<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Harriet Harman criminally hates men</title>
	<link>http://blog.fathersforlife.org/2008/07/29/harriet-harman-criminally-hates-men/</link>
	<description>About fathers and families, and the war against them.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 18:45:50 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Walter Schneider</title>
		<link>http://blog.fathersforlife.org/2008/07/29/harriet-harman-criminally-hates-men/#comment-10171</link>
		<author>Walter Schneider</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Aug 2008 13:14:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.fathersforlife.org/2008/07/29/harriet-harman-criminally-hates-men/#comment-10171</guid>
		<description>An update, a little dated but still importantly relevant:

MailOnline

Why does Harriet Harman hate marriage?

By Leo Mckinstry
2008 05 20

Political ideologues live in a permanent state of denial, refusing to accept any evidence that contradicts them. A classic example of this pattern lies in family policy.

For decades, feminist zealots have told us that family structure is irrelevant, fathers are unnecessary for child-rearing and marriage is outdated.

These views have had a disastrous influence, encouraging the state to preside over the breakdown in the traditional family. The results are everywhere  -  in crime, in benefits dependency, poverty and the rising costs to public services.

Yet, amid all this wreckage, hardliners still cling to their dogma. And none is more hardline than the High Priestess of British Feminism, Harriet Harman.

In an extraordinary interview published yesterday, she declared marriage was 'irrelevant' to public policy and described high rates of separation as a 'positive development', as it reflected 'greater choice' for couples  -  never mind the children....

Full Story: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1020553/Why-does-Harriet-Harman-hate-marriage.html

It boggles the mind why anyone bothers to cast his vote for her. She incorporates everything that one hates to see in a bad politician.  The last paragraph in Leo Mckinstry's article summarizes her well: "Her entire career, based on the elitist belief that she knows best, represents a betrayal of the traditional working class  -  the very people Labour was founded to represent."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An update, a little dated but still importantly relevant:</p>
<p>MailOnline</p>
<p>Why does Harriet Harman hate marriage?</p>
<p>By Leo Mckinstry<br />
2008 05 20</p>
<p>Political ideologues live in a permanent state of denial, refusing to accept any evidence that contradicts them. A classic example of this pattern lies in family policy.</p>
<p>For decades, feminist zealots have told us that family structure is irrelevant, fathers are unnecessary for child-rearing and marriage is outdated.</p>
<p>These views have had a disastrous influence, encouraging the state to preside over the breakdown in the traditional family. The results are everywhere  -  in crime, in benefits dependency, poverty and the rising costs to public services.</p>
<p>Yet, amid all this wreckage, hardliners still cling to their dogma. And none is more hardline than the High Priestess of British Feminism, Harriet Harman.</p>
<p>In an extraordinary interview published yesterday, she declared marriage was &#8216;irrelevant&#8217; to public policy and described high rates of separation as a &#8216;positive development&#8217;, as it reflected &#8216;greater choice&#8217; for couples  -  never mind the children&#8230;.</p>
<p>Full Story: <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1020553/Why-does-Harriet-Harman-hate-marriage.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1020553/Why-does-Harriet-Harman-hate-marriage.html</a></p>
<p>It boggles the mind why anyone bothers to cast his vote for her. She incorporates everything that one hates to see in a bad politician.  The last paragraph in Leo Mckinstry&#8217;s article summarizes her well: &#8220;Her entire career, based on the elitist belief that she knows best, represents a betrayal of the traditional working class  -  the very people Labour was founded to represent.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

