<?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>Salon.com > Religious Right</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/religious_right/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 06:12:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Faux history for the GOP</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/20/faux_history_for_the_gop/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/20/faux_history_for_the_gop/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[American History]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Right]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12923110</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Republicans love David Barton and his new book, "The Jefferson Lies" -- even though it gets history wrong]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Earlier this month, the evangelical writer David Barton’s new book, “<a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Jefferson-Lies-Exposing-Believed/dp/1595554599/saloncom08-20">The Jefferson Lies</a>,” hit the New York Times bestseller list for hardcover nonfiction. Barton isn’t popular, however, only with the ordinary American reader. On May 8, John Boehner authorized the use of Statuary Hall in the U.S. Capitol for a religious service to commemorate the first inauguration of George Washington. Among the speakers was Barton, who is revered by social conservatives because he argues that the nation was founded primarily by evangelical Christians on explicitly Christian teachings.</p><p>Barton -- “one of the most important men alive,” according to Glenn Beck -- is frequently criticized as a pseudo-historian by progressives and academic historians for his claims about the Founders. He is now facing scrutiny, however, from evangelicals. After Barton’s speech in the Capitol, John Fea, chairman of the history department at evangelical Messiah College, accused Barton of “peddling falsehoods” about Washington, and asked, “Is it time to gather Christian historians together to sign some kind of formal statement condemning Barton's brand of propaganda and hagiography?”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/20/faux_history_for_the_gop/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/20/faux_history_for_the_gop/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>47</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The prudes are winning</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/01/the_prudes_are_winning/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/01/the_prudes_are_winning/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Love and Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12912280</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The author of "America's War on Sex" says things have gotten worse under Obama]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The explosion of government-funded abstinence-only education, extreme assaults on reproductive rights, crackdowns on "indecency" and "obscenity": This is but a small sampling of what spurred sex therapist Marty Klein to publish "America's War on Sex: The Attack on Law, Lust and Liberty" in 2006, midway through George W. Bush's second term. Six years later, under a Democratic presidency, many of the same problems exist -- in fact, in some regards, things have gotten worse.</p><p>That's why Klein has updated the book in <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Americas-War-Sex-Continuing-Psychology/dp/1440801282">a new edition</a> published this week to detail the ways that sexual rights have actually become "increasingly tenuous" under President Obama. Sure, abstinence-only programs have been greatly defunded, but the battle over sex education still rages on -- as do assaults on reproductive rights and all manner of sex-related business, entertainment, expression and experience.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/01/the_prudes_are_winning/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/01/the_prudes_are_winning/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>22</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Oklahoma City&#8221;: The Bubba job</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/22/oklahoma_city_the_bubba_job/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/22/oklahoma_city_the_bubba_job/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Apr 2012 20:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[What to Read]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12888741</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two seasoned journalists explore the disturbing, unanswered questions about the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the hours after the 1995 bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, cable news breathlessly reported that authorities were searching for three Middle Eastern men supposedly seen fleeing the scene. True, this was just two years after the bombing of the World Trade Center by a Islamist cell led by Ramzi Yousef, but even so, the notion that foreign terrorists would target an ordinary office building in the middle of flyover country was far-fetched. Yet not as far-fetched, it seems, as the idea that Americans would do it, and end up killing 168 of their fellow citizens, 19 of them little children.</p><p>An FBI agent from Dallas, Danny Coulson, knew better. As Andrew Gumbel and Roger Charles relate in their impressive new book, <a href="http://click.linksynergy.com/deeplink?mid=36889&amp;id=FYUtulI7nw4&amp;murl=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.barnesandnoble.com%2Fbooksearch%2FISBNInquiry.asp%3FEAN%3D9780061986444%26">"Oklahoma City: What the Investigation Missed -- and Why It Still Matters,"</a> Coulson jumped in his car and headed to Oklahoma City as soon as he heard about the bombing, fielding a call from a CBS correspondent along the way. She told him "everybody in Washington" said the perpetrators were Middle Eastern, but he said no way. "It's a Bubba job," he told her. "It's Bubbas."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/22/oklahoma_city_the_bubba_job/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/04/22/oklahoma_city_the_bubba_job/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>73</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Home-schooled and illiterate</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/15/homeschooled_and_illiterate/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/15/homeschooled_and_illiterate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2012 18:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AlterNet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rick Santorum]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12678881</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The religious right calls it the "responsible" choice, but for some kids it means isolation with little education]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In recent weeks, home schooling has received nationwide attention because of Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum’s home-schooling family. Though Santorum paints a rosy picture of home schooling in the United States, and calls attention to the “responsibility” all parents have to take their children’s education into their own hands, he fails to acknowledge the very real potential for educational neglect among some home-schooling families – neglect that has been taking place for decades, and continues to this day.</p><p><a href="http://www.alternet.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://images.salon.com/img/partners/ID_alternetInline.jpg" alt="AlterNet" align="left" /></a>While the practice of home schooling is new to many people, my own interest in it was sparked nearly 20 years ago. I was a socially awkward adolescent with a chaotic family life, and became close to a conservative Christian home-schooling family that seemed perfect in every way. Through my connection to this family, I was introduced to a whole world of conservative Christian home-schoolers, some of whom we would now consider “Quiverfull” families: home-schooling conservatives who eschew any form of family planning and choose instead to “trust God” with matters related to procreation.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/15/homeschooled_and_illiterate/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/15/homeschooled_and_illiterate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>744</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Birth control: The right&#8217;s still winning</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/23/birth_control_the_rights_still_winning/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/23/birth_control_the_rights_still_winning/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Birth Control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contraception]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Right]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12405901</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Put aside opinion polls and the Komen and Virginia wins. The right's strategy is long-term and based in the courts]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There’s been a troubling trend among some liberals to do a premature victory dance over the contraception insurance benefit debate. Look at the polling data, the reasoning goes, and you’ll find even Catholics support both Obama’s policy and his reelection. Who doesn’t use birth control, except for few outlier zealots? This is a political winner for Obama and the Democrats, the victory dancers contend. Game, set, match.</p><p>It’s far too shortsighted, and worse, dangerously complacent, to measure victory election cycle by election cycle. (Even gaming the outcome of this year’s election is a risky proposition at best.) The opponents of birth control insurance coverage don’t use an election as a metric. Sure, they’d love to win, but even a loss inspires them to redouble their efforts, not to pack up and go home after learning they are on the minority side of public opinion.</p><p>They are evangelists. If public opinion isn’t on their side, they’ll strive to change public opinion. They are dogged, well-financed and unrelenting. Their claims about the proper role of religion in governing and policymaking — which Democrats fail to contest forcefully enough — are eroding the separation of church and state, and taking down gains made in access to reproductive healthcare along with it.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/23/birth_control_the_rights_still_winning/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/23/birth_control_the_rights_still_winning/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>151</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama&#8217;s winning hand on religion</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/09/obamas_winning_hand_on_religion/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/09/obamas_winning_hand_on_religion/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Contraception]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Right]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12320161</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Policies based on science and reason are the best way to protect free exercise of religious belief]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>President Obama's strategy of  “reaching out to” or “appealing to” religious voters has proven to be <a href="http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/3698/">ineffective electorally</a> and counterproductive for policymaking. As much as Obama seems to understand the complexities of American religion, he listens too much to the voices of religious leaders who want the government to accommodate their edicts regardless of the impact on everyone else. The spoils go to the ones with access, to those who sit in the valued “seat at the table” in Washington.</p><p>After decisively issuing the contraception coverage rule last week, the administration took only a few news cycles, dominated by liberal Catholics like <a href="http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/5655/four_catholic_men_v._obama/">E.J. Dionne</a> fretting about how Obama “botched” the issue, to dispatch surrogates to assuage the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/09/obamas_winning_hand_on_religion/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/09/obamas_winning_hand_on_religion/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>120</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Christian right, alive and powerful</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/01/the_christian_right_alive_and_powerful/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/01/the_christian_right_alive_and_powerful/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 20:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AlterNet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Right]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12277871</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Despite media reports of its death, the movement is flexing its political muscles on five separate fronts]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Recently, in a New Republic article titled "<a href="http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/99679/whose-afraid-the-christian-right-the-precipitous-political-decline-conservati">The End of the Christian Right</a>," historian Michael Kazin confidently asserts that “the Christian Right is a fading force in American life, one which has little chance of achieving its cherished goals.”</p><p><a href="http://www.alternet.org"><img style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://images.salon.com/img/partners/ID_alternetInline.jpg" alt="AlterNet" align="left" /></a>I have lost count of how many times the Religious Right has been declared dead as a political force by someone in the mainstream media. Maybe Kazin’s piece seemed absurd to me because I read it the day after watching every Republican presidential candidate take time from their South Carolina debate preparation to stop by Ralph Reed’s “Faith and Freedom Coalition” event and pledge devotion to the Religious Right’s agenda.</p><p>Kazin acknowledges this dynamic, but says, “whatever their influence on the Republican primary, the Christian Right is fighting a losing battle with the rest of the country – above all, when it comes to abortion and same-sex marriage, the issues they care most about.”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/01/the_christian_right_alive_and_powerful/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/01/the_christian_right_alive_and_powerful/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>29</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What&#8217;s next for Michele Bachmann?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/05/whats_next_for_michele_bachmann/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/05/whats_next_for_michele_bachmann/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 20:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iowa caucuses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michele Bachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Right]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=11916421</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Obscurity, hopefully]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Michele Bachmann, a deeply deluded and irresponsible religious fanatic who until this week was apparently seriously running for president of the United States, has slunk back home to her oddly shaped Minnesota congressional district to <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/01/05/presidential_bid_over_bachmann_faces_big_decision/">brood on her future.</a></p><p>Politico <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71054.html">declares her a "lock" for reelection,</a> but that depends on whether or not she runs. She effectively promised not to, but that promise may have been predicated on her remaining a legitimate presidential candidate. (Minnesota law prohibits running for two federal offices at once.)</p><p>Bachmann is not a lock because she's particularly beloved in her district -- as <a href="http://www.dumpbachmann.com/">longtime Bachmann critics</a> have been at pains to point out to the national media, she never wins Stillwater, <del>her district's largest city</del>, [<strong>CORRECTION</strong>: St Cloud is her district's largest city. Stillwater is where Bachmann's home is. Dumb mistake on my part, apologies.] and she has tended to win tight races with help from third-party spoilers -- but <a href="http://www.theawl.com/2012/01/michele-bachmann-americas-perfect-monster">because she is hugely popular outside her district</a>, with a nearly endless supply of Christian right cash.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/01/05/whats_next_for_michele_bachmann/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/05/whats_next_for_michele_bachmann/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>41</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Iowa evangelicals still can&#8217;t find a good non-Romney candidate</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/19/iowa_evangelicals_still_cant_find_a_good_non_romney_candidate/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/19/iowa_evangelicals_still_cant_find_a_good_non_romney_candidate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 17:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Catholicism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iowa caucuses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mitt Romney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Newt Gingrich]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rick Santorum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10648841</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Each acceptable candidate keeps imploding, to the annoyance of the religious right]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pity the poor Iowa evangelicals, who have no one to vote for in the upcoming caucuses. I mean, they have far-right Catholic Rick Santorum and genuine millennialist evangelical believer Michele Bachmann, but Bachmann is crazy and Santorum is creepy, so what they're actually looking for is someone electable who isn't also a Mormon.</p><p><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/evangelicals-divided-on-whom-to-support-in-gop-presidential-race/2011/12/18/gIQAer4B3O_print.html">Jason Horowitz has the story, for the Washington Post,</a> and I bet he was thrilled to get this bit of color into the paper:</p><blockquote><p>In 2008, evangelical support washed over former Arkansas governor and Southern Baptist preacher Mike Huckabee, but this year [Iowa Right to Life executive director Jenifer] Bowen expressed bewilderment at the theological and electoral calculations that were leading conservative-values voters to bestow their blessing on one candidate after another.</p>
<p>“It doesn’t make any sense,” Bowen said, as she set down a basket filled with fetus dolls.</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/12/19/iowa_evangelicals_still_cant_find_a_good_non_romney_candidate/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/19/iowa_evangelicals_still_cant_find_a_good_non_romney_candidate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>44</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Are evangelicals a national security threat?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/29/are_evangelicals_a_national_security_threat/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/29/are_evangelicals_a_national_security_threat/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2011 18:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Right]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10272837</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new poll suggests that American Christians (unlike Muslims) are likely to put their faith before their country]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you have the stomach to listen to enough right-wing talk radio, or troll enough right-wing websites, you inevitably come upon fear-mongering about the Unassimilated Muslim. Essentially, this caricature suggests that Muslims in America are more loyal to their religion than to the United States, that such allegedly traitorous loyalties prove that Muslims refuse to assimilate into our nation and that Muslims are therefore a national security threat.</p><p>Earlier this year, a <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/muslims-most-loyal-american-religious-group-poll-says-002413175.html">Gallup poll</a> illustrated just how apocryphal this story really is. It found that Muslim Americans are one of the most -- if not the single most -- loyal religious group to the United States. Now, comes the flip side from the Pew Research Center's stunning <a href="http://www.pewglobal.org/2011/11/17/the-american-western-european-values-gap/?src=prc-headline ">findings</a> about other religious groups in America (emphasis mine):</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/11/29/are_evangelicals_a_national_security_threat/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/29/are_evangelicals_a_national_security_threat/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>187</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Deadbeat dad Joe Walsh rewarded for &#8220;support of the family&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/04/deadbeat_dad_joe_walsh_rewarded_for_support_of_the_family/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/04/deadbeat_dad_joe_walsh_rewarded_for_support_of_the_family/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 22:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Joe Walsh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tea Parties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Republican takeover]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tony Perkins]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10162515</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Family Research Council celebrates the "pro-family" credentials of a guy who owes six figures in back child support]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Joe Walsh has earned a 100% "True Blue" rating from the Family Research Council, the evangelical lobbying organization and hideous advocate of assorted bigotries. Not Joe Walsh the Eagle, but <a href="http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/8598963-418/rep-walsh-lauded-by-group-for-being-pro-family-though-accused-of-owing-child-support.html">Joe Walsh the "Tea Party" freshman congressman who,</a> not coincidentally, owes more than $100,000 in back child support that he refuses to pay.</p><p>FRC lauds Walsh for his "unwavering support of the family," by which they don't mean <em>his</em> family, because obviously his support for them has been known to waver. But supporting one's actual children is less important, to Tony Perkins and his organization, than Walsh's steadfast belief that the government's sole responsibility is to ensure that life is as difficult and miserable as possible for women and gay people.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/11/04/deadbeat_dad_joe_walsh_rewarded_for_support_of_the_family/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/04/deadbeat_dad_joe_walsh_rewarded_for_support_of_the_family/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>67</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mitt Romney proposes &#8220;partnership agreements&#8221; for gay couples who happen to be emotionless cyborgs</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/11/mitt_romney_proposes_partnership_agreements_for_gay_couples/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/11/mitt_romney_proposes_partnership_agreements_for_gay_couples/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gay Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LGBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mitt Romney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Same-sex marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10107635</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The GOP front-runner invents a less marriage-y phrase for "civil unions"]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mitt Romney once <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/09/17/the-flyer-mitt-romney-doe_n_64694.html">celebrated gay pride weekend</a> when he was running to be the governor of liberal Massachusetts, but now he is running for the Republican nomination for president, and so he does not like to talk about his shameful history of tolerance (or at least willingness to pander to a potential constituency). But at a recent New Hampshire town hall, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/11/mitt-romney-gay-marriage_n_1004831.html">Sam Stein reports,</a> the audience peppered Romney with questions about AIDS funding and gay marriage, and Romney did not seem thrilled. Still, he has a great proposal to completely defuse the entire gay marriage debate <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/11/mitt-romney-gay-marriage_n_1004831.html">in a way that will surely please everyone.</a></p><blockquote><p>"What I would support is letting people who are of the same gender form, if you will, partnership agreements," he replied. "If they want to have a partnership with someone else and have, as a result of that, such things as hospital visitation rights and similar benefits of that nature."</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/11/mitt_romney_proposes_partnership_agreements_for_gay_couples/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/11/mitt_romney_proposes_partnership_agreements_for_gay_couples/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>28</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rick Santorum and the rest of the 2012 field hit the Values Voter Summit</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/07/rick_santorum_and_the_rest_of_the_2012_field_hit_the_values_voter_summit/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/07/rick_santorum_and_the_rest_of_the_2012_field_hit_the_values_voter_summit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2011 19:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rick Santorum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Values Voter Summit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10105220</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The annual religious right gathering generates predictable extreme talk from Republican candidates]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Family Research Council's Values Voters Summit is happening right now at Washington DC's Omni Shoreham Hotel. The summit is the Republican Party's annual tribute to the most retrograde and extreme members of the religious right, and normal people across the nation are asked to politely look away as GOP pols pander to their nutty base. Rick Perry apparently went over well.</p><p>So far today Eric Cantor referred to Occupy Wall Street as "a growing mob" and Rep. Steve King made a joke about how <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65449.html">pro-gay marriage protesters were "the most unhappy people I ever heard refer to themselves as gay."</a> (Maybe they were unhappy because you're trying to deprive them of rights enjoyed by everyone else in the country?)</p><p>Rick Perry <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2011/10/07/values_voter_summit_perry_s_anti_mormon_endorser.html">was introduced by a guy who hates Mormons,</a> and who made a series of barely veiled references to Mitt Romney not believing in the correct Jesus. (Rick Perry <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65449.html">does not consider Mormonism a "cult,"</a> according to his campaign.)</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/07/rick_santorum_and_the_rest_of_the_2012_field_hit_the_values_voter_summit/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/07/rick_santorum_and_the_rest_of_the_2012_field_hit_the_values_voter_summit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>23</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

