This has to be one of the most depressing votes ever in California. They used the US Constitution to trample on civil rights. I will never understand why religious people are so scared of gays and lesbians. Let people have their rights and you can home school your children and turn them into another generation of nutcases. It was just the worst thing to wake up to after an incredible election.
On a serious note however i was completely shocked by that Prop 8 vote... Cali is looked upon as a relatively liberal bastion by us midwesterners... Prop 8 passes in Kansas... not California...
yeah in an otherwise bright and sunny day in CA, this is an unfortunate situation. i just don't get it either, this was probably approved by many of the religious minority. how people can fight for equal rights and then vote against something like this is beyond me.
on a brighter note, this is a good day for CA animals and prop 2!
Unfortunately, this initiative was heavily backed by the Mormon church, which had been planning this for years. Ironic that the Mormons had to flee the Midwest and found their own state because American society didn't approve of their marriage choices.
Hopefully this thing will either be overturned by the courts or by federal legislation, or be rescinded in a future initiative.
in 2000, prop 22 (similar to prop 8) passed 62%-38%
now prop 8 passed 52%-48%
very unfortunate it wasn't defeated but that's a pretty big jump in 7 years. i agree with LIG that if this gets to the ballot again the result should be correct (marriage is between two adults regardless of gender).
They really need to ban the proposition system in California-it doesn't take that many signatures to get something on the ballot and then it only takes a simple majority for passage-in some states it takes sixty. So, you end up with fringe groups (or groups based out of state like the LDS) throwing up these hateful laws and then an uninformed populace votes to deny people rights-this has happened now with gays/lesbians, they tried to do it with immigrants, they went after affirmative action, and Prop 13 in the seventies has decimated tax revenue and destroyed school systems all over the state. People shouldn't have the right to determine who gets rights and who doesn't-that's the courts decision, not the tyranny of the majority.
And this decision makes me hate religion even more than I did before.
i'm pretty upset about prop 8. The amount of sign, cars, and buildings that were vandalized in the LA area for having "no on 8" signs is heart breaking.
i always thought people wanted separation of church and state. the church governs marriage (or at least should. it is a "religious" act). it should be left to them to decide to marry who they wish. it shouldnt be a judicial decision in the first place. so i am glad that the thing passed.
people seem to think that voting by proposition is such a democratic and admirable means of deciding certain issues, but really it neglects the flip side of majority rule, which is minority protection. proposition voting does not seem undemocratic, but in that sense it is.
I guess this means I can't invite Archinect to my California wedding any time in the near future.
:*(
But seriously, I'm appalled. Oh, and ALL religious people are not scared of queer people. People truly filled with the holy spirit are generally supportive of human rights, not total bigots.
I guess this means I can't invite Archinect to my California wedding any time in the near future.
:*(
But seriously, I'm appalled. Oh, and ALL religious people are not scared of queer people. People truly filled with the holy spirit are generally supportive of human rights, not total bigots.
bucku, marriage is not a religious act. It is a civil contract between two people governed by the state. Some religions choose to act as representatives of the state and perform marriage ceremonies, and some people choose to have their marriages performed in that method. But you can also get married in a civil/non-religious ceremony, and when you get married in a church you still have to get a marriage license issued by the state in order for the union to be legal.
Marriage is a civil rights issue, NOT a religious one, plain and simple. Churches are free to discriminate for whom they will perform the service - look at how the Catholic church won't marry anyone who isn't Catholic - and *that* is separation of church and state.
odb, thanks for the explanation - it's an interesting process on how to legislate discrimination and hate.
I'm not so surprised - ever been outside LA or SF? Lowlife culture isn't only in the tv y'all. Canada, however, which is as honkytonk as it comes, is a total revelation. Same-sex marriage has been legal for years
In other words: I'm all for love, but let's be honest and face how many people get married for reasons that have nothing to do with love. In this country we're free to do that as a marriage is basically a tax arrangement in the eyes of the government. To allow people to enter a state-sanctioned business arrangement with people of one gender and not the other is nothing more than gender-based discrimination, which I am pretty sure is disallowed by the constitution.
And if I'm not being clear, I am completely in support of gay marriage. I imagine this will work its way to the Supreme Court now, right, since there are several thousand legally married couples in California who just had their marriages thrown into question?
and to bucku (and 4arch) I agree with you that "marriage" or partnership should not carry legal weight, and should be defined only by individuals/groups as they see fit. If Proposition 8 was "Marriage is no longer a legal status, and no longer confers privileges upon married couples that other people don't get, and privileges coupledom over other social organizations" instead of "Marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman," then I'd also be glad it passed.
BUT - Prop. 8 didn't pass because a ton of Californians also thought that the government's intrusion into personal social arrangements should be abolished. It passed because millions of queer-hating voters were mobilized to defend "traditional" marriage (which is not actually very traditional at all), because many people there really, really loathe us and are actively campaigning to deny us civil rights (which is disturbing, no matter whether one values the institution of marriage as either a religious or civil organization or not.)
On a totally personal level, I'm really, really horrified that Prop. 8 passed because it's solid evidence that there are millions of people who hate me. Scary. Better not get too comfortable, you know?
I'm no expert on California state law (nor any other type of law, for that matter), but it's my understanding that just about any harebrained proposal can get on the ballot with enough petition signatures, which makes the whole process very susceptible to mob rule. (See previous California initiatives on immigration and taxes.) IMO, that whole stupid statewide initiative mechanism needs to be scrapped.
"Perhaps the best solution, and one mentioned before, is to give all couples civil union licenses. Gay or straight, it's irrelevant. Then leave the 'marriage' thing up to individual churches. They can decide if they want to be bigots or not."
liberty,
before the judicial system there was already a law in place. under this law marriage was sacred and supposed to be "man and wife". marriage WAS initially sacred and religious. as you stated, "people get married for reasons that have nothing to do with love". clearly the meaning of marriage has been bastardized.
i must say that i oppose gay marriage- i believe it is sacred. on one hand though, my wife is a nurse and it is quite ridiculous that two people who love each other, and often more than legally married people, are not allowed to see each other when in the hospital because they are not "family". i dont necessarily see a reason to oppose a sort of civil union.
call it semantics, but marriage is marriage. if the state wants to create a new term to fit the lifestyle of those who are not under this definition so be it. but man and man is not marriage. sorry.
before the judicial system there was already a law in place. under this law marriage was sacred and supposed to be "man and wife".
please don't tell me you're referring to biblical law...
i dont necessarily see a reason to oppose a sort of civil union.
call it semantics, but marriage is marriage.
semantics? yeah, "separate but equal" was pure semantics too.
f the state wants to create a new term to fit the lifestyle of those who are not under this definition so be it.
lifestyle? being an architect is a lifestyle, being gay is not. do you really think someone would choose to be part of a discriminated and maligned minority?
my thoughts on homosexuality are complicated, meaning i dont feel i have to explain them to you. i accept others for who they are and expect the same. i dont think you can decide for me or persecute my beliefs. if you want to get down to it, there is no proof either way if people choose to be or not to be. they are who they are. it is when you start forcing others into the equation who wish not to be there that you begin to step on toes.
and yes. i was referring to biblical law. are you to tell me that my definitions are more or less correct than yours? if so, how hypocritical.
SurfaceS you know I love you but I must disagree with your assertion that Prop 8 passing means that "millions and millions of people hate you". As with many civil rights struggles in our country, these things take time. It definitely disappointed me to wake up and see that our state went solidly for Obama but that Prop 8 barely passed. But Obama himself AND Joe Biden have both publicly said that they do not support gay marriage, and you know that Obama doesn't hate you or any gay people. In fact the Yes on Prop 8 people sent out many flyers using Obama's quotes on that - but conveniently glazed over the part where he stated his vehement opposition to it.
My point is this: it's disappointing to those of us progressives who want the country to move a little faster than it can. This is not to say it won't move that way in the future, but many decent people still have to warm up to the idea. This is why I hope it gets shot down in the court because doing anything to amend the Constitution means that even if people DO warm up to it, the Constitutional amendment is there, despite the public's changing opinion on it.
i think so. i would say that if one is living by the rules/laws or preachings of said religion it is. yet you still choose to do so. there is always a choice. how you make that choice or what choices you make is what defines whether it is lifestyle or not. many claim to be "religious" and yet their lifestyle would not reflect that by the choices they make. just my opinion though, i guess.
bucku, i'm willing to acknowledge that you don't come across as being a bigot, and you certainly don't have to explain anything to me. i have several family members who i wouldn't characterize as being discriminatory yet voted yes on prop 8.
that said, i do take issue with your reference to biblical law.
you can believe whatever ancient tribal nonsense you want, as long as it remains within the boundaries of your own head space. the minute it begins to affect legislation, that's where i have a problem.
i agree, and vice versa. so it is more a matter of opinion than law or even biblical law on whether to make marriage a judicial decision. hence the intermediate. create a new "term" for the decision that grants the rights for the parties and yet does not cause conflict on either the religious side nor the constitutional or judicial.
"there is no proof either way if people choose to be or not to be"
This is 100% a lie. There is no proof if you choose not believe in scientific discovery. Stop pushing your religious views on people that do not believe in fairy tales. I still do not understand why a particular life style threatens the fabric of your religion.
Esentially you need to stop picking and choosing what biblical laws you follow and either follow them all or continue being hypocritical.
By far the worst thing about Yes on Prop 8 was the lies in their commercials about how voting NO would mean Gay marrige would be taught in grade school. I have no idea where this came from. Yikes
i havent distanced myself from any biblical laws. i try to follow all of them, at least new testement. it would take knowing me better for you to decide if i dont.
if i have said something hypocritical than please excuse that and allow me clarify what i meant with reason.
i havent pushed anything on you. i am merely stating my view as it pertains to my belief as you are doing the same. if you think i am pushing than you may choose to not read my thread and thus cancel out the equation of me and you.
and please enlighten me as to the scientific evidence. genetics have already been ruled out by the scientific community so what other evidence can you enlighten me with?
Well, bucku, did you "choose" an attraction to the opposite sex? I assume it's ingrained in your biology and drives and emotions and was not "chosen". Then why would you deduce that someone would "choose" (like picking a pair of pants) this same drive or attraction to the same sex? But let's be honest, the anti-gay factions NEED homosexuality to be a choice so they can more easily dismiss aspects of that group - like gay marriage - as something that can be easily avoided and can more freely place the blame on the victim of discrimination and hate because, you know, they can choose to live another "lifestyle".
You know, I had made a promise to others in this forum to let go of my anger and outrage at these spurious and ridiculous arguments that barely veil the prejudice behind them and oppress others with "biblical laws" that not everyone in this free country is holden to. It's a new morning in America and I feel good about what happened yesterday...but in the dark days of the past 8 years, which are about to end, I might have responded to bullshit like yours this way: "Go fuck a duck"....but I'm past all that now.
Modern Chrisitian religion picks and chooses what it preaches to you. Some people are smart to question what is being taught while other drop down a matress and take it. You did nothing to me personally but people like you took away rights of people. And I do believe I am justified in saying people like you because you follow the same fake God. In your fairy tale land is it OK to lie to millions of people.
"genetics have already been ruled out by the scientific community" - by who - Sarah Palin - This is not true and it is a very complex issue. You just lied.
"My point is this: it's disappointing to those of us progressives who want the country to move a little faster than it can. This is not to say it won't move that way in the future, but many decent people still have to warm up to the idea."
But that's the problem-the state had moved forward. And then people from out of the state didn't like it and jumped in and have now moved the state *backwards* from where it already was. And what kind of precedent is that to be enshrined in a constitution? Usually rights are expanded through time to various groups, not taken away.
Ugh, this is filling me with such rage. I cannot believe this.
Disgusted by Prop. 8
I cannot believe it. How did this happen?
This has to be one of the most depressing votes ever in California. They used the US Constitution to trample on civil rights. I will never understand why religious people are so scared of gays and lesbians. Let people have their rights and you can home school your children and turn them into another generation of nutcases. It was just the worst thing to wake up to after an incredible election.
That sucks but it doesn't automatically mean that this will change right?
On a brighter note, CT voted no to amend the constitution, http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-2conquest.artnov05,0,779871.story
My response to bans on gay marriage has always been why don't we just get it over with and ban *ALL* marriage?
the hidden cameras have an amazing song called ban marriage...
check it out!
The Hidden Cameras - Ban Marriage
On a serious note however i was completely shocked by that Prop 8 vote... Cali is looked upon as a relatively liberal bastion by us midwesterners... Prop 8 passes in Kansas... not California...
yeah in an otherwise bright and sunny day in CA, this is an unfortunate situation. i just don't get it either, this was probably approved by many of the religious minority. how people can fight for equal rights and then vote against something like this is beyond me.
on a brighter note, this is a good day for CA animals and prop 2!
yes. i am really disappointed as well.
also, prop 2 passed. guess people care more about chickens and cows than they do about people.
Unfortunately, this initiative was heavily backed by the Mormon church, which had been planning this for years. Ironic that the Mormons had to flee the Midwest and found their own state because American society didn't approve of their marriage choices.
Hopefully this thing will either be overturned by the courts or by federal legislation, or be rescinded in a future initiative.
in 2000, prop 22 (similar to prop 8) passed 62%-38%
now prop 8 passed 52%-48%
very unfortunate it wasn't defeated but that's a pretty big jump in 7 years. i agree with LIG that if this gets to the ballot again the result should be correct (marriage is between two adults regardless of gender).
i know quite a few gay ex-mormons and needless to say they are livid
They really need to ban the proposition system in California-it doesn't take that many signatures to get something on the ballot and then it only takes a simple majority for passage-in some states it takes sixty. So, you end up with fringe groups (or groups based out of state like the LDS) throwing up these hateful laws and then an uninformed populace votes to deny people rights-this has happened now with gays/lesbians, they tried to do it with immigrants, they went after affirmative action, and Prop 13 in the seventies has decimated tax revenue and destroyed school systems all over the state. People shouldn't have the right to determine who gets rights and who doesn't-that's the courts decision, not the tyranny of the majority.
And this decision makes me hate religion even more than I did before.
prop 2 passed?! outstanding. prop 8 not passing is bs!
let's see if the yes on prop 8 people put their money where their mouth is and try and ban divorce.
i'm pretty upset about prop 8. The amount of sign, cars, and buildings that were vandalized in the LA area for having "no on 8" signs is heart breaking.
i always thought people wanted separation of church and state. the church governs marriage (or at least should. it is a "religious" act). it should be left to them to decide to marry who they wish. it shouldnt be a judicial decision in the first place. so i am glad that the thing passed.
either way. i live on the east coast so screw it.
people seem to think that voting by proposition is such a democratic and admirable means of deciding certain issues, but really it neglects the flip side of majority rule, which is minority protection. proposition voting does not seem undemocratic, but in that sense it is.
I guess this means I can't invite Archinect to my California wedding any time in the near future.
:*(
But seriously, I'm appalled. Oh, and ALL religious people are not scared of queer people. People truly filled with the holy spirit are generally supportive of human rights, not total bigots.
I guess this means I can't invite Archinect to my California wedding any time in the near future.
:*(
But seriously, I'm appalled. Oh, and ALL religious people are not scared of queer people. People truly filled with the holy spirit are generally supportive of human rights, not total bigots.
bucku, marriage is not a religious act. It is a civil contract between two people governed by the state. Some religions choose to act as representatives of the state and perform marriage ceremonies, and some people choose to have their marriages performed in that method. But you can also get married in a civil/non-religious ceremony, and when you get married in a church you still have to get a marriage license issued by the state in order for the union to be legal.
Marriage is a civil rights issue, NOT a religious one, plain and simple. Churches are free to discriminate for whom they will perform the service - look at how the Catholic church won't marry anyone who isn't Catholic - and *that* is separation of church and state.
odb, thanks for the explanation - it's an interesting process on how to legislate discrimination and hate.
I'm not so surprised - ever been outside LA or SF? Lowlife culture isn't only in the tv y'all. Canada, however, which is as honkytonk as it comes, is a total revelation. Same-sex marriage has been legal for years
In other words: I'm all for love, but let's be honest and face how many people get married for reasons that have nothing to do with love. In this country we're free to do that as a marriage is basically a tax arrangement in the eyes of the government. To allow people to enter a state-sanctioned business arrangement with people of one gender and not the other is nothing more than gender-based discrimination, which I am pretty sure is disallowed by the constitution.
And if I'm not being clear, I am completely in support of gay marriage. I imagine this will work its way to the Supreme Court now, right, since there are several thousand legally married couples in California who just had their marriages thrown into question?
Proposition 8 is already facing legal challenges. Here's hoping that the courts declare it an epic fail.
and to bucku (and 4arch) I agree with you that "marriage" or partnership should not carry legal weight, and should be defined only by individuals/groups as they see fit. If Proposition 8 was "Marriage is no longer a legal status, and no longer confers privileges upon married couples that other people don't get, and privileges coupledom over other social organizations" instead of "Marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman," then I'd also be glad it passed.
BUT - Prop. 8 didn't pass because a ton of Californians also thought that the government's intrusion into personal social arrangements should be abolished. It passed because millions of queer-hating voters were mobilized to defend "traditional" marriage (which is not actually very traditional at all), because many people there really, really loathe us and are actively campaigning to deny us civil rights (which is disturbing, no matter whether one values the institution of marriage as either a religious or civil organization or not.)
On a totally personal level, I'm really, really horrified that Prop. 8 passed because it's solid evidence that there are millions of people who hate me. Scary. Better not get too comfortable, you know?
"My response to bans on gay marriage has always been why don't we just get it over with and ban *ALL* marriage? "
Bann all marriage....imagine that
lb this is prospective, not retrospective - those who are already married are in no danger of losing anything
btw - what's all this love and support showering in when just a few months ago a thread on queer architects was knuckle sandwiched
LIG, if the amend/revise issue holds water, how was it allowed to get this far in the first place?
I'm no expert on California state law (nor any other type of law, for that matter), but it's my understanding that just about any harebrained proposal can get on the ballot with enough petition signatures, which makes the whole process very susceptible to mob rule. (See previous California initiatives on immigration and taxes.) IMO, that whole stupid statewide initiative mechanism needs to be scrapped.
I agree with Kos:
"Perhaps the best solution, and one mentioned before, is to give all couples civil union licenses. Gay or straight, it's irrelevant. Then leave the 'marriage' thing up to individual churches. They can decide if they want to be bigots or not."
liberty,
before the judicial system there was already a law in place. under this law marriage was sacred and supposed to be "man and wife". marriage WAS initially sacred and religious. as you stated, "people get married for reasons that have nothing to do with love". clearly the meaning of marriage has been bastardized.
i must say that i oppose gay marriage- i believe it is sacred. on one hand though, my wife is a nurse and it is quite ridiculous that two people who love each other, and often more than legally married people, are not allowed to see each other when in the hospital because they are not "family". i dont necessarily see a reason to oppose a sort of civil union.
call it semantics, but marriage is marriage. if the state wants to create a new term to fit the lifestyle of those who are not under this definition so be it. but man and man is not marriage. sorry.
Your use of the term "lifestyle" betrays your misunderstanding of this issue, IMO.
how am i misunderstood?
please don't tell me you're referring to biblical law...
i dont necessarily see a reason to oppose a sort of civil union.
call it semantics, but marriage is marriage.
semantics? yeah, "separate but equal" was pure semantics too.
f the state wants to create a new term to fit the lifestyle of those who are not under this definition so be it.
lifestyle? being an architect is a lifestyle, being gay is not. do you really think someone would choose to be part of a discriminated and maligned minority?
my thoughts on homosexuality are complicated, meaning i dont feel i have to explain them to you. i accept others for who they are and expect the same. i dont think you can decide for me or persecute my beliefs. if you want to get down to it, there is no proof either way if people choose to be or not to be. they are who they are. it is when you start forcing others into the equation who wish not to be there that you begin to step on toes.
and yes. i was referring to biblical law. are you to tell me that my definitions are more or less correct than yours? if so, how hypocritical.
being an architect is a career choice. not a lifestyle.
Attempting to be open-minded and positive is a lifestyle!
hopefully you werent accusing me of being closed minded. clearly i am open and accepting. i just have boundaries.
Just declaring my lifestyle! Not trying to force anybody into the equation here!
open minded and positive are character traits. so is overly sarcastic and intolerant.
SurfaceS you know I love you but I must disagree with your assertion that Prop 8 passing means that "millions and millions of people hate you". As with many civil rights struggles in our country, these things take time. It definitely disappointed me to wake up and see that our state went solidly for Obama but that Prop 8 barely passed. But Obama himself AND Joe Biden have both publicly said that they do not support gay marriage, and you know that Obama doesn't hate you or any gay people. In fact the Yes on Prop 8 people sent out many flyers using Obama's quotes on that - but conveniently glazed over the part where he stated his vehement opposition to it.
My point is this: it's disappointing to those of us progressives who want the country to move a little faster than it can. This is not to say it won't move that way in the future, but many decent people still have to warm up to the idea. This is why I hope it gets shot down in the court because doing anything to amend the Constitution means that even if people DO warm up to it, the Constitutional amendment is there, despite the public's changing opinion on it.
Is subscribing to religious beliefs a lifestyle choice?
i think so. i would say that if one is living by the rules/laws or preachings of said religion it is. yet you still choose to do so. there is always a choice. how you make that choice or what choices you make is what defines whether it is lifestyle or not. many claim to be "religious" and yet their lifestyle would not reflect that by the choices they make. just my opinion though, i guess.
bucku, i'm willing to acknowledge that you don't come across as being a bigot, and you certainly don't have to explain anything to me. i have several family members who i wouldn't characterize as being discriminatory yet voted yes on prop 8.
that said, i do take issue with your reference to biblical law.
you can believe whatever ancient tribal nonsense you want, as long as it remains within the boundaries of your own head space. the minute it begins to affect legislation, that's where i have a problem.
i agree, and vice versa. so it is more a matter of opinion than law or even biblical law on whether to make marriage a judicial decision. hence the intermediate. create a new "term" for the decision that grants the rights for the parties and yet does not cause conflict on either the religious side nor the constitutional or judicial.
"there is no proof either way if people choose to be or not to be"
This is 100% a lie. There is no proof if you choose not believe in scientific discovery. Stop pushing your religious views on people that do not believe in fairy tales. I still do not understand why a particular life style threatens the fabric of your religion.
Esentially you need to stop picking and choosing what biblical laws you follow and either follow them all or continue being hypocritical.
By far the worst thing about Yes on Prop 8 was the lies in their commercials about how voting NO would mean Gay marrige would be taught in grade school. I have no idea where this came from. Yikes
i havent distanced myself from any biblical laws. i try to follow all of them, at least new testement. it would take knowing me better for you to decide if i dont.
if i have said something hypocritical than please excuse that and allow me clarify what i meant with reason.
i havent pushed anything on you. i am merely stating my view as it pertains to my belief as you are doing the same. if you think i am pushing than you may choose to not read my thread and thus cancel out the equation of me and you.
and please enlighten me as to the scientific evidence. genetics have already been ruled out by the scientific community so what other evidence can you enlighten me with?
Well, bucku, did you "choose" an attraction to the opposite sex? I assume it's ingrained in your biology and drives and emotions and was not "chosen". Then why would you deduce that someone would "choose" (like picking a pair of pants) this same drive or attraction to the same sex? But let's be honest, the anti-gay factions NEED homosexuality to be a choice so they can more easily dismiss aspects of that group - like gay marriage - as something that can be easily avoided and can more freely place the blame on the victim of discrimination and hate because, you know, they can choose to live another "lifestyle".
You know, I had made a promise to others in this forum to let go of my anger and outrage at these spurious and ridiculous arguments that barely veil the prejudice behind them and oppress others with "biblical laws" that not everyone in this free country is holden to. It's a new morning in America and I feel good about what happened yesterday...but in the dark days of the past 8 years, which are about to end, I might have responded to bullshit like yours this way: "Go fuck a duck"....but I'm past all that now.
Modern Chrisitian religion picks and chooses what it preaches to you. Some people are smart to question what is being taught while other drop down a matress and take it. You did nothing to me personally but people like you took away rights of people. And I do believe I am justified in saying people like you because you follow the same fake God. In your fairy tale land is it OK to lie to millions of people.
"genetics have already been ruled out by the scientific community" - by who - Sarah Palin - This is not true and it is a very complex issue. You just lied.
"My point is this: it's disappointing to those of us progressives who want the country to move a little faster than it can. This is not to say it won't move that way in the future, but many decent people still have to warm up to the idea."
But that's the problem-the state had moved forward. And then people from out of the state didn't like it and jumped in and have now moved the state *backwards* from where it already was. And what kind of precedent is that to be enshrined in a constitution? Usually rights are expanded through time to various groups, not taken away.
Ugh, this is filling me with such rage. I cannot believe this.
The ACLU has also filed a motion to block Proposition 8. Somebody remind me to renew my ACLU membership.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.