NATION

PASSWORD

[DRAFT] Repeal "Freedom of Marriage Act"

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Punk Reloaded
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 450
Founded: May 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

[DRAFT] Repeal "Freedom of Marriage Act"

Postby Punk Reloaded » Thu May 27, 2010 4:46 am

However well intentioned this resolution is, this resolution is basically forcing all World Assembly nations to establish that marriage is defined as any contract between two people. That is all well and good for nations that wish to define marriage as such, but nations not desiring to do so are being forced into following this.

Religious states certainly should have the right to establish the criteria of marriage as they so define. Secular states should also be able to do this as well without being infringed upon by the World Assembly.

Put it this way, in Punk Reloaded we have a long tradition of mother's marrying their eldest son if their husband passes away. I see no reason to put forth a resolution that requires the same for all fellow World Assembly nations. Instead, I respect the customs and traditions of my fellow members and think this resolution should be repealed as it unilaterally forces a particular morality on ALL member nations.

Respectfully,
King Maximus Punk IV
Punk Reloaded
Last edited by Punk Reloaded on Thu May 27, 2010 2:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Former Delegate of The West Pacific
Former Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific

Punk Reloaded - Retired
Big D Baby - Retired
Punk Daddy - Citizen of TSP

In TWP, we go Commando. - Darkesia

User avatar
Grays Harbor
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 18566
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Grays Harbor » Thu May 27, 2010 5:11 am

Is this a draft repeal or a blog? We are leaning towards the latter.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
Morlago
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1396
Founded: Jun 22, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Morlago » Thu May 27, 2010 5:37 am

Illegal due to branding.
Last edited by Morlago on Thu May 27, 2010 5:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Angelo Gervoski
Minister of WA Affairs of
The United Islands of Morlago
Yë Morre Waidamün i Mórlago

DEFCON: 1 2 (Low) 3 4 5 6


Economic Left/Right: -1.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.33
Graph
Center-left social moderate.
Left: 2.2, Libertarian: 0.75
Foreign Policy: -6.11 (Non-interventionalist)
Culture: -6.31 (Cultural liberal)

User avatar
Nullarni
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1348
Founded: Sep 26, 2006
Ex-Nation

Postby Nullarni » Thu May 27, 2010 6:29 am

How many times are we going to see proposed repeals of the "Freedom of Marriage Act" that have no chance of going anywhere? I have half a mind to draft up my own version just to give them something legal.
Proud founder of the NEW WARSAW PACT. Visitors welcome.

User avatar
Freeoplis
Diplomat
 
Posts: 551
Founded: Dec 18, 2009
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Freeoplis » Thu May 27, 2010 8:54 am

Nullarni wrote:How many times are we going to see proposed repeals of the "Freedom of Marriage Act" that have no chance of going anywhere? I have half a mind to draft up my own version just to give them something legal.

We agree with the esteemed delegation, we have lost count of how many proposals have been put forward with regards to this issue.
The Republic of Freeoplis
Region of Absolution

User avatar
Urgench
Minister
 
Posts: 2345
Founded: May 21, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Urgench » Thu May 27, 2010 9:30 am

Punk Reloaded wrote:However well intentioned this resolution is, this resolution is basically forcing all World Assembly nations to establish that marriage is defined as any contract between two people. That is all well and good for nations that wish to define marriage as such, but nations not desiring to do so are being forced into following this.

Religious states certainly should have the right to establish the criteria of marriage as they so define. Secular states should also be able to do this as well without being infringed upon by the World Assembly.

Put it this way, in Punk Reloaded we have a long tradition of mother's marrying their eldest son if their husband passes away. I see no reason to put forth a resolution that requires the same for all fellow World Assembly nations. Instead, I respect the customs and traditions of my fellow members and think this resolution should be repealed as it unilaterally forces a particular morality on ALL member nations.

Respectfully,
King Maximus Punk IV
Punk Reloaded




Your Majesty's logic is faulty. Why should religious states be allowed to practice a form of rank discrimination which other states should not be expected to? There is nothing logically specific to them which makes them exempt is there?

Would your Majesty wish for these mothers of Punk Reloaded married to their sons to continue to be recognised as married when they travelled abroad? In order that the rights they enjoy in their home nation were not summarily removed from them the minute the left your Majesty's jusridiction?

And exactly what kind of morality does your Majesty suggest is being forced on all member nations by the FoMA?

Yours,
- Mongkha, Khan of Kashgar, Ambassador in Plenipotentiary to the World Assembly for the Confederated Sublime Khanate of Urgench -

Exchange Embassies with the CSKU here - viewtopic.php?f=5&t=67

Learn more about Urgench here- http://www.nswiki.net/index.php?title=Urgench

User avatar
Punk Reloaded
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 450
Founded: May 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Punk Reloaded » Thu May 27, 2010 2:01 pm

[ooc]{snip}

Apparently I missed a section when I was reviewing the proposal guidelines before calling for the repeal.

I'll rework this and resubmit.
[/ooc]
Last edited by Punk Reloaded on Thu May 27, 2010 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Former Delegate of The West Pacific
Former Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific

Punk Reloaded - Retired
Big D Baby - Retired
Punk Daddy - Citizen of TSP

In TWP, we go Commando. - Darkesia

User avatar
Grays Harbor
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 18566
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Grays Harbor » Thu May 27, 2010 2:11 pm

To see what is invalid, one need only read through the replies right here in front of you. Also, it is customary to submit a draft here for debate and suggestion Prior to it being submitted for approval. There are a very many folk here who are quite good at crafting these things, and it would behoove anybody to listen and pay attention to their comments and suggestions.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
Punk Reloaded
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 450
Founded: May 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Punk Reloaded » Thu May 27, 2010 2:14 pm

Working on a draft now. Again OOC, and disrespect meant to some, I've read enough resolutions in my day to not have much faith in many of their authors honestly. However, from a technical valid/invalid standpoint I welcome all input. Harsh? Yes. But my opinion nonetheless.
Former Delegate of The West Pacific
Former Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific

Punk Reloaded - Retired
Big D Baby - Retired
Punk Daddy - Citizen of TSP

In TWP, we go Commando. - Darkesia

User avatar
Urgench
Minister
 
Posts: 2345
Founded: May 21, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Urgench » Thu May 27, 2010 2:30 pm

Punk Reloaded wrote:Working on a draft now. Again OOC, and disrespect meant to some, I've read enough resolutions in my day to not have much faith in many of their authors honestly. However, from a technical valid/invalid standpoint I welcome all input. Harsh? Yes. But my opinion nonetheless.



OOC how charming, well you work away on that then. I notice you've failed completely to make an argument for your repeal, but whatever, you know best I'm sure.
- Mongkha, Khan of Kashgar, Ambassador in Plenipotentiary to the World Assembly for the Confederated Sublime Khanate of Urgench -

Exchange Embassies with the CSKU here - viewtopic.php?f=5&t=67

Learn more about Urgench here- http://www.nswiki.net/index.php?title=Urgench

User avatar
Quadrimmina
Minister
 
Posts: 2080
Founded: Mar 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Quadrimmina » Thu May 27, 2010 3:08 pm

The Republic of Quadrimmina offers the following proposal drafted by a special interest group called "Quadrimminans for National Sovereignty".

Title: Repeal "Freedom of Marriage Act"
Type: General Assembly Proposal for Repeal

THIS WORLD ASSEMBLY,

RECOGNIZING the good intentions of the "Freedom of Marriage Act" in ensuring that the rights of marriage are granted to all those who seek to become married,

UNDERSTANDING the civil rights granted to parties as a result of this resolution,

REALIZES that this resolution is a breach of national sovereignty and forces an international standard for what is a national issue,

NOTES that numerous nations, especially theocracies and other nations that have absolutist beliefs about marriage, cannot express their political views due to the constrictions of this resolution,

IN AN ATTEMPT TO ENSURE that national sovereignty is maintained in the World Assembly,

HEREBY REPEALS General Assembly Resolution #15, the "Freedom of Marriage Act".
Last edited by Quadrimmina on Thu May 27, 2010 3:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sincerely,
Alexandra Kerrigan, Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Republic of Quadrimmina.
National Profile | Ambassadorial Profile | Quadrimmina Gazette-Post | Protect, Free, Restore: UDL

Authored:
GA#111 (Medical Research Ethics Act)
SC#28 (Commend Sionis Prioratus)
GA#197 (Banning Extrajudicial Transfer)

Co-authored:
GA#110 (Identity Theft Prevention Act)
GA#171 (Freedom in Medical Research)
GA#196 (Freedom of Information Act)

User avatar
Urgench
Minister
 
Posts: 2345
Founded: May 21, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Urgench » Thu May 27, 2010 3:27 pm

OOC deleted in light of the fact that the repeal author in fact claims to support the FoMA and is proposing a repeal for other reasons than the repeal of the FoMA.
Last edited by Urgench on Thu May 27, 2010 4:34 pm, edited 4 times in total.
- Mongkha, Khan of Kashgar, Ambassador in Plenipotentiary to the World Assembly for the Confederated Sublime Khanate of Urgench -

Exchange Embassies with the CSKU here - viewtopic.php?f=5&t=67

Learn more about Urgench here- http://www.nswiki.net/index.php?title=Urgench

User avatar
Embolalia
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1670
Founded: Apr 03, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Embolalia » Thu May 27, 2010 3:29 pm

Quadrimmina wrote:
The Republic of Quadrimmina offers the following proposal drafted by a special interest group called "Quadrimminans for National Sovereignty".

Title: Repeal "Freedom of Marriage Act"
Type: General Assembly Proposal for Repeal

THIS WORLD ASSEMBLY,

RECOGNIZING the good intentions of the "Freedom of Marriage Act" in ensuring that the rights of marriage are granted to all those who seek to become married,

UNDERSTANDING the civil rights granted to parties as a result of this resolution,

REALIZES that this resolution is a breach of national sovereignty and forces an international standard for what is a national issue,

NOTES that numerous nations, especially theocracies and other nations that have absolutist beliefs about marriage, cannot express their political views due to the constrictions of this resolution,

IN AN ATTEMPT TO ENSURE that national sovereignty is maintained in the World Assembly,

HEREBY REPEALS General Assembly Resolution #15, the "Freedom of Marriage Act".

I don't agree with what this proposal says. However, I say we bring this to a vote, just to vote it down. Then, when someone brings up a poorly written repeal, we can point to this and say, "see? This is what a repeal of this should look like! And people don't like it anyway, so don't bother."
Do unto others as you would have done unto you.
Bible quote? No, that's just common sense.
/ˌɛmboʊˈlɑːliːʌ/
The United Commonwealth of Embolalia

Gafin Gower, Prime minister
E. Rory Hywel, Ambassador to the World Assembly
Gwaredd LLwyd, Lieutenant Ambassador to the World Assembly
Author: GA#95, GA#107, GA#132, GA#185
Philimbesi wrote:Repeal, resign, or relax.

Embassy Exchange
EBC News
My mostly worthless blog
Economic Left/Right: -5.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.51
Liberal atheist bisexual, and proud of it.
@marcmack wrote:I believe we can build a better world! Of course, it'll take a whole lot of rock, water & dirt. Also, not sure where to put it."

User avatar
Quadrimmina
Minister
 
Posts: 2080
Founded: Mar 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Quadrimmina » Thu May 27, 2010 4:16 pm

Embolalia wrote:
Quadrimmina wrote:
The Republic of Quadrimmina offers the following proposal drafted by a special interest group called "Quadrimminans for National Sovereignty".

Title: Repeal "Freedom of Marriage Act"
Type: General Assembly Proposal for Repeal

THIS WORLD ASSEMBLY,

RECOGNIZING the good intentions of the "Freedom of Marriage Act" in ensuring that the rights of marriage are granted to all those who seek to become married,

UNDERSTANDING the civil rights granted to parties as a result of this resolution,

REALIZES that this resolution is a breach of national sovereignty and forces an international standard for what is a national issue,

NOTES that numerous nations, especially theocracies and other nations that have absolutist beliefs about marriage, cannot express their political views due to the constrictions of this resolution,

IN AN ATTEMPT TO ENSURE that national sovereignty is maintained in the World Assembly,

HEREBY REPEALS General Assembly Resolution #15, the "Freedom of Marriage Act".

I don't agree with what this proposal says. However, I say we bring this to a vote, just to vote it down. Then, when someone brings up a poorly written repeal, we can point to this and say, "see? This is what a repeal of this should look like! And people don't like it anyway, so don't bother."


The Forge administration of the Quadrimminan government is deeply for the resolution whose repeal is requested in this debate. However, my office was presented with this resolution, and we presented it for the purpose Your Excellency has designated. Thank you for your understanding of our diplomatic motives behind this resolution.
Last edited by Quadrimmina on Thu May 27, 2010 4:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sincerely,
Alexandra Kerrigan, Ambassador to the World Assembly from the Republic of Quadrimmina.
National Profile | Ambassadorial Profile | Quadrimmina Gazette-Post | Protect, Free, Restore: UDL

Authored:
GA#111 (Medical Research Ethics Act)
SC#28 (Commend Sionis Prioratus)
GA#197 (Banning Extrajudicial Transfer)

Co-authored:
GA#110 (Identity Theft Prevention Act)
GA#171 (Freedom in Medical Research)
GA#196 (Freedom of Information Act)

User avatar
Mousebumples
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 8597
Founded: Antiquity
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Mousebumples » Thu May 27, 2010 4:25 pm

Nat Sov is not a valid argument for repeal.
Leader of the Mouse-a-rific Mousetastic Moderator Mousedom of Mousebumples
Past WA Delegate for Europeia & Monkey Island
Proud Member of UNOG
I'm an "adorably marvelous NatSov" - Mallorea and Riva
GA Resolutions (sorted by category) | Why Repeal? | Reppy's Sig Workshop

User avatar
Urgench
Minister
 
Posts: 2345
Founded: May 21, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Urgench » Thu May 27, 2010 4:30 pm

Quadrimmina wrote:
Embolalia wrote:
Quadrimmina wrote:
The Republic of Quadrimmina offers the following proposal drafted by a special interest group called "Quadrimminans for National Sovereignty".

Title: Repeal "Freedom of Marriage Act"
Type: General Assembly Proposal for Repeal

THIS WORLD ASSEMBLY,

RECOGNIZING the good intentions of the "Freedom of Marriage Act" in ensuring that the rights of marriage are granted to all those who seek to become married,

UNDERSTANDING the civil rights granted to parties as a result of this resolution,

REALIZES that this resolution is a breach of national sovereignty and forces an international standard for what is a national issue,

NOTES that numerous nations, especially theocracies and other nations that have absolutist beliefs about marriage, cannot express their political views due to the constrictions of this resolution,

IN AN ATTEMPT TO ENSURE that national sovereignty is maintained in the World Assembly,

HEREBY REPEALS General Assembly Resolution #15, the "Freedom of Marriage Act".

I don't agree with what this proposal says. However, I say we bring this to a vote, just to vote it down. Then, when someone brings up a poorly written repeal, we can point to this and say, "see? This is what a repeal of this should look like! And people don't like it anyway, so don't bother."


The Forge administration of the Quadrimminan government is deeply for the resolution whose repeal is requested in this debate. However, my office was presented with this resolution, and we presented it for the purpose Your Excellency has designated. Thank you for your understanding of our diplomatic motives behind this resolution.





Actually might we ask why such a pointless endeavour should be undertaken? If your Excellency's government is in fact a supporter of the proposal in question why would it jeopardise the continued protections of it by presenting an even relatively credible repeal of it to this organisation?

Laws are not tested by being threatened with constant repeal (credible or not) they are strengthened by being unchallenged and accepted, a good law needs no challenge after all. Indeed it seems perverse for any nation which supports this statute to provoke a crisis in confidence in it based on the pretence of seemingly credible (though nonetheless spurious) challenge to it.


Yours,
Last edited by Urgench on Thu May 27, 2010 4:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Mongkha, Khan of Kashgar, Ambassador in Plenipotentiary to the World Assembly for the Confederated Sublime Khanate of Urgench -

Exchange Embassies with the CSKU here - viewtopic.php?f=5&t=67

Learn more about Urgench here- http://www.nswiki.net/index.php?title=Urgench

User avatar
Punk Reloaded
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 450
Founded: May 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Punk Reloaded » Fri May 28, 2010 5:16 am

Ok, here's a draft:

The Nations of the World Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGES the spirit of the resolution to allow all citizens to select their own partner regardless of gender;

CONCERNED that the resolution redefines the word “marriage” as merely a contract between two persons for the sole purposes of protecting the “common estate and inheritance rites”;

CONCERNED that the resolution does not specifically mention partner’s rites in emergency medical situations or general health care at all;

VERY CONCERNED that the resolution makes no mention of “minors”;

REALIZING that such ambiguity may unintentionally open the door for children to be exploited by this resolution;

SEEKING an opportunity establish a more expansive resolution that closes the loophole to protect the rights of minors and expand the terms of the contractual unions,

The World Assembly hereby repeals the “Freedom of Marriage” resolution.
Former Delegate of The West Pacific
Former Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific

Punk Reloaded - Retired
Big D Baby - Retired
Punk Daddy - Citizen of TSP

In TWP, we go Commando. - Darkesia

User avatar
Grays Harbor
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 18566
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Grays Harbor » Fri May 28, 2010 5:41 am

You have made it pretty clear you will submit regardless, and don't give a flip about what anybody says or what suggestions are made, so why should anybody bother to comment? Myself, I plan on not giving my delegates approval to this however it is worded as I believe the resolution targeted requires no repeal. good day to you.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
Punk Reloaded
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 450
Founded: May 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Punk Reloaded » Fri May 28, 2010 7:02 am

If I didn't give a - your words - flip about what anyone says about the proposal why would I post it here before proposing it. Sometimes when someone asks for input....they really would like some input.

Would anyone like to offer their thoughts on this. Is it "technically valid", suggestions, don't care?
Former Delegate of The West Pacific
Former Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific

Punk Reloaded - Retired
Big D Baby - Retired
Punk Daddy - Citizen of TSP

In TWP, we go Commando. - Darkesia

User avatar
Nullarni
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1348
Founded: Sep 26, 2006
Ex-Nation

Postby Nullarni » Fri May 28, 2010 7:07 am

*Retracted*
Last edited by Nullarni on Sat May 29, 2010 5:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
Proud founder of the NEW WARSAW PACT. Visitors welcome.

User avatar
Grays Harbor
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 18566
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Grays Harbor » Fri May 28, 2010 7:16 am

Punk Reloaded wrote:If I didn't give a - your words - flip about what anyone says about the proposal why would I post it here before proposing it. Sometimes when someone asks for input....they really would like some input.

Would anyone like to offer their thoughts on this. Is it "technically valid", suggestions, don't care?


Punk Reloaded wrote:Working on a draft now. Again OOC, and disrespect meant to some, I've read enough resolutions in my day to not have much faith in many of their authors honestly. However, from a technical valid/invalid standpoint I welcome all input. Harsh? Yes. But my opinion nonetheless.


"technical" is not the only thing you need ask about. Valid content, which your draft is still quite short on, is just as important. So, I stand by my earlier statement of wondering why you ask, when you have made it quite clear you have no intention of listening to anybody but yourself.
Everything you know about me is wrong. Or a rumor. Something like that.

Not Ta'veren

User avatar
Hirota
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7000
Founded: Jan 22, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Hirota » Fri May 28, 2010 7:31 am

Punk Reloaded wrote:The Nations of the World Assembly,

ACKNOWLEDGES the spirit of the resolution to allow all citizens to select their own partner regardless of gender;

CONCERNED that the resolution redefines the word “marriage” as merely a contract between two persons for the sole purposes of protecting the “common estate and inheritance rites”;
No, it doesn't. It applies to unions between two people and enforcing a minimum standard for protection of common estate and inheritance. It does not actually redefine what a marriage is. In fact, the title of the resolution is a slight misnomer, as the body of the resolution does not mention marriage at all.

CONCERNED that the resolution does not specifically mention partner’s rites in emergency medical situations or general health care at all;
I'd argue that "(b) No State shall establish different conditions, requirements or effects to unions of persons of the same or different sex." covers this.

VERY CONCERNED that the resolution makes no mention of “minors”;

REALIZING that such ambiguity may unintentionally open the door for children to be exploited by this resolution;
Huh. So this is complete rhetoric then?

SEEKING an opportunity establish a more expansive resolution that closes the loophole to protect the rights of minors and expand the terms of the contractual unions,

The World Assembly hereby repeals the “Freedom of Marriage” resolution.
When a wise man points at the moon the imbecile examines the finger - Confucius
Known to trigger Grammar Nazis, Spelling Nazis, Actual Nazis, the emotionally stunted and pedants.
Those affected by the views, opinions or general demeanour of this poster should review this puppy picture. Those affected by puppy pictures should consider investing in an isolation tank.

Economic Left/Right: -3.25, Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.03
Isn't it curious how people will claim they are against tribalism, then pigeonhole themselves into tribes?

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
I use obviously in italics to emphasise the conveying of sarcasm. If I've put excessive obviously's into a post that means I'm being sarcastic

User avatar
Punk Reloaded
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 450
Founded: May 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Punk Reloaded » Fri May 28, 2010 7:37 am

How is this not technically valid? I've read the rules and think this fits within the rules.

No mention of national sovereignty. Other repeal resolutions have referenced loop holes and/or unintentional consequences of resolutions they sought to repeal. What am I missing from a technical standpoint? In essence why would the mods delete this?

And, again...i've answered the question of why I'd like input, please read a few lines up. If you have no desire to provide input, that's your choice.
Former Delegate of The West Pacific
Former Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific

Punk Reloaded - Retired
Big D Baby - Retired
Punk Daddy - Citizen of TSP

In TWP, we go Commando. - Darkesia

User avatar
Zemnaya Svoboda
Diplomat
 
Posts: 828
Founded: Jan 06, 2004
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Zemnaya Svoboda » Fri May 28, 2010 7:46 am

I'd use "ACKNOWLEDGE" instead of "ACKNOWLEDGES" but other than that I'm having difficulty finding a problem with it myself.

User avatar
Nullarni
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1348
Founded: Sep 26, 2006
Ex-Nation

Postby Nullarni » Fri May 28, 2010 7:50 am

*Retracted as invalid*
Last edited by Nullarni on Sat May 29, 2010 5:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
Proud founder of the NEW WARSAW PACT. Visitors welcome.

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Advertisement

Remove ads