<?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: NEW VIDEO: Top 10 Marriage Victories of 2012!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.nomblog.com/31825/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825</link>
	<description>The official blog of the National Organization for Marriage</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 05:19:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy E King</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146285</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy E King</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 16:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146285</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It appears quite obvious that marriage corruption supporters must mischaracterize everything people say just to lend an appearance of acceptability to their depravity.

Newt reportedly noted that &quot;momentum appears to be on the side of SSM.&quot; He did not say he agrees with it, he did not say the momentum is on its side, he did not say he changed his position on this topic,

Mischaracterizing statements made so as to lend a greater appearance of acquiescence then that which actually exists is a tactic of the desperate.

marriage corruption has no basis in the laws of nature; they are completely dependent upon mischaracterizations of intent and the bastardization of language just to lend an appearance of acceptability to their depravity.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It appears quite obvious that marriage corruption supporters must mischaracterize everything people say just to lend an appearance of acceptability to their depravity.</p>
<p>Newt reportedly noted that "momentum appears to be on the side of SSM." He did not say he agrees with it, he did not say the momentum is on its side, he did not say he changed his position on this topic,</p>
<p>Mischaracterizing statements made so as to lend a greater appearance of acquiescence then that which actually exists is a tactic of the desperate.</p>
<p>marriage corruption has no basis in the laws of nature; they are completely dependent upon mischaracterizations of intent and the bastardization of language just to lend an appearance of acceptability to their depravity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: OvercameSSA</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146273</link>
		<dc:creator>OvercameSSA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 15:13:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146273</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Homosexuals demanding the right to be &quot;married&quot; is like a guy demanding that his health insurance provide him a breast pump because a pregnant  friend of his received one.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Homosexuals demanding the right to be "married" is like a guy demanding that his health insurance provide him a breast pump because a pregnant  friend of his received one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Son of Adam</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146261</link>
		<dc:creator>Son of Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 06:51:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146261</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rats is right, John B.  And you can have them.  They&#039;re the kind of folks who favor SS&quot;M&quot; anyway. - those who have little or no respect for fidelity or monogamy whatsoever.  It is no coincidence that the same people who have been attacking natural marriage for decades come out in favor of marriage redefinition.  It is all part of the process to weakening and destroying the institution.  

And Newt is hardly operating on political opportunism since he is not running for political office.  He has nothing to lose by selling out like those Republican Senators in NYS.  

And I wouldn&#039;t call winning 31 referendums and 31 constitutional amendments protecting REAL marriage in this country to be a sinking ship.  Neither does six federal courts upholding natural marriage, including the SCOTUS itself with Baker vs. Nelson.  And don&#039;t forget North Carolina that voted to protect marriage by over 61%!  

While true we&#039;ve experienced setbacks we are still ahead and poised for more victories in the future.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rats is right, John B.  And you can have them.  They're the kind of folks who favor SS"M" anyway. - those who have little or no respect for fidelity or monogamy whatsoever.  It is no coincidence that the same people who have been attacking natural marriage for decades come out in favor of marriage redefinition.  It is all part of the process to weakening and destroying the institution.  </p>
<p>And Newt is hardly operating on political opportunism since he is not running for political office.  He has nothing to lose by selling out like those Republican Senators in NYS.  </p>
<p>And I wouldn't call winning 31 referendums and 31 constitutional amendments protecting REAL marriage in this country to be a sinking ship.  Neither does six federal courts upholding natural marriage, including the SCOTUS itself with Baker vs. Nelson.  And don't forget North Carolina that voted to protect marriage by over 61%!  </p>
<p>While true we've experienced setbacks we are still ahead and poised for more victories in the future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zack</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146250</link>
		<dc:creator>zack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 04:05:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146250</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[typo: they&#039;re*]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>typo: they're*</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John B.</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146248</link>
		<dc:creator>John B.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 03:53:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146248</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Credibility&quot;?  We&#039;re not giving him credibility, we&#039;re amused by his political opportunism now that he sees which way the wind is blowing, just as we were always amused that he ever had any credibility on your side given his history of serial marriages (and serial infidelity).  Honestly, we don&#039;t want him.  He&#039;s no more credible now than he was then, but we expect to see plenty more rats like him abandoning your sinking ship.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>"Credibility"?  We're not giving him credibility, we're amused by his political opportunism now that he sees which way the wind is blowing, just as we were always amused that he ever had any credibility on your side given his history of serial marriages (and serial infidelity).  Honestly, we don't want him.  He's no more credible now than he was then, but we expect to see plenty more rats like him abandoning your sinking ship.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Son of Adam</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146236</link>
		<dc:creator>Son of Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:32:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146236</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And don&#039;t forget the federal judge&#039;s finding upholding Nevada&#039;s definition of marriage as being only one man and one woman, and called on the United States Supreme Court to grant certiorari in the California case that invalidated Proposition 8.  That makes six federal courts that have rejected equal-protection arguments for redefining marriage: the District of Nevada, District of Hawaii, Middle District of Florida, Western District of Washington, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court in a summary decision issued in 1972 known as Baker vs. Nelson.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And don't forget the federal judge's finding upholding Nevada's definition of marriage as being only one man and one woman, and called on the United States Supreme Court to grant certiorari in the California case that invalidated Proposition 8.  That makes six federal courts that have rejected equal-protection arguments for redefining marriage: the District of Nevada, District of Hawaii, Middle District of Florida, Western District of Washington, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court in a summary decision issued in 1972 known as Baker vs. Nelson.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Son of Adam</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146235</link>
		<dc:creator>Son of Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:21:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146235</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why is the left suddenly giving Newt so much credibility after his divorcing three wives and having numerous affairs?  Weren&#039;t these things the reason why his views on the natural family were belittled by the media?  But now that he is in favor of SS&quot;M&quot;, he is suddenly the Nostradamus of the 21st century with infinite wisdom and insight. 

Newt is known for telling outrageous lies and will do anything to advance his career.  This news should come as no surprise considering how much money is in supporting SS&quot;M&quot; these days.  

Why would anyone care what the serial adulterer has to say anyway?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why is the left suddenly giving Newt so much credibility after his divorcing three wives and having numerous affairs?  Weren't these things the reason why his views on the natural family were belittled by the media?  But now that he is in favor of SS"M", he is suddenly the Nostradamus of the 21st century with infinite wisdom and insight. </p>
<p>Newt is known for telling outrageous lies and will do anything to advance his career.  This news should come as no surprise considering how much money is in supporting SS"M" these days.  </p>
<p>Why would anyone care what the serial adulterer has to say anyway?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John B.</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146234</link>
		<dc:creator>John B.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:07:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146234</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With &quot;victories&quot; like these, who needs defeats?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With "victories" like these, who needs defeats?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barb Chamberlan</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146231</link>
		<dc:creator>Barb Chamberlan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2012 23:28:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146231</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I like Newt, but he does have a few foibles. One of these is his belief that he can predict the future.  He was convinced he&#039;d be the presidential nominee, for example.  

He needs to throw his support behind the new generation of conservatives.  The rumors of marriage&#039;s death have been greatly exaggerated.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like Newt, but he does have a few foibles. One of these is his belief that he can predict the future.  He was convinced he'd be the presidential nominee, for example.  </p>
<p>He needs to throw his support behind the new generation of conservatives.  The rumors of marriage's death have been greatly exaggerated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zack</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146229</link>
		<dc:creator>Zack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2012 20:07:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146229</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Stephen

&quot;It&#039;s at the Huff post. Another sign of the times&quot;

The Huffington Post is hardly a reliable source. Though I do find it amusing that leftwingers reword parroted material and claim it as their own original thought.

Anyways that&#039;s besides the point. Newt Gingrich conceded the failure of the Conservative movement to convey its message. It makes no sense why someone would vote Democrat because of one or two issues and keep voting that way, but agree with the GOP on a whole myriad of others. There are whole constituencies within the DNC that are very conservative, but have allowed themselves to be convinced their victims.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Stephen</p>
<p>"It's at the Huff post. Another sign of the times"</p>
<p>The Huffington Post is hardly a reliable source. Though I do find it amusing that leftwingers reword parroted material and claim it as their own original thought.</p>
<p>Anyways that's besides the point. Newt Gingrich conceded the failure of the Conservative movement to convey its message. It makes no sense why someone would vote Democrat because of one or two issues and keep voting that way, but agree with the GOP on a whole myriad of others. There are whole constituencies within the DNC that are very conservative, but have allowed themselves to be convinced their victims.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quinn</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146227</link>
		<dc:creator>Quinn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2012 19:31:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146227</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Desperation? really.. 31 states to 10 states &amp; the SCOTUS ruling in favor of real marriage come next June.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Desperation? really.. 31 states to 10 states &amp; the SCOTUS ruling in favor of real marriage come next June.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146221</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2012 18:06:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146221</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Will F, yes he did. It&#039;s at the Huff post. Another sign of the times. Happy 2013, everyone.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Will F, yes he did. It's at the Huff post. Another sign of the times. Happy 2013, everyone.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Will Fisher</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146220</link>
		<dc:creator>Will Fisher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:51:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146220</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is it true that Newt Gingrich just conceded the marriage battle? I&#039;ve heard but can&#039;t confirm. Anyone know for sure?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is it true that Newt Gingrich just conceded the marriage battle? I've heard but can't confirm. Anyone know for sure?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mikhail</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146202</link>
		<dc:creator>Mikhail</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2012 05:44:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146202</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Should have included Australia where it was voted down 98-42. Australia is a very conservative and religious country but it was still inspiring to see that not all western countries were following the lead of Denmark and Holland!

Happy new year everyone see you in 2013 where the battle for marriage continues in France, England, New Zealand, Illinois, Indiana, Uruguay and even Taiwan!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Should have included Australia where it was voted down 98-42. Australia is a very conservative and religious country but it was still inspiring to see that not all western countries were following the lead of Denmark and Holland!</p>
<p>Happy new year everyone see you in 2013 where the battle for marriage continues in France, England, New Zealand, Illinois, Indiana, Uruguay and even Taiwan!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: OldKingBlog</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146200</link>
		<dc:creator>OldKingBlog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2012 05:41:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146200</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Earth to Stefan: The ONLY thing lame here is you. Move on to Moveon, post haste!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Earth to Stefan: The ONLY thing lame here is you. Move on to Moveon, post haste!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stefan</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146199</link>
		<dc:creator>Stefan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2012 05:06:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146199</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And a pretty lame top ten list to boot. Can&#039;t wait for the 2013 results.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And a pretty lame top ten list to boot. Can't wait for the 2013 results.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stefan</title>
		<link>http://www.nomblog.com/31825/comment-page-1#comment-146198</link>
		<dc:creator>Stefan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Dec 2012 05:01:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.nomblog.com/?p=31825#comment-146198</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Desperation]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Desperation</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
