<?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: Carol Sanger, &#8220;Seeing and Believing: Mandatory Ultrasound and the Path to a Protected Choice&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.feministlawprofessors.com/2008/12/carol-sanger-seeing-and-believing-mandatory-ultrasound-and-the-path-to-a-protected-choice/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.feministlawprofessors.com/2008/12/carol-sanger-seeing-and-believing-mandatory-ultrasound-and-the-path-to-a-protected-choice/</link>
	<description>Nearly all of us root for fairness, not for our own sex. - Nicholas Kristof</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:26:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: digg &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Personhood Bill Lays Egg in North Dakota Senate</title>
		<link>http://www.feministlawprofessors.com/2008/12/carol-sanger-seeing-and-believing-mandatory-ultrasound-and-the-path-to-a-protected-choice/comment-page-1/#comment-4649</link>
		<dc:creator>digg &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Personhood Bill Lays Egg in North Dakota Senate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 03:41:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=4434#comment-4649</guid>
		<description>[...] Gov. John Hoeven that are quite likely to be challenged in court, each for their own stark Fourth Amendment violation against unreasonable search and seizures, notwithstanding the thorny ethical dilemma.     One proposed law requires abortion clinics to [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Gov. John Hoeven that are quite likely to be challenged in court, each for their own stark Fourth Amendment violation against unreasonable search and seizures, notwithstanding the thorny ethical dilemma.     One proposed law requires abortion clinics to [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

