Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Sexual Orientation

Options
1…5681011…14

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    Snappy Smurf
    Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭Snappy Smurf


    philologos wrote: »
    Show me anything you have that shows that sexuality is biologically determined from birth or that there is a gene that determines sexuality.

    There's been nothing demonstrated as far as I can tell that shows this.

    Oh, and in terms of your claims about judging, this sin is no greater and no lesser than any other sin as far as Christianity is concerned. My sin before God makes me about as guilty as your sins. Thankfully, Jesus Christ came to rescue us if we only will repent and believe in Him, much as the man in Jimi's article has done.
    Well there are sins that cry out to heaven.
    Zombrex wrote: »
    Well ya did. Here specifically
    Do you agree though that they different types of love, different states of emotional connection? And that homosexuals fall in love with each other the same way that heterosexuals do?

    I'm happy if you do, in my experience though a lot of Christians don't, viewing homosexuality as nothing more than a state of desiring sexual intercourse and nothing more.
    Zombrex wrote: »
    Close enough.
    There are people who fall in love with their pets.


  • Options
    #213
    JimiTime
    Registered Users Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    PDN wrote: »

    I don't believe anyone 'falls' in love. That is mystical clap-trap for teenagers who sigh over pictures of Justin Bieber.

    Love that quote:) And 100% agree. This concept of 'falling in love' and subsequently 'falling out of love' is the prime example of the complete lack of understanding of what Love is.


  • Options
    #214
    Zillah
    Registered Users Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    philologos wrote: »
    Show me anything you have that shows that sexuality is biologically determined from birth or that there is a gene that determines sexuality.

    It's a little more complex than that. I know religious people love to draw lines between black and white but reality doesn't work that way.

    Anyway, I like that you didn't think to do a cursory google before demanding we do it for you:

    - It is a statistical reality that the more older brothers a man has the more likely he is to be gay, to the tune of 33% per brother. This has to be biological in origin (likely intra-uterine hormonal).

    - The sisters of gay men tend to have disproportionately more offspring than those of straight men. The researchers concluded that this is likely due to gay-inducing genetics being carried in the female line.

    - This study showed that the brains of gay men responded to male pheromones the way that straight male brains respond to female pheromones (it is hardwired into the brain).

    There's loads more, you'd find them if you were actually interested.


  • Options
    #215
    Snappy Smurf
    Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭Snappy Smurf


    Zillah wrote: »
    It's a little more complex than that. I know religious people love to draw lines between black and white but reality doesn't work that way.

    Anyway, I like that you didn't think to do a cursory google before demanding we do it for you:

    - It is a statistical reality that the more older brothers a man has the more likely he is to be gay, to the tune of 33% per brother. This has to be biological in origin (likely intra-uterine hormonal).

    - The sisters of gay men tend to have disproportionately more offspring than those of straight men. The researchers concluded that this is likely due to gay-inducing genetics being carried in the female line.

    - This study showed that the brains of gay men responded to male pheromones the way that straight male brains respond to female pheromones (it is hardwired into the brain).

    There's loads more, you'd find them if you were actually interested.
    The first one is interesting. There are several theories about that: one is that there is decreased responsiveness in the male child to the effects of Testosterone. Something to do with the mother becoming resistant to Testosterone or something like that. And then secondly there is the fact that this child is at the end of the line, perhaps more likely to be babied and also perhaps bullied by older brothers and perhaps not getting the attention they need from their father.

    But as interesting as these things are, they in no way show that homosexual behaviour is moral. Suppose they found a gene that predisposes to stealing - would that make stealing OK?

    The brain pheromone thing: well behaviours and responses can be learned and conditioned. That is in no way conclusive. Neither is the sister thing.


  • Options
    #216
    Zillah
    Registered Users Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    Snappy Smurf wrote: »
    perhaps more likely to be babied and also perhaps bullied by older brothers and perhaps not getting the attention they need from their father.

    We're talking science here. There is no evidence whatsoever that being babied or bullied makes people gay. You may as well say it is because they may see more penis as a child because they have brothers which makes them gay. No connection whatsoever.
    But as interesting as these things are, they in no way show that homosexual behaviour is moral.

    I don't care.
    The brain pheromone thing: well behaviours and responses can be learned and conditioned. That is in no way conclusive. Neither is the sister thing.

    I didn't say it was conclusive. They point towards a general pattern of biological determinism for homosexuality, however. Like I said, there are loads more similar studies out there, showing differences in brain structure, fingerprints, even hair growth patterns - all of which point towards an underlying physiological basis.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    Benny_Cake
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,205 ✭✭✭Benny_Cake


    philologos wrote: »
    It is a point of view, as are all worldviews and philosophies.

    However, if the Bible is God's inspired word, and if God has revealed Himself to us through it, surely this text can give us a glimpse into the mind of God on this issue?

    Of course the Bible can, and that is perhaps an interesting discussion to have. It will always come down to how we read and interpret what the Bible says though - theologians such as the Rev. Peter Gomes have taken a different view on what the Bible has to say on the issue.


  • Options
    #218
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Zillah: You do realise that more likely doesn't mean determined biologically from birth?

    I also disagree with your conclusion of being hardwired into the brain. You do know that your brain can change its structure?

    Also, I've read through many of the articles that I've been given before, and simply put they do not say that sexuality is biologically determined from birth. Zombrex has suggested it may be a factor, which means that if other factors are not fulfilled then it won't happen of necessity.
    Nodin wrote:
    Considering the fact that there is an estimated 38,000 different churches, I don't really think clarity of message is going to be culled from there.

    As someone who has opened the Bible with Christians of varying denominations, I don't believe that the Bible cannot be understood, and cannot be studied with relative clarity. The same applies actually for when I've brought non-believers and non-Christians to the Bible.

    Benny_Cake: That argument is thoroughly unconvincing, particularly when he explains away Paul's works:
    Three references from St. Paul are frequently cited (Romans 1:26-2:1, I Corinthians 6:9-11 and I Timothy 1:10). But St. Paul was concerned with homosexuality only because in Greco-Roman culture it represented a secular sensuality that was contrary to his Jewish-Christian spiritual idealism. He was against lust and sensuality in anyone, including heterosexuals. To say that homosexuality is bad because homosexuals are tempted to do morally doubtful things is to say that heterosexuality is bad because heterosexuals are likewise tempted. For St. Paul, anyone who puts his or her interest ahead of God's is condemned, a verdict that falls equally upon everyone.

    There's no explanation in there whatsoever from the passages.


  • Options
    #219
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Zillah wrote: »
    - It is a statistical reality that the more older brothers a man has the more likely he is to be gay, to the tune of 33% per brother. This has to be biological in origin (likely intra-uterine hormonal).

    Why does it have to be biological in origin?

    Have there been any studies involving a control group of people who had older brothers and sisters yet didn't know it?


  • Options
    #220
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    JimiTime wrote: »
    Love that quote:) And 100% agree. This concept of 'falling in love' and subsequently 'falling out of love' is the prime example of the complete lack of understanding of what Love is.

    Maybe you have just never experienced it. I think if you had you would understand why the term "falling" in used.


  • Options
    #221
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    PDN wrote: »
    Why does it have to be biological in origin?

    Because it doesn't happen to the same statistical degree unless the brothers are biologically related (ie the effect was not found in men placed in adopted families with older brothers).

    If the effect was knowing you had brothers then this should be found in both cases.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    PDN wrote: »
    I hope and pray that you are not a parent.

    So you would give your son a car without telling him not to drive too fast?

    The more valuable a gift is, the more we expect the recepient to treat it with care and respect.

    Sexual intimacy is one of the most powerful and wonderful gifts that God has given. I think God had a real brainwave the day He invented sex. Also, if we are honest, sexuality when handled wrongly can cause more hurt and pain than almost any area of life. So it makes perfect sense that the giver would advise us to use the gift in the way that will produce the maximum fulfillment and the least harm.

    Yet you have no problem in telling people they should deny theirs.
    Do i honestly need to point out the flaw in your thinking?

    And in answer to your first part, yes i am a parent, i have a 17 year old daughter and a 14 year old son - to the best of my knowledge both are heterosexual but if it turns out either or both prefer their own gender i certainly wouldn't tell them they are sinners and that they can't ever have sex. I sincerely hope if you ever found yourself in that position, you wouldn't either.
    As a parent, my greatest wish for my kids is that they are happy and find someone to love and share their life with.
    Snappy Smurf wrote: »
    In Catholic schools, they're Catholic teachers, hired by the Church and in part paid for by the Church IIRC.

    I think homosexuality should be kept hidden, out of public view. I wouldn't advocate bedroom police. The Church is free to teach the doctrine of the Church. The state should approve only heterosexual marriage. All other 'sexual relationships', whether they be hetero or homo, are informal and ought to have no standing in law. That would be my position.

    Very progressive.
    PS: isn't their about 100 smurfs and only 1 smurfette?.......just saying!!!:D
    PDN wrote: »
    Not so.

    The usual Christian position is not that 'homosexuality' (as in an orientation) is sinful - but that homosexual activities are sinful.

    Therefore, quite clearly, it is those who wish to argue against the usual Christian position who are making this all about sexual lust.

    Lust is a very loaded term, sexual desire is perfectly normal - and despite what a lot of people tell you, certain people are born gay. I have several gay friends and they all tell me the same thing, they knew they were gay from a very early age, they were in fact born that way. One man i know even had to leave his home country because his "christian" family would not accept him as he was. Now what the hell is christian about turning your back on your child or your brother or sister, you could not hope to meet a nicer, less offensive person - it's not like he's some murderer or rapist.
    PDN wrote: »
    I don't believe anyone 'falls' in love. That is mystical clap-trap for teenagers who sigh over pictures of Justin Bieber.

    We are attracted by various people, and we make choices. In our better choices we unselfishly choose to love others.

    Spoken like someone who has never fallen in love.
    Personally speaking, as someone who has, i can confirm you are mistaken. If you have "chosen" to love someone, then i'm afraid you don't actually love them at all. You may well be fond of them, but it's not the same thing - you won't believe me of course, but i guarantee i'm right!
    Snappy Smurf wrote: »
    There are people who fall in love with their pets.

    I think it's a numbers game smurf, there are indeed people into bestiality but they would be a very small minority.
    If 1 in a million people like a certain thing, it's probably an aberation, 1 in 10 - you'd really have to be classing as normality.


    JimiTime wrote: »
    Love that quote:) And 100% agree. This concept of 'falling in love' and subsequently 'falling out of love' is the prime example of the complete lack of understanding of what Love is.

    You're right about the lack of understanding - you don't choose who to love, you can however choose who to settle for.
    philologos wrote: »
    Zillah: You do realise that more likely doesn't mean determined biologically from birth?

    I also disagree with your conclusion of being hardwired into the brain. You do know that your brain can change its structure?

    Do you know many peolpe who have changed their sexuality? I personally haven't heard of it happening. Sexuality is not something we learn, like a language. It goes all the way through like a stick of rock:)!

    Zombrex wrote: »
    Maybe you have just never experienced it. I think if you had you would understand why the term "falling" in used.

    Couldn't agree more. You don't step into love, you fall into it. If it's under your control it's not really love.


  • Options
    #223
    doctoremma
    Registered Users Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭doctoremma


    Re: falling in love. I'm with Zombrex and Spongebob. 12 years on, I can remember the exact moment I fell in love with my husband. After that, the concept of "choice" simply didn't exist for me. And I spent many a happy hour "mooning" around over him, although I stopped short of kissing pictures of him.

    If I'm honest, it's coming across like the premise of "falling" in love is somehow immature, that making a conscious choice is a more mature type of love. I find that quite patronising.


  • Options
    #224
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    doctoremma wrote: »
    Re: falling in love. I'm with Zombrex and Spongebob. 12 years on, I can remember the exact moment I fell in love with my husband. After that, the concept of "choice" simply didn't exist for me. And I spent many a happy hour "mooning" around over him, although I stopped short of kissing pictures of him.

    If I'm honest, it's coming across like the premise of "falling" in love is somehow immature, that making a conscious choice is a more mature type of love. I find that quite patronising.

    And I sincerely hope neither of you fall out of love as mysteriously as you fell in love. I've spent too many hours counselling families who have been devastated by selfish pigs who made bad choices and then dodged the responsibility for their actions by blaming it on hormones dressed up as magic.


  • Options
    #225
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    Yet you have no problem in telling people they should deny theirs.
    Do i honestly need to point out the flaw in your thinking?
    I think it's more a case of you being incapable than of needing to.

    So, who exactly am I telling to deny anything?
    Do you know many peolpe who have changed their sexuality?
    Prisons are full of them. Men who were heterosexual on the outside will happily engage in sex with other men. Humans, particularly the male of the species, are like dogs - they'll hump anything if the circumstances are right.


  • Options
    #226
    Sin City
    Registered Users Posts: 2,375 ✭✭✭Sin City


    Has my post been deleted ?

    The one where a Christian was demanding proof of something to exist?
    Which I find quite rich


    Bottom line sexual orientation is no ones business as long as its consensual it shouldnt matter


    Homosexuality isnt a condition or anything else


  • Options
    #227
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Sin City wrote: »
    Has my post been deleted ?

    The one where a Christian was demanding proof of something to exist?
    Which I find quite rich


    Bottom line sexual orientation is no ones business as long as its consensual it shouldnt matter


    Homosexuality isnt a condition or anything else

    Yes, your post was deleted. If you want to make more snide comments about Christianity then you will also attract yellow cards, red cards and ultimately bans.

    Now go and read the Charter.


  • Options
    #228
    Sin City
    Registered Users Posts: 2,375 ✭✭✭Sin City


    Deleted for back seat moderating.

    If you wish to address moderating issues please do so via PM rather than inthread.

    If you had read the Charter as advised then you would know this. When we put it as a sticky saying PLEASE READ that should be a clue.


  • Options
    #229
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    PDN wrote: »
    Prisons are full of them. Men who were heterosexual on the outside will happily engage in sex with other men. Humans, particularly the male of the species, are like dogs - they'll hump anything if the circumstances are right.

    Eh? They don't change their sexuality, it's not a button you can flick on or off.

    That's just rape, really. A lot of it is to do with internal prison politics and power and sexual relief, not anything to do with attraction or so.


  • Options
    #230
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    Eh? They don't change their sexuality, it's not a button you can flick on or off.

    Exactly, they choose to have sex with whoever might be accessible.

    This idea of identifying oneself by orientation is bunk. You might as well identify yourself as being a boiled-egg eater.

    Some people are certainly more drawn to certain kinds of sexual activity than others - but we are all responsible for the actions and choices we make.


  • Options
    #231
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    PDN wrote: »
    Why does it have to be biological in origin?

    Have there been any studies involving a control group of people who had older brothers and sisters yet didn't know it?

    It has to be biological because evolution dictates the way humanity progresses. Humans are a mix of fitness maximisers and adaptation executors.
    Love is biological. An adaption, natural selection has chosen over time to aid reproduction ( I do say aid just in case you use it as a stick to beat homosexuality, as we are adaptation executors).

    Its also widely believed religion is a cultural adaption for that matter.

    If you want to see studies there are plenty; an anthropological study of the ethnographic records of 166 cultures in 1992 found that romantic love defined as “any intense attraction that involves the idealisation of the other, within an erotic context, with the expectation of enduring for sometime into the future” was evident in 147 of these societies. Its also been statistically analysed in literature by Patrick Hogan and he concluded its a universal prototype that suggests a cross cultural prototype in emotional experience.

    The whole postmodern idea that love is a cultural construct dating back to French courtly love and expounded upon by Hollywood today has been blown out of the water by evolutionary psychology. Its been recorded in almost every culture in the world.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    PDN wrote: »
    And I sincerely hope neither of you fall out of love as mysteriously as you fell in love. I've spent too many hours counselling families who have been devastated by selfish pigs who made bad choices and then dodged the responsibility for their actions by blaming it on hormones dressed up as magic.

    There is of course the glaringly obvious fact that some people are just assholes, but i fail to see what it has to do with falling in love?
    Or perhaps you're advocating staying stuck in a loveless marriage rather than going and being happy with someone else? Doesn't seem that great a plan to be honest. (if that is what you mean?)
    PDN wrote: »
    I think it's more a case of you being incapable than of needing to.

    So, who exactly am I telling to deny anything?

    Prisons are full of them. Men who were heterosexual on the outside will happily engage in sex with other men. Humans, particularly the male of the species, are like dogs - they'll hump anything if the circumstances are right.

    You're telling homosexuals to deny their nature, which any amount of scientific and anecdotal evidence will tell you is not a good idea and causes a raft of problems for people.
    Prisoners engaging in same sex acts is hardly changing their core sexuality, it's more a case of desperation i'd say, or maybe they had bisexual leanings to begin with?


  • Options
    #233
    doctoremma
    Registered Users Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭doctoremma


    PDN wrote: »
    And I sincerely hope neither of you fall out of love as mysteriously as you fell in love. I've spent too many hours counselling families who have been devastated by selfish pigs who made bad choices and then dodged the responsibility for their actions by blaming it on hormones dressed up as magic.
    Excuse me?

    You think because I had a "light bulb" moment with my husband, that I could easily have that with someone else? That I don't have the capacity to recognise the mature, well-developed relationship that has happily emerged from that "light bulb" moment is far more important to me? That we are held together by little more than hormones and magic?


  • Options
    #234
    doctoremma
    Registered Users Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭doctoremma


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    Or perhaps you're advocating staying stuck in a loveless marriage rather than going and being happy with someone else?
    Of course he is. After all, isn't that what homosexuals should be doing?


  • Options
    #235
    Andrewf20
    Registered Users Posts: 3,187 ✭✭✭Andrewf20


    wolfsbane wrote: »
    We are not immediately created by God at our conception - we are formed from Adam's seed. Adam's nature is what we are, not the original perfect creation.

    But who created Adams nature?


  • Options
    #236
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    doctoremma wrote: »
    Excuse me?

    You think because I had a "light bulb" moment with my husband, that I could easily have that with someone else? That I don't have the capacity to recognise the mature, well-developed relationship that has happily emerged from that "light bulb" moment is far more important to me? That we are held together by little more than hormones and magic?

    No, I think that you have made a choice to love your husband for better or worse, but that in your previous post you downplayed the choice aspect so as to score points in a debate on an internet forum.


  • Options
    #237
    doctoremma
    Registered Users Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭doctoremma


    PDN wrote: »
    No, I think that you have made a choice to love your husband for better or worse, but that in your previous post you downplayed the choice aspect so as to score points in a debate on an internet forum.
    I'm not sure we are talking about the same "moment" in a relationship.

    I did not make a conscious choice when I fell in love with my husband. I'd known him a long time and I was strangely surprised by it. But once it happened, that was it, no second thought, no pros and cons, he was the one for me. I had no choice in how I felt.

    We did, of course, make a conscious choice to get married.


  • Options
    #238
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    philologos wrote: »
    ..............
    As someone who has opened the Bible with Christians of varying denominations, I don't believe that the Bible cannot be understood, and cannot be studied with relative clarity. The same applies actually for when I've brought non-believers and non-Christians to the Bible.
    .....................

    'Varying denominations'....often based on different readings of the bible. As I said, there are over 38,000 Christian churches. That alone speaks to the difficulty of interpretation. Seeking an answer on something as specific as homosexuality is therefore doomed to failure.


  • Options
    #239
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    PDN wrote: »
    And I sincerely hope neither of you fall out of love as mysteriously as you fell in love.

    Has already happened. It would be great if everyone stayed in love with the first person they fell in love with, but it doesn't work like that. If it did everyone would marry the first person they fall in love with. No point pretending it does.
    PDN wrote: »
    I've spent too many hours counselling families who have been devastated by selfish pigs who made bad choices and then dodged the responsibility for their actions by blaming it on hormones dressed up as magic.

    Ah yes, was wondering when it would get around to this, the Christian obsession with feeling justified in blaming people, as if that achieves anything. Girl no longer loves her boyfriend, decides to break up with him to date other people. You can blame her for this all you like, doesn't make her love her boyfriend any more so aside from perhaps allowing the boyfriend to vent a little at the end of the day does blaming her achieve anything? Would the boyfriend want her to continue going out with him even though her feelings have changed and she doesn't feel as he feels?

    People cannot control who they fall in love with, or who they fall out of love with. You can of course control who you marry, and who you decide to stay with even though you aren't in love with them any more. And you can decide to blame someone who gets divorced because they don't want to be with the person any more.

    Personally I think that if someone is no longer in love with their partner or spouse staying together anyway, while initially seeming noble, leads to bitterness and resentment by both parties. I certainly would not want my wife faking it for the next 60 years under some noble notion that she owes it to me. I've seen this happen a few times and it is not pretty.

    You may disagree, you may feel that a person should continue in a loveless marriage because they have already made a life long commitment to the other person and that they should continue to be loving to that person (the action rather than emotion) even if that is not coming from genuine love.

    That is up to you, you may feel happier being able to blame any person who breaks up with their girlfriend or divorces their husband because they no longer feel as they once did. But that has little to do with the reality of what love is or how it works. It is either genuine or they are faking it. Faking it might be seem noble initially but I think if you think about it for a bit you would agree that in reality it is probably the less of both options, particularly in the long run.


  • Options
    #240
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    PDN wrote: »
    No, I think that you have made a choice to love your husband for better or worse, but that in your previous post you downplayed the choice aspect so as to score points in a debate on an internet forum.

    I don't think you quite get how falling in love works!
    You don't just choose to love somebody, i don't think that would even be possible. If your way of thinking had an ounce of truth to it we'd all be in perfect relationships, simply find someone you're compatable with and then choose to love them - perfection.
    If it worked your way, there'd be no need to be counselling anybody, everybody would be perfectly happy!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #241
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    doctoremma wrote: »
    I'm not sure we are talking about the same "moment" in a relationship.

    I did not make a conscious choice when I fell in love with my husband. I'd known him a long time and I was strangely surprised by it. But once it happened, that was it, no second thought, no pros and cons, he was the one for me. I had no choice in how I felt.

    We did, of course, make a conscious choice to get married.

    I can't help but wonder is the issue a genuine confusion between the emotional state of being in love and the physical action of being loving. Anyone can act lovingly to anyone else, irrespective of how they feel about them. Or put it another way you can fake it if you choose to. But you cannot fake the emotional state you are in, any more than you can choose to feel guilty, or feel nervous, or feel homesick or feel happy. You can act guilty, you can act nervous, you can act homesick and you can act happy. But you cannot make yourself feel these things.

    Man life would be so much easier if you could :D


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement