<?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 for Army of Principles</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?feed=comments-rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 16:45:33 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Poor Joe Biden by Army of Principles &#187; Al Gore and the Cato Institute</title>
		<link>http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=247#comment-2830</link>
		<dc:creator>Army of Principles &#187; Al Gore and the Cato Institute</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 05:33:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=247#comment-2830</guid>
		<description>[...] Bernstein praised Joe Biden &#8220;for not pulling rank&#8221; to get tickets to Benjamin Button (I posted the story this [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Bernstein praised Joe Biden &#8220;for not pulling rank&#8221; to get tickets to Benjamin Button (I posted the story this [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Back from the Holidays by testing</title>
		<link>http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=243#comment-2829</link>
		<dc:creator>testing</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 06:33:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=243#comment-2829</guid>
		<description>testing 1 2 3</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>testing 1 2 3</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Back from the Holidays by admin</title>
		<link>http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=243#comment-2828</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 06:32:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=243#comment-2828</guid>
		<description>(testing new commenting system)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(testing new commenting system)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on It&#8217;s Elementary, My Dear Obama by Gabor</title>
		<link>http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=172#comment-18</link>
		<dc:creator>Gabor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 07:34:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=172#comment-18</guid>
		<description>very clever</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>very clever</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;The Future is Cao&#8221; by Gabor</title>
		<link>http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=205#comment-17</link>
		<dc:creator>Gabor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 06:53:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=205#comment-17</guid>
		<description>The problem with Cao is that he'll have to face a non-corrupt democrat in 2010 in a ~+20 blue county.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem with Cao is that he&#8217;ll have to face a non-corrupt democrat in 2010 in a ~+20 blue county.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on This is Despicable by Gabor</title>
		<link>http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=207#comment-16</link>
		<dc:creator>Gabor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 06:51:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=207#comment-16</guid>
		<description>I'm not a fan of that article. Too preachy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not a fan of that article. Too preachy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bush is not a fundamentalist by Jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=215#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:38:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=215#comment-15</guid>
		<description>I think he took the "God sent a son" part as a divine mandate for his hereditary presidency.  (By the way, wouldn't something more than "probably not" be a bit more comforting?  And, I'm not really sure what antecedent he's qualifying, but is he saying that there's a lot to learn from literalism?  What does that even mean?  That capacious boats can, in fact, house millions of species?)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think he took the &#8220;God sent a son&#8221; part as a divine mandate for his hereditary presidency.  (By the way, wouldn&#8217;t something more than &#8220;probably not&#8221; be a bit more comforting?  And, I&#8217;m not really sure what antecedent he&#8217;s qualifying, but is he saying that there&#8217;s a lot to learn from literalism?  What does that even mean?  That capacious boats can, in fact, house millions of species?)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on This is Despicable by Jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=207#comment-14</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 05:51:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=207#comment-14</guid>
		<description>The weeping woman did not hold a nontrivial position--she was the manager.  Gays and straight allies are perfectly within the realm of reasonable and acceptable behavior to boycott her company to ensure that their patronage won't support causes that harm them.  Remember the libertarian beauty of it all--that people vote with their dollars?  A restaurateur votes with her dollars, and former patrons vote with theirs.  A restaurateur weeps, and thirty-two thousand gay individuals wonder if their marriages will be forcibly annulled.  Millions more grow up with the disappointment that they'll never be able to marry.  And conservative blogs hold up scarecrows (this woman likely didn't prove the rule of Yes On 8 donors).  No one would have boycotted the restaurant if she was merely personally against gay marriage--she voted by secret ballot, and (rightly) nobody would have known.  But in the marketplace of ideas, you have to live up to whatever public statements you make about an issue.  And her donation was--from the perspective of campaign finance laws at the very least--a public statement.  It seems like she was a compassionate private actor--she should let her public self know about that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The weeping woman did not hold a nontrivial position&#8211;she was the manager.  Gays and straight allies are perfectly within the realm of reasonable and acceptable behavior to boycott her company to ensure that their patronage won&#8217;t support causes that harm them.  Remember the libertarian beauty of it all&#8211;that people vote with their dollars?  A restaurateur votes with her dollars, and former patrons vote with theirs.  A restaurateur weeps, and thirty-two thousand gay individuals wonder if their marriages will be forcibly annulled.  Millions more grow up with the disappointment that they&#8217;ll never be able to marry.  And conservative blogs hold up scarecrows (this woman likely didn&#8217;t prove the rule of Yes On 8 donors).  No one would have boycotted the restaurant if she was merely personally against gay marriage&#8211;she voted by secret ballot, and (rightly) nobody would have known.  But in the marketplace of ideas, you have to live up to whatever public statements you make about an issue.  And her donation was&#8211;from the perspective of campaign finance laws at the very least&#8211;a public statement.  It seems like she was a compassionate private actor&#8211;she should let her public self know about that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on President Joe Biden? by Army of Principles » President Joe Biden ?</title>
		<link>http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=203#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>Army of Principles » President Joe Biden ?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 06:22:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=203#comment-13</guid>
		<description>[...] But let’s say it happens. Let’s say Barack Obama gets impeached or resigns because of some scandal that goes south in a summer second. Then we’re left with President Joe Biden . Is this actually better for Republicans? &#8230;[Continue Reading] [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] But let’s say it happens. Let’s say Barack Obama gets impeached or resigns because of some scandal that goes south in a summer second. Then we’re left with President Joe Biden . Is this actually better for Republicans? &#8230;[Continue Reading] [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Atheists post anti-religion sign in holiday display by Jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=164#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 08:15:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.armyofprinciples.net/bishop/?p=164#comment-11</guid>
		<description>I'm shocked by both the theistic and atheistic attempts to sway hearts and minds, aren't you?  Both are appallingly sure of themselves.  I disagree that all the atheistic attempt serves to do is polarize and offend--I think they both have that capability.  Granted, both have their redeeming qualities, as well.  I think the atheists should have omitted the unfair last four lines of their sign.  Then all the displays could be either equally ludicrous or equally credible.

If you're going to open up public spaces to decoration by Christians and other traditional religions, I would see nothing polarizing, offensive, nor misguided about having the Seven Aphorisms of Summum by their side.  Or do you just take issue with the last four lines of the atheists' sign?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m shocked by both the theistic and atheistic attempts to sway hearts and minds, aren&#8217;t you?  Both are appallingly sure of themselves.  I disagree that all the atheistic attempt serves to do is polarize and offend&#8211;I think they both have that capability.  Granted, both have their redeeming qualities, as well.  I think the atheists should have omitted the unfair last four lines of their sign.  Then all the displays could be either equally ludicrous or equally credible.</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re going to open up public spaces to decoration by Christians and other traditional religions, I would see nothing polarizing, offensive, nor misguided about having the Seven Aphorisms of Summum by their side.  Or do you just take issue with the last four lines of the atheists&#8217; sign?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
