<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: NH House Takes Up Competing Marriage Bills</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/02/05/8628/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/02/05/8628</link>
	<description>News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 07:39:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Timothy Kincaid</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/02/05/8628/comment-page-1#comment-32759</link>
		<dc:creator>Timothy Kincaid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 23:12:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=8628#comment-32759</guid>
		<description>Trevor, you may wish to be secretly pleased about Wyoming. Sixteen Republicans (39%) joined all Democrats to defeat an anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment.  Had this been a party line vote, it would be on the ballot.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Trevor, you may wish to be secretly pleased about Wyoming. Sixteen Republicans (39%) joined all Democrats to defeat an anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment.  Had this been a party line vote, it would be on the ballot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/02/05/8628/comment-page-1#comment-32753</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 22:45:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=8628#comment-32753</guid>
		<description>Then you&#039;d be wrong, Trevor.  Even though a large majority of Republican voters did support such amendments in states where they have passed, sizeable minorities did not.  Let&#039;s not forget that large numbers of Democrat voters also voted for these amendments in these states as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Then you&#8217;d be wrong, Trevor.  Even though a large majority of Republican voters did support such amendments in states where they have passed, sizeable minorities did not.  Let&#8217;s not forget that large numbers of Democrat voters also voted for these amendments in these states as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Trevor</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/02/05/8628/comment-page-1#comment-32726</link>
		<dc:creator>Trevor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 18:07:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=8628#comment-32726</guid>
		<description>I disagree.  I find it perfectly reasonable to assume all Republicans will vote against same-sex marriage ALL the time (cynicism).  This is the only responsible assessment of the likely voting outcome.  Granted a few Republicans may vote for marriage equality.  Like all cynics I&#039;ll be secretly pleased when and if my assumptions are disproven.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I disagree.  I find it perfectly reasonable to assume all Republicans will vote against same-sex marriage ALL the time (cynicism).  This is the only responsible assessment of the likely voting outcome.  Granted a few Republicans may vote for marriage equality.  Like all cynics I&#8217;ll be secretly pleased when and if my assumptions are disproven.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pender</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/02/05/8628/comment-page-1#comment-32721</link>
		<dc:creator>Pender</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 16:09:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=8628#comment-32721</guid>
		<description>Yeah, the Granite state has a libertarian streak a mile wide. Could be that they (rightly) see civil rights and equality as libertarian causes -- getting the government out of the business of judging us morally for things that do not affect anyone but ourselves.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, the Granite state has a libertarian streak a mile wide. Could be that they (rightly) see civil rights and equality as libertarian causes &#8212; getting the government out of the business of judging us morally for things that do not affect anyone but ourselves.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Timothy Kincaid</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/02/05/8628/comment-page-1#comment-32686</link>
		<dc:creator>Timothy Kincaid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 01:47:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=8628#comment-32686</guid>
		<description>Suricou Raven,

We cannot blindly assume that Republicans in New England are anti-gay.

In the 2007 vote in the house for civil unions, 5 Democrats voted no and 26 Republicans voted yes.  We don&#039;t know how that would translate when it comes to marriage, but it does show that we cannot make assumptions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Suricou Raven,</p>
<p>We cannot blindly assume that Republicans in New England are anti-gay.</p>
<p>In the 2007 vote in the house for civil unions, 5 Democrats voted no and 26 Republicans voted yes.  We don&#8217;t know how that would translate when it comes to marriage, but it does show that we cannot make assumptions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Suricou Raven</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/02/05/8628/comment-page-1#comment-32685</link>
		<dc:creator>Suricou Raven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 01:16:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=8628#comment-32685</guid>
		<description>None, I would guess. If the legislature approved civil unions in 2007, what is the chance they will ban them again now?

As states go, it&#039;s a quite blue one. 58% democratic, 40% republican (2% empty, and one lonely independant).

At the same time, that&#039;s 40% who are sure to vote against gay marriage - so it wouldn&#039;t take many democrats dissenting to prevent passage of that bill.

I&#039;m guessing that this is going to be a party issue, and the parties are balanced enough that each will be able to block the other.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>None, I would guess. If the legislature approved civil unions in 2007, what is the chance they will ban them again now?</p>
<p>As states go, it&#8217;s a quite blue one. 58% democratic, 40% republican (2% empty, and one lonely independant).</p>
<p>At the same time, that&#8217;s 40% who are sure to vote against gay marriage &#8211; so it wouldn&#8217;t take many democrats dissenting to prevent passage of that bill.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m guessing that this is going to be a party issue, and the parties are balanced enough that each will be able to block the other.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joel</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/02/05/8628/comment-page-1#comment-32668</link>
		<dc:creator>Joel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2009 19:52:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=8628#comment-32668</guid>
		<description>Which one is most likely to succeed?

And...

TALK ABOUT OPPOSING VIEWS!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Which one is most likely to succeed?</p>
<p>And&#8230;</p>
<p>TALK ABOUT OPPOSING VIEWS!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
