LGBT Pride Month 2013 Has Ended; What Have You Learned?

LGBT Pride Month 2013In an earlier article, I posted that the month of June 2013 had been proclaimed as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) Pride Month by President Barack Obama. I wrote a post here on what LGBT Pride Month meant to me as a veteran. My words were added to those of hundreds of other bloggers on the web who are LGBT, LGBT-allies and straight people who wanted to express their sentiments about this special month. My friend and brother free-thinker blogger and nudist, Roger Poladopoulos asked for, collected and posted a few of these sentiments on his blog A Guy Without Boxers which you can read here.

Now it’s self-quiz time, readers! Here is a question of which only YOU can honestly answer:
As LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) Pride Month ends, what have YOU learned?
Before you answer that question, first ask yourself these questions:

  • Did I study the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions this week on Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s Proposition 8? How did I feel about the decisions?
    (Take note of this article as you ponder this question.)
  • Did I bother to talk directly with or Facebook-chat with people – particularly older people, whom I know are gay, lesbian, bisexual, pansexual or transgender and ask any of them about THEIR views regarding the recent Supreme Court rulings?

Stonewall Inn-June 28, 1969In case you had no idea that June 2013 was LGBT Pride Month or if you procrastinated until the last-minute to learn what that was about, let me help get you up-to-speed with a history lesson. No, I won’t give some lengthy commentary or “did-you-know” facts here. If you’re genuinely interested and so inclined to learn, you can easily find whatever you want to know about LGBT Pride Month, LGBT history and facts on the internet. However, I do want to pique whatever interest you might have by inviting you to watch an on-line 90-minute PBS American Experience video called Stonewall Uprising.
(See photo link below)

This past Friday, June 28, 2013, marked the 44th anniversary year of the 1969 Stonewall Riots that began when police raided the Stonewall Inn, a popular gay bar in the Greenwich Village section of New York City. That raid sparked the gay liberation/gay rights movement. In the film, Stonewall Inn (Today)producers at PBS’ American Experience draw upon eyewitness accounts and rare archival material to bring that pivotal event to life. The film is based on David Carter’s critically acclaimed book; Stonewall: The Riots that Sparked the Gay Revolution. The video, Stonewall Uprising was produced by Kate Davis and David Heilbroner.  There are three (out of many) important reasons for why Stonewall is important in American history:

  • Social Injustice
  • Social Oppression
  • Social Inequality

 – all based solely on sexual orientation – a natural phenomenon, regardless whether you believe it. These are among the very same reasons for the Civil Rights movement! Now, there is some debate as to whether the Gay Rights Movement is the same as the Civil Rights Movement. Let me say for the record, that while there are some slight differences in both movements, the very word civil implies and includes ALL citizens or people in a society. And let’s not forget that BOTH movements were about – and STILL are about human rights and equality – which would include those of LGBT people! Civil Right Movement-cloud form of MLKOne more thing: unlike many members of my ethnic group, I do not subscribe to the preposterous notion that the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s was “only for Black people”. Having lived through the 1960s Civil Rights era as a child, witnessing it unfold on television, radio and print media, and having members of my family who did their part in the fight (including a few cousins involved in the Philadelphia Chapter of the Black Panther Party), I’ve learned and have been taught more than I care to discuss on the issues of racism, social injustice, social oppression and social inequality. It’s why I’m such a strong proponent of human rights for ALL people  – regardless of race, gender, religion, nationality and of course, sexual orientation. But I digress.

I saw the Stonewall Uprising film a few years ago in my Criminal Justice college class during an intense discussion on police tactics and their conduct regarding the rights of subculture societies like the LGBT community.  At that time, I thought theHarvey Milk-1978, HM postage stamp film was fascinating and informative. I still think it is! Another interesting and fascinating film related to the Stonewall riots is Milk, the 2008 biographical film based on the life of late gay rights activist and politician Harvey Milk, the first openly gay person to be elected as a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. Click here for a brief bio on Harvey Milk. Film synopsis on Milk is here. Milk movie trailer here:

Considering the Supreme Court decisions last week that struck down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s Proposition 8 – and as LGBT Pride Month ends, I challenge everyone – young and old, who are straight or gay – especially the younger LGBT people (and any close-minded people reading this blog) to get off Facebook for a while, stop surfing the web for sales, pornography or whatever, kill the on-line chat bullshit, lay aside any biases and WATCH STONEWALL UPRISING!  I further challenge each person to learn just a little more about the history of our fellow citizens and our country!

CLICK THE PHOTO BELOW to watch the 90-minute PBS American Experience film…STONEWALL UPRISING.
Stonewall Uprising-film

** ARTICLE UPDATE: July 1, 2013 **
Brother free-thinker blogger Roger, whom I mentioned earlier, has just published an article giving an excellent summary and tie-in of Stonewall history with the Supreme Court events of the present on his blog, A Guy Without Boxers. Click here to read, Reflection: Stonewall and the Supreme Court.

Keepin’ It…REAL!

SCOTUS Decisions: Indirectly, We Bear Some Responsibility!

US Supreme Court Building, sealThere are people who think that certain decisions or rulings by the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) do not or should not interest them. Those people couldn’t be more wrong! For example, this past week SCOTUS handed down several important decisions, four of which I posted to a Facebook group where, until recently, I had been a member:
(Click each case to see the news story)

A member in that particular Facebook group complained that “no one in the group was interested…” He added: “That is all political shit. The other stuff is all same-sex/gay shit. Nobody cares about that here. You need to post that same-sex thing on the gay pages!”
That member’s arrogance and ignorance, as well as his implied bigotry, along with the other group members who supported his views, had greatly irritated me. I had posted the SCOTUS decisions for the information and benefit of everyone in that group. Never mind that I had become frustrated seeing that only one member (out of a group membership of some 300-plus – in which about 30 were active participants) , was willing to have an intelligent discussion about one of those SCOTUS decisions, I had to read the complaining member’s implied bigoted comment too! The main thing that turned my frustration into fuckstration and which gave cause for me to leave that Facebook group was the fact that many of the members – people in their mid to late-30’s, many who are Black (I’m ashamed to admit) and supposedly educated, seemed eager to talk about other bullshit things but were not willing to discuss the hottest topics saturating the media and the web – and which could have some impact on their lives! USSC Justices hearing casesAnyway… the cavalier attitude of those particular people in that Facebook group made me ask myself the following question:
Did the members in that group realize that if any of them voted in any national election of the past eight years or more, that THEY actually held some responsibility for the decisions the Supreme Court made on the disputed issues in which they had all agreed that “no one was interested?”
Then it hit me! The people in that group – and perhaps hundreds of others might not be aware that they or rather, WE bear some responsibility – in a roundabout way, for the decisions made by the Supreme Court!”

Now, I can imagine readers asking, “How is anyone responsible for any decision or ruling the Supreme Court makes?
I’m glad you asked!

Readers, no matter what or how we may agree or disagree regarding issues of dispute that are brought and argued before the Supreme Court – or any court having appointed or elected judges, we bear some responsibility to the decisions that judge or court makes – that is, if we, our parents and perhaps our grandparents and other family members voted in local, state or national elections.

Before I explain what that means, let me inform everyone that we need to take an active interest in what the Supreme Court is doing whenever it is in session, regardless whether a case now or in the future has any direct effect upon us, our family or community. The fact is, in many situations, depending on certain criteria, a court’s ruling could possibly affect someone other than the plaintiff and the defendant in the case being heard by the court. Often court rulings on previous cases are used as a precedent or model in arguing and/or deciding other cases. Such a precedent might someday help determine the outcome of some future case in which you or someone you know might be involved.U.S. Federal Court hierarchy (2)

One does not have to know much about law or have the experience of a trial lawyer to understand the Supreme Court. However, Americans need to have some knowledge of the U.S. Constitution, the functions of the three branches of American government (Executive, Legislative, Judicial), the American judicial process, and the people who sit on the nation’s highest court and how they got to sit there, if he or she is to understand – to some degree, how and why Supreme Court Justices come to make certain decisions and opinions on certain cases. Equally helpful to an American citizen is to know a little something about each Justice’s personal position or viewpoint on morality, politics, religion, social, and cultural issues.

Key points about the U. S. Supreme Court:

  1. Established under Article III of the United States Constitution, the Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the nation. It has ultimate (and largely discretionary) appellate jurisdiction over all federal courts and over state court cases involving issues of federal law, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases.
  2. There are nine (9) Supreme Court justices: 8 Associate Justices and 1 Chief Justice. Under Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, each Justice is nominated by the President of the United States. Each judicial nomination must be confirmed by the U.S Senate before a Justice can be sworn in.Justices of U.S. Supreme Court (as of June 28, 2013)
  3. Justices serve on the court for life or until they decide to resign, retire, is removed from the bench after impeachment (yes, a justice CAN be impeached) or dies in office.
    ** S/N Fact: The only S/C Justice to be impeached was Associate Justice Samuel Chase in 1805. The House of Representatives passed Articles of Impeachment against him; however, he was acquitted by the Senate.
  4. The Constitution does not specify qualifications for Justices, such as age, education, profession, or native-born citizenship. Generally, this means that almost anyone – even someone without a law degree, legal training or judicial experience, can be nominated and confirmed to serve on the Supreme Court. (Think about that!)
  5. In the U.S., both the Executive and Legislative Branches of the federal government have a voice in the composition of the Supreme Court. Depending on various political factors, a Justice might see the tenure of several presidents and congressional legislators while seated on the bench.

Key reasons to be interested in Supreme Court decisions (and why we bear some responsibility):

  1. Once a Justice is seated on the bench, he or she has no political obligation or favors owed to the president who made his/her nomination, the senators who confirmed the nomination, to any political party of said president or senator, or to any political or private lobbying group.
  2. Americans tend to vote for the president and congressional leaders based on certain criteria they liked and respected of that person(s). For example, in 2008 and 2012 we might have voted for Barack Obama to be president of the United States because we believed in his position on certain moral, political, religious, social and cultural issues.
  3. Since his presidency, Barack ObamaBarack-Obama-on Air Force One has appointed (nominated) two people to the Supreme Court and could possibly nominate one more, if not two before he leaves office in January 2017. Like his predecessors, President Obama most likely – but not necessarily, nominates people to the court whose political thinking or ideology are the same or similar to his own. Therefore, during a nominating president’s term in office and long after he or she leaves office, decisions made by a Supreme Court justice could – but not necessarily, be reflective and/or influenced by the shared ideology of the president who appointed that Justice to the bench.
  4. As with his previous court nominations, Obama’s third and possibly even his fourth nomination could be confirmed by the Senate – even if that Senate is ruled by the opposing political party of the sitting president.
  5. There are many political ideologies but for the purpose of this article I’ll keep it simple and name three which everyone often hears about: liberal, moderate and conservative. If a two-term president having one of these ideologies makes a Supreme Court nomination of say, two, three, or four justices and/or one of those justices happens to be nominated for Chief Justice (with each nomination being confirmed by the Senate as required by the Constitution), it is possible that a Supreme Court Justice could make a decision, dissent or write an opinion on a case which is reflective of the ideology (or some degree thereof) he or she has mutually in common with that president.
    IMPORTANT NOTE: The political thinking, position or ideology of the president, the senators and the Justice(s) may not necessarily reflect our own. This is why it is very important to study and completely understand where political candidates stand ideologically before giving our support, money, and of course, our vote. A decision reflective of a particular ideology could set a nationwide judicial precedent for decades!
  6. Do not easily dismiss the possibility of President Obama nominating one, if not two more people to serve on the Supreme Court before leaving office. There are three Associate Justices in their mid to late 70s, two of which to date, have served more than 25 years; another Justice is 80 years old. Besides those four Justices, the seat of any Supreme Court justice could possibly be rendered vacant due to any number of the reasons previously mentioned that would preclude a sitting Justice from holding his or her seat.SCOTUS Justices-1
    Remember: Supreme Court justices are no less immune to the probabilities of life than anyone else.
  7. We may have been responsible for electing the very people who serve on the United States Committee on the Judiciary – more popularly known by and referred to as the Senate Judiciary Committee.United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
    Learn more about this Committee here:
  8. The Senate Judiciary Committee is tasked with vetting the president’s judicial nominations. The U. S. senators who confirmed Associate Justices Sonia Maria Sotomayor and Elena Kagan – both Obama nominees, could have been vetted and confirmed by senators whom we and/or our parents or grandparents, as the electorate or voters, elected into office.
  9. When we elected “Senator X”, we did so because that person, like the president we voted for, had certain moral, political, religious, social and cultural views that were similar to our own. Naturally, we expect “Senator X” – as we expect our chosen president, to make key appointments and nominations of people to government positions and court judgeships whose views or ideologies are similar to our own.  As such, we would hope that the actions and decisions of those confirmed appointees will be made accordingly.
  10. Ideally, we would all love to have the people working in all three branches of our government making decisions that coincide with our respective ideologies. Reality however, can be a cruel co-parent of Life and as such, does not always give us – or everyone what they want or expect. We need to consider this as we think of the other seven Supreme Court Justices who were nominated by previous presidents and confirmed by previous senators – either of which who might be long dead but still people who we and/or our parents or grandparents might have elected to office.
    S/N: Our perspectives or ideologies may not always be in sync with those of our parents or those of our voting-age children. Some of us are already seeing this. It’s always good when we can agree with our parents or children when discussing certain issues, the job performance of our political leaders and even court decisions but its frustrating, perhaps downright fuckstrating when our points of view clash.

The point I’m attempting to illustrate is that we, as the American electorate, must understand that we carry some responsibility for the decisions or rulings made by our government leaders and representatives, as well as those made by the Supreme Court (or any court). It’s sort of a domino effect – with every succeeding action happening because of some previous action. Whether we agree or disagree with the Supreme Court’s rulings or decisions this past week, we must not ignore the fact that some responsibility rests with us due to our involvement in electing the people who nominated and confirmed the Justices who sit on the bench and ruled as they did in the first place. As with most things happening in all three branches of our great government, there are some decisions we are happy with and others we aren’t. In the grand scheme of things, we are indirectly responsible for those decisions. Before you dismiss this idea, just… think about it.

Keepin’ It…REAL!

National HIV Testing Day

National HIV Testing Day - June 27, 2013Today, June 27th, is National HIV Testing Day (NHTD). National HIV Testing Day is an annual campaign to encourage people of all ages to “Take the Test, Take Control.”

Too many people don’t know they have HIV. In the United States, nearly 1.1 million people are living with HIV, and almost one in five do not know they are infected! Getting tested is the first step to finding out if you have HIV. If you have HIV, getting medical care and taking medicines regularly helps you live a longer, healthier life and lowers the chances of passing HIV on to others.

For more information and the HIV and STD testing sites near you, visit this websiteNOW!

** Some places are offering FREE HIV TESTS today! **OraQuick In-Home HIV Test package

If you can’t get to a testing center or have privacy concerns, there is a popular HOME test you can purchase: OraQuick In-Home HIV Test (about $40.00) which can be purchased at a local pharmacy-store near you. Check the web for other home kits.

This important note from someone receiving treatment for HIV:
Black straight & gay couple couple“Just because someone says he or she recently tested negative – and even shows proof – does not mean they may not be infected with HIV. [Consider the] window period for incubation…”

I got tested last month and was happy to learn that I was HIV NEGATIVE. I publicly reported the results for two very important reasons which you can read about here:

I hope each sexually active person reading this will be encouraged to get tested.
Now… be safe out there!

Keepin’ It…REAL!

My Views on Religion* (Pt. 3)

*Another presentation in the KIR continuing series of articles of the Steppin’ On The Feet Jesus Washed (SOTFJW) Project-Mission!
[Click here to read MVOR* (Pt. 2)]
STATEMENT: You want to push messages of positivity on social media? Fine, but please refrain from posting anything RELIGIOUS!

Religion- people shove it down your throat (RFXP edit)I’m all for people posting messages of positivity on social media. I understand many people mean well (bless their hearts). However, in their well-meaning, some of those people tend to get religious …EXTREMELY religious! Let’s take Facebook for example, where many messages of positivity are posted. Some people post religious messages that are soft or subtle – that is, they don’t hit the reader over the head with their words. I can be kool with those messages – sometimes. However, other people post religious messages, prayers and pictures which are strong, explicit, directing, practically suggestive, if not absolute in nature. For example, some messages or pictures might say, “TAKE your problems to the Lord Jesus in prayer”, “God will take care of all of your problems IF you only come to Him”, “Turn away from your sins posting anti-religious picsand FOLLOW Christ”, etc. And let me not even get into those religious pictures and posts that tell people to “click ‘Like’ if you love Jesus, ‘Ignore to go to Hell” or there would be posted comments or pictures that instruct people to ‘Like’, ‘Share’ or to repost some religious comment or picture just to prove the reader loves Jesus or that he/she agrees with the posted religious statement otherwise, it implies that person doesn’t loveHe took my place-REALLY or accept Jesus and is going to Hell. I say, if the intent of Christian people is to get people to convert to Christianity or accept Jesus Christ as the son of God or as some Savior, then those Christians are going about it all wrong – and they are doing wrong by trying to play on the conscience of other people. I hate seeing postings of this type on Facebook!

One of the reasons for the existence of my pet project (or “mission”, as I like to call it) called Steppin’ On The Feet Jesus Washed (SOTFJW) is because I have a problem with strong Christian rhetorical messages, prayers and pictures being posted in social media like Facebook. (Yeah, I know: I can just ignore them but that’s often hard to do when one logs on and is bombarded with them!) Christianity notwithstanding, I simply do not believe people ought to push any religious beliefs or religion on Facebook or similar social media. Many such messages, prayers and pictures are presumptuous,Religion isn't under attack-being called out judgmental and insensitive in nature. Many of them are aimed at people whom that religion has determined are not living as their religion, holy book and god dictates. They tend to ignore the existence, if not disrespect the existence of other religions – religions which are just as honorable and deserving of the same respect as the Christian religion. Such messages, prayers and pictures are also insensitive to people who may be agnostic or atheist. (Yes, it matters to us/them, too!) I ask: Must non-religious people, agnostics and atheists be subjected to seeing material from any religious entity in social media? I certainly do not think so. It’s why I support some of the anti-religious/anti-Christian messages in social media groups and on web-sites. Their efforts seem to help balance the scale of the shit which religious people post there.

It would be nice if Facebook, Twitter and all forms of social media had a filtering feature where users have the option of filtering or blocking out anything deemed religious or offensive in nature. If such a filter option existed, users would not have to defriend or block people who post make such postings…Facebook Like, Dislike, Fuck you choices people whom otherwise have a good social media relationship with that user. Some people, including my sister, have told me that on Facebook, they found some of my comments and pictures posted on my page “negative” or “offensive”. She and a few others have complained how offended they are over certain pictures I’ve posted that were anti-Christian in nature. They’ve complained about my constant use of the word fuck [one of my favorite words –in all of its connotations]. Well frankly, I don’t give a fuck about her feelings or those of other people where Facebook or this blog is concerned. I’ve told them as much and have stated that everyone has the option of simply ignoring my page, defriending or blocking me. Superman tosses the crossI couldn’t care less – either about their religious beliefs, feelings or goals and certainly couldn’t care less about their opinion regarding what I post on my Facebook page – (and certainly not over what I post in this blog). My belief is that if everyone else can post the things they want and not give a fuck about my feelings and sensitivities, why the hell should I or would I want to give a fuck about theirs? Who says that Facebook has to be a place full of positivity and euphoric bliss? Fuck that! Only fools refuse to believe that in the real world, there are both good things and bad things just as there are positive and negative things. Let it be noted: I am not now, nor will I ever be responsible for the sensitivity of other people.  

For the record, I want it noted that I support religious freedom. I support and respect any person’s right to believe and worship as their conscience guides them. However, people need to remember that religious freedom does not mean people have the freedom or the right to force, lure or attempt to convince other people into thinking and believing in their particular religion or doctrine. As I have done with previous articles on religion, so shall I do with this one: talk about those things which make me uncomfortable or which I feel is wrong that are being done by some of the people (not all) in the Christian religion.

Christian Denominations pie chart (2009)Christianity is perhaps the only religion, out of the many that I know of, whose members – from any one of its more than approximately 41,000 denominations that consistently pushes their religious rhetoric and religious book on to people. A religion with that many denominations simply tells me that there is no one who can agree on the same things written in a book which they all claim was inspired to have been written by God. Everyone has their own interpretation and opinions about what the Bible says! I’ve argued that a perfect god would never author an imperfect book, so it seems to me if the Bible is so right, then won’t everyone believe it as written? And if the Bible is the book by which Man should study and live his life, then why can’t everyone agree on it? Why do 41,000 splinter groups or denominations of Christianity exist?

As noted in previous articles in this blog, I used to be a Christian. I used to be one of the many in that religion who ignored the feelings and rights of other people to think and decide for themselves how they should live their lives, which religion to choose (if any), what spiritual walk to take (if desired), which deity to serve (if they believed in a deity) and what “holy” book to read (if they believed in one or wanted to read one). I used to be like many pompous ass Christian people who thought the There it issouls of other people needed “saving” by some person believed to be the son of a deity. I used to condemn anyone who didn’t believe as I believed; often that included people who followed so-called “false religions”, agnostics and atheists. I used to be one of those Christians who harshly judged the “unsaved”, considering them “unwashed” or “unclean” and “wicked”. I was one of those Christians who believed that the Bible was the “undisputable word of God”; that it was some infallible, perfect manuscript sent by God; I was one of those people who felt that any person who could read, ought to use it as their main guide for living a “decent life” and to bring others to Jesus Christ and Christianity. I had believed that the Bible gave me the sole authority to point out those sins or deeds considered to be more “abominable” or offensive in God’s eyes than other sins and to judge the actions and lives of other people who committed such “awful” sins. I remember Free thinking & knowledge breaks mental bondage (RFXP edit)always praying for the souls of the “lost”. And I too, would quote some biblical scripture to back up, challenge or prove that certain things people were doing were sinful and “not Christ-like”, as I would declare that any other religion or thinking other than the “mind of Christ” was sinfully wrong. Yes, sadly and regretfully, some near thirty years ago, I had once been one of those very terrible people. Reflecting on my past sins against my fellow man makes me nauseous…knowing that I used to be like that, particularly when I recall what a hypocrite and a living contradiction I’d once been; a person who dared to condemn certain sins which others were doing when I too, had been doing and enjoying the same sins and “acts of abomination” myself! Thankfully thirty years ago, I had my “road to Damascus experience”. I won’t go into any specific detail except to say that I eventually came to realize the error of my ways and began to turn away from Christianity and from being a religious self-righteous, asshole!

I feel it’s wrong for people to assume that their religion is the only and the right religion or that their religion is the way, the truth, and the light. I feel it’s wrong to assume or expect that everyone ought to believe in God, Jesus Christ and that they need to be “saved” from their sins. I feel it’s wrong to assume or expect that everyone ought to live and guide their respective lives governed by whatever the Bible says or that they ought to rely on the “power” of prayer. It’s presumptuous for many Christians to believe that simply by their posting biblical scripture, people ought to respect it, be moved by it, submit to it and/or readily – if not instantly, be affected by it in some manner simply because theyReligion is like penis say it is “the word of God”. Many Christians are especially wrong when they do this sort of thing in an attempt to pass judgment or attack a person for who he/she is or how that person might be living. Again, the Steppin’ On The Feet Jesus Washed project (SOTFJW) exists to help bring to light, balance and smash this nonsense!

A synopsis of Christian hypocritical thinking would be:

“I am a Christian, saved by the blood of Christ. My sins and sinful behavior is forgivable. I will surely go to Heaven. Your sin is an abomination to God and is unforgivable. He will not love you for it. Repent, get saved or you are going to Hell!”

Translation: “Because I am a Christian, basically am better than you. That generally means I can do whatever I want. God will still love and always forgive me. However, if you are not a Christian, God will never forgive you unless you become a Christian and stop doing the sins that are an abomination and therefore unforgivable.”

To be fair, all Christian people do NOT think or act like this – thankfully!

The people who post religious messages on social media outlets like Facebook can continue to express their positive demeanor. Moses says- Be Cool, & Don't be an AssholeHowever, I challenge religious people to see if they can post positive messages without ever crossing the line of another person’s  or subgroup of people’s right to independent thinking, without fucking around with the conscience of others, or without making some subtle or even a direct, in-your-face judgment of the way people choose to live and govern their lives. I would ask that they save any religious messages and rhetoric for their personal pages and groups or better yet, send/share them only with people whom they know would actually appreciate seeing such things.

[Click here to read MVOR* (Pt. 2)]

Keepin’ It…REAL!
©2013 RobFather-X! Productions. All rights reserved.