<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Patrick Oden</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.patrickoden.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.patrickoden.com</link>
	<description>The Common Lawyer, Now in Blog Form</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 04:36:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>States&#8217; rights and individual rights</title>
		<link>http://www.patrickoden.com/legal-theory/states-rights-and-individual-rights/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patrickoden.com/legal-theory/states-rights-and-individual-rights/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 04:36:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Oden</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[legal theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[individual rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[racism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[states' rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=188</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This Salon article says, in summation, that states do not have rights, only people do. Not quite. I understand the sentiment. People have rights, and should have rights, while legal entities do not (or, at least, not as many). States are legal entities, comprised of the residents thereof. The author takes &#8220;states&#8217; rights&#8221; to be [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patrickoden.com/legal-theory/states-rights-and-individual-rights/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>FCC loses Net Neutrality case</title>
		<link>http://www.patrickoden.com/legal-theory/fcc-loses-net-neutrality-case/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patrickoden.com/legal-theory/fcc-loses-net-neutrality-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Apr 2010 17:21:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Oden</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[legal theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[comcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fcc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[net neutrality]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=186</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I wonder if this will embolden the Internet Service Providers to revert back to their torrent-busting ways? &#8230; [T]he U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled today that the agency lacks the authority to regulate the policies of Internet service providers. In Comcast Corp. v. FCC, the court considered whether the FCC [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patrickoden.com/legal-theory/fcc-loses-net-neutrality-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>BREAKING NEWS: GOP supports global trade!</title>
		<link>http://www.patrickoden.com/politics/breaking-news-gop-support-global-trad/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patrickoden.com/politics/breaking-news-gop-support-global-trad/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Apr 2010 14:16:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Oden</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fiscal responsibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[made in the usa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[salon.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sloganeering]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=180</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a shocking turn of events, Republicans are willing to buy from and sell to the global markets. News at 11. I was reading an article over at Salon.com about the GOP buying t-shirts made in Honduras. They were basically taking the Democratic Party line and making fun of the GOP for buying non-American products [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patrickoden.com/politics/breaking-news-gop-support-global-trad/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Should have stopped at Hokey</title>
		<link>http://www.patrickoden.com/religiosity/should-have-stopped-at-hokey/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patrickoden.com/religiosity/should-have-stopped-at-hokey/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 22:49:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Oden</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[religiosity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[christian absurdity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hokey pokey faith healing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=175</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think this absurdity speaks for itself. My favorite part was where they all started shaking their heads, in and out, and all about. Maybe they&#8217;ll shake some intelligence loose in there. Could stand for a bit extra, it seems.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patrickoden.com/religiosity/should-have-stopped-at-hokey/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Filibuster of Supreme Court Justices</title>
		<link>http://www.patrickoden.com/politics/filibuster-of-supreme-court-justices/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patrickoden.com/politics/filibuster-of-supreme-court-justices/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 22:19:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Oden</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[filibuster]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[how to lose elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[right-wing crazies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scotus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme court justice]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=172</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was reading over at my favorite right-wing political forum (the only one I can stand to read, because it&#8217;s the only one that doesn&#8217;t oppress dissenting opposing viewpoints), and I came across a topic by a short-sighted right-wing ideologue brilliant political strategist. Here&#8217;s his argument, syllogistically interpreted by me. Premise the first: Justice Stevens [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patrickoden.com/politics/filibuster-of-supreme-court-justices/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Time travel is possible, and you can too!</title>
		<link>http://www.patrickoden.com/science/time-travel-is-possible-and-you-can-too/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patrickoden.com/science/time-travel-is-possible-and-you-can-too/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 10:06:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Oden</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[physics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[time]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[time travel]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=168</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I love debates about whether time travel is possible. The question probably occurs most commonly in rather niche fields of science, but the question of time travel is also the frequent fodder of science fiction and philosophy. The great thing about the question is that, as of yet, no one knows whether travel to different [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patrickoden.com/science/time-travel-is-possible-and-you-can-too/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>They Probably Believe It</title>
		<link>http://www.patrickoden.com/technology/they-probably-believe-it/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patrickoden.com/technology/they-probably-believe-it/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 05:44:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Oden</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ipad]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=165</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is a slice of Apple&#8217;s home page, which shows the debut of the iPad. If you click on the image and open up the larger size, you&#8217;ll see it better. Apple is billing its new play-work-gadget-tool as &#8220;magical.&#8221; The sad thing is that some MacHeads probably believe it. I mean, come on. Magical. Really? [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patrickoden.com/technology/they-probably-believe-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is God Alive?</title>
		<link>http://www.patrickoden.com/philosophy/is-god-alive/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patrickoden.com/philosophy/is-god-alive/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 12:14:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Oden</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[god]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[living being]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[living god]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=162</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is God dead? Or is God neither/something else entirely? The Abrahamic religious tradition talks about God as a &#8220;Living God.&#8221; For sake of this argument, we need not assume that God does exist or does not exist. So, let&#8217;s assume that God exists. By strong induction, we can say that all living beings start to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patrickoden.com/philosophy/is-god-alive/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>President Obama: the First Year</title>
		<link>http://www.patrickoden.com/legal-theory/president-obama-the-first-year/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patrickoden.com/legal-theory/president-obama-the-first-year/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 20:54:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Oden</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[legal theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[first year]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=159</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some Thoughts on the State of the Union I am not satisfied with President Obama&#8217;s first year, but I temper that with the idea that one year is not long enough to get everything done that a president would probably like to accomplish. I hope that whatever health care reform comes out of this is [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patrickoden.com/legal-theory/president-obama-the-first-year/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sophisticated Philosophical Arguments</title>
		<link>http://www.patrickoden.com/philosophy/sophisticated-philosophical-arguments/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patrickoden.com/philosophy/sophisticated-philosophical-arguments/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2010 15:34:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Oden</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chris hitchen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[junk philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pseudo-philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[richard dawkins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[theology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[william lane craig]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patrickoden.com/?p=148</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I recently watched a video on YouTube featuring William Lane Craig. His assertion was that the &#8220;new atheists&#8221; were rather not intellectually bright, and that they present no sophisticated philosophical arguments. The new atheists, he claims, are doing little more than rehashing arguments from the intellectual giants (my words) who were their predecessors, such as [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patrickoden.com/philosophy/sophisticated-philosophical-arguments/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
