Okay, folks...
I'm going to take a stab at this. I know I'll get parts wrong. I know I'll miss some aspects.
However, the term "marriage" is as big and broad in the world of the FLDS as it is narrow and defined in the lexicon of the average person.
I think that the myriad of uses of a single word has caused considerable grief. Mainly because those persons in empowered positions have not taken the time to learn what the word actually is in the FLDS culture. They have assumed our simple meaning and superimposed that meaning over every instance they confront the word in the FLDS.
The other thing that confounds me is how "we" have assumed the term "sealed" to mean a conventional marriage, as we define marriage. And, conveniently, we pretend the difference between "time" and "all eternity" are negligible.
Anyway, here are the types of situations I have seen referred to as "marriage" within the FLDS.
1. The equivalent of a 'betrothal'. This seems to be infrequent, and usually involves a young adolescent girl, who is sealed to an older, 'elder' in the church. It is presumed that the marriage will not be consummated until much later, when the girl herself wants to, and comes to her husband. This assures a place in the afterlife as part of the family of the husband.
2. A 'sealing' of a widow to a man in the community, for 'time'. Her husband has died in good standing, and she is already assured her place with him in the afterlife, but a sealing for 'time' to another man assures her needs and care in this life are met. This may or may not, be a consummated sealing. That would be up to the woman.
3. A 'sealing' of a woman whose husband has lost his priesthood. A woman's path to eternal life is through her husband. If her husband has lost his priesthood, a woman can ask to be sealed to another in order to attain heaven in the next life. This is the choice of the woman, who also makes this choice on behalf of her young children who are unmarried, and boys who have not reached the age and requirements of priesthood. Some women choose to be sealed to another shortly after their husband has lost his priesthood. Some choose to wait and see if their husband repents and returns to the community. It is considered the woman's choice to make.
4. A conventional sealing., for time and eternity, between two individuals who have each decided they are ready for this union. This is the beginning of the journey, together. After being sealed, the couple get to know one another. They work at loving one another. When they are both ready, particularly the woman, the marriage is consummated, and the aspect of becoming a family together begins. There is no set time for this. It is when they have both decided that they are ready for this next step. And, importantly, the woman must be the one to come to her husband and declare herself ready for this step.
Now I may have over simplified these types of "marriages". And there may be types of relationships I have missed. And I didn't discuss the individual experiences aspect. And I didn't discuss the times when things have gone awry from the doctrinal definitions and expectations.
What I wanted to show is that "marriage" has many permutations within the FLDS community. Without understanding that, all sorts of assumptions of wrongdoing can happen. The differences in how we conventionally use language, and the variations within the specific culture of the FLDS are of tremendous importance. Over the last few months I have seen ugly judgments being rendered without any real understanding.
The judgments have been based on the use of the same word without accommodation for the very different meanings applied to the word.
In our "outside" world, marriage comes after two people have gotten to know one another, and have decided they want to spend their lives together, as a married couple. They have already determined that there is physical attraction and emotional commitment. Often, even if the relationship has not been consummated, there has been some degree of sexual intimacy and exploration.
In the FLDS culture, when an individual feels they are ready to begin the journey with another person, they let their parents know. And the Prophet is told. Or, for a man who has a family, the Prophet, through divine inspiration, will know that he is ready to expand his family.
Through the Prophet, who is inspired through prayer, two people are brought together. If both of them agree, they are sealed. Sometimes they have never met. Rarely do they know each other well.
For these two people, this is the beginning, there is a time of getting to know one another. Of working on love and commitment and building a relationship. It is a time for all of those things that have usually taken place in an "outside" relationship, before marriage. Here it happens after marriage. It is very, very different.
And, importantly, one only acts on one's sexuality within their marriage. Period. No exceptions. It is sacred. It is a gift from God, between two people.
7 years ago
52 comments:
If you are already married and the guy leaves cause he is told to get out, can they get "sealed" to the other guy and NEVER have sex? just to be in a household?
I can see that you put a lot of thought into this. Often times over the past year I have thought to myself that the FLDS way is the best way. But that's just my own opinion.
About plural marriage, the prophet or someone holding the keys of sealing needs to sanction it or it is adultry. I don't know how far if the FLDS still practice it that way but that is the way it was taught at first.
You can't just go round up wives on your own. Plural marriage is a religious doctrine and I think that the outside world misses that aspect of it when discussing it.
Maayan,
Brigham Young and other early leaders had wives that were sealed to them without "sex" ever taking place so I would say the answer is yes.
And it's not really about being in the household either. Many of the wives of early leaders had their own homes, their own incomes. It is about eternal bonds of family relationships.
Dale...I wanted to write more about that aspect, but I haven't asked enough questions to feel like I could even begin to write about it...
Maayan- From what I understand, sexual relationships are ALWAYS initiated by the woman. She has to be ready and willing. If she isn't, it just doesn't happen. I've been told that NO really means NO in the FLDS. That is why men have been excomunicated for pushing themselves, even just with words, on their wives when their wife wasn't ready....
Dale, I think there are times, especially for widows, it is about the now...of being cared for...of having a member of the priesthood watch out for you....because, from what I understand, those sealings are for "time", meaning the here and now, but their original sealing that was for "all eternity" is still good......
I wish pliggy or cheese or rose would show up....lol
Reg,
About widows and sealings for time I agree with what you said and so does LDS church history (I have to talk about what I know and the FLDS and LDS come from the same roots).
But don't let some uneducated but well meaning LDS person tell you it is only about widows and orphans as the saying goes.
The primary purpose of marriage is to build your family both here and in the hereafter.
It doesn't look like pliggy is online right now. He would be an excellent source as to how the FLDS practice marriage in this day and age.
So Dale, If a woman is widowed, can she be released from her first, now dead, husband, and sealed for time and eternity to another? And why would she want to do that, unless, of course, she was unhappy with her first husband.....
He's probably driving....I haven't heard from him all day....
That's a good question. I suppose anything is possible but I really don't know.
He just got online. I sent him an im asking him to join us. I don't know if he will or not though.
"of course, she was unhappy with her first husband"
I do think that it would take more than just this. Happy comes and goes with every marriage.
I think there may have been times when a man was asked to leave, who had a large family, that his wives were immediately sealed to another for several reasons...and I have no way of knowing if the sealing was for just time, or time and eternity...but if it was a big family, the Prophet would want to make sure there was a head to the household....someone to make bottom line decisions and be responsible for making sure life moved forward.....so it's not just a spiritual decision, but a practical one, as well...
I think in our larger world, households without a father are not all that uncommon...we have gotten used to the idea...but in the FLDS community, it just isn't common, at all...and I would think it is especially true if it was a family of more than one wife and numerous children....
If it is just one wife there is the possiblity of returning to her own parent's home.....
Probably, ideally, a love will grow and it will be more than a relationship based on practical needs....
Dale, I mean asking to be unsealed, after he has died, in order to be sealed for eternity instead of just time, with a new husband....
I mean maybe she just didn't like the first one....stayed because it was what she thought was right, but now he's dead, who knows...I guess I'm just rambling...but I think if I didn't really like someone, and I had an opportunity to start over with someone else, I might want to take my chances that I'd really like the next one...and to me, it would be better to spend eternity with someone Iliked than with someone I didn't....
Howdy Everyone!
If a women really doesn't like the man she is married to, after he dies, if he did not lose his priesthood, no, she can not be released. But if she does something that makes her lose her position with that man, then she will get her release. But there isn't a good man around who would really want a woman like that.
Howdy,
These are quotes that were used in the Elissa Wall rape case, because the prosecution stated that Elissa Wall was raped via WSJ "forcing" her to get married and thus "forced" to have sex against her will. But these quotes were ignored by the jury, as also were the defense witnesses
“I have heard our Prophet say, “A man should only have those marital relations with a wife if she invites it; and the purpose for her to invite it is to have children. And if they are with child leave them alone sexually” The proper hugging, a kiss, proper touching and drawing close, that is proper as the Spirit of God is with you. But there is no force in the marriage of Celestial Marriage; all with an eye single to the glory of God.” (Warren S Jeffs February 14, 1999)
“There are some women who have been deceived by their husbands. When men apostatize they generally say to their wives, “Well, you have made an eternal covenant. You can never get away from me” They lie to their wives. So I put it how President Jeffs says. After he performs a sealing he shakes the man’s hand and says “You take care of this good woman and you keep sweet.” And then the turns to the woman, shakes her hand and says, “Your covenant is to obey this good man in all things in righteousness,” not in wickedness, but in righteousness.
“So you young ladies are being taught the ways of righteous living, that you may know. And no priesthood man has the right to have you do wrong”
“You obey this good man in all things in righteousness” I have heard him talk about it afterwards. He would say, “I have had to add that phrase “in righteousness”, because some men have taught their wives “You have to obey me no matter what.” No, no, no. That isn’t right. You obey your husband in all things in righteousness. And that is why you young ladies need to be taught correct principle, because if anything happens to the faithfulness of your husband, you don’t have to go to hell with him.” (Warren S Jeffs January 20, 1998)
“We are here to learn how to become like God by doing what He does, enter into the holy Celestial Law and exalt those who come under our jurisdiction. The father has to have the proper thoughts in his mind, and you need it in your minds, ladies. A father on this earth, a Priesthood bearer, can only look upon his wives and children as a stewardship. They really belong to Heavenly Father. And he should do with his family as the Lord directs, not just make up his own rules and do anything. And this realization that all he has belongs to God should awaken a father to the truth that he must be careful what he asks his wives to do, both in outward works and intimate relations. He must govern himself in his marriage connections to honor God and Priesthood.”
A "SEALING" is a Priesthood covenant. There is even a covenant of "sealing" between a father and his sons. It is meant to create one family sealed together from Adam to the final man on earth. In the highest heaven there are no single people, and all are sealed together as one family; sons and wives.
All marriage "sealings" are betrothals. There is not another ceremony before they can be intimate and have children. But there is absolutely no requirement to be intimate. NONE.
And yes, some sealings are for "time", rather than "time and all eternity" because their eternal sealing to a husband after this life has already been done. And the sealing is for comfort and family in this life only.
The "time" sealing's could be also interpreted as levirate marriages.
Whew....I went and put dinner on and all the good discussion came and went!!!
Rose....*waving*
So, What I'm hearing is that if a woman is really unhappy with her husband, she better speak up and, if after working on things, the unhappiness cannot be resolved, she needs to go to the Prophet or the bishop and speak up, because if he dies, and she didn't, she's stuck....
So, that's another way that FLDS do not expect women to be doormats...they are obligated to speak up for themselves.....
Women have more rights in our religion than people think. If a girl is told to marry a man, she can say no. But if a man says no, he looses that blessing. He really shouldn't say no.
Our marriages are not for the looks. We love a person for who they can become. A man should love his wife/wives yes, but he should love God, the prophet and priesthood above all. This is what a good woman should want her husband to be like.
Yes, there is love, there are wonderful relations, but only through priesthood. Does this make any sense?
It is not for lust but love. A heavenly love.
Yes women can speak out and say, I just can't love this man. I know of ladies that have been released because they just don't like the man. But in every case, she had her eye on another man when she got married. Instead of telling the truth when she was asked if she had someone in mind, she said "I do" at the wedding. This causes her to lose her chances of falling in love with the man she was placed with.
Rose-
I am constantly impressed with the difference between what the world thinks and the reality of your lives. It sounds as though women are charged with an enormous responsibility in creating families that work. That's huge!
I think all marriages, whether they are FLDS or anything, should be based on love for each other on a larger plain than the physical...it has to be because of the character of the person....but sometimes, it just doesn't work....
A person can be the best person in the world, but if they are also a grouchy S.O.B., I don't want to be around...now I might try for awhile to help him change...but if he stays a miserable person to be around, I want out. I want a person who can make me feel good about myself, life, choices, so on....
They way I've heard people talk about FLDS, once you are married, that's it...there is no way out if it is bad...but that's not what you're saying...you're saying there are standards a man needs to meet.....but responsibilities for the wife to help, and she doesn't have to put up with miserable behavior...
Oh, I am tired...so I tend to ramble...my thoughts just don't come together....
I had to laugh when you said it's not for lust....oh my goodness....maybe because I'm getting older....but honestly, those hormones are wonderful when they first kick in...but when you get older, you want a gentler existance that isn't confused or driven by hormones....
I'd have buried Fred out in the backyard, under the pond, years ago if we hadn't built a life based on family and friendship....and genuinely caring about one another....
Yes, your right. The wife is the help mate. She will love him and help him as he does her as well. She really makes most of the decisions, by giving her input and opinion. He respects her for that and can see that she really see's life at home better than he does. But when it comes to priesthood, he is the decider unless he just can't keep up the the standards of a good priesthood man. That is when she can go to the prophet and say he is not doing as you want. He will work with the man if he hasn't done things that need repenting of. The man will do better, or she will be released from him.
I hope people come and read the comments, even if they don't post.
I think they'll leave with a much better undeerstanding of marriage and relationships....
LOL you make me laugh. I said it that way cause it seems to be that most people think that men are in it for... well..sex. Can I say that word on here?
Our men are so sweet. That isn't the first thing on their minds. Its rather funny, most men want to see or talk to their little sweet heart daughter before the wife. They miss the sweet father daughter relation they have when they are out of town working week after week. I know cause my little girl will beg to call her father, and he will always ask to talk to her and ask about her. Its so sweet.
Aw....
I know my grandaughters absolutely adore their father! I mean they love their mother...but there is a special connection between Michael and his girls....
Having had only boys, I can't imagine raising a girl...for so many years I was the only female in the house...and they quickly forgot I was there...oh my...the male personality, untempered by sisters is not a pretty thing....
I think if I had to raise a girl, even if it wasn't on purpose, I would steer her into being gay.....boys can be such awful animals, left to their own!!!!
I'm sure most males, FLDS or anything, when they are young, can't help but feel lust...it's just the way they are wired...but in your community, from the time they are little, they are getting another message as well....and it is one of an expectation of always behaving with respect. A young man may see a pretty girl and lust pops into his brain, but it better not come out in his words or actions!!!!
By the way, I was just kidding about steering a daughter...but boys alone are strange animals!
And so crass......my goodness, I can remember them having farting contests and burping contests....
and all sorts of things I wouldn't write about....lol
Oh, I must admit, my teen boys have had their times. And so have the girls in the community about them. But I have the mother bear in me that comes out and real soon they know better. Yes, they will look at a girl and saw, "WOW, she's cute." But they know they leave the choice to the Lord and let Him do the choosing. The girls know they have to deal with me if they try to take my son from me or our religion.
And if the boys head in on straight, he will wait for the prophet to direct him.
Oh yes, even our boys do things like that. Its so stupid, but I guess boys will be boys.
I suppose if I was raised in a community where things are dne your way, I would accept it. But I think because I was raised from as long as I can remember to make my own choices, I would have a hard time with someone else making choices for me. I don't know. I'm sort of oppositional...*smile*...so I would probably be asking all kinds of questions...why him? why not so and so? what if I don't like him? can I think about it?
And I like the courtship process.... I've always been taken by the Amish...it's very formal, and very protected and careful...but there is a sweetness about it...
Every culture is different...I really don't like the recent, I mean like the last twenty years or so, of girls and boys hopping into bed with each other as though it is as insignificant as going to the movies or out for a drive...
Somehow the intense spirituality of sharing your sexuality with another is lost...that saddens me.....
Oh yes I agree.
But choice...We do have that choice. We don't have to marry anyone we don't want to. I remember when it was my turn. Everyone had done their match making, Yes the girls do that some times. And some of the times they are right. LOL...
But I was given the choice. I was asked by the prophet what I thought about it before it ever happened.
We are taught all our lives that we want to do the Lords will. So that was what I wanted in my life.
That is what I told the prophet. But I had done something my mother had told me to do. Years before I got married, I had voiced my concerns to her. I was worried I wouldn't marry the man that Heavenly Father wanted me to marry. Sh told me to pray from this day on, that I would feel a peace when I was told his name by the prophet. So that is what I did. And I fully believed it would happen.
When I was called to go see the prophet, I had fully expected to be placed with an older man. To be ta plural wife of an older man.
As I sat in front of the prophet, I was so nervous. My stomach was full of butterflies. Then the prophet told me who I was to marry,
an sudden peace came over me, then it was gone. I knew this man was the man for me. We met, and got married the next day. The courtship began. It was so fun. You never had to go home and wish you could be with him. You didn't have to worry if he would ever call again. But this is where the relationships of friendship and love starts to grow.
Well...that's an "AHhhhhhhhhh" story!
You are so blessed to have such a wonderful memory! I hope your girls remember the lesson, and look at your family, and know in their hearts how right you were!
Yes, we do have a wonderful relationship. A great friendship and marriage. I know I have several sister jealous of it as well. But I think its the same in any relation whether your FLDS or any other religion. It takes work to make a relationship grow. If anyone just expects it to happen, think again. We are all made up so differently and have different ideas that if you truly want a relationship, you will make it happen.
Hello Rose, I like reading your posts and it sounds like you are happy.
But did you know your religion sucks and you just don't realize how terrible your life is?
Yep, all true according to the anti-polgamy twerps who want to "free" you from a life of slavery and bondage.
Seriously, I know you are supposed to "keep sweet" and stuff, but if you are ever near an rabid anti-polygamy protestor who is foaming at the mouth, would be nice if you or someone else would pop them upside the head...take a break from "keep sweet" for just a few seconds.
duaneh1 you make me laugh. I'll tell you what. Some times it makes you want to give them a good pop in the mouth when they go off like that. They just don't really know what its like for us. We are happy. Course everyone has their moments, but that's why we are here, to learn to be a better person. =)
Thanks, I'm glad you like my posts. I feel rather dumb when it comes to posting. I'm not very good at expressing how I feel in words. But I will keep doing my best.
Duane, Rose does not give herself enough credit! She is super smart! And when she chooses to...oops, I forgot, they have no choice...when the pixies make her, she can write beautifully!!!!!!
Rose said:
"Women have more rights in our religion than people think. If a girl is told to marry a man, she can say no.
I know several women who said no, and they are happily married to good men.
"But if a man says no, he looses that blessing. He really shouldn't say no."
It is like asking a good mother if she would refuse a new child. That is how a good man feels about such a blessing.
I wrote about this a while ago and And HERE
All of the posts are good, but...
If a party is already married, then any of the four is still Bigamy in Texas.
Remember, in this state, there is no need to consummate the marriage, once the ceremony is complete, there is a marriage, whether a legal monogamous marriage or an illegal bigamous one.
This was a real joy to read all of your comments.
Rose, I love how you describe your marriage, how you came to get married and to court.
I didn't have a prophet, but I prayed for the Lord's word, and I have never questioned, or doubted, His guiding me to my husband. We really didn't know each other well before we got married, but we fell fast in love, and then we gained a lot of life experience, and we came to understand real love, the kind of love that comes when you stand by each other through hardship and pain and sickness and financial loss. I believed it of him, and he of me, but our weathering those raging storms together gave us knowledge of each other that we know we will stay committed to each other in good times and in bad.
I'm not sure if I met you, but I met several FLDS women both at the ranch when I visited and in Salt Lake and St. George when I attended the UEP hearings in support of the FLDS right to have the trust restored (and Wisan removed).
When I read your words, and your description of your life, I think of the sweet ladies I met and how their voices were like a song and their faces were bright and pure and pretty.
I was really touched by that, when I saw the ladies up close, that they had a natural beauty, a beauty that came from within. It's not painted on with makeup.
I admit I do not understand your ways. I think I have spent a lot of time defending my own beliefs and my own support of polygamy that I forget how to let go of that defense and that shields I keep holding up to deflect the barbs of the haters, and just learn.
Thank you for sharing. And thank you, Rericson, for opening this dialogue and giving us the chance to understand better.
Mary
blues said "Remember, in this state, there is no need to consummate the marriage, once the ceremony is complete, there is a marriage, whether a legal monogamous marriage or an illegal bigamous one."
even without a state liscense?
thats pretty thin ice thinking since you believe in sleeping with more than one woman, this consumating before marriage is purporting in the worst degree, or is that law only for the FLDS?
Bluesman,
I wondered when you were going to show up with the law and order stuff!!!
This blog isn't about the law...or at least that wasn't my intent...
It's more about talking about the reality of life in the FLDS community, what the doctrine is, how it's actualized...how people feel...all that good stuff....
Every thing has a time and place....for now, this place is for the human side of things...and for trying to develop some clarity because so many rumors and urban legends abound...
I don't know if you've met MPB?
MPB is Mary Batchlor....Mary has been working for a long time to try and help bureaucrats understand "The Principle" and to break down some of the barriers....
and to move toward changing the laws...
And maybe this forum will give her an opportunity to talk with some of the women from the FLDS community....because she is their voice, as well as all the others, "at the table"....Mary is a good person...and so is Rose...so you're not allowed to beat them up!!!
You can take your shots at me!!!
It's late, here...so I'm going to bring in my dogs and go put my feet up...
Have a wonderful evening, everyone!!!!
mhojho,
It may be thin ice, but that's been the law in Texas for decades, and was never directed at the FLDS (since it was in place years before that became an issue). Consummation is not a requirement for a marriage. The ceremony alone coupled with the intent of the individuals is what constitutes a marriage. That is the case both for a marriage under license or a common-law marriage (whether solemnized by a religious ceremony or not).
Regina,
I have never 'beaten up' either Rose nor Mary. As a matter of fact, Mary has posted several times on my blog and vice versa. Thus far, it has always be cordial, and I have no reason to think that will change.
What Rose says about marriage is correct also (as far as it taking effort to make it work). We don't agree on plural marriage, but she has to deal with the consequences from any violations of the law, not I.
If you change the laws, great. But questions of law do affect the 'human side' of it also.
or "in-human side" as the case may be.
Bluesman, I just don't want to turn things 'scrappy'....everyone knows what the laws in the different states are. Most of us agree that the laws are bad laws....
Folks who make the choice to ignore the law know full well that there could be a time when they have to do battle in court over "the law"....
But regardless of how the laws read, in all the different sttes, there is an enormous misunderstanding of the people involved.
And huge, huge misunderstandings of their lives and life styles....
So those are the things I want to be able to talk about....
And I know you are always polite to those who are also polite...I never questioned that..
I just hope you don't bring your "It's against the law" hammer.....'cause we know it's against the law!!!!!!!
On the other hand...advice on strategies and approaches to changing things would be super welcome!!!!!!!!!
People to approach to open dialogue with....who would be more open than whom....who is respected, who has clout and respect....what angle to approach things from....
You know the people, and have your finger on the pulse....
TxBluesMan our religion is only against the law because people made it that way. Remember the constitution? Freedom of religion. What happened to that? Why can someone decide what religion should have their freedom and what one they should make laws against? God gave us this land, the people in general, to worship our God they way we like. Why is is people think they know what it best and can rule against a people they don't understand?
so,
if a man goes out and cheats on his wife every night of the week and it doesn't enter his head to marry all these women then the law doesn't apply
but
if a man marries another woman besides his wife without a divorce
from his first wife, and never has physical contact with her he is guilty of a felony?
I thought this was all about sex!
It is obvious what kind of people made these laws, here is the chaos when comes the anarchy.
oh' its already here; remember the YFZ raid?
Blues, maybe you can help us get the law changed to where consummation before marriage(adultry) is a felony and plural marriage is legal, I think that right there would help change our country for the better, where people raise thier own children and take the responsibility for thier actions!
Rose,
I'm not wanting to get into an argument, nor, in deference to Regina, turn this into a legal shouting match.
However, the Free Exercise Clause does not do what you think it does. You are allowed to believe anything that you want to believe. If you believe that polygamy is the way to salvation, you have my support. You are not however allowed to act in a way that violates a law of general applicability. That has always been the case, even before Reynolds. Jefferson and the other founding fathers have numerous writings that explain this clearly.
As far as the laws prohibiting polygamy? They predate the founding of the Mormon faith by at least 100 years. The original crime of polygamy was a capital offense - meaning polygamists were executed. While it has been, in recent years, more focused on Mormons simply due to the fact that more fundamentalist Mormons practice polygamy than other groups. Other polygamists in Texas are in fact being prosecuted, although they aren't getting the media coverage that the FLDS are getting.
mhojho,
Your first paragraph states it fine. Fortification without an intention to be married in Texas is not a criminal offense (generally, excepting minors and relatives). A celibate but bigamous marriage is, in fact, a felony.
I'll pass on helping to change the law - I really don't care which way it reads, one way or the other. All I care about in this matter is the law.
Regina,
If by explaining the law I can help, I will. I do know that a number on both sides do not understand what the requirements of the law are, nor do they have a good understanding of the Constitutional issues involved (which are a fairly well-developed portion of the law).
I'm not really interested in getting more involved than that.
"A celibate but bigamous marriage is, in fact, a felony."
why, just why would a law like that be passed?
"I'll pass on helping to change the law - I really don't care which way it reads, one way or the other."
thats what I thought you would say; that would be like.. what.....self incrimination.
SURE ya don,t care what it reads uh huh, right!
How would it be self-incrimination?
Just a guess bluesy just a guess
Post a Comment