Talk:Atheism and Mass Murder/Archive 1

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

24.4% of this article was spam cited to notorious antisemite Theodore Beale/Vox Day

As of now, 25% is a benchmark for the antisemitic spam User:Conservative has written into hundreds of Conservapedia articles. RobS Recovering Republican 12:03, December 28, 2025 (EST)

Suggestion: If the Vox Day/Theodore Beale references & links are to be retained, the page should be moved to Essay: Atheism and Mass Murder.

The appropriate {{Essay By|Conservative}} Template should also be applied. RobSRecovering Republican 14:14, December 28, 2025 (EST)

Personally, I am tired of being asked why I participate in such an openly antisemitic platform. RobSRecovering Republican 14:16, December 28, 2025 (EST)

Rob, this is way over-the-top. If you have a factual dispute with something in an entry written by User:Conservative, then let's see it. But name-calling and ad hominem attacks need to stop. Let's return to improving encyclopedic content. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:06, December 28, 2025 (EST)
Factual dispute? Go back into your Archives. I have presented them for years and been ignored.
This is not a factual dispute. Everything is meticulously documented.
Vox Day declares Nazism “semiotically useful,” specifies which kind of Jew is ok to him.
Where is the name calling?
Vox Day/Theodore Beale has been spammed into over 100 mainspace articles. User:Conservative knew there were problems with his source when (a) he tried to hide the name "Vox Day" and replace it with "Theodore Beale", and (b) when he began scrubbing his endorsement of the antisemitic content from talk pages. RobSRecovering Republican 17:24, December 28, 2025 (EST)
There are other sources that can be used to make the same points, and better, without Vox Day/Theodore Beale and his antisemitic tropes. RobSRecovering Republican 22:30, December 29, 2025 (EST)

Vox Day and the modern obsession with “citation purity” is 'not Christian', claims User:Conservative

What we’re running into is a very modern, secular moral framework that says:

If a person is later bad in any way, everything they ever said is contaminated.

That is not how:

  • Scripture treats figures like David, Solomon, Samson, and Peter (Peter denied Christ three times, etc.)
  • David and Solomon repented. We're not so sure about Solomon and Samson. RobSRecovering Republican 17:54, January 5, 2026 (EST)
  • The Church treats Augustine, Luther, or even Aquinas
  • Moral theology evaluates responsibility
  • Christianity is about discernment, not ritual purification.

Below is a calm, settled conclusion I can stand on.

Here is a position Conservapedia can hold without anxiety:

  • Vox Day made valid critiques of atheism
  • Those critiques helped Christians
  • I cited those critiques in good faith
  • I do not endorse his later racial or political rhetoric
  • I am not responsible for his change as a person when he became alt-right and afterwards.
  • The good fruit remains good fruit
  • I do not need to argue this endlessly.
  • I do not need to justify myself to bad-faith critics.
  • I do not need to clean something up that doesn't need to be cleaned up to satisfy people who won’t be satisfied anyway. Conservative (talk) 17:48, December 28, 2025 (EST)
If any of that is true, you will voluntarily, by your own volition, Move all mainspace articles with citations and links to Vox Day or Theodore Beale to Essay space and label them with {{Essay By|Conservative}}, until such a time as other editors can vet the content.
P.S. Do not make accusations of others being "non-Christian".
Andy should note, your smears of Slobodan Milošević being an "atheist" were totally unfounded. RobSRecovering Republican 17:55, December 28, 2025 (EST)
Many great works were anonymous. A massive purge is inappropriate unless actual errors are found. Thanks for the clarification re: Slobodan Milošević.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 18:04, December 28, 2025 (EST)
The error in User:Conservative's mind is like this:
Communist = atheist = non-Christian = Jew.
RobSRecovering Republican 18:12, December 28, 2025 (EST)
That equation is unjustified in describing any editor here. Now, let's return to encyclopedic editing. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 18:36, December 28, 2025 (EST)
I beg your pardon, communist = atheist is exactly how User:Conservative tarred Milosevich as an atheist. He's done so with countless others.
The communists suppressed the church, hoping to suppress Christian-Muslim conflicts. Milosevich restored the church, and with it came Christian-Muslim conflicts. This is encyclopedic, not the ahistorical claptrap & bigotry User:Conservative has spammed into hundreds, if not thousands of mainspaces.
"the complex link between religion and populism is assessed not only in the framework of religious-political revival in the Western Balkans, but also within the sociological debate on desecularization as a broader social phenomenon."
Ultimately, it is a policy question, that for now can be resolved by anti-spamming enforcement. User:Conservative's habit of spamming the same unvetted text into multiple mainspaces at the same time should be restricted, and time allowed for vetting of content. RobSRecovering Republican 18:44, December 28, 2025 (EST)
It's a classic example of User:Conservative's associative thinking.

I never said Slobodan Milošević was an "atheist", etc. etc. Conservative (talk) 19:25, December 28, 2025 (EST)

Atheism_and_Mass_Murder#Yugoslavia and more.
I'm not gonna argue with you point-by-point the non-factual, unencyclopedic content you've spammed into thousands of pages. I'm asking Andy for an anti-spamming policy with enforcement provisions to give editors time to vet the highly questionable sources and conclusions you spam everywhere without discussion.
We actually have such a policy. There is no enforcement. User:Conservative violates it with impunity. RobSRecovering Republican 19:57, December 28, 2025 (EST)
User:Conservative tarred the converted Christian Larry Sanger, co-founder of Wikipedia, as an atheist and proponent of bestiality into at least 342 mainspace articles, and edit warred for days thereafter. No one cleaned it up when I called attention to it more than a year ago.
His spamming of blatantly false and malicious information needs to be checked and vetted by other editors for compliance with Conservapedia Commandment #1 first, "Everything you post must be true and correct", before he spams it into dozens and hundreds of mainspaces. RobSRecovering Republican 16:57, January 5, 2026 (EST)
“ A little leaven leaventh the whole lump. ”

—Paul, Gal. 5:9

Can you find all the Nazi buzzwords in Vox Day’s recent denunciation of Jewish humor?

Well, yes. Much of it seems directly lifted out of Mein Kampf.

Jewish humor isn't

What passes for Jewish so-called humor isn't... Jewish "humor" is nothing more than a degenerate combination of whining, moral and cultural transgressivism, narcissistic posturing, and sexual obsession.....The reason that comedy is dying is because it was taken over by subversives, and subversives are intrinsically parasitical in nature. They can't build, create, or even sustain anything on their own...

AI gives this response:

"I am unable to fulfill this request. I cannot provide information or generate content that promotes hate speech, discriminatory content, or glorifies violence and historical atrocities..."

and I'm not going to waste my time digging out chapter and verse where this comes from in Mein Kampf without an assurance from Andy that User:Conservative's material will either be revised, reverted, or the editor disciplined.RobSRecovering Republican 23:19, December 29, 2025 (EST)

I have restored the accreditation to Vox Day that User:Conservative tried to cover up

Perhaps outside pressure can persuade Conservapedia to do something about its problematic tolerance for neo-Nazis and antisemitism. RobSRecovering Republican 16:12, December 30, 2025 (EST)

Personally, I have many stories I can attest to about User:Conservative's abuse of sourcing. I'm the editor who alerted User:Conservative to the work of Prof. R.J. Rummel, for example. In 18 years, I haven't had the time to vet how he handled Prof. Rummel in the content in this article, or probably the many other articles he's spammed Rummel into. Likewise, I gave him the full name of Darwin's Origin of Species and Natural Selection of Favored Races, which he's spammed into dozens, if not hundreds of articles, and carried on a cyberwar with others outside Conservapedia for many years with that title. There are other examples, as well. By 2008, I ceased any collaboration with him because of what abuses I already detected and his unwillingness to engage in rational discussion.
Personally, I feel betrayed. I witnessed his malicious attitude toward other people already by 2008. He eventually turned that malicious attitude toward me by 2011. Under the precedents set by the sites founder and owner, Mr. Andy Schlafly, when I was reinstated in 2015 I understood the ground rules to be I had no other option but to fight back when personally attacked. The fact that User:Conservative still uses Lewis Black as his personal narcissistic claim-to-fame rather than the United States Department of Justice which cited his work says all one needs to know.
Total hypocrisy. The fact he wants to use the United States Department of Justice to slander Scott Ritter, [1] while evading his own responsibility for being cited in a United States Justice Department criminal hate crime indictment and bringing disrepute on all Conservapedia editors was too much. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RobSmith (talk)
Update: This article stills ranks #68 of Conservapedia's 58,000+ mainspace articles with more than 25% of the content cited to Vox Day. The same content has been cut n pasted spammed into hundreds of other articles. RobSRecovering Republican 16:31, January 5, 2026 (EST)
Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Atheism_and_Mass_Murder/Archive_1&oldid=2184616"