Ovi Magazine : The Pope should not be replaced by Eleana Winter-Irving

Newsletter

Contact

Murray Hunter: Opportunity, Strategy and Entrepreneurship

International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement

BBC News : -

iBite : -

The Pope should not be replaced
by Eleana Winter-Irving
2013-02-25 09:08:52

Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author

The Pope should not be replaced. The Catholic Church should disband, and all Cardinals and Bishops should hang their heads in shame.

The Pope is a nobody in spiritual terms. He is an ordinary person, living an extraordinary life that he does not deserve.

If Pope Benedict has any spiritual integrity, he will resume an ordinary life on a very limited pension. His grandeur is superficial and his status is superfluous. His perceived and secret values are not only redundant, but ignorant. Ignorant of any spiritual value.

The Pope (any) live a secret life and ordinary folk would recoil in horror if they only knew the truth. Why do you think the Pope’s valet stole the documents that are so incriminating? And why do you think he was incarcerated within the Vatican? He could see how wrong things were at the top and all the way down.

The paedophile cover-ups are probably the tip of the iceberg. Time will reveal all we hope.

For the latest news on the situation please go to:

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/02/22/did-the-pope-resign-due-to-backmail-new-allegations-say-yes/

Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author


Comments(24)
Get it off your chest
Name:
Comment:
(comments policy)

Murray Hunter	2013-02-25 10:08:44
Dear Eleana, Please watch this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3BJ23H5yBQ


Eleana Winter-Irving	2013-02-25 12:24:26
For those who couldn't be bothered clicking on the link provided. By Nathaniel Downes Ever since he announced his resignation, the field has been abuzz with questions, asking why. The Holy Father is a position for life, with the last resignation being that of Pope Gregory XII in 1415. Information had already come out that Pope Benedict sought immunity before resignation, and will be under protection after his resignation. But this leaves us with more questions. A lengthy investigation by the Italian newspaper “La Repubblica” has discovered that the origin of the resignation has little to do with health, but instead to do with another word, “influentiam,” Latin for Blackmail. They tie the resignation to the investigation into leaked documents, a scandal nicknamed “Vatileaks” in the popular media. The investigation into these leaked documents, detailing sex, corruption, bribery and scandal released in the book Sua Santità. Le carte segrete di Benedetto XVI, revealed that not only were the accusations true, but that there was a blackmailing ring behind it all, circling even at the highest levels of the Catholic Church. When the report was delivered, it is reported that Pope Benedict decided that day to resign, a symbolic falling on the sword. He further declared that once resigned, this report, 300 pages, will be released directly to the public on March 1st, revealing every dirty secret, every lie, every blackmail to the world. La Repubblica further continues, that the blackmailing ring involved homosexual members of the clergy. This is tied directly to the procurement of male prostitutes for members of the Papal staff. The new information coming out is bringing a lot of the dysfunction, the conflicting reports of the Catholic Church, and most of all the cover-ups. From kidnapped girls to child abuse, the Catholic Church has been riddled with scandals for decades. And no matter how much the public was assured it was not happening, the cover ups continued. A blackmail ring, however, would explain the entire situation. Through the use of bribes, coercion, and blackmail, even the Pope’s own instructions could be ignored, and the corruption would continue. The world of the Vatican is insulated, isolated, and now finds itself alone. The Catholic Church stands for something greater than mere human frailty, but the alleged corruption shakes the entirety to its core. Ultimately, the church is the responsibility of one man, born Joseph Aloisius Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI. If he died in office, the secrets would stay buried, and the corruption would continue. If revealed while he was in office, his credibility would be lost, the accused could scatter, and nobody would pay the ultimate penalty but for him. To make it complete, before he became Pope, Joseph Ratzinger was prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which handled all of the abuse cases before he became the head of the Catholic Church, so he can accept the full blame. But he would not do so without ensuring that those who did abuse their positions would pay for it as well. By resigning, and ordering the documents release before a replacement is chosen, he has chosen the most difficult path. Without a Pope, there is nobody to hide behind, nothing to shield them from the light of truth. But more importantly, it gives the church the opportunity to eliminate corruption from within. Pope Benedict began reforms aimed at rooting out corruption, but as the head of his church, he knew his efforts could only go so far. The ultimate way in which to eliminate blackmail is to expose the dirt which the blackmailer has on you. Decades of corruption through the church will need to be drug out into the light of day, and the embarrassment will haunt the retired pontiff for the rest of his days. But he will carry it alone, in seclusion, allowing his flock, those he pledged to protect, and to guide, to be protected from the worst of it. Heads will roll, arrests will happen, the image of the infallible Holy See will be shattered, but the Catholic Church will survive, and endure. And, just possibly, it can reconnect itself to the world which continues to move forward to a bright future. If the gamble of Pope Benedict works, if his action allows the elimination of the dirty secrets which have become a rot at the core of the Catholic Church, then perhaps history will look upon him kindly. Otherwise, if his gambit fails, and the church is consumed by its own corruption, then he will forever be remembered as the pope who abandoned his flock just before the end, after failing to protect them from the wolves among the sheep..


Thanos	2013-02-25 13:01:19
Here there are too many issues. But let me put some thoughts that perhaps sound very naïve since I’m a total “outsider” to the subject. First of all it is true that the Catholic Church has to deal with three major issues immediately with no more time to postpone decision. First the economic and sexual scandals. They don’t even make headlines anymore if they don’t include an official higher of bishop. This is not only happening in the catholic churches but in all churches including Orthodox and Protestants. Actually and sadly the last two decades the church is connected with sex, paedophile and economic scandals and this has not only to do with the expansion of information but also to do with victims found easier to admit what happened. Again, it has not only to do with crimes happened in the church world, the women and men who admit rape in general compared to last century or to fifty years ago has risen dramatically not because it happens more often but because it is easier and more accepted to admit it. Perhaps the answers are in the necessary separation between the faith and the people who serve the faith and they are a result of a multi-selective society. But that doesn’t mean that in the conscious of the people the two things are not connected.


Thanos	2013-02-25 13:01:42
Second, same sex marriage and gay priests. The gay movement from an outcast and underground society, punished with imprisonment even in late 1970s has become an acceptable and active part of the contemporary society – and rightly so – and it is natural to ask their right to participate and exercise their faith as well. Even practice it in both sides of the hill. And that while more and more Catholic priests admit their homosexuality which puts the church as an institution literally in the corner. Again this is a common problem among all churches. And third is the case of women priests, again a common problem to all churches. And of course in this case as in the second case theologians, theoreticians and the clerics have answers that march the faith but they contradict the society and the reality that there is a strong opposition inside the church like the latest events in the Anglican church shown.


Thanos	2013-02-25 13:02:10
Of course there are many more issues that contradict contemporary society and reality, like the issue of sex-protection and condoms that is blamed for genocide in Africa, but I think these three are the major problems. And now comes the issue of the resignation. In his resignation message the Pope himself admitted too old to deal with the contemporary problems and in the light of the new scandals and the weight of the old it is obvious that the catholic church needs a leadership that will either take a stand or change but the one who will lead the situation must be strong to face the reactions. And perhaps Benedict XVI didn’t feel strong enough for this task including his health’s situation as it has been leaked from the Vatican. But here and perhaps I’m naïve but the pope and his “holy role” has been even the reason for the schism between the churches and conflicts that last for centuries. He supposes to be the representative of god on earth and mediator between god and humanity how it happens to have failed in his role in most critical point? And perhaps I’m too naïve but equally naïve was the latest leak from the Vatican that god told Benedict to resign. Actually his resignation under the circumstances proves his human vulnerability and should raise again questions among the scholars about the schism of the churches.


Emanuel Paparella	2013-02-25 13:21:47
The above vituperations against the Catholic Church in general and the present Pope in particular come as no great surprise. They have in fact been around since the times of the Gnostic gospels in the third century AD predicting the imminent demise of the Church. Since then, they have predictably and periodically recurred all the way to our times, as G.K. Chesterton points out in just about all his book, especially The Everlasting Man. It is de rigoeur in the West since the time of "enlightened" Voltaire, for the Western intelligentsia which considers itself “enlightened” like Voltaire to resurrect from time to time, especially in times of crisis within the Catholic Church the old grudge with accompanying predictions of the imminent end of an allegedly moribund gothic Church whose demise is predicted and ardently wished for. In the coming weeks, as a new Pope is elected, quite predictably, we will be spectator to the politically correct circus of piling on biased and hateful vituperations upon vituperations and the present Pope, while he is still alive, will be alternatively placed by the “experts” and pundits in Church history whose historical sight does not go beyond their nose, in one or other realm of Dante’s Divine Comedy resurrecting the ancient diatribe between Dante and Petrarch about Celestine V resignation in the 13th century, as pointed out in an article just contributed to Ovi. Actually there is another article which the curious reader may wish to revisit and may prove useful to put the diatribe in perspective. It was written some four years ago for Ovi and is titled “Anti-Catholicism: The Last Acceptable Bias?.” It can be retrieved at the following link: http://www.ovimagazine.com/art/4476


Emanuel Paparella	2013-02-25 14:53:55
Thanos, you make some intriguing points on the matter. They are worth pursuing as a sincere dialogue that they are intended for. I suppose that if Dante were living today he would not be so foolish as to predict the imminent demise of the Church although he may go along with the idea, coming from the Australian quarters of the magazine and other quarters, of hanging one’s head in shame and the urgent need for reform and cleaning up the mess… I think that while refraining from calling him a saint (as Petrarch did with St. Celestine the V) he would first wait for the election of the new Pope and see how the present Pope behaves afterwards as a mere cardinal of the Church vis a vis the new Pope and whether or not the new Pope (like Boniface VIII after Celestine V) sends him in ostracizes him to some monastery. Only thereafter he would determine where to place Benedict XVI: in the antechamber to Hell (with the St. Celestine V, the resigning Pope of the XIII century) or in the deepest part of Hell with Boniface VII (the successor to Celestine V) or perhaps in heaven with his beloved Beatrice and Thomas Aquinas as a saint of the Church. In short, Dante would have to assess whether or not this pope’s resignation was that of a facilitator to a new pope out to reform and rejuvenate the Church (and it has happened before to the deep consternation of those who have predicted her demise) or that of an enabler leading to a pope that rather than clean up the mess made things worst. Time will tell. After all this is an institution that has been around for 2000 years or so to the disappointment of those who ardently wish its demise and would like to throw all religions out the window... Time has always told about the Church.


Emanuel Paparella	2013-02-25 15:54:41
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3BJ23H5yBQ If we needed an example of the superficial caricature of religion here is one as suggested in the very first comment above by Professor Murray Hunter and revealing perhaps the true agenda behind the article as a whole. Mr. Vikram Gandhi, despite his name, does not come from India where religion is taken a bit more seriously. No, he comes from New Jersey, a fact he is eager to inform us of right at the beginning of his diatribe against religion, to make sure that we understand that we are dealing with a modern "enlightened" rational man who has studied logical positivism and is consequently proceeding with the trivializing religion as some kind of self-deception and ignoramuses' superstition. He informs us that in his college years he has dutifully read William James’ Varieties of Religious Experience; but it appears that he never bothered to read William James’ Will to Believe, or G.K. Chesterton’s The Everlasting Man and if he did he understood precious little of what he read or, confronted with a phenomenon which has been within civilization since its origins, he would not have reduced it to a mere caricature. I am afraid there is very little “enlightenment” in this blatant bias toward religion as such which at times even uses religion for commercial economic or political purposes, as the “opium of the people” to better reduce them to consuming automatons for the global entrepreneurial market.


Eleana Winter-Irving	2013-02-25 16:27:45
A human being only needs one thing to guide them through life and that is their conscience. It was given to us for this purpose. It supersedes religions and cults. If a person does not listen to their conscience, they won't listen to any religious figure. Those that heed religious figures are shallow thinkers and have no idea of the importance of their conscience.


Emanuel Paparella	2013-02-25 18:15:42
Indeed, Ms. Winter, any genuine understanding of what religion is all about would have in principle to agree with the above statement of yours regarding freedom of conscience as integral part of any authentic religion or even the good old classical paganism of an Aristotle, and absent it, religion becomes nothing else but a pernicious cult or superstition or a self-deception of sort. But then again, it was a recent Pope (Pope Paul VI, to be exact) who said in one of his encyclicals that the Church within Christianity is a spiritual community of consciences and the body of Christ, not the exterior buildings and the bureaucratic organization called the Vatican, that is to say organized religion. And it was Jung who said that throw religion out the window and it will come back as a cult or an ideology since the human being is religious by nature and needs to worship something whether it is the living God or an idol of sort. Granted that one cannot expect you to have read anything by any Pope at any time and be familiar with a millenarian complex history of religions in general and Catholicism in particular (albeit without that reading precious little will be understood about Europe as Christopher Dawson taught us in his The Making of Europe) but at a minimum, within a rational discourse on the subject, can one at least expect a more nuanced and knowledgeable view of the nature and the assumptions related to religion before the insults and the slanderous and biased ad hoc accusations begin to rain down tick and fast?


Emanuel Paparella	2013-02-25 18:20:00
P.S. It also occurs to me that the Humian positing of a conscience with which the human being is endowed loses sight of the fact that, as rare as it might be, there are among us sociopaths who do not seem to have a conscience at all, those who would use the ring of Giges in devious ways, had they come in possession of it. Hume ought to have reflected a bit more deeply on that Platonic conundrum.


Emanuel Paparella	2013-02-25 18:51:17
P.S. S. I have always wondered about those who are proud to have a shotgun or even an assault weapon in their home. Is it only to protect themselves from wild predatory animals or also because they suspect that not all humans are born with a conscience as decent human beings? Could St. Augustine rather than Rousseau have had it on target with his concept of original sin and a propensity toward evil? Which of course does not mean that human nature is bad per se.


Eleana Winter-Irving	2013-02-26 15:35:11
Emanuel, I do own a gun and I do have a gun license. I do not have it for protection of my person though. It is locked away in a metal trunk with a triple lock. I have rabbits in my garden and orchard. I only shoot rabbits to eat. I have shot at foxes that ate my chickens. I feel I have a right to protect my property. I own 245 acres and I only use 5 acres. The rest I have donated to wildlife. It is theirs to do what they like with. However I plant, sow, organically fertilise, prune and generally nurture my 5 acres. I do not appreciate uninvited pests who destroy all my hard work. I never shot a fox, only used to frighten them away, but I eat the rabbits I shoot. So you have read that incorrectly, as you have everything else I have written. Reading Voltaire, Aristotle, Christopher Dawson, Dante or Pierre Teilhard de Chardin does not mean that you are a deep thinker. It merely means that you are a reader of deep thinker’s thoughts. P.S. I am Eleana Winter-Irving Pioneering family of Australia. Look it up.


Eleana	2013-02-26 16:21:11
Thanos, all the points you have made are valid except for one. I do not believe the Pope has any serious health issues. The Catholic Church and in fact any religion hold themselves in very high esteem. They laud it over their parishioners telling them what to do, how to live their lives and what is a sin and what is not. However it is only the Catholic Church that has the loop hole of confession to allow every priest, Bishop, Cardinal and even Pope to commit sins and then be absolved of them through the power beholden to the absolver; who incidentally has no powers at all. Is an ordinary man who believes he can commit the very sins he vehemently denounces from the pulpit and also believes his god will forgive him, even if he commits a crime. This is reprehensible. Yet so called intelligent peoples of this planet believe the Catholic Church is above everything and everyone and most importantly above the LAW. Emanuel is right to expect vituperations under these circumstances. It appears that the good professor condones paedophilia, molestation of children and buggery of altar boy and the subsequent suicide of many victims. He sees no shame in what these vile men have done. He condones rape of both boys and girls. He pontificates the merits of religion and believes I am ignorant of them. That is so. Religion does not have merit if you have a conscience; and if you do not have a conscience, such as serial killers, serial rapists, serial tortures etc., then these persons are without religion also. They are no more absolved of their sins than the priests, Cardinals or Bishops are. Pray tell me what you think is in the mind of a priest at the time he is raping an altar boy. Does he think his god is watching and goading him on? And does he hear his god saying, “good man, go ahead and ruin this boy’s life. I give you permission. Don’t worry if many years later he kills himself. It’s ok, it’s not your fault, I made you this way.” I don’t care how many millennia people have wished the demise of the Catholic Church. I’m not the slightest bit interested in the past. I am interested in the present and the future. Emanuel is always dwelling in the past, digging up long dead writers and spouting what they have said. At least I am original.


Eleana	2013-02-26 16:25:20
Murray, I watched it. It was funny and sad. To think how easily some are sucked in to fraud and falsehood. They must feel so foolish once they found out. Maybe they will be less gullible next time.


Emanuel Paparella	2013-02-26 17:03:01
Ms. Eleana Winter-Irving, you may call it disingenuous if you wish, but nowhere is your name or your domestic habits even mentioned when referring generally to people who have shotguns for their own protection. I tip my hat to your family’s glorious pioneering history assuming you wish to distinguish it from merre immigrant families and also assuming that they did not come to Australia to civilize the natives under the so called "white man’s burden"; man understood in the general mode of course... But the point about possession of shotguns was a larger one and concerned the question as to what extent we are all born innocent and then society corrupts us, and does the sociopath have a conscience initially or is there a propensity toward evil at work? You opt to simply ignore that point. I also do not recall ever having declared myself “a deep thinker” or wishing to be thought as one by the general public or the Ovi readership for that matter, whatever that term may mean; that is something that you have set up ad hoc as a straw man to be then duly brought down as sophistic tactics indeed would dictate…I would not deny however that as a philosophy professor I have read a book or two or I would be an incompetent one, and that moreove continue to consider knowledge, gnostic or otherwise (when not abused) as preferable to ignorance on any issue. Had Ovi not the same philosophy I would frankly not have been contributing to it on a regular basis for the last five years or so and would have long abandoned it.


Emanuel Paparella	2013-02-26 22:55:38
“It appears that the good professor condones paedophilia, molestation of children and buggery of altar boy and the subsequent suicide of many victims. He sees no shame in what these vile men have done. He condones rape of both boys and girls…” Wow! The above egregious comments are surprising but quite predictable at the same time. In fact, we have seen them before even in Ovi’s pages. Invariably and predictably, when one is unwilling or unable to deal objectively and serenely with the issue at hand without confusing mere opinions to which one is entitled with the empirical facts which one cannot invent without incurring in cunning and dishonesty, one resorts to ad hominem argumentation and to guilt by association. Scandal sheets and tabloids sold at the supermarket usually exhibit the those reprehensible tactics which far from fomenting free speech ultimately condone gossip and slander. Were one to follow to its proper conclusion the logic of what is cavalierly expressed in the above quote, one would have to conclude that the one billion and a half Catholics around the world are either pedophiles, molesters of children, rapists, serial criminals and sociopaths, or at a minimum they condone such crimes. As I have expressed somewhere else, anti-Catholicism has become the last acceptable bias and to allow those ugly tactics to parade as free speech and to go unanswered is to become an enabler. I submit that If one refuses to subscribe to those tactics one would at a minimum have to admit that two wrongs never make a right and to become an enabler of those sophistic tactics is just as shameful as the actions falsely imputed by implication and association to more than a billion Catholics. For shame, indeed.


Eleana	2013-02-27 03:19:02
Regarding being first settlers from Scotland and England, the Irvings of Bonshaw (Bonshaw Castle, still standing to this day) were from Scotland on the male side, married a Miss Winter who was English. They sailed to Australia just after Hume, Henty and Hovel. Our family remained friends with the Henty family right up to this generation and I was friends with Edrina Henty for years, up until I came up here where I now live. Huge tracts of land were claimed and stations set up, the largest being Yarralumla in Queensland. I do NOT condone the seizing of land without payment or permission and not something that I would do; however all Aborigines were welcome to live where they always lived and not interfered with. No member of my family were ever killed by Aborigines and nor did my family ever kill any. They did employ them and their conditions were good. Disrespect was never an issue. There are books that have been written about those early days where owner and native stockmen went out for days on end rounding up cattle, where they sat around the camp fire at night telling stories and sleeping side by side in their duffle bags. I know many Aboriginal people who are well educated and funny and we have a great time together. I am a bit of a snob and I don’t make friends with the lower class who behave anti-socially, but I am not racist or a bigot. I love people to be different from myself. Emanuel, when I write disparagingly about religion, as you say, I have a right to an opinion, but I am not attacking you. When you comment on any article I write, it seems that you set out to attack me personally. Don’t take what I say so personally and please reread what I have written before you comment, as you usually miss the point altogether. As you did when you say “Were one to follow to its proper conclusion the logic of what is cavalierly expressed in the above quote, one would have to conclude that the one billion and a half Catholics around the world are either pedophiles, molesters of children, rapists, serial criminals and sociopaths, or at a minimum they condone such crimes.” I feel that only you and your ilk would think that was what I was implying. What I did imply was that people without a conscience rarely hold to any Christian religion at all. I do not include Islam and Sharia Law here you will notice. By putting the Catholic Church on a pedestal in view of all that is going on at the Vatican is somewhat mystifying to those who understand that any religion is redundant to those who use their conscience to guide them through life. By putting the Catholic Church on a pedestal in your writings and reacting with hostility to any shock and horror at what priests, Cardinals and Bishops do behind closed doors in the name of religion, is something of a conundrum, something that only you can explain. What surprises me is that you evidently expect the rest of society to accept the goings on at the Vatican and elsewhere as normal and above reproach. I don’t care if a paedophile or child molester is a priest or other, meaning a lay person; that person is eligible to punitive action regardless of who he is. And if a priest buggerised your 8 year old son a hundred times and he took his life in suicide, how would you feel towards that priest? Or do you have sympathetic views towards these crimes because of some hidden guilt? Just asking, not accusing.


Eleana	2013-02-27 03:30:19
If Carl Jung was alive today and at his midlife, his views on some things may have changed. I am not an Atheist, but no Atheist that I know has ever considered joining a cult. The present Pope has already said that he is going to spend the remainder of his life in solitude and prayer. So that absolves the next Pope from banishing him to a monastery. He will be the same man whether he prays or not. His sins will remain even if he stops eating and prays his life away. His white robes won’t help in in his next incarnation, and if he has an inkling of karma he will be living the rest of his life in anguish and fear.


Emanuel Paparella	2013-02-27 07:20:00
P.S. As a footnote to my reply to Thanos’ points this may be worth considering: the latest seems to be that the new Pope will continue wearing white and will be called “Pope Emeritus,” which in effect will mean that we will have two popes in the Vatican, one looking over the other’s shoulder. Some may claim that the arrangement is a bit more democratic, but I for one am beginning to suspect that a Dante, confronted with that piece of news, not to speak of what the Italian newspapers have been alleging lately regarding his resignation, would have placed Benedict XVI together with Celestine V in the antechamber to Hell. It is becoming more intriguing by the hour.


Emanuel Paparella	2013-02-27 12:29:41
“And if a priest buggerised your 8 year old son a hundred times and he took his life in suicide, how would you feel towards that priest? Or do you have sympathetic views towards these crimes because of some hidden guilt? Just asking, not accusing.” In sophistic rhetorical terms the above disingenuous question is the equivalent of a journalist asking her/his interlocutor: “Sir, when was the last time you beat up and raped your wife? Just asking, not accusing.” Or perhaps asking: “Sir are you really a professor since your name does not seem to appear on the catalogue of the university you claim to be teaching at?" Or perhaps this: "Sir when was the last time you expressed an original idea of your own?" Most of us would concur that a good editor of a reputable newspaper would promptly fire a journalist who asked such ad hominem questions, for if one has to resort to such questions his argument cannot be very strong, but then again, given the brave new world we currently live in, perhaps that is an assumption that can no longer be held.


Eleana	2013-02-27 12:46:20
Emanuel, I have noted that you refrained from answering my question.


Emanuel Paparella	2013-02-27 15:26:40
Ms. Eleana Winter Irving, To the contrary it WAS answered but it seems that you missed it. In any case, for the record, given that you as well as your fellow-Australian Professor Hunter to whose defense you have come, have seen fit to impugn my integrity and professionalism with reprehensible innuendos which I predict will be disingenuously denied, let me answer more explicitly your impertinent innuendo: I do not condone the breaking of ethical norms or the law by anybody for any reason. They ought to be prosecuted to the full extent of both secular and canon law independent of their social status, whoever they are. I also resent and find your innuendos that I have engaged in and now I am defending those crimes irreprehensible and, again for the record, I do teach philosophy at a university (despite an accusation by the above mentioned fellow ex Australian that it was a lie, and never apologized for…) and have never been a defender and an advisor to any Pope nor do I intend to, as it has also been implied, even if only as a joke of sort. Indeed, if what you have just exhibited with those ad hominenm tactics is an example of militant feminism, I am afraid it does no honor to the authentic feminism which I happen to admire. Too bad!


Eleana	2013-02-28 14:13:10
Emanuel, you should laugh more, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha,hahahahahahaha, lol.