<?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: Yes, where DOES Jack Reed stand on DOMA Repeal?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://equalityontrial.com/2011/11/22/yes-where-does-jack-reed-stand-on-doma-repeal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://equalityontrial.com/2011/11/22/yes-where-does-jack-reed-stand-on-doma-repeal/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=yes-where-does-jack-reed-stand-on-doma-repeal</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 17:09:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Prop 8 Trial Tracker &#187; News roundup: reactions to President Obama&#8217;s marriage announcement, and other headlines</title>
		<link>http://equalityontrial.com/2011/11/22/yes-where-does-jack-reed-stand-on-doma-repeal/#comment-280045</link>
		<dc:creator>Prop 8 Trial Tracker &#187; News roundup: reactions to President Obama&#8217;s marriage announcement, and other headlines</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 15:05:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=12864#comment-280045</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] equality as well.  Rhode Island Senator Jack Reed finally completed his (extremely gradual) evolution on the issue of DOMA, tweeting that he now supported marriage equality and would cosponsor the [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] equality as well.  Rhode Island Senator Jack Reed finally completed his (extremely gradual) evolution on the issue of DOMA, tweeting that he now supported marriage equality and would cosponsor the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Prop 8 Trial Tracker &#187; Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.) announces support for marriage equality, DOMA repeal, Majority Leader Reid supports marriage equality</title>
		<link>http://equalityontrial.com/2011/11/22/yes-where-does-jack-reed-stand-on-doma-repeal/#comment-279997</link>
		<dc:creator>Prop 8 Trial Tracker &#187; Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.) announces support for marriage equality, DOMA repeal, Majority Leader Reid supports marriage equality</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 01:33:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=12864#comment-279997</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] written before about Senator Jack Reed&#8217;s slow evolution on the issue of repealing the Defense of Marriage Act. Despite polls in his state favoring marriage [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] written before about Senator Jack Reed&#8217;s slow evolution on the issue of repealing the Defense of Marriage Act. Despite polls in his state favoring marriage [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh</title>
		<link>http://equalityontrial.com/2011/11/22/yes-where-does-jack-reed-stand-on-doma-repeal/#comment-261252</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2011 00:52:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=12864#comment-261252</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Pat, you said right here, &quot;...but the only ones who have any impact on me, my kids, my society are the ones that might create children.&quot; In that case, stop opposing marriage for gay couples since, as you said, they don&#039;t have any impact on you, your kids, or &quot;your&quot; society. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pat, you said right here, &quot;&#8230;but the only ones who have any impact on me, my kids, my society are the ones that might create children.&quot; In that case, stop opposing marriage for gay couples since, as you said, they don&#039;t have any impact on you, your kids, or &quot;your&quot; society. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Straight Dave</title>
		<link>http://equalityontrial.com/2011/11/22/yes-where-does-jack-reed-stand-on-doma-repeal/#comment-260876</link>
		<dc:creator>Straight Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2011 01:36:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=12864#comment-260876</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jacob - 
Thanks for taking the time to reconsider your original decision, and also to explain it. I agree with this step and also the voices that encouraged it. IMO it is good to have a very limited amount of moderation. We&#039;re grownups and can handle  a bit of rough and tumble. The line is certainly fuzzy and I don&#039;t envy someone who has to make such judgements. You acted as a responsible member of the community when things drifted into the gray area, and then showed a lot of flexibility. I like the result and hope Pat returns to continue to engage with us, recognizing we have some boundaries. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jacob &#8211;<br />
Thanks for taking the time to reconsider your original decision, and also to explain it. I agree with this step and also the voices that encouraged it. IMO it is good to have a very limited amount of moderation. We&#039;re grownups and can handle  a bit of rough and tumble. The line is certainly fuzzy and I don&#039;t envy someone who has to make such judgements. You acted as a responsible member of the community when things drifted into the gray area, and then showed a lot of flexibility. I like the result and hope Pat returns to continue to engage with us, recognizing we have some boundaries. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacob Combs</title>
		<link>http://equalityontrial.com/2011/11/22/yes-where-does-jack-reed-stand-on-doma-repeal/#comment-260869</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacob Combs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2011 23:51:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=12864#comment-260869</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi all.  I appreciate your writing about this, and I want to explain to you the reasoning behind my decision. 
 
In my opinion, Pat&#039;s post about Ronnie&#039;s father is unfair, makes many assumptions, and is essentially a personal attack.  I understand that with comments on the internet in can be hard to read in terms of tone, but that comment was certainly out of line for the tenor of discussion we want to have on this site.  Hence the warning. 
 
Calling Judge Walker a &#039;nobody,&#039; again in my opinion, is another personal judgment that has no place on our site.  Any sitting judge, no matter whether or not one disagrees with their rulings or positions (and believe me, there are a few with whom I would certainly disagree) is clearly someone with a lot of training and a lot of power. None of them are &#039;nobodies,&#039; and I read Pat&#039;s comment as attempt to label Judge Walker a &#039;nobody&#039; solely based on his sexual orientation and relationship status.  Because I viewed this as a personal attack similar to the one for which I gave Pat a warning, I banned her from the site. 
 
However, I do believe that Pat has made several important and significant points here, and I appreciate the debate that she has engendered.  At P8TT, we will not ban people from the site who have different views from us, and Sheryl, I certainly would not want to resemble the moderators of NOM&#039;s blog in any way.  Personal attacks and offensive comments, on the other hand, are not tolerated. 
 
I am going to email Pat with a copy of my reasons for banning her, and invite her to return to the site if she wants to.  I certainly hope she does.  However, if I perceive any comment (on either side of the argument) to be personal in nature or offensive, I will follow up on that, and sometimes, the consequence will have to be a banning, if an individual (who has valid points) refuses to accept the tone of the conversation that we&#039;re looking for at P8TT. 
 
Again, thanks for your thoughtfulness and for writing to me.  Happy Thanksgiving! ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi all.  I appreciate your writing about this, and I want to explain to you the reasoning behind my decision. </p>
<p>In my opinion, Pat&#039;s post about Ronnie&#039;s father is unfair, makes many assumptions, and is essentially a personal attack.  I understand that with comments on the internet in can be hard to read in terms of tone, but that comment was certainly out of line for the tenor of discussion we want to have on this site.  Hence the warning. </p>
<p>Calling Judge Walker a &#039;nobody,&#039; again in my opinion, is another personal judgment that has no place on our site.  Any sitting judge, no matter whether or not one disagrees with their rulings or positions (and believe me, there are a few with whom I would certainly disagree) is clearly someone with a lot of training and a lot of power. None of them are &#039;nobodies,&#039; and I read Pat&#039;s comment as attempt to label Judge Walker a &#039;nobody&#039; solely based on his sexual orientation and relationship status.  Because I viewed this as a personal attack similar to the one for which I gave Pat a warning, I banned her from the site. </p>
<p>However, I do believe that Pat has made several important and significant points here, and I appreciate the debate that she has engendered.  At P8TT, we will not ban people from the site who have different views from us, and Sheryl, I certainly would not want to resemble the moderators of NOM&#039;s blog in any way.  Personal attacks and offensive comments, on the other hand, are not tolerated. </p>
<p>I am going to email Pat with a copy of my reasons for banning her, and invite her to return to the site if she wants to.  I certainly hope she does.  However, if I perceive any comment (on either side of the argument) to be personal in nature or offensive, I will follow up on that, and sometimes, the consequence will have to be a banning, if an individual (who has valid points) refuses to accept the tone of the conversation that we&#039;re looking for at P8TT. </p>
<p>Again, thanks for your thoughtfulness and for writing to me.  Happy Thanksgiving! </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DaveP</title>
		<link>http://equalityontrial.com/2011/11/22/yes-where-does-jack-reed-stand-on-doma-repeal/#comment-260666</link>
		<dc:creator>DaveP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 21:04:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=12864#comment-260666</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Pat,  
 
No, we don&#039;t have the same objectives. I am working to assure equal rights for all citizens. You are bent on oppressing gays and lesbians by denying them equal civil marriage rights. And the strange thing is, having seen your recent posts here, we see that you yourself are bisexual and yet you want to hurt LGBT people.  
You made a choice to marry someone of the opposite sex. That&#039;s your business, and while I certainly could never do that, I don&#039;t have a personal problem with your choice because it does not affect me. But for some reason, you have made it your business to try to force YOUR personal choice for dealing with your sexuality on every other gay person. You cling to the lie that same sex marriage somehow affects you, and it does not. You have gone so far as to call the judge who ruled in the Prop 8 case &quot;nothing&quot; simply because he is gay. This reveals a tremendous amount of self hatred. I really hope you find some way to address your issues.  
 
The difference between our objectives is that I am trying to help people get equal rights. You are lashing out and trying to hurt and oppress people just because, like you, they are gay. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Pat,  </p>
<p>No, we don&#039;t have the same objectives. I am working to assure equal rights for all citizens. You are bent on oppressing gays and lesbians by denying them equal civil marriage rights. And the strange thing is, having seen your recent posts here, we see that you yourself are bisexual and yet you want to hurt LGBT people.<br />
You made a choice to marry someone of the opposite sex. That&#039;s your business, and while I certainly could never do that, I don&#039;t have a personal problem with your choice because it does not affect me. But for some reason, you have made it your business to try to force YOUR personal choice for dealing with your sexuality on every other gay person. You cling to the lie that same sex marriage somehow affects you, and it does not. You have gone so far as to call the judge who ruled in the Prop 8 case &quot;nothing&quot; simply because he is gay. This reveals a tremendous amount of self hatred. I really hope you find some way to address your issues.  </p>
<p>The difference between our objectives is that I am trying to help people get equal rights. You are lashing out and trying to hurt and oppress people just because, like you, they are gay. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sheryl_Carver</title>
		<link>http://equalityontrial.com/2011/11/22/yes-where-does-jack-reed-stand-on-doma-repeal/#comment-260619</link>
		<dc:creator>Sheryl_Carver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:39:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=12864#comment-260619</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi, Jacob, 
 
Please reconsider banning Pat.  Except for one comment directed at Ronnie, after which she acknowledged your warning, she had not done anything worthy of banning.  Having many of my comments over at NOM&#039;s blog end up in moderation hell, perhaps I&#039;m more sensitive to banning people who&#039;s only crime is making statements the majority of a blog&#039;s readers don&#039;t like. 
 
Note, I am NOT defending her position, it&#039;s just that I think we here are quite capable of responding to Pat, or ignoring her if one thinks she&#039;s just trolling. 
 
I&#039;m assuming you have her email address, Jacob.  If you change your mind, please contact her.  In any case, please let us know your decision. 
 
PS - I&#039;m late to much of this discussion, as several things happened yesterday evening that kept me away from my computer &amp; iPhone until well after my brain ceased to function. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, Jacob, </p>
<p>Please reconsider banning Pat.  Except for one comment directed at Ronnie, after which she acknowledged your warning, she had not done anything worthy of banning.  Having many of my comments over at NOM&#039;s blog end up in moderation hell, perhaps I&#039;m more sensitive to banning people who&#039;s only crime is making statements the majority of a blog&#039;s readers don&#039;t like. </p>
<p>Note, I am NOT defending her position, it&#039;s just that I think we here are quite capable of responding to Pat, or ignoring her if one thinks she&#039;s just trolling. </p>
<p>I&#039;m assuming you have her email address, Jacob.  If you change your mind, please contact her.  In any case, please let us know your decision. </p>
<p>PS &#8211; I&#039;m late to much of this discussion, as several things happened yesterday evening that kept me away from my computer &amp; iPhone until well after my brain ceased to function. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://equalityontrial.com/2011/11/22/yes-where-does-jack-reed-stand-on-doma-repeal/#comment-260617</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:10:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=12864#comment-260617</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And back alley abortions never happened ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And back alley abortions never happened </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob in CA</title>
		<link>http://equalityontrial.com/2011/11/22/yes-where-does-jack-reed-stand-on-doma-repeal/#comment-260575</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob in CA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 04:09:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=12864#comment-260575</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As far as I know you may be right, Steve! It really doesn&#039;t matter either way. The bigotry demonstrated by this contributer is the same. In fact it&#039;s kind or more interesting if it&#039;s a guy  :-) 
 
Rob  ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As far as I know you may be right, Steve! It really doesn&#039;t matter either way. The bigotry demonstrated by this contributer is the same. In fact it&#039;s kind or more interesting if it&#039;s a guy  <img src='http://equalityontrial.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' />  </p>
<p>Rob  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: grod</title>
		<link>http://equalityontrial.com/2011/11/22/yes-where-does-jack-reed-stand-on-doma-repeal/#comment-260569</link>
		<dc:creator>grod</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 03:43:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=12864#comment-260569</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Pat, I&#039;m straight, married x 30y.  Canadians have had civil marriage equality for six years, some of the largest provinces for eight years.  While Canada&#8217;s population is only 10% of USA, there would be very few of us who would agree with you that by definition civil marriage is for straights only. Like many Americans, thirty years ago most of us would have accepted statements like you make without thinking about its implications. But its almost 2012. Five years out, there are over 16,000 gay marriages in Massachusetts, benefitting individuals and its citizens collectively.  Not to mention states that more recently recognized civilo marriage equality.  
 
Pat, if America holds itself a beacon to the world based on &#8216;all wo/men are born equal&#8217;, or more recently your rights of citizenship found in the 14 Amendment, how can you assert an unequal treatment before and under US law.   Have you recently read the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights?  These are rights of all human beings!   Eleanor Roosevelt was a member of the nine person drafting committee. &#8220;Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration&#8221;.  Equality is a core tenant. 
 ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pat, I&#039;m straight, married x 30y.  Canadians have had civil marriage equality for six years, some of the largest provinces for eight years.  While Canada&rsquo;s population is only 10% of USA, there would be very few of us who would agree with you that by definition civil marriage is for straights only. Like many Americans, thirty years ago most of us would have accepted statements like you make without thinking about its implications. But its almost 2012. Five years out, there are over 16,000 gay marriages in Massachusetts, benefitting individuals and its citizens collectively.  Not to mention states that more recently recognized civilo marriage equality.  </p>
<p>Pat, if America holds itself a beacon to the world based on &lsquo;all wo/men are born equal&rsquo;, or more recently your rights of citizenship found in the 14 Amendment, how can you assert an unequal treatment before and under US law.   Have you recently read the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights?  These are rights of all human beings!   Eleanor Roosevelt was a member of the nine person drafting committee. &ldquo;Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration&rdquo;.  Equality is a core tenant. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
