• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Conservapedia on Atheism

Lonewulf said:
LOL.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism#Reasonable_Explanations_for_Atheism

This is just idiotic.

"Reasonable explanations for Atheism:

Moral Depravity
Rebellion
Superficiality
Error
State Churches
Poor Relationship with Father
Division with Religion
Learned times, Peace, Prosperity
Negative Experiences with Theists
Scientism: Belief of science as God".

No "Use of Reason"...
Click to expand...


Actually, I think that one is close to "use of reason" being that they think "learned times" is a cause of atheism. Since they think atheism is bad, does that mean they also think peace and prosperity are bad? And what about all the people who believe peace and prosperity come from God?

I'm not sure what "superficiality" is supposed to mean or what it has to do with atheism.
 
Last edited:
Edges said:
Actually, I think that one is close to "use of reason" being that they think "learned times" is a cause of atheism. Since they think atheism is bad, does that mean they also think peace and prosperity are bad? And what about all the people who believe peace and prosperity come from God?

I'm not sure what "superficiality" is supposed to mean or what it has to do with atheism.
Click to expand...

From the link:

# Superficiality: Noted ex-atheist and psychologist Dr. Paul Vitz has stated that he had superficial reasons for becoming an atheist such as the desire to be accepted by his Stanford professors who were united in disbelief regarding God.[111]

The cite leads to here: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/vitz.txt
 
Last edited:
Conservatopedia is an actual insults to conservatives. They must be hanging their heads in shame.
It should be renamed to Fundiepedia.
 
paximperium said:
Conservatopedia is an actual insults to conservatives. They must be hanging their heads in shame.
It should be renamed to Fundiepedia.
Click to expand...

Like Muslims and 9/11, there doesn't seem to be any conservatives denouncing Conservapedia.

I guess BPSCG would take this evidence that all conservatives agree with Conservapedia.
 
On the talk pages, you do actually see some conservatives expressing their disappointment with Conservapedia. They can get kind of upset, and I don't blame them - if there were a Liberalopedia that were as bad as Conservapedia, I'd be pretty embarrassed as a liberal. ASchlafly, the guy who runs the show, and appears to be revered by some around there, is one Andrew Schlafly, son of Phyllis.

The juxtaposition of his reasoning skills as demonstrated on the Conservapedia talk pages with his graduating magna from HLS is one of those things that makes my head asplode.
 
Conservapedia said:
Doctors from the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons have stated that Obama uses techniques of mind control in his speeches and campaign symbols. For example, one speech declared, "a light will shine down from somewhere, it will light upon you, you will experience an epiphany, and you will say to yourself, 'I have to vote for Barack.'"[21]
Click to expand...

W.T.F.?

From:

http://www.aapsonline.org/newsoftheday/0089

Also:

In the years 2000 through 2004, before becoming a United States Senator and being in the public spotlight, Obama gave 1% of his earnings to charity even though he made $250,000 per year. Since becoming a national figure, that amount has jumped to 6%.[67] Obama's small donations are consistent with atheism and were perhaps influenced by his nonbelieving mother. According to a study by the Barna Group, atheists give less per capita in donations than religious Americans [68].
Click to expand...
So he's a Muslim, except when he's an atheist.
 
Last edited:
The AAPS is fringe nutjob association of alternative medicine quacks and anti-vaxers who unable to publish their crap in respectable journals, publish their own "peer reviewed" pile of garbage to seem more respectable.
 
Lonewulf said:
Just to clear up, I was being sarcastic. And brought up something unnecessarily, because I'm childish in general. :p
Click to expand...
AH, went over my head!

Does my irony meter need recalibrating?


State churches being on the list amuses me, but doesn't surprise me; the Anglican Church in America (connected to the Church of England) has a gay Bishop in a relationship so is obviously of the devil.
 
paximperium said:
Conservatopedia is an actual insults to conservatives. They must be hanging their heads in shame.
Click to expand...
Lonewulf said:
there doesn't seem to be any conservatives denouncing Conservapedia.
Click to expand...
PixyMisa said:
I've seen a few. But I expect that most of them have never heard of it.
Click to expand...
I don't know how common this is, but I was "conservative", and still think the same things, but don't think of myself as "conservative" now, because the word doesn't mean what it once meant (which was about government and economics, not religion). Too many prominent Republicans claiming to represent conservatism have recently gone along with the liberals' lies about who we are and what we think (such as at the Republicans' early Presidential "debates" when they had those ridiculous questions about their "conservative credentials"), so now there's nobody left defending any other definition, and no label left for the rest of us who have non-liberal political & economic beliefs but aren't theocrat wannabes. The word is now only applied to the theocrat wannabes, both by liberals and by themselves. We can't claim the word anymore, or even assert our ideas in the general public awareness and flow of ideas, because we simply have no significant representation in government or in news media.
 
Conservatives and democrats don"t respect the separation of church and state.
 
Lonewulf said:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism#Reasonable_Explanations_for_Atheism

This is just idiotic.
Click to expand...
You might simply have referenced the entire site.
Obama and the Natural Born Citizen Clause
Click to expand...
"...
the "evidence" brought forth to prove Obama's natural born status is next to non-existent, despite what you might have read or heard." [13]
Click to expand...
Eff me, I just rolled my eyes enough to hurt my forehead.
Like Muslims and 9/11, there doesn't seem to be any conservatives denouncing Conservapedia. I guess BPSCG would take this evidence that all conservatives agree with Conservapedia.
Click to expand...
Well, I can't be called a True Conservative as I don't have a kilt, but I trend right of center, so I'll call it a waste of bandwidth, and of little utility to anyone who is not wearing a Kilt of the proper tartan. It is ample evidence of the weakness of the Information Revolution.

FWIW: Beeps seems to have gotten bored of JREF, have not seen him post in some weeks.

RANT! How the eff do the people at Conservapedia deal with Christopher Hitchens? He's an atheist, and he's conservative. Does he not wear the correct Tartan on his Kilt?
​
Methinks the folks behind Conservapedia are attempting to redefine conservative. *sigh*

DR
 
Last edited:
Darth Rotor said:
RANT! How the eff do the people at Conservapedia deal with Christopher Hitchens? He's an atheist, and he's conservative. Does he not wear the correct Tartan on his Kilt?

Methinks the folks behind Conservapedia are attempting to redefine conservative. *sigh*

DR
Click to expand...

I don't know how to categorize Hitchens. He certainly does have some "traditionally conservative" views but he did endorse Barack Obama.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom