<?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: Friday Talking Points [Vol. 12]</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/12/14/friday-talking-points-vol-12/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/12/14/friday-talking-points-vol-12/</link>
	<description>Reality-based political commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2026 02:56:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chris Weigant</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/12/14/friday-talking-points-vol-12/#comment-1570</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Weigant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Dec 2007 02:37:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/12/14/friday-talking-points-vol-12/#comment-1570</guid>
		<description>gailcorbin -

Thanks for the kind words.

I can go back and open up that comment thread, but it would likely be just you commenting unless you invite others to do so as well.  I mostly close the comments just for convenience (to stop comment spam) but it&#039;s not a hard and fast rule or anything.

It&#039;s a shame (I just checked) that this article on Huffington Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/gay-marriage-and-polygamy_b_49928.html

seems to have lost all its comments.  HuffPost upgraded their comment system a few months&#039; back, so I guess they lost the old ones or something.

I say its a shame because you would have enjoyed reading the comment thread that appeared when this article first ran.  There were many who commented that they hadn&#039;t considered the similarities between gay marriage rights and polygamy rights, but what was even more interesting was the personal stories from people who had had experience with polygamy.  There was no consensus, there were children from polygamist relationships who had grown up with it, there were people who had been in a polygamist relationship themselves, and there were those (like yourself) who hadn&#039;t been in a formal polygamy, but more what they termed &quot;polyamory&quot; -- a looser definition.  Like I said, opinions were all over the map, some thought it was fine, some thought it was a disaster, and the only thing everyone agree with was that polygamy didn&#039;t automatically equate to &quot;marrying 14 year old girls,&quot; but that when it did cross the line to pedophilia that it was obviously wrong and a bad thing.

For such a contentious subject, it was a surprisingly civilized debate.  I was astonished myself because I never expected or even considered that people from polygamous relationships would ever comment about them like that in public.  But it was indeed an interesting and informative debate.

I realize that I&#039;m disappointing you by saying all this and then not being able to point you to a place to read this debate, and I&#039;m sorry about that but it&#039;s beyond my control.  And I hope you caught my article on Smoot this week, as it dealt with the church and state question as well, just from a different direction.

In any case, you&#039;re right there are polygamy rights web sites out there (some of which I ran into while researching, some after commenters pointed it out), so maybe you can find a similar type of debate there.  I&#039;m sorry that&#039;s the best I can offer you at this point, but I invite you to stick around and see what other subjects come up here that you might also want to comment on.

Anyway, thanks for writing.

-CW</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>gailcorbin -</p>
<p>Thanks for the kind words.</p>
<p>I can go back and open up that comment thread, but it would likely be just you commenting unless you invite others to do so as well.  I mostly close the comments just for convenience (to stop comment spam) but it's not a hard and fast rule or anything.</p>
<p>It's a shame (I just checked) that this article on Huffington Post:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/gay-marriage-and-polygamy_b_49928.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/gay-marriage-and-polygamy_b_49928.html</a></p>
<p>seems to have lost all its comments.  HuffPost upgraded their comment system a few months' back, so I guess they lost the old ones or something.</p>
<p>I say its a shame because you would have enjoyed reading the comment thread that appeared when this article first ran.  There were many who commented that they hadn't considered the similarities between gay marriage rights and polygamy rights, but what was even more interesting was the personal stories from people who had had experience with polygamy.  There was no consensus, there were children from polygamist relationships who had grown up with it, there were people who had been in a polygamist relationship themselves, and there were those (like yourself) who hadn't been in a formal polygamy, but more what they termed "polyamory" -- a looser definition.  Like I said, opinions were all over the map, some thought it was fine, some thought it was a disaster, and the only thing everyone agree with was that polygamy didn't automatically equate to "marrying 14 year old girls," but that when it did cross the line to pedophilia that it was obviously wrong and a bad thing.</p>
<p>For such a contentious subject, it was a surprisingly civilized debate.  I was astonished myself because I never expected or even considered that people from polygamous relationships would ever comment about them like that in public.  But it was indeed an interesting and informative debate.</p>
<p>I realize that I'm disappointing you by saying all this and then not being able to point you to a place to read this debate, and I'm sorry about that but it's beyond my control.  And I hope you caught my article on Smoot this week, as it dealt with the church and state question as well, just from a different direction.</p>
<p>In any case, you're right there are polygamy rights web sites out there (some of which I ran into while researching, some after commenters pointed it out), so maybe you can find a similar type of debate there.  I'm sorry that's the best I can offer you at this point, but I invite you to stick around and see what other subjects come up here that you might also want to comment on.</p>
<p>Anyway, thanks for writing.</p>
<p>-CW</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gailcorbin</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/12/14/friday-talking-points-vol-12/#comment-1568</link>
		<dc:creator>gailcorbin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:20:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/12/14/friday-talking-points-vol-12/#comment-1568</guid>
		<description>Hi.  This comment is on the Polygamy post you wrote in May.  I thought it was really well written and I learned something as well! (about the history of polygamy in the Old Testament)

I had a blog a while ago because I feel that polygamy should be legalized.  I think if people loved more they would be a lot happier and the country would run more smoothly.  I do support polygamy for myself and significant other(s).  I currently have one husband, one boyfriend, and one baby on the way.  (One estranged husband, to be fair)  

Comments are closed on your polygamy post, but I&#039;d like to discuss it now if people have opinions.  Thanks! Gail</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi.  This comment is on the Polygamy post you wrote in May.  I thought it was really well written and I learned something as well! (about the history of polygamy in the Old Testament)</p>
<p>I had a blog a while ago because I feel that polygamy should be legalized.  I think if people loved more they would be a lot happier and the country would run more smoothly.  I do support polygamy for myself and significant other(s).  I currently have one husband, one boyfriend, and one baby on the way.  (One estranged husband, to be fair)  </p>
<p>Comments are closed on your polygamy post, but I'd like to discuss it now if people have opinions.  Thanks! Gail</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fstanley</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/12/14/friday-talking-points-vol-12/#comment-1566</link>
		<dc:creator>fstanley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2007 02:22:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/12/14/friday-talking-points-vol-12/#comment-1566</guid>
		<description>You make some good points.  There is so much going on and so much spin that important issues get lost in the crossfire.  The democrats need to make the legislative process as clear and transparent as possible so that it becomes obvious how much the republicans and the president are obstructing congress.

Again it is all about getting your message out to the press and the public.

...Stan</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You make some good points.  There is so much going on and so much spin that important issues get lost in the crossfire.  The democrats need to make the legislative process as clear and transparent as possible so that it becomes obvious how much the republicans and the president are obstructing congress.</p>
<p>Again it is all about getting your message out to the press and the public.</p>
<p>...Stan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
