NATION

PASSWORD

Ministers threatened with arrest

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Is it legal to arrest the ministers?

Yes
174
47%
No
200
53%
 
Total votes : 374

User avatar
New Celisia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 705
Founded: Apr 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby New Celisia » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:51 pm

Infected Mushroom wrote:The state telling people to compromise their religious beliefs or else go to jail, to perform forced labor against their will with the threat of jail time...

and there's also something sickening to me about people purposely rubbing it in against people with religious beliefs. They could have gone to another place and gotten married, there is probably an established business segment that specializes in marrying gay people. Instead, they chose to try to bully the Ministers with the threat of state-sanctioned court action, jail time, and public shaming. It shows a lack of class...


It's a longstanding policy with the Left to perform the same sketchy political practices that the Right indulge in, and then attempt to claim the moral high ground. You'd think that gay rights activists, feminists, and more left winged individuals would be all for the rights of the individual and such. Especially concerning their whole political philosophy. Yet these individuals tend to be just as bigoted and intolerant of those that don't agree with their assessment, as the more radical individuals are who hate them. xD You can't breed tolerance with intolerance. It's a hypocritical viewpoint that many people hold and practice every day. You can't have an equal society by replacing one hated denomination of people (Homosexuals, Historically Feminists, etc.) with another group, (Conservative Christians). There is hate tactics and propaganda spread through the news that does this every day.

Also to note, I'm actually a Leftist myself. I'm a heterosexual white male, with a Christian upbringing but a more athiest/agnostic viewpoint. It differs. I'm just not afraid to call bullshit. It doesn't matter what side of the political line it falls behind.


DEVIANTART SILENTMENAGERIE
Religion: Secular Humanist
Political: Libertarian Socialist
LIKES: Gay Marriage, LGBT Rights, Religious Freedom, Egalitarianism, Pro-Life, USA (the people), Abraham Lincoln, the Jewish peoples.
DISLIKES: Wage Slavery, Totalitarianism, Nazism, Fascism, Communism, True Capitalism, Feminism, Abortion, Trump, Clintons, US Government, the State of Israel.

User avatar
Infected Mushroom
Post Czar
 
Posts: 39358
Founded: Apr 15, 2014
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Infected Mushroom » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:53 pm

Celritannia wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
doesn't mean the law is right


It shows the benefit of a society moving towards an equal status and not treating others as second class citizens by denying them something which is a basic human right under the UDHR.


the government is obligated to treat everyone equally, individuals and private businesses should not be.

In a free society, the individual in his capacity as the owner of his own business, time, labor, and investment has the right to factor in all sorts of considerations (some of them religious, personal, or non-economic) in deciding whether or not to service particular customers.

It is not the state's place to FORCE people to service each other.

In a truly free society, market transactions are entirely voluntary. The seller can't FORCE the buyer to buy things any more than the buyer should have the right to force the seller to perform against his/her wish. If you violate this principle of market freedom, you're instituting a regime of forced labor (sellers being forced to sell against their wishes, or buyers being forced to buy against their wishes). The OP is an example of the former.

User avatar
Fortunagen
Minister
 
Posts: 2331
Founded: Jan 25, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Fortunagen » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:54 pm

Fartsniffage wrote:
Fortunagen wrote:Alright, quick question, if these ministers were openly against marrying same sex couples to begin with, can they not just go to another church? I personally would not want to be married by someone who was against my marriage in the first place, regardless of whether or not they are bigoted. I mean, yeah, you can force these ministers to marry you, but that's not going to make them any more tolerant(it might even build animosity against you). Why not go somewhere where you are married by someone who appreciates it?


Because fuck bigots, basically.

If this couple want to run a business then they follow the law. It's that simple.

Not sure on the text of the law, but in my opinion I think it is ridiculous to force a business to provide a service to someone on principal. Voluntary transaction is the basis of our economic system, and when we force businesses to give services like this it is only going to piss off everyone involved when the solution would be much easier just to find a more accepting venue. I'd even be willing to provide an alternate option(register Life Church minister, yo) if I lived nearby.
Puzikas wrote:
Fortunagen wrote:Fortunagen is a non-nuclear state despite having vast reserves of uranium.

We couldn't POSSIBLY be stocking up for something.


Shutup, Iran! :p


Mistelemr wrote:With how many shootings that happen almost daily now, I find it hard to care.

Sure I hate myself for it, but fuck it, we invited this. It's sad, but at some point you just stop caring. People can scream and cry but nothing will ever get done about it. When was it last that a shooting incident like this (or any other) actually made people legitimately search for answers or try a new approach? None that I can think of, It's been the same people, shouting the same expletives with the same people dying.

I hear they have good internet over in Scandinavia.


One day, I'll make this sig cool again.

User avatar
Coccygia
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7521
Founded: Nov 24, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Coccygia » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:54 pm

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Celritannia wrote:
But this isn't a church though, that's the thing.
This is a business.


and businesses should be allowed to choose their customers

its the owners' investment, time, and labor. If the owner has firm religious beliefs, in a free society he should have the right to factor them into his business decisions

So if you don't wanna serve niggers, it's OK?
"Nobody deserves anything. You get what you get." - House
"Hope is for sissies." - House
“Qokedy qokedy dal qokedy qokedy." - The Voynich Manuscript
"We're not ordinary people - we're morons!" - Jerome Horwitz
"A book, any book, is a sacred object." - Jorge Luis Borges
"I am a survivor. I am like a cockroach, you just can't get rid of me." - Madonna

User avatar
Fortunagen
Minister
 
Posts: 2331
Founded: Jan 25, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Fortunagen » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:55 pm

Furry Alairia and Algeria wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
Saying ''This is the Law'' says nothing about whether or not that Law is morally right or wrong

In so that makes gay marriage and gays morally wrong.

A more accurate statement would be it makes people's opinions that gay marriage and gays are morally wrong.
Puzikas wrote:
Fortunagen wrote:Fortunagen is a non-nuclear state despite having vast reserves of uranium.

We couldn't POSSIBLY be stocking up for something.


Shutup, Iran! :p


Mistelemr wrote:With how many shootings that happen almost daily now, I find it hard to care.

Sure I hate myself for it, but fuck it, we invited this. It's sad, but at some point you just stop caring. People can scream and cry but nothing will ever get done about it. When was it last that a shooting incident like this (or any other) actually made people legitimately search for answers or try a new approach? None that I can think of, It's been the same people, shouting the same expletives with the same people dying.

I hear they have good internet over in Scandinavia.


One day, I'll make this sig cool again.

User avatar
Infected Mushroom
Post Czar
 
Posts: 39358
Founded: Apr 15, 2014
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Infected Mushroom » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:56 pm

Fortunagen wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
Because fuck bigots, basically.

If this couple want to run a business then they follow the law. It's that simple.

Not sure on the text of the law, but in my opinion I think it is ridiculous to force a business to provide a service to someone on principal. Voluntary transaction is the basis of our economic system, and when we force businesses to give services like this it is only going to piss off everyone involved when the solution would be much easier just to find a more accepting venue. I'd even be willing to provide an alternate option(register Life Church minister, yo) if I lived nearby.


EXACTLY.

Forced labor/non-voluntary transactions cannot be the basis of a free society.

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 42063
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Fartsniffage » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:56 pm

Fortunagen wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
Because fuck bigots, basically.

If this couple want to run a business then they follow the law. It's that simple.

Not sure on the text of the law, but in my opinion I think it is ridiculous to force a business to provide a service to someone on principal. Voluntary transaction is the basis of our economic system, and when we force businesses to give services like this it is only going to piss off everyone involved when the solution would be much easier just to find a more accepting venue. I'd even be willing to provide an alternate option(register Life Church minister, yo) if I lived nearby.


It's funny, but these same arguments were made when business were forced to serve blacks, somehow the fabric of America didn't crumble. Why do you think it will over serving gays?

User avatar
Celritannia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18457
Founded: Nov 10, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Celritannia » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:56 pm

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Celritannia wrote:
It shows the benefit of a society moving towards an equal status and not treating others as second class citizens by denying them something which is a basic human right under the UDHR.


the government is obligated to treat everyone equally, individuals and private businesses should not be.

In a free society, the individual in his capacity as the owner of his own business, time, labor, and investment has the right to factor in all sorts of considerations (some of them religious, personal, or non-economic) in deciding whether or not to service particular customers.

It is not the state's place to FORCE people to service each other.

In a truly free society, market transactions are entirely voluntary. The seller can't FORCE the buyer to buy things any more than the buyer should have the right to force the seller to perform against his/her wish. If you violate this principle of market freedom, you're instituting a regime of forced labor (sellers being forced to sell against their wishes, or buyers being forced to buy against their wishes). The OP is an example of the former.


Human Rights > Free Market
Basic logic really.

My DeviantArt
Obey
When you annoy a Celritannian
U W0T M8?
Zirkagrad wrote:A person with a penchant for flying lions with long tongues, could possibly be a fan of Kiss. Maybe the classiest nation with a lion with its tongue hanging out. Enjoys only the finest tea.

Nakena wrote:NSG's Most Serene Salad
Citizen of Earth, Commonwealthian, European, British, Yorkshireman.
Atheist, Environmentalist

User avatar
Fortunagen
Minister
 
Posts: 2331
Founded: Jan 25, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Fortunagen » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:56 pm

Coccygia wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
and businesses should be allowed to choose their customers

its the owners' investment, time, and labor. If the owner has firm religious beliefs, in a free society he should have the right to factor them into his business decisions

So if you don't wanna serve niggers, it's OK?

Yeah, as long is there is an alternative option for said "nigger" that is equal or better. If there is not, I believe that business itself should be turned over to a public department.
Puzikas wrote:
Fortunagen wrote:Fortunagen is a non-nuclear state despite having vast reserves of uranium.

We couldn't POSSIBLY be stocking up for something.


Shutup, Iran! :p


Mistelemr wrote:With how many shootings that happen almost daily now, I find it hard to care.

Sure I hate myself for it, but fuck it, we invited this. It's sad, but at some point you just stop caring. People can scream and cry but nothing will ever get done about it. When was it last that a shooting incident like this (or any other) actually made people legitimately search for answers or try a new approach? None that I can think of, It's been the same people, shouting the same expletives with the same people dying.

I hear they have good internet over in Scandinavia.


One day, I'll make this sig cool again.

User avatar
Furry Alairia and Algeria
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 21009
Founded: Apr 05, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Furry Alairia and Algeria » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:57 pm

Fortunagen wrote:
Furry Alairia and Algeria wrote:In so that makes gay marriage and gays morally wrong.

A more accurate statement would be it makes people's opinions that gay marriage and gays are morally wrong.

It's his viewpoint. He is not speaking for others, unless they explicitly say, "You can represent my view" or if he's a leader, which I wouldn't trust anyway..
In memory of Dyakovo - may he never be forgotten - Дьяковожс ученик


I do not reply to telegrams, unless you are someone I know.

User avatar
Gaiserin
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1026
Founded: Jun 22, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Gaiserin » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:57 pm

Interesting. I was under the impression that churches were still allowed to choose whom they bless and whom they don't.

Apparently, this isn't the case.
■■▀■▀■▀■▀▀▀■■■

User avatar
Infected Mushroom
Post Czar
 
Posts: 39358
Founded: Apr 15, 2014
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Infected Mushroom » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:57 pm

Celritannia wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
the government is obligated to treat everyone equally, individuals and private businesses should not be.

In a free society, the individual in his capacity as the owner of his own business, time, labor, and investment has the right to factor in all sorts of considerations (some of them religious, personal, or non-economic) in deciding whether or not to service particular customers.

It is not the state's place to FORCE people to service each other.

In a truly free society, market transactions are entirely voluntary. The seller can't FORCE the buyer to buy things any more than the buyer should have the right to force the seller to perform against his/her wish. If you violate this principle of market freedom, you're instituting a regime of forced labor (sellers being forced to sell against their wishes, or buyers being forced to buy against their wishes). The OP is an example of the former.


Human Rights > Free Market
Basic logic really.


You can't enforce human rights by sacrificing a business owner's human right to control his own body, physical labor, time, and investment.

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 42063
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Fartsniffage » Sun Oct 19, 2014 1:59 pm

Gaiserin wrote:Interesting. I was under the impression that churches were still allowed to choose whom they bless and whom they don't.

Apparently, this isn't the case.


Business, not a church.

User avatar
The Flood
Minister
 
Posts: 3422
Founded: Nov 24, 2011
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby The Flood » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:01 pm

Pope Joan wrote:Go ahead and prosecute them. This is a different situation than a congregational setting; it's a business.
Then they will just plead "Hobby Lobby" and win anyway.
Why do you militant secularists hate religious freedom so much? Citing Hobby Lobby as though they shouldn't have won, when they absolutely should have. For once the courts made the right call, and hopefully they will here too.
Agnostic
Asexual
Transgender, pronouns she / her

Pro-Life
Pro-LGBT
Pro-Left Wing
Pro-Socialism / Communism

Anti-Hate Speech
Anti-Fascist
Anti-Bigotry
Anti-Right Wing
Anti-Capitalism

Political Test
Political Compass
Personality Type: INFJ
I am The UNE now

User avatar
Washington Resistance Army
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54811
Founded: Aug 08, 2011
Father Knows Best State

Postby Washington Resistance Army » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:03 pm

The Flood wrote:
Pope Joan wrote:Go ahead and prosecute them. This is a different situation than a congregational setting; it's a business.
Then they will just plead "Hobby Lobby" and win anyway.
Why do you militant secularists hate religious freedom so much? Citing Hobby Lobby as though they shouldn't have won, when they absolutely should have. For once the courts made the right call, and hopefully they will here too.


Militant secularist...

I think you're looking for militant atheism or anti theism bud.
Hellenic Polytheist, Socialist

User avatar
Celritannia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18457
Founded: Nov 10, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Celritannia » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:04 pm

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Celritannia wrote:
Human Rights > Free Market
Basic logic really.


You can't enforce human rights by sacrificing a business owner's human right to control his own body, physical labor, time, and investment.


A government is elected to protect people, not businesses.
If the peoples rights are threatened then they should be defended.
A business must serve all people under the law.
Unless of course they have a membership system, which they don't.
Last edited by Celritannia on Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

My DeviantArt
Obey
When you annoy a Celritannian
U W0T M8?
Zirkagrad wrote:A person with a penchant for flying lions with long tongues, could possibly be a fan of Kiss. Maybe the classiest nation with a lion with its tongue hanging out. Enjoys only the finest tea.

Nakena wrote:NSG's Most Serene Salad
Citizen of Earth, Commonwealthian, European, British, Yorkshireman.
Atheist, Environmentalist

User avatar
Genivaria
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 69943
Founded: Mar 29, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Genivaria » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:04 pm

The Flood wrote:
Pope Joan wrote:Go ahead and prosecute them. This is a different situation than a congregational setting; it's a business.
Then they will just plead "Hobby Lobby" and win anyway.
Why do you militant secularists hate religious freedom so much? Citing Hobby Lobby as though they shouldn't have won, when they absolutely should have. For once the courts made the right call, and hopefully they will here too.

Yes how dare I care about the 1st amendment...

User avatar
The Union of Tentacles and Grapes
Diplomat
 
Posts: 787
Founded: Sep 22, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby The Union of Tentacles and Grapes » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:04 pm

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Celritannia wrote:
Human Rights > Free Market
Basic logic really.


You can't enforce human rights by sacrificing a business owner's human right to control his own body, physical labor, time, and investment.

Yes, you can. Any services or goods offered by a bussiness can be purchased by anyone, and if the owner declines certain customers then they are breaking the law. Walmart cannot legally not sell its shit to gay people. Churches cannot legally deny marriages to gay people(in places that aren't trapped in 1970).

Same thing happened with people of different skin colours being denied services and goods. If you don't want to sell to them, your business closes. You DO NOT HAVE a choice.

User avatar
Fortunagen
Minister
 
Posts: 2331
Founded: Jan 25, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Fortunagen » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:04 pm

You all are forgetting that we are talking about marriage here, not a basic necessity like food or water. There are other options for this couple, and I see no need for them to force someone to marry them when they could go to one of the hundreds of other churches who will happily take their money.
Puzikas wrote:
Fortunagen wrote:Fortunagen is a non-nuclear state despite having vast reserves of uranium.

We couldn't POSSIBLY be stocking up for something.


Shutup, Iran! :p


Mistelemr wrote:With how many shootings that happen almost daily now, I find it hard to care.

Sure I hate myself for it, but fuck it, we invited this. It's sad, but at some point you just stop caring. People can scream and cry but nothing will ever get done about it. When was it last that a shooting incident like this (or any other) actually made people legitimately search for answers or try a new approach? None that I can think of, It's been the same people, shouting the same expletives with the same people dying.

I hear they have good internet over in Scandinavia.


One day, I'll make this sig cool again.

User avatar
The Union of Tentacles and Grapes
Diplomat
 
Posts: 787
Founded: Sep 22, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby The Union of Tentacles and Grapes » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:06 pm

Fortunagen wrote:You all are forgetting that we are talking about marriage here, not a basic necessity like food or water. There are other options for this couple, and I see no need for them to force someone to marry them when they could go to one of the hundreds of other churches who will happily take their money.

"you have your own waterfountain" was a thing they argued for to support jim crow laws.

Rings just as hollow today.

User avatar
Celritannia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18457
Founded: Nov 10, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Celritannia » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:07 pm

Genivaria wrote:
The Flood wrote:Why do you militant secularists hate religious freedom so much? Citing Hobby Lobby as though they shouldn't have won, when they absolutely should have. For once the courts made the right call, and hopefully they will here too.

Yes how dare I care about the 1st amendment...

:clap:

My DeviantArt
Obey
When you annoy a Celritannian
U W0T M8?
Zirkagrad wrote:A person with a penchant for flying lions with long tongues, could possibly be a fan of Kiss. Maybe the classiest nation with a lion with its tongue hanging out. Enjoys only the finest tea.

Nakena wrote:NSG's Most Serene Salad
Citizen of Earth, Commonwealthian, European, British, Yorkshireman.
Atheist, Environmentalist

User avatar
New Celisia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 705
Founded: Apr 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby New Celisia » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:07 pm

The Flood wrote:
Pope Joan wrote:Go ahead and prosecute them. This is a different situation than a congregational setting; it's a business.
Then they will just plead "Hobby Lobby" and win anyway.
Why do you militant secularists hate religious freedom so much? Citing Hobby Lobby as though they shouldn't have won, when they absolutely should have. For once the courts made the right call, and hopefully they will here too.


People are always willing to sacrifice other's lives for the benefit of their own political agenda. Militant Secularists are no exception. Let's just throw these two trouble making bigots in jail. It's not like they should have any rights anyway. They're religious and against gays because they don't want to marry them. Let me force my beliefs on them, because I don't want them to force their beliefs on me. (This was an overt dramatized example for the sake of making a point.) This reactionary ridiculous thinking is just hurting everyone involved. Especially in the topic we're discussing, human rights?


DEVIANTART SILENTMENAGERIE
Religion: Secular Humanist
Political: Libertarian Socialist
LIKES: Gay Marriage, LGBT Rights, Religious Freedom, Egalitarianism, Pro-Life, USA (the people), Abraham Lincoln, the Jewish peoples.
DISLIKES: Wage Slavery, Totalitarianism, Nazism, Fascism, Communism, True Capitalism, Feminism, Abortion, Trump, Clintons, US Government, the State of Israel.

User avatar
Apparatchikstan
Diplomat
 
Posts: 669
Founded: Jul 03, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Apparatchikstan » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:09 pm

Fartsniffage wrote:
Fortunagen wrote:Alright, quick question, if these ministers were openly against marrying same sex couples to begin with, can they not just go to another church? I personally would not want to be married by someone who was against my marriage in the first place, regardless of whether or not they are bigoted. I mean, yeah, you can force these ministers to marry you, but that's not going to make them any more tolerant(it might even build animosity against you). Why not go somewhere where you are married by someone who appreciates it?


Because fuck bigots, basically.

If this couple want to run a business then they follow the law. It's that simple.

They didn't break the law. The prospective couples rights are not infringed upon by the refusal of this one establishment, as there are other agencies available. Now if this particular business had been the only venue for excercising the rights of the couple, you'd have an argument.
"I have a right to buy a car." doesn't translate to "You have cars, so you must sell me one."
> End of line_

User avatar
The Union of Tentacles and Grapes
Diplomat
 
Posts: 787
Founded: Sep 22, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby The Union of Tentacles and Grapes » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:09 pm

New Celisia wrote:
The Flood wrote:Why do you militant secularists hate religious freedom so much? Citing Hobby Lobby as though they shouldn't have won, when they absolutely should have. For once the courts made the right call, and hopefully they will here too.


People are always willing to sacrifice other's lives for the benefit of their own political agenda. Militant Secularists are no exception. Let's just throw these two trouble making bigots in jail. It's not like they should have any rights anyway. They're religious and against gays because they don't want to marry them. Let me force my beliefs on them, because I don't want them to force their beliefs on me. (This was an overt dramatized example for the sake of making a point.) This reactionary ridiculous thinking is just hurting everyone involved. Especially in the topic we're discussing, human rights?

Except nobody in real life is actually considering throwing them in jail. There are no warrants for their arrests, police reports filed, or anything in court about this. They brought it up themselves.


EDIT: if you think that you aren't compelled to provide services, try to find instances where car salesmen were able to not sell cars to a black person, because it's exactly the same circumstance. When that happens, they get sued. Probably doesn't happen anymore, because those racist enough to do it stick out like sore thumbs and are avoided.
Last edited by The Union of Tentacles and Grapes on Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Fartsniffage
Post Czar
 
Posts: 42063
Founded: Dec 19, 2005
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Fartsniffage » Sun Oct 19, 2014 2:12 pm

Apparatchikstan wrote:
Fartsniffage wrote:
Because fuck bigots, basically.

If this couple want to run a business then they follow the law. It's that simple.

They didn't break the law. The prospective couples rights are not infringed upon by the refusal of this one establishment, as there are other agencies available. Now if this particular business had been the only venue for excercising the rights of the couple, you'd have an argument.
"I have a right to buy a car." doesn't translate to "You have cars, so you must sell me one."


According to the law it does.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Czechostan, Diarcesia, Google [Bot], Ifreann, Neu California, Nu Elysium, Pridelantic people, Senkaku, Shrillland, Statesburg, Tarsonis, The Yeetusa, Trollgaard, Uiiop

Advertisement

Remove ads