Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, Moderators, move, protect, rollback, Administrators
27,336
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 419:
Line 419: − ::::Conservative, you will admit though that many conservatives and Christians are overweight? In a recent Gallup poll, of the 11 self-reported most religious states, ten are solid red states, with the exception being the usual red North Carolina. 7 of those states are in the top 11 most obese states. Conservative, why do you think that is so? [[User:CalMartin|CalMartin]] 22:48, 9 May 2011 (EDT)
Debate:Is Conservapedia fair and balanced? (view source)
Revision as of 02:54, May 10, 2011
, 02:54, May 10, 2011Reverted edits by CalMartin (talk) to last revision by Conservative
::::::::::I have to disagree. I think Conservapedia is already a great site. Before signing up as an editor I observed the site for a few months and came to respect the culture that has developed here. Sometimes people come in here so used to the watered down criticism of liberals they see in the mainstream media that they're unable to see the substance behind Conservapedia's critique. I like the site as it is, and would hate to see it change. If anything I'd like to see us step up our critique of liberalism. You complain that our commentary on atheism and Obama aren't nuanced enough. Again I have to disagree, some moral issues are black and white not shades of gray, as moral relativists would have us believe. So to present these issues in any other way would be dishonest. You also have to remember that the content Conservative authors is very popular and brings in a lot of page views. [[User:JimmyRa|JimmyRa]] 21:33, 9 May 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::I have to disagree. I think Conservapedia is already a great site. Before signing up as an editor I observed the site for a few months and came to respect the culture that has developed here. Sometimes people come in here so used to the watered down criticism of liberals they see in the mainstream media that they're unable to see the substance behind Conservapedia's critique. I like the site as it is, and would hate to see it change. If anything I'd like to see us step up our critique of liberalism. You complain that our commentary on atheism and Obama aren't nuanced enough. Again I have to disagree, some moral issues are black and white not shades of gray, as moral relativists would have us believe. So to present these issues in any other way would be dishonest. You also have to remember that the content Conservative authors is very popular and brings in a lot of page views. [[User:JimmyRa|JimmyRa]] 21:33, 9 May 2011 (EDT)
:::King, re: atheism and obesity: A few atheists? I suggest you return to grammar school and relearn how to count. It appears as though you want to play the fallacy of exclusionary game and leave it all the relevant data I provided concerning the very religious plus deal with all the data I gave concerning atheists. You are not fooling anyone. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 22:43, 9 May 2011 (EDT)
:::King, re: atheism and obesity: A few atheists? I suggest you return to grammar school and relearn how to count. It appears as though you want to play the fallacy of exclusionary game and leave it all the relevant data I provided concerning the very religious plus deal with all the data I gave concerning atheists. You are not fooling anyone. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 22:43, 9 May 2011 (EDT)