<?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/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Anthony David Jacques</title>
	<atom:link href="http://anthonydavidjacques.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://anthonydavidjacques.com</link>
	<description>Noir, philosophy, music and sometimes whiskey.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 00:54:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on An Open Letter to Religious Conservatives by Anthony David Jacques</title>
		<link>http://anthonydavidjacques.com/2012/02/19/an-open-letter-to-religious-conservatives/#comment-440</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anthony David Jacques]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 00:54:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anthonydavidjacques.com/?p=1704#comment-440</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I apologize for not redirecting the discussion back to the original website. The article can be found here: http://anamericanatheist.org/2012/02/19/an-open-letter-to-religious-conservatives/

Please forward any further comments there. (It really would be too much to deal with multiple conversations on the same topic in different places.)

Thanks!

ADJ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I apologize for not redirecting the discussion back to the original website. The article can be found here: <a href="http://anamericanatheist.org/2012/02/19/an-open-letter-to-religious-conservatives/" rel="nofollow">http://anamericanatheist.org/2012/02/19/an-open-letter-to-religious-conservatives/</a></p>
<p>Please forward any further comments there. (It really would be too much to deal with multiple conversations on the same topic in different places.)</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>ADJ</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on An Open Letter to Religious Conservatives by jonolan</title>
		<link>http://anthonydavidjacques.com/2012/02/19/an-open-letter-to-religious-conservatives/#comment-439</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jonolan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Feb 2012 23:37:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anthonydavidjacques.com/?p=1704#comment-439</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You, like so many others, miss the primary problem. The secular government has become involved in a religious sacrament - Marriage. Since they&#039;re first involvement there&#039;s never been a distinction between the religious sacrament and the secular contract.

That&#039;s the problem and it&#039;s why the religious conservatives have a point on their side.

America made a mistake, a grievous one, as it turned out many decades ago and we&#039;re still paying for it to this day. If the government had approached its involvement in marriage as solely the recording and governance of a legal contract between parties, we&#039;d not be in this mess.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You, like so many others, miss the primary problem. The secular government has become involved in a religious sacrament &#8211; Marriage. Since they&#8217;re first involvement there&#8217;s never been a distinction between the religious sacrament and the secular contract.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s the problem and it&#8217;s why the religious conservatives have a point on their side.</p>
<p>America made a mistake, a grievous one, as it turned out many decades ago and we&#8217;re still paying for it to this day. If the government had approached its involvement in marriage as solely the recording and governance of a legal contract between parties, we&#8217;d not be in this mess.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Orthodoxy ad Absurdum : New Essay by Anthony David Jacques</title>
		<link>http://anthonydavidjacques.com/2012/01/15/christianity-ad-absurdum-new-essay/#comment-414</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anthony David Jacques]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 00:22:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anthonydavidjacques.com/?p=1673#comment-414</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[PS: Feel free to jump into discussion on An American Atheist, if you wish. This isn&#039;t really the place for that.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>PS: Feel free to jump into discussion on An American Atheist, if you wish. This isn&#8217;t really the place for that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Orthodoxy ad Absurdum : New Essay by Anthony David Jacques</title>
		<link>http://anthonydavidjacques.com/2012/01/15/christianity-ad-absurdum-new-essay/#comment-413</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anthony David Jacques]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 00:21:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anthonydavidjacques.com/?p=1673#comment-413</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I don&#039;t get the impression you read the entire essay, though I could be wrong. However, I&#039;m not at all concerned with these men causing any harm, though this seems to be the central idea of your critique. 

And I certainly find no reason to assume these men are as free or intelligent as me. Committing every moment, every last faculty of your conscious life to an unfounded delusion is certainly not what freedom looks like (See also: North Korea) and as far as intelligence is concerned, I wouldn&#039;t hesitate to take these men on in a battle of wits, rhetorical debate, or trivial pursuit; orthodox Christianity edition.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t get the impression you read the entire essay, though I could be wrong. However, I&#8217;m not at all concerned with these men causing any harm, though this seems to be the central idea of your critique. </p>
<p>And I certainly find no reason to assume these men are as free or intelligent as me. Committing every moment, every last faculty of your conscious life to an unfounded delusion is certainly not what freedom looks like (See also: North Korea) and as far as intelligence is concerned, I wouldn&#8217;t hesitate to take these men on in a battle of wits, rhetorical debate, or trivial pursuit; orthodox Christianity edition.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Orthodoxy ad Absurdum : New Essay by homophilosophicus</title>
		<link>http://anthonydavidjacques.com/2012/01/15/christianity-ad-absurdum-new-essay/#comment-412</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[homophilosophicus]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Jan 2012 19:08:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anthonydavidjacques.com/?p=1673#comment-412</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Anthony, the wonderful thing is that you are free to disagree. This would mean that these pious men are free to disagree with you. We must assume that these men are as free and as intelligent as you, and yet have freely and intelligently chosen something else for their lives. It causes you no harm. It causes me no harm. It doesn&#039;t even seem to harm them. I don&#039;t see that it harms anyone. So I am glad you disagree, and I am glad they are there.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anthony, the wonderful thing is that you are free to disagree. This would mean that these pious men are free to disagree with you. We must assume that these men are as free and as intelligent as you, and yet have freely and intelligently chosen something else for their lives. It causes you no harm. It causes me no harm. It doesn&#8217;t even seem to harm them. I don&#8217;t see that it harms anyone. So I am glad you disagree, and I am glad they are there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

