<?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>ReligionLink &#187; Church &amp; state</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.religionlink.com/category/government-politics/church-state/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.religionlink.com</link>
	<description>Ideas and resources for every journalist</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 16:40:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Abortion controversies: New developments prompt new debates</title>
		<link>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_120202.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_120202.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 01:09:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Abortion & birth control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Church & state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Current edition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Doctrine & practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hot topics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medical ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women's issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.religionlink.com/?p=9369</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Abortion rights and health care are rarely far from the headlines, but they are especially hot topics given the furor over the decision -- later rescinded -- by the Susan G. Komen foundation to end most of its grants to Planned Parenthood.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_120202.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Death penalty update: Political debates, public opinion</title>
		<link>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_11110.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_11110.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2011 17:32:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[2012]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Church & state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Current edition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Death penalty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government & politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capital punishment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.religionlink.com/?p=8844</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The legitimacy of the death penalty has emerged as a hot topic in the national conversation. Oregon’s governor declared a moratorium on executions, the execution of convicted murderer Troy Davis in September sparked controversy, and in October the Supreme Court heard a case whose outcome could affect the use of the death penalty. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_11110.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Room for worship: Zoning disputes involve more than mosques</title>
		<link>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_110329.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_110329.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Mar 2011 23:05:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Church & state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Current edition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government & politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RLUIPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zoning]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.religionlink.com/?p=7423</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Plans to build or expand mosques have sparked controversy across the country in the past year, and news coverage has often focused on these disputes and cast them as symptomatic of a wider friction between Muslims and other Americans. But zoning issues are dogging efforts by all religious groups to build houses of worship. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_110329.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The abortion debate heats up: ReligionLink&#8217;s resources and experts</title>
		<link>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_110119.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_110119.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2011 10:20:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Abortion & birth control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Church & state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Current edition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government & politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Source guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women's issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[March for Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Roe v. Wade]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.religionlink.com/?p=4301</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The anniversary of the Jan. 22, 1973, Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion always sparks discussions about this hot-button issue, and the annual March for Life in Washington is one focus of attention. But the Republican takeover of the House has also raised hopes -- and concerns -- that new legislation could limit abortion rights. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_110119.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Election 2010 roundup: Politics and religion</title>
		<link>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_101103.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_101103.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 2010 13:09:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[2010]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Church & state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Current edition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government & politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Homosexuality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hot topics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Poverty and welfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.religionlink.com/?p=6674</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 2010 midterm congressional elections promised to reshape the political landscape, and they did just that, as Republicans swept to victory in the House while cutting deeply into the Democratic majority in the Senate. But the vote also recast the terrain on moral and social issues important to believers of all political persuasions.

]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_101103.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Shariah hysteria? Some in U.S. call for ban on Islamic law</title>
		<link>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_101022.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_101022.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Oct 2010 12:36:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Church & state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Current edition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Doctrine & practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government & politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hot topics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islamic law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslims]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shariah]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.religionlink.com/?p=6615</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Anxieties over Muslims in America have emerged in a spate of hate crimes as well as in high-profile controversies like the one over the construction of an Islamic center near Ground Zero. Now some politicians and activists say Islam's legal code, known as shariah, is another threat to the United States that must be countered.

]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_101022.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>National Day of Prayer, and a national debate over prayer</title>
		<link>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_100429.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_100429.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:26:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Church & state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Current edition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government & politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hot topics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Day of Prayer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.religionlink.com/?p=5449</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The National Day of Prayer is an annual civic and religious ritual that was established by Congress in 1952. Rarely has the observance been as controversial as it is this year, thanks to a recent court ruling.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_100429.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The faith-based initiative 2.0: Obama&#8217;s new approach</title>
		<link>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_100223.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_100223.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 20:44:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Church & state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Current edition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government & politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Housing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Poverty and welfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Faith-based initiative]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.religionlink.com/?p=4967</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After months of work, President Barack Obama&#8217;s Advisory Council on Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships has sent him a list of proposals on revamping the White House&#8217;s faith-based program. The proposals will also set priorities for the office and will renew debate &#8212; and media coverage &#8212; of this controversial initiative. Polls show that the faith-based [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_100223.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Splitting the baby: Religion and child custody</title>
		<link>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_100126.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_100126.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jan 2010 01:36:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Church & state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Current edition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage & family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child custody]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divorce]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.religionlink.com/?p=4407</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Religious differences are increasingly complicating child custody cases and are fueling a growing number of news stories. A generation ago, mothers almost always were granted custody and deemed responsible for most aspects of a child&#8217;s upbringing. Today these responsibilities are split more evenly between parents, and religion increasingly is a flash point. Experts say the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.religionlink.com/tip_100126.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>High court hears arguments in Establishment case</title>
		<link>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_09100.php</link>
		<comments>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_09100.php#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2009 21:35:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Church & state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law and courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.religionlink.com/?p=3421</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Religion was at the forefront as the U.S. Supreme Court began its new term this week. Justices heard arguments and seemed&#160;divided Wednesday over whether a cross in a national preserve violates the First Amendment&#8217;s Establishment Clause. The cross, which honors World War I soldiers, was first erected&#160;&#8211; without permission &#8212; in California&#8217;s Mojave Desert in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.religionlink.com/topic_09100.php/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

