To one I love


There was a man who looked around and was with questions and without answers.  “What if this and what if that? How does this and how does that? What if this happened, would that happening follow?”  And the man set about trying to find the answers to his questions. And he named this “science”. And it was good.

There was another man who looked around with questions and without answers.  “Why do I think this, and why do I think that? How does that thought follow this thought? What would I think about this if I thought that about this?”  And the man set about trying to find the answers to his questions. And he named this “philosophy ”. And it was good.

And yet another man looked at how people behaved – and he called his Q&As “sociology” and it was also good.  And this kept happening. Different persons asked their own questions and named their Q&As something else.  And all these questions had one thing in common.  The question: “Why?”

And some also asked why about something else.  Why was it okay to find answers to “why do flies fly?” – that meant so many flies could not fly any more.  Why was it okay to ask “why does the body do this?” – that meant some bodies could not do that any more.  Why was it okay to “find evidence” for a question – without regard for life itself?   And they named that “ethics”.

—————————————————–

Dear tildeb, I see “mankind” asking questions to questions for which there are no answers right now.  Otherwise there would no questions and we would have all the answers.  I don’t have all the answers and I do ask questions.  Just as you do.  And I do see harm.  Just as you do.  But also not as you do.

I see “harm” done by one person to another.  I see “good” done by one person to another.  I see science do both.  I see religion do both.  Everything has a ying and a yang, a plus and a minus, a good and a bad, a right and a wrong.  Everything has duality.

But now add love.

Love that is kindness – and kindness that is love – and duality becomes irrelevant.  Duality becomes old school.  Duality becomes confrontational.  And duality ceases to be “wisdom and truth” above all others – it is just one more hammer that can either bash heads or not.  And that hammer will do one or the other – because it is a hammer of duality.

But now add love.  And duality becomes irrelevant – and with it the “hammer” of rightness and wrongness.

Because I love as a person.  I talk to you as a person.  And I have proven “stuff” to myself in my own living – just as you have in yours.  I have proven “God” to me – just as you have proven “science” to you.  And your duality means that because you are right – I must be wrong.

Duality.

Now add love (as you accuse me of so often) – and both of us can be right – and neither of us can be wrong.  Because what is important is “inequalities in love” – the “me me me” above “you you you”.  What becomes important is the consequence of duality.  And, for me, that is what connects in love: the consequences of duality.

Which is why I don’t need you to believe as I do.   Which is why I can agree with much of what you say.  Which is why I have no need to convince you.  No need to think the same – other than in (in)equality in love – seeing the consequences of duality that bring about (in)equality in love.

Because you and I both love.  Because no matter who is “right” and who is “wrong” – we both love.  Your passion for the consequences proves that to me.  Your telling me that I love too much because of the consequences proves that.  Your “duality” is more than the duality of “right and wrong” – your passion is for (in)equality in love – just as mine.

And that is why I love you.

.

Advertisements

67 thoughts on “To one I love

        • Ark, my enthusiasm for these conversations is waning – also for reasons noted on earlier occasions. I admire your ability to respond quickly, but the comments shared don’t seem to “stick”.

          • You are trying to marry two subjects that ultimately have to go their separate ways.

            It is because of this desperate need for acceptability ( respectability?) why you have organisations such as the Templeton Foundation who are prepared to spend millions and millions of dollars in one sad and pathetic failed attempt after another to try to find this elusive ”common-ground” you are chasing. This genuine marriage of faith and science. And more specifically, Christian faith and Science.
            I can be friends with you as one bloke to another. But we are not talking football or kids or gardening or photography or music or whatever else we might find common ground over.
            Yours’ is a faith-based blog and this is – or so it seems – the only/primary thrust of your writing.
            You wish to label your personal take as a form of love, yet buried just below the surface of your Christian belief ( as in several other faiths) is the spectre of separation from your god and even damnation for non- compliance.
            And what is strange is that you know this and yet persist in this apparent fools errand of touting soft hands Jesus s the central component, the Key if you prefer!

            Why not just be fully transparent and do away with all the poetic license you employ in your posts?

            But if you do not know quite where you stand then you really can’t get uptight when others get frustrated by your presentations.

            • “You are trying to marry two subjects that ultimately have to go their separate ways.”

              Assumption and belief – not very “scientific”.

              “You wish to label your personal take as a form of love, yet buried just below the surface of your Christian belief ( as in several other faiths) is the spectre of separation from your god and even damnation for non- compliance.”

              Ditto. Good science explores. You prefer to see exactly what you look for and ignore the rest.

              “But if you do not know quite where you stand then you really can’t get uptight when others get frustrated by your presentations.”

              Ditto again. Your premise is showing again. And that gets in the way of all else, Ark.

              My “getting uptight” is not because I have an indefensible position, not because I am not sure “where I stand”, or even because I have a “defensible” position you cannot see. It is none of that. It is not even getting uptight (and I am not sure where that conclusion comes from either).

              I am perfectly happy journeying as I do and meeting those who wish to walk awhile alongside. It amuses me (and then becomes tiresome) when another chooses to walk alongside for the simple purpose of telling me I should walk in a different direction, with a different crowd, with a different “something”. We are both journeying a similar journey. And the “science” you bring (to tell me my journey is in the wrong direction and for the wrong reasons – reasons which are harmful to others) – that science is as much a “belief” as my own. And good science would recognise that.

              Yet you seem to prefer to not see that at all. And that puts you in the same direction and destination as any fundamentalist with a “sacred text” in hand and stern admonitions for all those who disagree. It is the same bullying and the same guile.

              I love science and always have. But an inequality of love in its use …? Not so much.

            • Then please tell me at what point/s do religion/faith and science touch base?

              I am not telling you that you should walk in a different direction. I am merely pointing out how untenable your position is where it relates to the subjects of love,/soft hands Jesus/faith and science.

              Science is not a belief like yours because you believe in the supernatural and make believe.

              If you feel there is an inequality of love then why not look to your beloved god belief as a major cause of the problem?

              I think you will finds lots to work with there.

            • Your asinine comments are a measure of the man you truly are Paul.

              But you are so steeped in your own version of faith-based hubris you have not the humility to even question, which is why it is simply so much easier to point a finger at me and cry: ”bully”.
              It’s worth remembering, Paul, that people like Torquemada also believed in soft hands Jesus.

            • You obviously do not value it enough to engage in a manner that encourages reciprocity, as your continued refusal to genuinely address the points raised.

            • Ark, you speak of respect yet have no interest in exploring anything I write, think or hold of value. Your only interest is “prove it” – whilst at the same time telling me it cannot be proven in terms that make you (or any reasonable person) believe. That word is the clue: “believe”. And it cuts both ways.

            • Like so many others who have a religious faith-based outlook you treat it as sacrosanct when in fact it should be regarded as the absolute antithesis of sacrosanct.

              As a rule I try never to use the word ‘prove’ in this context as we are not after proof but rather evidence to support claims made.

              We are where we are as a species largely because of scientific advancement.
              Simply consider the current means by which we are communicating.
              As a measure of how revolting and unsubstantiated religion and all its components truly are I will once more mention Torquemada.

              Consider that human sacrifice was once part and parcel of many religious practices.
              And the Catholics still indulge in a bit of Cannibalism.

              Your worldview ( I can’t think of a more suitable term at this moment) is based upon unsubstantiated claims of the supernatural , superstitions, and the continued worship of a first century eschatological prophet of highly dubious historical origins.

              You give it a cute name: Soft-Hands-Jesus and consider this makes everything all better.
              What you write has been explored in a b’zillion varieties by a similar number of individuals who believe they have a sacred duty to get to the true meaning of what the character, Jesus the Nazarene meant.
              When one is dealing with a more-than-likely non-historical individual in a corrupt set of texts then the outcome of this ”true meaning” is, in all likelihood, going to be meaningless, especially as the requirement that this character has to be believed to be some sort of divine offspring who can’t wait ’til you die so you can be ”with him”.

              That there are upwards of 35, 000 varieties of this blood sacrifice death-cult should, if you were truly honest with your self, tell you that you might just as well be worshiping a stuffed rabbit that you picked up at a local taxidermist.

              ”Oh hail enchanted Soft Paws Bunny”

              Sound utterly bloody stupid doesn’t it?
              And can you imagine the reaction from you missus and family if you stuck this stuffed rabbit on the mantel piece in your lounge/sitting-room and announced:
              ”The enchanted Soft Paws Bunny has shown me that we can all live together in peace and harmony.”

              How long before you were in a padded cell , Paul?

            • “meaningless”

              That word is the word of the day today – it falls at the bottom of today’ post!

              And your switch to the use of “we” is noted with amusement.

            • *Sigh* And so you are back to your obtuse method of reply.
              

              Meaningless:
              futile, pointless, aimless, empty, hollow, vain, purposeless, motiveless, valueless, useless, of no use, worthless, trivial, trifling, vacuous, unimportant, insignificant, inconsequential, insubstantial, nugatory, fruitless, profitless, barren, unproductive, unprofitable
              Just about describes the basis of your soft hands Jesus Soft Paws Bunny to a ‘T’

              I use ”we” in reference to humanity. If you wish to exclude yourself from it then that’s fine by me.

              And it is noted with amusement that you did not address the comment at all.

            • Ark, this may surprise you – but you have beaten any desire to “address” your comments out of me in earlier “addressings”.

              Only because unless I do according to Ark’s rules – back comes a pile of: “futile, pointless, aimless, empty, hollow, vain, purposeless, motiveless, valueless, useless, of no use, worthless, trivial, trifling, vacuous, unimportant, insignificant, inconsequential, insubstantial, nugatory, fruitless, profitless, barren, unproductive, unprofitable” personal belief dressed up as science. It kind of gets in the way of connecting. It does indeed make it “meaningless”.

              And it is noted with great amusement that you now speak for humanity as its elected representative! I would like it noted that I did not get a vote in this election. 🙂

            • Not my rules.
              You are the one insisting that your soft hands Jesus is the way
              You are the one that continues to insist this point, that they are apparently tied together by some sort of literary umbilicus.
              An insistence that negates the majority of earth’s population who have no belief or real interest in the biblical character Jesus the Nazarene.

              You simply cannot let go of your god- dependence and continue to attach a significance to it that those who are not Christian find baffling, and in context, meaningless.

              But the worst aspect is your refusal to accept the reality from whence this belief derived and the horrors perpetrated across history to arrive at the point where you can go all doey-eyed and use such a puerile term as Soft-Hands-Jesus and then call me a bully because I point out those horrors.
              There is no genuine embracing of religious diversity as each claims it is the One And Only.

              As I mentioned: start using the term Soft Paws Bunny and see how long it takes before people begin to consider you are suffering a mental illness.

            • Ark rule one: the bible is not true.
              Ark rule two: the horrors written in the bible are true
              Ark rule three: religion is the cause of horror
              Ark rule four: science is not
              Ark rule five: people are not relevant to horrors perpetuated
              Ark rule six: religion is the cause of horror
              Ark rule seven: science is not
              Ark rule eight: Ark does not believe this
              Ark rule nine: Ark knows this (without any belief at all)
              Ark rule ten: start from rule one again

            • You are still being asinine Paul, and continue to refuse to address my comments and their contents.
              I used the analogy of a vegetarian continuing to eat meat and this is pretty much what you continue to do with regards you turning a blind eye to the foundational basis of your Christian belief.
              The religious, soft-hands-Jesus component of your ”Love is everything” merely sullies rather enhances it.
              And yet you believe it is the other way around. Why? Cultural Indoctrination? Willful ignorance?
              When taken as a whole, one cannot even regard the character Jesus the Nazarene as a good moral teacher or one of good virtue, so why you attach some sort of holier than thou status to him simply illustrates your ignorance of what the character was really all about.

            • I am grateful for your consideration. However, the question is legitimate and merits an answer rather than your interpretation of the answer. Just in case it has been mislaid, the question is (after your response: “No. It is largely Historical Fiction.”): ““Largely” – which parts are true then?”

            • Possibly the ”largely” was not the right choice of word as I was hoping it might help you with the term Historical Fiction, in reference to certain places and people. Obviously it missed the mark.

              So, do I take it that you are now au fait with the term Historical Fiction?

            • Thank you for second-guessing me. 🙂 Not very successfully I have to add. For the sake of clarity can I now go back to the original questions again – as you seem to be amending your answer:

              “Thank you. And the Old Testament – is any of the Old Testament true (same criteria)?”

            • Grandchildren – always come first! 🙂

              Two answers – one a link not an answer, and the other a question. You insist on answers when you ask the questions. Why no answer to this question, please? Which invites the answer to the first – and now the second.

            • Historical Fiction is the answer. I just thought the link would more fully explain what I consider to be a straightforward answer and which you appear to be having such difficulty grasping.

            • Are you being obtuse now?
              I consider the entire Bible to be historical fiction.
              Is there something about this you are not able to comprehend?

            • Ark – not at all. Your first answer was “largely” – and you have not answered the “so is any true” question until just now. I know this is fairly tedious – but this is how you have a conversation in the comments boxes. You ask and ask again the same question. It is not conversation, it does not convince, and it is no fun.

              But that was not the reason for this line of questioning.

              Want to have a proper conversation?

            • You will recall my previous explanation, yes?

              Possibly the ”largely” was not the right choice of word as I was hoping it might help you with the term Historical Fiction, in reference to certain places and people. Obviously it missed the mark.

              I then dropped the ”largely”.
              Historical Fiction is the answer.
              Are you able to comprehend now?
              Have you bothered to read up on the definition of Historical Fiction?
              Do you fully understand what the term means, now?

              And do you accept the meaning or do you have any more asinine remarks before you are prepared to answer why you originally asked the question?

            • Interesting.
              You go off on a tangent about the character Jesus the Nazarene and the bible.
              Were you truly expecting a different sort of answer than the one I gave you?

              You don’t actually want conversation. In truth you want a platform.
              Look at your dialogue with Tildeb. And more pointedly with d9k.

              You are still hung up on the sin angle of your faith.
              Was this the original problem?
              Were you so riddled with guilt?

              This was what Tildeb was trying to explain about taking responsibility.
              I suspect you understand that perfectly well, but simply refuse to cut the umbilical.

              And maybe you will eventually come to understand why you are only chasing your tail.
              Much like Kipling’s Ballard of East and West.

            • “You don’t actually want conversation. In truth you want a platform.”

              I think that accusation could be leveled at anyone with a blog here – which is why it is a cheap shot. And as for responsibility – it cuts both ways Ark.

            • Oh we all want a platform when it comes to blogging. That’s the point of blogging isn’t it?

              But motivation is the key.
              For me, it is to post some photography, chat with people around the globe, and promote my writing – when I feel so inclined to post any.
              De-converts, such as the lady I left the link to, often use blogging as a means of catharsis and to also reach out to those still shackled to the nonsense of god-belief and help them out of it.

              She might be right up your street, and she is certainly a lot nicer than I am. 🙂

              Your motivation comes across largely as a means to assuage some sense of guilt for past ‘sins’ by espousing this new found ”Love Potion No 9”, which you consider is a panacea to the world’s ills, but is still crucially dependent on you clinging to to the narrative construct, Yahweh-in-his-human-disguise like a childhood security blanket; all the while purposely turning a blind eye to the vile foundation that this worship of an immoral, human blood sacrifice is founded upon.
              This form of indoctrination, carrot and stick, is so ingrained and has proved so successful for such death cult religions that people willingly indoctrinate themselves, and, sadly, their kids.
              De-converts from all forms of god-belief recognise this almost from the moment they shrug of this crippling mantle.
              Ironically, many are then filled with rage and guilt because of being lied to, duped and for being so credulous to allow themselves to have been coerced to pass this filth onto others.

              Go read that woman’s blog.
              It always sounds more genuine coming from a real deconvert as they have all been in similar situations.

              ‘Tis a beautiful, cool and breezy day in Johannesburg. The fish are splashing in the pool, the Prinias are chirping, there’s the smell of home-baked bread wafting through from the kitchen.
              Time for an early lunch!

            • Ark – the point of asking you about Jesus yesterday was your comment today.

              “the vile foundation that this worship of an immoral, human blood sacrifice is founded upon.”

              If it never happened it “never happened”. So it is not vile. Something you and “the atheists” gave me was the reason to think about what if you were right. And I found I did not need the “blood sacrifice”, nor the “garden”, nor the tales of annihilation, nor the arguments over whether “He did or He didn’t”. Didn’t need any of that. You and the deconverts did that.

              The other reason for asking about the bible yesterday is linked to that. Despite not having to believe/defend or quote the party line I see great good in the bible. Simply because I no longer had to believe it to be factually and historically true. that is liberating.

              This kind of sharing is what I mean by a proper conversation. Charting change, picking out positives, looking back and seeing the good. So – unlike you – I don’t have to crucify God (again!). And i can enjoy the bible without believing it to be a factual account.

              And it is why I struggle with you. You seem to expect (demand?) something that is not in me. But because your premise of all religion is bad – and because you tar me with that brush … I have nothing good to offer either.

              That approach is not good science and is not good humanity. In fact it is all the things you accuse religion of being. And that is why I don’t have to tick any boxes, or live up to any labels, or feel obligated to “take responsibility” for something I don’t defend.

              But you and tildeb are so blinkered you have never ever wanted to explore “depth” – you stay on the surface and shoot down anything you think is the enemy. And that is why I see similarities between you and bible bashing fundies – you don’t want to know anything different to what you know.

              And that is harmful.

            • Your approach to your belief is dishonest simply because you refuse to accept the historical realities and the modern legacies of what your religion was founded on and what it has become.

              If it never happened it “never happened”. So it is not vile.

              Just because there is no contemporary evidence to support any of the claims surrounding your god-man does not make the action and the belief system that it spawned not vile.
              The actions over the centuries of its adherents is proof of this.

              By refusing to acknowledge this you are tacitly giving the nod of acceptance, a green light if you like , to continue with this garbage.

              You don’t need your interpretation of Christianity – or any interpretation for that matter – to express love, but your addict-like dependence demonstrates that you are prepared to make almost any excuse to ensure you get your ‘fix.’

              I see great good in the bible. Simply because I no longer had to believe it to be factually and historically true. that is liberating.

              Really? It champions genocide, misogyny, rape, incest and slavery – even laying out quite precise codes for the latter.
              Yahweh is a meglomaniacal, genocidal egotistical capricious monster.
              In his human guise as the character Jesus the Nazarene, he is ignorant, arrogant, and delusional.

              As you seem unwilling to state what you are journeying to or from regarding your god belief and based on your posts you can hardly expect a different reaction from people such as Tildeb and myself.
              Oh, and religion is bad as it generally requires some form of obeisance to a make-beleive deity and for the reasons I mentioned above.

              And that is why I see similarities between you and bible bashing fundies – you don’t want to know anything different to what you know.

              I am open to a great many things, but religion has absolutely nothing positive to offer because of the foundational tenets it is built upon.

              You can’t be almost Christian anymore than you can be almost pregnant.

  1. The Lord is always telling me to, “come up higher, it doesn’t hurt so much up there.” Out of the reach of bashing hammers I suppose. When I think of Jesus, His ministry, and His words, I see His love, peace, and compassion. Yet His words are still filled with so much power and truth. To walk in that, away from the struggles of all this doubt and fear. I think it is like you say here – Love. This freedom comes from knowing we are loved unconditionally and loving in the same way. To get over ourselves I suppose.

    • Denine, I just love the way you write as you think. And more than that I love the way you explore what so many others never dare explore. I “came up higher” and found the essence of what exists “down here” in all the noise and hammer bashing. And- just like those blow up hammers for kids parties – I have found the “noise and hammers” down here to be the same: full of hot air. Yet something else – that every one who wields a hammer has something to offer – their “hot air” is for a reason.

      And what i have learned in the hammers on offer in these couple of posts is the “duality” – the yes/no, the right/wrong, the “good/bad” we all prefer. The “am I on the right side or wrong side” of the argument (which I think links with your thoughts on ego).

      And I have found “why love”. For me it takes away the need for one or the other and allows each. And that came from this little hammer-fest. But the “seeing that” came from “coming up here” and finding “down there” is so very full of goodness and love. And it is hard to see the goodness “down here” when we all think in “duality” – which side of the argument do I need to be on?

      (and your thinking aloud in the middle of all the noise here is quite beautiful!)

      Thank you!

      • The thing I love about allowing is the opportunity to grow. What do I believe? what do they belive? And why. I agree with what you said today, about not listening. Oh my word, The pounding, the pounding, the pounding….it’s enough to make one deaf. And why?
        The Lord showed me in a dream, a while back, man who died. I wept because I knew he had thrown his life away. All because he didnt know he mattered.
        Now, as I look back at many people in my life; over and over screaming in their own way to tell me, I didnt matter. And I see myself desperately trying to prove that did. But now seeing it from a new perspective. They, just like me, trying to prove they matter. Because somewhere along the way they too had been convinced they didn’t. They can’t “allow”

        The problem then becomes so many people trying to convince themselves they matter at the expense of others. If I can make you out to be dumb, then I am the smart one. If I can make you the wrong one, I can be right. If can can make you feel dirty, I can feel righteous. I can matter by making you believe you dont. See just how powerful I am now and how much I matter??
        But sin doesn’t work like that. Sin is like leprosy. The more you sin the less human you become. Lifeless and empty. The law of sin and death. Now dead and dying the more you need to sin to feel alive; to feel anything. Fiery darts, wounded, victims, “life is in the blood”. “Drunk off the blood of the saints.” More sin, less and less human. Less and less love for self or others.
        Now truly the less you do matter. I call them No-bodies. I’ve seen them spiritually, they huge black holes in their spiritual bodies. This is us in fallen condition. Spiritual leprosy.
        But in Christ, the blood washes away our sins, the leprosy, the Bread the Body. Oneness, our new spiritual condition wholenss, healing, holy and His. No can take that away from us. Sin is now outside of who we are in Him. But our soul ( mind, will, emotions) are still stuck in the old programing. Trying to prove our worthyness, to prove we matter. How we choose to “decorate” ourselves. Yet others seem determined to tear down our decorations.
        We are the temple of God, but our walls have weak spots, from believe the lies of enemy. These walls, people like to call them, “boundaries.”
        So now I see all those firey darts were never really about me in the first place. Shield of faith, knowing the truth of who and whose we are in Him. So many of us still believing we are the enemies projections and illusions of worthlessness or powerlessness.
        We matter, we always have, for we are dearly loved by our Creator and Father. But I think of Cain, who killed Able. He too could have chosen to do what is right, but instead decided to “hammer” his brother with a rock, today like you say today “with a lot of hot air” ..but when we continue to believe as them by submitting to the lies and trying to prove ourselves, we are handing them the power to dictate who we are at the expense of our self esteem, our-self worth, and true-selves.
        Maybe that is way they pound so hard, and cannot allow, they are really trying to break free themselves. Yet, we truly are all always reaping what we have sown. If we could just believe God, it would make all our lives so much easier! : ) Love is free, but people be tight! ; )

        • WOW! More please! I love reading your thoughts 🙂

          The reason I pursue love so much is that I had a very clear conversation: you find what you look for. And at that point I was very much in “as taught mode” meaning sin was the enemy and it must be outed at all costs. And those words: “you find what you look for” – I looked for sin – and I found sin – and I felt rewarded in finding sin – so I looked for more sin – and (guess what) found yet more sin!

          I remember the imagery: a great big warehouse inside me full and dark. And then taking a hose of love and hosing down my warehouse – and it became large and light and empty of darkness. And there was so much room for love! And ever since I have looked for love in all everywhere – and am filled with love. I don’t look for sin anymore. It takes up space simply because I allow – and when I look for love there is no space for sin. And that is liberating!

          • I Love that! So true! I have never thought of it like that. Love talking back and forth always learning something new here.
            I was rejected a lot as a child, but someone told me Jesus loved me, around 8 or 9, and I believed it. From then on He was my best friend. I have had a ton of sharp arrows fired into my heart over my life. But I have never understood what it feels like to be dark and empty inside. It has always puzzled me. I known much hurt, brokeness, but never empty.
            I think it’s hard to love for some, because to love something or to give love to another means we are assessing it as valuable. Or I guess how can you love if your full of empty? It’s always kind of felt like Christmas, when your a kid, being so exited to give your gift (love) only to have someone throw it back in your face and deemedin it “not good enough”. Maybe to value love is to deem it worthy. But we can’t do that because that would mean the others matters, when we want to be the one that matrers. Scienece matters, money’s matters, intelligents matters, good looks matter and if I have this than I matter. Love me… it’s never enough though is it? Because it doesn’t fill the empty. I see why people run from it, because it hurts when deemed not enough. Then I think isn’t that what we tell God all the time???

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