<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Privatize marriage</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/</link>
	<description>The Unpredictable Union of Pragmatism, Idealism, and Cynicism</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 17:17:58 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-15245</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:51:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-15245</guid>
		<description>It really derives from the more basic question, where is that line between church and state. Earlier political structures required the church and the state to be intertwined to enpower each system. Some of the inherent corruption led the US form of government to try to separate the two out. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Work out this question, "Is there a purely secular reason for marriage?" If so, then Western Style Democracy should be in the business of sanctioning it, if not, then it falls into the catagory of baptisms and baby dedications.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It really derives from the more basic question, where is that line between church and state. Earlier political structures required the church and the state to be intertwined to enpower each system. Some of the inherent corruption led the US form of government to try to separate the two out. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn&#8217;t. Work out this question, &#8220;Is there a purely secular reason for marriage?&#8221; If so, then Western Style Democracy should be in the business of sanctioning it, if not, then it falls into the catagory of baptisms and baby dedications.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-15196</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:18:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-15196</guid>
		<description>I'll have to gently remind my lovely wife about the times we've discussed what marriage is and is not, who should and should not be allowed to wed, and what role the government should play! :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ll have to gently remind my lovely wife about the times we&#8217;ve discussed what marriage is and is not, who should and should not be allowed to wed, and what role the government should play! <img src='http://www.flashpointblog.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karli</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-15180</link>
		<dc:creator>Karli</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 20:42:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-15180</guid>
		<description>Wife here - Brian says we've had this conversation and I'll be honest, I don't remember it! Here's my position: in general I think the government is annoying. They don't listen to me, and they don't do things the way I'd like them to be done. 

Therefore, they are probably too involved in marriage if I had to sit and think about it (which once again to be honest I haven't put much thought into the subject. I'm a tad busy usually). I have differing feelings on what constitutes marriage and who should be able to do what. Brian and I have had that conversation quite often - those I do in fact remember. 

I guess my overall opinion is that the government needs to keep their noses to themselves in many more aspects than they do, marriage included. Now that being said, I also hold the opinion that gays should be allowed to get married and I tend to wonder if that will be allowed by too many churches. So therefore, I guess there needs to be another way proposed to allow money, benefits etc to be passed between people who share lives.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wife here - Brian says we&#8217;ve had this conversation and I&#8217;ll be honest, I don&#8217;t remember it! Here&#8217;s my position: in general I think the government is annoying. They don&#8217;t listen to me, and they don&#8217;t do things the way I&#8217;d like them to be done. </p>
<p>Therefore, they are probably too involved in marriage if I had to sit and think about it (which once again to be honest I haven&#8217;t put much thought into the subject. I&#8217;m a tad busy usually). I have differing feelings on what constitutes marriage and who should be able to do what. Brian and I have had that conversation quite often - those I do in fact remember. </p>
<p>I guess my overall opinion is that the government needs to keep their noses to themselves in many more aspects than they do, marriage included. Now that being said, I also hold the opinion that gays should be allowed to get married and I tend to wonder if that will be allowed by too many churches. So therefore, I guess there needs to be another way proposed to allow money, benefits etc to be passed between people who share lives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-14971</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 04:39:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-14971</guid>
		<description>Reactionary, I'll see if I can coax her into responding tomorrow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Reactionary, I&#8217;ll see if I can coax her into responding tomorrow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daily Dixie: Agreed and recommended</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-14933</link>
		<dc:creator>Daily Dixie: Agreed and recommended</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:00:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-14933</guid>
		<description>[...] Flashpoint: Privatize marriage [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Flashpoint: Privatize marriage [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-14930</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:46:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-14930</guid>
		<description>Spoken like a true patriot, Brian.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Spoken like a true patriot, Brian.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Talmadge East</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-14883</link>
		<dc:creator>Talmadge East</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2007 15:22:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-14883</guid>
		<description>I am so behind you on this one.  People don't understand when I am asked "are you for gay marriage?"  The answer is I don't care, but it seems to me that IF the government IS going to be involved in marriage then at least "gay unions" would fall under equal protection.  To me they need to enforce what is constitutional or just get out of the institution all together.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am so behind you on this one.  People don&#8217;t understand when I am asked &#8220;are you for gay marriage?&#8221;  The answer is I don&#8217;t care, but it seems to me that IF the government IS going to be involved in marriage then at least &#8220;gay unions&#8221; would fall under equal protection.  To me they need to enforce what is constitutional or just get out of the institution all together.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reactionary</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-14878</link>
		<dc:creator>Reactionary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:28:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/privatize-marriage/#comment-14878</guid>
		<description>What does your wife say about it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What does your wife say about it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
