NATION

PASSWORD

[Abandoned] Repeal "Ban On Ritual Sacrifice'

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Ransium
Issues Moderator
 
Posts: 5083
Founded: Oct 17, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

[Abandoned] Repeal "Ban On Ritual Sacrifice'

Postby Ransium » Sun May 13, 2018 8:06 am

The World Assembly,

Lauding the goal of GAR #416 "Ban on Ritual Sacrifice" of preventing death of sapient beings;

Noting that "Ban on Ritual Sacrifice" claims to respect the rich tapestry of cultures composed by World Assembly member states;

However, convinced that the resolution embraces one cultural worldview while being wholly dismissive to many others;

Aware that the resolution makes no exception for when the party being sacrificed are willing and legal adults;

Convinced from the comments of the drafting author of the resolution that this omission was made because it was felt that local culture would 'brainwash' its adherents;

Outraged that the World Assembly would denigrate the facilities of and try to control the decision making of sentient adults of sound mind to this extent;

Finding it distressingly ironic that the traditions of some cultures within the World Assembly would be deemed to control its adherents to the extent that they could not make rational decisions, while the traditions of other cultures would be held up as the whole and unquestioned truth for all member nations;

Regretting that no exceptions were made in the original resolution for uncontacted tribes within member states, consequently the enforcement of "Ban on Ritual Sacrifice" necessitates the possible disruption and permanent alteration of previously independent cultures;

Hoping that a resolution could be put in place in the future that finds better balance between the need to prevent the unnecessary death of sentient species, while still treating the cultural traditions of all member states as valid;

Hereby repeals GAR #416 "Ban on Ritual Sacrifice".
Last edited by Ransium on Wed May 16, 2018 8:27 am, edited 5 times in total.

Commended by SC 236,
WA Delegate of Forest since March 20th, 2007.
Author of WA Resolutions: SC 221, SC 224, SC 233, SC 243, and GA 403.
Issues Editor since January 20th, 2017.
Author of 17 issues. First editor of 42.
Forum Moderator since November 10th, 2017. Game Moderator since March 15th, 2018.

User avatar
Kenmoria
Minister
 
Posts: 3081
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Sun May 13, 2018 8:12 am

"We stand opposed, purely because the resolution does not, we believe, do what you say it does."
Ban On Ritual Sacrifice wrote:Defining "ritual sacrifice" as the intentional and ritualistic act of killing one or more other beings (a) as an offering to a god or spirit, (b) as an effort to control sapient population growth, or (c) as a method by which a ruling class or regime creates or perpetuates social hierarchy;
"Killing yourself does not count as killing other beings."
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Currently centre-right on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts our democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Mzeusia
Envoy
 
Posts: 267
Founded: Oct 30, 2017
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Mzeusia » Sun May 13, 2018 8:15 am

Supported.
I set out to build a nation and so that is exactly what I will achieve.

Also, if you are interested in having the Mzeusian Library write something for your nation, click here!

User avatar
Ransium
Issues Moderator
 
Posts: 5083
Founded: Oct 17, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Ransium » Sun May 13, 2018 8:23 am

Kenmoria wrote:"We stand opposed, purely because the resolution does not, we believe, do what you say it does."
Ban On Ritual Sacrifice wrote:Defining "ritual sacrifice" as the intentional and ritualistic act of killing one or more other beings (a) as an offering to a god or spirit, (b) as an effort to control sapient population growth, or (c) as a method by which a ruling class or regime creates or perpetuates social hierarchy;
"Killing yourself does not count as killing other beings."


It is possible to willingly sacrifice yourself and for it not to be suicide. IPC made clear in the drafting thread that while suicide for ritualistic reasons is legal, if someone else performs the killing (as is necessary in many cultural traditions) it would not be legal no matter how willing the party being sacrificed was: viewtopic.php?f=24&t=79106

Commended by SC 236,
WA Delegate of Forest since March 20th, 2007.
Author of WA Resolutions: SC 221, SC 224, SC 233, SC 243, and GA 403.
Issues Editor since January 20th, 2017.
Author of 17 issues. First editor of 42.
Forum Moderator since November 10th, 2017. Game Moderator since March 15th, 2018.

User avatar
Desmosthenes and Burke
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 167
Founded: Oct 07, 2017
Capitalist Paradise

Postby Desmosthenes and Burke » Sun May 13, 2018 9:28 am

We are categorically opposed to the repeal. Human sacrifice of any kind stands in opposition to the fundamental principles of human rights and decency and any "culture" practicing it is an objectively savage and degenerate one lacking in fundamental morality and accordance with the ius naturale. This assembly is properly called on to be sensitive to the cultural, historical, and circumstantial differences of its members, but it would be a gross abrogation of its responsibilities to accept the patently false, anti-life proposition that all cultures and their associated practices are equally valid and deserving of respect.

User avatar
Kenmoria
Minister
 
Posts: 3081
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Sun May 13, 2018 10:01 am

"Also, we are opposed on the basis that killing other's for non-euthanasia purposes is always morally wrong, and should be rendered illegal. Simply because it is common in a culture does not make it acceptable, for example, FGM is practiced in many cultures but I don't see anyone trying to repeal #114, “Ban on Female Genital Mutilation”."
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Currently centre-right on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts our democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Ransium
Issues Moderator
 
Posts: 5083
Founded: Oct 17, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Ransium » Sun May 13, 2018 10:55 am

Kenmoria wrote:"Also, we are opposed on the basis that killing other's for non-euthanasia purposes is always morally wrong, and should be rendered illegal. Simply because it is common in a culture does not make it acceptable, for example, FGM is practiced in many cultures but I don't see anyone trying to repeal #114, “Ban on Female Genital Mutilation”."


Funny you should bring up 114. #114 is specifically about protecting children and young adults, and I would not oppose a ban on ritual sacrifice of a similar demographic. I'm fine with #114 because of this clause (although the grammar hurts a bit):

CLARIFY that this resolution does nothing to prohibit the voluntary alteration of the genitals when the individual undergoing the procedure fully understands the potential consequences and grants informed uncoerced consent to the procedure


Perhaps you should be the one repealing 114, since it appears you don't trust informed adults to make decisions for themselves, despite the culture they grew up in?
Last edited by Ransium on Sun May 13, 2018 10:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

Commended by SC 236,
WA Delegate of Forest since March 20th, 2007.
Author of WA Resolutions: SC 221, SC 224, SC 233, SC 243, and GA 403.
Issues Editor since January 20th, 2017.
Author of 17 issues. First editor of 42.
Forum Moderator since November 10th, 2017. Game Moderator since March 15th, 2018.

User avatar
Durzan
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 150
Founded: Dec 18, 2012
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Durzan » Sun May 13, 2018 11:39 am

Currently, the resolution has a simple blanket ban on any form of human sacrifice done by another's hand and allows for no such exceptions. While we Durzanians do find Human Sacrifice morally and ethically reprehensible as a concept, we believe that it is not our place (Nor the World Assembly's place) to determine and enforce said policy in other nations or cultures one way or another.

Therefore, on behalf of my citizens, I, Doctor Doomsday, do hereby support this resolution... but only for the sake of amending the resolution to allow for the sacrifice of willing and officially consenting adults (received as both verbal and written consent from the individual in clear language) done by legally licensed officials according to the laws and regulations of the host country.
Come at me Bro.

User avatar
Ransium
Issues Moderator
 
Posts: 5083
Founded: Oct 17, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Ransium » Sun May 13, 2018 7:52 pm

I've added a clause on uncontacted tribes. I believe that it is correct with the current state of WA law, but I could be wrong, please let me know if I am.

Commended by SC 236,
WA Delegate of Forest since March 20th, 2007.
Author of WA Resolutions: SC 221, SC 224, SC 233, SC 243, and GA 403.
Issues Editor since January 20th, 2017.
Author of 17 issues. First editor of 42.
Forum Moderator since November 10th, 2017. Game Moderator since March 15th, 2018.

User avatar
Kenmoria
Minister
 
Posts: 3081
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Sun May 13, 2018 11:18 pm

"I believe you have put “Salient” where you meant “Sapient” in the lauding clause."
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Currently centre-right on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts our democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Excidium Planetis
Negotiator
 
Posts: 7471
Founded: May 01, 2014
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Excidium Planetis » Mon May 14, 2018 12:50 am

salient beings


"I am quite certain that Ban on Ritual Sacrifice bans the killing of even the non-important beings." Ambassador Blackbourne points out from the back of the room.
WA Ambassador: Evander Blackbourne
Ex-Ambassador: Cornelia Schultz, author of GA#355 and GA#368.
#MakeLegislationFunnyAgain
Singaporean Transhumans wrote:You didn't know about Excidium? The greatest space nomads in the NS multiverse with a healthy dose (read: over 9000 percent) of realism?
Saveyou Island wrote:"Warmest welcomes to the Assembly, ambassador. You'll soon learn to hate everyone here."
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Digital Network Defence is pretty meh
Tier 8, 7.5 nation, according to my index.Made of nomadic fleets.


News: None. Good, right?

User avatar
Tinfect
Senator
 
Posts: 4400
Founded: Jul 04, 2014
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Tinfect » Mon May 14, 2018 1:45 am

"Quite needless to say," began Feren, apparently finding it quite necessary to say, "The Imperium is entirely opposed, and we find this effort to repeal entirely reasonable legislation entirely abhorrent. It is safe to say that Member-States of the World Assembly are to be held to a higher standard than Non-Members; where such a clear standard exists, such as the matter of simple murder in the name of any number of absurd primitivisms, this nonsense about the supposed irony of 'cultural traditions' and the superiority of one or the other is entirely meaningless. Certainly, Ambassador, a culture that prohibits such absurdities as this is considerably more advanced than one for which it is a matter of course; there can be little ambiguity in such things."
Raslin Seretis, Imperial Diplomatic Envoy, Male
Tolarn Feren, Civil Oversight Representative, Male
Jasot Rehlan, Military Oversight Representative, Female


Bisexual, Transgender (She/Her), Native-American, and Actual CommunistTM. This nation does not represent my actual political beliefs.

Imperium Central News Network: Grand Praetor declares Class 3 National Crisis in first public appearance | Intelligence orders immediate investigation into Military Oversight Decommission Protocol | Diplomatic Oversight announces informal Military Alliance with 'Oblong Collective' |  Indomitable Bastard #283

Nation stats have no power here!

User avatar
Herby
Diplomat
 
Posts: 836
Founded: Jul 13, 2014
Father Knows Best State

Postby Herby » Mon May 14, 2018 2:19 am

OOC. Dude. Not cool doing this while Wrapper is on a break. He’ll be back to full speed next month, can ya wait until then?
-- Ambassador #53. From the nation of Herby. But you can call me Herby.

Herby's doors and windows are ALWAYS locked when she's in the Strangers' Bar (unless she unlocks them for you). And, she has no accelerator, a mock steering wheel, and no gear shifter. So, no joyrides.

User avatar
Vrijstaat Limburg
Diplomat
 
Posts: 572
Founded: Jan 07, 2018
Father Knows Best State

Postby Vrijstaat Limburg » Mon May 14, 2018 2:58 am

Johannes W.R. de Marchant et d'Ansembourg, ambassador to the World Assembly representing the region Parkstad remarks:
"We believe in a nation's right to guide itself through its own culture and policies. The World Assembly shouldn't get into banning cultural activities, or they could end up as an unpopular entity to religious armed groups, who will pester and discriminate against people who openly support this assembly. In the interest of my region, and that of our assembly, we announce that we support to repeal this law to improve our relations with nations that practice ritual sacrifice. Denouncing this repeal and continuing the oppressive behaviour on tribes and small nations that practice religious killings is just as inhumane as the ritual sacrifices."

"It is up to any nation itsself to find their ways around their religion, to reform it where necessary, and to be conscious of inhumane practices. We cannot get between a people and their culture, or it would mean that this very entity could be threatened by outsiders. We support the repeal."
WA-Ambassador
his excellence Johannes Walther Robert "Sjeng" count de Marchant et d'Ansembourg, lord of Crassenstein (known in the assembly as Johannes W.R. de Marchant et d'Ansembourg.)
representing Vrijstaat Limburg and the region of Parkstad
VREES GOD
EER JE GOUVERNEUR
DIEN JE LAND

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 12806
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Mon May 14, 2018 3:51 am

Desmosthenes and Burke wrote:We are categorically opposed to the repeal. Human sacrifice of any kind stands in opposition to the fundamental principles of human rights and decency and any "culture" practicing it is an objectively savage and degenerate one lacking in fundamental morality and accordance with the ius naturale. This assembly is properly called on to be sensitive to the cultural, historical, and circumstantial differences of its members, but it would be a gross abrogation of its responsibilities to accept the patently false, anti-life proposition that all cultures and their associated practices are equally valid and deserving of respect.

Bell stands. "Hear, hear! What she said!"

Purveyor of contracts so one-sided, you'll be surprised there's text on the back of the page!

Third year law student, homebrewer, and cat worshiper

User avatar
Vrijstaat Limburg
Diplomat
 
Posts: 572
Founded: Jan 07, 2018
Father Knows Best State

Postby Vrijstaat Limburg » Mon May 14, 2018 4:00 am

Separatist Peoples wrote:
Desmosthenes and Burke wrote:We are categorically opposed to the repeal. Human sacrifice of any kind stands in opposition to the fundamental principles of human rights and decency and any "culture" practicing it is an objectively savage and degenerate one lacking in fundamental morality and accordance with the ius naturale. This assembly is properly called on to be sensitive to the cultural, historical, and circumstantial differences of its members, but it would be a gross abrogation of its responsibilities to accept the patently false, anti-life proposition that all cultures and their associated practices are equally valid and deserving of respect.

Bell stands. "Hear, hear! What she said!"


d'Marchant et d'Ansembourg calmly replies: "It's not up to us to critique other nation's cultures, even if they are gruesome. I strongly believe that any nation has a path to greatness, and that every nation, given time, will abolish their more grave traditions. I dislike repeating myself, but I need to make this very clear: To retain good relations with upcoming nations that still allow, and in some cases even organize, ritual sacrifices, and to not enforce this assembly's might, we should drop our ban on ritual sacrifices. We wouldn't want insurgents murdering ambassadors in nations that still permit the savage act. We, as a globalist organisation, cannot enforce what we deem "culturally appropriate". It is up to the nation itsself to find the proper way, as have we done. Cultures change, and with them do rituals. It is only a matter of time until the tribes stop sacrificing lives.

Let's not get involved."
WA-Ambassador
his excellence Johannes Walther Robert "Sjeng" count de Marchant et d'Ansembourg, lord of Crassenstein (known in the assembly as Johannes W.R. de Marchant et d'Ansembourg.)
representing Vrijstaat Limburg and the region of Parkstad
VREES GOD
EER JE GOUVERNEUR
DIEN JE LAND

User avatar
Tethys 13
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 397
Founded: Dec 05, 2007
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tethys 13 » Mon May 14, 2018 4:07 am

In
"Finding it distressingly ironic that the traditions of some cultures within the World Assembly would be deemed to control its adherents to the extent that they could not make rational decisions, while the traditions of other cultures would be help up as the whole and unquestioned truth for all member nations;"
did you mean to say "held" rather than "help"?
The Spacefaring Warrior Armada of Tethys 13
Population: >19 Billion
Leader: Zaia zho Planetsplitter
We use NS stats, with some artistic license.

User avatar
Ransium
Issues Moderator
 
Posts: 5083
Founded: Oct 17, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Ransium » Mon May 14, 2018 5:46 am

Herby wrote:OOC. Dude. Not cool doing this while Wrapper is on a break. He’ll be back to full speed next month, can ya wait until then?


I had time to write my little screed now. I promise I’ll submit when Wrapper can participate in the debate.

Commended by SC 236,
WA Delegate of Forest since March 20th, 2007.
Author of WA Resolutions: SC 221, SC 224, SC 233, SC 243, and GA 403.
Issues Editor since January 20th, 2017.
Author of 17 issues. First editor of 42.
Forum Moderator since November 10th, 2017. Game Moderator since March 15th, 2018.

User avatar
Alsace and Lorraine United
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 104
Founded: Apr 20, 2018
Corporate Bordello

Postby Alsace and Lorraine United » Mon May 14, 2018 6:18 am

Herby wrote:OOC. Dude. Not cool doing this while Wrapper is on a break. He’ll be back to full speed next month, can ya wait until then?


While I like wrapper a lot I think it is intellectually unsound to put the WA on hold because of someone’s absence

User avatar
Ransium
Issues Moderator
 
Posts: 5083
Founded: Oct 17, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Ransium » Mon May 14, 2018 8:35 am

Kenmoria wrote:"I believe you have put “Salient” where you meant “Sapient” in the lauding clause."


Tethys 13 wrote:In
"Finding it distressingly ironic that the traditions of some cultures within the World Assembly would be deemed to control its adherents to the extent that they could not make rational decisions, while the traditions of other cultures would be help up as the whole and unquestioned truth for all member nations;"
did you mean to say "held" rather than "help"?


I've fixed both of these typos, thanks for pointing them out.

Alsace and Lorraine United wrote:
Herby wrote:OOC. Dude. Not cool doing this while Wrapper is on a break. He’ll be back to full speed next month, can ya wait until then?


While I like wrapper a lot I think it is intellectually unsound to put the WA on hold because of someone’s absence


Anything worth doing is worth doing right, and allowing the original author to be around when attempting to repeal their resolution is doing it right IMO.

Commended by SC 236,
WA Delegate of Forest since March 20th, 2007.
Author of WA Resolutions: SC 221, SC 224, SC 233, SC 243, and GA 403.
Issues Editor since January 20th, 2017.
Author of 17 issues. First editor of 42.
Forum Moderator since November 10th, 2017. Game Moderator since March 15th, 2018.

User avatar
Alsace and Lorraine United
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 104
Founded: Apr 20, 2018
Corporate Bordello

Postby Alsace and Lorraine United » Mon May 14, 2018 8:38 am

Ransium wrote:
Kenmoria wrote:"I believe you have put “Salient” where you meant “Sapient” in the lauding clause."


Tethys 13 wrote:In
"Finding it distressingly ironic that the traditions of some cultures within the World Assembly would be deemed to control its adherents to the extent that they could not make rational decisions, while the traditions of other cultures would be help up as the whole and unquestioned truth for all member nations;"
did you mean to say "held" rather than "help"?


I've fixed both of these typos, thanks for pointing them out.

Alsace and Lorraine United wrote:
While I like wrapper a lot I think it is intellectually unsound to put the WA on hold because of someone’s absence


Anything worth doing is worth doing right, and allowing the original author to be around when attempting to repeal their resolution is doing it right IMO.


I too believe it was right but I don’t think it’s fair to assume that work must stop even if the author is gone

User avatar
Bears Armed
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 16705
Founded: Jun 01, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Bears Armed » Mon May 14, 2018 10:23 am

"This will have ourr support."

Artorrios o SouthWoods,
ChairBear,
Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly.
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed
(includes The Ursine NorthLands) Demonym = Bear[s]; adjective = ‘Urrsish’.
Our population is approximately 20 million. We do have a national government, although its role is strictly limited. Economy = thriving. Those aren't "biker gangs", they're our traditional cross-Clan 'Warrior Societies'... and are generally respected, not feared.
Author of some GA Resolutions, via Bears Armed Mission; subject of an SC resolution.
Factbook. We have more than 70 MAPS. Visitors' Guide.
The IDU's WA Drafting Room is open to help you.
Author of issues #429, 712, 729, 934.

User avatar
Wrapper
Senior Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 5299
Founded: Antiquity
Democratic Socialists

Postby Wrapper » Mon May 14, 2018 11:17 am

Alsace and Lorraine United wrote:...I don’t think it’s fair to assume that work must stop even if the author is gone

OOC: Actually, I agree. Ransium is under absolutely no obligation to await my return to active duty here. And if he decides to proceed and the repeal goes through before I return, I'll just make some tweaks and resubmit; I'm positive that if there are indeed flaws that warrant its repeal, I can get an improved version passed. That said, if he wants to wait, that's fine too; it's entirely up to him.

User avatar
Alsace and Lorraine United
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 104
Founded: Apr 20, 2018
Corporate Bordello

Postby Alsace and Lorraine United » Mon May 14, 2018 12:58 pm

Wrapper wrote:
Alsace and Lorraine United wrote:...I don’t think it’s fair to assume that work must stop even if the author is gone

OOC: Actually, I agree. Ransium is under absolutely no obligation to await my return to active duty here. And if he decides to proceed and the repeal goes through before I return, I'll just make some tweaks and resubmit; I'm positive that if there are indeed flaws that warrant its repeal, I can get an improved version passed. That said, if he wants to wait, that's fine too; it's entirely up to him.



This is how I feel, thank you for your confirmation ambassador, to clarify, I was in no way meaning that he could not wait, but that they shouldn’t have to

OOC: good to see ya wrapper
Last edited by Alsace and Lorraine United on Mon May 14, 2018 12:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Separatist Peoples
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 12806
Founded: Feb 17, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Separatist Peoples » Mon May 14, 2018 2:18 pm

Vrijstaat Limburg wrote:
d'Marchant et d'Ansembourg calmly replies: "It's not up to us to critique other nation's cultures, even if they are gruesome.

"Right. We should permit slavery, because it may be culturally important." Bell rolls his eyes. "Culture is a bad reason to protect bad acts."

To retain good relations with upcoming nations that still allow, and in some cases even organize, ritual sacrifices, and to not enforce this assembly's might, we should drop our ban on ritual sacrifices.

"We shouldn't ban genocide for nations that still engage in it, and refuse to enforce the Assembly's decree. See how dumb that sounds?"
We wouldn't want insurgents murdering ambassadors in nations that still permit the savage act.

"Why do you send your ambassadors to places they are likely to be murdered? Why is your response not sufficient to deter future attacks if you do? The last time the C.D.S.P.'s embassy was threatened, the ambassador ordered the evacuating naval craft to level the embassy property as soon as the protestors broke through the barrier. The late Ambassador Grenell's actions are well known, and he and the guards who stayed behind to secure the embassy all earned posthumous medals. Not the way I'd like to go, but to each their own."
We, as a globalist organisation, cannot enforce what we deem "culturally appropriate".

"Can. Do. This line of argument is intellectual and moral cowardice."

Purveyor of contracts so one-sided, you'll be surprised there's text on the back of the page!

Third year law student, homebrewer, and cat worshiper

Next

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cosmopolitan borovan, Last Man Standing, United Provinces of Atlantica, Wallenburg

Remove ads