assholes were looking to do something to that baker.

Regarding the Islam aside. The point (which you clearly don't get) is that if you think our religious laws here in the US are so archaic then take a quick trip to the ME for some perspective before you start spouting off about how archaic you think our laws are protecting the freedom of religion or our unfair "discrimination" of gays. That was the point that went waaaaay over your head.








edit on 5-9-2018 by Outlier13 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 01:03 AM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Where did I ever say I thought it was OK? It's not, but the reaction is totally understandable.

We all know that sometimes, maybe even most of the time, life ain't fair. This is one of those times.

All those people can really do is try to mitigate the damage. That starts, or should, with an apology. That's where I'd start anyway.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 03:27 AM
link   
a reply to: seagull

You didn't say it was OK ,you implied it , and sure an apology from the restaurant owner is a start, still as far as I'm concerned leave everyone else out of it.



posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: AutisticEvo

As you think its OK to punish everyone in the vicinity of the restaurant owners, that's sad that you think innocent people should suffer....

karma doesn't discriminate.


Karma also doesn't punish those for choosing to do their shopping or dining somewhere else.
It's not evil to boycott.
It's not evil to avoid hatred from hateful people.
It's not evil to shun the company of those who will disrupt our daily lives or routines, to violate basic host/guest protocol and spit in the face of every concept of "Good Business" .

It's also not your place or right to micromanage guilt or blame. You obviously have never even ran a lemonade stand much less a business.
Couple with your lack of travel experience and personal experience of small town etiquette and you've got every ounce of naivete and ignorance that you are displaying here.

Any business in that town had their opportunity after the first incident to reassure it's customers and the public that they don't discriminate in the same way.
Their silence showed consent.

The towns council or mayor could of made a statement to that effect.

Their silence showed consent.

So since you made the positive claim of "INNOCENCE" the rest of the town, the Burden of Providing Evidence of Proof is on YOU.

Small towns tend to have a general consensus on acceptable behaviours. If they had a problem with how the red Hen did that they would of said something to it's owner and to anyone listening.


That restaurant is the one that in a small town that made a choice that backfired on not just themselves due to social and business etiquette being breached but had a negative effect on the town as a whole in the eyes of the public.

They are the ones punishing the innocent.

You are making it sound as if by choosing not to do business within an area known for discrimination, risking not just personal abuse but the collateral abuse of ones friends and family is not only acceptable but is required of us by some new as of yet named social economic dogma?

So no worries about karma, we aren't doing anything wrong in the eyes of the universe by avoiding places that have no personal emotional restraint over their political butthurt.

I don't buy my coffee at Starbucks so I should be found guilty of what exactly?

Look I can see you are having trouble seeing this from a nonbiased indifferent point of view that uses reason, logic and cultural norms but let me give you another example of how breaching cultural norms can effect a small town.

Let's take a hypothetical dip down a rabbit hole.
Happy town has a population of 8000 and is on route 66.
One day happy towns favorite bar decides to fly a Nazi flag and their sign reads "OVEN BAKED Aushwitz Wedges"

Once this got out to the general public not only was the business boycotted but the towns consensual non comment on the issue let's the rest of the world assume they are ok with that.
Soon happy town lost most of it's happy tourism.
Now happy town is Nazi town. Because they let a bar become a Neo Nazi hangout and didn't care to put one ad out that they had nothing to do with it for would any visitors see the same nonsense END OF STORY.

I can't be bothered to waste any more time discussing the issue with you. You keep doubling down with these thin and shallow arguments that do not address the issue on a rational level.

I hope though that the Nazi town example helps, I know it's hard for people like you to understand anything without the word "Nazi" being thrown in as a landmark for "bad" so you don't get confused.

What's hilarious is apparently liberal travelers are not even close compared to their counterpart in the towns economic tourism.

Why hasn't the towns business boomed since they declared themselves?
Where's the boom in blue haired dreadlocked Trump haters?

Now that you mentioned it, I think what we have here is an Act of KARMA.

Perhaps you should consider that a quality in it's "Non Discrimination"

So you my friend are now well done. I am putting a fork in this.
You can keep denying but anyone with any sense and worldly experience will see that I have made it reasonably and logically clear as to who hurt themselves and their neighbors here.

If you do reply, could you at least provide some proof of that innocence? I probably won't bother to read it if you can't.




posted on Sep, 6 2018 @ 10:55 PM
link   
a reply to: AutisticEvo

Your lack of morality I'd disturbing....



posted on Sep, 7 2018 @ 12:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: FredT
a reply to: Outlier13




Also whats with the Islam strawman? At some point you just gotta stop using that particular Baba Yaga and try to argue you point on its merits or lack thereof no?

BY your logic its okay to descriminate against gays, but if say Joseph Goebbels walks into my restaurant then its NOT okay to deny him service? And failing that. Ill make some reference to religions issues in ISLAM................... Hey look I can create a strawman too


Baba Yaga is an old folklore originating in Balkan/Slavic/Russian regions.

Not Islamic.

Next time you want to sound clever do your research first.

Discrimination is based on prejudice specifically focused. Religion however is about making choices that are in support of philosophical law. They are not the same thing.

It's no more wrong for Christians to refuse to make a wedding cake for a gay wedding than it is for an Islamic female truck driver to refuse to ship Alcohol.

The problem with these new behaviours of the left is it shows why Democrats alone are to blame for groups like the KKK.

You all have to have someone to hate on and attack.
You made the KKK back when racism is ok.
Now that all that's not "officially" ok anymore Especially after your leaders and movements tried openly encourage RACISM towards Caucasians as OK...

You lost the election and now instead of reflecting on your evil views you doubled down and INVENTED an Equivilant but New form of Bigotry and Discrimination

That's why this argument you make bears no merit or foundation.

You are defending discriminatory Practices.
You are defending Jim Crow activism.
You are defending the Actions of Hate.

It's as if you all can't have a good day without being a Bigot
And that's why you and those who think you can excuse any wrong by copping your personal responsibility for your words and actions on some unrelated event....

Are the lowest of bigots.
Because you can't at least own your own bigotry.
Your own racist outlook.

But go ahead. Use any and all examples of unrelated content to justify your actions.

Maybe you can get some sentences reduced or get the public to feel sorry for Mass shooters.

In fact let's go there. I say all mass shooters, car killers like the one in Charlottesville are hereby excusable because one Democratic nutcase decided to shoot up a ball game.

You sure you want to keep running with your ignorance on this?

Your done. And I already ate so I'm throwing your burnt debate to the cat.



posted on Sep, 7 2018 @ 12:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: FredT
a reply to: Outlier13




Also whats with the Islam strawman? At some point you just gotta stop using that particular Baba Yaga and try to argue you point on its merits or lack thereof no?

BY your logic its okay to descriminate against gays, but if say Joseph Goebbels walks into my restaurant then its NOT okay to deny him service? And failing that. Ill make some reference to religions issues in ISLAM................... Hey look I can create a strawman too


Baba Yaga is an old folklore originating in Balkan/Slavic/Russian regions.

Not Islamic.

Next time you want to sound clever do your research first.

Discrimination is based on prejudice specifically focused. Religion however is about making choices that are in support of philosophical law. They are not the same thing.

It's no more wrong for Christians to refuse to make a wedding cake for a gay wedding than it is for an Islamic female truck driver to refuse to ship Alcohol.

The problem with these new behaviours of the left is it shows why Democrats alone are to blame for groups like the KKK.

You all have to have someone to hate on and attack.
You made the KKK back when racism is ok.
Now that all that's not "officially" ok anymore Especially after your leaders and movements tried openly encourage RACISM towards Caucasians as OK...

You lost the election and now instead of reflecting on your evil views you doubled down and INVENTED an Equivilant but New form of Bigotry and Discrimination

That's why this argument you make bears no merit or foundation.

You are defending discriminatory Practices.
You are defending Jim Crow activism.
You are defending the Actions of Hate.

It's as if you all can't have a good day without being a Bigot
And that's why you and those who think you can excuse any wrong by copping your personal responsibility for your words and actions on some unrelated event....

Are the lowest of bigots.
Because you can't at least own your own bigotry.
Your own racist outlook.

But go ahead. Use any and all examples of unrelated content to justify your actions.

Maybe you can get some sentences reduced or get the public to feel sorry for Mass shooters.

In fact let's go there. I say all mass shooters, car killers like the one in Charlottesville are hereby excusable because one Democratic nutcase decided to shoot up a ball game.

You sure you want to keep running with your ignorance on this?

Your done. And I already ate so I'm throwing your burnt debate to the cat.



posted on Sep, 7 2018 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

this is why I find the free market more of an indicator of the public's overall opinion on something than a "poll"

Lets look at four events here.

one... the owner of chick fil a gave a PERSONAL opinion on homosexuality on a CHRISTIAN radio show that was against what the democrats and homosexual supporters think. the called for a nationwide boycott because they felt the public supported their cause...It was an epic fail and business then and now booming.

two... the baker who refused to make a SPECIAL ORDER (I hate having to keep saying this but seems this specific part of thing gets overlooked/ignored by the left) same sex wedding cake.
the left claimed he was homophobic and stated the public is against what he did.
but the PUBLIC gave donations to him for his court case and he is DOING A BOOMING BUSINESS.

Three .....the In and out donated to the republicans and the democrats felt "offended" and it was a snub against them.
they called for a boycott of the CA location thinking the public supported them.
they were WRONG and they had a line around the block of customers...this was all the more important because it was in CA...a democratic claimed bastion.

Four...the red hen restaurant manager disrespected trump press sec and refused her service (along with her party).
the main stream press , liberals, democrats and anti trump (including alot here on ATS) were celebrating, giving "hi fives" and proclaiming how this was supported by the public at large.
well guess what again....the public as a majority PUT THAT LIE TO BED .
the business had to fire the manager, business is down so bad its hurting the restaurant financially and taking the town down with it.

in short the democrats, liberals, supporters (including some on ats), main stream media and anti trump scream, yell , and tell us how their agenda, causes, views, and dislike for trump is what the majority is. they tell us they have "the support of the people" at nausim.

but when as the saying goes the "rubber meets the road" we find (most of the time) it is the exact opposite.
be it a restaurant, a "boycott" , or a PRESIDENTIAL election.

so in short save your main stream polls, the anti trump anti conservative posts, and all the "protests/marches"

Ill take the PRACTICAL results as more accurate thank you.

Scrounger



posted on Sep, 7 2018 @ 08:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Outlier13
but, you don't have to be "religious" to have morals...
are my morals any less worthy as yours simply because the modern mainstream religions don't proclaim them?
shouldn't they be just as protected as your christian, or jewish, or islamic values?
Sanders isn't just an employee in the trump administration, she's the one we see on the tv every day bumbling her way through trying to justify what his administration has done, is doing, and is planning to do in the future.. if "GOD" can tell the baker not to bake a cake for the homosexual couple, or the tow truck driver who just drove to another state to tow a broken car down to leave the disabled lady stranded, if he can tell a hospital to force all the doctors working there to leave a women's miscarriage untreated till her health is reduced to a critical level...
well, he danged sure can tell a restaurant owner not to serve someone who is playing a role in ripping babies our of the arms of their mothers and locking them in cages leaving them to cry for hours upon hours!!!
this is the world the "religious wanted", where we all can follow our own beliefs in healthcare, in commerce, in real estate, wherever they can force it into. now, well, I guess you can live with it!!! just don't act surprised when someone else's "morality ends up conflicting with your own, because it's gonna happen often!!!



posted on Sep, 7 2018 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: [post=23744715]dawnstar



but, you don't have to be "religious" to have morals...
are my morals any less worthy as yours simply because the modern mainstream religions don't proclaim them?

I never said one must be religious in order to have morals. Morals are morals regardless of where or how they are derived. Your parents, friends, religion, society in general is where you ultimately derive your adoption of morals and values. However, if you do some research across the world you will find most morals have all derived from religious teachings. Be they Christian, Jewish, Islam, Hindu, etc.


shouldn't they be just as protected as your christian, or jewish, or islamic values?

Dependent upon the country, society, and culture you are in. I could take you to a street in the middle east in a particular town and if you proclaim you are a Christian you will be beaten to death where you stand. Do you think you have the right to go into someone's land and defy their culture and make proclamations they find offensive and expect them to simply turn a blind eye? Is if for you or I to say what and how they believe is wrong? Of course not. You know why? Because it is not our country. Not our culture. Not our belief system where we derive our morals.

If those same people come to MY country then I have every right to punish them for not abiding by my belief system and the morals MY country was founded upon. I also have the right to not allow them to practice their belief systems if they conflict with the belief systems in my country. That is crossing the line. Do you understand the difference?


Sanders isn't just an employee in the trump administration

Yes, she is just an employee. Nothing more.


she's the one we see on the tv every day bumbling her way through trying to justify what his administration has done, is doing, and is planning to do in the future

Perhaps you don't understand the job responsibilities of the White House Press Secretary. I suggest you look it up because what you state are her actual responsibilities.


just don't act surprised when someone else's "morality ends up conflicting with your own, because it's gonna happen often!!!

That's fine with me. As I said you have to draw a line at some point in your life. You seem to imply you are ok with another person infringing upon your personal morals and belief system while I am not (within reason).

Using gays as an example since that is the primary topic here I am fine with gays having their relationships with same sex partners. What they do in their PRIVATE life is between two consenting adults. However, let's say I have kids and we are out in public then I am not ok with them walking down the street in assless chaps throwing butt plugs out to people (including kids) like they do each year during the gay pride parade in NYC. That is crossing the line. Do you understand why you have to draw lines?

You can insult me to my face, call me any and every name you want and I will take it. You can even verbally threaten me. But the moment you lay a hand on me I will knock you out. That is crossing the line. Do you understand why you have to draw lines?



posted on Sep, 7 2018 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: scrounger

Well said.



posted on Sep, 7 2018 @ 01:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: scrounger
a reply to: [post=23731317]

one... the owner of chick fil a gave a PERSONAL opinion on homosexuality on a CHRISTIAN radio show that was against what the democrats and homosexual supporters think. the called for a nationwide boycott because they felt the public supported their cause...It was an epic fail and business then and now booming.



The owner was donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-Marriage Equality groups.

The board removed him.

There are now Chick-Fil-A franchises owned by LGBT.

The boycott was a success.



posted on Sep, 7 2018 @ 01:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: scrounger
a reply to: [post=23731317]

one... the owner of chick fil a gave a PERSONAL opinion on homosexuality on a CHRISTIAN radio show that was against what the democrats and homosexual supporters think. the called for a nationwide boycott because they felt the public supported their cause...It was an epic fail and business then and now booming.



The owner was donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-Marriage Equality groups.

The board removed him.

There are now Chick-Fil-A franchises owned by LGBT.

The boycott was a success.


The "owner"?

Are you speaking of Dan Cathy? He is still and has been the Chairman, President and CEO of the company since 2013.

So....was it the owner of a single store you are talking about or did you just not know?



posted on Sep, 7 2018 @ 03:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Outlier13

I am a native US citizen living in the US.. never been in the middle east, never plan on visiting, thank you!!

but, your claim that the baker denying his services to a gay couple is different than someone denying sanders service in their restaurant because the baker has constitutional protections because of his "religious belefs" since some may find some of the actions of the trump admin more reprehensible than baking a danged cake, and they might feel that they not only have a civic, but also a moral obligation to make their feelings hard and FELT by those within the administration.. however they can.
so, we have a baker, refusing to bake a cake, and people gripe...
we have a gas supplier refusing to refill gas tanks in the middle of winter...
we have tow truck drivers leaving handicapped people on the side of the road..
all of these should have known that their decision would be adversely effecting their businesses, but they chose to do them anyways... one can only assume it was because there was an underlying belief, moral code, something they felt very strongly about... the baker isn't "special" in any way simply because one of our current religious sects have extended a belief into the area of commerce.. they deserve no special protection above the others.
but to be honest, I don't really care about cakes, or sarah's restaurant meal really... I am sure no one's life was put in jeopardy in either case.
the other two, along with what I have mentioned about "religious beliefs" influencing the type and quality of the healthcare we get..
well that is another matter.
no one's "religious beliefs" should be protected to the point where they are a danger to the health and welfare of others.

and it's time to ask a question here...
just what is it that is protected by the constitution?
is it the churches, or those individuals that make up those churches? does a church have to have a large number of followers, or are those lone wolves out there, who aren't really connected to any officially recognized church also granted that protection?
is it the businesses, or those people working in that business?




You seem to imply you are ok with another person infringing upon your personal morals and belief system while I am not (within reason).


but, isn't that what is happening when a hospital that is following rules set down by a group of bishops prevents doctors from using the accepted medical practices adopted by the AMA to alleviate the suffering and protecting the health of a women during a miscarriage when every cell in his body is telling him he needs to act to induce the birth of the non viable fetus? or when the lady in charge of handing out the marriage licenses not only refused to follow the law, but also insisted on all those working below her to follow her example?

not everyone has the same beliefs, the same moral principles, and it's not our government's job to decide which ones is worthy of protection and which aren't.. your lines can get a tad bit blurry real fast the more you press for your religious rights, expanding them into new areas.



posted on Sep, 7 2018 @ 03:42 PM
link   
Just go to a different restaurant. There must be a zillion of them who don't give a damn.



posted on Sep, 9 2018 @ 11:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: scrounger
a reply to: [post=23731317]

one... the owner of chick fil a gave a PERSONAL opinion on homosexuality on a CHRISTIAN radio show that was against what the democrats and homosexual supporters think. the called for a nationwide boycott because they felt the public supported their cause...It was an epic fail and business then and now booming.



The owner was donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-Marriage Equality groups.

The board removed him.

There are now Chick-Fil-A franchises owned by LGBT.

The boycott was a success.


I had to quote this not only for blatant ignorance (willful perhaps) and lacking in any PROOF.

Scrounger



posted on Sep, 12 2018 @ 02:36 PM
link   


Sure but do you think its an exceptable consequence, do you think its OK innocent people have to deal with the fallout ?


What one THINKS is completely irrelevant. People are going to respond as they wish. If they wish to refuse to go to the town, nothing you can do to stop that. Whether it's morally wrong to punish the other businesses or not. For most, it will be a silent protest, just in the form of them simply not going there anymore. The same way you may choose to silently boycott a restaurant where you got bad service.

The town could have tried to mitigate the damage ages ago, but they CHOSE to not issue an apology, and now they have to deal with the consequences of that DECISION. Just as the bakers must deal with the consequences of theirs. Morality doesn't factor into it. This is pure supply and demand, and the choice of the consumer as to how they respond. If people can take their business elsewhere, they will. Simple as that.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 01:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: scrounger

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: scrounger
a reply to: [post=23731317]

one... the owner of chick fil a gave a PERSONAL opinion on homosexuality on a CHRISTIAN radio show that was against what the democrats and homosexual supporters think. the called for a nationwide boycott because they felt the public supported their cause...It was an epic fail and business then and now booming.



The owner was donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-Marriage Equality groups.

The board removed him.

There are now Chick-Fil-A franchises owned by LGBT.

The boycott was a success.


I had to quote this not only for blatant ignorance (willful perhaps) and lacking in any PROOF.

Scrounger


Whatever floats your boat.

Odd how some posters post whatever they want with no proof -- then expect proof from poster posting a different viewpoint.



posted on Sep, 13 2018 @ 01:56 AM
link   
I wouldn't go out to eat anywhere with a Trump hat, shirt, pin, logo, etc.. In this political environment, can you imagine the things that are being done to, or "added" to the food of Trump supporters in restaurants?
edit on 9/13/2018 by carewemust because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2018 @ 01:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: scrounger

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: scrounger
a reply to: [post=23731317]

one... the owner of chick fil a gave a PERSONAL opinion on homosexuality on a CHRISTIAN radio show that was against what the democrats and homosexual supporters think. the called for a nationwide boycott because they felt the public supported their cause...It was an epic fail and business then and now booming.



The owner was donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-Marriage Equality groups.

The board removed him.

There are now Chick-Fil-A franchises owned by LGBT.

The boycott was a success.


I had to quote this not only for blatant ignorance (willful perhaps) and lacking in any PROOF.

Scrounger


Whatever floats your boat.

Odd how some posters post whatever they want with no proof -- then expect proof from poster posting a different viewpoint.


I see you follow typical extremest liberal logic.
that being YOU made a statement .
someone calls you out on the content of it and provide FACTS proving it as opposed to OPINION or in this SPECIFIC CASE wishful thinking.
then instead of providing that PROOF (aka FACTS) you make some snarky comment that is silly and irrelevant.

Im sorry but you made a SPECIFIC CLAIM about them , who got fired and who owns them.

I asked for PROOF/FACTS of your claim.

you didn't provide it.

In fact someone else provided FACTS countering YOUR CLAIM.

that is it in a nutshell.

btw YOU MADE THE CLAIM...it is up to YOU to defend it, not for me or others to come up with proof and that you are the sole and final judge if legit.

so again here is your quote

The owner was donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-Marriage Equality groups.

The board removed him.

There are now Chick-Fil-A franchises owned by LGBT.

Now show PROOF

A. who he donated to

B. when he was fired "by the board"

C. there are franchises owned by LGBT.....more specifically LGBT GROUP since that acronym is a GROUP TITLE not a specific person.

there now its up to you .... as the old 80s saying modified goes
put up or look like a ranting ideological fool

scrounger



new topics

top topics



 
67
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join