<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Ruth Institute Blog &#187; Marriage Legalities</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ruthblog.org/category/marriage-legalities/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ruthblog.org</link>
	<description>An intellectual climate favorable to marriage</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 00:02:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>A Response to Keith Ablow</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/12/30/a-response-to-keith-ablow/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/12/30/a-response-to-keith-ablow/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2011 23:04:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Betsy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Divorce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jennifer Roback Morse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Newsletter articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marriage legalities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=9888</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Jennifer Roback Morse This article was first posted on December 29, 2011, at NationalReview.com. Celebrity therapist and “life coach” Dr. Keith Ablow just jumped on the “let’s get the government out of the marriage business” bandwagon. I have been writing against the “privatizing marriage” mantra, going all the way back to 2005. (See also here [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/12/30/a-response-to-keith-ablow/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Forced Marriages in Germany More Prevalent than Thought</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/11/14/forced-marriages-in-germany-more-prevalent-than-thought/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/11/14/forced-marriages-in-germany-more-prevalent-than-thought/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2011 18:18:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Betsy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[forced marriage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=9398</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[from SPIEGEL ONLINE More women and girls living in Germany are being forced into marriage under the threat of violence than previously thought, according to a new study released by the German government on Wednesday. In 2008, the most recent year for which statistics are available, 3,443 people sought help at counseling and information centers [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/11/14/forced-marriages-in-germany-more-prevalent-than-thought/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Future Belongs To Those Who Show Up For It&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/04/02/the-future-belongs-to-those-who-show-up-for-it/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/04/02/the-future-belongs-to-those-who-show-up-for-it/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Apr 2011 05:20:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>leland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics & Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polyamory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[popular culture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Population]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Demographic Winter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex-selective Abortion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=6944</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One has to wonder sometimes if Western Civilization is even going to bother showing up for the the future of the world. Well, not the way things are going in America lately, at least not according to recent government data as reported in the LA Times: LA Times: The maternity business has experienced a recession, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/04/02/the-future-belongs-to-those-who-show-up-for-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Same-Sex &#8216;Marriage&#8217; Law Cited in Canadian Polygamy Trial</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/04/01/same-sex-marriage-law-cited-in-canadian-polygamy-trial/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/04/01/same-sex-marriage-law-cited-in-canadian-polygamy-trial/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Apr 2011 02:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>leland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics & Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polyamory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polygamy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Same Sex Marriage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=6930</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[from WinnipegFreePress.com: The last time Canadians had a debate about the definition of marriage, it was over whether gays and lesbians had a constitutional right to marry. In the end, the courts decided they did. Now, as a British Columbia judge weighs whether polygamy should be decriminalized, advocates on both sides of the debate are [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/04/01/same-sex-marriage-law-cited-in-canadian-polygamy-trial/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>52</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>After Same-Sex &#8216;Marriage&#8217; the Sky&#8217;s the Limit</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/03/31/after-same-sex-marriage-the-skys-the-limit/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/03/31/after-same-sex-marriage-the-skys-the-limit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 08:43:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>leland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[incest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[morality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics & Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polyamory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Same Sex Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex Radicals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexual identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[homosexual agenda]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=6876</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[LGBTweekly.com: The Irish edition of tabloid news magazine The Sun recently covered the story of Penny Lawrence, a 28-year-old woman suffering from Genetic Sexual Attraction (GSA) who is now pregnant with her father’s child. If you seriously don&#8217;t think there are folks waiting in the wings for same-sex &#8216;marriage&#8217; to set the legal precedent they [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/03/31/after-same-sex-marriage-the-skys-the-limit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Just Another Day for Dr. J</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/03/31/just-another-day-for-dr-j/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/03/31/just-another-day-for-dr-j/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 08:33:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>leland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Children]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jennifer Roback Morse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parental Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Same Sex Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[same sex parenting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parenting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=6863</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today CatholicVote.org published an article that covers a lecture Dr J gave in early February. In fact we already have a thread about it. (Pro-Family Speaker Challenges Students) But apparently people are still writing about her talk, it is a presentation well worth revisiting, and the author of the article very succinctly sums up what [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/03/31/just-another-day-for-dr-j/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Justice, marriage and religious liberty</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/03/05/justice-marriage-and-religious-liberty/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/03/05/justice-marriage-and-religious-liberty/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2011 21:25:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Betsy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DOMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=6361</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Sheila Liaugminas The Obama administration made the incoherent declaration last week that it will no longer defend in court a federal law it must enforce. And thus the Justice Department signaled the likelihood that injustices may lie on the landscape for a host of issues. Starting with religious liberty and marriage law. Robert P. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/03/05/justice-marriage-and-religious-liberty/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>22</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>So Now It&#8217;s Going To Be Collusive Litigation By Obama, Is It?</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/03/03/so-now-its-going-to-be-collusive-litigation-by-obama-is-it/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/03/03/so-now-its-going-to-be-collusive-litigation-by-obama-is-it/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 03:14:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>leland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gay lobby]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judicial Activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics & Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proposition 8]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Same Sex Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DOMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[homosexual agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=6321</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the FRC article: As the president of the Family Research Council (FRC), an organization that has filed amicus briefs defending both Proposition 8 and DoMA, I am troubled by the lightning-fast integration of concepts and actual language from the Attorney General Letter into the Motion to Vacate Stay. Let me repeat: the Motion was [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/03/03/so-now-its-going-to-be-collusive-litigation-by-obama-is-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Are monogamy-only laws unconstitutional?</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/02/28/are-monogamy-only-laws-unconstitutional/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/02/28/are-monogamy-only-laws-unconstitutional/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 23:22:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>leland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gay lobby]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics & Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polyamory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Same Sex Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[homosexual agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=6212</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Philosopher Francis Beckwith has posted a short, but incisive, comment on patheos.com concerning the legal implications of the &#8216;reasoning&#8217; undergirding the Obama administration&#8217;s refusal to continue to defend DOMA. This is the core of his argument: &#8230;there are sexual minorities, the polyamorous, whose sexual orientation requires more than one partner. But if sexual orientation requires [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/02/28/are-monogamy-only-laws-unconstitutional/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>56</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What Judicial Oligarchy?</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/02/24/what-judicial-oligarchy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/02/24/what-judicial-oligarchy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 22:01:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>leland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Federal Prop 8 Trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judicial Activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prop 8 Trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proposition 8]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Same Sex Marriage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=6116</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When the so-called &#8216;justices&#8217; of the California Supreme Court, in their ruling overturning Proposition 22, commanded the State to recognize same-sex &#8216;marriages&#8217; immediately – in the face of warnings that those &#8216;marriages&#8217; would be be the source of enormous legal confusion when Proposition 8 passed &#8211; it was a case of the judiciary attempting to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/02/24/what-judicial-oligarchy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>41</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Nah! It Won&#8217;t Lead to Polygamy&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/02/21/nah-it-wont-lead-to-polygamy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/02/21/nah-it-wont-lead-to-polygamy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2011 00:18:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>leland</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polygamy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=6052</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Winnipeg Free Press: If a court decides or parliament decides that polygamy is legal, then the whole face of our Canadian society will change.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/02/21/nah-it-wont-lead-to-polygamy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>57</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pope: Marriage is not an absolute right</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/01/24/pope-marriage-is-not-an-absolute-right/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/01/24/pope-marriage-is-not-an-absolute-right/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2011 21:26:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Betsy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Catholic Church]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=5407</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by By NICOLE WINFIELD, Associated Press VATICAN CITY – Pope Benedict XVI told priests Saturday to do a better job counseling would-be spouses to ensure their marriages last and said no one has an absolute right to a wedding. Benedict made the comments in his annual speech to the Roman Rota, the Vatican tribunal that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2011/01/24/pope-marriage-is-not-an-absolute-right/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Stop the Presses: European court Protects Marriage!</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/12/02/stop-the-presses-european-court-protects-marriage/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/12/02/stop-the-presses-european-court-protects-marriage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 2010 01:45:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer Roback Morse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prop 8 Trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marriage law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=4660</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this day of US Courts following European Courts, here comes an interesting story from the European Court of Human Rights: “The European Court of Human Rights has refused permission to appeal in a challenge to the ban on gay marriage in Austria. The effect of the decision is to make the court’s rejection of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/12/02/stop-the-presses-european-court-protects-marriage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>31</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>On Rules and Exceptions</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/10/06/on-rules-and-exceptions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/10/06/on-rules-and-exceptions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 21:51:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ari</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=4106</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One of the most favored tactics of the enemies of marriage is to point out some exceptions to the principle that marriage is fundamentally about procreation.  &#8220;What about infertile couples?&#8221; they ask, thinking they&#8217;ve made a brilliant point. (We had one exceptionally brilliant commentator who accused NOM of advocating a ban on marriage between infertile [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/10/06/on-rules-and-exceptions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>163</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Marriage In Retreat. We Resolve to Advance upon the Enemy.</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/10/05/marriage-in-retreat-we-resolve-to-advance-upon-the-enemy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/10/05/marriage-in-retreat-we-resolve-to-advance-upon-the-enemy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 02:03:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ari</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=4098</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the New York Times: The United States crossed an important marital threshold in 2009, with the number of young adults who have never married surpassing, for the first time in more than a century, the number who were married. The New York Times attributes the decline to the economy.  Undoubtedly the economy has an [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/10/05/marriage-in-retreat-we-resolve-to-advance-upon-the-enemy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>158</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fred on Hooking Up&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/07/04/fred-on-hooking-up/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/07/04/fred-on-hooking-up/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2010 02:37:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ari</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Divorce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fathers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fathers' Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[feminism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Homosexuality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hook-up]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gay marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hooking up]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=3097</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fred Reed writes some provocative stuff.  I often disagree with him, but he&#8217;s smart as a whip and always interesting.  In this article, he takes on hooking up. I see where women, or college girls anyway, are honking and blowing most fierce about how they don’t like the way sex works nowadays. Yeah. It seems [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/07/04/fred-on-hooking-up/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Divorce Question</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/05/20/divorce-question/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/05/20/divorce-question/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2010 18:45:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ginny</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Kos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Divorce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=2443</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Over at Dante Atkins’ Daily Kos post, some commenters have said that no-fault divorce is necessary; without it, women would be stuck in abusive marriages, unable to prove fault.  Everyone admits that there are some reasons why a woman (or man) might need to leave a marriage.  These include situations like: spousal abuse child abuse [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/05/20/divorce-question/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Busy Week in NYC</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/02/15/busy-week-in-nyc/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/02/15/busy-week-in-nyc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 22:43:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Betsy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Jennifer Roback Morse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ruth Institute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Same Sex Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marriage equality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Marriage Week]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=1496</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse had a very productive, though snowy, trip to New York last week. One surprise was a FOX NEWS Strategy Room interview along with Chuck Stetson, organizer of National Marriage Week. Click here to watch. Also, you can listen to a podcast of Dr. J&#8217;s debate with Prof. Katherine Franke called &#8220;Is [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/02/15/busy-week-in-nyc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Question-begging by the LA Times</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/01/14/question-begging-by-the-la-times/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/01/14/question-begging-by-the-la-times/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:59:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer Roback Morse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prop 8 Trial]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=1109</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[George Skelton of the LA Times opines that &#8220;the notion that baby-making is the principal purpose of marriage in 21st century America is plain absurd. Let&#8217;s just say that upfront.&#8221;  Well that&#8217;s nice. How does he say that with such confidence? we all know happily married, childless couples who benefit society without ever propagating. Some [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/01/14/question-begging-by-the-la-times/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>More from Quebec</title>
		<link>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/01/13/more-from-quebec/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/01/13/more-from-quebec/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 22:29:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer Roback Morse</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Marriage Legalities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Correctness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prop 8 Trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ruthblog.org/?p=1076</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Quebec Policy Against Homophobia gives itself these missions and permissions: On Page 20, the State gives itself the power to intervene in all parts of civil society, including the most private and intimate. &#8220;awareness-raising and educational activities must publicize the various forms of homophobia, including the most insidious. It is important to target the various [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/01/13/more-from-quebec/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk
Page Caching using disk (enhanced) (user agent is rejected)
Database Caching 8/24 queries in 0.033 seconds using disk

Served from: www.ruthblog.org @ 2012-02-11 01:31:42 -->
