<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel> 

	<title>Comments on: Comments on 722</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/722//</link>
	<description>Comments on MetaFilter post Comments on 722</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2000 11:57:03 -0800</pubDate>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2000 11:57:03 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>

	<item>
		<title>Post number 722</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/722/</link>	
		<description>The most disgusting things I&apos;ve seen in California this year are the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.channel2000.com/news/stories/news-20000211-005615.html&quot;&gt;parents against&lt;/a&gt; a &lt;a href=&quot;http://metafilter.com/detail.cfm?link_ID=709&quot;&gt;student group&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.protectmarriage.net/&quot;&gt;Propsition 22&lt;/a&gt;. Last night, I saw that support for prop 22 was &lt;b&gt;leading&lt;/b&gt; in the polls, which I find incomprehensible. The LA Times has &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.latimes.com/communities/news/inland_empire/20000211/tiv0003541.html&quot;&gt;a summary of what religious leaders think&lt;/a&gt; about it, and there&apos;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/02/11/MN97056.DTL&quot;&gt;a protest against the proposition by 400 clergymen&lt;/a&gt; this weekend. If even these guys have problems with it, why would the average citizen support it? Hopefully reason will win out on this one, but unfortunately, if you haven&apos;t already registered to vote in CA, it&apos;s too late for &lt;a href=&quot;http://calvoter.org/2000/&quot;&gt;this primary election&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">post:www.metafilter.com,2000:site.722</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2000 11:18:00 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mathowie</dc:creator>		<category>prop22</category>		<category>religion</category>		<category>california</category>		<category>protests</category>		<category>demonstrations</category>		<category>elections</category>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: CrazyUncleJoe</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/722/#717</link>	
		<description>I love the slogan at the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.noonknight.org/&quot;&gt;No on Knight&lt;/a&gt; (anti Prop 22) website:  &quot;California is better than this&quot; - I wish I believed that.  One of the reasons I am loathe to move away from California is that I consider it to be a much less narrow-minded state (vs. other places I have lived)... but things like this (and prop 186 aka &quot;deport them wetbacks&quot;) are eroding my sense of egalitarian pride.  Sure, it&apos;s narrow minded and conservative &lt;b&gt;Behind the Orange Curtain&lt;/b&gt;, but I like to think that the rest of us live up to the slogan.  If we aren&apos;t better than this, we damn well should be.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2000:site.722-717</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2000 11:57:03 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>CrazyUncleJoe</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: megnut</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/722/#718</link>	
		<description>Wow, thanks for pointing this out Matt. I wasn&apos;t even aware that this was on the ballot! </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2000:site.722-718</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2000 11:59:17 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>megnut</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: palegirl</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/722/#719</link>	
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.protectmarriage.net/purpose.html&quot;&gt;purpose statement&lt;/a&gt; on the &quot;project marriage&quot; site says &quot;[prop 22] does not take away anyone&apos;s rights or attack any group of people or their family. It merely affirms the irreplaceable role of marriage between men and women in our society.&quot; -- what a joke.  the only reason to affirm m/f marriage is to deny same-gender couples equal rights.  how disgusting.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2000:site.722-719</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2000 12:10:06 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>palegirl</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: wendell</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/722/#721</link>	
		<description>When somebody tells me &quot;Well, Prop 186/209 must be OK, since it was passed by the people&quot;, I point out that, in November of 1964, California passed overwhelmingly a proposition (#14) to override the Federal Fair Housing Act.  Of course that was the same year an initiative (#15) passed outlawing Pay TV.  History repeats itself like a bad burrito.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2000:site.722-721</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2000 12:28:44 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>wendell</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: palegirl</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/722/#734</link>	
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.latimes.com/news/state/20000211/t000013702.html&quot;&gt;a gay and lesbian group supports prop 22&lt;/a&gt;: &quot;A spokeswoman for the opposition campaign dismissed Gays for 22 as a tiny fringe group whose comments will have little influence on the fate of the measure. &apos;We congratulate [our opponents] on putting so many resources into finding the five gay people who support Prop. 22,&apos; said the spokeswoman, Tracey Conaty. &apos;It looks to us like a pretty desperate move.&apos;&quot;</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2000:site.722-734</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2000 17:20:27 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>palegirl</dc:creator>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
