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.

 

A Question For Masons

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 12:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlexKennedy
It is the tradition of our order not to reply to slander and attack.

Since time immemorial, it has been the tradition of Freemasonry and Freemasons not to reply to slander and attack.


Then what, pray tell, are the HUNDREDS of posts from you and a few others doing scattered throughout these threads?





posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by PublicGadfly

Originally posted by AlexKennedy
It is the tradition of our order not to reply to slander and attack.

Since time immemorial, it has been the tradition of Freemasonry and Freemasons not to reply to slander and attack.


Then what, pray tell, are the HUNDREDS of posts from you and a few others doing scattered throughout these threads?



You may have missed the other thread, where I said that I had not respected the tradition very well. But not all of the posts are responding to slander and attack -- some are responding to innocent questions. Also, just because I have made the decision to avoid getting mired in the nonsense presented by some anti-Masons here, does not mean that my fellow brethren here necessarily agree with me. They have decided that it's more important to get the truth out. I feel that I become a worse person when I engage in these kinds of arguments. Do you take issue with my decision?



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlexKennedy

Originally posted by PublicGadfly

Originally posted by AlexKennedy
It is the tradition of our order not to reply to slander and attack.

Since time immemorial, it has been the tradition of Freemasonry and Freemasons not to reply to slander and attack.


Then what, pray tell, are the HUNDREDS of posts from you and a few others doing scattered throughout these threads?



You may have missed the other thread, where I said that I had not respected the tradition very well. But not all of the posts are responding to slander and attack -- some are responding to innocent questions. Also, just because I have made the decision to avoid getting mired in the nonsense presented by some anti-Masons here, does not mean that my fellow brethren here necessarily agree with me. They have decided that it's more important to get the truth out. I feel that I become a worse person when I engage in these kinds of arguments. Do you take issue with my decision?


No Alex, I applaud it.

I am very sure we see many things differently.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 05:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Warpspeed
Can you prove that you do not ?

It is a silly request really.



No. It's not a silly request.
Your's is the idiotic statement. As any fool knows - you can't prove a negative.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Warpspeed
Can you prove that you do not ?

It is a silly request really.




That's close to the lamest thing I have ever heard...


There's this wonderful thing called research, try it sometime...



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leveller
No. It's not a silly request.
Your's is the idiotic statement. As any fool knows - you can't prove a negative.


Never underestimate the ignorance of fools my dear Leveller, as I am an expert on the subject, I can speak with empirical insight on the inverse percipience of a certain violator of relativistic velocities.


[edit on 26/8/2004 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 07:20 PM
link   
how easily that any slight discussion on masonry brings out such vehement distrust and vitriolic outbursts on this board! Forgive, as I am quite new to ATS, and while interested in many of the other forums in here, having read the many long-continuing threads concerning masons (for the better or worse) I grew quite interested in the whole thing. Primarly as I knew little about masons other than the usual modern 'folklore' and any historical information I knew that I could relate to the subject (classicial and medieval guilds n such stuff.. very little really), I was genuinly curious as to how masons seem to interact (so many people think I have discovered) in higher political affairs. My rather convulouted enquiry, while putting some people's backs up (and now having read the whole thread after a day or so.. I can see why) eventually was quicly answred, and was rather obvious, once someone tells you. Then it all started getting a bit bonkers. Are the roots of human suspicion so deep as to just conjure such malice, or is the whole mason thing as bad as some wuld rant???? I mean, (in regarding my orginal spiel) its one thing to have some shady private interests and exploiting political position... very normal thing in politics.. but people seem to genuinly think masons are like plotting the end of the world. Now I know well enough to think that I couldnt possibly make my mind up one way or another at this point... but could someone kinda explain... calmly... why they feel that a bunch of people with a secret society.. as wierd as it might all seem... must be really bad.. without the use of 9ft lizards.. and do masons here feel that peoples concerns are just superstition or do they have base in fact or understandable misunderstanding???



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Qoelet
Are the roots of human suspicion so deep as to just conjure such malice, or is the whole mason thing as bad as some wuld rant???? I mean, (in regarding my orginal spiel) its one thing to have some shady private interests and exploiting political position... very normal thing in politics.. but people seem to genuinly think masons are like plotting the end of the world.


Freemasonry has historically had two major enemies: religious ones and political ones, both of which has endlessly sought to discredit Freemasonry, and have issued endless propaganda to that effect.

Religious opposition has, at least historically, originated with the Roman Catholic Church, while Protestants have defended the Order (non-Christian religions have generally ignored the subject completely).
But in recent years, the evangelical "Religious Right" of fundamentalist Protestantism have begun to attack Freemasonry, while Catholicism has come closer to seeking a truce. I personally attribute this to the fundamentalist wing's tendency to be ignorant of history, as well as of ideas that exist outside their own plastic bubbles.
In like manner, I attribute the liberalization of Catholic policy to the Church leadership of today that is far more secularly educated than their predecessors, and have adopted more liberal views.
For example, 2 centuries ago, Protestants were demanding separation of church and state, while Catholics demanded that church and state be united. Today, the opposite is true, at least concerning the fundamentalist Protestants.

The second enemy of Masonry is the political. This enemy can be, for the most part, classified under two groups: the Communist Party and the Fascist movement (which includes the German Nazis and Spanish Falange).

The Communist Party of the Soviet Union officially banned Masonry in the late 1920’s. British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, himself a Mason, once asked Soviet Premiere Josef Stalin if he allowed Masonic Lodges in Russia. Stalin replied by asking “Would you allow fleas to infest your dog?”
Masons were sporadically persecuted in all Communist countries until Stalin’s death in 1953. Nikita Khruschev, who became Chairman of the Soviet Communist Party in 1954, kept the ban on Freemasonry, but lifted the death penalty for Masons. From this time until the collapse of the Soviet bloc, it remained illegal to be a Mason, but the punishment was “reduced” to hard labor and “re-education” (i.e., being force-fed communist propaganda in prison camps).

The Fascist movement was, by far, much worse; and practically all modern anti-Masonic “conspiracy theories” have their roots in the twisted mind of Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda for the German National Socialist Party.
It was the Nazis who invented the tale that Masons were in cahoots with Jewish bankers who were hell-bent on taking over the world...and of course, as the Party hacks in Berlin made clear, it was they only they who could save the world from this “Illuminati conspiracy”. Massive anti-Masonic propaganda campaigns were launched, including an anti-Masonic museum being opened in Munich. The Nazi Party composed an official manual on Freemasonry, to be used by the SS when “interrogating” suspected Masons. At the Nuremberg trials, secret documents of the Nazis were included as evidence concerning Nazi atrocities committed against Freemasons and their families.

The Fascist Party of Italy had similar regulations. Benito Mussolini had declared Freemasonry illegal immediately after he seized power, and used state terror to close Italian Lodges, with the full support of the papacy.

Same thing in Fascist Spain. As a young man of 22, General Francisco Franco had applied to a Masonic Lodge for membership, and was refused admission. He did not forget this insult, and declared war on Freemasonry when he became Spain’s dictator. A league of Nazi SS “Masonic experts” were sent to Madrid by Hitler in order to assist the Spanish tyrant in his quest to rid the peninsula of the “Masonic question”.


and do masons here feel that peoples concerns are just superstition or do they have base in fact or understandable misunderstanding???


In my opinion, the opponents to Masonry from the religious standpoint are indeed guided by superstition; to them, the whole world is considered only from the rose-tinted goggles of their theology.
From the political point of view, the reason is just plain hatred. Freemasonry stands for the principles of liberalism, i.e., freedom of speech and religion, democratic representative government, and individual liberty. To the Fascists, all that is, to quote Mussolini, “sentimental slop”. In order for the state to exercise complete control over every aspect of its citizens’ lives, liberalism in all its forms must be crushed. To do this, they invented “conspiracy theories” in order to provoke in the people fear of those who would have liberated them.

Fiat Lvx.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 08:44 PM
link   
I had a very dear friend and Lodge brother by the name of King Dean, who has sadly (for those of us left behind) passed to the Grand Lodge Above. King had visited various countries throughout the world during historic moments, and had visited Stalin's Soviet Union. There was once a paper being given on the suppression of Masonry by Communist and Facist governments, and King stood up to say,

"You've got it wrong, young man. The reason for the suppression of Masonry in Stalin's Russia was nothing so sophisticated as a fear of free societies. It was because in the mind of those in power, Masonry was connected with "International Jewry.""

... and we all know how Stalin treated the Jews.

[edit on 26-8-2004 by AlexKennedy]



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Qoelet


This is not a mason forum.

There are a plethora of masonic sites on the web. Many pro, many anti.

There are also a few in this thread that appear to be active masons that you could e-mail, I'm sure.

Masonic purpose, history and belief are heavily attended to by many people with various motives.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by PublicGadfly

This is not a mason forum.


I certainly hope you're not suggesting that we Masons do not have the right to discuss Freemasonry here, or that people cannot ask questions about Freemasonry here? I can't see how it's reasonable to preclude positive discussion of Freemasonry in this forum.

I would encourage those who wish to ask me questions on this forum to do so, regardless of the question (although I will not answer snide insinuation or slanderous attack, as I have already noted).


df1

posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by PublicGadfly
This is not a mason forum.

ATS can be any type of forum that the operators and members mutually agree upon and judging from the number of Mason related topics, it seems that not many people agree with your assessment.
.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alex Kennedy I certainly hope you're not suggesting that we Masons do not have the right to discuss Freemasonry here, or that people cannot ask questions about Freemasonry here? I can't see how it's reasonable to preclude positive discussion of Freemasonry in this forum.


Alex, you have a "right" to post whatever you want- and you know this. I feel that you know very well what I posted is not what you alude to.

"reasonable to preclude"? sure Alex, like this is Masonic recruiting 101


Originally posted by df1 ATS can be any type of forum that the operators and members mutually agree upon and judging from the number of Mason related topics, it seems that not many people agree with your assessment.


I don't know df- out of perhaps 800+ posters I venture to guess perhaps 40 venture into the "mason threads." I could be mistakn on my math.

It still isn't a "mason" forum.

You or anyone else want to discuss masony, then that's fine by me. I rather enjoy reading the mason threads. They reinforce some of my prejudices. It seems like a lot of 'stuff' gets thrown out that really makes we wonder if Albert Pike was right or not. I kind of always had some doubts about him anyway.

That's O.K. too. isn't it? j/k

I seriously have to question something I once learned-
"seekers shall find"

Just doesn't seem to fit here.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by PublicGadfly

It still isn't a "mason" forum.



Just doesn't seem to fit here.



well...

maybe it was nice to be able to ask masons and non-masons alike questions, getting answers 'from the horses mouth'. I happen to like primary sources... and last time I looked.. it was a secret societies forum.. and masons are uhh... no stop me.. I must be wrong.

Im notoriously bad at starting the wrong topics in the wrong forums... but here I feel justified... and believe it or not, people have been pleasantly forthcoming. Im not going to 'run off and join the masons' just 'cause I asked a bunch of questions... and Im not going to let someone sh*t on my questions just 'cause they dislike masony or my lines of enquiry... if you think Im stupid.. read someone elses threads... if you dislike masons, tell me why, or start ur own thread.. I just like expanding my knowledge without pissing too many people off...

ohh.. now Im just ranting, i think I'll leave this thread alone...



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 08:47 AM
link   
I posted this before in the wrong thread. This one is more appropriate. I'm sorry if you read it before, but there were a couple of questions that were not answered. My thanks to Leveller for answering most of them.

Over the past week or so, while on a whim deciding to look into the history and beliefs of freemasonry, I was fortunate enough to come across ATS. I had recently come to the conclusion that I was, after 20 years of being a Christian, in fact really an agnostic with deist tendencies. I decided to look into a few things that I had always been told were either undesirable, wrong, or just plain evil. Somehow, freemasonry had been on that list. As I read many hundreds of posts, I witnessed time and time again the leonine rapacity of those (mostly Christians) who attacked it. As entertaining as their tales of Satan worship and world domination were, rarely did an opponent exibit anything more than the hubris and vehemence of a Klansmen. The masons have done an excellent job of convincing me (and I'm sure any reasonable person who has read your responses) that you are an organization of honorable men with honorable causes. That being said, I have a few questions.

1. The requirement that one profess belief in a Supreme Being. I have read in a few of the other threads that one is able to form his own of opinion of what a Supreme Being consists of. I myself believe it to be extremely likely that our universe was a creation, yet would never claim that I know (or prove) this to be true. Can one of you elaborate on this requirement?

2. I've seen it stated in another thread that no masonic ritual begins without an open "sacred book of law" on the altar, which is usually the Bible. Is the identity of that book voted on by the members of the lodge, with the book with the most votes adopted?

3. Speaking of the "sacred book of law", one would assume that many masons, the ones posting on ATS in particular, do not consider any text to be the definative law, and seek knowledge in less traditional areas as well, such as western mystery schools (B.O.T.A., A.E.O). I assume that I would be correct in stating that most mainstream Christians would not encourage this pursuit. The fact that masonry does encourage members to seek truth as they (the members) see fit is probably a very large reason why there is so much hate and fear of masons out there.

4. I have read that part of the masonic moral code is to respect and obey all laws of one's country. Is this an unconditional rule? Surely there must be exceptions if under an extremely oppressive or fascist rule? This country would obviously not exist if it wasn't for our forefathers (some of whom I've learned to be masons) rising up against their opressive, yet legitimate government.

5. Finally, a few of you that I have grown to respect are members of B.O.T.A. This organization seems to place a higher focus on the Qabalah than most rosicrucian orders I have researched recently. I'm interested to know if you believe B.O.T.A. to be more legitimate or intellectual than other mystery schools, or if perhaps it just seemed right to you. I would assume that you would agree with Dr. Case when he states that no school can claim to be the true rosicrucian order.

I've had a lot of fun and learned even more with the secret society board. I'm looking forward to your answers.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by JonestownRed
I posted this before in the wrong thread. This one is more appropriate. I'm sorry if you read it before, but there were a couple of questions that were not answered. My thanks to Leveller for answering most of them.

Over the past week or so, while on a whim deciding to look into the history and beliefs of freemasonry, I was fortunate enough to come across ATS. I had recently come to the conclusion that I was, after 20 years of being a Christian, in fact really an agnostic with deist tendencies. I decided to look into a few things that I had always been told were either undesirable, wrong, or just plain evil. Somehow, freemasonry had been on that list. As I read many hundreds of posts, I witnessed time and time again the leonine rapacity of those (mostly Christians) who attacked it. As entertaining as their tales of Satan worship and world domination were, rarely did an opponent exibit anything more than the hubris and vehemence of a Klansmen. The masons have done an excellent job of convincing me (and I'm sure any reasonable person who has read your responses) that you are an organization of honorable men with honorable causes. That being said, I have a few questions.

1. The requirement that one profess belief in a Supreme Being. I have read in a few of the other threads that one is able to form his own of opinion of what a Supreme Being consists of. I myself believe it to be extremely likely that our universe was a creation, yet would never claim that I know (or prove) this to be true. Can one of you elaborate on this requirement?


Well, you have pretty much stated the extent of the masonic requirement. A man must express a belief in A Supreme being and in most jurisdictions, the immortality of the soul. PERIOD. There is no inquiry as to how you know g-d. and prosletyzing or preaching is strictly forbidden in lodge as it is a very divisive subject, and we are seeking that on which we can best agree...


2. I've seen it stated in another thread that no masonic ritual begins without an open "sacred book of law" on the altar, which is usually the Bible. Is the identity of that book voted on by the members of the lodge, with the book with the most votes adopted?


No, in the United States, it is primarily the KJV of the Holy Bible. When a candidate passes through the degrees, HE has a choice of the Volume of Sacred Law upon which to take his obligations. Many lodges have copes of the various VSLs. In California, if a candidate wishes to use another VSL, we replace the Lodge Bible with his bible, and open, obligate him, and close the lodge using that VSL.


3. Speaking of the "sacred book of law", one would assume that many masons, the ones posting on ATS in particular, do not consider any text to be the definative law, and seek knowledge in less traditional areas as well, such as western mystery schools (B.O.T.A., A.E.O). I assume that I would be correct in stating that most mainstream Christians would not encourage this pursuit. The fact that masonry does encourage members to seek truth as they (the members) see fit is probably a very large reason why there is so much hate and fear of masons out there.


I would say that you are problably right. Since Masonry offers no dogma or religious instruction, and allows its members to seek g-d in their own way, in fact, encourages that pursuit, causes some of the more... dogmatic severe heartburn, and is the very source of their angst.

The problem though, is that masonry is not a religion, it is a FELLOWSHIP of RELIGIOUS men... the more... dogmatic among us can't understand the difference, hence the fear and hatred, as people fear what they cannot understand.


4. I have read that part of the masonic moral code is to respect and obey all laws of one's country. Is this an unconditional rule?


This is an interesting question, one which we have been debating, because, for instance, in the UK, there are laws requiring a mason to declare his affiliation if he is a police officer, a politician, a lawyer, a judge and some other public official. This is so neonazi as to be frightening, as these folks have declared their purpose in requesting the information is to EXCLUDE masons.

So, if the law if wrong, do we have the duty to ignore it? We did in Nazi Germany when Hitler outlawed masonry. We did in Cuba, when Castro outlawed masonry. We did in Russia, when the Politboro (Stalin?) banned masonry... we have, in fact, ignored those laws in every country where dictators have come to power and banned masonry.

My obligation does not INTERFERE with the duty I owe to G-d, my country, my neighbor or myself, it appertains to freemasonry alone. The ONLY reference to laws outside the lodge in my obligation is peripheral, in that I pledged to keep the secrets of a brother as my own WHEN GIVEN TO ME IN CHARGE AS SUCH, MURDER AND TREASON EXCEPTED.

And even in those cases, I am under no OBLIGATION to reveal them, but am given the OPTION of not keeping those secrets. You see, as a fraterntiy, masonry is about becoming better men, so it is implicit in the masonic code and teachings that we will obey the laws of our country, but...

If a man is convicted of a crime outside the lodge, masonry takes immediate steps to convene a masonic court, charges are presented, and the man is summarily ejected from the fraternity.


Surely there must be exceptions if under an extremely oppressive or fascist rule?


The fraternity does not speak to it, but there are manifold examples of our ignoring illegal laws...


This country would obviously not exist if it wasn't for our forefathers (some of whom I've learned to be masons) rising up against their opressive, yet legitimate government.

5. Finally, a few of you that I have grown to respect are members of B.O.T.A. This organization seems to place a higher focus on the Qabalah than most rosicrucian orders I have researched recently. I'm interested to know if you believe B.O.T.A. to be more legitimate or intellectual than other mystery schools, or if perhaps it just seemed right to you. I would assume that you would agree with Dr. Case when he states that no school can claim to be the true rosicrucian order.


I can speak only for myself, as MASONRY takes no position on a brother's religious search or affiliation. For myself, I know nothing about these organizations, though I know of a handfull of brothers, mostly through the internet, that are involved in the Temple of Adytum, OTO, Rosicrucians etc. They are, however, FEW and far between.

I hope this helps. Good questions, by the way. Keep asking.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by theron dunn

2. I've seen it stated in another thread that no masonic ritual begins without an open "sacred book of law" on the altar, which is usually the Bible. Is the identity of that book voted on by the members of the lodge, with the book with the most votes adopted?


No, in the United States, it is primarily the KJV of the Holy Bible.


This is slightly different in Canada and the commonwealth. Up here, we have every holy book a member requests on the altar. For this reason, we might have a Bible, a Quran, the Vedas, etc. etc. Rudyard Kipling reported finding I believe seven different holy books on the altar of a Lodge he visited in India.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlexKennedy
Rudyard Kipling reported finding I believe seven different holy books on the altar of a Lodge he visited in India.


Kipling was initiated in India. He wrote plenty about his own Lodge containing the different scriptures.

The UK is the same as Canada. We have books of all faiths open in our Lodges. I even heard of one guy who was interested in Egyptian mythology ask for three or four books to be open when he was initiated!!!



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Thanks for clearing some of that up, however...

Originally posted by theron dunn

The fraternity does not speak to it, but there are manifold examples of our ignoring illegal laws...


Interesting that you use the term "illegal laws". Is an illegal law any law that runs contrary to the interests of masonry? I would tend to side with masons in the examples you provided, but what about other circumstances? I hate to get too specific here, but this is the first thing I thought of. Suppose a mason was caught and arrested with a small bag of marijuana, but had not been driving or participating in any other type of illegal or dangerous activity (I am by no means insinuating that masons smoke pot). Some, like myself, would consider this to be a benign, hypocritical (on the government's part) arrest. Lets go ahead and assume the poor fellow also had glaucoma as well. Would this man then be subject to expulsion from his lodge because he violated a law? I tend to look at crime as something that causes harm to another. Apart from this example, as well as the ones you provided, I'm sure there are many cases where we can all agree that disobeying the law was not the "wrong" or immoral thing to do.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by JonestownRed
Thanks for clearing some of that up, however...

Originally posted by theron dunn

The fraternity does not speak to it, but there are manifold examples of our ignoring illegal laws...


Interesting that you use the term "illegal laws". Is an illegal law any law that runs contrary to the interests of masonry?


I would say no, but an illegal law is a law that runs contrary to human rights and dignity. Henry David Thoreau wrote an interesting piece once, On the DUTY of Civil Disobediance is, I believe, the title. There are some laws that MUST be disobeyed. For instance, slavery laws, Jim Crow Laws (remember Rosa Parks?) and so on. So, the answer would be, no, not just laws that injure masons/masonry.


I would tend to side with masons in the examples you provided, but what about other circumstances? I hate to get too specific here, but this is the first thing I thought of. Suppose a mason was caught and arrested with a small bag of marijuana, but had not been driving or participating in any other type of illegal or dangerous activity (I am by no means insinuating that masons smoke pot). Some, like myself, would consider this to be a benign, hypocritical (on the government's part) arrest.


The issue of Marijuana is an interesting one, but Masonic jurisprudence is quite clear. If a Mason violates the LAWS of the United States, and is convicted of said offense, at least in California, he faces masonic trial, and likely expulsion for that act. I know of a few (VERY FEW) cases where a mason has been convicted of a crime and summarily expelled from the fraternity.


Lets go ahead and assume the poor fellow also had glaucoma as well. Would this man then be subject to expulsion from his lodge because he violated a law?


Subject to expulsion? YES. Would he be expelled? Well, in the case you cite, probably not, but a trial would be held. Now, to be clear, is it Mandatory under the CALIFORNIA masonic code that a brother that is convicted of a Felony be tried and expelled. Period. As for misdemeanors, well, I don't know, but a trial might be held, and he might not be found guilty.

There are three levels of punishment that a Masonic trial can mete out. The lowest is to be Rebuked in open lodge. The second is to be suspended for a period of time from all masonic activities, and the third and of course, most serious, is to be expelled.


I tend to look at crime as something that causes harm to another. Apart from this example, as well as the ones you provided, I'm sure there are many cases where we can all agree that disobeying the law was not the "wrong" or immoral thing to do.


I agree, but here is the conundrum: In some jurisdictions, part of the obligation is to obey the laws and constitution of the country. That being the case, these brothers are caught on the horns of a dilema. To obey their obligation and fight within the system to change or right the injustice, or to ignore the law entirely... myself, I would chose to ignore the law. Part of masonry teaches me to make my best judgment...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join