Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Kurt Vonnegut

2007-04-15T18:46:35Z

AppliedFaith: put in past tense

'''Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.''' (1913 – 2007) was a prolific writer whose most prominent work, ''Slaughterhouse-Five'' (1969), is based on his personal experiences as a prisoner of war trapped in the Allied bombing of Dresden in [[World War II]]. He then wrote many more novels, of which ''Breakfast of Champions'' (1973) was the most commercially successful though not as acclaimed by critics.

Vonnegut described himself as an [[atheist]],<ref>Some question whether Kurt Vonnegut was an atheist. He has described himself as a "secular humanist," and the majority of secular humanists are atheist or agnostic.</ref> and in 1992 won the "Humanist of the Year" award.<ref>http://www.celebatheists.com/index.php?title=Kurt_Vonnegut_Jr.</ref> He attributed his atheism to having studied anthropology, yet he has often been respectful of those with faith, such as observing that "there were no Atheists in foxholes."<ref>http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/quote-v.htm</ref>

Of German descent, Vonnegut was captured by the Germans during the [[Battle of the Bulge]] in World War II in 1944. Taken to Germany as a prisoner of war, Vonnegut was then stuck in an underground meat locker with his fellow prisoners during the firebombing of Dresden on February 13, 1945. 135,000 Germans died in that attack, the same number who perished when the [[atomic bomb]]s were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki ''combined''. Afterwards, Vonnegut and his fellow prisoners were left to dig corpses out of the ruins.

Robert Scholes gave this review of the ''Slaughterhouse-Five'' in the New York Times Book Review:<ref>http://www.vonnegutweb.com/sh5/index.html</ref>

:Be kind. Don't hurt. Death is coming for all of us anyway, and it is better to be Lot's wife looking back through salty eyes than the Deity that destroyed those cities of the plain in order to save them. ... Slaughterhouse Five is an extraordinary success. It is a book we need to read, and to reread.

Vonnegut's timing was perfect, as America in 1969 was struggling with the [[Vietnam War]] and other issues relevant to the book, such as [[ecology]], [[consumerism]] and claims of [[overpopulation]].

Vonnegut's last book, ''Man Without a Country'' is a scathing criticism of the Bush administration and current U.S. foreign policy.

Vonnegut died on April 11, 2007 from brain injuries he received in a fall almost five weeks earlier.

== References ==

<references/>

[[Category:Authors|Vonnegut, Kurt]]

Conservapedia talk:Abuse

2007-04-15T18:38:19Z

AppliedFaith: /* Accusations of trolling */

I'm not objective because I've been editing the article myself. It seems to ''me'' that [[User:RightWolf2]] has the impression that unsupported opinion is OK as long as it's ''conservative'' opinion, and is at least near the borderline of Conservapedia Commandment #6. It particularly bothers me that, in order to support the statement that
:"[Wikipedia's] Mediation Committee, Arbitration Committee, and number of site adminitrators contain a disproportionate number of homosexual members in comparison to demographic percentages within the Wikipedia Community."
he cites http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/ although the link page contains neither the word "homosexual" nor the word "gay." Perhaps there is relevant material on that site, but it's his job to find it and cite it, not to keep reinserting a link to this site's home page. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 16:58, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:Wikipedia-Watch is Daniel Brandt's site. I don't know if it states that outright, but I try and look into it. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:04, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:This here http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/hivemind.html I think is what he is refering to. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:10, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
::The word "homosexual" isn't on that page, either. Only one reference to "gay," an assertion that a Wikipedia administrator "attempt[ed] to falsely suggest that Brandt is gay."
::My objection is ''not'' that he's citing a strongly anti-Wikipedian website, although this should probably be made clear. The question is: does the site really say what he says it says, and, if so, where? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:00, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:::I think that's right; what the editor is probably suggesting is if someone did the actual leg work of checking those users cited on that list, they would come up with a high percentage disproportionate to the general population of people who openly confess to being gay. Of course this, in Wikipedia, would be considered Original research. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 19:03, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

==Current Alerts==

We need to make sure that we removed current alerts after they have been handled. I propose that once someone has addressed a current alert, we only leave it up for a day max, because the current alert section is getting messy with comments.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 20:23, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
:I also moved Current Alerts to the Top of the page, so we don't have to dig to find them.

*Excellent! --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 02:56, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

== What happened here ==
Goodness! Whatever happend here? --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 02:15, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:The page was archived, TK. Use the little history button at the top of the page. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 02:18, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

::I archived the page, as it was too large. Geo.[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Geo.plrd Talk] 02:19, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Speaking of large...that Conservative Abuse page is very much too long! I shall archive it now. Gee, I hope I do it right...anyone wanna say how to do it correctly? Or maybe somone wants to do it themself? :p --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 03:42, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:*I see the helpfulness is overflowing, and once again proving my point. A few who consider themselves "elite" will never offer help or information, because they like their positions of knowing the Wiki so well, they can supplant their ideas for the majority of the users. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 16:20, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

::This sure seems like “criticize[ing] without solutions” [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Zach_Johnson&diff=next&oldid=96133]. I was under the impression that “Criticism, without offering a solution...is unacceptable behavior.” [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Zach_Johnson&diff=prev&oldid=96161] I mean you posted your question less than 24 hours ago and “We don't have a running clock here, demanding instant action.” [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:AmesG&diff=prev&oldid=98009]--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 19:54, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

*Exactly, as opposed to being rat packed instantly with criticism. Yes, you have it right. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 19:58, 10 April 2007 (EDT)
:I’m not sure what you mean by “rat packed” but I’ll go ahead and assume it was intended in the politest and most civil manner possible and not as a baseless ad hominem attack. I’m also not sure what your other point was, but I think mine was fairly clear, if you are going to attack people for complaining about things then you ought not complain rather than fix things (I on the other hand have never told people to stop complaining as I think legitimate complaints well expressed benefit the site, especially on locked pages) .--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 20:18, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

*Last night, I was talking to TK and I mentioned the possible idea of a tutoring system for new sysops or editors. I know this isn't really the appropriate page to bring this up, but it's a possible solution. I know Wikipedia does it. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 19:59, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

::I once had the motivation for something like that (and I still occasionally got the drive back, like in [[Conservapedia:Footnotes - technical help]]). Even these days, I try to help where I find calls for help, but it's relatively thankless work in many cases.
::On-topic: I think the first step for that would be to compile a list of open questions. We have some sysops who need a few pointers for sysop tools, and we got some sysops who need a full-scale "MediaWiki 101". It will be impossible to write a help without a starting point. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 20:08, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

I am afraid we are past that now, they don't want others sharing knowledge, it robs them of their elite status. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 20:02, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:TK, I'm disappointed. I thought I helped you often enough for you to avoid such broad statements. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 20:08, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Maybe eventually the field of thistles will be burned to grow anew. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 20:02, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:The archive didn't really suit me. Can you leave some of the recent stuff up, so it's handier to use? When I drop in, I'm usually in a hurry. I just want to add a one-liner, on the model of what I see in front of me. If it's too clean, I kind of freeze up. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 20:04, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

== Accusations of trolling ==

Excuse me, but adding the conservative Christian view of sex to [[Heterosexuality]] is not "trolling", and neither is removing loaded words like "genocide" and "murder" from [[Holocaust]]. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 10:53, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
::We are debating "editing done in an attempt to embarrass conservapedia" [http://www.conservapedia.com/User:CPAdmin1/Proposed_Block_Policy#Attempting_to_embarass_Conservapedia]right now with a recommended ban of 6 months. These two edits, in my view, could earn you a one year ban, but you are free to put your input on that discussion page if you feel these were not attemtps to embarass Conservapedia. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 13:19, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

: 'Genocide' and 'Murder' are both legal charges that the instigators of the Holocaust were found guilty of. They are facts. Conservapedia is in favour of facts (a fairly difficult statement, but bear with me). Hence removing facts from Conservapedia is trolling. [[User:Wikinterpreter|Wikinterpreter]]
::So because the winners get to write the history books, objectivity and neutral language are to be thrown out the window? [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 11:15, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
AppliedFaith, the winners in World War II were those who were opposed to slaughtering innocents. I think it's okay that people who are ''not'' in favor of slaughtering innocents get to write the history books. Do you disagree?-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 13:24, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:I think an encyclopedia shouldn't be using loaded terms that by their nature tell readers what to think. And try telling the civilians of Dresden, Nagasaki, and Hiroshima that the Allies were opposed to slaughtering innocents. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 14:38, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

Conservapedia talk:Abuse

2007-04-15T15:15:01Z

AppliedFaith: /* Accusations of trolling */

I'm not objective because I've been editing the article myself. It seems to ''me'' that [[User:RightWolf2]] has the impression that unsupported opinion is OK as long as it's ''conservative'' opinion, and is at least near the borderline of Conservapedia Commandment #6. It particularly bothers me that, in order to support the statement that
:"[Wikipedia's] Mediation Committee, Arbitration Committee, and number of site adminitrators contain a disproportionate number of homosexual members in comparison to demographic percentages within the Wikipedia Community."
he cites http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/ although the link page contains neither the word "homosexual" nor the word "gay." Perhaps there is relevant material on that site, but it's his job to find it and cite it, not to keep reinserting a link to this site's home page. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 16:58, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:Wikipedia-Watch is Daniel Brandt's site. I don't know if it states that outright, but I try and look into it. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:04, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:This here http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/hivemind.html I think is what he is refering to. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:10, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
::The word "homosexual" isn't on that page, either. Only one reference to "gay," an assertion that a Wikipedia administrator "attempt[ed] to falsely suggest that Brandt is gay."
::My objection is ''not'' that he's citing a strongly anti-Wikipedian website, although this should probably be made clear. The question is: does the site really say what he says it says, and, if so, where? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:00, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:::I think that's right; what the editor is probably suggesting is if someone did the actual leg work of checking those users cited on that list, they would come up with a high percentage disproportionate to the general population of people who openly confess to being gay. Of course this, in Wikipedia, would be considered Original research. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 19:03, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

==Current Alerts==

We need to make sure that we removed current alerts after they have been handled. I propose that once someone has addressed a current alert, we only leave it up for a day max, because the current alert section is getting messy with comments.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 20:23, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
:I also moved Current Alerts to the Top of the page, so we don't have to dig to find them.

*Excellent! --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 02:56, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

== What happened here ==
Goodness! Whatever happend here? --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 02:15, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:The page was archived, TK. Use the little history button at the top of the page. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 02:18, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

::I archived the page, as it was too large. Geo.[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Geo.plrd Talk] 02:19, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Speaking of large...that Conservative Abuse page is very much too long! I shall archive it now. Gee, I hope I do it right...anyone wanna say how to do it correctly? Or maybe somone wants to do it themself? :p --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 03:42, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:*I see the helpfulness is overflowing, and once again proving my point. A few who consider themselves "elite" will never offer help or information, because they like their positions of knowing the Wiki so well, they can supplant their ideas for the majority of the users. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 16:20, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

::This sure seems like “criticize[ing] without solutions” [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Zach_Johnson&diff=next&oldid=96133]. I was under the impression that “Criticism, without offering a solution...is unacceptable behavior.” [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Zach_Johnson&diff=prev&oldid=96161] I mean you posted your question less than 24 hours ago and “We don't have a running clock here, demanding instant action.” [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:AmesG&diff=prev&oldid=98009]--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 19:54, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

*Exactly, as opposed to being rat packed instantly with criticism. Yes, you have it right. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 19:58, 10 April 2007 (EDT)
:I’m not sure what you mean by “rat packed” but I’ll go ahead and assume it was intended in the politest and most civil manner possible and not as a baseless ad hominem attack. I’m also not sure what your other point was, but I think mine was fairly clear, if you are going to attack people for complaining about things then you ought not complain rather than fix things (I on the other hand have never told people to stop complaining as I think legitimate complaints well expressed benefit the site, especially on locked pages) .--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 20:18, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

*Last night, I was talking to TK and I mentioned the possible idea of a tutoring system for new sysops or editors. I know this isn't really the appropriate page to bring this up, but it's a possible solution. I know Wikipedia does it. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 19:59, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

::I once had the motivation for something like that (and I still occasionally got the drive back, like in [[Conservapedia:Footnotes - technical help]]). Even these days, I try to help where I find calls for help, but it's relatively thankless work in many cases.
::On-topic: I think the first step for that would be to compile a list of open questions. We have some sysops who need a few pointers for sysop tools, and we got some sysops who need a full-scale "MediaWiki 101". It will be impossible to write a help without a starting point. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 20:08, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

I am afraid we are past that now, they don't want others sharing knowledge, it robs them of their elite status. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 20:02, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:TK, I'm disappointed. I thought I helped you often enough for you to avoid such broad statements. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 20:08, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Maybe eventually the field of thistles will be burned to grow anew. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 20:02, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:The archive didn't really suit me. Can you leave some of the recent stuff up, so it's handier to use? When I drop in, I'm usually in a hurry. I just want to add a one-liner, on the model of what I see in front of me. If it's too clean, I kind of freeze up. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 20:04, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

== Accusations of trolling ==

Excuse me, but adding the conservative Christian view of sex to [[Heterosexuality]] is not "trolling", and neither is removing loaded words like "genocide" and "murder" from [[Holocaust]]. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 10:53, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

: 'Genocide' and 'Murder' are both legal charges that the instigators of the Holocaust were found guilty of. They are facts. Conservapedia is in favour of facts (a fairly difficult statement, but bear with me). Hence removing facts from Conservapedia is trolling. [[User:Wikinterpreter|Wikinterpreter]]
::So because the winners get to write the history books, objectivity and neutral language are to be thrown out the window? [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 11:15, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

Conservapedia talk:Abuse

2007-04-15T14:54:39Z

AppliedFaith: /* Accusations of trolling */

Conservapedia talk:Abuse

2007-04-15T14:53:17Z

AppliedFaith: Accusations of trolling

I'm not objective because I've been editing the article myself. It seems to ''me'' that [[User:RightWolf2]] has the impression that unsupported opinion is OK as long as it's ''conservative'' opinion, and is at least near the borderline of Conservapedia Commandment #6. It particularly bothers me that, in order to support the statement that
:"[Wikipedia's] Mediation Committee, Arbitration Committee, and number of site adminitrators contain a disproportionate number of homosexual members in comparison to demographic percentages within the Wikipedia Community."
he cites http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/ although the link page contains neither the word "homosexual" nor the word "gay." Perhaps there is relevant material on that site, but it's his job to find it and cite it, not to keep reinserting a link to this site's home page. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 16:58, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:Wikipedia-Watch is Daniel Brandt's site. I don't know if it states that outright, but I try and look into it. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:04, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:This here http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/hivemind.html I think is what he is refering to. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:10, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
::The word "homosexual" isn't on that page, either. Only one reference to "gay," an assertion that a Wikipedia administrator "attempt[ed] to falsely suggest that Brandt is gay."
::My objection is ''not'' that he's citing a strongly anti-Wikipedian website, although this should probably be made clear. The question is: does the site really say what he says it says, and, if so, where? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:00, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:::I think that's right; what the editor is probably suggesting is if someone did the actual leg work of checking those users cited on that list, they would come up with a high percentage disproportionate to the general population of people who openly confess to being gay. Of course this, in Wikipedia, would be considered Original research. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 19:03, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

==Current Alerts==

We need to make sure that we removed current alerts after they have been handled. I propose that once someone has addressed a current alert, we only leave it up for a day max, because the current alert section is getting messy with comments.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 20:23, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
:I also moved Current Alerts to the Top of the page, so we don't have to dig to find them.

*Excellent! --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 02:56, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

== What happened here ==
Goodness! Whatever happend here? --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 02:15, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:The page was archived, TK. Use the little history button at the top of the page. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 02:18, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

::I archived the page, as it was too large. Geo.[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Geo.plrd Talk] 02:19, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Speaking of large...that Conservative Abuse page is very much too long! I shall archive it now. Gee, I hope I do it right...anyone wanna say how to do it correctly? Or maybe somone wants to do it themself? :p --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 03:42, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:*I see the helpfulness is overflowing, and once again proving my point. A few who consider themselves "elite" will never offer help or information, because they like their positions of knowing the Wiki so well, they can supplant their ideas for the majority of the users. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 16:20, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

::This sure seems like “criticize[ing] without solutions” [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Zach_Johnson&diff=next&oldid=96133]. I was under the impression that “Criticism, without offering a solution...is unacceptable behavior.” [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Zach_Johnson&diff=prev&oldid=96161] I mean you posted your question less than 24 hours ago and “We don't have a running clock here, demanding instant action.” [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:AmesG&diff=prev&oldid=98009]--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 19:54, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

*Exactly, as opposed to being rat packed instantly with criticism. Yes, you have it right. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 19:58, 10 April 2007 (EDT)
:I’m not sure what you mean by “rat packed” but I’ll go ahead and assume it was intended in the politest and most civil manner possible and not as a baseless ad hominem attack. I’m also not sure what your other point was, but I think mine was fairly clear, if you are going to attack people for complaining about things then you ought not complain rather than fix things (I on the other hand have never told people to stop complaining as I think legitimate complaints well expressed benefit the site, especially on locked pages) .--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 20:18, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

*Last night, I was talking to TK and I mentioned the possible idea of a tutoring system for new sysops or editors. I know this isn't really the appropriate page to bring this up, but it's a possible solution. I know Wikipedia does it. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 19:59, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

::I once had the motivation for something like that (and I still occasionally got the drive back, like in [[Conservapedia:Footnotes - technical help]]). Even these days, I try to help where I find calls for help, but it's relatively thankless work in many cases.
::On-topic: I think the first step for that would be to compile a list of open questions. We have some sysops who need a few pointers for sysop tools, and we got some sysops who need a full-scale "MediaWiki 101". It will be impossible to write a help without a starting point. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 20:08, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

I am afraid we are past that now, they don't want others sharing knowledge, it robs them of their elite status. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 20:02, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:TK, I'm disappointed. I thought I helped you often enough for you to avoid such broad statements. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 20:08, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Maybe eventually the field of thistles will be burned to grow anew. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 20:02, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:The archive didn't really suit me. Can you leave some of the recent stuff up, so it's handier to use? When I drop in, I'm usually in a hurry. I just want to add a one-liner, on the model of what I see in front of me. If it's too clean, I kind of freeze up. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 20:04, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

== Accusations of trolling ==

Excuse me, but adding the conservative Christian view of sex to [[Heterosexuality]] is not "trolling". [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 10:53, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Martin Luther King

2007-04-15T08:56:44Z

AppliedFaith:

Too bad this page is protected. There's nothing here about his extramarital affairs, his plagiarism, or his support for socialism. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 04:24, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:Oh good God in Heaven, are you trying to discredit Martin Luther King Jr.? The man is an American ICON. Thats like trying to discredit JFK or Lincoln. I think every city has a street named after MLK.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 04:25, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
::He's an icon for liberals and Negroes, not for all Americans. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 04:37, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:::Well, if you wanna hate the man according to your twisted beliefs, be my guest. Btw, since when is Socialism a vice?--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 04:39, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
::::I never said I hated him. There's a big gap between "He's not my icon" and "I hate him". And if you don't know what's bad about socialism, you're at the wrong website. Even liberal Wikipedia allows criticism of MLK in their article, it's pretty ironic that a conservative encyclopedia just tells what a great guy he was and then locks the page. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 04:50, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::I asked since when was socialism a vice? It may not work well, but that doesn't make it bad. I think that if you wanna add that stuff, you have a right to do so. I'm just stating that I don't think that his human errors will affect my feelings about those things that he did positive for this country.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 04:52, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
::::::Gee, thanks for giving me your permission. Unfortunately the page is still locked. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 04:56, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
Give me a break. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 04:43, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:This is what scares me about history. A man is subject to be picked apart for every action he takes, despite the fact we are just humans at the end of the day.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 04:45, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Martin Luther King

2007-04-15T08:50:39Z

AppliedFaith:

Too bad this page is protected. There's nothing here about his extramarital affairs, his plagiarism, or his support for socialism. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 04:24, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:Oh good God in Heaven, are you trying to discredit Martin Luther King Jr.? The man is an American ICON. Thats like trying to discredit JFK or Lincoln. I think every city has a street named after MLK.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 04:25, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
::He's an icon for liberals and Negroes, not for all Americans. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 04:37, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:::Well, if you wanna hate the man according to your twisted beliefs, be my guest. Btw, since when is Socialism a vice?--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 04:39, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
::::I never said I hated him. There's a big gap between "He's not my icon" and "I hate him". And if you don't know what's bad about socialism, you're at the wrong website. Even liberal Wikipedia allows criticism of MLK in their article, it's pretty ironic that a conservative encyclopedia just tells what a great guy he was and then locks the page. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 04:50, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
Give me a break. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 04:43, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:This is what scares me about history. A man is subject to be picked apart for every action he takes, despite the fact we are just humans at the end of the day.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 04:45, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Martin Luther King

2007-04-15T08:37:23Z

AppliedFaith:

Talk:Martin Luther King

2007-04-15T08:24:05Z

AppliedFaith: New page: Too bad this page is protected. There's nothing here about his extramarital affairs, his plagiarism, or his support for socialism. ~~~~

Too bad this page is protected. There's nothing here about his extramarital affairs, his plagiarism, or his support for socialism. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 04:24, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Heterosexuality

2007-04-14T20:49:28Z

AppliedFaith: /* Why? */

==empty sections==
What's the point of all the empty section headings? I'm not sure whether to ask why they are there, or why they are not complete (e.g. there are not sections for "heterosexuality and the common cold" or "Heterosexuality and inanimate objects"). --[[User:Scott|Scott]] 04:47, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
: Bit weird isn't it? Is it a spoof?--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 04:49, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

::I think the intention is to end up with an article as informative and well balanced as the one on [[homosexuality]].
::[[User:JC|JC]] did say "Content needs to be added. Its kinda science stuff I can't do it.". Unfortunately I don't know any better either.
::One can only assume content will be forthcoming.
:::"Be strong and of good courage, and do it: fear not, nor be dismayed: for the LORD God, even my God, will be with thee; he will not fail thee, nor forsake thee, until thou hast finished all the work for the service of the house of the LORD." (1 Chronicles 28:20)
::[[User:BillyBoy|BillyBoy]] 06:04, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

== Why? ==

Why were my good faith edits reverted without discussing them first? [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 16:10, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

You're not going to convince me it was good faith. The Bible does NOT say that sex within marriage is bad. 1 Corinthians 7:5 [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 16:15, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
:Not sinful, no, but it does say it's better to remain single and celibate, and that marriage is only for people who would otherwise be tempted to commit fornication (1 Corinthias 7:8-9). [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 16:26, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
::If celibacy is the prefered thing, wouldn't we pretty quickly go extinct? Don't you think god would like us to keep on having babies?! [[User:Silverfish|Silverfish]] 16:38, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
:::I don't pretend to know the mind of God. But I do know that Jesus was unmarried and celibate, and that Christians are called upon to be as like Jesus as they can. It's always worth striving for perfection, even though we know we will never achieve it. There will always be enough people who cannot resist temptation and therefore get married, so there's no risk of humans becoming extinct. But that doesn't mean that Christians who are unmarried (especially Christian children and teenagers who we are hoping will be the target audience of this site) should be looking forward to marriage. Rather, they should learn that celibacy is the ideal that they should strive for, and only if they can't resist sexual temptation should they consider marriage as a last resort. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 16:49, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

Heterosexuality

2007-04-14T20:33:56Z

AppliedFaith: at least we can keep the new Bible passages I added.

'''Heterosexuality''' is sexual attraction to the opposite sex, that is, men attracted to women, and women attracted to men. Its opposite is [[homosexuality]], where men are attracted to men and women to women. Unlike homosexuality, heterosexuality is not an abomination to Christians, but heterosexual acts are still sinful if performed outside of [[marriage]]. The Bible does teach that [[celibacy]] is preferable to marriage for Christians.<ref>1 Corinthians 7</ref>

== Biblical Views on Heterosexuality ==

The Bible gives some guidelines for heterosexuals.

=== Old Testament ===

:"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that ''is'' thy neighbour's." (Exodus 20:17)

:"And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her. And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. If he take him another ''wife''; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish." (Exodus 21:7-10)

:"And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins." (Exodus 22:16-17)

:"And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that ''is'' a bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free." (Leviticus 19:20)

:"If a man find a damsel ''that is'' a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty ''shekels'' of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

=== New Testament ===
:"But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." (Matthew 5:28)

:"''It is'' good for a man not to touch a woman." (1 Corinthians 7:1)

:"I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety." (1 Timothy 2:8-15)

== See Also ==

*[[Bisexuality]]
*[[Homosexuality]]

== References ==
<references />

Talk:Heterosexuality

2007-04-14T20:26:03Z

AppliedFaith: /* Why? */

Heterosexuality

2007-04-14T20:13:16Z

AppliedFaith: restoring the rest of my edits, since there has been no discussion about why they were removed

'''Heterosexuality''' is sexual attraction to the opposite sex, that is, men attracted to women, and women attracted to men. Its opposite is [[homosexuality]], where men are attracted to men and women to women. Unlike homosexuality, heterosexuality is not an abomination to Christians, but heterosexual acts are still sinful if performed outside of [[marriage]]. The Bible does teach that [[celibacy]] is preferable to marriage for Christians, however, because sexual activity is always impure, even when conducted within marriage.

== Biblical Views on Heterosexuality ==

The Bible gives some guidelines for heterosexuals.

=== Old Testament ===

:"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that ''is'' thy neighbour's." (Exodus 20:17)

:"And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her. And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. If he take him another ''wife''; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish." (Exodus 21:7-10)

:"And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins." (Exodus 22:16-17)

:"And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that ''is'' a bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free." (Leviticus 19:20)

:"If a man find a damsel ''that is'' a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty ''shekels'' of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

=== New Testament ===
:"But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." (Matthew 5:28)

:"''It is'' good for a man not to touch a woman." (1 Corinthians 7:1)

:"I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety." (1 Timothy 2:8-15)

== See Also ==

*[[Bisexuality]]
*[[Homosexuality]]

Angela Merkel

2007-04-13T21:33:41Z

AppliedFaith: she was born in Hamburg (West Germany)

[[Image:Angelamerkel.jpg|thumb|right|Chancellor Angela Merkel]]
'''Angela Merkel''' is the leader of the [[German Christian Democratic Party]] and the current Chancellor of [[Germany]]. She was born in Hamburg and raised in the former [[German Democratic Republic]], where she also studied physics.
[[category:political people]]

Talk:Holocaust

2007-04-13T20:13:54Z

AppliedFaith: Reverts

The "Criticism" section could be a major black eye if it's not carefully watched. --[[User:John|John]] 22:52, 7 March 2007 (EST)

== Reverts ==

You can revert back to the biased version if you insist, but you could at least have kept the correct spelling of "occurrence". [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 16:13, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Heterosexuality

2007-04-13T20:10:55Z

AppliedFaith: Why?

Holocaust

2007-04-13T15:03:33Z

AppliedFaith: rm liberal bias

[[Image:Hgdye56.jpg|right|thumb|"Selection" of Hungarian Jews at the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp in May/June 1944. To be sent to the right meant slave labor; to the left, the gas chambers.]]
The Holocaust was the execution of the Jews and others during [[World War II]] by the [[Nazi]] government of [[Germany]], which played on Adolf Hitler's widely held anti-Semitic sentiments. In addition to the deaths of 6 million Jews, several million other people were also killed, which included Slavs, Jehovah's Witnesses, Gypsies, physically and mentally disabled people, common criminals, homosexuals, communists and other political opponents of national socialism were also exterminated.

The records of the amount of people who were killed in the Holocaust were never fully uncovered, yet estimates have read anywhere from 11 to 12 million total victims.

The occurrence of the Holocaust is only in [[Holocaust denial|denial]] within small groups with anti-semitic leanings. The Germans kept accurate records of the massacres.
[[category:history]]

Template:User tolerancecompromisetruth

2007-04-13T14:39:35Z

AppliedFaith: I hope this is what you meant

{{Userbox |border-c=#000 |border-s=1 |id-c=#fff |id-s=12 |id-fc=#000 |info-c=#039 |info-s=8 |info-fc=#fff |id=[[Image:Christflag.jpeg|50px]] |info=This user does not believe in so called ''Tolerance'' when it compromises Truth.}}

Catholic

2007-04-13T14:36:12Z

AppliedFaith: add points about idolatry and polytheism

A Catholic is a person who follows [[Catholicism]]. Catholics follow the [[Pope]], who is the Bishop of Rome and traditionally lives in the [[Vatican]].
The Roman Catholic church claims to be founded by Peter by direct order from Jesus, thus making it the first institutional Christian church on earth and the only church with the personal endorsement of Christ. [[Protestant|Protestants]] split away from this church, claiming it had moved away from Biblical teachings, and became too focused on worldly power. Many Protestants reject the Church's claim to be founded on the order of Jesus {{fact}}, and many feel that Catholics practice [[idolatry]] and a form of [[polytheism]] by praying to statues of saints. (Catholics respond by saying praying to saints is not the same as worshiping them.)

The word "catholic" means "universal" and the term catholic can be used to refer to the belief that all Christians are part of one universal Church. The term is used with this meaning in the [[Nicene Creed]] ("one holy catholic and apostolic church") and Apostle's Creeds ("holy catholic church" ).

[[Category:Religion]]

Marriage

2007-04-13T14:29:19Z

AppliedFaith: /* Christianity */ celibacy is holier than marriage

'''Marriage''' is a form of [[interpersonal relationship]]; a kind of social contract. The word "marriage" by itself encompasses a broad range of meanings,<ref>The American Heritage dictionary includes legal marriage between a man and a woman, common-law marriage, and same-sex marriage[http://www.bartleby.com/61/2/M0120200.html]</ref> but it is often short for ''Christian marriage'' or ''holy matrimony,'' which is ordained by God and considered a [[sacrament]] by Roman Catholics[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09707a.htm] (but not most Protestant denominations). In a few times and places, other forms existed, such as [[polygamy]] (multiple spouses) and [[homosexuality#Homosexuality and Marriage|homosexual]] marriage (two people of the same sex).

In most cultures, marriage is regarded as a life-long commitment to another person, under any circumstances. Frequently this involves a public commitment ceremony (called a wedding) to each other and, if the participants are Christian, before God.<ref>[http://www.cofe.anglican.org/worship/liturgy/commonworship/texts/marriage/marriage.html The Marriage Service], ''The Church of England'', Retrieved 20 March 2007</ref> Unfortunately, sometimes people do not or cannot maintain that commitment, and the marriage ends in [[divorce]].

In most countries, married couples are treated as a single economic entity, and when one partner dies, the other may inherit all of their property in a simpler system than would be required without the marriage.

African-Americans were not allowed to marry in all areas of the US until after the civil war, and mixed race couples were only allowed to marry in all areas of the US after a 1967 decision in the US Supreme Court.

Same-sex couples are not allowed to marry in many areas of the world, although this restriction was lifted in April 2001 by Holland and January 2003 by Belgium, which is causing the destruction of traditional marriage in those countries.<ref>[http://www.nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz200602280810.asp]</ref> By the end of 2004, same-sex marriage was legal in most Canadian provinces and in the Yukon and is now enshrined in Canadian federal law C-38. <ref>[http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_marr.htm]</ref>

== Bible ==

The Old Testament clearly allows polygyny. (Gen. 4:19, Gen. 16:1-4, Gen. 26:34, Gen. 32:32, Exodus 21:10, Dt. 21:15, Judges 8:30, I Sam 1:1-2, II Sam 12:7-8, I Kings 11:2-3, I Chron. 4:5, II Chron. 11:21, II Chron. 13:21, II Chron 24:3.) This is less common, but never outlawed, in the New Testament.

The Old Testament allows for the purchase of wives (Gen. 29:18, I Sam. 18:25-27).

The clearest description of marriage comes from I Corinthians 7:1-16:

Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.

Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment. For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.

I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.

And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

==Christianity==

In most branches of Christianity, marriage is a life-long religious union between a man and a woman. However, many Christian groups acknowledge that [[celibacy]] is more holy than marriage, and some, such as the [[Shakers]], have gone so far as to prohibit marriage.

==Mormonism==

Historically, [[Mormonism]] has practiced polygyny (more than one wife). It stopped being a part of mainstream Mormonism in 1890, but some fringe groups still practice it.

==Islam==

Islam allows [[Muslim]] men to have up to four wives. The Qu'ran says(4:3): "Marry women of your choice, two, or three, or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one." <ref>http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/ISLAM/QURAN.HTM</ref>

Before Islam, it was common for a man to have many wives. The limit of four imposed by Islam was a way of controlling the situation. A Muslim may marry up to four women only on condition he deals justly with all of them. For example, he must provide each with separate living accommodation. Since this is difficult, most Muslim men in practice do not have more than one wife.

The reason for allowing multiple wives was for the welfare of widows and orphans. Muslim men are required to be financially responsible for the members of their family, and this was a way of ensuring that there was somebody to take responsibility for widows' and orphans' welfare.

It also allowed for a man who wished to father children to take another wife if his first wife was barren, and allowing the first wife to choose whether to continue in the marriage. A Muslim man is not allowed to marry another woman without the knowledge and consent of his wife, and the wife has the right to ask for divorce if she does not agree.<ref>http://www.islamonline.com/cgi-bin/news_service/spot_full_story.asp?service_id=795</ref>

==Civil marriage==

Civil marriage is a legal [[contract]]. In the state constitutions of almost all states, this contract must be between one man and one woman. It gives each member certain rights and obligations. Most commonly, these include [[power of attorney]], [[inheritance]] rights, sharing finances, and rights in relation to any children they may have. With the advent of no-fault divorce, most of these rights and obligations can be terminated by either party at any time for any reason.

The Scandinavian nations and the UK allow same-sex couples to gain benefits by registering a legal commitment, although they acquire fewer advantages than opposite-gender couples receive automatically upon marriage.

In the U.S. there are over a thousand federal benefits to marriage but none to same-sex civil partnerships. Couples registering same-sex relationships receive some state benefits in California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Vermont. Rights accruing from same-sex marriages contracted in other states are respected in Rhode Island, and some restricted benefits are available to same-sex partners in Hawaii and Maine.<ref>[http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_marr.htm]</ref>

==References==
<references />
[[category:religion]][[category:culture]]

Heterosexuality

2007-04-13T14:26:55Z

AppliedFaith: expanding and explaining

'''Heterosexuality''' is sexual attraction to the opposite sex, that is, men attracted to women, and women attracted to men. Its opposite is [[homosexuality]], where men are attracted to men and women to women. Unlike homosexuality, heterosexuality is not an abomination to Christians, but heterosexual acts are still sinful if performed outside of [[marriage]]. The Bible does teach that [[celibacy]] is preferable to marriage for Christians, however, because sexual activity is always impure, even when conducted within marriage.

== Biblical Views on Heterosexuality ==

The Bible gives some guidelines for heterosexuals.

=== Old Testament ===

:"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that ''is'' thy neighbour's." (Exodus 20:17)

:"And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her. And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. If he take him another ''wife''; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish." (Exodus 21:7-10)

:"And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins." (Exodus 22:16-17)

:"And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that ''is'' a bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free." (Leviticus 19:20)

:"If a man find a damsel ''that is'' a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty ''shekels'' of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

=== New Testament ===
:"But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." (Matthew 5:28)

:"''It is'' good for a man not to touch a woman." (1 Corinthians 7:1)

:"I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety." (1 Timothy 2:8-15)

== See Also ==

*[[Bisexuality]]
*[[Homosexuality]]

User:AppliedFaith

2007-04-13T14:01:41Z

AppliedFaith: New page: I've been reading Conservapedia for a while now and I want to correct some of the liberal bias I see in the articles. ~~~~

I've been reading Conservapedia for a while now and I want to correct some of the liberal bias I see in the articles. [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 10:01, 13 April 2007 (EDT)