How Christians Turned a Supportive Blog Comment Into a Personal Attack

bruce gerencser street preaching crooksville ohio

Bruce Gerencser, street preaching, Crooksville, Ohio, with his young son Jaime. Circa late 1980s.

A few years ago, several men from Calvary Chapel in Hemet, California went to the local Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to preach to the captive audience lined up outside the DMV waiting for it to open. Not long after they started preaching, at the behest of a DMV security guard, a California Highway Patrol (CHP) officer was dispatched to the DMV to deal with the street preachers. After refusing to stop preaching, the obnoxious preachers were arrested. According to the CHP officer, they were breaking the “preaching to a captive audience” law. After finding out no such law exists, the charge was amended to “impeding an open business.” This charge was dropped and the district attorney then charged the street preachers with trespassing.

Here’s a YouTube video of what took place:

Video Link

The arrested street preachers secured legal representation through the Advocates for Faith and Freedom (operated by Robert Tyler and Jennifer Bursch), a non-profit law firm “dedicated to protecting religious liberty in the courts.” According to a September 2015 update on the law firm’s website, the criminal case against the street preachers was dropped. Advocates for Faith and Freedom have since filed a federal lawsuit seeking “a federal remedy to further clear his (Mark McCay) name and to protect other individuals who seek to peacefully express their faith.” The update states the following:

Advocates for Faith & Freedom has filed a legal brief in support of religious freedom before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of Mark Mackey, the Riverside man who was preaching the gospel when he was arrested outside the Hemet DMV for what a CHP officer deemed “interfering with an open business through obstruction or intimidation.”

Last year, though, a Superior Court judge absolved Mackey of the crime saying that the street preacher did not violate the law. During the course of the criminal trial, the judge also suggested that the law used by the CHP officer was unconstitutional.

Mackey and two other men were reading the Bible outside the DMV when Officer Darren Meyer accused them of preaching to a “captive audience.” The officer later amended the allegations, citing them instead for intimidation. At the time the men were approached by the officer, however, the DMV office was closed and the men were standing 50 feet from the entrance as citizens waited outside the door. The men never approached the crowd. After insisting that they were exercising their constitutional rights, the officer arrested Mark Mackey and Brett Coronado.

The federal suit—stayed while the criminal case played out in state court—alleges that there was no probable cause to arrest Mackey and that his First Amendment rights were violated. Even though our client has been criminally cleared, we are seeking a federal remedy to further clear his name and to protect other individuals who seek to peacefully express their faith. The federal district court found that the CHP officer did have probable cause. We will keep you apprised as this Ninth Circuit Appeal advances..

I first heard of this story through Defending Contending, a fundamentalist Christian blog.  A man by the name of Bill Phillips wrote an article about the arrest of the street preachers. Here’s part of what he had to say: (link no longer active)

I discussed this with a couple atheists in the comments on this YouTube video. They are biased against anyone preaching about the Bible of course; they also believe these preachers broke the law. They say they support freedom of speech, but they don’t seem to understand that the whole point of the First Amendment is to protect speech you may find offensive or annoying.

I spent a number of years preaching on public street corners and sidewalks. I was accosted numerous times by law enforcement officers demanding that I stop preaching. While I was never thrown in the pokey, I was threatened with arrest numerous times. In every instance it was a local business owner who demanded the police shut me up. Try as they might to keep me from preaching, they failed miserably. One Saturday, knowing they couldn’t arrest me, four Zanesville, Ohio police officers parked their cruisers a short distance from me and got out of the cars. For the entire time I was there they stood staring at me, hoping that I would be intimidated into quitting. I wasn’t, and later I went to the police station and filed a complaint against the officers.

Having experienced the heavy hand of law enforcement officers who are ignorant of the law and the first amendment, I am sympathetic towards anyone who is harassed or arrested for exercising their first amendment right to free speech. When I read the aforementioned story on Defending Contending, I decided to leave a comment in support of the arrested street preachers. Here’s my innocuous, supportive, relatively non-offensive, non-argumentative comment:

Well, I am an atheist who supports the right for idiots to stand on public property and preach. This is America and the freest real estate in America is public property.

I preached on the streets for many years. I was threatened with arrest dozens of times. I have been harassed by police more times than I can count. I stood my ground because the first amendment matters…for Christians and atheists.

This means having to put up with people and speech I find offensive.

Yes, I called the street preachers idiots. They are. And they are also obnoxious, in your face, and offensive. While I support their first amendment right to free speech, it doesn’t necessarily follow that I like or support their message. I don’t.  As a former street preacher, I know all the tricks of the trade. So when I come across street preachers haranguing the public with the “good news”, I tend to mock them. Just exercising my right to free speech, even if Polly wishes I wouldn’t. I tend to see harassing street preachers as fun and games. Polly just stands in the distance, alternately laughing and shaking her head.

In leaving my comment, I thought Bill Phillips and Defending Contending readers would appreciate an atheist standing up for the fundamentalist street preachers, especially since the blog post mentioned several atheist YouTube commenters who thought differently.  I should have known better.

Jim, using the Flee Babylon moniker, replied to my comment with this:

“Well! I am an atheist who supports the right for idiots to stand on public property and preach.”

Bruce – There are many problems with your alleged testimony. Let me ask you a question. Were you truly born again (met Christ not in word but in reality and power) and now turned away from him or did you have a mental belief in Christ, earn a living from it, and now your mental belief is changed?

Kindly, Jim

As you know, I have no patience for this line of interrogation. I have written about it numerous times. I replied to Jim:

Normally Jim I would use a few choice words to tell you want I think of your comment but I will respect the fact this is not my house,

Your use of the word alleged is offensive. It is my life, my story, my testimony and you don’t get to frame the storyline. I was every bit a Christian that you now are. I don’t care if that squares with your theology. It matters not to me whether or not you think or know I was never a Christian. I know. I give you this challenge…. Find one person who knew me as their pastor or a fellow colleague in the ministry who thought, at the time, I was not a Christian. Either I was deluded and an expert at deceiving people or your theological premise fails when applied to real life.

That said, what the **** does this have to do with the point of the post? I won’t discuss this further with you. Come over to my house and we can discuss it there.

And let the pile on begin…

Todd 3588 writes:

What’s an atheist?

Jon Gleason writes:

1 John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

Linda MacDonald writes:

Bruce Gerencser, GOD says you were never his and you nor I get to “frame the storyline” HE DOES. There’s no such thing as being A Christian and then no longer being one.

Jesus after talking about people who did great things in his name says-”Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’ -”Mat 7:23

“I NEVER KNEW YOU” means never.

A person does not become born again of the spirit of God and become unborn. God’s word clearly says- “No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God.”-1 John 3:9.

a person leaving and becoming a staunch atheist is evidence that you were one of the first 3 soils but never the 4th soil-good soil.

Satan has mental assent just like many people have but never a full commitment from your heart where GOD reaches down to YOU and saves you. It is God who reaches down to us not us reaching up to him.

No human decision saves anyone-John 1:13 only when we are born of God from above.

Mickie Merrie writes:

What astounds me is he sees it as a badge he wears to brag about it! Any remorse for the sheep he sheared?

Just wrote this the other day for another blog..sure seems to fit this one too!

“A man blinded by God…a man struck deaf by God…due to His perfect judgement of the heart, cannot be made to see or hear by man. We may not even yet see their blindness nor deafness, for it begins at God’s descretion (sic), due to sin in the heart, long before it manifest itself in their actions. This too explains the sudden change in the behavior of those who walked the path uprightly in days gone by.
It’s not how you ran the race, but how you run the race, and finish a winner in Him.”

Having put his hand to the plow and looked back …

Perhaps this will help him and those who relate to him get a cleare (sic) picture, it is good for all of us to read…

http://www.reformedsermonarchives.com/ryle38.htm

Happy Resurrection Day to everybody!

Todd3588 writes:

Here are two thoughts….The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.” Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Or you will also be like him.

Todd3558 also wrote:

Ah the “interpretation” arguement (sic) AGAIN. “That’s YOUR truth.” “This is MY truth.” Blah, blah, blah. “Your interpretation is wrong…if you were as smart as me, then your interpretation and understanding and (non)belief would be as ‘advanced’ as mine.” Blah, blah, blah.

Anti-Christian, A(nti)theists are all the same. Arrogant. Elitist. Dead in their sin. Blind to truth. Under the wrath of God. Destined to spend eternity in a place created for Satan and his angels. Just like all others who’ve not been given the gift of faith and conversion.

And  finally Jim chimed in, giving me his email address and telling me what a wonderful guy he is:

“I was every bit a Christian that you now are”

That is my point, I could never say “I used to be married but now I dont (sic) believe that my wife ever exsited (sic)”. Such a statement would mean either:

A) I only imagined I was married, however popwerful (sic) that imagination was (like I bought a second car to keep in the drive way, drew a picture of what I thought my wife might look like, etc)

B) I was married and am now so angry or hurt that I deny my estranged wife even existed

Either you were a false convert all along or you are an apostate and walked away from truly knowing Christ. This has nothing to do with theoolgy, (sic), just reality. I am not impressed with what people thought of you as a pastor either – modern church people are the easiest to trick into believing anything. If there is one thing I applaud it is you leaving the professional clergy that scripture knows nothing of. Maybe you will find Christ in the wilderness if you have never truly met Him. If not, I pray you find healing from what ever pain the religious beast system caused to you.

Please do not be angry at me and treat me as someone who deserves a few choice words. I would actually meet up with you if you lived near Detroit? My email is repent_trust@yahoo.com

Jim

Interspersed in the comment section are several comments by my friend John Arthur. John, always a polite man, tried to engage Defending Contending commenters on my behalf, but to no avail.  What’s interesting is that there is only one comment directly related to subject of the post. Feed a fundamentalist dog an atheist bone and it will forget the filet mignon in its food bowl.

I suppose that it could be argued that I baited the Christian commenters by calling the street preachers idiots. I can see how someone might think that, but that was not my intent. I simply made a judgment based on their behavior. They acted like idiots and I said so. Why should my opinion be considered offensive? Shouldn’t God’s chosen ones view such criticisms as a badge of honor? Doesn’t Psalm 119:165 say:

Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them.

Nothing shall offend them, the Bible says. Yet, one atheist uttering a six letter word causes some of the zealots at Defending Contending to feel offended. Man, they need to come over to the other side of the street and have a taste of the hate and maliciousness dished out by Jesus-loving Christians towards Bruce Gerencser, the preacher turned atheist.

I posted this to illustrate to readers how a comment of SUPPORT on a Christian blog turned into a personal attack. An attack, I might add that says far more about Defending Contending readers, their insecurities, and their religion, than it says about me.

22 Comments

  1. KatieS

    “modern church people are the easiest to trick into believing anything”
    That made me laugh. He’s admitting it, right there, admitting it.
    It does come down to insecurity and fear. So much fear. They will throw anyone and anything under the bus to assuage that fear.
    That said, Jim does seem fairly nice, especially in comparison to the rest. He just totally fails to wrap his head around the concept that we don’t believe god exists.
    His wife analogy falls down in that the story should be that he thinks he’s married to his wife, but he’s never seen her, never touched her, never spoken to her and what little he knows about her is in a very old book that says she’ll torture you forever if you don’t believe in her.

    Reply
  2. Peter

    Bruce, I am not seeking at all to defend the Christian commentators on that blog, but I will offer one observation. Your testimony threatens their whole worldview and if they admit that you once were a “true Christian” then in essence it means that their theological position falls apart. So they really only have two options either admit you were a true a Christian and this proves their theology were wrong or to argue that you were never a Christian. So it is not hard to see which they would choose.

    I am also reminded of the old maxim, the weaker one’s argument is the louder that person needs to shout.

    Reply
  3. Geoff

    Sorry to say Bruce, but I think using the word ‘idiots’ totally alienated what is, let’s face it, an irrational audience. They themselves saw nothing at all wrong with the preachers you were referring to and, indeed, far from simply supporting their right to free speech, actually endorsed their actions. So by saying they were idiots, you were calling the audience idiots as well (which, by the way, is true).

    I still can’t get my head round this ‘once a Christian always a Christian’ thing. You used to believe something and now you don’t. What’s the big deal? Someone used to be married but isn’t any longer, doesn’t mean they weren’t once married.

    And these people get to vote!

    Reply
  4. Steve

    I concur dude, “idiots” is probably what set them off, lol!

    Of course, being who they are, it wouldn’t take very much, though 🙂

    Reply
  5. Troy

    Here’s my retort to Jim: I used to believe in Santa Claus but now I don’t believe that my Santa ever existed.

    Such a statement would mean either:

    A) I only imagined Santa, however powerful that imagination was (like we saw the milk and cookies eaten, and even a bite out of carrot for the reindeer, etc)

    B) I was a Santa believer and am now so angry (didn’t get that Xbox 1!) or hurt that I deny Santa even existed.

    Now if it is theologically impossible to become an ex-Christian why are the likes of Jim Elliff (as mentioned in a recent blog post) so afraid people will “doubt or lose their faith” if they listen to Bart Ehrman?

    Reply
  6. exrelayman

    All true, but, if your use of ‘idiot’ is just your opinion and should not offend them, perhaps their use of ‘never was a real Christian’ is just their opinion and should not offend you? What’s good for the goose, etc.

    Often how one responds to something is more important than the thing itself.

    But a ‘supportive comment’ that refers to the supported with the term ‘idiot’, that’s rich alright.

    Reply
    1. Bruce Gerencser (Post author)

      My use of the word idiot was meant to convey that no matter how ignorant a person might be, I support their right to free speech. While it certainly can be inferred by my statement, I didn’t directly call these street preachers idiots. My comment was meant show support for their first amendment cause.

      Reply
    2. Bruce Gerencser (Post author)

      I would also add that saying someone is an idiot is a far cry from invalidating a person’s life and consigning them to the eternal flames of hell. The former is perhaps poor word choice. The latter is a personal attack on a person’s character, an attempt to denigrate, diminish, and invalidate.

      Reply
      1. exrelayman

        Yes, the distinction you draw I knew. I tend to think of it as rather hair splitting myself, but I am not in your shoes. No problem. Life may be more pleasant if you can when possible realize they are being offensive AND choose not to take offense. I do not claim that I am always able to do this!

        So we got the fools says in his heart vs idiot. Or, as Mr. Loftus would say, deluded. Once feelings are hurt, minds are more resistant to change. Not that the indoctrinated as a class are particularly open to change sans perceived insult. Thankfully, for those preferring truth to dogma, investigating where the faith came from is possible. A few of us escaped.

        And there should be a law restricting freedom of speech when the intended audience cannot choose to avoid it by walking away. How would they like it if the street preachers were Muslim?

        Reply
        1. Bruce Gerencser (Post author)

          The question I had about the story was whether they were actually on public property. Certainly the sidewalk in front of the DMV is public property, but if they were actually in the parking lot, I’m not certain that qualifies as public property. Even then, the government can and does restrict the exercise of free speech in public spaces. For example, there are places in Washington DC where you cannot publicly preach. I attended a street preachers convention in DC and law enforcement made it quite clear to us where we could and couldn’t preach. Several preachers were arrested because they were unwilling to obey the law.

          Years ago, I went to the Perry County Fair to preach to/at fair attendees. I was threatened with arrest, but I successfully rebuffed their threats with a free speech argument. Months later I received a letter from the Ohio Attorney General telling me that fairgrounds were, in fact, private property. Come to find out, counties rent the fairgrounds to the county agricultural board, and this made the event private. I was no longer permitted to preach in the fairgrounds. I consulted a Christian law firm that specialized in first amendment cases, and after researching the matter, they told me the letter from the Ohio Attorney General was correct.

          Reply
  7. Jerod Hatch

    Hi Bruce,

    Just read your blog looking for something else, and wanted to thank you for standing up for these guys. It is not often we find former Christians defending Christians, such as myself, especially for something which can be done so obnoxiously as was the case in front of the DMV. I know all three of the men in the video, and respect that they are tradesman with day jobs as well as Pastors of Reconciled fellowship in San Jacinto – Not professional clergy, not cemetary, i mean seminary trained. Their offputting style is not quite what the Bible depicts as evangelism, and as you implied, their rewards for such activity is from men.

    What follows is what I have gleaned from one of the men briefly, and from talking to others in town, so take it with a grain of salt.

    After the fact it turns out they had dealt with that same officer before this event for the same thing (hence the camera just mmmmaaaybe), that they had routinely failed to get a permit which would have allowed them to harangue others permit free (they also do this stuff out in front of the Hemet Court house where they are only harassed by citizens).

    What I do not agree with its that they turned around and sued the CHP officer personally in a civil suit. What’s even more sad is that this Officer may have been affected deeply had the pastors forgiven him, since he is exactly the type of pression they should be preaching to – a former Christian, agnostic, homosexual police officer whose mother actually is a Christian and pays for him daily (according to my pastor who met the officer’s Mom in Idyllwild).

    Having been a pastor I am sure you are familiar with Five-Point Calvinism, the philosophy from which these men understand their method of evangelism. It is shotgun evangelism, hoping to make it stick to whomever God has foreordained to be saved.

    At any rate, at this late date it doesn’t really matter, save that Hillary will attempt to change my deep-seated religious beliefs and it adds fuel to her ire.

    Reply
    1. Jerod Hatch

      “Type of person” ; “prays”, not “pays”

      Reply
    2. Brian

      Jerod, this kind of talk incites people like me to use words like ‘idiot’ in response to people like you. In counselling, sensitive people have pointed out to me that Ableism is a trap very easily tripped into and I do make efforts to avoid it. So. You bully. I use the term bully because what you are doing in your sick Cross way is attack the police officer. You get into his underwear because you are sick, sir. You have no business talking about his sexuality or lack of it. His belief or lack of it is his right as a citizen, a breathing person. You are an offensive person acting poorly. That the other Christians you take to task here have gone on to personally attack the officer only shows how sick they are as well. They believe they should be able to bully a captive audience with their Bible nonsense and you agree with them in principle. I am a former Christian and would be on the phone to the cops if some asshole like the the guy in the video came up to me in a lineup where I was waiting to do government business and starting reading to me, judging and spitting Christian hatred. Go fuck yourself, Jerod Hatch. Fuck your fantasy love that lives as hatred in this world.

      Reply
      1. Jerod Hatch

        Brian,

        I don’t know how far this will actually go with you, but I’d like to extend an apology for what offended you in my post. I played the pharisee a bit, and you were correct to point it out. I reduced the officer to a “type” of person and paired a “type” with his homosexuality. Huge mistake. I’m sorry. Old habits die hard.

        I only meant to bring it up to say that had the men not sought damages but personally spoken to and forgiven the officer they felt offended them, those means would have served their stated spiritual ends more effectively. In principle,no, I don’t agree with that type of evangelism. The hearer must feel free to walk away, which obviously one would not in line at the DMV. God works in freewill.

        In fact we are all – 100% of the global population – the type who need the gospel, saved and unsaved. The saved need it as a reminder of who they were before Jesus, are in Christ, and what they are promised by redemption in Christ’s sacrifice. The unsaved need the Gospel to live eternally with Christ, as He promised, and to avoid the reality of hell, a place not meant for us.

        In the future I will remember your rebuke and be more gentle, even though I cannot change the standard set forth in scripture. It is not hate to share a sincere belief in Christ and wish that others would have life in him and avoid hell. It is hate to be apathetic towards the reality of hell and those choosing it. I sincerely hope you have a good day, or night, wherever you are. Be safe.

        J

        Reply
        1. Brian

          J, I appreciate that my rebuttal did not send you into paroxysms of victimhood, something that often seems to happen when I speak with American Christians and something that is more and more evident among the tea party believers now. They feel that the world of their truth is being taken from them and that they are about to suffer untold persecution. But here is the way I see it: Even though you say you are feeling apologetic because of your previous way of stating things, you point out finally that it ain’t never your decision to say what God has decided. That puts you in the camp of Steven Anderson et al as I see it. We are going to hell to burn eternally because God. Homosexuals need Jesus is a statement that can only be made by someone who hates with ‘love’ because the Authority has given him permission. What if the homosexual individual knows in his heart just how love works and and is sure of his feelings? And what if the non-believer (me) feels exactly this way too? Must I be consigned to hell by your God? What on earth would you want to have anything to do with a Trump-God like that?

          Reply
  8. Zoe

    Jerod Hatch: “It is not hate to share a sincere belief in Christ and wish that others would have life in him and avoid hell. It is hate to be apathetic towards the reality of hell and those choosing it.”

    Zoe: And it is not hate to share a sincere belief that there is no hell and it would be apathetic for me not to tell you so.

    Reply
  9. J.D. Matthews

    So many Christians, so few lions…

    Reply
    1. Brian

      The days of auto-de-fe come to mind, the kind of test that singes your short-hairs and makes a tortured mockery of any sense of true justice. So it is with belief systems. Some stranger in authority decides your fate. The fundamentalist of the Muslim faith is in bed with the Christian fundamentalist and they are so far gone they do not have a clue where they are…. You want to talk perverted acts? Just picture those believers.

      Reply
      1. Jerod Hatch

        Steven Anderson and others of his ilk are biblically illiterate without the love of Christ. Yes, homosexual behaviors are sin, but they were paid for by Christ’s blood.

        So, Brian, the answer to your question is yes. As a former christian you should know all too well the gospel that says If you don’t believe in Christ then you are condemned already to hell – not by Christ but by your own failure to live up to the perfect law of God. So Christ lived up to that standard for you so you can have eternal life instead of eternal judgement. All he requires in return is your trust in him before he returns. Once he returns or you die you will spend eternity in hell if you spend the rest of your life rejecting his gift of salvation, Jesus. This gospel is supposed to offend you because your unrepentant heart is on the offensive against God. The good news is is that his heart breaks for you even while you spit in his face. But there is hell to pay because a just God cannot condone sin. Thank God Christ loved us enough to live the perfect life for all of us sinners. The only difference between my guarantee of eternal life and your guarantee of eternal death is trust in Christ.

        If I didn’t offend you I would be useless in this regard. This is THE MOST loving thing one person can do for another.

        Reply
        1. Brian

          You, sir, are addled. Fuck me because I don’t believe in your fairy tale, the fairy tale that is not even yours but someone else’s that you pass along to me with a warning. Fuck your fairy tale. God is dog is fog is airy woo-woo. I am angry sometimes at people who go around harming others with big smarmy smiles in their expression, like you, Jerod. The gift of salvation would turn me into an addled biped like you going around and condemning others because your big bully fantasy told you to spread the wealth, the perfect love. You spread harm.
          You do offend me, Jerod. Don’t blame God for what you enjoy doing to others like me. Don’t bullshit. None of us is perfect, Jerod, and none of us is condemned. We choose to live for today as it is or die for it. You have chosen to believe the big fairy tale and die to this life. I choose to live. I can do without you being like me but you will continue to harm in His Name! Any wonder I get angry at you?
          “If I didn’t offend you, I would be useless in this regard….” No, Jerod, you would be respectful and care more for people than your beliefs allow a present. Bring on your Judgement, Jerod. I mean smack me again and smile and tell me it is Jesus’ love. You really don’t see how harmful you are…
          During the ?2nd Crusade the order came down after the resistance had been overwhelmed, to take no prisoners. Kill them all, the authority from God said. God will know his own. Would you have done God’s will on that day, Jerod? If God said, Jerod, take your son and tie him to a tree and sacrifice him, are you faithful enough to do it? You see, it is all quite sick, Jerod, and it works for you.

          Reply
        2. Geoff

          “If I didn’t offend you I would be useless in this regard. This is THE MOST loving thing one person can do for another.”

          Jerod, if we stood on street corners telling you to renounce your beliefs and become an atheist we’d probably be arrested. As it is, we are accused of being strident simply for expressing our views, mainly on the internet. Yet you somehow feel it is your duty to force down our throats your illogical and unsupported beliefs.

          By all means you are entitled to your opinions, even foolish ones, but if you want to propagate those views then I suggest you refine them, consider them, and then engage in proper debate.

          Reply
          1. Jerod

            Funny, I saw that very thing in Balboa Park on Saturday. It was like the beginning to a joke: an atheist, a muslim, and a christian were proselytizing in a park…

            Christians do get arrested for proselytizing. The article Bruce wrote has to do with that very thing.

            So consider, refine, and then engage?

            I.e., succumb to intimidation, twist scripture from its intended straightforward meaning, and then engage in debate once I adhere to the agendas you would like me to.

            A free market place of ideas and freedoms of speech and thought are exactly what your irrational comment seeks to destroy. Had you been at the park that day, I think you might have been sent “into paroxysms of victimhood”. This is ‘Murica, no apologies (unless I completely screw up a post 🙂

            Cats and dogs… living together!!

Please Leave a Pithy Reply

%d bloggers like this: