<?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: NOM&#8217;s New Ad is Unimpressive</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/04/30/11026/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/04/30/11026</link>
	<description>News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:03:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: werdna</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/04/30/11026/comment-page-1#comment-39678</link>
		<dc:creator>werdna</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 15:12:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=11026#comment-39678</guid>
		<description>Timothy-Following you off topic, I love your question about the slippery slope argument. The sad truth is that, when it comes to marriage anyway, many of our opponents do wish to see a return to an older era where marriage is not a contract of equals, where men and women have different legal rights and responsibilities within the marriage. Forcing them to make that explicit won&#039;t help their case though!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Timothy-Following you off topic, I love your question about the slippery slope argument. The sad truth is that, when it comes to marriage anyway, many of our opponents do wish to see a return to an older era where marriage is not a contract of equals, where men and women have different legal rights and responsibilities within the marriage. Forcing them to make that explicit won&#8217;t help their case though!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: a. mcewen</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/04/30/11026/comment-page-1#comment-39638</link>
		<dc:creator>a. mcewen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 02:35:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=11026#comment-39638</guid>
		<description>Actually it was Perez Hilton who caused the video to be removed but NOM is still in a conundrum. If NOM complains then it can be easily pointed out that the group did the same thing with the &quot;Gathering Storm&quot; audition videos</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually it was Perez Hilton who caused the video to be removed but NOM is still in a conundrum. If NOM complains then it can be easily pointed out that the group did the same thing with the &#8220;Gathering Storm&#8221; audition videos</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ephilei</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/04/30/11026/comment-page-1#comment-39636</link>
		<dc:creator>Ephilei</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 02:13:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=11026#comment-39636</guid>
		<description>@Timothy

FYI, the video no longer plays due to a so-called copyright violation.

How hypocritical that NOM criticizes pro-gays for supposedly &quot;silencing opposition&quot; but is prohibiting their own words from being examined in the wrong circles.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Timothy</p>
<p>FYI, the video no longer plays due to a so-called copyright violation.</p>
<p>How hypocritical that NOM criticizes pro-gays for supposedly &#8220;silencing opposition&#8221; but is prohibiting their own words from being examined in the wrong circles.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/04/30/11026/comment-page-1#comment-39634</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 02:04:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=11026#comment-39634</guid>
		<description>Pretty lame ad.  Not as bad, or rather worthy of parody, as the &quot;gathering storm&quot; nonsense but still lame.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pretty lame ad.  Not as bad, or rather worthy of parody, as the &#8220;gathering storm&#8221; nonsense but still lame.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason D</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/04/30/11026/comment-page-1#comment-39627</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 01:25:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=11026#comment-39627</guid>
		<description>it&#039;s always been my contention that straight marriage leads easily to polygamy, incest, beastiality, necrophilia and all sorts of strangeness all on it&#039;s own.

If you look at the proposed FMA and DOMA not a single word of it prevents any of these things from happening.

They keep writing &quot;marriage is one man and one woman&quot; but they seem to forget to explain what constitutes a &quot;man&quot; and a &quot;woman&quot; and forget entirely about the fact that polygamists don&#039;t get married in groups, A man with six wives has six marriages --- each marriage only has one man and one woman.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>it&#8217;s always been my contention that straight marriage leads easily to polygamy, incest, beastiality, necrophilia and all sorts of strangeness all on it&#8217;s own.</p>
<p>If you look at the proposed FMA and DOMA not a single word of it prevents any of these things from happening.</p>
<p>They keep writing &#8220;marriage is one man and one woman&#8221; but they seem to forget to explain what constitutes a &#8220;man&#8221; and a &#8220;woman&#8221; and forget entirely about the fact that polygamists don&#8217;t get married in groups, A man with six wives has six marriages &#8212; each marriage only has one man and one woman.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Flash! Church and state are supposed to be separate! at Lesbian Dad</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/04/30/11026/comment-page-1#comment-39619</link>
		<dc:creator>Flash! Church and state are supposed to be separate! at Lesbian Dad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 00:29:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=11026#comment-39619</guid>
		<description>[...] grist for the mill&#8221; file.  The National Organization for MisinformationMarriage has amplified their claim that marriage equality somehow quashes, instead of clears the path for, true religious freedom. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] grist for the mill&#8221; file.  The National Organization for MisinformationMarriage has amplified their claim that marriage equality somehow quashes, instead of clears the path for, true religious freedom. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RU486</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/04/30/11026/comment-page-1#comment-39615</link>
		<dc:creator>RU486</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 23:58:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=11026#comment-39615</guid>
		<description>If you ask me, opposite-sex marriage is the beginning of the slippery slope that leads to polygamy.  After all, if a man can marry a woman, what&#039;s to stop a man from marry two women?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you ask me, opposite-sex marriage is the beginning of the slippery slope that leads to polygamy.  After all, if a man can marry a woman, what&#8217;s to stop a man from marry two women?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill S</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/04/30/11026/comment-page-1#comment-39614</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 23:24:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=11026#comment-39614</guid>
		<description>Alex-
I&#039;m still amazed that they had over a million bucks to spend, and instead of using it to, y&#039;know, directly help families in need, they decided to spend it villifying GLBT folk.
Nice to know where their priorities lie,</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alex-<br />
I&#8217;m still amazed that they had over a million bucks to spend, and instead of using it to, y&#8217;know, directly help families in need, they decided to spend it villifying GLBT folk.<br />
Nice to know where their priorities lie,</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Timothy Kincaid</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/04/30/11026/comment-page-1#comment-39613</link>
		<dc:creator>Timothy Kincaid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 23:22:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=11026#comment-39613</guid>
		<description>For those weilding the slippery slope argument, I want to ask them:

Knowing that they were a slippery slope that led directly to so many rights for gays, if you could go back now and reverse civil rights for blacks, would you?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For those weilding the slippery slope argument, I want to ask them:</p>
<p>Knowing that they were a slippery slope that led directly to so many rights for gays, if you could go back now and reverse civil rights for blacks, would you?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RU486</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/04/30/11026/comment-page-1#comment-39612</link>
		<dc:creator>RU486</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 23:13:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=11026#comment-39612</guid>
		<description>Their message has been reduced to &quot;mean gays are picking on us.&quot;  Not very effective.  If they were smart (and they&#039;re not), they would have stuck with &quot;we have to protect the innocent children,&quot; which is always a winner.  Meanwhile, over at the IFI, Laurie Higgins has reverted to the &quot;slippery slope leading to polygamy&quot; argument.  An oldie, but a goodie.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Their message has been reduced to &#8220;mean gays are picking on us.&#8221;  Not very effective.  If they were smart (and they&#8217;re not), they would have stuck with &#8220;we have to protect the innocent children,&#8221; which is always a winner.  Meanwhile, over at the IFI, Laurie Higgins has reverted to the &#8220;slippery slope leading to polygamy&#8221; argument.  An oldie, but a goodie.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

