<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Open Culture - Latest Comments in John Updike on How Rabbit Angstrom Would Have Voted?</title><link>http://oculture.disqus.com/</link><description>None</description><atom:link href="https://oculture.disqus.com/john_updike_on_how_rabbit_angstrom_would_have_voted/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:22:31 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: John Updike on How Rabbit Angstrom Would Have Voted?</title><link>http://www.openculture.com/2008/11/how_would_rabbit_angstrom_have_voted.html#comment-21002823</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hanoch, I have to basically agree with you here. Those weren't particularly well chosen words. Boy, I am feeling quite post-partisan these days.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Dan Colman</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:22:31 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: John Updike on How Rabbit Angstrom Would Have Voted?</title><link>http://www.openculture.com/2008/11/how_would_rabbit_angstrom_have_voted.html#comment-21002824</link><description>&lt;p&gt;In describing the citizens of Pennsylvania, he says they "tend to want to ban abortion and all manner of redneck ideas".  Unbelievable.  It should not be that difficult--particularly for an intelligent person like Updike--to recognize the profound moral implications of taking the life of a developing human being in its mother's womb, irrespective of where one ultimately comes out on the issue.  In reducing the other side of this this profound debate to nothing more than a "redneck idea", Mr. Updike shows a deplorable tendency towards elitism, and demonstrates there is not necessarily a connection between intelligence and wisdom.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Hanoch</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 10:35:42 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>