The persecution of Christianity.

So, I recently responded to a post in my blog (here) in which a Christian stated that they are being stripped of their rights because of a vocal minority, and that Christians have been a “silent” majority. I answered rather quickly and not especially thoughtfully. I think I’d like to take the time to respond a bit more in depth, because while I’m sure many atheists and people of other religions have heard more than enough on the subject, it seems most Christians don’t think we’ve gotten the message. We’ve gotten it. Really. But I’ll go ahead and address the concerns, since so many of you seem to feel an infringement upon your rights.

  But what about the atheists?…..is another argument.

What about them? Nobody is asking them to be baptized. We’re not going to pass the collection plate. Just humor us for 30 seconds. If that’s asking too much, bring a Walkman or a pair of ear plugs. Go to the bathroom. Visit the concession stand. Call your lawyer!

Ah, well, it isn’t just atheists. And, sorry, but yes. It is asking too much. My favorite quote regarding rights is “yours end where mine begin.” The federal government shall not endorse one religion over another. Period. Even if the branch of the federal government we’re talking about is a high school. You’re welcome to your right to pray in public. Is there a reason you MUST have that prayer on the loudspeaker of a federal building during a sporting event? Are you afraid your god won’t hear you? Can’t you do it without someone else leading you? Pray! Go ahead! No one is stopping you. But don’t expect to be led by federal employees. That’s the law, and that’s MY right, too.

Saying you should have the right to have a federal employee say a prayer on government property is essentially saying “this is our religion and you HAVE to accept it and the government endorses it.” Well, we don’t, and it doesn’t. That’s why that amendment is there. Your right does not supersede the law, and it does not trump mine.  

Unfortunately, one or two will make that call. One or two will tell thousands what they can and cannot do. I don’t think a short prayer at a football game is going to shake the world’s foundations.

No. One or two will remind the federal government that they cannot endorse a religion. NO ONE is telling you not to pray! Is the distinction really that difficult to understand? Why?

Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek, while our courts strip us of all our rights. Our parents and grandparents taught us to pray before eating, and to pray before we go to sleep. Our Bible tells us to pray without ceasing. Now, a handful of people and their lawyers are telling us to cease praying.

God, help us. And if that last sentence offends you, well, just sue me.

Actually? Christians have just as much right as any other adherent of any other religion. And while I’m sure you deride them non stop every chance you get, the ACLU fights just as hard for Christians as for any other group. As it should be. What you apparently want is more rights than adherents of any other religion. Tough. You can’t have it.  

The silent majority has been silent too long. It’s time we tell that one or two individuals who scream loud enough to be heard that the vast majority doesn’t care what they want. It is time that the majority rules! It’s time we tell them: ‘You don’t have to pray; you don’t have to say the Pledge of Allegiance; you don’t have to believe in God or attend services that honor Him. That is your right, and we will honor your right; but by golly, you are no longer going to take our rights away. We are fighting back, and we WILL WIN!’

I’m going to ask for a citation, here. What rights are being taken, exactly? You have the right to pray, you have the right to attend whatever house of worship tickles your little pink fancy, you have the right to even keep “God” in the Pledge of Allegiance. And while you’re at it….gimme a citation for Christians being a silent majority; seems to me all we hear about every year is how Christians have rights and we’re going to recognize them. 

While you’re at it, look up “tyranny of the majority.” The majority wanted to keep women from voting. The majority wanted to keep black children from attending white schools. The majority wanted to refuse interracial marriage. The majority wanted to refuse to allow immigrants to serve in the military. Our civil rights are in place to protect the individual from the tyranny of the majority.  Since when did we become a nation of sheep, that we HAVE to go along with the majority? Our country was founded on individualism.

In closing; Let me just say that none of what I’ve heard is about Christians keeping the rights they have nearly as much as it’s about forcing everyone else to live by their rules.  

Advertisements

27 responses to “The persecution of Christianity.

  1. Pingback: The persecution of Christianity.

  2. So you admit the first admendment which guarenteeing free speech ceases when one becomes a christian?
    The first amendment states:
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    Your post is saying that the government should prohibit the free exercise of religion. Saying a short prayer before a ball game is the” free exercise of religion”, thereby forcing your religion upon everyone else. I am not an advocate of having to say a prayer over the speaker system, I am an advocate for having a few moments of silence where people can pray as they desire or not to pray. You don’t have a problem of thrusting your religious world view Atheism upon the rest of us.
    No. One or two will remind the federal government that they cannot endorse a religion. NO ONE is telling you not to pray! Is the distinction really that difficult to understand? Why?
    You are certainly telling where we cannot pray, violating the first amendment freedom of speech and prohibiting the free exercise thereof (religion).
    The early documents show that our first four presidents supported christianty. The first two Presidents of the United States were patrons of religion — Washington was an Episcopal vestryman and Adams described himself as “a church going animal.” Both offered strong rhetorical support for religion. In his Farewell Address (September 1796) Washington called religion, as the source of morality, “a necessary spring of popular government,” while Adams claimed that statesmen “may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand.”
    Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, the third and fourth presidents, are generally considered less hospitable to religion than their predecessors, but evidence shows that, while in office, both offered religion powerful symbolic support. During his two administrations (1801-1809), Jefferson was a “most regular attendant” at church services in the House of Representatives at which, surviving records show, evangelical Christianity was forcefully preached. Madison followed Jefferson’s example, although unlike Jefferson, who road on horseback to church in the Capitol, Madison came in a coach and four. Jefferson permitted church services to be conducted by various denominations in government buildings, such as the Treasury and the War Department. During his administration, the Gospel was also preached in the Supreme Court chambers. It is, in fact, accurate to say that on Sundays in Washington during the Jefferson and Madison administrations the state became the church.
    Actually? Christians have just as much right as any other adherent of any other religion. And while I’m sure you deride them non stop every chance you get, the ACLU fights just as hard for Christians as for any other group. As it should be. What you apparently want is more rights than adherents of any other religion. Tough. You can’t have it.
    To the framers of the Constitution, the idea of having a government not based on God would have been unthinkable. It is important to remember that when the Constitution was written, the only possible explanation for the existence of the Universe was special creation. Therefore, all of the delegates at the Philadelphia convention were creationists of one form or another. This is the reason the framers did not create a “secular” state in the modern sense of the term. Indeed, the concept of “secularism” as it is used today didn’t even exist in 1787.
    Our Founding Fathers were not ashamed to embrace the Ten Commandments in legal and public arenas. In fact, they thought the Ten Commandments an indispensable part of sound policy and good government. As you walk up the steps to the building which houses the U.S Supreme Court you can see near the top of the building a row of the world’s law givers and each one is facing one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view. it is Moses and he is holding the Ten Commandments! As you enter the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge oak doors have the Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion of each door. As you sit inside the courtroom, you can see the wall,
    right above where the Supreme Court judges sit, a display of the Ten Commandments! There are Bible verses etched in stone all over the Federal Buildings and Monuments in Washington , D.C. James Madison, the fourth president, known as ‘The Father of Our Constitution’ made the following statement:
    ‘We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.’ Patrick Henry, that patriot and Founding Father of our country said: ‘It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ’.
    Every session of Congress begins with a prayer by a paid preacher, whose salary has been paid by the taxpayer since 1777. Fifty-two of the 55 founders of the Constitution were members of the established orthodox churches in the colonies. Thomas Jefferson worried that the Courts would overstep their authority and instead of interpreting the law would begin making law. an oligarchy. The very first Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, said: ‘Americans should select and prefer Christians as their rulers.’
    You have some very large men who were the founders of this country that disagree with you.
    You have me wrong! I respect other religions. I work with Muslims and have the utmost respect for their religion and they respect Christians. Except for extremeist on both sides. You may or may not know that Lebanon law states that they must elect a Christian president. They do not have a problem being under a Christian government. I don’t know any more about their laws than that. Your link to the ACLU surprised me. I guess I only knew of a few exsamples of the ACLU involvement.
    While you’re at it, look up “tyranny of the majority.” The majority wanted to keep women from voting. The majority wanted to keep black children from attending white schools. The majority wanted to refuse interracial marriage. The majority wanted to refuse to allow immigrants to serve in the military. Our civil rights are in place to protect the individual from the tyranny of the majority. Since when did we become a nation of sheep, that we HAVE to go along with the majority? Our country was founded on individualism.
    Over two hundred years ago slavery was a fact of life, there were Christians who did own slaves but it was acceptable just as it was in Europe, Asia and Austrailia. But wrong is wrong and many Christians took up the fight against slavery. Many churches became part of the underground railroad to allow safe passage to freedom. And many Christians gave their lives for in fight for slaves fredom. Both sexism and racism are sadly a part of American culture as they are, often to a much greater degree, in other cultures around the world. The dominant groups of any culture do not give up their privileged position easily. Christians have always seen a primary responsibility of the Christian life to defend human rights.
    What you fail to realise is that the freedoms you enjoy today are due to Christians fighting on the side of the underdog in the past. Please do not associate religion with true Christianity. There is a difference

  3. I included three statements by Leftcoastlibrul in with my comment but after posting my comment the format for the statements were not proerly posted.

  4. leftcoastlibrul

    1. Your comments were posted word for word. I didn’t “misrepresent” a syllable.

    2. “I am not an advocate of having to say a prayer over the speaker system, I am an advocate for having a few moments of silence where people can pray as they desire or not to pray. You don’t have a problem of thrusting your religious world view Atheism upon the rest of us.”

    Do you not see the irony inherent in this statement? A “moment of silence to pray as they desire”….why is it necessary? Why do you NEED that moment? Why can’t you pray without it? Does everyone need to stop what they’re doing so YOU can have that moment? And if so…how is that not “thrusting your religious world view” on everyone else? Or is it only wrong when atheists do it?

    Our Founding Fathers were not ashamed to embrace the Ten Commandments in legal and public arenas. In fact, they thought the Ten Commandments an indispensable part of sound policy and good government. As you walk up the steps to the building which houses the U.S Supreme Court you can see near the top of the building a row of the world’s law givers and each one is facing one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view. it is Moses and he is holding the Ten Commandments!”

    You’re relying too much on internet glurge. First of all, the first amendments (our Civil Liberties) were NOT based on the ten commandments. Cite.

    Q: Is the United States Constitution based on the Ten Commandments?

    Jefferson argued at length and at various times in his long life that our American laws derive from English common law and that common law in turn owed nothing to Christianity or to the Ten Commandments. He explained:

    ” . . . we know that the common law is that system of law which was introduced by the Saxons on their settlement in England, and altered from time to time by proper legislative authority from that time to the date of the Magna Charta [1215 CE], which terminates the period of the common law…and commences that of the statute law…. This settlement took place about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was not introduced till the seventh century…. Here, then, was a space of about two hundred years, during which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it…. If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law. ..” (Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814. From Andrew A. Lipscomb, ed., The Writings of Thomas Jefferson , Vol. XIV, Washington, DC: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1903, pp. 85-97.)

    Second: It’s in dispute as to whether that figure is Moses, not to mention; THEY’RE NOT ALL LOOKING AT HIM! There are three central figures, and they’re all facing forward. CITE.

    As you sit inside the courtroom, you can see the wall right above where the Supreme Court judges sit a display of the Ten Commandments!

    * The wall “right above where the Supreme Court judges sit” is the east wall, on which is displayed a frieze designed by sculptor Adolph A. Weinman. The frieze features two male figures who represent the Majesty of Law and the Power of Government, flanked on the left side by a group of figures representing Wisdom, and on the right side by a group of figures representing Justice:

    Frieze

    In a letter on file in the archives of the Supreme Court, Adolph Weinman, the designer of this frieze, states that the tablet visible between the two central male figures, engraved with the Roman numerals I through X, represents not the Ten Commandments but the first “ten amendments to the Constitution known as the ‘Bill of Rights.'”
    2

    * The friezes which adorn the north and south walls of the courtroom in the Supreme Court building (also designed by Adolph Weinman) depict a procession of 18 great lawgivers: Menes, Hammurabi, Moses, Solomon, Lycurgus, Solon, Draco, Confucius and Octavian (south wall); Justinian, Mohammed, Charlemagne, King John, Louis IX, Hugo Grotius, Sir William Blackstone, John Marshall and Napoleon (north wall).

    “What you fail to realise is that the freedoms you enjoy today are due to Christians fighting on the side of the underdog in the past. Please do not associate religion with true Christianity. There is a difference.”

    And what you fail to realize is I don’t care what “Christians” do; I care what people do. I don’t categorize people into Christian, Muslim, Taoist, Atheist. Until someone from any of those groups try to impose THEIR religious beliefs on me. Don’t you realize that you just put Christianity above every other religion and basically said all others are inferior? All religions are equal, and that’s the way it needs to stay. Making this a “Christian nation” is imposing that religious belief on me. We have a secular government. We have a largely Christian society. Why is that not enough for you? Why can’t you just live your life and let the rest of us do the same? You know. Like that guy you say you believe in told you to.

    Oh, and if you want to argue with me, do it honestly. Don’t just cut & paste some email. Find the facts and give me citations.

  5. 1. Your comments were posted word for word. I didn’t “misrepresent” a syllable.

    My comment above was not to indicate you “misrepent”. I was responding to a few of your statements (3) and where your comments appear as if I wrote it all. I was only alluding to the format I used to indicate where I was citing your comments which did not convert through to the post.

  6. In the link provided please find photos of several federal buildings and figures, a letter from the National Archives indicating the images are indeed the 10 commandments. Also the first Seal of the United States, designed by Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson by a Resolution of Congress, shows Moses, stretching his hand over the Red Sea, causing it to overwhelm Pharaoh. Above is the pillar of fire and the cloud, expressive of Divine presence and command. Motto: Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.
    Link to Supreme Court Frieze

    Christianity was very relevent to our forefathers and and in the makeup of our country. America is a free country and you are free to worship God or not.

    Just because something is outside our understanding does not mean it does not exist. I have never seen a blackhole. I could deny they exist. I can only relay on the teachings and findings of the scientist who say they are real and do exist. Infact they would exist whether I believe in blackholes or I don’t believe in blackholes.
    Be blessed.

  7. leftcoastlibrul

    Please check the citation in my previous post. That is NOT the ten commandments. The artist himself says it is not the ten commandments, but our first ten amendments to the Constitution. I will repost the exact quote:

    “In a letter on file in the archives of the Supreme Court, Adolph Weinman, the designer of this frieze, states that the tablet visible between the two central male figures, engraved with the Roman numerals I through X, represents not the Ten Commandments but the first “ten amendments to the Constitution known as the ‘Bill of Rights.’”

    Scientific evidence for black holes.

    None of which refutes the facts of my post. Namely: Christians have just as many rights as adherents of any other religion. Regardless of what they may think, they do not deserve MORE rights than any other citizen.

  8. Snopes has it wrong!
    The typeface is not consistant through out the letter. Appears to be altered.

    Expose’ on U.S. Supreme Court curators’ unsigned October 31, 1932 letter and descriptive sheet on Courtroom Friezes

    1. The typewriter text size is different from the numerous official letters by Weinman (on his letterhead and/or typed name/signature).

    2. The inserted corrections are not in his handwriting.

    3. There is a discrepancy between “Truth with mirror and rose” and “Truth with mirror and lilly” – each contradicting the other. “Lily” is misspelled.

    4. “Innocense” is misspelled twice. Weiman’s original letters and descriptive signed sheets contain no misspellings.

    5. There is a discrepancy between “Power of Good” and “Power of Evil” in the October 31, 1932 letter; and “Powers of Good” and “Powers of Evil” in the descriptive sheet.

    6. In “Symbolism in Supreme Court Frieze” – “Frieze” in the title, should be “Friezes” as there are four.

    7. “Bill of Right” with the blazing sun, symbol of “Right” and “Protector of Right” male figure leaning on shield bearing the symbol of “Right” – the blazing sun; should be “Bill of Rights” and the male figure bearing a shield is “Security” in
    original.

    8. The word “RIGHT” – l. straight, direct, rule; 2. righteous, upright, being in accordance with what is just, good or proper (conduct); 3. conforming to facts or truth; 4. suitable, appropriate; 5. genuine, real; 6. preferable; 7. acting or judging in accordance with truth or fact, etc.
    “RIGHTS” (as in Bill of Rights”) – justification; vindication; to do justice to; redress the injuries of; avenge; to adjust or restore to the proper state or condition.

    9. There is a discrepancy between “faces” in letter and “fasces” in descriptive sheet.
    Weinman could not have misspelled this frequently-used symbolic word – the well-known symbol for ancient Roman unified government, recurring in his
    sculptures.

    10. The definition for the word “pylon” is:
    1) Gateway
    2) truncated pyramid or two of these, serving as a gateway to an
    Egyptian Temple.
    3) Any slender, towering structure, flanking an entranceway supporting
    telegraph wires, marking a course in an air race, etc.
    This definition, taken from Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary – Eleventh Edition, does not, in any way, match the definition for the tablet upon which the Ten Commandments are inscribed, between “The Majesty of the Law” and “The Power of Government.”

    link to Christian Heritage Minstries

    I wasn’t refuting the existence of black holes, I was merely making a point.

  9. Here is a copy of the original unaltered letter which is signed by Adolph Weinman.

    letter

  10. leftcoastlibrul

    Do you have an unbiased citation? IOW, one that’s considered trustworthy regardless of which side of the political/social spectrum on which you happen to fall? The Supreme Court itself would be a good citation, or the Library of Congress, or the Smithsonian.

    Not that I think anyone is lying, but when there is a very compelling reason for people to alter a document in order to further their own means…it begs more than passing askance.

    In regard to your enumerated objections: You are aware that words were spelled differently then than they are now, correct?

    A link can be added like this: shift+arrow key (next to the M) a href=” then the website here, then ” shift+arrow key (next to the ?) then your text, then shift+arrow key (next to the M) /a shift+arrow key (next to the ?) without the spaces between, except for the first a href=” so that it looks like this: US Gov’t cite, in which it is found that the friezes really are what I said they were.

    It speaks rather loudly that someone who supports our government so vehemently refuses to accept a reliable citation from that government….

  11. Here it is again without having to search for the original unaltered letter which is signed by Adolph Weinman.

    http://www.christianheritagemins.org/articles/Straus_Mem.htm#July25

  12. The original letter which is signed by Adolph Weinman with a signed dated response letters from Roger Straus give credit and athenticity to the letter.

  13. leftcoastlibrul

    I find that citation somewhat difficult to accept, considering the friezes were hung in 1933, 7 years prior to the date of that letter. The building itself was completed in 1935.

    Your citation is biased, and the society that altered it has a specific reason for doing so.

    Oh, and I fixed your links.

    To reiterate: None of this changes the fact that

    1 There is a separation of church and state;
    2 The Dept. of Education is a part of the US Federal Government;
    3 Any school official calling for a prayer or a moment of silence in order to pray is doing so illegally, and
    4 You can pray as much as you want, wherever you want, so long as doing so does not infringe on the rights of others. If it’s private property, that’s a little different; you’ll need to get the owners’ permission.

    Stop moving the goal posts. You have just as many rights as you always have. You don’t get more than anyone else, nor should you.

  14. Thanks for fixing the links. Now my comments look as professional as yours.
    Be Blessed

  15. The attempt by atheists to shove their god down everyone’s throats amounts to advocating a state religion. A state religion is against the law and a violation of the first amendment.

  16. leftcoastlibrul

    I think you’re contradicting yourself, here. You say our founding fathers were very invested in their ties with god (even though a great many of them [including the one that penned the Declaration of Independence] were Deists), and yet you say they violated the first amendment by enforcing it? A state religion violates the first amendment. Religion is not free speech. It’s religion, and it’s covered separately under the first amendment. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t make YOUR interpretation correct.

    The founding fathers put that amendment in. Not atheists. And it isn’t just atheists asking to have it enforced. I repeat: if any other religion but Christianity were made our State Religion, you’d be having a cow and screaming first amendment all the way to the Supreme Court. This isn’t about your rights being stepped on, it’s about you wanting to push an agenda. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge “The government shall make no laws regarding the establishment of religion” is entirely the issue at hand. According to the wiki cite, it means:

    “The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by the Congress or the preference of one religion over another, or religion over non-religion. Originally, the First Amendment only applied to the federal government. Subsequently, under the incorporation doctrine, certain selected provisions were applied to states.”

    Here is the Incorporation Clause.

  17. “I think you’re contradicting yourself, here…it’s about you wanting to push an agenda.” ~lcl
    And now we have your interpretation. Who are the ones pushing your agenda. Freedom of religion and free speech are one amendment not two, You cannot have your laws prohibiting religion or free speech.Nobody is forcing you to believe in God. God never forces himself on anybody but he welcomes all who will seek him.

  18. leftcoastlibrul

    Yes, it’s one amendment. With three. Separate. Clauses. Free speech. Free Religion. Free press. Religious freedom and freedom of speech are two different things. You need to read that cite.

    Religion isn’t faith. While no one can force me to believe in anything, a state religion can force others to only worship via one religion.

    Again, I think it’s important to note that not everyone who wants to maintain the First Amendment is an atheist. There are plenty of Christians and people of other religions who support religious freedom as well.

  19. The Declaration of Independence
    …We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…

    Leave out the Declaration, as many do, and the Constitution becomes subject to the personal whims of revisionist judges, relativist intellectuals, cultural engineers, and others who reject the very premises of our nation’s founding.

    All human beings are created equal and endowed by God with unalienable rights;

    The purpose of government is to secure these rights; and

    No government is just or legitimate if it systematically violates these rights.

  20. leftcoastlibrul

    So, are you now admitting that gays, as citizens should have the same rights, since ALL are equal under the law?

    Also, you still haven’t proven that your rights have been violated, other than to confuse freedom of speech with freedom of religion. IF they were the same thing, they wouldn’t require two separate clauses. I find it interesting that you think judges who disagree with you are “activist,” yet no jurist would ever interpret the Constitution in the manner you have. Don’t you think there’s a reason for that?

  21. The Constitution should be interpreted and applied as written — not as distorted by dictatorial courts or self-serving special interests. But to ensure true understanding of the intent of the Founders: interpreting the Constitution accurately requires the additional perspective of the Declaration of Independence — the “self-evident” truths of which the Constitution was intended to frame into law. Since the original intent of the Constitution was to ensure through law what the Declaration expressed in principle, the Declaration should be held up as the ultimate interpretive framework for studying and implementing our revered Constitution.

  22. leftcoastlibrul

    No. The Declaration of Independence was our divorce decree from England; nothing more, nothing less. It holds no sway over our legal proceedings.

    Incidentally; I wrote a post about “activist judges” here.

  23. ‘If we ever forget that we’re one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.’

  24. leftcoastlibrul

    I love that I continually have to point out a rather obvious fact to Republicans regarding Ronnie Ray Guns: He was an ACTOR. Granted, president was the best acting he ever did….but he was still an actor.

  25. Pingback: Recent Links Tagged With "rights" - JabberTags

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s