<?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: Video: Faith leaders on &#8216;save marriage, save the world&#8217;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://minnesotaindependent.com/29524/video-faith-leaders-on-save-marriage-save-the-world/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/29524/video-faith-leaders-on-save-marriage-save-the-world</link>
	<description>News. Politics. Media.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Nov 2011 23:48:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sarcasmmmm</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/29524/video-faith-leaders-on-save-marriage-save-the-world/comment-page-1#comment-27505</link>
		<dc:creator>Sarcasmmmm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:00:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://minnesotaindependent.com/?p=29524#comment-27505</guid>
		<description>Gay marriage is a threat to traditional marriage.  Christian marriage has long been held as the glue which holds family and communities together.  Children need to be raised in a family with a mother and a father of good Christian values.  Thus, I believe, that there should be a constitutional amendment that states, “Marriage is defined as the union of one white Christian man to one white Christian woman”.   Further, since the other threats to marriage are divorce and death, both should also be outlawed. We need to put the “lock” in wedlock.  You married each other and that is forever.  Next, since children need both a mother and father, all children born outside of wedlock or those who have just one parent (for whatever reason) should be taken from their single parent and given to a good Christian family.  I am sure, as a Christian, that this is covered in the Bible somewhere.  Probably next to the quote about killing a son who disobeys their father…..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gay marriage is a threat to traditional marriage.  Christian marriage has long been held as the glue which holds family and communities together.  Children need to be raised in a family with a mother and a father of good Christian values.  Thus, I believe, that there should be a constitutional amendment that states, “Marriage is defined as the union of one white Christian man to one white Christian woman”.   Further, since the other threats to marriage are divorce and death, both should also be outlawed. We need to put the “lock” in wedlock.  You married each other and that is forever.  Next, since children need both a mother and father, all children born outside of wedlock or those who have just one parent (for whatever reason) should be taken from their single parent and given to a good Christian family.  I am sure, as a Christian, that this is covered in the Bible somewhere.  Probably next to the quote about killing a son who disobeys their father…..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Minnesota Central</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/29524/video-faith-leaders-on-save-marriage-save-the-world/comment-page-1#comment-27376</link>
		<dc:creator>Minnesota Central</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 19:33:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://minnesotaindependent.com/?p=29524#comment-27376</guid>
		<description>What a joke.  
IF they were serious about this legislation, why didn’t this get introduced on January 22 when the session started ?  Why wait virtually two months … and now that the session is embroiled in spending issues.  
Does this have a chance of getting serious committee review ?  
This accomplishes the purpose of confirming to your donors that you support this issue, and proves that they know it is going no where.  
Here’s my question, will this get a hearing faster than Cornish’s HF 0800 (Castle Doctrine) which he waited virtually a month after the session started to introduce it and still has not had a committee hearing ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What a joke.<br />
IF they were serious about this legislation, why didn’t this get introduced on January 22 when the session started ?  Why wait virtually two months … and now that the session is embroiled in spending issues.<br />
Does this have a chance of getting serious committee review ?<br />
This accomplishes the purpose of confirming to your donors that you support this issue, and proves that they know it is going no where.<br />
Here’s my question, will this get a hearing faster than Cornish’s HF 0800 (Castle Doctrine) which he waited virtually a month after the session started to introduce it and still has not had a committee hearing ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/29524/video-faith-leaders-on-save-marriage-save-the-world/comment-page-1#comment-27328</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 23:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://minnesotaindependent.com/?p=29524#comment-27328</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Mom Blogs - Blogs for Moms...&lt;/strong&gt;

...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Mom Blogs &#8211; Blogs for Moms&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Clemens</title>
		<link>http://minnesotaindependent.com/29524/video-faith-leaders-on-save-marriage-save-the-world/comment-page-1#comment-27324</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Clemens</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 22:05:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://minnesotaindependent.com/?p=29524#comment-27324</guid>
		<description>These &quot;religious leaders&quot; would do well to re-read Jesus&#039; condemnation of the purity codes in his confrontation with the Pharisees in Mark 7.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These &#8220;religious leaders&#8221; would do well to re-read Jesus&#8217; condemnation of the purity codes in his confrontation with the Pharisees in Mark 7.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

