<?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: Linkfest: Gay Rights Updates</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kipesquire.net/2008/12/linkfest-gay-rights-updates-3/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kipesquire.net/2008/12/linkfest-gay-rights-updates-3/</link>
	<description>A Stitch in Time Saves Nine ... But Haste Makes Waste</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:02:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Miller</title>
		<link>http://www.kipesquire.net/2008/12/linkfest-gay-rights-updates-3/comment-page-1/#comment-8287</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Miller</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2009 07:52:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kipesquire.net/?p=8686#comment-8287</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;It’s not a frivolous observation, even if it’s made by a bigot. Perhaps my fellow libertarians would consider addressing that meta-question rather than mindlessly chanting the (unhelpful) mantra of “government should get out of the marriage business.”&lt;/i&gt;

I guess.

However, the reporting requirement was nothing new, and ignorance of the law is no excuse.  A search of the anti-Prop 8 donations will also yield my name, and I knew that before giving.

At a certain point, people should be willing to defend the positions they take on public policy issues, rather than attempt to defraud the public about it.  That&#039;s true for voluntary political contributions, as well as signatures on petitions/referenda.

I value the present disclosure laws, because they allow me to make personal consumption decisions (and business decisions) that ensure I am utterly minimizing the flow of resources that I control or have influence over towards anti-gay causes.

And that&#039;s ultimately what the pro-Prop-8 bigots are bitching about -- their hate has economic consequences they&#039;re not willing to face.  They want to defraud the very people they voted against by smiling at them and saying &quot;of course I didn&#039;t support that horrible law,&quot; when in reality, they did.

And last time I checked, libertarians don&#039;t support fraud either.

So the question isn&#039;t as cut-n-dry as the pro-8 people would try to make it, especially considering that THEY were the first people to threaten boycotts against people based on their contributions to the anti-8 campaign.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>It’s not a frivolous observation, even if it’s made by a bigot. Perhaps my fellow libertarians would consider addressing that meta-question rather than mindlessly chanting the (unhelpful) mantra of “government should get out of the marriage business.”</i></p>
<p>I guess.</p>
<p>However, the reporting requirement was nothing new, and ignorance of the law is no excuse.  A search of the anti-Prop 8 donations will also yield my name, and I knew that before giving.</p>
<p>At a certain point, people should be willing to defend the positions they take on public policy issues, rather than attempt to defraud the public about it.  That's true for voluntary political contributions, as well as signatures on petitions/referenda.</p>
<p>I value the present disclosure laws, because they allow me to make personal consumption decisions (and business decisions) that ensure I am utterly minimizing the flow of resources that I control or have influence over towards anti-gay causes.</p>
<p>And that's ultimately what the pro-Prop-8 bigots are bitching about &#8212; their hate has economic consequences they're not willing to face.  They want to defraud the very people they voted against by smiling at them and saying "of course I didn't support that horrible law," when in reality, they did.</p>
<p>And last time I checked, libertarians don't support fraud either.</p>
<p>So the question isn't as cut-n-dry as the pro-8 people would try to make it, especially considering that THEY were the first people to threaten boycotts against people based on their contributions to the anti-8 campaign.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

