<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: It&#8217;s not the piety, it&#8217;s the policy, stupid</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.benedictionblogson.com/2008/03/02/its-not-the-piety-its-the-policy-stupid/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.benedictionblogson.com/2008/03/02/its-not-the-piety-its-the-policy-stupid/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 21:38:15 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bene D</title>
		<link>http://www.benedictionblogson.com/2008/03/02/its-not-the-piety-its-the-policy-stupid/#comment-100267</link>
		<dc:creator>Bene D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2008 23:32:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benedictionblogson.com/2008/03/02/its-not-the-piety-its-the-policy-stupid/#comment-100267</guid>
		<description>Sorry Georgia, I've not heard of Carmon Friedrich. 
As far as I can tell she is a book blogger in the US. 
I couldn't find anything on Jeannie Chauncey, but I didn't look very hard.

What do they have to do with a quote from The Journal of Lutheran Ethics (November 2007) regarding US elections in 1960?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry Georgia, I&#8217;ve not heard of Carmon Friedrich.<br />
As far as I can tell she is a book blogger in the US.<br />
I couldn&#8217;t find anything on Jeannie Chauncey, but I didn&#8217;t look very hard.</p>
<p>What do they have to do with a quote from The Journal of Lutheran Ethics (November 2007) regarding US elections in 1960?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Georgia</title>
		<link>http://www.benedictionblogson.com/2008/03/02/its-not-the-piety-its-the-policy-stupid/#comment-100240</link>
		<dc:creator>Georgia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 2008 15:51:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benedictionblogson.com/2008/03/02/its-not-the-piety-its-the-policy-stupid/#comment-100240</guid>
		<description>
Carmon Friedrich to me is one of the most dangerous women in modern christianity, along with Jeannie Chauncey.  Can't legislate morality.  Faith comes from the heart and is a private matter.  
What does theocracy mean?  Will the declining birthrate kill the economy and society?  Or is this christian propaganda?  What about the blue laws?  Are they necessary?

The film’s producer said, “The challenge now is to change hearts and minds back in favor of families without forcing anything on people and to ask how this can be done without becoming a theocracy.” I agree with the first part, that we must persuade rather than force, even though I’ve had The Handmaid’s Tale waved at me many times by those who think I envision enforcing such a dystopia. However, if the definition of “theocracy” just means a society where God’s Word is the basis for how we determine what is right and wrong as we craft legislation (or refrain from crafting it, which is usually the nobler of the two options, in my humble opinion), then I think he’s going to miss the mark with his mission of saving the world. Saving it for what and from what? By what standard and for what purpose do we care that old people are not abandoned as useless drains on society’s resources? How can we encourage people to abandon hedonism and selfishness for diapers and obligations unless they understand their obligation to God and their need for His blessing?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Carmon Friedrich to me is one of the most dangerous women in modern christianity, along with Jeannie Chauncey.  Can&#8217;t legislate morality.  Faith comes from the heart and is a private matter.<br />
What does theocracy mean?  Will the declining birthrate kill the economy and society?  Or is this christian propaganda?  What about the blue laws?  Are they necessary?</p>
<p>The film’s producer said, “The challenge now is to change hearts and minds back in favor of families without forcing anything on people and to ask how this can be done without becoming a theocracy.” I agree with the first part, that we must persuade rather than force, even though I’ve had The Handmaid’s Tale waved at me many times by those who think I envision enforcing such a dystopia. However, if the definition of “theocracy” just means a society where God’s Word is the basis for how we determine what is right and wrong as we craft legislation (or refrain from crafting it, which is usually the nobler of the two options, in my humble opinion), then I think he’s going to miss the mark with his mission of saving the world. Saving it for what and from what? By what standard and for what purpose do we care that old people are not abandoned as useless drains on society’s resources? How can we encourage people to abandon hedonism and selfishness for diapers and obligations unless they understand their obligation to God and their need for His blessing?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
