<?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: Where do laws come from? The consent of the governed?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.absurdintellectual.com/2009/07/07/where-do-laws-come-from-the-consent-of-the-governed/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.absurdintellectual.com/2009/07/07/where-do-laws-come-from-the-consent-of-the-governed/</link>
	<description>... since &#039;aught-eight.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 11 Dec 2011 21:33:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Grant Hamilton</title>
		<link>http://www.absurdintellectual.com/2009/07/07/where-do-laws-come-from-the-consent-of-the-governed/comment-page-1/#comment-2911</link>
		<dc:creator>Grant Hamilton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 01:09:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.absurdintellectual.com/?p=4049#comment-2911</guid>
		<description>Yeah, he chooses to think that anything not explicitly impossible must therefore be okay. Definitely rude, no matter how he frames it.

Interestingly, though, for me it calls to mind the classic dictionary dilemma -- does a dictionary merely describe and collect common usage? It did once. Or does it set out rules that must be followed, as it does now? Perhaps any set of rules comes from that same descriptive origin, and turns into that same set of rigid laws that must be followed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, he chooses to think that anything not explicitly impossible must therefore be okay. Definitely rude, no matter how he frames it.</p>
<p>Interestingly, though, for me it calls to mind the classic dictionary dilemma &#8212; does a dictionary merely describe and collect common usage? It did once. Or does it set out rules that must be followed, as it does now? Perhaps any set of rules comes from that same descriptive origin, and turns into that same set of rigid laws that must be followed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MPot</title>
		<link>http://www.absurdintellectual.com/2009/07/07/where-do-laws-come-from-the-consent-of-the-governed/comment-page-1/#comment-2909</link>
		<dc:creator>MPot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 23:05:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.absurdintellectual.com/?p=4049#comment-2909</guid>
		<description>Interesting stuff.  Sounds like Meyers hasn&#039;t twigged to the difference between law (the rules of the game) and etiquette/convention (the often tacit conventions of the tribe).  Socially inept?  Perhaps.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting stuff.  Sounds like Meyers hasn&#8217;t twigged to the difference between law (the rules of the game) and etiquette/convention (the often tacit conventions of the tribe).  Socially inept?  Perhaps.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

