<?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: Planned Parenthood is all About Sex</title>
	<atom:link href="http://catholicexchange.com/2009/06/24/119770/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://catholicexchange.com/2009/06/24/119770/</link>
	<description>Catholic News, Catholic Articles, Catholic Apologetics, Catholic Content, Catholic Information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 03:46:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: PrairieHawk</title>
		<link>http://catholicexchange.com/2009/06/24/119770/comment-page-1/#comment-40792</link>
		<dc:creator>PrairieHawk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:25:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://catholicexchange.com/?p=119770#comment-40792</guid>
		<description>The very words &quot;Planned PARENTHOOD&quot; imply that parenthood is a consequence of sexual activity. Are they going to rename themselves &quot;Planned Licentious Pleasure&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The very words &#8220;Planned PARENTHOOD&#8221; imply that parenthood is a consequence of sexual activity. Are they going to rename themselves &#8220;Planned Licentious Pleasure&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce Roeder</title>
		<link>http://catholicexchange.com/2009/06/24/119770/comment-page-1/#comment-40755</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce Roeder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:09:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://catholicexchange.com/?p=119770#comment-40755</guid>
		<description>Hmm. This is a sick misunderstanding of the natural law.

I submit all persons are entitled to experience and enjoy EATING independent of NUTRITION.

Eating is not merely a vehicle for individuals to satisfy their nutritional interests. The entitlement to experience and enjoy eating independent of nutrition, and nutrition independent of eating should be safeguarded, paying particular attention to those who, historically and in the present, are denied such an entitlement.

I understand that the rights and protections guaranteed to people under age eighteen, as a matter of international and national law, sometimes differ from the rights of adults. These differences relate to all aspects of human rights but require particular approaches in regard to eating rights. I begin from the premise that persons under eighteen are rights holders, and that at different points within the spectrum of infancy, childhood, and adolescence, certain rights and protections will have greater or lesser relevance. Once they are full grown, their nutritional needs become subordinate to their desire - nay, their right for the pleasures of eating.

And so on.

But, of course we can all see that as a stupid, false rationalization of what we rightly label a disorder, a selfish twisting of the natural design of eating, which has two aspects -- the aspect of nutrition and the aspect of pleasure.

If we can see it with eating, why can&#039;t we see it with sexuality?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm. This is a sick misunderstanding of the natural law.</p>
<p>I submit all persons are entitled to experience and enjoy EATING independent of NUTRITION.</p>
<p>Eating is not merely a vehicle for individuals to satisfy their nutritional interests. The entitlement to experience and enjoy eating independent of nutrition, and nutrition independent of eating should be safeguarded, paying particular attention to those who, historically and in the present, are denied such an entitlement.</p>
<p>I understand that the rights and protections guaranteed to people under age eighteen, as a matter of international and national law, sometimes differ from the rights of adults. These differences relate to all aspects of human rights but require particular approaches in regard to eating rights. I begin from the premise that persons under eighteen are rights holders, and that at different points within the spectrum of infancy, childhood, and adolescence, certain rights and protections will have greater or lesser relevance. Once they are full grown, their nutritional needs become subordinate to their desire &#8211; nay, their right for the pleasures of eating.</p>
<p>And so on.</p>
<p>But, of course we can all see that as a stupid, false rationalization of what we rightly label a disorder, a selfish twisting of the natural design of eating, which has two aspects &#8212; the aspect of nutrition and the aspect of pleasure.</p>
<p>If we can see it with eating, why can&#8217;t we see it with sexuality?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arkanabar Ilarsadin</title>
		<link>http://catholicexchange.com/2009/06/24/119770/comment-page-1/#comment-40753</link>
		<dc:creator>Arkanabar Ilarsadin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:06:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://catholicexchange.com/?p=119770#comment-40753</guid>
		<description>How is it that every other sexual creature known has that capacity in order to reproduce, but our use of that capacity MUST be separated from reproduction?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How is it that every other sexual creature known has that capacity in order to reproduce, but our use of that capacity MUST be separated from reproduction?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

