<?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: dumb as&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/17/34332/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/17/34332</link>
	<description>News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 00:01:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: RobNYNY1957</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/17/34332/comment-page-1#comment-96508</link>
		<dc:creator>RobNYNY1957</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 17:48:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34332#comment-96508</guid>
		<description>Federal judges don&#039;t swear to uphold federal law, they swear (or affirm) that they will uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States.  If non-constitutional laws are in conflict with the Constitution, the Constituion prevails.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Federal judges don&#8217;t swear to uphold federal law, they swear (or affirm) that they will uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States.  If non-constitutional laws are in conflict with the Constitution, the Constituion prevails.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lauren--NY</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/17/34332/comment-page-1#comment-96491</link>
		<dc:creator>Lauren--NY</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 02:20:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34332#comment-96491</guid>
		<description>Someone please explain to this fool that it is NOT the job of the judicial branch to enforce the law. Good Lord.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Someone please explain to this fool that it is NOT the job of the judicial branch to enforce the law. Good Lord.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jake</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/17/34332/comment-page-1#comment-96465</link>
		<dc:creator>Jake</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Jun 2011 14:50:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34332#comment-96465</guid>
		<description>“It’s not up to them to judge whether they like a law or not — it’s their job to enforce the law.”

Ummmm .......</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>“It’s not up to them to judge whether they like a law or not — it’s their job to enforce the law.”</p>
<p>Ummmm &#8230;&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kate</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/17/34332/comment-page-1#comment-96448</link>
		<dc:creator>Kate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Jun 2011 04:37:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34332#comment-96448</guid>
		<description>I find it deliciously ironic that the ad space above this post (at 1135 pm on June 18th) has an ad for Michelle Bachman in 2012...right above the picture of the box of rox...LOL!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find it deliciously ironic that the ad space above this post (at 1135 pm on June 18th) has an ad for Michelle Bachman in 2012&#8230;right above the picture of the box of rox&#8230;LOL!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jerry</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/17/34332/comment-page-1#comment-96442</link>
		<dc:creator>Jerry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Jun 2011 00:15:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34332#comment-96442</guid>
		<description>(pssst Randy… they aren’t appealing)

Psssssst, Timothy, you are talking to a box of rocks

*snigger*</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(pssst Randy… they aren’t appealing)</p>
<p>Psssssst, Timothy, you are talking to a box of rocks</p>
<p>*snigger*</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hunter</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/17/34332/comment-page-1#comment-96413</link>
		<dc:creator>Hunter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jun 2011 10:21:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34332#comment-96413</guid>
		<description>Someone needs a class in remedial civics.  Not that it would matter.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Someone needs a class in remedial civics.  Not that it would matter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Regan DuCasse</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/17/34332/comment-page-1#comment-96398</link>
		<dc:creator>Regan DuCasse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 23:54:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34332#comment-96398</guid>
		<description>Someone let me know if I have this straight.
  With DOMA in effect, a gay couple isn&#039;t subject to federal laws because they are excluded from them. Regarding bankruptcy anyway, right?

  That is to say, you can&#039;t enforce a law or laws against someone you&#039;ve created laws specifically so they aren&#039;t subject to them.

  If I have that right and understand this judge&#039;s ruling correctly...
In cruder parlance, proponents of DOMA have stepped on their own dicks.

  The unintended consequences of DOMA and other discriminatory laws regarding marriage and so one, are starting to come home.
  I never thought it would be this much fun watching the heads explode.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Someone let me know if I have this straight.<br />
  With DOMA in effect, a gay couple isn&#8217;t subject to federal laws because they are excluded from them. Regarding bankruptcy anyway, right?</p>
<p>  That is to say, you can&#8217;t enforce a law or laws against someone you&#8217;ve created laws specifically so they aren&#8217;t subject to them.</p>
<p>  If I have that right and understand this judge&#8217;s ruling correctly&#8230;<br />
In cruder parlance, proponents of DOMA have stepped on their own dicks.</p>
<p>  The unintended consequences of DOMA and other discriminatory laws regarding marriage and so one, are starting to come home.<br />
  I never thought it would be this much fun watching the heads explode.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark F.</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/17/34332/comment-page-1#comment-96390</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark F.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 22:55:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34332#comment-96390</guid>
		<description>I fgind this post insulting to our friends in the mineral community!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I fgind this post insulting to our friends in the mineral community!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hyhybt</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/17/34332/comment-page-1#comment-96383</link>
		<dc:creator>Hyhybt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 20:36:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34332#comment-96383</guid>
		<description>Seems simple enough to me: when only one side bothers to show up in court, that side wins.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seems simple enough to me: when only one side bothers to show up in court, that side wins.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
