<?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: It&#039;s Controversial to Celebrate Life</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cosmopolitanconservative.com/2010/01/27/its-controversial-to-celebrate-life/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cosmopolitanconservative.com/2010/01/27/its-controversial-to-celebrate-life/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 02:53:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cosmopolitan Conservative &#187; Blog Archive &#187; WaPo Columnist Calls Out NOW</title>
		<link>http://www.cosmopolitanconservative.com/2010/01/27/its-controversial-to-celebrate-life/comment-page-1/#comment-959</link>
		<dc:creator>Cosmopolitan Conservative &#187; Blog Archive &#187; WaPo Columnist Calls Out NOW</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:25:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cosmopolitanconservative.com/?p=1678#comment-959</guid>
		<description>[...] Now, where have I heard that before? Possibly here? [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Now, where have I heard that before? Possibly here? [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: adrienne</title>
		<link>http://www.cosmopolitanconservative.com/2010/01/27/its-controversial-to-celebrate-life/comment-page-1/#comment-958</link>
		<dc:creator>adrienne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 23:25:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cosmopolitanconservative.com/?p=1678#comment-958</guid>
		<description>Mike, previously CBS turned down right-of-center and religious groups as well as liberal. CBS is owned by Viacom, and it is highly unlikely that a major corporation is giving preferential treatment to a conservative Christian organization. I agree that it looks unfair. However, if CBS honestly changed their policy recently, why slam Focus on the Family? Any other group that can raise the money has the ability to work with CBS to place advocacy ad.

I don&#039;t think it&#039;s hypocritical. It&#039;s a policy change. I wouldn&#039;t like it if EMILY&#039;S List was sponsoring an ad during the Superbowl, but it&#039;s the organization&#039;s right to do so if they please. Pony up the cash and call CBS. They want to make money. They don&#039;t care who buys the advertising.

Have liberal groups realized how much more attention the Superbowl and Focus on the Family are getting now? Y&#039;all look like the bad guys here. If someone wants to buy and ad, buy one also. Don&#039;t whine about it. The PR on this situation makes the anti-lifers look bad and Focus look good. Had the anti-lifers not reacted so strongly, would anyone outside of Focus on the Family members even know this is going on?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike, previously CBS turned down right-of-center and religious groups as well as liberal. CBS is owned by Viacom, and it is highly unlikely that a major corporation is giving preferential treatment to a conservative Christian organization. I agree that it looks unfair. However, if CBS honestly changed their policy recently, why slam Focus on the Family? Any other group that can raise the money has the ability to work with CBS to place advocacy ad.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s hypocritical. It&#8217;s a policy change. I wouldn&#8217;t like it if EMILY&#8217;S List was sponsoring an ad during the Superbowl, but it&#8217;s the organization&#8217;s right to do so if they please. Pony up the cash and call CBS. They want to make money. They don&#8217;t care who buys the advertising.</p>
<p>Have liberal groups realized how much more attention the Superbowl and Focus on the Family are getting now? Y&#8217;all look like the bad guys here. If someone wants to buy and ad, buy one also. Don&#8217;t whine about it. The PR on this situation makes the anti-lifers look bad and Focus look good. Had the anti-lifers not reacted so strongly, would anyone outside of Focus on the Family members even know this is going on?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.cosmopolitanconservative.com/2010/01/27/its-controversial-to-celebrate-life/comment-page-1/#comment-957</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:41:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cosmopolitanconservative.com/?p=1678#comment-957</guid>
		<description>The problem here is not freedom of speech, the problem is that CBS has a strict policy of anti-advocacy ads during the SuperBowl, which they have repeatedly enforced when it has come to ads regarding liberal points of view. Suddenly their own policy doesn&#039;t apply. It&#039;s CBS&#039;s hypocrisy that is the issue for most of the complaining groups. If they air this ad, they need to allow pro-choice, or animal rights, or GLBT marriage rights ads to be aired... they have consistently denied these ads in the past.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem here is not freedom of speech, the problem is that CBS has a strict policy of anti-advocacy ads during the SuperBowl, which they have repeatedly enforced when it has come to ads regarding liberal points of view. Suddenly their own policy doesn&#8217;t apply. It&#8217;s CBS&#8217;s hypocrisy that is the issue for most of the complaining groups. If they air this ad, they need to allow pro-choice, or animal rights, or GLBT marriage rights ads to be aired&#8230; they have consistently denied these ads in the past.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: adrienne</title>
		<link>http://www.cosmopolitanconservative.com/2010/01/27/its-controversial-to-celebrate-life/comment-page-1/#comment-956</link>
		<dc:creator>adrienne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 21:32:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cosmopolitanconservative.com/?p=1678#comment-956</guid>
		<description>Both. Contraception is getting better and cheaper. I have no problems with access to contraceptives, and I believe that pro-life groups need to become better advocates of birth control.

Also neo-natal medicine is dramatically improving. The earlier that a premature infant survives outside of the womb, the harder it is to justify aborting a baby as a non-viable life. It forces pro-abortion groups to admit that abortion is callously murdering infants because they are simply inconvenient. That puts abortion in a much different playing field.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Both. Contraception is getting better and cheaper. I have no problems with access to contraceptives, and I believe that pro-life groups need to become better advocates of birth control.</p>
<p>Also neo-natal medicine is dramatically improving. The earlier that a premature infant survives outside of the womb, the harder it is to justify aborting a baby as a non-viable life. It forces pro-abortion groups to admit that abortion is callously murdering infants because they are simply inconvenient. That puts abortion in a much different playing field.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Malnurtured Snay</title>
		<link>http://www.cosmopolitanconservative.com/2010/01/27/its-controversial-to-celebrate-life/comment-page-1/#comment-955</link>
		<dc:creator>Malnurtured Snay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:16:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cosmopolitanconservative.com/?p=1678#comment-955</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m curious how you can assert medical science is on your side -- in what way?  In preventing pregnancy before it occurs with contraceptives?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m curious how you can assert medical science is on your side &#8212; in what way?  In preventing pregnancy before it occurs with contraceptives?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

