<?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: Burkeanism Blogfest</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.edcottrell.com/2008/05/11/burkeanism-blogfest/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.edcottrell.com/2008/05/11/burkeanism-blogfest/</link>
	<description>musings of a conservative Texas attorney on law, faith, politics, technology, and life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 May 2010 06:34:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed</title>
		<link>http://www.edcottrell.com/2008/05/11/burkeanism-blogfest/comment-page-1/#comment-67457</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 22:03:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.edcottrell.com/?p=502#comment-67457</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m inclined to say it&#039;s a pretty interesting discussion, despite my disagreement with some of the conclusions. Burke, of course, gets used for all sorts of arguments, many of which I&#039;m sure he would not have considered reasonable. For example, I agree with what I think you&#039;re saying, that a Burkean approach cannot result in endorsing gay marriages on gradualist grounds (Carpenter argues that it can). Still, I think it&#039;s interesting to see what the avowedly conservative minds over at Volokh and elsewhere have to say about such things, especially because of the disagreements.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m inclined to say it&#8217;s a pretty interesting discussion, despite my disagreement with some of the conclusions. Burke, of course, gets used for all sorts of arguments, many of which I&#8217;m sure he would not have considered reasonable. For example, I agree with what I think you&#8217;re saying, that a Burkean approach cannot result in endorsing gay marriages on gradualist grounds (Carpenter argues that it can). Still, I think it&#8217;s interesting to see what the avowedly conservative minds over at Volokh and elsewhere have to say about such things, especially because of the disagreements.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roach</title>
		<link>http://www.edcottrell.com/2008/05/11/burkeanism-blogfest/comment-page-1/#comment-67456</link>
		<dc:creator>Roach</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 21:52:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.edcottrell.com/?p=502#comment-67456</guid>
		<description>Recent Russian immigrants over at Volokh should probably slow down on telling Burkean conservatives what America is all about.

In any case, Burkeanism is not Fabian gradualism towards certain uncompromising and ideologically derived goals, such as equality or sexual license.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Recent Russian immigrants over at Volokh should probably slow down on telling Burkean conservatives what America is all about.</p>
<p>In any case, Burkeanism is not Fabian gradualism towards certain uncompromising and ideologically derived goals, such as equality or sexual license.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
