FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


please stop kiiling animals





prajbishnoi
hello
friend pleas stop to killing animals .. it's not good for all .
thanks
paul_indo
What are you talking about?

Can we kill animals to eat them? or must we never kill animals?
ocalhoun
Why just animals? Do plants not equally deserve to live?
Baka_Desu
Plants and animals deserve to live, but if it is necessary to kill plants or animals, i guess we have to. I mean if we don't kill plants or animals, what do we eat?
ponda
prajbishnoi wrote:
hello
friend pleas stop to killing animals .. it's not good for all .
thanks


Why? Animals kill each other you know. You don't see lions trying to convince other lions to not kill gazelles. It's just a food chain thing.
mattyj
prajbishnoi wrote:
hello
friend pleas stop to killing animals .. it's not good for all .
thanks


what a ridiculous post...Do you want to explain the reason why we should stop? Or are you just going to tell everyone to stop and not add anything to the discussion?

Animals eat animals to live, fact of life
jwellsy
prajbishnoi wrote:
hello
friend pleas stop to killing animals .. it's not good for all .
thanks


WOW! You are so enlightened. Are you available to be the governments new Animal Control Czar?
jabce85
haha, this made me laugh...... lets see if it can get even more ridiculous.
andysart380
natural order of life....if your saying dont kill them personally well if i go buy a steak somebody had to kill a cow somewhere...we dont have control of it and im not going to stop eating meat...EVER
Marcuzzo
the way I see it.... to kill for food or to protect your life or someone else's is OK, the rest is a crime
ocalhoun
Marcuzzo wrote:
the way I see it.... to kill for food or to protect your life or someone else's is OK, the rest is a crime

Also, unavoidable accidents are forgivable.

Add that, and you have my 3 acceptable reasons for killing a living thing.
Marcuzzo
ocalhoun wrote:
Marcuzzo wrote:
the way I see it.... to kill for food or to protect your life or someone else's is OK, the rest is a crime

Also, unavoidable accidents are forgivable.

Add that, and you have my 3 acceptable reasons for killing a living thing.


yes, and that too, one time I ran over a Muskrat,
I felt bad for a week.
poor bugger


I also want to add revenge to it, I know it is not nice, but lets say, you are somewhere and a bear or something grabs and kills your wife, daughter, son, whatever.... if it is too late to protect them, I'm sure my instinct will take over to take the animal out.
but then again, anybody who would be in that position would go out of his/her mind.
like this guy
ocalhoun
Marcuzzo wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
Marcuzzo wrote:
the way I see it.... to kill for food or to protect your life or someone else's is OK, the rest is a crime

Also, unavoidable accidents are forgivable.

Add that, and you have my 3 acceptable reasons for killing a living thing.


yes, and that too, one time I ran over a Muskrat,
I felt bad for a week.
poor bugger


I also want to add revenge to it, I know it is not nice, but lets say, you are somewhere and a bear or something grabs and kills your wife, daughter, son, whatever.... if it is too late to protect them, I'm sure my instinct will take over to take the animal out.
but then again, anybody who would be in that position would go out of his/her mind.
like this guy

Revenge, however, is not an acceptable reason to kill any living thing.
Revenge won't repair the damage done, and 'an eye for an eye' leaves the whole world blind. (Or, in this case, a life for a life leaves the whole world dead...)

To kill it in order to protect others who may be harmed later, that may be acceptable, but do not kill for revenge.
Marcuzzo
ocalhoun wrote:
Marcuzzo wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
Marcuzzo wrote:
the way I see it.... to kill for food or to protect your life or someone else's is OK, the rest is a crime

Also, unavoidable accidents are forgivable.

Add that, and you have my 3 acceptable reasons for killing a living thing.


yes, and that too, one time I ran over a Muskrat,
I felt bad for a week.
poor bugger


I also want to add revenge to it, I know it is not nice, but lets say, you are somewhere and a bear or something grabs and kills your wife, daughter, son, whatever.... if it is too late to protect them, I'm sure my instinct will take over to take the animal out.
but then again, anybody who would be in that position would go out of his/her mind.
like this guy

Revenge, however, is not an acceptable reason to kill any living thing.
Revenge won't repair the damage done, and 'an eye for an eye' leaves the whole world blind. (Or, in this case, a life for a life leaves the whole world dead...)

To kill it in order to protect others who may be harmed later, that may be acceptable, but do not kill for revenge.



you are right, I totaly agree,
I'm not a vindictive person, I'm just saying that any man that sees a dearly loved person get killed in front of his eyes would go out of it.

what I mean is that I would attack the animal/human/whatever with my bare hands if no weapons are at hand, and if
that would end up in it's or my death, so be it.
deanhills
Marcuzzo wrote:
you are right, I totaly agree,
I'm not a vindictive person, I'm just saying that any man that sees a dearly loved person get killed in front of his eyes would go out of it.
Since whatever killed the dearly loved person has to be a real threat, I would have thought that that would have been a justifiable reason for killing the animal, i.e. the threat would not stop at having killed the loved person, as the animal would then likely kill you as well. I would kill it as an act of self-defense in response to the presence of a real threat. An animal that kills has to be something totally ugly and scary, and once it has got the taste of killing, it would probably be better for it to be put down anyway.
ocalhoun
Marcuzzo wrote:

I'm not a vindictive person, I'm just saying that any man that sees a dearly loved person get killed in front of his eyes would go out of it.

Well, even if one does 'go out of it', it doesn't change morality. Crimes done in the heat of passion are still crimes.
nigam
For me guys, killing animal is really disgust me. But if you kill animals for their meat. I think that would be fine. Let's say some pig, cow, chicken, goat and fish... But if you kill an animal just for fun. That's the thing the annoys me. Those people hunting our racing pigeon when they fly home or just flying around our vicinity. You know what... If I saw somebody doing that to my pigeons, I don't hesitate doing what he does to my pets...ty
Afaceinthematrix
[quote="nigam"You know what... If I saw somebody doing that to my pigeons, I don't hesitate doing what he does to my pets...ty[/quote]

While killing animals for the hell of it (which I think should be illegal) is cruel, I think you may need to reconsider that statement...
imera
I don't have problems with us killing animals for food, but not for fun. I also don't like breeding animals to feed us, the way the big farmers do it.
Afaceinthematrix
imera wrote:
I don't have problems with us killing animals for food, but not for fun. I also don't like breeding animals to feed us, the way the big farmers do it.


Why? That's the most efficient way to feed a growing human race... Well actually, it's not. Cattle is very inefficient and the world would be better off if we didn't eat it. But as far as a human race that likes meat, that is the most efficient way to feed us...
Jinx
Controlling animal populations can also be a valid reason to kill them. Rats, for example, spread disease, so their populations must be controlled. Canada is having a problem with an oversized goose population, and in the American South (Alabama, Georgia, etc...) deer are breeding faster than the hunters can thin them out and are becoming a problem.

If allowed to increase unchecked (and in most cases that's our fault in the first place for killing off all the predators) these populations would eventually develop diseases or deplete their food sources and starve. Much better to play the role of the predators we displaced and thin out the populations ourselves.
jwellsy
Allowing animals to overpopulate is very cruel and demonstrates poor stewardship.

It's interesting how animal rights groups spend their own money on salaries and advertising so they can pay more salaries. How about habitat improvements, something that actually benefits animals. It's the money raised from sportsmen through licensees and equipment sales taxes that preserves wildlife habitat and their quality of life. Meanwhile, the animal rights people want animals to have the right to an attorney so they can sue to get food.

This whole animal rights thing about some little minnow that is turning California's bread basket into a dust bowl is ridiculous.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twd59PrqCNg

I didn't hear anyone mention animal euthanasia. When our pets get so old that they are in constant pain then the humane thing to do is to put them down to end their suffering.
Quote:
Since 1998 PETA has killed more than 17,000 animals, nearly 85 percent of all those it has rescued

http://www.newsweek.com/id/134549
ProwerBot
I can honestly say I think killing animals is wrong.

But, I simply cannot switch to a vegetarian. I have tried, and it's just not for me.
ocalhoun
Jinx wrote:
Controlling animal populations can also be a valid reason to kill them. Rats, for example, spread disease, so their populations must be controlled.


That's a corollary of the 'defense' reason for killing.

As for the 'killing them for their own good' thinning out of over-populations... I find that questionable. It might be better to let nature run its course.


ProwerBot wrote:
I can honestly say I think killing animals is wrong.

But, I simply cannot switch to a vegetarian. I have tried, and it's just not for me.

Ah, but killing plants is also 'wrong', when done for the wrong reasons... My three reasons apply to all living things, not just animals.
supernova1987a
well, he can't of course go to tigers and tell them to stop killing other animals, but he can tell us humans, right? you get that?

ProwerBot wrote:
I can honestly say I think killing animals is wrong.

But, I simply cannot switch to a vegetarian. I have tried, and it's just not for me.


If you have tried, maybe you should try again. It works. Don't make others make you think like it's just not for you.... Trust me, it is a very wise decision to make.

Quote:
Ah, but killing plants is also 'wrong'


plant kingdom is different from animal kingdom. lets not kill animals who have well developed nervous system and intelligence.

(for example, pigs are found to be more intelligent than dogs but we tend to love dogs and can't think of even kicking a dog but hate pigs?? why??)

there is no need for arguments. trust me. vegetarianism is way better (for health and karma). you don't need to be a Vegan though.
ocalhoun
supernova1987a wrote:

plant kingdom is different from animal kingdom. lets not kill animals who have well developed nervous system and intelligence.

(for example, pigs are found to be more intelligent than dogs but we tend to love dogs and can't think of even kicking a dog but hate pigs?? why??)

Ah, so the 'intelligence=right to live' argument rears its ugly head again.

Fortunately, I have the cure.
Intelligence cannot confer the right to live, or it would be perfectly acceptable to kill retards and brain-damaged humans.
mattyj
supernova1987a wrote:
well, he can't of course go to tigers and tell them to stop killing other animals, but he can tell us humans, right? you get that?

ProwerBot wrote:
I can honestly say I think killing animals is wrong.

But, I simply cannot switch to a vegetarian. I have tried, and it's just not for me.


If you have tried, maybe you should try again. It works. Don't make others make you think like it's just not for you.... Trust me, it is a very wise decision to make.

Quote:
Ah, but killing plants is also 'wrong'


plant kingdom is different from animal kingdom. lets not kill animals who have well developed nervous system and intelligence.

(for example, pigs are found to be more intelligent than dogs but we tend to love dogs and can't think of even kicking a dog but hate pigs?? why??)

there is no need for arguments. trust me. vegetarianism is way better (for health and karma). you don't need to be a Vegan though.


Vergetarianism is NOT the healthier choice

Humans are omnivores (hence the canine teeth for MEAT eating), its how our species has evolved, the protein from meat helped early man to develop a larger brain, and yet you're now saying after millions of years of evoling to eat both plants and meat, that eating only plants is healthier?
ocalhoun
mattyj wrote:


Humans are omnivores (hence the canine teeth for MEAT eating), its how our species has evolved, the protein from meat helped early man to develop a larger brain, and yet you're now saying after millions of years of evoling to eat both plants and meat, that eating only plants is healthier?

It is healthier for those who need to recover from a lifetime of binging on too much meats and fats...
For the health benefits though, I would only recommend it as a short-term or medium-term diet, which would need some protein supplement to go along with it. Then at the end of that diet, go back to a balanced diet that includes modest amounts of meat.

For those who go vegetarian for moral concerns, I beg you to consider the lives of plants as well.
natilovesmike
Who are you taking to? you know animals kill animals too right?
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
For those who go vegetarian for moral concerns, I beg you to consider the lives of plants as well.
Think tonight when I am watering my plants I will let them know that there is at least one person who cares about them Laughing I'm curious, if you are talking about modest amounts of meat, exactly what would "modest" be?
mattyj
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
For those who go vegetarian for moral concerns, I beg you to consider the lives of plants as well.
Think tonight when I am watering my plants I will let them know that there is at least one person who cares about them Laughing I'm curious, if you are talking about modest amounts of meat, exactly what would "modest" be?


I eat a modest amount of meat, only 2 or 3 meals a day consist of mainly meat Wink
Marcuzzo
mattyj wrote:
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
For those who go vegetarian for moral concerns, I beg you to consider the lives of plants as well.
Think tonight when I am watering my plants I will let them know that there is at least one person who cares about them Laughing I'm curious, if you are talking about modest amounts of meat, exactly what would "modest" be?


I eat a modest amount of meat, only 2 or 3 meals a day consist of mainly meat Wink


this calls for a picture... just kidding Surprised

I have a cat that kills mice for it's own amusement...
and I'm sure that most house cats will do the same thing.
I know it is instinct but still, the human nature isn't a lot better
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
For those who go vegetarian for moral concerns, I beg you to consider the lives of plants as well.
Think tonight when I am watering my plants I will let them know that there is at least one person who cares about them Laughing I'm curious, if you are talking about modest amounts of meat, exactly what would "modest" be?

Better to ask an expert nutritionist than me... I'd guess around 30% or less of the diet though.
king17
yo to people we need to start to think for the next generation like your kids might surffer becuase we wasting staff that are no renewable
Afaceinthematrix
mattyj wrote:
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
For those who go vegetarian for moral concerns, I beg you to consider the lives of plants as well.
Think tonight when I am watering my plants I will let them know that there is at least one person who cares about them :lol: I'm curious, if you are talking about modest amounts of meat, exactly what would "modest" be?


I eat a modest amount of meat, only 2 or 3 meals a day consist of mainly meat ;)




Meat (according to this) should only account for 2/16 of your servings, so 12.5%. However, I'm sure that if 15-20% of your diet was eggs, nuts, meat, etc. you would be fine. Balance and portions are the most important thing in a diet. So you're probably way past "modest amounts of meat."
mattyj
Afaceinthematrix wrote:
mattyj wrote:
deanhills wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
For those who go vegetarian for moral concerns, I beg you to consider the lives of plants as well.
Think tonight when I am watering my plants I will let them know that there is at least one person who cares about them Laughing I'm curious, if you are talking about modest amounts of meat, exactly what would "modest" be?


I eat a modest amount of meat, only 2 or 3 meals a day consist of mainly meat Wink




Meat (according to this) should only account for 2/16 of your servings, so 12.5%. However, I'm sure that if 15-20% of your diet was eggs, nuts, meat, etc. you would be fine. Balance and portions are the most important thing in a diet. So you're probably way past "modest amounts of meat."


The "winky face - Wink" after a comment generally conveys sarcasm on the internet, but you know, whatever
Afaceinthematrix
mattyj wrote:
The "winky face - ;)" after a comment generally conveys sarcasm on the internet, but you know, whatever


I'm sorry. I've never understood the emoticons. I don't use them (that's why I disable them in my posts - so they don't show up when I quote someone). They actually annoy me so I just tend to read right past them...
mattyj
Afaceinthematrix wrote:
mattyj wrote:
The "winky face - Wink" after a comment generally conveys sarcasm on the internet, but you know, whatever


I'm sorry. I've never understood the emoticons. I don't use them (that's why I disable them in my posts - so they don't show up when I quote someone). They actually annoy me so I just tend to read right past them...


They are a good one to convey tone in your messages, hard to do otherwise on the internet, but for the record i was being extremely sarcastic, i eat meat, but not the amount i stated back there
deanhills
Thanks for the pyramid and the mathematical calculations Matrix. Ocalhoun is right that a nutritionist could figure that out for a person, but the pyramid and % are right on. Nutritionist may complicate things and probably won't know how to do the math either.
jwellsy
That pyramid does not mention exercise. To suggest that the highest % of a diet should be carbohydrates without an exercise element is misleading.
ocalhoun
jwellsy wrote:
That pyramid does not mention exercise. To suggest that the highest % of a diet should be carbohydrates without an exercise element is misleading.

Nutrition is a complicated subject... Are we really going to try to cover all of it in an unrelated thread?
Marcuzzo
jwellsy wrote:
That pyramid does not mention exercise. To suggest that the highest % of a diet should be carbohydrates without an exercise element is misleading.


the pyramid is merely a blueprint of a healthy diet... what does exercise have to do with it.
you can perfectly eat healthy and not be in shape.
jwellsy
Exercise has everything to do with it. A high carb diet with a sedentary lifestyle is not healthy. I prefer the Harvard pyramid, which is opposite to the one used in this thread.

The food diamond works too.
meyhem
No matter what we eat we are killing so what does it matter. Even if you eat raw food like veggies it was live at one point and you killed it to eat it so I should make a thread called plz dont kill the plants
ocalhoun
meyhem wrote:
No matter what we eat we are killing so what does it matter. Even if you eat raw food like veggies it was live at one point and you killed it to eat it so I should make a thread called plz dont kill the plants

Now there's someone whom I agree with, and is getting back on topic!
Hooray!
venkat_330
Lets not kill blooded animals for our desire...please stope eating vegetables even tht has enough protiens and vitamins
ocalhoun
venkat_330 wrote:
Lets not kill blooded animals for our desire...please stope eating vegetables even tht has enough protiens and vitamins

<.<
They have to eat something.
Insanity
We will all eventually just need vitamins and mineral intakes every so often... making the arduous task of chewing and digesting our food completely obsolete. Eventually, eating food will be the way of the past, and we will all have IV drips which will feed and nourish us without us moving a muscle. Then you can just sit back on your couch and watch the 10054th Simpsons episode without ever leaving the house to eat or get food.

But until that happens, we will have to eat vegetables and animals. That's just how the way things are.
ocalhoun
Insanity wrote:
We will all eventually just need vitamins and mineral intakes every so often... making the arduous task of chewing and digesting our food completely obsolete. Eventually, eating food will be the way of the past, and we will all have IV drips which will feed and nourish us without us moving a muscle.

Well, that's a pretty pessimistic view of the world...
And animals or plants would still probably have to die to provide the nutrients in the IV drips.
furtasacra
Insanity wrote:
We will all eventually just need vitamins and mineral intakes every so often... making the arduous task of chewing and digesting our food completely obsolete. Eventually, eating food will be the way of the past, and we will all have IV drips which will feed and nourish us without us moving a muscle. Then you can just sit back on your couch and watch the 10054th Simpsons episode without ever leaving the house to eat or get food.

But until that happens, we will have to eat vegetables and animals. That's just how the way things are.


Ha ha, 20 years ago my father said eventually the human race would evolve into just a big fat butt with one big eyeball and one finger for pushing buttons. I'm glad he didn't live to see how close we're already getting to that.

And to return to the subject of the post, I don't have a problem with killing animals that are ACTUALLY going to get eaten, but we need to stop wasting so much.

Horrendous amounts of meat ends up getting tossed out. The end result of this is that an unnecessary number of animals are born to have a miserable life, die a brutish, painful death, and it's all for nothing because they go into the garbage and nourish no one.
toasterintheoven
meat is murder, so sayeth Morrissey, end of story
menino
Killing animals and plants for food and required consumption is ok, I think, although I feel bad about slaughter houses, but thats what animals are there for.
Of course if you love animals that much, dont eat them, and if you love plants, I dont know what you can eat, except drink water all throughout, but that wotn give you nutrients now, will it?

Anyways, needless killing of animals is wrong.
ocalhoun
menino wrote:
I feel bad about slaughter houses, but thats what animals are there for.

That's a horrifying sentiment.

I doubt the animals themselves consider the slaughterhouse to be their purpose in life.
toasterintheoven
if you find vegetarianism hard but still want to try it, try finding other reasons to become a vegetarian, the primary reason why I'm a vegetarian is because I come from a line of diabetics in the family, I don't even really like animals...
ocalhoun
toasterintheoven wrote:
the primary reason why I'm a vegetarian is because I come from a line of diabetics in the family, I don't even really like animals...

... diabetes is caused by too much sugar intake, especially refined and processed sugars...
The pancreas produces insulin which is used to digest and absorb sugar, but if you overload it too much, it will stop working and not produce enough insulin, a condition known as diabetes.
Since meat doesn't contain much sugar, I doubt being vegan alone will help much with that.
mattyj
toasterintheoven wrote:
if you find vegetarianism hard but still want to try it, try finding other reasons to become a vegetarian, the primary reason why I'm a vegetarian is because I come from a line of diabetics in the family, I don't even really like animals...


Im struggling to comprehend how you believe being vegetarian helps with diabeties?

Meat is mostly protein, not sugar, Fruits & Vegetable are higher in sugar content than meat, so if you were worried about diabeties, you should aim for an all meat diet, like the eskimoes
jpayee
animals is just like human. kill animal today and you might kill a human tommorow.
toasterintheoven
you're right. I'm vegetarian to keep my cholesterol under control, but it certainly doesn't help with sugar intake, especially since I do still like junk food
eday2010
jpayee wrote:
animals is just like human. kill animal today and you might kill a human tommorow.


Not even close.

Most of the animals that are killed are only alive to be killed. They are only alive to provide food for us. So if we didn't kill them, we wouldn't breed them, and thus they would have never been alive to begin with. That's not very fair, now is it?
ocalhoun
eday2010 wrote:
jpayee wrote:
animals is just like human. kill animal today and you might kill a human tommorow.


Not even close.

Most of the animals that are killed are only alive to be killed. They are only alive to provide food for us. So if we didn't kill them, we wouldn't breed them, and thus they would have never been alive to begin with. That's not very fair, now is it?


So, if we kept a 'herd' of domesticated humans, bred only for being killed, that would be moral?

After all, we only bred them so that we could kill them- if it weren't for that, they would never have been born at all, right?
deanhills
eday2010 wrote:
Most of the animals that are killed are only alive to be killed. They are only alive to provide food for us. So if we didn't kill them, we wouldn't breed them, and thus they would have never been alive to begin with. That's not very fair, now is it?
I guess you are referring to those poor chickens in the slaughter production line? And cattle herds that are specifically bred for the purposes of slaughtering? Including fish farms? I know I'm a hypocrite, as I do eat fish and occasionally chicken, however wish I could stop that, as wonder how moral that really is. At the same time, we probably do have to survive and animal flesh seems to be a good source of protein for most.
paul_indo
Sentience is what seperates plants from animals and is the reason we have no problem "killing" plants.
Otherwise you wouldn't cut your grass cos it might cry Smile

Sentience is also why I believe we should treat animals with respect and compassion.
We should treat them well and if we kill them for food it should be done in a humane way.
Nature has placed animals on the food chain, even us sometimes, so it is perfectly natural to eat meat.
As higher beings we should avoid the pain inflicted when animals kill each other for food but we should not feel guilt in the killing itself. As I said it is natural.
ocalhoun
paul_indo wrote:

Otherwise you wouldn't cut your grass cos it might cry Smile

...
I don't cut my grass, for much the same reason.
Sentient or no, why should I harm so many living things, just to satisfy some arbitrary sense of aesthetics?

/Though, to be fair, most of my grass is in a horse pasture, so it gets eaten rather than cut.
eday2010
deanhills wrote:
eday2010 wrote:
Most of the animals that are killed are only alive to be killed. They are only alive to provide food for us. So if we didn't kill them, we wouldn't breed them, and thus they would have never been alive to begin with. That's not very fair, now is it?
I guess you are referring to those poor chickens in the slaughter production line? And cattle herds that are specifically bred for the purposes of slaughtering? Including fish farms? I know I'm a hypocrite, as I do eat fish and occasionally chicken, however wish I could stop that, as wonder how moral that really is. At the same time, we probably do have to survive and animal flesh seems to be a good source of protein for most.


I am referring to any animal that is farmed for meat. The only reason they are alive is to supply food.
ocalhoun
eday2010 wrote:

I am referring to any animal that is farmed for meat. The only reason they are alive is to supply food.

Again, I ask, if we had a group of humans raised only for that purpose, would it then be permissible to eat them?
crossroads
Im sorry but this topic is just random. I can understand if someone had a story behind it or an argument to talk about but the fact that the first post is just short and not really detailed enough to know what the heck they are talking about makes its pretty worthless.
ajitha999
please stop killing to animals.
bcz it's our natural blessings
Razz Razz Confused Confused Confused
Related topics
do you like Rock or Rap?
I hav@ verry beutifulle dog she is my frind
favorite lead singers
The downfall of american society
HOW TO ENSURE THAT VIRUS DOES NOT SPREAD THRU YOUR ADDRESSBk
Do we need Religions?
*Live Help Image*
Anything you want to know about islam??
God has ordered you to kill
Muslim speaks out...
Stop Smokiing...
God exists - and here's the proof
Occupy’s Serial Rapist Protected by Mob’s Code of Silence
Best Posts = Coins!!!
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Hobbies and Animals

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.