frumnotyeshivish

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 351 through 400 (of 560 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Am I Smart Enough for Law School? #984461
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Akuperma, your gross generalizations about those who will succeed and fail are untrue.

    The SAT focuses far more on external knowledge than the LSAT making it much easier to study for.

    “Acquired skills” is a very broad term. Obviously, infants don’t have the skills to take these tests. Some infants, however, have a far greater innate capacity to learn and apply things than others. This allows them to “acquire” more skills, and do better on standardized tests, and particularly the LSAT.

    True, studying the methods of solving games quickly (the most learnable part of the LSAT) may help you do somewhat better, but in my experience, the ability to excel is dictated far more by natural abilities than by learned methods.

    I believe it is an intelligence test, and I didn’t fail.

    Let me ask you this: do you believe that everyone is equally intelligent, or that intelligence doesn’t play a big role in a person’s test results?

    in reply to: Tattoo eyeliner #959281
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    WIY: Medical need? Really? Tattoos cure cancer, I guess…

    in reply to: Am I Smart Enough for Law School? #984422
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Playtime:

    It isn’t that hard to get a law degree. It is very, very difficult to excel in law school.

    If your goal is to get a high paying job out of school, you generally must excel.

    To excel in law school you need to be moderately bright, have a decent memory, be a quick typist, and an excellent writer.

    Typing and writing are the best ways to prepare for law school.

    The LSAT does as good as the school and scholarship it gets you into. No more no less. It can also be a good personal evaluation tool.

    Don’t go to law school to become rich. Go to law school if you think you’ll excel at and/or enjoy being a lawyer.

    in reply to: Should I Go To Medical School? #958336
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    It has happened. It could be. Because the challenges are even greater for a frum mother, my assumption is that the OP would’ve mentioned it were that the case.

    in reply to: Practical Kol Diparush Shailah #957266
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    No. I think that was addressed with the yesh lo matirin arguments before.

    I’m asking (and I know I could be very wrong) is:

    the concept of bittul clearly requires two distinct identities. The thing being botul and the thing it’s being botul to.

    Are strawberry ice creams botul to raspberry ones? I think not, because there’s not distinct halachic identity between them, unlike neveila and shchuta.

    Now here, there’s milchig and pareve with the only difference being that the milchig might cause external people to violate a minhag/drabanan.

    Is this sufficient to cause a halachik identity suffucient to start discussing bitul?

    in reply to: Can rishonim be wrong? #957050
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Moshe Rabeinu was wrong a few times. Amram his father never sinned, yet made a mistake in divorcing his wife.

    Of course a Rishon can be wrong!

    We are just so much wronger.

    in reply to: Practical Kol Diparush Shailah #957261
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    The following q is coming from a complete basar b’cholov am ha’aretz (sadly, me): Doesn’t it matter that eating milchigs after fleishigs is (at least) not a issur d’oiraisa? Wouldn’t that affect the bitul question? Most of the comparisons seem to involve neveilos. No? Please enlighten me…

    in reply to: Should I Go To Medical School? #958308
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    If your reason for wanting to go to Touro is that it is a quick decent degree, it might work. There are quicker degrees (using yeshiva credits which I’m assuming you have) and better degrees out there but probably not both.

    If you are thinking about going to Touro because you wish to minimize your exposure to the ugliness of the world then med school may not be the way you eventually want to go. Even if it is, Touro may limit your med school options, causing you to move to a place that is likely far worse for your ruchniyus.

    Why not go to a “real” college? It might be cheaper (if you are smart enough for med school, you should be smart enough to get into a good school at less than full price), and it will almost certainly give you a better, more usable education that will help you decide want you really want to do.

    Princeton, Columbia, NYU, Penn, Yeshiva, Fordham, Rutgers, College of NJ, and Stevens are all comparable commutes or better from Lakewood, and all will provide a far more valuable degree than Touro. If you choose not to go to med school these degrees would translate to more opportunities.

    As far as whether Doctors make a decent living, the answer is yes. There is a shortage of primary care physicians, and the government will even subsidize part of the cost of med school for those who agree to be a physician in an area with a shortage. That area might not have a minyan though.

    Some doctors are obscenely rich. Many more aren’t.

    Obamacare makes it more likely that any given patient has insurance which makes it more likely that a doctor will at least get paid.

    I’d be more worried about technological advances that lessen the need for human doctors or government intervention far more drastic than Obamacare.

    The current system seems unsustainable. Medical care is a necessity that anyone feels they must pay for, but the price is really insane. IMHO it is fundamentally wrong that so many people make so much money off of medicine. In a sense it is taking advantage of desperate people.

    True, some of the money drives healthcare quality up, but to argue that the reason so many can take such a large cut off of someone else’s cancer or senility is for the patient’s benefit seems to only works up to a point. We’re at least approaching that point.

    If money is your only motivation, successful careers in finance or business are doable for talented and motivated (and some might say soulless) people.

    Although the future is in technology, particularly in biotech (although biotech may have some of the same concerns as the medical field generally), the managers of a company make more than the employees with the technical training, and no one makes more than the savvy investor.

    There are also easier ways of making a decent living (think [biomedical] engineering).

    In summary, if you really want to become a Doctor (not just for the money), can make it as a Doctor, and want to remain in an area of your relative choosing (which is a pretty strong need for a frum jew), you need to distinguish yourself. This is difficult enough with a good college degree, and even harder with one from Touro. It is doable though, and an admirable career choice if done for the right reasons.

    I do think R’ Moshe has a tshuva where he says not to do it. It was easier to find a decent job without a degree then, true, but if I remember correctly he was against the amount of time it would take to do relative to other jobs. Caveat: the tshuva was for a younger person who didn’t need parnassah at the time. It seemed R’ Moshe had a hard time justifying becoming a Doctor for the sake of parnassah in ten years. Don’t have the mareh makom offhand.

    Whatever you do, good luck, and daven!

    in reply to: Mind-blowing statement from the Iben Ezra #977626
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Do “stealing” and “wickedness” have the same meaning?

    Wickedness could be referring to bitul torah. Amassing money beyond your requirements at the expense of learning could be characterized as “wickedness.”

    Wickedness could also refer to many things.

    The Ibn Ezra didn’t say what you said he did.

    The doubters can be characterized as “right.”

    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Writersoul – I think you are wrong about the stigma. A smoker in Yeshiva isn’t embarrassed about it. An alcoholic in Yeshiva is terrified that people will know about his problem (if he has one).

    I don’t consider occasional drinking a problem.

    OneDay – Anti-anxiety meds are far, far more addictive than tobacco. They also cause less cancer and they have more productive uses. If anti-anxiety meds were available over the counter, their abuse would be rampant.

    As far as whether smoking to reduce anxiety is okay, a cost-benefit analysis is in order. This requires knowledge of the cost of smoking (in terms of health, possibility of forming a habit, money etc.) vs. the benefits — like every substance on earth.

    Bottom line – unless a substance is both obscenely addictive and dangerous (think heroin, meth, crack etc.) there may be times when they have a productive use. Therefore, a cost-benefit analysis is always in order.

    Only an insane (or irrational) person would choose not to take something which has more benefit than cost. Period.

    The real question is what’s the cost and what’s the benefit…

    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    “Alcohol abuse, as described in the DSM-IV, is a psychiatric diagnosis describing the recurring use of alcoholic beverages despite its negative consequences.” – Wikipedia.

    It sounds to me like using alcohol in the productive way described would be non-abuse; it might even be recommended.

    A person should use all the tools at their disposal to be productive.

    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    I think focusing on alcohol is taking the focus away from what the alcohol abusers want to escape from. That happy, productive, and otherwise healthy people don’t begin abusing alcohol, is my overwhelmingly strong presumption.

    While we may hear some claimed anecdotal exceptions, I know better. I do. Prove me wrong.

    in reply to: Psychiatrists Discriminate #953866
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Brony, how would you categorize your own post?

    How about: a cynical pothead who pretends like he’s not interested in the subject matter poasts about nothing useful?

    Personally, I think wild brain masterman (the little I know) has valid points. The whole discrimination thing doesn’t apply that well to medicine because there are many medical differences between the physiology of the genders, not just the way they are treated.

    Brony, can you do my post too? I’m not trying to be dismissive of your brilliant characterizations; I was trying to do the same to you.

    in reply to: How do you understand "Vesimach es ishto?" #964356
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    WIY – your original premise: “It seems that a husband is obligated to make his wife happy. Meaning without him she wouldn’t be happy.”

    It seems that the truth of the premise would depend on how one defines happiness and/or the word “vesimach”.

    Is happiness finite?

    Could vesimach mean to make happier?

    If say happiness came from feeling fulfilled, wouldn’t there be an objective and subjective measure of it, much like life itself?

    If my last hypothesis is correct, a way of fitting psychology into the truth that is the torah would be as follows:

    Subjectively, any person can find their mission and accomplish whatever they can. Feeling fulfilled is a result of actually doing whatever you were able to do, wherever and whoever you are.

    However, if a person is blessed enough to be in a situation where their mission is truly objectively big (say a person is moshiach), the happiness of feeling fulfilled after such a huge accomplishment would be far greater.

    A woman who is married (to a deserving man), says the torah, is in a position to objectively accomplish more, and therefore objectively feel a more intense fulfillment.

    This was completely speculative and perhaps gibberish.

    in reply to: ??? ??? ??? #1100177
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Popa, can you mach some good heimish with me?

    in reply to: Why Can't Women Get Modern Smicha and Become Rabbis? #1071591
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    The question is not so much of the capabilities of women, the question is what is the mission women were created to do?

    For the answer, we have Chazal and Mesorah.

    It is not that women want to be men; it’s that women are looking at men and think “it’s not fair.”

    Either it is fair, or it’s not supposed to be. Those are the only two options that fit with Chazal and Mesorah.

    in reply to: Why Can't Women Get Modern Smicha and Become Rabbis? #1071541
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    I think this whole conversation is geared toward discussing what women have the right to be in judaism. The concept of rights and entitlements is quite contrary to classic jewish thought.

    The premise of our lives is that we were created for a purpose. We have a mission. The mission is to create a relationship with, become close to, and be the slaves of, Hashem, thereby bringing the world to its spiritual fulfillment.

    The question then is God created men and women with many obvious differences. Why? We don’t believe the differences are accidental. Our sages explain many differences in the relative roles of men and women and their relative strengths and weaknesses. We don’t know God as well as our sages did.

    Shlomo Hamelech says in koheles “isha bchol aileh lo motzosi.” Rashi explains this is referring to halachah. Women have other strengths. If the role of women is perceived as a lesser one, either there is a problem with the perception, or God designed it that way. Neither of those two options suggests that women should waste their time trying to be men. I believe that it is tragic that so many just missed the boat.

    in reply to: Law v. chain of command. #951904
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Akuperma, you said: “This is a big issue for goyim, since most western legal systems considering it a valid defense that someone is following orders with a possible exception only of one knows that the orders one is following were also illegal.”

    I suppose the possible exception is the fundamental issue. Ignorance of the (clear and valid)law is not an excuse both in the religious and secular context. There is also a presumption of knowledge of the law.

    In Germany, the law of following orders unconditionally may have been inherently tyrannical and therefore unbinding(see our declaration of independence for rationale).

    The only real questions arise when 1. there is a disagreement as to the content of the law, or 2. the question isn’t whether the law was technically violated, rather, whether we found the right scapegoat. Receiving orders going against the law may be a mitigating excuse as to the punishment but don’t (in a civilian context) justify violation.

    As far as whether the chain of command in a military context requires the soldier to follow orders unquestioningly, there are laws about that too. Soldiers are taught what they may or may not do. So long as the (secular) laws don’t violate basic principles

    of decency (and/or the constitution), the law always trumps all.

    In summary, the law always takes precedence, in every context, unless the law is fundamentally flawed.

    in reply to: Itchy Beard Begone! #998887
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    There’s a lav of lo sisneh es achicha bilvovecha. This is bein adam lechaveiro. Health, you have just inspired me to inform you that you get on my nerves.

    in reply to: Really Good Novels #973805
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Yserbius – two different issues, and I quote myself: “No guarantees of clean content in these books.”

    in reply to: Really Good Novels #973802
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Sometimes a funny joke also happens to be kfirah. This is not so great. Even worse, however, is a joke that’s funny because it’s kfira. The author is so viewpointedly skilled that you can occasionally temporarily lose your own perspective.

    To me Pratchett seemed to fall in the latter category more than DA, although DA seemed to be a more pure intellectual.

    As far as numbers go, six points are six times more infinite than one. Sorry if I came/come across a little “Freudian”-retentive. Obviously, it reflects far more about me and/or my mood (or, indeed, my early childhood) than it does on anything you said.

    in reply to: Really Good Novels #973800
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    1. I’m not sure if I ever said one is worse than the other.

    2. I’m not sure if I believe one is worse than the other.

    3. Adams seems to me to write more rationally and intellectually and Pratchett seems far better at painting pictures and emotions.

    4. Perhaps emotional kfira scares me more. Fear, after all, is an emotion.

    5. My reference to YOUR lack of mentioning HGTTG was because of its physical size, and because I’ve seen you quote it a few times.

    6. IDK if I’d have read more than five of DA’s books either.

    in reply to: Really Good Novels #973798
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Discworld seems to be a little too far gone for me to appreciate. Also, the kfira is too explicit for me to laugh at. It twinges a little. If you add in the fact that Pratchett is a big advocate of allowing people to murder themselves and their loved ones in the name of mercy, it just bothers me. IDK. I think I only read like 5 of the books.

    OoM – I cant believe you didn’t mention Hitchhiker’s Guide, along with the non-debatable inclusion of the one volume LOTR as from the best books ever.

    Personally, if discussing comedy, the funniest books I’ve ever read were Ludlum’s Road to Omaha and Road to Gandolfo.

    Best Fantasy Series I’ve read IMHO:LOTR, Wheel of Time, Sword of Truth, Song of Ice and Fire.

    Shannara- the ones I’ve read were decent. No time to read books anymore… No guarantees of clean content in these books.

    Ender and HP are strangely riveting children’s books, which distinguishes them from nearly all jewish novels in the fact that they’re strangely riveting.

    in reply to: Posting Too Much #946182
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Squeak: “Achievement of your happiness is the only moral purpose in your life.”

    I would shorten that statement to “Achievement is the purpose of life.” If I would throw in happiness, I would leave out all the subjective words (like “your happiness” and “your life”).

    in reply to: No more college? #947163
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Saysme, it sounds like you once had plans, and now aren’t sure.

    Don’t go to college to find yourself.

    Find yourself, and see if you’re in college.

    in reply to: Lakewood's sociological style #945145
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    I was joking about the spelling. Greasy means having to do with grease, with grease meaning lubrication.

    It this context it’s a slur referring to Yeshivsh people who may not shower that much.

    in reply to: How would you respond to Savage on Metzitzah #1028036
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    DovidH, if a heart surgeon says that because the patient didn’t ask me not to operate while drunk, he implied permission, does that work?

    There are two primary options as far as parents and MBP: either they believe in it and want it, or they don’t and they don’t. There are few people that would say: “Well I don’t think MBP is important but I sure love Herpes.”

    Now the question is back to how anyone can justify doing something dangerous to someone else’s infant without the parents knowledge.

    in reply to: Lakewood's sociological style #945140
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Greeci is spelled with two e’s, and I believe the correct term is Greek.

    in reply to: Brainwashing as Part of Chinuch #1014432
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    See how brainwashing works? Health, I was counting on you to prove my point.

    (As an aside, and for like the fourth time we’ve been in such a dialogue, I DON’T SMOKE.)

    Brainwashed or not, I must address one thing you’re saying:

    “Hypocrisy at its finest. You can control and manipulate others, but if s/o tries to do it to you -then this gets your goat.”

    1. Why do you think I control and manipulate others?

    2. Even if I do (I try not to btw), why is it hypocritical? Doing what you hate done to yourself to others is wrong, but not inherently dishonest.

    in reply to: Prove G-d in One Sentence #959622
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    writersoul – it isn’t necessarily an irrational argument; I’d prefer to call it pointing out a vague aspect of what is the most rational explanation for existence.

    My proof was that things don’t come from nothing. If this is absolutely true, the only logical conclusion is that there always was something (or nothing, which I won’t address more than by saying that anyone who thinks they don’t exist is someone I couldn’t possibly be talking to).

    The problem with the idea that there was always something (other than the expanding universe), is that it fundamentally at the deepest level makes no sense. The question of what came first, the chicken or egg has a strong point. There must have been an egg that didn’t come from a chicken or a chicken that didn’t come from an egg. Well, what did it come from? An evolution based argument may say “something else.” And that? “Something else.” But then what? What is physical matter so as to exist, and what caused it?

    The most rational answer is “an entity outside the rules,” or more specifically “an entity not caused by any other entity.”

    The next obvious question is what created the entity outside the rules? My entire argument was based on the scientific fact that everything comes from something, so how can I says that there’s an entity that doesn’t come from something?

    The answer is, that we can’t/don’t know how it works, it’s beyond science; all we know is that it must be.

    While it is true that the atheist’s point that this argument is untestable is valid, better the untestable than the one that fails the test.

    in reply to: Prove G-d in One Sentence #959591
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Another try for one sentence: What Rabbi Kelemen’s book “Permission to Believe” says.

    in reply to: Prove G-d in One Sentence #959590
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Something doesn’t scientifically come from nothing, yet nearly all agree there was once nothing, proving that a power outside science created the something.

    in reply to: Prove G-d in One Sentence #959586
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    I got it one word: Existence.

    in reply to: How would you respond to Savage on Metzitzah #1028022
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Is it possible that in the times of Chazal the Herpes virus was less prevalent in society? Why can’t MBP be healthy unless the mohel has Herpes?

    PBA, you said: “If the mohel holds it is required min hadin, he should obviously not ask. If the mohel holds it is not required, then maybe he should. . . . And if they are idiots, then I don’t care anyway.”

    What if the Mohel holds it’s required, yet is reasonably certain that the parents wouldn’t consent if they knew. Shouldn’t the Mohel recuse himself at that point? Perhaps mohelim should be breaking into homes to perform milah with MBP on children who otherwise wouldn’t receive it. After all, it’s a chiyuv.

    IMHO, a Mohel who goes deliberately against the parents wishes and hurts the child deserves to be locked up for the sake of society. He’s a deliberate idiot, which is far worse than an uninformed idiot.

    As far as scientific proof of incidence, all the studies are misleading. The question is whether MBP makes THIS CHILD more likely to get herpes. The answer is, obviously, yes. Next question, how much more likely? Answer: who knows? Any chance of knowing would depend on voluntary participation in an unbiased study. Good luck with that.

    Lastly, I’m mostly with PBA on point 3. However, the scope of the reg here makes this gov interference with religion a little more palatable. No one is stopping anyone from doing anything they want to do, as long as they are informed of the potential human sacrifice.

    What I don’t like is the dismissive attitude the government has shown for the importance of religion. What bothers me most is that the DOH recommends not to do it, as opposed to informing people of the risks of this important practice (to those that believe it as such).

    Bottom line: the risk is real, but may not be as high as the government is saying, and genuine religion may say to do it anyway. The DOH, Savage, and the general public should respect the last part the most.

    in reply to: Separate Yeshivas for the Kollel Families #944860
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    I had a R”Y that once said that Chinuch is naturally a vertical process (i.e from a parent or authority figure to the child). While horizontal issues can exist, they’re almost always due to a lack in vertical guidance.

    in reply to: Brainwashing as Part of Chinuch #1014428
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    DY: “We object when certain techniques are used by the tobacco companies…”

    That may have once been true. Nowadays, the anti-tobacco people rule the world from the shadows.

    If you don’t believe me, just see how they already got so many here (especially “Health,” he’s way gone).

    I hate being manipulated by other people. Always.

    Chinuch is different though. As it must be.

    in reply to: How would you respond to Savage on Metzitzah #1027955
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    I think the “ick” factor is why this is such an issue not only for Savage but for every secular person I’ve spoken to or read on the issue including the District Judge who split hairs she never would have otherwise to avoid strict scrutiny.

    That’s why I virulently defend MBP to anyone (secular and interested) listening. My emotions about MBP are similar to my emotions about smoking in this regard. Ya, it’s not healthy but it’s not treated fairly.

    On the other hand, half of me thinks that even with strict scrutiny the reg should be left alone.

    All of me thinks that the purpose of the reg is appropriate (albeit half unconstitutional): make sure parents know what’s happening, and make sure a murdering Mohel is on the hook the first time before others are murdered (or negligently manslaughtered… whatever you want to call the act of making a baby dead because they didn’t care enough).

    in reply to: Post to Post�NOT #1047705
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    [This is my first attempt at using a seemingly archaic ui…italics italics please ignore for post to post purposes… now on to my real post:]

    Because nothing finite can become infinite, my brain has no idea if what I just said makes sense.

    in reply to: Why I won't let my kids do ????? #1186790
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    pba: we give honors based on our perception of status. Are you saying this isn’t correct behavior, or that marriage shouldn’t play a part in status?

    in reply to: Post to Post�NOT #1047695
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Obfuscation: what politicians try to do but aren’t quite smart enough to pull off.

    in reply to: A Monkey with a Typewriter #1023758
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    What does infinite mean?

    in reply to: YWN Videos #936370
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Ash: explain the benefits that YWN will receive. Do you think they will get more traffic from visitors that otherwise wouldn’t be there? Enough to take on the headache?

    It is easy to say “I want.” I want a million dollars. Now what?

    in reply to: YWN Videos #936366
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Hosting videos takes server/bandwidth space. This costs money. I’m sure if you gave the money to YWN up front, they’d consider accommodating you. Otherwise, explain why the benefits outweigh the costs for the business…

    in reply to: 1:00 AM Lurkers #1011133
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Me, but I’m still on the old time.

    in reply to: Post to Post�NOT #1047664
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    I hope that I’m not hopeless.

    in reply to: A Monkey with a Typewriter #1023722
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Is it just me, or does this thread look like every other one out there? “And all I gotta do is act naturally” — Ringo

    in reply to: 1:00 AM Lurkers #1011124
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    If in five minutes I go back in time five minutes, what time is it then? Oh I know, time to go to sleep!

    in reply to: Facebook Is To Blame For Rising Orthodox Jewish Divorce Rate? #935305
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Health: “Yes, I know cases of ‘Frum’ people being Mezaneh then, but you had to make an effort.”

    How are you so in the loop? Is there a “Health Professional” social networking site in which these sensitive topics are shared?

    See if you’d be a “Mental Health Professional” like me, I’d understand…

    in reply to: 1:00 AM Lurkers #1011113
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    I wonder why people wonder about people wondering. Am I unique like that?

    in reply to: Post to Post�NOT #1047661
    frumnotyeshivish
    Participant

    Elluuuuuuuuuuuuull! Rabboissai Ellluuuuuuuul! Only 6 months away! What? You goyim don’t feel it? In Europe a lady once fainted….She then became the N’Tziv. Wait, all those stories just confuse me. The common denominator: you’re not good, be better! Elllllllllluuuuuuuuulllll!

Viewing 50 posts - 351 through 400 (of 560 total)