Showing posts with label England. Show all posts
Showing posts with label England. Show all posts

September 9, 2016

Gay Vicar Says Church of England “An Embarrassing Mess!”



 Foreshew-Cain (right) married his long-term partner, Stephen, (left) last June.






This week the Church of England found itself in a very publicly difficult situation about sexuality—again.

At the end of August, Bishop Nicholas Chamberlain, the Bishop of Grantham, came out as the first openly gay bishop with a partner. To those of us in the LGBTI community within the Church this wasn’t a surprise; we had all known for a long time.

But it has proved to be troublesome for the Church, which had chosen to purposefully conceal his relationship (Bishop Nic has always been open, if not public, about his sexuality.) When a new bishop is appointed there is an official biography and usually it includes some personal facts to paint a human picture—of the wife or husband, the children and pets, and a few details such as their like of real ale or hill walking. Oddly, these days new bishops all seem to like hill walking. 

If you look at Bishop Nic’s biography there is no reference at all to the man with whom he has shared, as he has said, a loving and faithful relationship for 30 years. We now know that the Archbishop of Canterbury knew about this and indeed had them both round for dinner; the Bishop of Lincoln knew, and indeed the press office at Church House knew—it’s just that they couldn’t bear to think that anyone else would know.

This weekend has also seen the publishing of an open letter from 14 of the married gay and lesbian clergy of the Church of England, and other some married lay people, to our bishops. We wrote to share with them the joy and happiness we have in our married lives, and in the freedom to live with our wives and husbands in public, faithful and lifelong relationships. I had been with my husband for 15 years before we could marry, and being married has made a real difference—somehow the whole relationship feels more solidly grounded and we rejoice in that discovery.

The official position is that lay people can pretty much do as they please, though the Church ensured that it is impossible for gay couples to legally marry in a Church of England parish and local clergy are banned from offering services of blessing, such as those given to Prince Charles and Camilla after their civil marriage, even if the couple haven’t been involved in a notorious divorce.

Clergy are allowed to enter civil partnerships, again without a church service afterwards, and have to promise not to have sex with each other. Bishop Nic is not in a civil partnership but has said that he is celibate and in this he is entirely compliant with the current Church rules.

There has been an attempt at a blanket stop on marriage for gay and lesbian clergy, and those who do are officially disciplined, and a ban placed on them ever getting a new post in the Church. The Church will not consider for ordination anyone who is married to someone of the same sex, no matter how good a priest they might make.

Yet quietly, clergy are getting married or converting their civil partnerships to marriage; gay ordinands in sexual relationships are getting the nod through while appearing to comply with the selection procedures; and clergy are having sex in their civil partnerships. Priests are offering services of blessing and thanksgiving to gay and lesbian couples and parishes celebrating with them. The bishops all know this, and many even collude in the dishonesty around the current position with private words of support and public obedience to the official line. One recently married priest I know of was invited into the episcopal study, handed his letter of discipline and then the bishop’s wife arrived with two gin and tonics—and as she said “congratulations,” the bishop toasted the new couple. 

Frankly, it’s a mess and an embarrassing one because everyone knows it’s a mess, and at a fundamental level is making the Church, as the archbishop himself said, look “odd.” Actually, I think it’s worse—the current stance makes us look hypocritical and foolish and undermines our ability to speak with any real authority on other moral issues. While the Church continues to treat the LGBTI community in ways that cause the archbishop sleepless nights in which he is “consumed with horror” we can hardly call out others for their treatment of the poor, the widowed and the orphaned as our faith requires us to do.

The married clergy wrote to urge the bishops to recognize that this isn’t working. We asked for some honesty and that they allow parishes freedom to celebrate our relationships without fear of retribution or censure. We aren’t expecting wedding bells in our churches just yet, but we do expect to be able to say prayers, offer blessings and to rejoice in the love that brings two people together to make a commitment to each other. We know that some in the Church won’t find this acceptable; there have always been some who find change difficult. But there is no longer a single theology of marriage and relationships in the Church and it is time this was recognized.

The bishops have banged on for two years about “good disagreement” as being fundamental to the Church’s life and flourishing—it is time for that rhetoric to become reality.


Andrew Foreshew-Cain is a vicar at St Mary with All Souls, Kilburn, and St James West Hampstead, in north London

June 28, 2016

Brexit is Not the End of England but Just a Part of It




                                                                       
 
                                                                  
  
This isn’t meant to scare you, but let’s consider the absolute worst-case scenarios of “Brexit.”

All over the world, political scientists and financial professionals have been hunkered down trying to game out the economic implications of Britain’s surprise decision to leave the European Union. Many of them had already done various calculations, but now that the decision is real, a surfeit of new scenarios has emerged.

Most of the war-gaming has been focused on the direct economic blow to Britain. But the catastrophe-shouting there has almost certainly been overly loud: Yes, Britain’s economy is likely to suffer in the near term as the government reconstitutes and tries to negotiate its divorce with Europe. And yes, the pound will probably continue to lose value, and the uncertainty of Britain’s relationship with Europe will paralyze investment until new rules of engagement are put in place.

All of which will makes markets around the world shudder, shrug and generally behave like petulant teenagers. “Stocks have entered a new realm of volatility, unlikely to abate anytime soon,” according to a Wells Fargo research note issued on Monday. It warned, “Get used to it.”

But it would be wrong to focus exclusively on Britain when considering the possible financial ramifications and permutations. In a truly dire scenario, Britain is just the leading domino. It’s the next dominoes — most likely across the Channel — that matter more.

“We see Brexit as just one step in a process that is unavoidable of further referendums by other nations to exit the E.U.,” Felix Zulauf, an investor who operates a hedge fund in Switzerland, wrote in a note on Monday, contending that “the damage” of Brexit “will therefore be far worse for the E.U. than for the U.K.”

Of far greater concern will be if other European Union countries attempt their own exits — even if their efforts are unsuccessful. More glimmers of no-confidence among nations in the consortium could ultimately lead to a crisis that would be felt far beyond Europe.

Consider this: Italy’s government is considering pumping as much as $45 billion into its banking system after the Brexit vote. Shares of the biggest Italian banks have fallen more than 20 percent since the results of the vote were announced. And Italian banks are considered particularly vulnerable because they hold hundreds of billions of euros in bad loans. If Brexit forces a material economic slowdown across the Continent, Italy’s banks — without a rescue plan — could significantly suffer.

Remember: There’s no need to panic now, at least not yet. But if, down the line, Italy’s economy were to falter and help from the European Union was not forthcoming without tough conditions — remember Greece and the possibility of Grexit? — we could witness the seceding of Italy, which will be the third-largest member of the consortium after Germany and France (assuming that Britain does officially leave).

That, in turn, could lead to a true catastrophe: Italy would probably be forced to return to the lira, which would most likely be tremendously devalued. An unstable lira would cause huge problems for investors and banks across the globe that have interests in Italy, as well as a massive credit crunch within the country. (By the way, you could replace “Italy” with “Spain” or “Portugal” in this scenario and end up in much the same place.)

Long before then, however, there is a decent chance that we will see another country — probably the Netherlands — try to make a run for it. After Britain voted to break away from the European Union, Geert Wilders, the populist leader of the Netherlands’ surging anti-immigrant Party for Freedom, posted on Twitter, “Hurray for the British.” He added: “Now it’s our turn. It’s time for a Dutch referendum.” He used this hashtag: #ByeByeEU.

The Netherlands is a relatively healthy country, so — as a matter of pure economics — the repercussions of its leaving the European Union would most likely be muted. But if Brexit wasn’t enough of an inspiration for other fiercely nationalistic and economically healthy countries to seek an exit, watching a place like the Netherlands that actually uses the euro (unlike Britain, which never switched from the pound) could prove to be a convincing model.

Richard N. Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, has already predicted that several countries will leave the European Union within the next five years, which is increasingly becoming the conventional wisdom. Given the low growth of so many countries in the union, it is hard to imagine that a populistic revolt won’t emerge.

“The global economy remains stuck in a deflationary expansion of minimal growth and minimal rates,” Merrill Lynch wrote in a note to investors on Monday. “And electorates are increasingly voting in the developed world against wage deflation, high unemployment, immigration and inequality.”

James Pethokoukis, a commentator at the American Enterprise Institute, recently found a memorandum written in 2011 during the euro crisis by Willem Buiter, the global chief economist at Citigroup, that imagined the destruction of the European Union. “A breakup of the Euro Area would be rather like the movie ‘War of the Roses’ version of a divorce: disruptive, destructive and without any winners,” he wrote, describing how “even a partial one involving the exit of one or more fiscally and competitively weak countries, would be chaotic.”

Here’s what would happen: “Exit, partial or full, would likely be precipitated by disorderly sovereign defaults in the fiscally weak and uncompetitive member states, whose currencies would weaken dramatically and whose banks would fail,” Mr. Buiter wrote at the time. “If Spain and Italy were to exit, there would be a collapse of systemically important financial institutions throughout the European Union and North America and years of global depression.”

For now, let’s hope these worst-case scenarios are just that.


March 10, 2016

Palace Staffers Vehemently Deny the Queen was Against Gay Marriage



                                                                       
Palace staffers are pushing back hard against a report that Elizabeth wasn’t pleased about legalizing same-sex marriage in Britain.

Senior sources at Buckingham Palace were pushing back hard Monday against claims that Queen Elizabeth was opposed to gay marriage when it was introduced in the U.K. in 2013.
The Mail makes the astonishing claim—which goes against Her Majesty’s reputation for tolerance and open-mindedness—in a new series penned by gossip columnist Richard Kay launching in the paper today.
The Mail claims that the queen did not approve of the legalization of same-sex marriage, and expressed her frustration to a friend at the height of the controversy.

The friend, according to The Mail, said: “It was the ‘marriage’ thing that she thought was wrong, because marriage ought to be sacrosanct between a man and a woman.”
However, sources at the palace poured cold water on those claims.
 “It seems unlikely that one of her friends would pass on her thoughts to The Mail,” sniffed one senior courtier to The Daily Beast.
Palace staff—many of whom are gay—are hamstrung by the fact that the queen maintains strict political neutrality and would never publicly comment either way about issues such as same-sex marriage.

However, one courtier did make an explicit—for them— denunciation of the claims by emailing The Daily Beast a link to a piece in Pink News in which the gay TV presenter and comedian Stephen Fry recounted the following story: “When the queen signed the Royal Assent for the Equal Marriages Act, allowing gay people to marry for the first time, she put it down and said ‘Well, who’d have thought 62 years ago when I came to the throne, I’d be signing something like this? Isn’t it wonderful?’”

Although Fry says the story is apocryphal, the fact that palace staffers were ready to email the story to an ink-stained wretch is a pretty clear sign that they consider The Mail’s report to be inaccurate, and a mischaracterization of the queen’s views.
“We’re not going to get into a did she / didn’t she,” said the source, but called the story “spurious and unsubstantiated.”

Queen Elizabeth has previously signaled her support for gay rights in very public ways.
She was a passionate supporter of a “Commonwealth Charter” signed in 2013 which declared: “We are implacably opposed to all forms of  discrimination, whether rooted in gender, race, colour, creed, political belief, or other grounds.”
The ”other grounds” referred to sexuality—but specific reference to ”gays and lesbians” was omitted for fear of upsetting Commonwealth countries with draconian anti-gay laws.
The queen, unlike her son Charles, has studiously maintained an apolitical stance throughout her reign.

She appeared to intervene in the Scottish independence referendum when she told a group of well-wishers outside Sandringham church to “think very carefully about the future” the day before the vote.
 
It was reported that the queen was urged to speak after an appeal from Downing Street, as the Out campaign gained ground, but this allegation has never been proven or acknowledged.
There is little doubt that the queen was delighted with the result when the Scots voted not to leave the U.K.

Prime Minister David Cameron was caught on an open microphone telling Michael Bloomberg that she “purred” with happiness down the line when he phoned her with the result.

Daily Beast

October 21, 2015

15K+ Since Same Sex Marriage Became Legal in England and Wales



 Ferris in London Celebrates Same Sex Marriages

  More than 15,000 same-sex marriages have taken place since it became legal in England and Wales, the first official statistics have revealed.
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) confirmed a total of 15,098 couples had legally married since 2014.
Of those, 7,366 were marriages while 7,732 accounted for conversions from civil partnerships.
The number of couples opting for civil partnerships fell by 70% between 2013 and 2014 it found. 
Same-sex marriage became legal just after midnight on 29 March 2014, with several couples opting to tie the knot moments afterwards.




 Peter McGraith and David Cabreza married at 00:01 BST at Islington Town Hall having been together for 17 years.
Mr McGraith said: "I don't think things have changed for us in many ways, we were already in a long-term relationship, we already had two kids, except the visibility of gay marriage across the world starts to make a difference.
"There have always been gay men and lesbians in long-term relationships that have quite happily survived within the context of family and community, but the law caught up with the existence, and I'm hoping in other countries legislation can give people a chance."
He added: “Gay men and lesbians don’t want to be defined or constrained by notions of 'traditional' marriage, but the introduction of marriage equality around the world is a signifier of a kind of progress for sexual minorities." 
The ONS said the most popular month to get married so far had been August 2014 with 844 marriages. The summer months traditionally see more marriages than the rest of the year.
It also revealed 55% of marriages were between female couples and 45% male with the average age being 37 for women and 40 for men. 
Teresa Millward, who married Helen Brearley in Halifax on the day it became legal, said: "It was very overwhelming. Getting married was about creating a stability and having that option to have a family and I'm now no different to my brother, my neighbours or my friends."
Since their wedding the couple have become parents to a son, Hilton. 
Ms Millward, who gave birth to Hilton, said: "Helen automatically became the second parent rather than having to do anything complicated with documents and it means if anything happens to me she has the same rights as I do as a Mum and would automatically be Hilton's second parent."




 Just over half of the 15,000 weddings which have taken place have been for couples converting their civil partnerships to weddings, an option which became available in December 2014.
Couples wishing to do so must attend a register office or an approved premises to make the conversion official. 
In May the Republic of Ireland voted to legalise same-sex marriage in a referendum which saw 62% of the votes cast in favour of amending the country's constitution.
Scotland legalised the convention in December 2014 with the first gay weddings taking place on Hogmanay.
Northern Ireland is currently the only place in the UK and Ireland that has not legalized same-sex marriage, which Mr McGraith described as "really embarrassing".
BBC

March 19, 2015

No Rape Instead Consensual Sex on England and Wales Prisons






‘Sexual activity is widespread in prisons and must be seen as an urgent health issue,’ said Frances Crook of the Howard League. 
 ‘Sexual activity is widespread in prisons and must be seen as an urgent health issue,’ said Frances Crook of the Howard League. Photograph: Alamy

Rape is extremely rare in prisons in England and Wales, whereas consensual gay sex, pornography and masturbation is widespread and accepted, according to the findings of the first systematic review of sex between inmates.
The two-year commission on sex in prison, set up by the Howard League for Penal Reform, warns of an “urgent health issue” and calls for “coherent and consistently applied policies which recognise and respond to the reality of consensual and coercive sex in prison”.
The commission was blocked by the Ministry of Justice from interviewing current inmates, so instead based its research on in-depth interviews by a criminologist, Dr Alisa Stevens, with 26 former prisoners who spoke for the first time about their experiences.
Gay and bisexual ex-prisoners reported that while they were able to be open about their sexuality on the wing, they were discreet about their sexual activities and relationships.
They usually had sex in the cell of one of the participants or in the showers during periods of association. Some men who shared cells had sex at night despite official prison policy that men who are discovered to be in a sexual relationship should be separated and not allowed to share a cell.


One heterosexual man said that he had sex with gay or bisexual prisoners “out of necessity” and had resumed exclusive heterosexual relationships since leaving prison: “I’m completely straight. What happened then was just about having my sexual needs met, in a particular time and place where I couldn’t get [heterosexual] sex.”
The researchers found that the availability of condoms and dental dams to minimise the risk of exposure to sexually transmitted infections varied widely from prison to prison. Some of those interviewed had been refused condoms while others could get them from healthcare but in circumstances that didn’t allow for any privacy.
The two women ex-prisoners who were interviewed said they had not had personal experience of sex in prison but were aware that “close friendships” were commonplace: “I couldn’t believe how much kissing and cuddling was going on,” said one. “It was a big, big shock, a big culture shock. Someone like me, never been in prison before. I didn’t know where to look half the time!”



The former prisoners insisted that coerced sex was rare behind bars. Three male interviewees disclosed that they had been raped by other prisoners, and three others had been threatened with rape while they were in prison.
One had been raped by five assailants in a cell but was dissuaded from making a formal complaint by a prison officer. He was advised that “grassing” on other prisoners at such an early stage in his long sentence would “mark his cards” for the rest of his time inside.
The researchers also found a tacit acceptance by prison staff of both pornography and masturbation. One interviewee recalled how, feeling “overwhelmed and nervous” on his first night, he asked for a bible. He was told apologetically by an officer that they had no bibles but he could offer him some pornographic magazines to “help you get to sleep”.
Stevens said: “This research has illustrated the urgent need for coherent and consistently applied policies which recognise and respond to the reality of consensual and coercive sex in prison.”
Frances Crook, the director of the Howard League for Penal Reform, said: “This final report of the commission shows that sexual activity is widespread in prisons and must be seen as an urgent health issue. The commission has conducted the first systematic review of sex in prison and it is clear important lessons must be learned, and fast.”
A HM Prison Service spokesperson said: “We do not condone sex in prisons or believe that prisoners in a relationship should share a cell. 
“We take the report of any sexual assault incredibly seriously and ensure that victims are supported and protected. Every incident is fully investigated and careful analysis is currently taking place to help understand the reasons behind sexual assaults in prisons.”
The spokesperson said the rise in referring cases to the police showed commitment of HMPS to tackling the issue: “We have introduced a new protocol with the police and crown prosecution service to introduce a new approach to further aid the investigation of crime in prison.”

May 13, 2014

Partner of exRAF Pilot Pleads ‘not guilty’ to Stabbing his partner to death


                    Former RAF pilot Steven Barrett found dead in Lochend Butterfly Way Edinburgh  on Saturday 6 April

A man accused of murdering his former RAF pilot partner in a knife attack has told a court that he "would have no reason to do such a thing".
Darren McLauchlan, 24, said he found Steven Barrett seriously injured in a bedroom in their Edinburgh flat
                     Darren Mclaughlan
He told the High Court in Edinburgh that he called an ambulance and then applied pressure on Mr Barrett's wounds until paramedics arrived.
Mr McLauchlan denies murdering Mr Barrett by stabbing him on the body. 
He also denies a further charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice.
The incident is alleged to have happened on 6 April last year, after the couple returned to their flat in Lochend Butterfly Way following a night out with their friend Shannon Nisbet.
Mr McLauchlan told the court that he found 27-year-old Mr Barrett beside the bed, apparently trying to get up from a "sort of kneeling position".
He said Mr Barrett told him to get out of the room.
Mr McLauchlan said he had started shouting "What have you done?" at Mr Barrett after spotting a knife in the room.
He then said he called an ambulance and used a towel to wrap around and apply pressure to Mr Barrett's wounds.
He said he knew there were a number of issues in Mr Barrett's life, including telling his parents that he was gay and redundancy fears at the airline Flybe, where he worked after leaving the RAF.
The trial before judge Michael O’Grady QC continues.

Observations in testimony from Darren McLaughlan
Darren in Center
Darren McLauchlan, 24, said he found Steven Barrett at a bedroom in a flat they had moved to in Edinburgh's Lochend Butterfly Way after a night out in the city with a friend Shannon Nisbet.
He said he was down by the bed "in a sort of kneeling position" and added: "He looked like he was trying to get himself up."
"The first thing he said to me was to get out the room," he said, adding that at that point he did not see a knife.
"He repeatedly told me to get out and not to go near him," he told the High Court in Edinburgh.
But he said that when he came to the bottom of the bed where he was he saw a knife.
McLauchlan said his head "was all over the place" and he was crying and screaming at Mr Barrett "what have you done".
He said he was screaming "why, why'" and Mr Barrett told him to say it happened outside. He called an ambulance and was told to get a towel and wrap it on him and apply pressure.
Mr McLauchlan said one of the last things he said to the ambulance personnel was that he thought he was going to die.
He said he knew there were a number of issues in Mr Barrett’s life that he was facing, including telling his parents that he was gay and redundancy fears at the airline Flybe.

 Steven BarrettMr Barrett has been a Flybe first officer working out of Edinburgh
 

April 22, 2014

British PM Stresses England is a Christian Nation

Criticised ... Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron is under fire for stressing that En
Criticised ... Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron is under fire for stressing that England is a “Christian country” during his Easter address. Picture: AFP Source: AFP
BRITISH Prime Minister David Cameron has been accused of sowing sectarianism and division after stressing in an Easter message that Britain was still a “Christian country”.
The criticism came in an open letter signed by 55 public figures, including writers Philip Pullman and Terry Pratchett and the Nobel prize-winning scientists John Sulston and Harold Kroto.
Cameron, a member of the established Church of England, has been increasingly vocal about his beliefs recently, and in an article published last week urged Christians to be “more evangelical” about their faith.
Commentators suggest he is trying to build bridges with the Church, which opposed government plans to introduce gay marriage, and following vocal criticism from many clergy about the impact of the government’s austerity measures.
“Some people feel that in this ever more secular age we shouldn’t talk about these things. I completely disagree,” the Conservative prime minister wrote in the Church Times, an Anglican newspaper.
“I believe we should be more confident about our status as a Christian country, more ambitious about expanding the role of faith-based organisations, and, frankly, more evangelical about a faith that compels us to get out there and make a difference to people’s lives.”
The open letter, which was organised by the British Humanist Association and published in the Daily Telegraph newspaper, disputes Cameron’s claims that Britain is still a Christian country.
“Constantly to claim otherwise fosters alienation and division in our society,” it says.
It adds that highlighting the social contribution of Christians above others, which was also a theme of remarks Cameron made to an Easter reception at Downing Street, “needlessly fuels enervating sectarian debates”.
The 2011 census found 59.3 per cent of people in England and Wales said they were Christian, down from 71.7 per cent 10 years earlier.
The number of those reporting no religion was 25.1 per cent, up from 14.8 per cent in 2001.
Cameron has always been open about his faith but not evangelical, following the trend of British politicians to keep their religious convictions to themselves.
Former Labour prime minister Tony Blair was a devout Christian but said he was careful not to speak openly about his faith while in office because “you always get into trouble talking about it”. He converted to Roman Catholicism in 2007 after leaving office.
A spokeswoman for Cameron said the prime minister had made clear as far back as December 2011 that he believed Britain was a Christian country, although he recognises the importance of different faith groups.
“He has said on many occasions that he is incredibly proud that Britain is home to many different faith communities, who do so much to make the UK a stronger country,” she said.

March 26, 2014

What Britons Are Afraid of and it’s Not Homosexuals

                                                                                           
                                                                                         

From 
Davina McCall to Ranulph Fiennes, Britain can claim a rich source of inspiration when it comes to fearlessly facing up to the most daunting of challenges.

Yet if pressed to stand up to the 13 things that most scare the UK public, would you be able to come away saying you could brush off all of them?

A new survey has been released which reveals the things that most scare the British public, from a majority who are at least a little afraid of heights to a significant minority who suffer from cynophobia – a fear of dogs.

YouGov presented more than 2,000 people with an unlucky 13 common phobias, asking them to rate their fear of each from “not at all” to “very afraid”.
The survey found that heights are the biggest fear of all for British people, with a massive 58 per cent of respondents saying they suffer from acrophobia or “vertigo” to some degree.
While that’s not necessarily surprising – gravity can be a killer, after all – more than a quarter of the public said they were inexplicably afraid of mice.

At the lower end of the scale, 12 per cent of respondents suffered from coulrophobia – fear of clowns – and 14 per cent were at least a little afraid of the sight of blood.
“All are not created equal when it comes to fears,” YouGov’s William Jordan said.
“With the exception of needles and getting shots and blood – of which British men and women are about equally afraid – more women than men are afraid of each thing [on the list].”
This gender gap was widest when it came to spiders, which scare the majority of women (52 per cent) but only a third of men.

The survey results were also broken down by age groups, and found that fears varied enormously when comparing 18 to 24-year-olds with those 60 and above.
It found that young people were much more likely to be scared of spiders, needles and public speaking, while older people tend more to fear snakes and heights.
And the results also showed wide discrepancies between the regions of the UK, with people in London and the south consistently more afraid of just about everything when compared to the north and Scotland.
How many of the 13 are you afraid of? 

Amazon SearchBox Use it for All Meerchandise

The Forest Needs help

Summer Athlete

Adamfoxie Blog Int.

Adamfoxie Blog Int.
Amazon

ONE

ONE
Relief World Hunger

Taylor Made 2016 Family Clubs

Click Here To Get Anything by Amazon- That will keep US Going

Amazon EcHo

Blog Archive/White No# Stories per Month/year

Popular Posts

Everyday at the Movies

Orangutans ARE Part of the Forest

The Gay Man in You♥ or Him