<?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: Strange California Supreme Court decision &#8211; gay marriage</title>
	<atom:link href="http://radioviceonline.com/strange-california-supreme-court-decision-gay-marriage/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://radioviceonline.com/strange-california-supreme-court-decision-gay-marriage/</link>
	<description>The blog home of The Jim Vicevich Show</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:56:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve McGough</title>
		<link>http://radioviceonline.com/strange-california-supreme-court-decision-gay-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-4502</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve McGough</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 20:18:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radioviceonline.com/?p=12475#comment-4502</guid>
		<description>I would think a libertarian would be against the state being involved with any of it. Why do they have to be involved in registrations of marriages or civil unions at all? Maybe leave marriage as traditionally defined, let others do the civil route (a contract with the state not being part of it)?

That said, many think the declining state of affairs, lower expectations for minority youths can be tied to the break up of the traditional family. Is the traditional family a good thing, a bad thing, or does it matter at all? Walter Williams has written about this.

So maybe the state does have a roll in supporting traditional marriage and supporting it since - some would say - civilization (the success of kids and future generations) partly depends on it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would think a libertarian would be against the state being involved with any of it. Why do they have to be involved in registrations of marriages or civil unions at all? Maybe leave marriage as traditionally defined, let others do the civil route (a contract with the state not being part of it)?</p>
<p>That said, many think the declining state of affairs, lower expectations for minority youths can be tied to the break up of the traditional family. Is the traditional family a good thing, a bad thing, or does it matter at all? Walter Williams has written about this.</p>
<p>So maybe the state does have a roll in supporting traditional marriage and supporting it since &#8211; some would say &#8211; civilization (the success of kids and future generations) partly depends on it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: skepticalcynic</title>
		<link>http://radioviceonline.com/strange-california-supreme-court-decision-gay-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-4501</link>
		<dc:creator>skepticalcynic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 20:04:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radioviceonline.com/?p=12475#comment-4501</guid>
		<description>Can someone explain to me how a &quot;libertarian&quot; can be AGAINST gay marriage?

And until we STOP screwing up close to 50% of our traditional marriages, can we give it a rest when it comes to the sanctity of marriage?  Its a joke.  We can give a rats azz about vows UNTIL two guys or two woman want to give it a shot.  I DIDN&#039;T believe gay marriage, BUT I admit, its getting harder and harder to defend traditional marriage as something special.  Maybe it WAS, once.  But not now.  People bust my chops about my pushing the importance of vows and promises for years now.  Maybe I just give up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can someone explain to me how a &#8220;libertarian&#8221; can be AGAINST gay marriage?</p>
<p>And until we STOP screwing up close to 50% of our traditional marriages, can we give it a rest when it comes to the sanctity of marriage?  Its a joke.  We can give a rats azz about vows UNTIL two guys or two woman want to give it a shot.  I DIDN&#8217;T believe gay marriage, BUT I admit, its getting harder and harder to defend traditional marriage as something special.  Maybe it WAS, once.  But not now.  People bust my chops about my pushing the importance of vows and promises for years now.  Maybe I just give up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill</title>
		<link>http://radioviceonline.com/strange-california-supreme-court-decision-gay-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-4479</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 00:39:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radioviceonline.com/?p=12475#comment-4479</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s see, will the proponents of same sex marriage be as eager to endorse polygamy?  Oh of course they will when they find that Muslim doctrine encourages it. 

 No wait, what about the Mormons?   Could it get confusing?  

Even ACLU lawyers will wonder which societal undermining group they should defend and champion.  Won&#039;t this be fun?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s see, will the proponents of same sex marriage be as eager to endorse polygamy?  Oh of course they will when they find that Muslim doctrine encourages it. </p>
<p> No wait, what about the Mormons?   Could it get confusing?  </p>
<p>Even ACLU lawyers will wonder which societal undermining group they should defend and champion.  Won&#8217;t this be fun?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Erik Blazynski</title>
		<link>http://radioviceonline.com/strange-california-supreme-court-decision-gay-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-4463</link>
		<dc:creator>Erik Blazynski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 13:00:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radioviceonline.com/?p=12475#comment-4463</guid>
		<description>It is just a matter of time before California allows gay marriage, and every state allows gay marriage.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is just a matter of time before California allows gay marriage, and every state allows gay marriage.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wayne SW</title>
		<link>http://radioviceonline.com/strange-california-supreme-court-decision-gay-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-4462</link>
		<dc:creator>Wayne SW</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 12:59:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radioviceonline.com/?p=12475#comment-4462</guid>
		<description>When the dust settles, will I be able to marry my favorite Moose &lt;strong&gt;and&lt;/strong&gt; my Pet Rock?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When the dust settles, will I be able to marry my favorite Moose <strong>and</strong> my Pet Rock?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dimsdale</title>
		<link>http://radioviceonline.com/strange-california-supreme-court-decision-gay-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-4452</link>
		<dc:creator>Dimsdale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 22:49:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radioviceonline.com/?p=12475#comment-4452</guid>
		<description>Oh, and don&#039;t forget the post vote bullying, i.e. the harrassment of supporters of Prop 8 and boycotting of businesses that gave campaign contributions.

Now if Republicans did that, oooooh boy, what an outcry there would be!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, and don&#8217;t forget the post vote bullying, i.e. the harrassment of supporters of Prop 8 and boycotting of businesses that gave campaign contributions.</p>
<p>Now if Republicans did that, oooooh boy, what an outcry there would be!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dimsdale</title>
		<link>http://radioviceonline.com/strange-california-supreme-court-decision-gay-marriage/comment-page-1/#comment-4451</link>
		<dc:creator>Dimsdale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 22:47:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://radioviceonline.com/?p=12475#comment-4451</guid>
		<description>Just like Massachusetts.  They claim that the population is behind them (I know...), but refuse to let them vote on it, preferring to use the liberal courts to make it legal without legislation or a vote.

And the funny thing is, it was the huge jump in black voters that kicked the vote for Prop 8 over the top.  Kinda ironic, no?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just like Massachusetts.  They claim that the population is behind them (I know&#8230;), but refuse to let them vote on it, preferring to use the liberal courts to make it legal without legislation or a vote.</p>
<p>And the funny thing is, it was the huge jump in black voters that kicked the vote for Prop 8 over the top.  Kinda ironic, no?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

