Jump to content


Photo

What Is Christian View For Marijuana?


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#21 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 26 April 2010 - 03:37 AM

And don't worry Ron I don't think you are condoning any sort of behavior.  ;)

View Post


I know Java... But I want to ensure no one quotes me out of context :)


Also: This in no way implies that I condone quoting out of context :)

#22 Isabella

Isabella

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 589 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:Cell biology, developmental biology, genetics, zoology, anthropology.
  • Age: 0
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Vancouver, Canada

Posted 26 April 2010 - 09:04 AM

There are many researchers that would disagree with your points concerning the non-lethality of marijuana smoke Isabella

View Post

That’s interesting, all the more reason to avoid smoking. I wasn’t aware of all those dangers. Although when I said marijuana was non-lethal, I was referring more to the potential of an overdose.

However, smoking cigarettes or pot is bad for your body and has no medicinal purpose at all. Dope is used with the express motivation to become "high" which is intoxication.

View Post

I disagree. Marijuana prevents nausea and increases appetite. There are natural and artificial THC products (ex. Marinol) that doctors can prescribe to patients who need to gain weight, for example cancer patients going through chemo.

#23 bobabelever

bobabelever

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 392 posts
  • Age: 43
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Arizona

Posted 26 April 2010 - 11:57 AM

I see your point Java, but consider this.  If it is made legal, who is going to worry about the "correct" use of it? Except those who probably don't agree with its use in the first place. 

I don't believe it should be made legal as far as "recreational" use goes.  Moderation means little when it becomes an addiction or at least "regular" use. It should be medicinal use only for particular medical problems.  What happens if it's legal?  No restrictions at all.  What happened here in NZ is they lowered the drinking age, because they decided "they're doing it anyway".  All this did, was create a far bigger problem with youth drinking in NZ. Now we are far worse off than before.

Making something like this legal for any recreational use would be a big mistake IMO.  People (youths especially) will smoke it like cigarettes openly and not even worrying about consequences because it's now "legal", thus encouraging others to do the same - e.g. their peers and those even younger. I have seen what it does to people.  Memory problems, loss of clarity, being high and not concentrating on much else, changes in behaviour/personality/mood. I have even gotten high from someone else smoking it near me.  Even though I had none myself.

There are enough cigarette/alcohol related problems already without adding yet another and making it legal as well.

Sorry, I think it would spell big problems.  This is how it always begins.  Just a little of this, or a little of that, in moderation and it'll be ok.  But once you let a drug in,  there is no telling what it may do to any given individual, because it is so easily addictive.  Also, teachers in school have to teach kids already that are often high!  This makes their job so much more difficult. 

This is potent stuff, it's a drug and that's exactly how it ought to be treated.

View Post

I agree Bex, to legalize it as "recreational" is a bad idea.

#24 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 26 April 2010 - 02:44 PM

I'm surprised that marijuana isn't cited by creationists as one of those organisms that couldn't have evolved by chance. It's an incredibly useful plant. You can make rope out of it, oil, cloth, paper, food, plastic, and anti-bacterial agents just to name a few uses off the top of my head.

As far as the medicinal/recreational uses go, I think that smoking is a by product of the prohibition of marijuana use in most countries. It is quite possible to take it with a vaporiser or by ingestion.

#25 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 27 April 2010 - 02:03 AM

I'm surprised that marijuana isn't cited by creationists as one of those organisms that couldn't have evolved by chance.  It's an incredibly useful plant.  You can make rope out of it, oil, cloth, paper, food, plastic, and anti-bacterial agents just to name a few uses off the top of my head.

As far as the medicinal/recreational uses go, I think that smoking is a by product of the prohibition of marijuana use in most countries.  It is quite possible to take it with a vaporiser or by ingestion.

View Post


And I'm surprised that evolutionists are not claiming the dinosaurs had pot parties.

#26 Javabean

Javabean

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 950 posts
  • Location:Harrisburg Pa
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Harrisburg

Posted 27 April 2010 - 03:31 AM

And I'm surprised that evolutionists are not claiming the dinosaurs had pot parties.

View Post



Its funny that you mention this, because animals in nature will eat plants that make them happy. One of the legends on how people discovered the coffee bean involved a group of goat herders noticed their goats got more energetic after eating the fruit of this certain plant.

Regardless, I don't think Jason was going for an attack on creationists with his post. From what I've seen a common argument against evolution is 'something this useful couldn't have evolved by chance.' And marijuana is simply an amazing plant. It has possibly more uses than soybeans.


edit: I needed to re-word a sentence ;) too early again :)...is there a sleepy smiley, and if not why?

#27 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 27 April 2010 - 03:31 AM

I'm surprised that marijuana isn't cited by creationists as one of those organisms that couldn't have evolved by chance. 

View Post


Of course it couldn't have evolved by chance, there is no evidence (empirical or otherwise) of anything evolving by chance. There is just presupposition and "a priori" wants. But, if you have empirical evidence of marijuana evolving by chance, you can always post it here.

#28 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 29 April 2010 - 05:19 PM

I see your point Java, but consider this.  If it is made legal, who is going to worry about the "correct" use of it? Except those who probably don't agree with its use in the first place. 

I don't believe it should be made legal as far as "recreational" use goes.  Moderation means little when it becomes an addiction or at least "regular" use. It should be medicinal use only for particular medical problems.  What happens if it's legal?  No restrictions at all.  What happened here in NZ is they lowered the drinking age, because they decided "they're doing it anyway".  All this did, was create a far bigger problem with youth drinking in NZ. Now we are far worse off than before.

Making something like this legal for any recreational use would be a big mistake IMO.  People (youths especially) will smoke it like cigarettes openly and not even worrying about consequences because it's now "legal", thus encouraging others to do the same - e.g. their peers and those even younger. I have seen what it does to people.  Memory problems, loss of clarity, being high and not concentrating on much else, changes in behaviour/personality/mood. I have even gotten high from someone else smoking it near me.  Even though I had none myself.

There are enough cigarette/alcohol related problems already without adding yet another and making it legal as well.

Sorry, I think it would spell big problems.  This is how it always begins.  Just a little of this, or a little of that, in moderation and it'll be ok.  But once you let a drug in,  there is no telling what it may do to any given individual, because it is so easily addictive.  Also, teachers in school have to teach kids already that are often high!  This makes their job so much more difficult. 

This is potent stuff, it's a drug and that's exactly how it ought to be treated.

View Post


It's kind of like P*rn*gr*phy. In the eighties, I remember it got so bad you could walk in some convenience stores and look at some gross stuff, right next to the Enquirer. Since then, they are more discreet, and wrap the mags. I mean are we going to put it on the new stand because people lust anyway? There is something called restraint in society, and Bex has social proof of what relaxing the rules will do.

People used to go to the movies here in America, or bowling. Now an exciting night out is at the 'boat' where you go and blow 200$. All because the restraints on gambling were relaxed. I know it's people's business what they do, but where do we stop?

If people want weed, they can get it. But do we want to market it now??? The corporations will push the numbers down our throat--they only know one word--GROWTH!!

#29 Bex

Bex

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,066 posts
  • Interests:God, creation, friends/family, animals, health topics, auto/biographies, movies (horror, comedy, drama, whatever, just as long as it's good), music, video games (mainly survival horror, or survival/adventure types), crossword puzzles, books on real life crime/serial killers/etc. Prophecy/miracles/supernatural/hauntings etc, net surfing/forums etc.<br /><br />One of my favourite forums for information on many topics:<br /><br />http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 29 April 2010 - 08:26 PM

It's kind of like P*rn*gr*phy.  In the eighties, I remember it got so bad you could walk in some convenience stores and look at some gross stuff, right next to the Enquirer.   Since then, they are more discreet, and wrap the mags.   I mean are we going to put it on the new stand because people lust anyway?  There is something called restraint in society, and Bex has social proof of what relaxing the rules will do.

People used to go to the movies here in America, or bowling.  Now an exciting night out is at the 'boat' where you go and blow 200$.  All because the restraints on gambling were relaxed.  I know it's people's business what they do, but where do we stop?

If people want weed, they can get it.  But do we want  to market it now???  The corporations will push the numbers down our throat--they only know one word--GROWTH!!

View Post


Exactly! This is what happens when we "loosen up" and allow a trickle of something and before you know it, it becomes a torrent and then they're trying to do something about it with providing councelling sessions and "withdrawal" programmes for the very problems they've actually helped by "loosening up" on the restrictions. And all the money these things cost (not to mention the emotional/mental costs).

The so-called "freedom" has often lead to captivity in addiction, destroyed marriages, families etc. On a whole, society suffers because of lax laws on alcohol, drugs, gambling and P*rn*gr*phy. Once you let a foot in the door, the door swings wide open.

Yes, people can become addicted to almost anything, but show me most of the withdrawal programmes out there and let's take a look at what most of them are aimed at - drugs/alcohol/P*rn/gambling. These are big problems in society because each of these things are easily addictive/destructive.

The most vulnerable of course are the youth and that's so often where the life long ingrained habits take root.

#30 Javabean

Javabean

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 950 posts
  • Location:Harrisburg Pa
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Harrisburg

Posted 29 April 2010 - 10:25 PM

AFJ and Bex,

I see the points you are making and I feel that they are very valid. My feelings on the legalization would be as such.

Legal age 21 like Alcohol. Places that would handle it like cigarettes. Instead of spending the money that we do on incarcerating people who buy/sell weed, could be used for education programs to detract from smoking pot.

Of course smoking bans in public places would be enforced, so it wouldn't be happening in bars/restaurants/places of business. And places of business could still control who works for them based on being drug free.

But I also agree that if the correct measures aren't taken then there could be serious consequences.

#31 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 01 May 2010 - 07:28 AM

AFJ and Bex,

I see the points you are making and I feel that they are very valid.  My feelings on the legalization would be as such.

Legal age 21 like Alcohol.  Places that would handle it like cigarettes.  Instead of spending the money that we do on incarcerating people who buy/sell weed, could be used for education programs to detract from smoking pot. 

Of course smoking bans in public places would be enforced, so it wouldn't be happening in bars/restaurants/places of business.  And places of business could still control who works for them based on being drug free.

But I also agree that if the correct measures aren't taken then there could be serious consequences.

View Post

Java,

Have you considered the ramifications of the corporations marketing marajuana? I work in sales in a very aggessive worldwide corporation, and there is only one mantra-- growth. Beat last years numbers so we can get more return at Wall St. and hence more investors!

My point is it will not just be available, it will be pushed. Look at the beer displays in the stores--marketing. They get bigger and more elaborate with more promos all the time--all for market share. While there would not be displays, there will be posters and point of sale signage everywhere. It would be the same kind of frenzy with pot. Very rich people "pushing" the stuff at stores.

Not only that, but now drunk people will be stoned and drunk at the same time! What a mess! Kids driving from the bar to get some dope--great! It won't help anyone but the IRS.

#32 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 02 May 2010 - 05:40 AM

Have you considered the ramifications of the corporations marketing marajuana?  I work in sales in a very aggessive worldwide corporation, and there is only one mantra-- growth.  Beat last years numbers so we can get more return at Wall St. and hence more investors!

My point is it will not just be available, it will be pushed.  Look at the beer displays in the stores--marketing.  They get bigger and more elaborate with more promos all the time--all for market share.  While there would not be displays, there will be posters and point of sale signage everywhere.  It would be the same kind of frenzy with pot.  Very rich people "pushing" the stuff at stores. 

View Post


Even with all the advertisements for alcohol there are people that choose not to drink. Even with the total ban on cigarette advertisement there are still people that choose to take up smoking.

Marijuana will always be sold, but by legalising it you take the cash flow out of the hands of criminals and put it into the hands of legitimate businessmen.

Not only that, but now drunk people will be stoned and drunk at the same time!  What a mess!  Kids driving from the bar to get some dope--great!  It won't help anyone but the IRS.

View Post


Kids should not be driving to the bar if they intend to get drunk! People should not drive under the influence of any drug regardless of whether it's recreational or prescription.

#33 Bex

Bex

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,066 posts
  • Interests:God, creation, friends/family, animals, health topics, auto/biographies, movies (horror, comedy, drama, whatever, just as long as it's good), music, video games (mainly survival horror, or survival/adventure types), crossword puzzles, books on real life crime/serial killers/etc. Prophecy/miracles/supernatural/hauntings etc, net surfing/forums etc.<br /><br />One of my favourite forums for information on many topics:<br /><br />http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 02 May 2010 - 04:45 PM

Even with all the advertisements for alcohol there are people that choose not to drink.  Even with the total ban on cigarette advertisement there are still people that choose to take up smoking. 


Correct, but this does not remove the fact that repeated messages can still have an impact for good or bad.

If advertising didn't work, they wouldn't continue to waste their time on money on doing so. It must indeed have some impact! We have the worst case of youth drinking ever and the numbers are growing. In spite of those who continue to avoid drinking, we have a growing number who are. We have plenty of commercials here in NZ that place "alcohol" with "cool" and "funny" and "Sports". Great message to the young eh?

In spite of those who continue smoking, we have a growing number who don't. So messages can and apparently do work!

Yes, there will always be die hard smokers, but the less it's encouraged and bragged about as cool, the better. Nearly everybody smoke once upon a time and why? Because it was viewed as "cool" "stylish" and the adverts reflected this by using a model man or woman. Movies reflected the same. This is no longer the case! And thank goodness for that.

Less people smoke now than they did then. We see the graphic consequences, rather than the cosmetic psuedo hype. The reality seems to be getting through. Smoking is no longer seen as "chic", but rather an unfortunate habit that both harms the smoker, and those around them. Trust me, it's becoming an increasingly unpopular habit.

Marijuana will always be sold, but by legalising it you take the cash flow out of the hands of criminals and put it into the hands of legitimate businessmen.
Kids should not be driving to the bar if they intend to get drunk!  People should not drive under the influence of any drug regardless of whether it's recreational or prescription.


I don't think this is the answer Jason. Having marijuanna seen as a viable a way of life, a "legitimate" lifestyle I believe will see worse problem than we do now. What we're talking about here is a drug and a drug that does indeed affect the mind, as I've seen by personal experience.

Yes, marijuanna will always be sold, but not on the open market and I hope it never is. As far as I'm concerned, no legitimate businessman would sell such a "product". Keeping it "illegal" is at least restrictive and sends a message, regardless of those who continue to violate the law. Why drop standards for the sake of those that violate them?

#34 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 02 May 2010 - 05:19 PM

If advertising didn't work, they wouldn't continue to waste their time on money on doing so. It must indeed have some impact! We have the worst case of youth drinking ever and the numbers are growing. In spite of those who continue to avoid drinking, we have a growing number who are.  We have plenty of commercials here in NZ that place "alcohol" with "cool" and "funny" and "Sports".  Great message to the young.

View Post


Surely that's an argument against advertising, not marijuana.

#35 Bex

Bex

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,066 posts
  • Interests:God, creation, friends/family, animals, health topics, auto/biographies, movies (horror, comedy, drama, whatever, just as long as it's good), music, video games (mainly survival horror, or survival/adventure types), crossword puzzles, books on real life crime/serial killers/etc. Prophecy/miracles/supernatural/hauntings etc, net surfing/forums etc.<br /><br />One of my favourite forums for information on many topics:<br /><br />http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 02 May 2010 - 05:33 PM

Surely that's an argument against advertising, not marijuana.

View Post


You brought the subject up Jason. You must have had a reason for doing so, and I answered you.

My point was that messages can influence for the good or bad, as can making something illegal or legal. In spite of those who will (and those who always have) act/ed to the contrary according to their own desires or beliefs.

#36 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 02 May 2010 - 07:10 PM

I work for one of the most aggressive sales organizations in the world. They are insatiably hungry for market share--which means shelf space. Believe me shelf space creates sales.

Legalized marajuana will lose some of it's negative social mystique and be tried by people who would have never "hooked up" with a street pusher. "Availability encourages use" is tried and true.

But it will be legalized I believe, eventually, because it will benefit the treasury. And moral reasons are not relevant in a culture that calls God irrelevant.

#37 Mr.Razorblades

Mr.Razorblades

    Banned Troll from a troll forum

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 144 posts
  • Age: 28
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • US

Posted 03 May 2010 - 06:00 AM

I don't think this is the answer Jason.   Having marijuanna seen as a viable a way of life, a "legitimate" lifestyle I believe will see worse problem than we do now.  What we're talking about here is a drug and a drug that does indeed affect the mind, as I've seen by personal experience.

The entire problem with this argument is the lack of facts. We cannot believe what we will see unless a predictable model is set up, and there really can be no predictable model solely because we can't assume how each individual will act according to the laws.

Your body produces drugs naturally that would be considered illegal if they were manufactured, which now that I think about it many are synthesized. I mean scientists are now finding the capability of mice to produce morphine naturally in their bodys and other evidence is pointing to humans having this same ability. If we're going to making marijuana illegal, even with all of its beneficiary properties, then we have to make alcohol, morphine, nicotine, caffeine, testosterone, endorphins, adrenaline, GH, serotonin, oxytocin, and many, many more compounds illegal. Why this one plant is such a harbinger of displeasure among so many confounds me.

Yes, marijuanna will always be sold, but not on the open market and I hope it never is.  As far as I'm concerned, no legitimate businessman would sell such a "product".   Keeping it "illegal" is at least restrictive and sends a message, regardless of those who continue to violate the law.  Why drop standards for the sake of those that violate them?

I completely disagree with this. Making this plant legal would have some serious helpful side effects.

1. We would quickly fill that giant hole we call debt with some intelligently proposed taxes.
2. We would create jobs that would actually be beneficial and not just the government creating jobs to 'make' work.
3. We could use hemp in numerous applications limiting the number of actual tree we consume a year which would also allow America to regain some control on the export market.
4. Sick individuals would be capable of relieving their pains where other drugs are incapable of working on them due to allergies and specific body chemistry. Even the THC derived pill for cancer victims is not as useful as people think, which leads to an interesting fact; did you know that the same government who prohibits marijuana and says that it has no medicinal purposes is also the same government that created the THC derived pill and whom also currently hold the patent for?
5. We would begin to put the Mexican drug cartel and various other drug cartels out of business because a majority of their income (rougly 70-80%) comes from the sell of marijuana in America. By taking away prohibition we would essentially cut their source of income off, making them useless.

These are just some of the effects that it would have. Individuals have the choice to what they want to put in their body. Just because some guy in an alley does crack does not mean that I'll do crack as well. No one can physically force you to take any drug you don't want, you have the ability to choose what you put in your body (well technically you don't because the government decides what is best for you right now which is ludicrous). You are right though, if we do keep it illegal it does send a message and that message is:

"Hi, we're America. We're afraid of change, and remind blind to logic and reasoning even though we declare those ideas to be a part of the foundation we reside on. So come on over everyone and step all over us, because you know we won't do anything about it! Have a plasmic day!"

#38 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 03 May 2010 - 03:02 PM

Yes, marijuanna will always be sold, but not on the open market and I hope it never is.  As far as I'm concerned, no legitimate businessman would sell such a "product". Keeping it "illegal" is at least restrictive and sends a message, regardless of those who continue to violate the law.  Why drop standards for the sake of those that violate them?

View Post


The Dutch would disagree with you.

#39 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 May 2010 - 12:11 AM

Even with all the advertisements for alcohol there are people that choose not to drink.  Even with the total ban on cigarette advertisement there are still people that choose to take up smoking. 

Marijuana will always be sold, but by legalising it you take the cash flow out of the hands of criminals and put it into the hands of legitimate businessmen.
Kids should not be driving to the bar if they intend to get drunk!  People should not drive under the influence of any drug regardless of whether it's recreational or prescription.

View Post


Nicotine doesn't impair you and it takes a lot more alcohol than pot to impair you. I've smoked pot in my life. It takes ten minutes to get high. Then after that you want to go out and get something to eat.

I just don't want it legalized. I'd rather there just be less serious penalties for having small amount. I think California has it right. If it's less than two ounces and in a single bag then it's for personal use so you get a $100 ticket and you're on your way.

#40 Javabean

Javabean

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 950 posts
  • Location:Harrisburg Pa
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Harrisburg

Posted 04 May 2010 - 03:10 AM

Nicotine doesn't impair you and it takes a lot more alcohol than pot to impair you.  I've smoked pot in my life.  It takes ten minutes to get high.  Then after that you want to go out and get something to eat.


It depends on the person, but in general I agree. And as far as someone who is impaired on pot, they certainly don't drive as recklessly as someone who is drunk. They tend to drive slower, and more paranoid than anyone else does. Still they shouldn't be driving.

I just don't want it legalized.  I'd rather there just be less serious penalties for having small amount.  I think California has it right.  If it's less than two ounces and in a single bag then it's for personal use so you get a $100 ticket and you're on your way.

View Post


Baby steps. Its a good thing. :rolleyes: Even if it was legal I would still avoid the stuff. I like it, but I just don't want to be stoned often/at all.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users