<?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: Eve’s Breasts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://atheology.com/2005/02/25/eves-breasts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://atheology.com/2005/02/25/eves-breasts/</link>
	<description>n. against God or gods, anti-theology, the defense of naturalism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2012 13:38:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rastaban</title>
		<link>http://atheology.com/2005/02/25/eves-breasts/comment-page-1/#comment-40</link>
		<dc:creator>Rastaban</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2006 15:09:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://atheology.com/2005/02/25/eves-breasts/#comment-40</guid>
		<description>Hey, thanks for providing the link to the art. It&#039;s even less objectionable than I would have imagined.  Which makes this sentence from the ACLU article even more bizarre:

&quot;Because Eve&#039;s breasts were bare in the mural, the Pilot Point Police Department repeatedly threatened, in writing, to prosecute Miller under a criminal statute aimed at those who would victimize children by selling or displaying to them hard-core pornography.&quot;

If the picture of a breast &quot;victimizes&quot; children by displaying &quot;hard-core pornography&quot; then what should we do to a woman who allows her baby to actually suck on her breast? Oh horror of horrors!

In reality I would expect a motherly breast to be a comforting image to any child. Unless of course the child&#039;s mind has been warped by Christinsanity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, thanks for providing the link to the art. It&#8217;s even less objectionable than I would have imagined.  Which makes this sentence from the ACLU article even more bizarre:</p>
<p>&#8220;Because Eve&#8217;s breasts were bare in the mural, the Pilot Point Police Department repeatedly threatened, in writing, to prosecute Miller under a criminal statute aimed at those who would victimize children by selling or displaying to them hard-core pornography.&#8221;</p>
<p>If the picture of a breast &#8220;victimizes&#8221; children by displaying &#8220;hard-core pornography&#8221; then what should we do to a woman who allows her baby to actually suck on her breast? Oh horror of horrors!</p>
<p>In reality I would expect a motherly breast to be a comforting image to any child. Unless of course the child&#8217;s mind has been warped by Christinsanity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Esteban</title>
		<link>http://atheology.com/2005/02/25/eves-breasts/comment-page-1/#comment-39</link>
		<dc:creator>Esteban</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 May 2006 21:49:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://atheology.com/2005/02/25/eves-breasts/#comment-39</guid>
		<description>You can see the actual mural here: http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/censorship/11517prs20050111.html
  On the other hand, if you want to see real boobies, look here:  http://www.montereybay.com/creagrus/boobies.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can see the actual mural here: <a href="http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/censorship/11517prs20050111.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/censorship/11517prs20050111.html</a><br />
  On the other hand, if you want to see real boobies, look here:  <a href="http://www.montereybay.com/creagrus/boobies.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.montereybay.com/creagrus/boobies.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

