<?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/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: &#8220;The persecution of Belmont Abbey&#8221;	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/10/the-persecution-of-belmont-abbey/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/10/the-persecution-of-belmont-abbey/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 13:44:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Glaucon		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/10/the-persecution-of-belmont-abbey/comment-page-1/#comment-77497</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Glaucon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 13:44:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=14315#comment-77497</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I thought the Weekly Standard article was misleading and agenda filled.  The Belmont Abbey College contraception benefits situation  is a small skirmish in the war over who is going to control American Catholicism: the conservatives, or the vast majority of American Catholics who favor contraception.  The conservatives are happy to count the majority as being &#039;Catholic&#039; when they&#039;re trying to demonstrate that a majority of employees are Catholic to meet NC law, but equally happy to tell these self described liberal Catholics that if they don&#039;t believe in xx, they should go somewhere else for church.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought the Weekly Standard article was misleading and agenda filled.  The Belmont Abbey College contraception benefits situation  is a small skirmish in the war over who is going to control American Catholicism: the conservatives, or the vast majority of American Catholics who favor contraception.  The conservatives are happy to count the majority as being &#8216;Catholic&#8217; when they&#8217;re trying to demonstrate that a majority of employees are Catholic to meet NC law, but equally happy to tell these self described liberal Catholics that if they don&#8217;t believe in xx, they should go somewhere else for church.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Todd Rogers		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/10/the-persecution-of-belmont-abbey/comment-page-1/#comment-74015</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Todd Rogers]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:57:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=14315#comment-74015</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Don&#039;t worry, the czars will straighten it all out.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t worry, the czars will straighten it all out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: wfjag		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/10/the-persecution-of-belmont-abbey/comment-page-1/#comment-74011</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[wfjag]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:51:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=14315#comment-74011</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Let&#039;s see if I understand the facts:  The March 12, 2009 letter from the EEOC office for North Carolina said that the policy was legal, but, the July 30, 2009 letter from the same EEOC office said that it is not.  This is another example of why we need expanded federal powers over more areas of our lives.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s see if I understand the facts:  The March 12, 2009 letter from the EEOC office for North Carolina said that the policy was legal, but, the July 30, 2009 letter from the same EEOC office said that it is not.  This is another example of why we need expanded federal powers over more areas of our lives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Tom T.		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/10/the-persecution-of-belmont-abbey/comment-page-1/#comment-74008</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom T.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:28:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=14315#comment-74008</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Did the health plan also not include erectile-dysfunction and fertility treatment for unmarried employees, in accordance with Catholic doctrine?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did the health plan also not include erectile-dysfunction and fertility treatment for unmarried employees, in accordance with Catholic doctrine?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
