Midnight Fireworks - In this furry gay anal sex game you'll celebrate new year adjusted speed that matches the target speed (shown in the top right corner).Missing: agenda | Must include: agenda.
It also sometimes helps to have the gender neutral term spouse so the language doesn't become unnecessarily clumsy when we try to make various points that may need to be, for example, enshrined in legislation. Your point is a good oen an also a strong one as this debate has so often been - and continues to be - hijacked by the tendency to claim a restricted use of terms to 'shade' the debate and demonise those who hold a conservative view by the those of the noisy minority.
The argument that 'has no impact on anyone other gay rights agenda those that wish to enter into marriage' is thoughtless. It affects all Australian citizens not just people who wish gay rights agenda use this legislation.
Are they making gay marriage compulsory? That is the thin end It affects all Australian citizens You're conflating two different things there - and particular argument from the debate, and who can participate in the debate. The debate is one everyone can participate in. That particular argument is a justification for marriage equality that extending marriage rights to LGBT does not impact on others in any way, ergo rebutting the arguments of opponents about t'll destroy marriage or negatively affect society somehow.
However it must be asked - how will marriage equality affect Australian citizens who do gay rights agenda wise to gay mavie stars someone of the same gender? Yank, I don't gay latin xxx you have read the Marriage Act, or understand what it purpose is. gay rights agenda
In fact, looking gay rights agenda most of the righhs here, I don't think most people have any idea what the Marriage Act is about at all. The Marriage Act never set out to define what is or is not gay amatuer cock marriage. Rather it sets out what authorities the Commonwealth gay rights agenda allow to recognise marriage, for the purposes of interaction of married agendw with the State in Australia. If you like, what marriage was or was not was left in the hands of those authorities.
In terms of defining marriage, the Act limits itself to just saying marriage shouldn't involve minors kind of, anyway. That's about it until This allowed government york uk gay b b courts at various levels in Australia to bestow benefits on those within a marriage, which was intrinsically linked to the development of our welfare gays in speedos. So gay rights agenda within a marriage got benefits, those outside of marriage missed out.
Hence marriage became an equality issue. And this is the nub of the issue, really. This is fundamentally an argument about who should define marriage, rather than about "equality" per se. The equality part of the equation has already largely been dealt with.
Personally, I think the guys in parliament in got it right gay rights agenda government should largely stay out of defining marriage. What the government does need to attend to is ensuring that it does not unfairly discriminate between those who are in a marriage and those who are not.
I can see not argument for "marriage equality" and I can see no fundamental human right to marriage. It is just a particular type of relationship, which has a very long history within our Judeo-Christian culture.
And consider that many of the most influential gay rights agenda in the development of this culture have actually not been married - including Christ himself. Gay rights agenda many of the greatest and most enduring sexual relationships in our history were not in marriage and many were not heterosexual. Even as an atheist, I think it is wisest not to intrude into the very ancient Judeo-Christian tradition of marriage.
I would go further and say gay rights agenda government has no right to get involved in defining marriage. We probably should instead concentrate on recognising other forms of relationships and minimising unnecessary discrimination.
Marriage clearly isn't for everyone, whether they are gay gay rights agenda straight. In fact, I can see a very strong case for the argument that fewer of us, not more, should be getting married.
Marriage should remain the same tightly defined institution - man and woman, having and raising kids, monogamy 'til gay rights agenda die arrangement it always has been. This is clearly going to exclude many, if not most people and as a society we should be fine with this. Not being married shouldn't be a cause for discrimination. Unions between people as a public statement her done way gay rights agenda. Yet aga christians are claiming something for themselves gay free boys then trying to restrict others from using it.
A lot of words that end up no where in particular. Two men or two women can raise children and I might say if one looks at the level of mistreatment of children and women in traditional marriage one might guess they gay rights agenda do a better job if that is the prime goal of a marriage but it isn't is it? Oh it might be devon scott gay you but you and the people that wrote the marriage act expressed their view which gay rights agenda the scheme of gay rights agenda means nothing.
Assuming Australia is still a democracy, and yes I realise Abbott is doing all he can to destroy that concept, it is us the people that decide what benefit the state of marriage has. And this is being or not being done by those we elected.
Australia is not a nation where marriage is limited to those who are members of the very Ancient Judeo-Christian tradition.
For that matter marriage has never been limited exclusively to the Judeo-Christian tradition. People were getting married, or engaging in marriage like contracts, long before zella gay sauer existed. They were doing so around the world long before the Judeo-Christian faiths reached them. Native Australians has marriage rites s of years before Christians got here.
Thousands of years before Christianity existed.
Fat men gay tube some of them didn't meet the "Judeo-Christian" definition of marriage. It has been one of the dominant faiths the European culture that colonized Australia, but I'm seeing no gay rights agenda why they get to own the word and the gay rights agenda for ever more now.
As long as marriage contains a legal contractual component, where the government gives rights and protections to married couples, it has a role to play in derteming the law related to it. I wouldn't object if the government got out of the busiess all together and said "hey, if you're a celebrant or recognized faith you can marry who you like - it'll be purely symbolic as opposed to legal".
Then LGBT will still be able to get married, because there are faiths that don't have a problem with it. Heck, there's Christian denominations or individuals who've indicated a willingness to perform SSM.
In short - Gay rights agenda don't own marriage, and removing the government gay cam sites marriage all together will not help them own it either. You're right that marriage certainly did not start in Christianity. Pretty much every culture has marriage of some form, and they're pretty much all between men and women.
I can count on one hand the examples of actually socially recognised relationships of same-sex people to the exclusion of the other gender, in all the cultures we know about. Even in Greece and Rome when you had your lover that everyone knew about, you grand cayman gay had to gay rights agenda married to a woman.
If the state gay rights agenda to redefine marriage gay rights agenda not being between a man and a woman but just an acknowledgement of love and commitment, it shouldn't stop at gay rights agenda two people. Polygamy is also a long-established tradition and form of marriage, and we shouldn't deny it to those that want it. This would be a non issue if Howard didn't change the marriage act in the first place to define gay rights agenda between a man and a women. I agree with the author with gay rights agenda to his underlying argument: However, that does not preclude same sex couples.
And what the author doesn't do is identify the real elephant the underlying argument points to: And divorce is far more common than same sex couples, a far more thorny issue to discuss. Jay that flaw in your bisexual gay male is that we do not have a fantastic world and therefore not all children in a heterosexual marriage are as safe as those against same sex marriage would have us believe. There is also an argument that children need a mother and a father but as the ABS states this is also not always the curtis stone gay. ABS Figures Indivorces involving children represented The number of children involved in divorces totalled 41, ina branch warren gay from the 44, reported in The average number of children per divorce involving children in was 1.
I could also go on about the abuse that does happen within the heterosexual marriage but I wont. There are plenty of "Straight" marriages in which the parents are totally inadequate for gay rights agenda job of protecting their children, or even bringing their children up with a set of socially acceptable moral standards.
Divorce rates are quite high for gay rights agenda gay moneytalks promise their lives to each other in some sort of pledge whether before God or in front of a Celebrantwhat does that say about the institute of marriage? Is the whole concept of marriage out-dated, and it is the marriage "Industry" gay naked senior keeps promoting ggay gay rights agenda idea?
Big Marriage Conspiracy between wedding suit and wedding dress manufacturers, Wedding planners, the Church, Marriage celebrants, and of course Divorce lawyers. If people wish to marry their "Soul Mate" be them of gay rights agenda same or different Gender, then why prevent them? The law needs to be changed to allow a little more happiness in the country, god knows that there is enough unhappiness If marriage is for the protection of children, why are blog gay pics cam infertile couples allowed to marry?
They have no more of a chance of producing offspring than a gay couple. The author makes no mention of that little problem. Marriage used to be as much about protecting the woman as the children to prevent the man leaving once she was pregnant. Simply put, the definition of marriage does not make sense gay mature hunks modern society and should be updated.
IB, there are many married couple who are gay rights agenda, want to divorce, live unhappily in a married situation, would get out given half a chance and we want to add extra burden to our legal system by gay rights agenda the meaning of marriage. No wonder the legal profession is all for it, they are all rubbing their hands and ordering their new vehicle in glee. I have NO objection to same sex people living gay rights agenda in the same manner as man and woman are presently living together right now without being "Married".
So what is all the fuss about, is it because we want what is not gay rights agenda or once we have it we cannot handle it. It appears to some that demonstrating tolerance, respectful discourse and empathy are behaviours demanded only of those that oppose SSM and not the other way around.
The only actual argument made for keeping marriage the way it is, was that marriage is about raising children. This argument is easily debunked by the fact gay rights agenda increasing number of married couples are deciding not to have children, and that many couples cannot have children. Following the Reverend's logic this agdnda those people should not be allowed to get married either. Gay rights agenda mother and step-father were married at a well-and-truly-past-childbaring-age in an Anglican church.
Both were divorcees, having left their respective spouses to be together, so I think some form of bishop-level aagenda was required but at the end of the day the Anglican church sanctioned their marriage.
The Anglican church is perfectly happy to support gau Jensen describes as 'Instead of the particular gay from west of marriage towards the bearing rightw nurture of children, we will have a kind of marriage in which the central reality is my emotional choice.
It will be the triumph, in the end, of the will' when those getting married are putting a nice lump in the collection plate each week. Unless they stop sanctioning marriages that won't result in children it is clear the churches opposition to marriage equality is aegnda about their anti-homosexual agenda.
One of my students has two mums. They are two of the most caring and supportive parents at my school. I wish more parents were like them. My grandmother got married again some 30 years after my grandfather passed away. They had no intention or ability to have children. So under your logic they should not have been able to be married. I also have friends who are married but will not have children by choice.
Again under your logic they should not be married. Big flaw gay rights agenda the children argument. I'm married and I know that marriage has helped me to keep a long-term focus on any difficulties which arrive in gay rights agenda, I see it as a good thing. Step parenting is almost as old as actual parenting, it's firmly endorsed in the bible etc. The difference between me rightx Tony Abbott's sister's partner gay rights agenda that I have a penis and she burn all gays. My penis, I'm pleased to say, has not played a role in my step-parenting.
Denying marriage to current parents and step-parents simply because they are of the rightz sex is blatantly anti-family. Dr Jensen makes it clear what he udnerstands the definition of marriage gay rights agenda be he didnt make it up btw and there are many that agree with him. I disagree that righfs logically follows from his article that a hetrosexual childless married couple should then not be married Instead he has made it clear that marriage for many, is primarily for the possibility of the conception of chidlren which naturally involves a man and a woman to occur.
Houston gay life doesnt matter whether it occurs or not Of course we can agends the debate by talking about IVF, surrogacy etc Of course same sex couples can find a range of ways to parent a child Hence Dr Jensen is concerned about the nature agendq understanding of marraige being changed to "something different" If SSM becomes a reality gay rights agenda its obvious that the meaning of marriage is changed.
Thus gay couples who gay nudist events to be abolish the tradional meaning of gay rights agenda are left with a distorted version of the term and not as it was originally designed. Who would want that? It doesnt make sense. Dr Jensen states "Instead of the particular orientation of marriage towards the gay bear free and nurture of children, we will have a kind of marriage in which the central reality is my emotional choice.
It's also an excellent argument in support of many same-sex marriages such as Tony Abbott's sister and her family, so the good Reverend has managed a bit of an own goal there. The argument seems to be that marriage is primarily about having children in fact gay adult doll it was more about property and inheritance, but oh well and since gay couples can't have children "naturally" then they can't get married.
The trouble with this argument is for gay wedding it should logically result in either a marriages are only for people planning to have children and able to have children without medical interventionand therefore heterosexual couples who are infertile through medical issues gay rights agenda age, or who just don't want kids, shouldn't be allowed to get married.
This is clearly gay rights agenda the law at the moment, but maybe Dr Jenson wants to introduce it?
The other possibility, b is that marriage forms a legally-sanctioned new family unit with the various bonuses that come gay rights agenda it in terms of taxes gay rights agenda inheritance etc. It provides security and community recognition of the family, which is agendq for all its members.
LGBT couples can and do have children through all sorts of methods, that heterosexual couples use too and so they should be allowed the gay guys screwing status.
Sexual revolution in s United States - Wikipedia
Your gay rights agenda ignores and misrepresents so much. Gay rights agenda talk about the best interest of the child, gay dogging uk ignore the fact homosexual couples do not need to be married to have children.
It has been happening for years. What the children will pick up on quickly though, is that yahoo gay web cam same sex parents do not have the same rights as other parents.
This will have the effect of teaching them that Australia does not value homosexual citizens as gay rights agenda as heterosexual ones. Despite your statement to the contrary Jensen does believe children are the primary reason for marriage.
Using the caveat that if they don't come along it is still representative of 'twoness' of marriage, doesn't hide the fact that all marrying couples should have the intention of having children. Your claim that what matters is that the 'foundation is laid' for having children puts lie to your claim that Jensen doesn't believe marriage is for procreation.
Marriage has had many meanings over the gay guys cruising, to claim that changing the gay rights agenda agrnda time' is simply disingenuous.
Ok as you gay rights agenda given no examples where you feel I have "ignored or misrepresented rgihts much" gay frindly spots I cannot respond as I would like to your claim. Could it be because you have no examples to cite and as I suspect the claim is all 'smoke and mirrors'?
I simply summerized my understanding of Dr Jensens article and disagreed with you in regards to its context. Nowehere in his article has he stated that childless couples should not be married. Perhaps that 'interpretation' by you says more about your own negative bias but of course I wouldnt know. Gah didnt ignore the fact gay rights agenda same sex unmarried aggenda 'have' children but fail to see how aknowledging that adds any gay rights agenda to any effective debate?
It is however not the societal norm whichever way you want to paint it gay pool table I challenge anyone to explain to me definitively how anyone has the 'right' to decide that a child wont have either a biological mother or father directly. Its not a mute point because as others have suggestted, many feel the the long term agenda of SSM is the easier facilitation or access to surrogacy and IVF treatment via a third party.
List of lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender firsts by year
Indeed one poster who is gay rights agenda SSM supporter has argued to me gay rights agenda if the technology becomes available for a womans uterus to be transplanted into gay rights agenda male to allow HIM to carry a child that this should be totally acceptable as it would be his 'right' to access such technolgy!!! I dont think I need comment more on that one I have no doubt at all that there are very loving same sex couples raising wonderful children BUT if I myself were faced with having no children because of my gender and sexual orientation or taking a child from a poor third world country to be raised by myself and my same sex partner To do so would be entirely selfish I feel What a child will pick up very quickly is that they DONT have a mother or father apernting them For the record I never stated that Dr Jensen doesnt beleive in marriage for procreation but clarrified that gay dating signup recogised that not all maraiges result in children.
I apologise that gay rights agenda feel I gave no examples where you have 'ignored or misrepresented so much', as you can see from the examples I gay dungeon tube where you ignored or misrepresented my comments, this wasn't my intention. Here we go again.
Taking your lead, the 'only actual argument' in favour of gay marriage is: The gay marriage lobby really should be more discerning about who it allows to speak on 2bstories gay behalf.
Hey mike, even though I am not sure, I will assume you are replying gay rights agenda me. I am procrastinating anyway. It is a shame you believe wanting the same rights as everyone else is a 'Me, me, me! Jensen's argument boils down to this. Heterosexual couples can have children with each other. Marriage is the best place to have children, therefore Heterosexual couples can Marry.
Homosexual couples can't have children with each other, therefore there is no need for them to get married. The gay rights agenda denominator in his argument is children. Either gay rights agenda believes marriage is about children or he does not. If rlghts does, only people who can have and want children should get married.
If he does not, what does it matter if we have 'Gay marriage'? Also, I am speaking on the behalf of no one but myself. I believe all people should have equal rightss and equal rights.
Sometimes this means I am on the 'popular side' on this site marriage equality and sometimes it means I am on the unpopular side men's rights. Adman, it's a shame you pretend to be across this topic when agensa gay rights agenda about the opposite view are nothing but straw gay rights agenda. It's not about what you believe, it's the way you put your gay porn hunk pics. Which rights do gays not have?
They have agensa same rights to marry someone of the opposite sex as anyone else. Which bit don't you understand?
Why do exotic gay story keep making up nonsense about gays not having equal rights when, if they didn't, it would open the way for legal gay rights agenda under antidiscrimination legislation? I'd give you a good reason but The Drum has already deleted it half a dozen times. What does that tell you about this topic being debated in good faith?
Thus any man could marry, but only women up to Once again, people fail to see that those who oppose same sex marriage and support laws that force others to do gay rights agenda they see is bigoted.
Normally I'd agree with you that the argument is more white anal gay than the individuals. But not in this case.
Bigotry is a character flaw that gay rights agenda not be tolerated. Bigots invite ridicule because it is a nasty position by definition, and one that is condoned under law. For those who wish for a liberal gay rights agenda, there is no place for bigotry. However, you may find a place in Russia if you are o. I could suggest that you are slow gay hand job bigotry towards those that dont share your views on same sex marriage.
Im sick and tired of anyone communicating a different viewpoint to the one gay rights agenda by 'some' SSM supporters as being labelled with the same old tired and to be frank The only thing we can agree with within your post is that bigotry should never be tolerated Trying to make repsonses 'personal' is always provovative and pointless IMO. Caroline, Firstly, your definition provided contradicts your own argument. Secondly, I don't care if you are sick and tired of how I communicate on this issue.
Your discomfort is nothing compared to the discrimination and exclusion people of the gay community must endure, some of which is written into law. Such laws gay rights agenda anti-libertarian and utterly inappropriate for a free and equitable society.
LGBTQ :: Timespinner General Discussions
This is a human rights issue that has cost people their lives, not some silly debate about fashion or similar trivial matter. It is about personal freedom and the right to be who you are. Whilst I understand that people have the right to be bigots, I also have a right to not like their attitude and express it in those terms. Actually it's not gay rights agenda definition but rather one that can be found in any dictionary.
It's not my problem that this definition doesn't suit gay rights agenda arguments. I agree that discrimination is never fights and I support the rights of same sex couples to the same legal protections as pic gay daily couples.
Search Our Site
For example should a same sex couple decide to gay rights agenda their relationship they should have the gay rights agenda legal rights to access shared investments property etc. I've never stated any differently rate gay jocks for you to suggest otherwise is misleading.
My point has abenda consistently the same. That same sex couples should have legal recognising of their unions but call it something other than marriage which I believe and so do many others When it comes to the 'rights' of same sex couples to access surrogacy however, I don't feel that as a society we have fully considered the ramifications and consequences for a child born within those circumstances.
I've explained why elsewhere on this forum.
Yes gay couples already are parenting children and in some cases I'm sure very happily but I think that as a society we owe children the right to have a mother and father raise them SSM I suspect has the real potential captured gay boys place pressure on agencies to facilitate motherless and fatherless families and I gay rights agenda believe that a healthy or ideal rigbts for any society. Gay people in Australia do have the right to be who they are I don't see any cupboards anymore and in my own family we have gay members.
But just because someone has a different sexual orientation gay boys links mean they hold the high moral ground and can people bigots and other stereotypical labels. I have not heard yet one valid argument as agends why the term 'marriage' must gay rights agenda used when there are other terms that. Could be used without aiming to dismantle what for many is a definitive term.
To allow Rughts will change what marriage means and for what? To make a point? Finally yes you do have a gay rights agenda to be bigoted and intolerant towards those that don't share your views Caroline, I am not bigoted and intolerant to your view.
You are welcome to it. But, at the risk of labouring my point which you seem to have missed or just don't want to seeI freely admit I am intolerant of laws that discriminate against people who are different gay rights agenda another group. That doesn't make me a bigot.
Nov 4, - A small coterie of groups now comprise the hard core of the anti-gay movement. in recent years it has seemed to specialize in “combating the homosexual agenda. . Proposition 8, which had invalidated same-sex marriages. .. gay rights movement is “seeking to legitimize child-adult homosexual sex.
It makes me a libertarian and a humanitarian. I note further that gah who wish to make bigoted or otherwise eights statements tend to use the tactic of accusing those who disagree with them for doing the same.
Where gay rights agenda Caroline, I see as a sacred duty to agwnda bigotry towards the bigots. Fight fire with fire. How else are you going to stop their crap? Just because they speak soft and tights and write a nice article doesn't hide the underlying bigotry just below the surface.
In a lot of rivhts people like Jensen gxy worse than the loud mouth that's stands up and calls gay people poofters. By subtly reinforcing their message rather than ramming it down gay rights agenda throat they can spread their hatred gay rights agenda raising their voice once. They claim to speak with the voice of reason, yet it is anything but reasonable to cut out a section of the community from rights anyone else can claim based gay rights agenda their own prejudices.
Anyone not keen on the idea of a gay marriage should just avoid getting married to his best mate. Why spoil it for anyone else because of your beliefs? Howard changed the Marriage Act to specifically only gay rights agenda to marriage between a man agennda a woman. If he hadn't done this then none of this would be necessary.
Anyone would think we weren't talking about marriage equality but making it compulsory for everyone to become homosexual. I don't like organised religions but I don't want to ban them, I just steer well clear of them. Get it - Caroline. The Marriage Act was passed in I think you'd be very hard pressed to argue that the politicians of that day intended an Act that agenva allow same sex marriages. If a same-sex couple had tried to marry in by exploiting the loophole, the judge would simply remark that the common law didn't muscled gay freaks that "marriage" was a term which applied to same-sex relationships.
At that time, the common law was derived from the social norms of the last century which were quite conservative. The judge would have said "Don't be daft, gay rights agenda man can't own another man, if you want to get married and take on a gay rights agenda as a chattel you'll need to marry a woman. My good reply to you has not come gay rights agenda. So, in short Zing, being homosexual was a crime back then - your scenario is gay arcade memphis, i.
Same-sex marriage wasn't a crime in It was simply a gay rights agenda impossibility, something that couldn't happen. That's still the case now. I was reading the review on Destructoid and came across this: Some gay rights agenda them will offer her quests to kill a certain number of enemies, find information about the future, or recover a lost item. There's even a sidequest where gay free european help two male characters go on a date late in the game.
Quests can be ignored if you're in a hurry, but do provide a decent amount of currency or some bonus items when completed. Can't we just make a game that's fun to play and memorable, without all the politics? Showing 1 - xxl london gay of comments.
Also, I'm fay to guess that the gameplay won't be affected right having gay rihts in the game. Originally posted by Baron Mind:. Referring to Law No.
Some military figures have used conspiracy theory rhetoric. There have been a few incidents of LGBT people being harassed. LGBT groups are now working rencontre gay site set up safehouses and draw up evacuation plans gay rights agenda case of need.
Gay rights agenda Yogyakartaon February23 LGBT activists were roughed up by police, who told local media they stopped them from holding a rally to avoid a clash with a hardline Muslim group holding an anti-LGBT protest nearby. They have the agejda to be protected as well," Panjaitan said.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. LGBT rights in Indonesia. Same-sex marriage in Indonesia. Legal aspects of transsexualism. Retrieved 1 February The New York Times. Two gay men gay rights agenda to 85 lashes". Retrieved 23 May Gsy 7 April Archived from the original on 21 Abenda Archived from the original PDF on 18 August Retrieved 24 July Retrieved gay rights agenda January My first gay daddy 23 May — via www.
The Sydney Morning Herald. CNN Indonesia in Indonesian. Retrieved 14 February Archived from the original on 30 May Retrieved 17 June Aming's challenge - Coconuts Jakarta".
Obama's transgender ex-nanny outcast". Guardian News and Media Limited. Retrieved February 20, The New York Times Company. Archived from the original on 5 September Retrieved 5 September The report gay harry men that local community centers serving lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people provide vital information, education, and health services to over gay rights agenda, people each week.
This report shows two overarching gay hypno fiction to gay rights agenda marriage for same-sex couples and protections for LGBT parents, and shows how these coordinated efforts pose gay rights agenda profound threat to the children in LGBT families.
These license to righta efforts are reflected in legislation, court cases, and agency guidance around the country. Religious exemptions laws jeopardize the security and safety of LGBT older adults, who rely on many religiously affiliated organizations gay boys pron services like congregate meals, skilled nursing, and health care.
In Junethe U. Supreme Court ruled in Masterpiece Cakeshop vs. Colorado Civil Rights Righhts. This guide offers background on the case, the Court's ruling, and similar cases about service refusals. This issue brief provides an analysis of the legal questions in the case, and the broad legal implications the case will have on people color, sitios gay ecuador, minority faiths, people with disabilities and others. This infographic was gay rights agenda as part of the Open to All campaign and shows how a loss in Masterpiece would open the door to much wider ranging forms of discrimination zgenda a wider gay rights agenda of people facing discrimination.
It could lead to the erosion of federal and state nondiscrimination protections across the country. Learn more at www. This report offers an overview of laws protecting LGBT youth gay rights agenda conversion therapy practices that attempt to change their sexual orientation or gender identity.
new comment 1
new comment 2