<?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: Heterosexual Menace: Stop Her Before She Marries Again</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/02/21/9008/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/02/21/9008</link>
	<description>News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 14:52:13 +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 (TRiG)</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/02/21/9008/comment-page-1#comment-34264</link>
		<dc:creator>Timothy (TRiG)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Feb 2009 00:38:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=9008#comment-34264</guid>
		<description>A good while ago a guy on the BBC messageboard h2g2 made a suggestion which at the time I thought was rather silly, but which now makes a good deal of sense to me.

Let the government institute civil unions and marriages as separate institutions. Let the legal privileges granted by each be equal. Let marriages be open only to opposite-sex couples, while civil unions are open to both opposite-sex and same-sex couples. And, finally, let marriage licenses cost three times the amount of civil unions licenses.

They&#039;d have to pay for their separatism. I wonder how many would put their money where their mouth is.

TRiG.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A good while ago a guy on the BBC messageboard h2g2 made a suggestion which at the time I thought was rather silly, but which now makes a good deal of sense to me.</p>
<p>Let the government institute civil unions and marriages as separate institutions. Let the legal privileges granted by each be equal. Let marriages be open only to opposite-sex couples, while civil unions are open to both opposite-sex and same-sex couples. And, finally, let marriage licenses cost three times the amount of civil unions licenses.</p>
<p>They&#8217;d have to pay for their separatism. I wonder how many would put their money where their mouth is.</p>
<p>TRiG.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MR BIll</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/02/21/9008/comment-page-1#comment-34227</link>
		<dc:creator>MR BIll</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2009 19:00:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=9008#comment-34227</guid>
		<description>For my part, I would support a &quot;three strikes and yer out&quot; law on marriage: after the third divorce, you could only get a civil union. (of course, that option is rapidly being destroyed by the Right, in mostly Southern states..)

Thanks for this series.  I resent being told me and my guy are a threat to the institution of marriage.  Unlike some of these poster children for heterosexual insanity...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For my part, I would support a &#8220;three strikes and yer out&#8221; law on marriage: after the third divorce, you could only get a civil union. (of course, that option is rapidly being destroyed by the Right, in mostly Southern states..)</p>
<p>Thanks for this series.  I resent being told me and my guy are a threat to the institution of marriage.  Unlike some of these poster children for heterosexual insanity&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
