<?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: No charges in Mormon church plaza kissing incident</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.365gay.com/news/no-charges-in-mormon-church-plaza-kissing-incident/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.365gay.com/news/no-charges-in-mormon-church-plaza-kissing-incident/</link>
	<description>The daily news source for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 04:01:09 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Roger Ramjet</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/news/no-charges-in-mormon-church-plaza-kissing-incident/comment-page-1/#comment-71836</link>
		<dc:creator>Roger Ramjet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:55:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=8867#comment-71836</guid>
		<description>For azorman:

The debate over whether this is private property or not is not that simple:

The mormons &#039;purchased&#039; this public square from the city government without the appropriate rules followed. 

Reason? Because this once-public square was the scene of Anti-Mormon debates throughout the decades. The Mormons got sick of having to watch these debates, so they put pressure on the government to buy it - to silence protests in the future.

The citizens of Salt Lake City DO NOT recognize the Mormon church as owners of this property - but USURPERS.

So now that you understand the real history of your &#039;Private Property&#039; argument, maybe you&#039;ll change your view.

The only real reason why the DA dropped the charges in this case was because the Mormon church would LOSE. 

And that would set a nasty precident for the Homophobes who paid for the proposition 8 and Prop 1 in Maine campaigns.

to the mormons: Don&#039;t get your magic panties in a bunch.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For azorman:</p>
<p>The debate over whether this is private property or not is not that simple:</p>
<p>The mormons &#8216;purchased&#8217; this public square from the city government without the appropriate rules followed. </p>
<p>Reason? Because this once-public square was the scene of Anti-Mormon debates throughout the decades. The Mormons got sick of having to watch these debates, so they put pressure on the government to buy it &#8211; to silence protests in the future.</p>
<p>The citizens of Salt Lake City DO NOT recognize the Mormon church as owners of this property &#8211; but USURPERS.</p>
<p>So now that you understand the real history of your &#8216;Private Property&#8217; argument, maybe you&#8217;ll change your view.</p>
<p>The only real reason why the DA dropped the charges in this case was because the Mormon church would LOSE. </p>
<p>And that would set a nasty precident for the Homophobes who paid for the proposition 8 and Prop 1 in Maine campaigns.</p>
<p>to the mormons: Don&#8217;t get your magic panties in a bunch.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: azorman</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/news/no-charges-in-mormon-church-plaza-kissing-incident/comment-page-1/#comment-71832</link>
		<dc:creator>azorman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 11:29:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=8867#comment-71832</guid>
		<description>Well what i think needs to be remembered here is that it is private property and the owners of said property can eject whoever they like for whatever reason.  If they thought it was lewd for a man and a woman to hug, that is their right.  its a PRIVATE property, they are doing a public service by allowing everyone to view such a well kept area.  But we should not just force them to accept things they find offensive and against their religion on their own property.  If this were a public place, it would not be a big deal, but its their property, their rules, simple as that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well what i think needs to be remembered here is that it is private property and the owners of said property can eject whoever they like for whatever reason.  If they thought it was lewd for a man and a woman to hug, that is their right.  its a PRIVATE property, they are doing a public service by allowing everyone to view such a well kept area.  But we should not just force them to accept things they find offensive and against their religion on their own property.  If this were a public place, it would not be a big deal, but its their property, their rules, simple as that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Morgan</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/news/no-charges-in-mormon-church-plaza-kissing-incident/comment-page-1/#comment-70290</link>
		<dc:creator>Morgan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:23:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=8867#comment-70290</guid>
		<description>If two people straight or gay kissed in our church parking lot, noone would notice, give it a thought or would care.

Glad I am not a Mormon. Getting upset over a natural thing like a kiss is strange to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If two people straight or gay kissed in our church parking lot, noone would notice, give it a thought or would care.</p>
<p>Glad I am not a Mormon. Getting upset over a natural thing like a kiss is strange to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ALAN</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/news/no-charges-in-mormon-church-plaza-kissing-incident/comment-page-1/#comment-70276</link>
		<dc:creator>ALAN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 01:34:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=8867#comment-70276</guid>
		<description>Ginelle said &quot;It is basically a no brainer&quot; 
You should remember that we are talking about the Mor(m)ons and not regular people here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ginelle said &#8220;It is basically a no brainer&#8221;<br />
You should remember that we are talking about the Mor(m)ons and not regular people here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ginelle</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/news/no-charges-in-mormon-church-plaza-kissing-incident/comment-page-1/#comment-70255</link>
		<dc:creator>Ginelle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 19:33:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=8867#comment-70255</guid>
		<description>Obviously, someone has the good sense not to pursue this issue and waste the taxpayers dollars in the process!  Regardless whether it is two men or women kissing or a man and woman kissing, this issue should have never been filed with the Salt Lake City Prosecutor&#039;s Office.  It is basically a no brainer, if you want to charge to men for kissing, or two women, then why not charge a man and woman for the same so called &quot;offence&quot;.  It is only fair, right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obviously, someone has the good sense not to pursue this issue and waste the taxpayers dollars in the process!  Regardless whether it is two men or women kissing or a man and woman kissing, this issue should have never been filed with the Salt Lake City Prosecutor&#8217;s Office.  It is basically a no brainer, if you want to charge to men for kissing, or two women, then why not charge a man and woman for the same so called &#8220;offence&#8221;.  It is only fair, right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
