How The Left Works To Destroy Christianity

by Kung Fu Zu10/5/15

Some time back, I was reading through some interesting thoughts on religion and the Left when I came upon the following comment explaining one of the more sinister ways the Left works to undermine Christianity. Sadly, they are aided by unwitting dupes who naively try to have a reasonable interchange.

This piece deals with how a particular leftist homosexual propagandist worms his way into the conversation and stays there.

This is how it works. McNeill reinterprets the story of Sodom, claiming that it does not condemn homosexuality, but gang rape. Orthodox theologians respond, in a commendable but naïve attempt to rebut him, naïve because these theologians presume that McNeill believes his own arguments, and is writing as a scholar, not as a propagandist. McNeill ignores the arguments of his critics, dismissing their objections as based on homophobia, and repeats his original position. The orthodox respond again as if they were really dealing with a theologian. And back and forth for a few more rounds. Until finally McNeill or someone like him stands up and announces, “You know, this is getting us nowhere. We have our exegesis and our theology. You have yours. Why can’t we just agree to disagree?” That sounds so reasonable, so ecumenical. And if the orthodox buy into it, they have lost, because the gay rights apologists have earned a place at the table from which they will never be dislodged. Getting at the truth about Sodom and Gomorrah, or correctly parsing the sexual ethics of St. Thomas, was never really the issue. Winning admittance to Holy Communion was the issue.

This paragraph explains exactly how the Left corrupts Christianity, and frankly, everything they touch. This is how we got deviant marriage. A Leftist can invent the most outrageous, silly, dishonest and downright stupid thesis to which no moderately educated person would give any credence. But some well meaning, yet foolish intellectual will take it on face value. Then the thesis takes on a life of its own.

The People must stop deferring to so called experts and the like. These are people who too often live in Cloud Cuckoo Land and are so enamored of fine sounding words that they are regularly taken in by leftist scoundrels.

We must stop shirking our responsibility and call out the lies and liars for what and who they are. Time is running short.


Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (956 views)

Share
This entry was posted in Blog Post. Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to How The Left Works To Destroy Christianity

  1. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    There are those who view the Devil as real and as one who rebelled from God.

    Who knows? But it’s pretty easy to see that all this homo stuff is a rebellion, plain and simple. Internal problems are not dealt with in a constructive way. Instead these problems are projected out (much like a rambunctious child) and this results in a prolonged and systematized lashing out at the order that does not include dysfunction and perversion as normal.

    This really is the destructive counterculture come home to roost. As I’ve often said about the Left, they are “Not that.” And I see that a lot on internet forums, for example. At heart, the Left’s ideology is very weak. Abortion, in particular, threatens to topple them from the pillar of moral superiority.

    So instead of making an argument for their beliefs, they simply lash out at those who hold different or opposite beliefs. This helps them, at least momentarily, to lose the uncomfortable doubt they have about their own selves and beliefs.

    This is one reason we don’t indulge trolls here. I have no problem with an honest difference of opinion. But I’ve been around the block a few times and recognize when people are in “lashing out” mode and whose purpose of engaging in dialogue (such as it is) is simply to prove to themselves yet again that, indeed yes, the right is full of anti-science, bigoted, small-minded, and mean individuals.

    And then they can go on their way, having provoked the reaction they were hoping to get. That’s one reason this site will never be a haven for trolls. I’ve already read their mail. They can’t get the normal satisfaction of reinforcing their supposed moral and intellectual superiority.

    And this is why it makes sense for a lesbian to shit on the church. This woman is in rebellion. She hides under the facade of “nice,” but she means to lash out. And the great victory of the Left is that they have been able to redefine their vandalism in terms of “tolerance” and other PC-speak. But there’s nothing tolerant about this group of enraged juveniles. They ought to be sent packing from every church that exists. Start your own damn church, but don’t vandalize someone else’s.

    But that they aren’t sent packing shows you how little most people understand their own religion. Not all things have to be accepted and tolerated. And at some point it’s incumbent upon Christians to understand that “tolerance” for queers and such is just dancing with the devil. They mean to swallow your church whole and leave nothing behind recognizable to Christ.

    • Rosalys says:

      “So instead of making an argument for their beliefs, they simply lash out at those who hold different or opposite beliefs.”

      “And then they can go on their way, having provoked the reaction they were hoping to get.”

      In other words, their amygdalae have been disturbed and they must do something to calm themselves down and make them feel good about themselves. If instead of having “nice” little discussions, we push the rabbits to the wall (figuratively, with clear statements of truth and an absolute refusal to back down in any way) letting them know that we know what they are about and what they are doing, you can hijack their amygdala. They will be the ones to back down and may even shut down emotionally and become a near catatonic blob of goo. Or they may go into an emotionally and totally irrational, explosive rant. Either way they show themselves to be the idiots, twerps, and cowards that they are. (For an explanation of r/K Selection Theory, and how to deal with these people, visit http://anonymousconservativ.ipage.com/blog/ The site seems to be under reconstruction right now, so I couldn’t link to the specific page, but his blog is worth reading.)

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        I happened to read the following from Theodore Dalrymple yesterday.

        I have mistrusted my own rage ever since, as a student of physiology, I saw a cat stimulated to insensate rage by the discharge of electrodes in its amygdala.

        It seems appropriate for this discussion.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        In other words, their amygdalae have been disturbed and they must do something to calm themselves down and make them feel good about themselves.

        I do think people become addicted to drama (otherwise known as “Facebook”). And, yeah, we do that a bit here as well. It’s inherent to being a social species. But not too much, I hope. We ought not to be useful idiots for either the left or right and engage in regular Orwellian two-minute-hates. And we see an awful lot of that from the Left.

        It’s just been my experience on the internet, Rosalys, that Leftists come visit in order to rage about something. And because most conservatives have not read StubbornThings and become as informed as they should be, they too often take the bait and try to argue something point-by-point not realizing that the troll isn’t interested in debate but in confirming in his own mind that you are a moron.

        Talking points are like Linus’ security blanket. They need to be stated like a mantra every once in a while to retain what thread there is of believability to it. And some just like being a bully. The Left, by and large, is an ideology that leaves people alienate and angry. So they lash out.

  2. Rosalys says:

    The real problem is with (so-called) Christians who put up with this crap. They are weak, cowardly, and man centered. They don’t know the first thing about what the Bible actually says, (except for that part about, “Jesus said you can’t judge me! Niener, niener, niener!”) they don’t really know why Jesus Christ even bothered to come, and they don’t care to find out for themselves. The blind are willingly following a blind clergy. They just want to liked, and don’t want to rock the boat. Well I have some important news for everybody; Jesus rocked the boat! Hard! And he wants His people to rock the boat!

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Dennis Prager has a saying for that: “Nice but not good.” There are a lot of Christians who are “nice.” But they are not good.

  3. Timothy Lane says:

    Matt Barber has an article available on Town Hall today which deals with the topic. He points out the alignment of modern leftism with militant (i.e., Koranic) Islam against Judaism and Christianity. He also notes the weaknesses of Catholicism in this struggle (such as Catechism selections that implicitly accept the validity of Islam) — and points out an African bishop who challenges this demonic alliance. The link is:

    http://townhall.com/columnists/mattbarber/2015/10/18/islam-and-liberalism-twin-beasts-of-the-apocalypse-n2067357?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&newsletterad=

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      The writer says,

      “the “progressive” left is overwhelmingly anti-Semitic, anti-Christian and pro-Muslim”

      One often hears this meme, but it is not the case that the progressive Left is overwhelmingly anti-Semitic. In point of fact, no other racial, national or ethic group is so strongly “progressively left” as are the Jews. They make up an inordinate number of the movers and shakers of the progressive Left. I think there are clear historical reasons for these facts. One day, I may write a couple of pieces about this.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        They are, at the very least, strongly anti-Zionist, and I think there is at least a strong anti-Semitic streak. Leftist Jews are very good at self-loathing, both in Israel and America. (Anyone familiar with the likes of Golda Meir will know this wasn’t always true.)

        • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

          Many Jews are anti-Zionist; some orthodox Jews for religious reasons, the secular ones for other reasons.

          I don’t think that many Leftist Jews are so much self-loathing as religious hating. This hate includes religious Judaism. Of course, they hate Christianity more.

  4. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    I written several pieces under which I could place the following link. But since this is my most recent article on the lunatic Left I decided this is the most convenient spot.

    It is important that everyone see the truth that Americans are getting fed up with the lying liars of the LGBT Left.

    http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/11/03/perverts-lose-in-houston-as-voters-say-no-to-men-in-ladies-rooms/

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Note that the Kim Davis affair played a significant role in the Kentucky elections this year, with the Democrats rejecting their own (which is why she has now switched parties). Bevin made heavy use of the issue in his win, and William Westerfield nearly won for Attorney General (losing by just over 2000 votes) running heavily on the issue. But I’ll admit that neither was as impressive as the 61-39 rejection of homosexuality anti-discrimination and transgendered bathrooms in Houston.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        Bevin was another great success story. Hopefully, he will go about building a conservative machine and get rid of the Turtle.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        But I’ll admit that neither was as impressive as the 61-39 rejection of homosexuality anti-discrimination and transgendered bathrooms in Houston.

        Damn. I was thinking of opening a transgender wing of ST. Why think small? We lead most of the web on opinion (if not hits), why not lead on something else? I’m shooting from transhuman. Why do things in piecemeal fashion?

        Hey, at some point you just have to go with the flow. Reality is what reality is (even if it’s a shared fantasy). I figure there would be people who would like to post on here as a crocodile, or a Martian, or whatever. Who am I to force them to take the identify of a human?

        I’m sure Jonah Goldberg would agree with me. Give me time. I’m just a little slow on the uptake sometimes. But I get there eventually.

  5. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Matthew 18:20 says, “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

    So you have to wonder if an entire convention of methodists qualifies as a quorum. Evolution News and Views reports:

    The slogan of the United Methodist Church (UMC) is “Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors.” But UMC officials are now under fire for being closed-minded and intolerant after they banned Discovery Institute, from sponsoring an information table at the denomination’s upcoming General Conference in May. Intelligent design is the idea that life and the universe show evidence of being the result of purposeful design rather than unguided processes.

    There is nothing more basic to Christianity than the idea that there is a conscious, purposeful Creator. “Designer” is a synonym for “Creator.” It seems clearly that the United Methodist Church is a Marxist (“Progressive”) organization. If I were Jesus, I would ask them to remove the cross from their logo.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      The long march through the institutions is almost complete. The Reds have wonderfully wormed their way into the establishment denominations.

      There might be a small backlash mounting. The Anglican Convention recently suspended the American Episcopalian Church from having any input in the world convention for three years due to the ordination of queer priests. It appears the world convention tried reasoning with the Americans, but to no avail.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        There has also been a backlash within APEC itself, as some congregations have threatened to revolt against the cultural and religious liberalism of the hierarchy. I suspect that many will now adhere directly to the Anglicans.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        That long march is indeed complete. I’m quite sure that “diversity,” “tolerance,” “multiculturalism,” and “social justice” are the guiding influences. And for those dogmas you don’t need Jesus, and obviously you don’t need God.

        Don’t get me wrong. I think Intelligent Design is a one-trick pony. Until they take an archaeological approach and try to divine the techniques and history of the designer, they can’t do much but repeat the obvious, if profound, idea that “things are designed.” I do quite a bit of reading at Evolution News and Views, and it tends to be little more than a circle-jerk, although when they delve into biology it’s often a great read.

        But the idea of a designer is absolutely fundamental to the only belief systems outside of atheism. Either you believe this all somehow occurred by chance or you believe the opposite. The various revealed truths that religions add to this is another subject.

        But if you don’t support the idea of intelligent design (even if only in regards to the universe as a whole), then what the hell are you doing calling yourself a Christian or Jew?

  6. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    More on this issue. I read half of an overly long article on the subject of why the United Methodist Church banned the Discovery Institute from having a booth at one of their conventions. By all means, read the whole piece if you like to watch paint dry.

    But what I came away with can be summed up in one sentence: Liberal Christians (such as they are Christians) are as scared to death to be called anti-science as most white people are nowadays to be called racist. Therefore they accept Darwinism completely and will not entertain ideas against this.

    Okay, that was two sentences. But I think it’s that simple. Contrast that with some of the early Christians who gladly martyred themselves for their faith. These panty-waste Methodists are scared to death of being thought of as rubes for questioning the dogma of Darwinism. So they question their Christian dogma instead (particularly the one the says that there is a supreme Creator).

    You can’t make up this kind of idiocy, and the powers-that-be in the Methodist church in question are clearly idiots.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      This is why liberal Christians aren’t genuine Christians. They place their secular ideology above their Bible (unless they rewrite their Bible to reflect it).

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        Those are fighting words, you intolerant person, you. Don’t you know it’s impolite to question someone’s faith? Yeah, their faith may be Leftism, but don’t question it.

        I’m still dabbling with the idea of Christianity. Haven’t quite had any light shining in my face on the road to Damascus or anywhere else. And it doesn’t help to see all these knuckleheads who don’t know their Christian asses from their Christian elbows. They make a mockery of it all. The good news is that, at least for me, it reaffirms that God is not a function of mere human culture, at least if that God is real and meaningful. And that is a God, however tentatively, who can be accessed without all the BS of “social justice” and whatever goofy crap the Methodists and others think is an addition to the Ten Commandments. (#12: Thou shalt not release carbon dioxide.)

        • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

          Perhaps God put humanity here for us to learn a hard lesson. If we learn it, we might just understand and appreciate good when we experience it.

  7. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Along the lines of the general subject, I think this article is right on the money: The Rise of Religious Narcissism.

    The only dot Bruce didn’t connect was the rise of Leftism as the animating force for this kind of narcissism. I don’t think this is something that arose on its own inside Christianity, for example.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      It seems evident that this religious narcissism is basically liberal religion — a social activity (usually involving social activism) without the moral code that is the heart of any religion. They’d be happy with Aleister Crowley as their pope.

      Incidentally, since the article starts out by discussing the transgender movement, I will mention that the Olympics have apparently decided to allow transgenders to go as the sex they claim to be. Women who think they’re men have no further restriction, whereas men who think they’re women must promise not to change their minds (assuming they actually have a mind) for 4 years, and keep their testosterone levels reasonable. They might as well get rid of the separation between men’s and women’s sports as long as they’re going this far, but I suspect that’s too rational to be politically correct.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        It seems evident that this religious narcissism is basically liberal religion — a social activity (usually involving social activism) without the moral code that is the heart of any religion. They’d be happy with Aleister Crowley as their pope.

        Well, I agree with you, of course, Timothy. I think this is a good piece by the author, but he missed many large points.

        Many inside of religion think one should remain “unpolitical.” (In practice that means against-traditional and pro-liberal, but that’s another subject). So it’s the height of at least politeness not to point out that these “narcissistic” Christians are most likely being moved by the Alinsky Spirit, not the Holy Spirit. To be fair, I’m not sure of Bruce’s religious orientation.

        Another clue as to his unwillingness to dig down is this:

        therapeutic New Age outlook has given rise to a self-centered, highly emotional brand of religion

        I think feminism, and the demonization of the male, has had a lot to do with this focus on emotionalism. Strength is now not considered the person (man or woman) who can buck up under great strain. (Kipling: “If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs.”). It’s the person who can shed a lot of tears, come to “closure,” or go deeper and deeper into their identity as a helpless victim. (I’m convinced Prime Time TV would have no shows without this theme.)

        Liberal Christianity is compatible with Freudianism, psychobabble, Marxism, and Darwinism. It’s not particularly compatible with the Bible.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      I thought the following observation by Bruce was on target,

      Though they denigrated traditional Judeo-Christian monotheism, humanistic psychologists such as Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow recommended Eastern mysticism as a means of self-realization. Since it is a religious outlook making few absolute moral demands, the New Age approach appealed to a free-wheeling, morally liberated youth culture, as Melanie Phillips observes. However, many of the Eastern societies where such religions flourish have been conspicuous more for their conformity and groupism than for individuality and self-actualization.

      As I have made clear in a number of my pieces, the hate for Christianity goes back a long way. Certainly before the question of economics became the moving force in politics that is has become.

      What types such as Maslow are really trying to do is cut the cord between Western tradition and the individual and culture. The “self-actualization” nonsense is made to create unhappy individuals from normal people. The man had a miserable childhood and projected universals through his personal ticks, much like Freud.

  8. Timothy Lane says:

    Meanwhile, as a reminder that they haven’t yet succeeded, Town Hall reports that a group of pro-lifers returning from the March for Life were stuck in the blizzard on the Pennsylvania. (NR’s Kathryn Lopez was one of them.) They decided to set up a snow altar and celebrate a mass, such as they could. A priest on a bus joined in with 300 hosts, and in the end they had 6 priests and 500 worshippers celebrating mass in the snow. It’s definitely a feel-good story from our viewpoint. The link is:

    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/christinerousselle/2016/01/24/turnpike-mass-n2109256

  9. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    I was watching the football game between the Broncos and the Patriots. The Broncos won (yeah!) although I didn’t really have a dog in the fight. That also meant that I spent about 4 hours (geez those passing-intensive games are long) reading web content. I can’t stand to watch 4 hours of just football. I’ve got to multitask. So I read a couple Trump Derangement Syndrome articles over at NRO. And then, on a lark, went over to FirstThings to see what articles on religion they might have.

    Holy Jesus, if you’ll pardon my French. They’ve also got some Trump Derangement Syndrome going on, and one schmuck there is using the prestige of C.S. Lewis to try to prove his case (her case, I believe).

    And please don’t get me wrong. I’m not a Trumpette, or whatever they call the “He can’t do no wrong” maniacs. And every candidate has some of those. I think Trump is highly problematic. But he is there precisely because the Republican Establishment (including sites such as NRO) have failed their base. They have. This is undeniable. They’ve lied, manipulated, and outright blustered.

    So I’m surfing the web and finding there’s no escaping people who just can’t believe Donald Trump is ahead in the polls. I think I’d find the same thing if I browsed a gardening site. But I know why he is ahead in the polls. If you are at StubbornThings, you know why as well (frustration at the corrupt establishment, Trump’s emphasis on immigration, the general leftward tilt of mainstream politics, the elevation of celebrity). There’s no mystery here. And no one knows what the hell he would do as president, which is the same damn thing we could say about McCain, Romney, Bush, etc. — with the possible exception that one could say that, actually, we do know how they would govern…like liberals.

    With Trump? We don’t know. But, jeepers, to pull out C.S. Lewis to try to make your case. Good god. Where were all these really smart people when they tried to ram Romney, McCain, or Jeb Bush down our throats?

    I’m not a Trump apologist. But I am amused by all the supposed “conservatives” who have come out of the woodwork saying we need limited government. Baloney. When has National Review backed limited government except in esoteric rhetoric? But when push comes to shove, they back the Big Government RINO.

    And so do a lot of Christians. And that brings to mind something I truly believe: There aren’t a lot of real Christians out there.

  10. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    I’m not a Trumpette,

    The snide term is now Trumpkin.

    Where were all these really smart people when they tried to ram Romney, McCain, or Jeb Bush down our throats?

    Middle-aged and young journalists are not the really smart people. Even, or especially, those who attended Ivy League schools. The education system has been churning out ignorant lemmings for decades now. The only difference between journalist lemmings and the others is that, occasionally, the journalist lemmings can write well. They still don’t know very much.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Oh, well, I could be a Trumpkin. I like that term. “Trumpster” works as well.

      I get your point about journalists. One of the things our universities are cranking out are parrots. They can, well, parrot certain phrases or ideas. I heard this one black elected official chick on NPR talking about Flint, Michigan, which is in such poor shape that the state has had to step in for emergency management. She said the problem they were having at the moment with getting good drinking water was the fault of “putting profit before people.” This person is an idiot.

      But hasn’t Kevin Williamson and his ilk simply learned to parrot different lines? But when it comes to putting them in practice, well, that’s not really the point, is it? It’s mental masturbation. Conservatism has been turned into a gigantic book club and lecture circuit. But actually trying to win the culture wars? They don’t even show up. You have fools such as Goldberg trumpeting his surrender (as he did by giving in to gay marriage).

      You have people parroting socialist slogans, or sometimes conservative slogans, and there isn’t a lot of real-world wisdom involved. That’s what we are short of. There are a lot of people who have learned to parrot what is considered erudite language. But it’s just a parrot. There’s no substance to it.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Wasn’t Trumpkin the red dwarf in Prince Caspian?

      Note that the large group of conservative Trump critics includes a wide array of people, many of whom probably did oppose McCain and Romney in the primary (Glenn Beck likely did).

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        Note that the large group of conservative Trump critics includes a wide array of people, many of whom probably did oppose McCain and Romney in the primary (Glenn Beck likely did).

        As I recall National Review was pushing Romney long before the primaries even began.

        I find Beck now is worse than irrelevant, he is a clown. I would have to go back to get quotes, but he has said some odd things over the last year or so. I doubt his endorsement helped Cruz at all.

        As an aside, I figure Palin’s endorsement of Trump mainly helped him in Iowa, which is all he really needs her for as if he wins Iowa, he will be riding a wave which appears as if it will be unstoppable. It looks as if he has N.H. and S. Carolina in the bag. He would have to have a very bad showing on Super Tuesday for things to change.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          Yes, I’m afraid Beck has jumped the shark, although he did endorse Cruz (good choice). But he also said he’d vote for Sanders instead of Trump (the clown part).

          National Review was indeed pushing Romney. And they did their utmost to characterize Newt as something that he wasn’t…while ignoring the elephant in the living room which was the Romney was a liberal.

          • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

            How stupid was it of the Republican party to push a plutocrat who looked and acted like a stereotypical plutocrat?

            Trump has more money, but he didn’t make it in finance (this fact is important) and he doesn’t act like a plutocrat. I think many Americans see themselves as self-made in the way Trump is self-made, his rich father not withstanding. Few think of financiers as models, rather financiers are generally hated. And I will say, many of today’s bunch deserve it.

  11. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    My general premise is that Western Civ has no chance of righting itself without the re-implementation of traditional values, particularly (but not exclusively) Christian values.

    Well, I have my doubts about that, particular because Christians institutions themselves have gotten so off track. Here’s a pretty good article by Bruce Davidson in this regard: The Death of Evangelicalism

  12. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    Finally, a Christian who gets it and is willing to shout out from the roof tops what needs to be done?

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/03/12/my-message-for-evangelical-christians-stop-being-silly-little-wimps.html

    Such feminized “Candy-Ass Christians” as described by this man’s father need to be called out and shamed. The future of Western Civilization is at stake, men. Get some balls!

    Can I have an Amen?!

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Amen.

      To stand strong for one’s faith in Jesus Christ and push back against a culture that, in the words of Isaiah 5:20, “call[s] evil good and good evil” is to be “divisive,” “unloving,” “bigoted,” and “intolerant.”

      A concise way to note the moral inversion that has occurred.

      Here’s another crucial insight:

      This is because evangelicals have confused Christ’s command to love others with being likable, as if that were an attribute of God. (It isn’t.) As such, they endeavor to be, above all else, inoffensive and polite. This doctrinal malpractice has given us a generation of men who are what Lewis called “men without chests.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *