<?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: UC Policy on Reporters is Reprehensible</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cityonahillpress.com/2011/05/12/uc-policy-on-reporters-is-reprehensible/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cityonahillpress.com/2011/05/12/uc-policy-on-reporters-is-reprehensible/</link>
	<description>A Student-Run Newspaper</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 14:27:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Concerned</title>
		<link>http://www.cityonahillpress.com/2011/05/12/uc-policy-on-reporters-is-reprehensible/comment-page-1/#comment-331</link>
		<dc:creator>Concerned</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2011 14:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cityonahillpress.com/?p=17743#comment-331</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Policy on the reporter vs. the protestor should not be different. They are both protected under the God (or whom/whatever you believe to be your creator) given rights that the constitution guarantees the government (in the case of the first amendment, specifically congress) cannot infringe upon.

&quot;Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.&quot;

Therefore, if the people are peaceably assembled, or the press is there, there is no difference between the two, both actions are RIGHTS not privileges.

I am saddened that this article focusses on the idea that the press should be treated differently, rather than recognizing the equality that exists between the people peaceably assembled and the reporters that wish to show the world what is going on. Both the reporter and the protestor have the right to be there, and the right not to be pursued by the government.

Let us not forget one of the corner stones of this country: we are all created equal.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Policy on the reporter vs. the protestor should not be different. They are both protected under the God (or whom/whatever you believe to be your creator) given rights that the constitution guarantees the government (in the case of the first amendment, specifically congress) cannot infringe upon.</p>
<p>&#8220;Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.&#8221;</p>
<p>Therefore, if the people are peaceably assembled, or the press is there, there is no difference between the two, both actions are RIGHTS not privileges.</p>
<p>I am saddened that this article focusses on the idea that the press should be treated differently, rather than recognizing the equality that exists between the people peaceably assembled and the reporters that wish to show the world what is going on. Both the reporter and the protestor have the right to be there, and the right not to be pursued by the government.</p>
<p>Let us not forget one of the corner stones of this country: we are all created equal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
