<?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: The language of the military ban</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/25/22975/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/25/22975</link>
	<description>News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 21:17:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emily K</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/25/22975/comment-page-1#comment-69202</link>
		<dc:creator>Emily K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 May 2010 02:47:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22975#comment-69202</guid>
		<description>although i&#039;m sure comments will be infrequent from now on in this post (b/c it&#039;s relatively old,) I concur with the previous two commenters - obvious troll is obvious.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>although i&#8217;m sure comments will be infrequent from now on in this post (b/c it&#8217;s relatively old,) I concur with the previous two commenters &#8211; obvious troll is obvious.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Maurice Lacunza</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/25/22975/comment-page-1#comment-69165</link>
		<dc:creator>Maurice Lacunza</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 18:36:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22975#comment-69165</guid>
		<description>Lucrece is right. Leave the idiot troll and his bait alone.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lucrece is right. Leave the idiot troll and his bait alone.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lucrece</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/25/22975/comment-page-1#comment-69142</link>
		<dc:creator>Lucrece</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 07:50:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22975#comment-69142</guid>
		<description>Jesus Christ, how dumb can you all be to continue taking the bait from a troll?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jesus Christ, how dumb can you all be to continue taking the bait from a troll?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/25/22975/comment-page-1#comment-69141</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 06:45:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22975#comment-69141</guid>
		<description>Amazing Quo, that your faith in that the reasons for banning gays from serving are &quot;sound&quot;, yet openly acknowledge there is no real world verification of these arguments. Gee, I wonder where your certainty comes from?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Amazing Quo, that your faith in that the reasons for banning gays from serving are &#8220;sound&#8221;, yet openly acknowledge there is no real world verification of these arguments. Gee, I wonder where your certainty comes from?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Priya Lynn</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/25/22975/comment-page-1#comment-69130</link>
		<dc:creator>Priya Lynn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 01:57:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22975#comment-69130</guid>
		<description>Quo said &quot;The possibility that non-American militaries might have allowed homosexuals to serve without obvious harmful consequences does not mean that the American military would have the same experience, if it went the same route.&quot;.

Beyond your wishful thinking here&#039;s no reason to believe the American experience would be any different than other western countries&#039; experience has been.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Quo said &#8220;The possibility that non-American militaries might have allowed homosexuals to serve without obvious harmful consequences does not mean that the American military would have the same experience, if it went the same route.&#8221;.</p>
<p>Beyond your wishful thinking here&#8217;s no reason to believe the American experience would be any different than other western countries&#8217; experience has been.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emily K</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/25/22975/comment-page-1#comment-69124</link>
		<dc:creator>Emily K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 01:15:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22975#comment-69124</guid>
		<description>This is a step in the right direction. change happens slowly but Americans who fight alongside other armed forces who *DO* allow gays - including the UK and Israel - have seen that it&#039;s just not a big deal. A decision to lift the ban would, imho, cost the least amount of political capital. And since so many other nations have done so, we&#039;re ready to join the rest of civilization.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a step in the right direction. change happens slowly but Americans who fight alongside other armed forces who *DO* allow gays &#8211; including the UK and Israel &#8211; have seen that it&#8217;s just not a big deal. A decision to lift the ban would, imho, cost the least amount of political capital. And since so many other nations have done so, we&#8217;re ready to join the rest of civilization.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quo</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/25/22975/comment-page-1#comment-69122</link>
		<dc:creator>Quo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 00:56:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22975#comment-69122</guid>
		<description>Burr,

You&#039;re talking, I suppose, about military forces outside the United States. The possibility that non-American militaries might have allowed homosexuals to serve without obvious harmful consequences does not mean that the American military would have the same experience, if it went the same route.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Burr,</p>
<p>You&#8217;re talking, I suppose, about military forces outside the United States. The possibility that non-American militaries might have allowed homosexuals to serve without obvious harmful consequences does not mean that the American military would have the same experience, if it went the same route.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Burr</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/25/22975/comment-page-1#comment-69119</link>
		<dc:creator>Burr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 00:26:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22975#comment-69119</guid>
		<description>Oh yes, the reasons are SO sound!




...except for that tiny little inconvenient fact that none of the theorized disruptions have occurred in practice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh yes, the reasons are SO sound!</p>
<p>&#8230;except for that tiny little inconvenient fact that none of the theorized disruptions have occurred in practice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quo</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/25/22975/comment-page-1#comment-69114</link>
		<dc:creator>Quo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 00:07:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22975#comment-69114</guid>
		<description>It really is taking things the wrong way to think that a dryly written piece of legislation that does not mention you or any other individual specifically is saying something &quot;outrageously offensive&quot; about you.

To think that your nation is saying anything at all about you as a person by passing the don&#039;t ask, don&#039;t tell law can seem a little egotistical.

That law, while it unfortunately does not go far enough in its restrictions on homosexuals in the military, does make perfectly reasonable points about military life, and the reasons it gives for thinking that the presence of open homosexuals would be disruptive are sound.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It really is taking things the wrong way to think that a dryly written piece of legislation that does not mention you or any other individual specifically is saying something &#8220;outrageously offensive&#8221; about you.</p>
<p>To think that your nation is saying anything at all about you as a person by passing the don&#8217;t ask, don&#8217;t tell law can seem a little egotistical.</p>
<p>That law, while it unfortunately does not go far enough in its restrictions on homosexuals in the military, does make perfectly reasonable points about military life, and the reasons it gives for thinking that the presence of open homosexuals would be disruptive are sound.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lucrece</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/05/25/22975/comment-page-1#comment-69095</link>
		<dc:creator>Lucrece</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 20:51:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22975#comment-69095</guid>
		<description>Do they have non-discrimination clauses for gender and race? If so, why are they so resistant to non-discrimination clauses for sexual orientation?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do they have non-discrimination clauses for gender and race? If so, why are they so resistant to non-discrimination clauses for sexual orientation?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
