Who Brian McLaren is Voting For and Why

Thanks to Bob for passing this along (I highly recommend his blog in general, and his recent election commentary in particular):

Below is a portion of McLaren’s Reason 1 for “Why I’m voting for Obama, and why I hope you will, too.”

I honestly haven’t paid enough attention to all the little issues in this election yet, and I definitely haven’t decided on who I’m voting for.  BUT, I must say that for the first time my political views are starting to be shaped by a growing theology of what it means to be a Jesus-follower rather than a conservative group mentality about what’s moral and immoral.  As I’m continually challenged by reading books such as Jesus for President and blogs like Jesus-Shaped Spirituality, Bob Hyatt, and my friend JR, my views on everything from parenting to politics has shifted from asking myself what seems to make sense and appears moral to asking myself what Jesus would think and do.  So as I’m approaching questions that are bigger than those I’ve tackled before in the area of politics, I’m finding that I’m continually bumping-up against how unbiblical and un-Christlike my priorities and focus have been, despite following the same teachings as most other evangelical Christians regarding the “spiritual” way to vote.

All that to say… I still don’t know who I’m voting for.  That’s going to take a LOT more time and effort spent in listening to the candidate’s positions and seeing how things look in the next month or so. (And maybe watching an actual speech)  BUT.  I’m really tracking with McLaren on this.  These are some of the main things I’ve been asking myself lately.  So, I’m gonna keep watching for what he has to say next, and I’d love to hear what anyone thinks about this particular issue:

Why I’m Voting for Obama, and Why I Hope You Will Too: Reason 1

Reason 1: Framing Story

[Note: over the next few weeks, I’ll be posting a number of personal reflections on the political campaign. I am only speaking as a private citizen, not as the representative of any group.]

My top reason for supporting Barack Obama for president centers in the narrative I believe he frames his life and work by, in contrast to the narrative John McCain frames his life and work by. To me, this issue of narrative (or framing story, for readers of my book Everything Must Change) means far more in a president than whether he claims to be liberal or conservative, religious or nonreligious, Christian or otherwise, Democrat or Republican.

Does anyone doubt that Senator McCain lives by a warrior narrative? This is the most consistent theme in his campaign. For him the world is clearly divided into us and them.

We are good; they are evil. We are right; they are wrong. We are about safety; they are about danger.

This dualistic and fearful narrative is deeply rooted in McCain’s generation. They were formed in the simple, binary context of Axis and Allies, and then Communists and Free World. When Communism collapsed, a new antagonist conveniently presented itself (pre-empting the expected “peace dividend” and keeping the famed “military-industrial complex” well funded). This new war became what McCain calls “the transcendent challenge of the 21st century,” the clash of the West with fundamentalist Islam. McCain’s word “transcendent” is significant. It suggests a kind of holy war mentality, because for McCain, these us-them dualisms are absolute and therefore of a cosmic, metaphysical, even spiritual nature.

The dualistic us-them mindset, I believe, is bogus and dangerous. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is, ironically, the same narrative that drives “fundamentalist Islam,” and so by following it, we will become more and more like those we call our enemies. We already have done so in recent years, in fact, with torture and secret prison camps and the like. This warrior narrative is what Senator McCain has most dangerously in common with President Bush. This “transcendent war” narrative is what we are in most desperate need of changing through this election.

Think about where this warrior narrative can lead in the next four years. From war with Iraq to war with Iran, maybe even war with Russia, any of which would likely require the reinstatement of the draft since our troops have been stretched to the breaking point over the last four years. Soccer and hockey moms who are comforted by McCain’s warrior posture should keep this in mind, because there may well be an unanticipated downside to his fighter mindset.

Senator Obama certainly believes in a strong national defense. But I believe he leans toward a profoundly different narrative. It is a reconciliation narrative, a peace-building narrative, a collaboration narrative. He made it clear when he said he would change President Bush’s policy of not talking to our enemies. McCain and others tried to portray this alternative approach as cowardice and appeasement, but they were wrong. Instead of dividing the world into “us” and “them,” Obama’s narrative seeks to bring people together in a expanding us. While McCain’s narrative only offers enemies surrender and defeat, Obama’s offers them the possibility of reconciliation.

I favor Obama’s narrative or framing story because of two convictions I hold very deeply and passionately.

First, I am a committed Christian, and I believe a narrative of reconciliation is in harmony with the teachings of Jesus. Conversely, a narrative of domination and defeat is not: it is the way of Caesar, or what Jesus called “the kingdoms of this world.” I believe that at the core of Jesus’ teaching is the world’s truly transcendent challenge and call – to rise above the old narrative of “love your brother and hate your enemy.” In other words, rather than to “transcendent war,” I believe God’s call to all people is toward transcendent reconciliation. I am convinced that war is inherently non-transcendent. It is, in fact, anti-transcendent. I feel the God-given call to love enemies and seek reconciliation and eventual collaboration rather than domination and defeat and extermination. I know that many Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, agnostics, and atheists would feel a similar revulsion to voting an energetic promoter of a warrior narrative into office for another four years (or more).

Second, I believe we have crossed a threshold in my lifetime. Senator McCain, because of his age and his viewpoint, lives on the older side of that threshold. This doesn’t mean he is evil, but it means he is responding in ways that are no longer appropriate to a world that no longer exists, and in that way, his viewpoint is no longer helpful.

Read the rest…


19 responses to “Who Brian McLaren is Voting For and Why

  1. So are we just supposed to ignore all the wars that happened in the Bible? I don’t quite understand his viewpoint on Obama at all. I don’t know if you have seen his “slip” on the “57 states” or his “Muslim faith”. I don’t know about anyone else but you will never hear “my muslim faith” slip from my mouth accidentally. (I’ve got video clips of these if you want to see) And what about Obama ‘s stance on abortion? Definitely doesn’t fit in with the Bible…


  2. Well, Jennifer, I think what he’s referring to is the fact that while yes there were wars in the Bible, those were for the purposes of God using Israel to bring justice and to bless His people in a very specific time and place. The danger comes when modern Christians confuse Israel with America and assume that we are the modern version of God’s chosen people and it’s our job to institute similar “justice.” More than that, though, is the fact that Jesus changed everything. His teachings were to love our enemies and not live by the sword. As Christians our job isn’t to superimpose Old Testament theocratic ideas onto our modern political situation since they are two vastly different things that don’t relate at all. Our job IS to follow the teachings of Jesus and to live as part of the Kingdom of God that He has brought. Part of the newness of this kingdom is what McLaren is talking about, our responsibility to follow Christ’s example in bringing about a new kind of justice in the world, one in which the first become last and we show kindness to our enemies even in the face of evil (like when Jesus reprimanded Peter for using violence and cutting-off the soldier’s ear when they were leading Him away to be crucified).
    I’m definitely pro-life, so the abortion issue is a concern, but I’m also asking myself what it means to be truly pro-life in every area, not just before birth. Killing babies is wrong, but so is the killing of children and adults that war brings. I’ve worked in a crisis pregnancy center this year, and I think that grassroots efforts that deal with the individual are very helpful, but I’m not sure that voting for someone who probably can’t change Roe v. Wade anyway, much less the individual decisions of millions of mothers, would be more valuable than someone who is fully able and willing to stop the current killings of children and adults in war zones. Anyway, those are just the things that I’m thinking about…. =)


  3. You are a victim of the rules you live by.JennyHolzerJenny Holzer


  4. I think that we need to be careful in how we look at God in the Old and New Testaments. Because of Jesus, believers are part of a new covenant. God, however, is the same yesterday, today, and forever. God didn’t undergo an indentity change in the New Testament. The Old Testament is still part of our scripture and is useful in guiding how we live. Jesus was not a complete pacifist. There’s a time to be meek and a time to fight. To use the overused example, Jesus wasn’t meek when he drove the money changers out of the temple. We must be sensitive to the Holy Spirit to determine what to do in a situation. Jesus acted consistent with his purpose, which was to die on the cross. Part of Peter’s mistake was attempting to thwart that purpose. God may ask us to be martyrs too, but he might ask us to fight for the weak and the helpless, not to mention the protection of our families. I don’t think that is inconsistent with Scripture.

    That being said, I’m not crazy about either candidate. I think McCain has made an idol of America in his own life, and he’s changed his tune on a number of issues to please Republican voters. I also think that Obama has a lot of people deceived. One concern of mine is that Obama attended a church whose pastor preached sermons that increased racial strain between blacks and whites. While in that church, he remained silent about on that matter and only distanced himself from that rhetoric when it hurt him politically. He’s certainly more likeable than McCain on a personal level, but I’m incredibly concerned about what he will do while in office. I believe that secular humanism influences his ideology of government more so than it does for McCain (although McCain also buys into it to some extent), and I do not like that.

    People should not be deceived. They are both politicians who are saying what they think that they need to say to please their respective parties and get elected. I don’t trust either one of them. For me, I think that it will come down to voting what I believe to be the lesser of two evils.


  5. According to McLaren (and all postmodernist and emergent church folk) there is no absolute truth to stand for or promote…which is the same message of Obama. Sad. Very Sad. When Christians stop standing for the Truth that is clearly revealed in Scripture, we will accept the “proposed absolute” of the postmodernist that relativism must drive your personal decisions. We may as well worship Oprah.


  6. Metro Dad, I’m afraid that’s quite a bit of an overstatement and a commonly held misconception of what it means to be an emerging or postmodern Christian. While McLaren is controversial in some areas of his teachings, that’s no reason to write him off as a nutcase who couldn’t be completely right-on about many other things. Seeking to follow the teachings of Jesus in the way you vote, to the best of your conscience, is a far cry from worshiping Oprah, no matter who you vote for.


  7. Hi Emily! Just wanted to say – I’m in the same boat as you on this one as far as being undecided, however I have watched speeches and discussion and have been reading blogs by christians (including the above) from the get go and I feel… oh what’s the word- troubled, stressed, burnt out by it, and yet I would feel irresponsible to ignore everything and not vote . Didn’t really have an opinion to post about the situation, I just share some of your thoughts, plus a basket of my own concerns about our gov’t, war, abortion, and the economy. Cheers!


  8. Actually, Ms. Gill, Obama’s stance on abortion is right in line with what Jesus would do. Free will has a place here. When Jesus encountered harlots, did he drag them to officials to be stoned? This is going to sound rude and cliche, but please be slow to anger: Jesus is pro-choice. The miracle of conception is a gift from God and outside the governing powers of man’s law. Yes, abortion is a sin, but many sins are not punished by man’s law. Obama’s stance will not send him striking down the unborn left and right. I’m not saying there will be no consequences for mothers who choose abortion; there of course will be. But judgment and consequences should come from God, not from a fallible government. Obama is advocating focus on the actual problem: how unwanted pregancies occur in the first place. A law against abortion will not stop abortion. It will only endanger more precious lives.


  9. Sarah,
    I would be real careful making statements like Jesus is pro-choice. Sure Jesus wants baby’s limbs pulled off with a vacuum device- a baby that is fearfully and wonderfully made in His own image- that makes alot of sense. I guess the question comes down to do you believe there is such thing as moral absolutes. Just because the world is going to hell and full of sin, should we not stand up for what is right even if things aren’t likely to change? Even if Roe v Wade is not overturned I don’t change my stance just because it is unlikely to change a backward thinking society. I don’t think you have to be a biblical scholar to understand why being pro-murder doesn’t exactly line up with scripture. As far as Obama goes, he has so many other issues that make him a joke as a candidate for president. He won’t salute the flag. He is associated with a known terrorist- William Ayers who was associated with the Weather Underground a terrorist group who bombed the Pentagon in the 1960’s and actually killed a kid. Have you seen Reverend Wright? Michelle Obama is just now proud of her country. Obama is associated with some pretty scary people and while McCain may not be the ideal, at least you can’t question his patriotism. At the end of the day vote for who you want but as a christian I don’t see the attraction to voting for Obama.


  10. Sarah, I think that we need to be careful to learn about Jesus from the Bible as a whole and not just the parts that appeal to us and our beliefs. Jesus did say to the men about to stone the adulterous woman that the one without sin should throw the first stone. He also told the woman to go and sin no more. Therefore, you can’t read this story as a license permitting her to sin but as an act of mercy and a command to stop.

    Also, to address your “free will” argument. In reality, outlawing abortion won’t take away the ability to have one, for “back alley” and illegal ones will continue. Instead, outlawing it will punish those who do abort children.

    Don’t be deceived, all laws impose someone’s sense of morality on citizens–whether they be anti-discrimination laws or laws to protect the value of human life. I do agree that the government can’t punish every sin, but it should punish some of them. The controversy comes in defining sin and choosing what to promote and what to punish.


  11. Your political view is of your own choosing, although I would like to say it might be a little leftist to call McCain a “Warrior.” I feel a better adjective for him might be “Patriot” or “Hero.” I would be careful of whose Kool-Aid you are drinking. Please, do some research into what a person claims before you jump on their ship because it is the cool thing to do.
    You quoted “our responsibility to follow Christ’s example in bringing about a new kind of justice in the world,” and then you followed with the statement that because Peter was condemned for cutting off Malchus’ ear; this must mean Jesus condemns all violence. Thus, justice is condemning all violence. This leads to the silly conclusion that Christians should not defend themselves against evil. Also, the same God endorsed the “old theocratic ideas” as well as Jesus’ teachings. Furthermore, the Old Testament is much more than a book of God’s system of government. I hope you used “theocratic’ incorrectly in the statement.
    Unfortunately, you have committed a common fallacy by picking verses out of the bible for your own personal gains. The very next verse, if you are reading John’s account, states “Jesus commanded Peter, “Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?” This was not a political policy ploy, this passage displays Peter’s lack of understanding of what was to come. Although the scripture records Peter’s acknowledgement of Jesus as the Messiah, Peter wanted an earthly king to rule. I feel that is was not until Peter denied Christ that he realized Jesus was his spiritual king not to rule men as an earthly ruler, but a spiritual ruler.


  12. I don’t see how you can claim to be Christian and vote for Obama. Jesus would absolutely NOT be pro-choice (unless you referring to the choice of having sex or not, because a child is not a choice). Did I miss somewhere where there were a bunch of pregnant women who conceived without choice….the choice to have sex and possibly make a child? If you choose to have sex, you need to be prepared for the miracle of life, not commit murder.


  13. Stephen–First of all, if you read what I wrote at the beginning of the post you would’ve noticed that I said that I DON’T know who I’m voting for. So I’m not drinking anyone’s Kool-Aid or jumping on the cool ship. I have had a great deal of respect for Brian McLaren before I heard any of his political views, so it interested me to hear what he thought about the election. If I do agree with him in some of his statements or if I end-up voting for Obama, that doesn’t mean that I’m being suckered-in or duped just because you and I disagree on something.
    Secondly, what I meant by “theocratic” is to refer to the fact that the nation of Israel in the OT was a theocracy. America is a democracy, so the two are like apples and oranges. You can’t take what was God’s will for His chosen people in a very specific time and place and say that it relates to a different time, place, nation, and government. That’s just not good hermaneutics. It’s not an issue of God “endorsing” OT theocracy, He obviously created and directed it. What I was saying is that Jesus changes everything. In the OT, God related to His people through the Law, one that was both religious and political. Now he relates to us on the basis of Jesus. It’s not that we ignore or forget what came before, and it’s not that He has changed, it’s that His choice method of revealing Himself and relating to us has changed since Jesus came to bring a new kingdom. It not only changes the way God relates to us, it changes the way we relate to each other and our world. That’s why I feel comfortable with the fact that justice is administered differently in the OT and the NT/now.
    I do agree with you that Jesus’ statement about the sword has everything to do with His mission to be crucified and that Peter was unaware of that. I wasn’t trying to say that that wasn’t the case, but His statement about the sword seems to go along with everything else in the NT that I read about loving our enemies as well as the interpretation of the early church who committed themselves to nonviolence.


  14. Martha–I understand your struggle with abortion, and I share your pro-life commitment. But I think that it’s important to recognize that holding to certain viewpoints is not what defines a person as being a Christian. Being a Christian is about following Jesus, and along that path, there is much room for disagreement on non-essentials. I’m not saying that there’s not a right and wrong on important issues, but humans are fallible and are allowed to be wrong about something and still be in relationship with God. I think it’s dangerous when we start making judgements on other people’s spiritual lives because they disagree with us.


  15. You have a very interesting theology. For the record, it could be argued there were several kings that had forms of government which were totalitarianism, not theocracies. It seems that you have rationalized the Old Testament as the God of the Jews and New Testament Jesus as God of the gentiles. Jesus taught Old Testament principles that were established by God. Jesus repeatedly quoted the Old Testament and further explained the laws, thus validating the laws set forth by Moses. When the Pharisees questioned Jesus about the greatest commandment, His answer expressed principles found in the Old Testament. You cannot deny the importance of the Old Testament, nor can you claim that Jesus changed everything. Faith in Jesus covers our inability to follow Old Testament laws by providing God’s grace.
    Please don’t take this the wrong way, our beliefs are not that far apart. I too believe in the principles taught by Jesus and in no way do I condone violence. I would like you to further explain what you mean by “justice.” God still is a “just” God as he was in the Old Testament. Although some people might disagree, God was fair with his justice or judging in the Old Testament just as He is fair in the New Testament. Our actions, just like in the Old Testament, are subject to his justice at any time. God’s reparations are just as sever e as they were in the Old Testament. I would argue that God’s qualities are still the same.


  16. Stephen–I think you’re really misunderstanding some things that I’m saying. In no way am I saying that the OT is for Jews and the NT is for Christians or trying to write-off its importance or application. I’m pretty much in agreement with everything you just said in your first paragraph.
    As far as justice goes, I do disagree with you on that. Jesus IS our justice. God’s justice toward us is perfectly satisfied by Christ’s sacrifice. I agree with you that God was fair in his justice in the OT, but His justice after that is found in Christ. In Christ there is no longer any condemnation for our sins. Because Jesus was the final punishment, there is no longer any punishment left for those of us who are in Him. (When I say punishment, I am not talking about natural consequences that are part of God’s structuring of the universe. I believe Christians still experience natural consequences of our behaviors like unwanted pregnancies when you have sex or problems that result from unwise behavior. All of humanity experiences this.) While this is too big of a conversation to fully address here in a comment, I do think it is a significant area of theology and a valid point to pursue of whether Christians still experience punishment by God for our sins. I think many would say yes, but I don’t think that’s what the Bible teaches, I think it’s what our human nature feels. Like you said, God’s qualities are still the same today as they were yesterday, but through Jesus, He chooses to relate to us in a completely different way based-on our justification and covering of our sin and reconciliation of the broken relationship. If He still wanted to punish us, that that means that there was a part of Jesus’ sacrifice that is insufficient. For me to have a sin that requires the punishment of God means that it is not covered by Christ’s blood. That’s not much of a salvation. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, I always appreciate thoughtful feedback! =)


  17. I think we do agree; just on different terminology. As far Justice is concerned, if you substitute Justice for salvation in you above paragraph; then we completely agree. “Jesus IS our SALVATION. God’s SALVATION (for) toward us is perfectly satisfied by Christ’s sacrifice. I agree with you that God was fair in his justice in the OT, but His SALVATION after that is found in Christ.” The only point I will make about “Justice” is the article appeared to make McCain out to be a blood thirsty person in pursuit of war; but this is not the person that I see.
    You hinted at the possibility of being a Deist which we could discuss for hours upon hours. The short, short version would be the opposite of your above opinion; I tend to feel God is involved (maybe not every little aspect of our lives, but at least major events if asked for) and theorize people choose not to accept this since there is no rational proof that he does intervene and this would negate the need for the many explanations for the presence of evil in the world such as the “greater goods defense.” I too have enjoyed our conversation and am sorry if I appeared abrasive in my initial post.


  18. I may be out of line in speaking on behalf of Emily here, but I can assuredly say to Stephen that she is not a deist.

    I agree that God’s justice against us is satisfied in Jesus and that there is now no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus. Scripture teaches that. That is completely true, and yet God still somehow cares about our deeds.

    In Romans 5 and 6, Pauls talks about grace at work in our lives and is careful to clarify that this grace is not a license to sin. In Acts 5, we learn about Ananias and Saphira, whom God struck dead for lying to the Holy Spirit. As a result, “Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events” (Acts 5:11).

    Also, the Corinthian church was taking the Lord’s supper in an unworthy manner, and consequently were eating and drinking judgment upon themselves (1 Cor. 11:27-29). “That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. But if we judged ourselves, we would not come under judgment. When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world.”

    Further, to the churches in Revelation 2 and 3, God says over and over, “I know your deeds.” They’re pretty much told to shape up or their “lampstand” will be removed.

    How do we reconcile these facts: we have no condemnation in Christ, Jesus has paid for our sin, God still cares about what we do, God disciplines us, and God’s discipline is sometimes physical? While we don’t experience condemnation and won’t go to hell for our sin, God still cares what we do, and we experience his discipline in our lives for our disobedience. This discipline is sometimes physically painful and can even cause our death. I think that we mistakenly call all physical discipline “punishment,” but I don’t think that’s biblical.

    I’m still trying to work out what I believe on this subject, but this is what I’ve been thinking about lately, and it seemed to apply to this discussion. I should probably blog on this.


  19. Hey – thanks for posting this. I read McLaren’s posts on his blog and a blog dedicated to “clergy for Obama” and just wanted to put my thoughts out there.

    McLaren has recently launched into a new fixation with “narratives”. I heard a Mars Hill (Rob Bell’s) guest sermon by McLaren where he stated that there are many different narratives and somehow everyone fits into ONE of them. It was disturbing and shallow to say the least.

    Now, don’t get me wrong – I used to be a HUGE McLaren fan. His first few books really helped me climb out of the “traditional church thinking” box and into what I would consider a “progressive Jesus-imitating” lifestyle. They were refreshing and, quite frankly, faith-saving.

    But as I’ve watched McLaren over the years I’ve noticed something: He has a way of positioning himself completely opposite “traditional Christianity” on EVERY issue and then proceeds to build a new theology around that stance in order to prove why it’s the “better” or “correct” stance. Sometimes it actually is – but lately he seems to be running out of “lost truths” to champion… which brings me back to his new political stance.

    He feels the need to categorize the two candidates by his perception of their “narrative”. McCain = “warrior narrative” and Obama = “redemption narrative”. Unfortunately he does not qualify these as opinions – – and the more grievous and naive mistake (by which I am quite honestly surprised) is that he fails to point out that people are not so simply categorized as having ONE narrative.

    It could be said that for each individual ISSUE a candidate might have a different narrative. For example in regards to the war: McCain=warrior narrative and Obama=victim narrative -or- on taxes McCain=Hard Work Deserves Reward narrative and Obama again is the Victim narrative.

    In fact – I would say that rather than having a redemptive narrative as his most common, Obama has a victim narrative mentality.

    Let me clarify. Obama’s campaign is built around “fairness” – not real fairness but “every team in the league gets a First Place Trophy” fairness. He’s a HUGE advocate of unions because it allows the ‘worker’ to demand specific wages despite performance. Or – if you make $150,000 a year – that’s not fair to people who make less (they should get some of that money, so Obama would like to take theirs and give it to someone who doesn’t earn it) There are a lot of victims out there in Obama’s mind – victims of the “free market”. His “narrative” is not to redeem that which is corrupted by legitimate injustice but, for lack of a better example, to cut off one of Babe Ruth’s arms so he can’t hit more homeruns than the others. (that would make it fair, right?)

    Incorrect Victim Assumptions by Obama:

    Abortion: mother’s are victims of pregnancy

    US Poverty: the poor are victims of the rich

    Gas Prices: we are victims of big oil executives greed

    The War: Iraqi citizens are victims of “empirialism”

    Gay Marriage: gays are victims of “right wing marriage hogs”

    Economy: Americans are the victims of predator lenders and republican “de-regulators”

    Pick an issue – Obama will show you the victims.

    Anyway – just be careful how you read McLaren’s stuff – it’s not as objective as it used to be and it’s very crafty. Don’t fall for the “narrative” crap just because it sounds progressive. And for the sake of impact I shall capitalize this for everyone – JUST BECAUSE IT’S PROGRESSIVE DOES NOT MEAN IT’S RIGHT. Not all change is good change..

    I pray God’s guidance for you as you make your decision in the upcoming election.

    Grace and peace…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s