MySpace


derek dyson

derek dyson


Last Updated: 11/17/2009

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Gender: Male
Status: In a Relationship
Age: 28
Sign: Scorpio

City: tulsa
State: Oklahoma
Country: US
Signup Date: 11/26/2005
Wednesday, June 13, 2007 

    In response to Associate Pastor and ORU graduate Dan Cross' recent article in Urban Tulsa Weekly, refuting my essay titled Coffee: For Believers Only, I have decided to defend my previous stance and elaborate further in the following essay.

 

Rationality is the only case worth reviewing.

By: Derek Dyson

 

            One could look to Webster's Dictionary to define intolerance, but as any freshman composition student could tell you, it's much better to cite a source that is less automatic and regurgitated if you really want to make a point.  Instead, one could simply use the past 2000 years of Christianity to make a valid point of what intolerance really looks like in our culture.  Case in point; Christians my not like homosexuals because their literal interpretation of some ancient book tells them that god doesn't like gays, but when they actively take steps to infringe on the rights of homosexuals, there comes a point where a human beings unalienable rights must trump  ancient mythological beliefs. In short, rationality and human rights should always outweigh the intolerance of fanatical religious doctrine. In the 21st century, the Evangelical community is attacking gays, attempting to deny them the very same rights given to all other loving couples of this nation. In the 20th century the Southern Baptists were heading the Ku Klux Klan and the courts that they were tried in, stifling the equal rights of African Americans.  For centuries the Christian community has actively infringed on the rights of women, as well as the lives of anyone straying from their belief system, all while citing divine text as their motive. Historically, from the Crusades, through the Inquisition and extending to our lives today as American citizens, the Christian authorities have attempted to push their particular belief system onto others at any cost.  Although it is not done at the stake or by the sword as it once was, the Christians of today actively persecute others in a way that is just as devastating, through legislature and lobby groups. 

             Just by looking at the current administrations "faith based initiatives", their stance against stem cell research as well as their attempts to teach the Creation Myth in the Science classrooms of our public schools, one could easily see how the Christian community is adversely affecting the lives of all Americans. The evangelical community is actively infringing on the rights of American citizens and they are doing so through political avenues, effectively bringing theology and mythology into the realm of real world politics.

            Although I fully understand that "all" Christians are not evangelical zealots attempting to pass legislature in Congress, I also understand that a vast majority of Christians are sitting in the same pew's as these zealots every Sunday and not saying a word about their radical beliefs or intolerance towards other human beings.  They sit next to these zealots and hand over 10% of their income to the exact same cause.  Whether this money goes to build a new wing on the church or goes to fund the initiatives set forth by some fanatical lobby group, both the zealots and the moderates are feeding the same beast.  All Christians are, and must be lumped together in the same category unless they start to speak out against their fellow believers who are actively damaging society.  If they sit back and watch intolerance in their religion and refuse to speak out against it, they deserve to be labeled as what they are, apathetic religious fanatics.  

            Mr. Cross says that I was wrong to claim that Oral Roberts' City of Faith  and his $500 million dollar empire that surrounds it were built on a scam because some of that money may have allowed fellow Christians to help others in their community.So, I guess we are to overlook the fact that this money came from a traveling sideshow run by a charlatan, who peddled his tricks and slight of hand techniques in the name of god and supernatural faith healing just to make a buck.  We must overlook the fact that this man was robbing people of their money and in more than one instance their lives, affording himself millions of dollars in personal wealth in the process. We must overlook this fact, because he gave a portion of this money to well meaning Christians who then used the funding to help in the community.

            If Oral Roberts can be let off of the hook for swindling millions of dollars out of the pockets of American Citizens, maybe we should let others off of the hook because of their contributions to society as well.  Take Pablo Escobar for instance.  He exploited the pockets of week minded and vulnerable Americans by trafficking drugs from Columbia to the United States for nearly a decade.  He too provided a desired service to the public and to his credit was also renowned for giving money back to his community, often building soccer stadiums, hospitals and parks for his fellow citizens.  I guess in the eyes of Mr. Cross, the ends outweigh the means. As long as you're helping other people in the process, it doesn't matter where you get your inspiration or funding.

            Mr. Cross also says that Academia attempts to place itself above the Christian community as being intellectually superior.  I would have to agree with him on this subject and this is why.  Academia prides itself on reason and intellectual development through the arts and sciences.  The Christian community has continuously fought against science and self expression outside that of religion for nearly its entire existence.  Many would say that this is why the Intellectual community has distanced itself from the Christian community.  Personally, I would argue that this is rightfully so considering that by and large, Christian Science books don't contain science, the history books aren't historically accurate and the music is manufactured, drab and inartistic.  This would easily explain why such a split could occur between true intellectuals and artists and their Christian contemporaries.  It also explains why few reputable publishers put out overtly Christian literature and why no record label that prides itself on artistic value would promote any artist that would hedge their bets on appealing to the "Christian music scene". 

            In recent times, Christian theology has not been able to compete in academia or the intellectual community in general because it's rife with substandard literature and art. To combat this, Christian organizations have made their own book publishers and record labels, allowing complete control of their confined market, where they peddle their products in church bookstores, summer camps and numerous private schools founded solely on the stance that public schools will eventually lead their children into hedonism and/or unbelief.  Now is this censorship, or is it free market economics?

            Deliberately shielding information from someone is obviously censorship whether Mr. Cross wants to admit it or not.  This is because it secludes important works of art and literature from a large percentage of the public and as I have said before, "censorship leads to ignorance".  As for the Economic side of this question, they have their market and the right to supply it with a demanded product.  Although I feel that this product is inferior, I can only hope that a truly free market will eventually prevail and they will lose their market share.  If not, I will enjoy the fact that millions of Evangelical Christians and their indoctrinated children will have systematically disqualified themselves from the world job market when it comes to the fields of science and technology.  Schools like Rhema and ORU may supply the field of Ministry with adequate graduates, but they are not exactly sending out award winning physicists, geneticists or molecular biologist to tackle the truly important questions of this world. 

            Evangelical Christians may be allowed to pull the wool over their own children's eyes by sending them to private schools and censoring what they read, but that doesn't change the fact that they repeatedly attempt to use political avenues to pull the same wool over the eyes of each and every child in our public school system. Actions such as these sent us into the Dark Ages centuries ago; let's not allow religious dogma to condemn our children to the same fate as it once did in this truly dark period in the history of the human race.


Also, following Mr. Cross' lead, I will cite a court case as to give my point of view some sort of unfounded validity. Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al., Case No. 04cv2688. (District Court says Intelligent design can stay where it belongs, in ancient books of mythology).Chalk one up for rational thought in the American public!

adam

 
i agree u probably should send it in.

I would argue that the church does sell hope. if people want to buy it i have no problem with that. I am a free market economist. I do agree that my tolerance stops at the point that people of faith try to force others to live by their morals.

I do have my own personal hatred for focus on the family. I dont like any groups that advocate for the banning of books. I guess thats just my anti nazi subconscious poking through.
 
Posted by adam on Tuesday, June 12, 2007 - 12:59 AM
[Reply to this
Carolann

 
"...Christian organizations have made their own book publishers and record labels, allowing complete control of their confined market, where they peddle their products in church bookstores, summer camps and numerous private schools founded solely on the stance that public schools will eventually lead their children into hedonism and/or unbelief."

Sadly true. Maybe not the motive but certainly the fruits of the labor.

Hello Derek! I was pushing buttons on my car stereo and remembered that you put it in for me. :)
 
Posted by Carolann on Wednesday, September 05, 2007 - 12:59 AM
[Reply to this
derek dyson
derek dyson

 
You are in that scene...you should speak out!!!! I think that it is sad that some people are so afraid the world that they would keep their children from experiencing some of the great works of art and literature that are out there, only because it is secular........Anyhow:), it is nice to hear from you. I miss your smile.
 
Posted by derek dyson on Wednesday, September 05, 2007 - 5:24 PM
[Reply to this
Dan

 
It would provide a context to judge the competence of your response to my response if I posted my response to your essay in the Urban Tulsa:

JUNE 6, 2007

Love Letters, Hate Mail


I read Derek Dyson's letter, Coffee: For Believers Only!, May 17-23 issue of Urban Tulsa Weekly, with mixed feelings. I could relate with Derek's angst as an employee, assuming his report is accurate, and as a liberal thinker, the latter adjective not assuming its oft political connotation. However, being a graduate from Oral Roberts University's seminary and the Associate Pastor of Father's House, I can also detect the stereotypes and prejudices in Derek's writing that he assails against Nordaggio's.

Derek's report of how Nordaggio's management handled the situation seems inept from a managerial and human resources perspective. As a Christian, I was somewhat embarrassed, while recognizing that Nordaggio's has not been heard from in this matter. I have seen similar attitudes exhibited by Christians in other contexts and, as a Christian, especially of the flavor focused upon in Derek's letter, I deplore being stereotyped in this fashion. Derek typifies his opinion in the letter of "Christianity and the intolerance that its followers embrace."

I am one Christian that does not embrace intolerance. Much of my life has served the addict, alcoholic, prostitute, homeless, mentally ill, and, yes, homosexuals. Furthermore, I was not the only Christian performing such services. Indeed, ORU graduates, from an institution Derek describes as a "500 million dollar empire... built around this scam," are frequently seen in service to the fringes of society displaying an unimaginable level of tolerance and compassion. They are joined by graduates of other local Bible schools as well. It would be interesting to survey the percentage of Christians serving such populations vs. the percentage of non-Christians performing those same services. While I lack such data, my experience tells me that Christians overwhelmingly show up in compassion toward others. Derek's letter, and views on his Myspace, betray his prejudices, even though he attempts to portray himself as an open-minded, free-thinker, a "liberal" in the classical sense of the term.

I think that Derek might err in thinking "tolerance" to mean embracing. Let's look at Merriam-Webster's definition:

2 a : sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own b : the act of allowing something : TOLERATION

3 : the allowable deviation from a standard; especially : the range of variation permitted in maintaining a specified dimension in machining a piece.

While many Christians do, in fact, judge others, many also do not. The fact that Evangelical Christians, those believing in the authority of the Bible in matters of faith and practice, cannot embrace homosexuality as being an alternative lifestyle, that is compatible with biblical standards, does not preclude them from being "tolerant" by the above definition. Indeed, the tolerance of those serving Christians, referenced above, is magnified by this definition. This tolerance is consistent with the love that Christ preached and demonstrated, being rejected by many of the church people of His day He went to the streets, to the sinners, publicans, and prostitutes -- yes, even those outside His religion. Comparing Christian tolerance with the tolerance of other religions worldwide, Christians display this example of Christ by contrast.

Calling Christians intolerant is not only unfair, it is hypocritical. I share Derek's disdain for censorship. However, a place of business has the right to maintain the atmosphere that it seeks to target the market it chooses. I find Derek's ploy here to be manipulative and anything but liberal and democratic. Derek wants Nordaggio's to let Urban Tulsa Weekly distribute its papers at their places of business, so he labels them "censors," disaffirming their right to set their atmosphere and target their market. Why? Inferentially, it would appear that he disagrees with the atmosphere and the target market. Freedom of speech does not extend into private property, or to the employees of businesses who might wish to take the message or atmosphere in a different direction. So, I ask, who is the real censor here?

Derek describes himself as a "secular humanist". The U.S. Supreme Court cited Secular Humanism as a religion in the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins (367 U.S. 488). The reasons being that it has a theism, albeit usually atheism, a world view concerning creation and the roles of humanity in its environment, and a normative standard, a sense of morality. In Derek's letter and upon his Myspace it is clear that his sense of morality has been offended. His essays, thus, do not take on a purely philosophical, Socratic questioning. Rather, they are spiced with a sense of judgment. One wonders just how tolerant is Derek?

As a Christian, I have often found a double-standard among liberal thinkers and PostModernists. The tendency is to promote freedom of speech and thought for a diversity of perspectives -- except Christianity. The rebuttal is often cloaked in prejudicial language, like Derek uses, that Christians as a class are intolerant, judgmental, censoring, etc, excluding themselves from the embrace of diversity. All the while we are asked to understand the viewpoint of, for instance, a radical Islamo-fascist who saws off the head of those innocent bystanders who might disagree with their radical perspective. How did Christians get excluded from that embrace of diversity?

Christians are often viewed as unintelligent in the same manner that prior stages of development in this country, and the world, looked upon women and certain ethnic groups. While liberal thinkers and PostModernists would consider such attitudes an outrage when directed at these populations, the same is well accepted when directed at Christians. This double-standard is exercised in our schools and institutions of higher learning cultivating its greater prevalence in successive generations. The effect is not only accelerating prejudice and intolerance, but a proselytizing of our youth toward this religion of Secular Humanism in the name of education. The demonstrations of this are far too numerous to list in this letter of response.

Perhaps Nordaggio's mishandled a termination. Until we hear from them we will not have sufficient evidence to judge, unless you are one of the double-standard people. My question, however, has to do with just how liberal and free-thinking are the readers of this publication? Do you harbor such prejudicial stereotypes that Derek displays? Or are you really open to free speech? Are you consistent in your embrace of diversity?

Dan Cross

Associate Pastor
http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A17339
 
Posted by Dan on Saturday, September 20, 2008 - 1:56 AM
[Reply to this
Dan

 
Here is Derek's original Letter to the Editor:

Home » Columns » Letters

MAY 9, 2007

Love Letters, Hate Mail


Comments (2)
Mail Article
Print Article
Add to favorites
ALSO IN LETTERS
Love Letters/Hate Mail
Love Letters, Hate Mail
Letters (Aug. 20, 2008)
More (65)...


ALSO IN COLUMNS
Staying Power
Comprehensive Plan or Commie Plot?
A Bailout for Detroit
More (246)...Dig Deep

Dear Editor:

As many of us are aware of, June 15 marks a day for Tulsa that brings a 50-year wait to an end. That's right--they are digging up a 1957 Plymouth that is buried beneath a sidewalk near the old Tulsa County Court House.

This event has generated much buzz and excitement not only in the local community, but has also received countless national attention. I personally know of many people planning to drive in from neighboring and distant states to attend this spectacular event. And all of this was planned 50 years ago to be part of our state's centennial celebration.

As a native Tulsan, and avid car enthusiast, I myself have been counting down the days on my calendar for nearly a year now. As the event grows nearer, my enthusiasm and excitement has diminished, not as a result of the novelty wearing off, but as a result of the details of the event continues to evolve.

As I now understand it, I am going to be forced to purchase a ticket to be able to witness the unveiling of the 50 year old coffin. I was under the impression that the Oklahoma legislature provisioned funds to pay for projects and events for the year long celebration of our wonderful state.

Remember the fireworks that went on in downtown back in November, those funds paid for that event as well. I quickly grew concerned about the funds that the "Tulsarama" people are generating off of this event.

I have to admit I have not been able to bring myself to pay the $25 required to purchase a reserved seat to the unveiling of the car. I did some research and discovered directly on the buriedcar.com website that on April 23rd, 2007 a press release was issued stating that "Mayor Kathy Taylor announced that the City of Tulsa will waive all fees associated with the use of the Maxwell Convention Center for the events involving the buried Belvedere."

Later on the same release adds that "On Thursday, April 19th, the Tulsa county Budget Board, unanimously passed a measure to aid the Tulsarama events as well, allocating 56,000 for law enforcement and safety involving the events."

This is where my concerns began to grow greater, so I started making some phone calls. First I called my city councilor, who while quite interested in my concern did not have the answers to my questions readily available.

Then I decided to contact the Oklahoma Centennial Commission directly, where my phone calls were never returned. The only person who I was able to get any information from was Paula Hale, the Tulsa Coordinator for the car event. She told me that they were attempting to generate funds for this event through primarily private donations. I asked her about the fact that the Convention Center and police protection had been underwritten by the City, and County. I never received a direct answer from her.

Now I understand that there will be expenses that will be incurred beyond simply having a building and police present. There will be event insurance, excavation fees, and other such expenses that go with any large event. I do however have a hard time believing that there is not a single excavation company in this entire great state of ours that would be willing to donate their services. I also find it hard to believe that enough private donations can not be generated to cover the other costs associated with this event.

Instead I will be left with 2 choices: Pay to park in downtown Tulsa, Pay $75 for tickets to get my family seats, and I am sure there will be t-shirts and other novelties available at the event. Or I can simply not attend and wait to see the results of the event in the newspaper.

As a concerned citizen of Tulsa, I think the Oklahoma Centennial Commission has a duty to be financially responsible with the funding of their events and needs to be open with its citizens about where those funds are coming from.

In addition I am concerned that I could not get a straight answer, as to where proceeds generated from the event that exceeded the costs would be diverted. I would not have such a hard time stomaching this whole situation if it were being put on by a private source, but this is the state and city governments hosting this event.

I am certain that I am not the only citizen that will share my concerns regarding this whole convoluted event. The City of Tulsa demands Answers.

Signed,

Bentley Wright

Student of Anatomy

Dear Editor:

Let me start out by saying that I am a big fan of your weekly publication and because of this issue I will make it a point to never miss another one. I am not a learned man. Nor am I well spoken or well traveled. But I know something when I see it and I know nipple when I see one, a left nipple to be exact, in the Night Trips advertisement on page 54 (May 3).

I am reminded of the "Seinfeld" episode where Kramer takes a picture of Elaine for Christmas cards that she is sending to her friends and family. "I've got nipples, he's got nipples *Kramer raises his shirt*, we've all got nipples."-Jerry. I can only hope that no one is calling this poor woman "Nip". Anyway, I just thought I would say keep up the good work.

Sincerely

Tim Brophy

Editor's Note: Thank you for reminding us of our kinship to all mammals great and small.

Coffee: For Believers Only!

Dear Editor:

Coffee has served as the center piece of the intellectual community for centuries. Public intellectuals and laymen alike have met amongst the intoxicating aroma of freshly roasted beans to discuss politics, philosophy and other social avenues of life, all while enjoying a hot cup of coffee.

Sadly, this cultural exchange of information cannot be upheld in a society that is intolerant and prejudice; two negative aspects of humanity that have lead to the subject of this essay.

I am a former employee of Nordaggios Coffee, which is locally owned by a proud graduate of Oral Roberts University (a private Bible College in Tulsa, Oklahoma) and a devout Christian. I was a dedicated employee and I truly loved my job. Customers enjoyed my presence and my passion for the product that I sold. I had a number of regular customers during my morning shift that knew me by name and frequently asked for my opinion on music, politics, philosophy and coffee. Many of these customers are no longer my customers, but are now my friends and I believe that our relationship will extend far past these recent events.

On February 28th I was let go from Nordaggios Coffee after a two-hour discussion, initiated by the owner, about my personal beliefs on some very important social issues. I met with him off of the clock and the discussion continued as follows.

As I walked to the table and sat down we exchanged pleasantries as acquaintances would, but the mood suddenly shifted when the owner plopped down a copy of Urban Tulsa Weekly onto the table in front of me, asking "what do you think about this?" I should probably preface this by saying that two weeks prior to our meeting, Nordaggios management took a stance against what they called "pornography" and made it known that Urban Tulsa would no longer be distributed in their stores.

After being informed that all copies of this independent alternative newsweekly should be stacked in the back room away from the eyes of customers, I felt the need to speak out against what I saw as blatant censorship.

The store I worked at was located in Owasso, Oklahoma and this publication was the only source of information on local arts and culture that could be found within miles. In protest, I taped a note to the pile of papers in the back room that simply said "censorship leads to ignorance".

This single phrase all but sealed my fate as a Nordaggios employee.

During our discussion about this incident, I pointed out that there was a copy of Shakespeare's Macbeth on the store bookshelf that contained sex, incest, violence and murder, yet it remained morally justified in the eyes of management and free for all to read. I added that if a single customer had complained about sexual deviances found in the King James Version, things that would pale in comparison to the Urban Tulsa's "pro gay" articles that got it banned from the store initially, he would undoubtedly allow this book to stay. This is simple logic, so I was not surprised when he failed to see the correlation. For some reason these remarks caused a sudden change in the subject of our discussion and we quickly moved on to a greater matter.

Nordaggios employees are overwhelmingly Christian. In fact, of the 30 or so employees, I was the only person who wasn't a devout Christian. I am openly agnostic and consider myself a secular humanist. I feel very strongly about my beliefs and I enjoy discussing them with others in person, as well as on the myspace blog that I keep updated frequently. This myspace blog was now the center of our discussion.

Close to a month earlier I had received an email from a disturbed ORU student who had read one of my essays and felt that I didn't fully understand god. He stated that I was ignoring all of the "evidence" for the existence of his Christian god, such as miraculous healings, resurrections and other supernatural occurrences and that he had felt the need to "enlighten me". I replied respectfully and eloquently to the student's remarks, which he then deleted, as to keep the devil off of his myspace page.

Knowing that I cannot stop a person from censoring my thoughts from their personal web page, I decided that a public reply on my own blog would be the best route to take. I compiled evidence and wrote an essay about the "faith healings" of Oral Roberts and the 500 million dollar empire that he built around this scam.

I cited my sources and used all of the proper etiquette that is required for a work of literature to be taken seriously and to be intellectually sound. During that week this essay was read by close to a thousand people, many of which were ORU students or graduates and also fellow co-workers. Keep in mind that this is an open forum of information that is free to be embraced or ignored by any person who may choose to do so.

Because of this essay and others that had openly criticized the shortcomings of Christianity, I was now discussing my philosophical beliefs with my employer, only minutes before I was to be terminated. He too proclaimed witch-craft, faith healings and demonic exorcism as "proof" that his god exists. He explained that Ted Haggard's recent stint of homosexual prostitution was a direct product of witch-craft and that demons were so rampant in "Liberal Cities" on the West Coast that it served as a hot bed for gays, murderers and prostitutes, then adding "you would fit in well in Seattle."

I explained that remarks such as these were exactly what have lead to my open discussion of Christianity and the intolerance that its followers embrace. He then went on to say that it was irresponsible for me to openly discuss my beliefs on religion with 18 year old kids, who are new into their faith and unsure about their beliefs, because it might cause them to question the nature of god.

Astonished that he would say such a thing, I quickly replied that this was the very reason that I feel I must discuss the faults of religion. Be it philosophical ideals or historical evidence, any information that can make a person question the world around them should be information that they seek.

If his religion could not stand up to scrutiny and rational thinking, then his religion did not deserve to stand up at all. This was apparently very disturbing to him because he quickly started to back peddle in his reasoning and his development of new ideas started to decline rapidly. Under my lead, we then moved on to discuss the Israel/Palestine conflict, the Rapture scenario, the Christian Coalition and Pat Robertson, Evolution versus intelligent design, the Crusades, the Inquisition and finally Christian intolerance towards Jews and homosexuals. Although he seemed to continuously lose his train of thought, I felt that I was making great progress in the expression of my views, thus leading to a successful debate.

After a few failed attempts to get me "on his side" our discussion on religion and philosophy started to stammer and eventually fell to silence. This is when he looked up at me and finally decided to get to the point of this whole ordeal. Jillian (my manager), he said, doesn't think that you respect her because of this Urban Tulsa deal and after you were late last Saturday she decided that we needed to let you go.

So there it was. After an hour and a half of arguing with me about my stance on censorship, religion and supernatural faith healings, he "had to let me go" because I was late last Saturday. He then added that this had nothing to do with the fact that I was an "atheist" (a term he kept using even after I corrected him) or the fact that I had openly criticized his belief system. Of course it had nothing to do with these things, because that would be discrimination. Instead he decided to drive forty-five minutes across town to discuss religion with me for and hour and a half and then spent roughly 20 seconds telling me that I was fired for being late to work. This makes sense right?

Ultimately, this worked out better than I ever could have planned. I used a public forum to discuss the intolerance, bigotry and suppression of information that is exuded by the Christian community and then my Christian conservative boss decided that the best way to deal with my open dissent was to be intolerant and to suppress my point of view by getting me out of his company.

As if the irony in this wasn't beautiful enough, he then handed me a hundred dollar bill as I walked out the door, thanking me for all had done as a dedicated employee.

Although I do not agree with the owners reasoning behind my termination, I can easily see why such a person could justify letting me go. This man moved from the West Coast to get away from the demons and witches that were damaging society. He then went to a conservative Christian college in the Midwest that reinforced these views and gave him the inspiration to start his Christian coffee shop. He somehow hired a young graduate student purely out of intuition, but had forgotten to ask him if he believed in god. This student then stood firmly under his first amendment rights and openly discussed the importance of rational thought in society.

Recognizing this free speech as the exact behavior he had been trying to escape, the owner felt justified in ridding his company of this demon. A process I would like to call dissidential exorcism. This term will constantly serve as inspiration as to why I must continue to speak out against religious intolerance and irrational thinking in the world that I live in.

Derek Dyson
http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A17074
 
Posted by Dan on Saturday, September 20, 2008 - 2:08 AM
[Reply to this