Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation

2011-06-21T02:50:08Z

TriciaS:

[[Image:Haeckel.jpg|right|200px|thumb|[[Ernst Haeckel]]]]
A notable case of a scientists using fraudulent material to promote the [[theory of evolution]] was the work of German scientist and [[Atheism|atheist]] [[Ernst Haeckel]]. Noted evolutionist [[Stephen Gould]] wrote the following regarding Ernst Haeckel's work in a March 2000 issue of ''Natural History'':
{{cquote|"Haeckel’s forceful, eminently comprehensible, if not always accurate, books appeared in all major languages and surely exerted more influence than the works of any other scientist, including Darwin…in convincing people throughout the world about the validity of evolution... Haeckel had exaggerated the similarities [between embryos of different species] by idealizations and omissions. He also, in some cases — in a procedure that can only be called fraudulent — simply copied the same figure over and over again.…Haeckel’s drawings never fooled expert embryologists, who recognized his fudgings right from the start. Haeckel’s drawings, despite their noted inaccuracies, entered into the most impenetrable and permanent of all quasi-scientific literatures: standard student textbooks of biology... Once ensconced in textbooks, misinformation becomes cocooned and effectively permanent, because…textbooks copy from previous texts.... [W]e do, I think, have the right to be both astonished and ashamed by the century of mindless recycling that has led to the persistence of these drawings in a large number, if not a majority, of modern textbooks!"<ref>http://www.creationism.org/caesar/haeckel.htm</ref>}}

Stephen Gould continues by quoting Michael Richardson of the St. George’s Hospital Medical School in London, who stated: "I know of at least fifty recent biology texts which use the drawings uncritically".<ref>http://www.creationism.org/caesar/haeckel.htm</ref>
[[Image:Osborn.jpg‎‎|200px|thumb|left|Dr. [[Henry Fairfield Osborn]]]]
Creationists have written regarding the fraudulent nature of Haeckel's work and how a prestigious German science journal published his dubious work.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v18/i2/haeckel.asp</ref><ref>http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/747</ref>

[[Intelligent design]] theorist [[Michael Behe]] publicly exposed the fraudulent nature of Haeckel's embryos in a [[NY Times]] article.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/articleFiles/PDFs/survivalOfTheFakest.pdf</ref> It appears as if Stephen Gould was irritated that the fraud was exposed in a manner that publicly embarrassed the evolutionary community - namely though a high profile NY Times article.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/articleFiles/PDFs/survivalOfTheFakest.pdf</ref>

Dr. [[Jonathan Wells]] published a book in 2002 entitled ''[[Icons of Evolution]]''. Dr. Wells contends that the book shows that "the best-known “evidences” for Darwin’s theory have been exaggerated, distorted or even faked."<ref>http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=bvfHD7zgzLoC&oi=fnd&pg=PR11&dq=icons+of+evolution&ots=B_V4AmLvnc&sig=-KgTBNwbAiu8nsFI87DaoDIJdj4</ref><ref>http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=1180</ref><ref>http://www.iconsofevolution.com/</ref><ref>http://www.discovery.org/articleFiles/PDFs/survivalOfTheFakest.pdf</ref>

Professor Reiner Protsch von Zieten was a professor of anthropology at [[Frankfurt University]] for 30 years before he was forced to resign.<ref>http://skepdic.com/protsch.html</ref> It was found that he falsified dates on many "stone age" fossils which included a skull fragment named Hahnhöfersand Man which supposedly linked humans and Neanderthals.<ref>http://skepdic.com/protsch.html</ref> The scientific fraud only came to light when he was caught attempting to sell his department's complete chimpanzee skull collection to the United States.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1418025,00.html</ref> An investigation later established that he had also passed off fake fossils as genuine ones.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1418025,00.html</ref>

The most famous case of a hoax perpetrated on scientists in regards to the evolutionary view was the case of [[Piltdown Man|Piltdown man]].<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/1124piltdown.asp</ref> More recently, although it might not have been the result of a deliberate hoax, the [[Archaeoraptor]] was a large embarrassment to [[National Geographic]].<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4208news2-3-2000.asp</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2/4273news4-11-2000.asp</ref>

The [[Nebraska man]] (also called Hesperopithecus haroldcookii) was a case of speculation. Nebraska man was promoted based on the find of a single peccary-like tooth (wild pig-like tooth). Dr. [[Henry Fairfield Osborn]], head of the Department of Palaeontology at New York’s American Museum of Natural History, wrote the following in the press concerning [[Williams Jennings Bryan]]:
[[Image:Dolphin.jpg|thumb|200px|right|Dr. Tim White, anthropologist at the University of California-Berkeley, gave the name "[[Flipperpithecus]]" to a supposed "humanoid species" arising from a fossil find that is most likely part of a dolphin's rib.]]
{{cquote|“The earth spoke to Bryan from his own state of Nebraska. The Hesperopithecus tooth is like the still, small voice. Its sound is by no means easy to hear... This little tooth speaks volumes of truth, in that it affords evidence of man’s descent from the ape."<ref>http://www.detectingdesign.com/earlyman.html#Nebraska%20Man</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v13/i4/nebraska.asp</ref>}}
Nebraska Man was debated vigorously among evolutionary paleoanthropologists for five years until Dr. Gregory King Williams published a refutation of the find in the journal ''Science'' which ended the debate<ref>http://www.allaboutcreation.org/nebraska-man-faq.htm</ref> Nebraska man never gained wide acceptance by evolutionary scientists although it enjoyed coverage in the ''[[Illustrated London News]]''.<ref>http://www.allaboutcreation.org/nebraska-man-faq.htm</ref><ref>http://www.detectingdesign.com/earlyman.html#Nebraska%20Man</ref>

In addition, the science journal ''New Scientist'' recently reported the following regarding the fossil which was dubbed "[[flipperpithecus]]":
{{cquote|"A five million-year-old piece of bone that was thought to be a collarbone of a humanlike creature is actually part of a dolphin rib...The problem with a lot of anthropologists is that they want so much to find a hominid that any scrap of bone becomes a hominid bone." - Dr. Tim White (anthropologist, University of California, Berkeley). As quoted by Ian Anderson "Hominoid collarbone exposed as dolphin's rib", in New Scientist, 28 April 1983, p. 199<ref>http://www.creationism.org/articles/quotes.htm</ref>}}
==Inflated claims of evolutionists growing in frequency and intensity ==

''see also:'' [[Richard Dawkins and pseudoscience]]

In recent times, [[theory of evolution and little consensus|despite their being little consensus on how evolution allegedly occurred]] according to the various [[theories of evolution]], evolutionists have tried to convince the public of the supposed validity of the evolutionary position by increasing and frequently using the term "overwhelming evidence" or similar terms in relation to the alleged existence of evidence that supports their position.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2006/0612school-year.asp</ref>
For example, prominent [[atheism|atheist]] and evolutionist [[Richard Dawkins]] claimed in an interview with journalist [[Bill Moyers]] that there is "massive evidence" for the theory of evolution.<ref>http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript349_full.html</ref>

Within the [[evolution|evolutionary]] science community and the [[creation science]] community, Richard Dawkins has faced charges of engaging in [[pseudoscience]] and also has faced charges of committing elementary errors.<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/send-clowns-–-richard-dawkins-obliges</ref><ref>http://creation.com/the-greatest-hoax-on-earth/main.php</ref>

==See Also==
*[[Atheism and deception]]
*[[Creation vs. Evolution Videos]]
*[[Evolutionists who have had problems with being overweight and/or obese]]
*[[Theory of Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality]]
*[[Richard Dawkins and pseudoscience]]
*[[Causes of Atheism]]
{{evolution}}

==References==
<references/>

[[category:evolution]]
[[Category:Theory of Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation]]
[[Category: Conservative's masturbatory exercises]]

Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality

2011-06-21T02:48:43Z

TriciaS:

[[Image:2384975035_230a0eac30.jpg‎‎|thumb|right|170px|The [[Wall Street Journal]] reported: "A comprehensive new study released by [[Baylor University]] yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to [[superstition]], tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in [[pseudoscience]] than evangelical Christians."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>]]
In the [[United States]], [[CBS]] News reported in October of 2005 that the [[Theory of evolution and liberalism|Americans most likely to believe only in the theory of evolution are liberals]].<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml</ref> {{cquote|The CBS News reported the following:
Americans most likely to believe in only [[evolution]] are [[liberal]]s (36 percent), those who rarely or never attend religious services (25 percent), and those with a college degree or higher (24 percent).

White evangelicals (77 percent), weekly churchgoers (74 percent) and conservatives (64 percent), are mostly likely to say God created humans in their present form.<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml</ref>}}

Given that [[Professor values|liberalism is so prevalent in academia]], it is not entirely surprising that college graduates are indoctrinated into the [[atheism|atheistic]] evolutionary paradigm via evolutionary propaganda. The [[Theory of Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation‎|evolutionary paradigm has a history which is fraught with fraud and hoaxes]].

Despite the [[evolution|lack of evidence for the evolutionary position and the counter evidential nature of the evolutionary paradigm]], [[atheism|atheists]] and liberals persist in advocating the evolutionary [[paradigm]]. The continued support of the atheist and liberal community for the evolutionary paradigm is not surprising given the that the [[Wall Street Journal]] reported:
{{cquote|The reality is that the [[New Atheism|New Atheist]] campaign, by discouraging [[religion]], won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass [[superstition]]. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith -- it's what the empirical data tell us.

"What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that [[Conservative Christianity|traditional Christian religion]] greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of [[astrology]]. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in [[pseudoscience]] than evangelical Christians....

This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book "The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener," skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in pseudoscience, cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html</ref>}}

The results of the aforementioned findings are not unexpected given the data concerning the [[Causes of Atheism|causes of atheism]] and [[Professor values|given the present state of academia in the Western world]].
===American Liberals and Recent Behavior in Accordance with Social Darwinism ===

''See also'': [[Liberals and uncharitableness]] and [[Atheism and Uncharitableness]]

Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at [[Syracuse University]], published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism."<ref>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html</ref> Professor Brooks found that [[Liberals and uncharitableness|American liberals are significantly less charitable than conservatives]] despite earning more.<ref>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html</ref> [[Conservatives]] also donate more time and donate more blood. <ref>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html</ref> The results are not entirely surprising given that Darwinists have displayed behavior in accordance with [[social darwinism]]. According to the Pew Research Center, American [[liberal]]s are more likely to support pro-[[abortion]] views. <ref>http://people-press.org/report/283/pragmatic-americans-liberal-and-conservative-on-social-issues</ref> [[Creation Ministries International]] has written that evolutionary thinking has contributed to the [[eugenics|eugenic]] idea of [[abortion|aborting]] babies with defects and has also contributed to erroneous and immoral justifications for abortion.<ref>http://creation.com/abortion-an-indispensable-right-or-violence-against-women-sex-selection-aborting-girls</ref><ref>http://creation.com/human-life-questions-and-answers-abortion-and-euthanasia</ref>

==See also==
*[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]
*[[Atheism and deception]]
*[[Evolutionists who have had problems with being overweight and/or obese]]
*[[Atheism and satanic deception]]
*[[Theories of evolution]]
*[[Theory of evolution and little consensus]]
*[[Falsifiability of evolution]]
*[[Atheism and Debate]]
*[[Causes of Atheism]]

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Evolution]]
[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:Atheism]]
[[Category: Conservative's masturbatory exercises]]

Atheism and morality

2011-06-21T02:46:25Z

TriciaS:

[[Image:115523-004-FA619CA3.jpg|thumb|right|251px| The perverse and cruel atheist [[Marquis de Sade]] in prison, 18th century line engraving.]]
Not possessing a [[Religion|religious]] basis for [[morality]], [[atheist]]s are fundamentally [[Moral_relativism|incapable]] of having a coherent system of morality. [[Barna Group]] found that atheists and [[agnostics]] in America were more likely, than [[theist]]s in America, to look upon the following behaviors as morally acceptable: [[Illegal drugs|illegal drug use]]; excessive drinking; [[fornication|sexual relationships outside of marriage]]; [[abortion]]; cohabitating with someone of opposite sex outside of marriage; [[Profanity|obscene language]]; [[gambling]]; [[pornography]] and obscene sexual behavior; and engaging in [[homosexuality]]/[[bisexuality]].<ref>http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/5-barna-update/58-practical-outcomes-replace-biblical-principles-as-the-moral-standard</ref> Given the [[Homosexuality and Health|many diseases associated with homosexuality]], the [[Bible|biblical]] prohibition against homosexuality is quite arguably one of the [http://creationwiki.org/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge many examples where the Bible exhibited knowledge that was ahead of its time].

The ''Journal of Medical Ethics'' declared concerning the atheist and [[sadism|sadist]] [[Marquis de Sade]]:
{{cquote|In 1795 the Marquis de Sade published his La Philosophic dans le boudoir, in which he proposed the use of induced abortion for social reasons and as a means of [[population control]]. It is from this time that medical and social acceptance of abortion can be dated, although previously the subject had not been discussed in public in modern times. It is suggested that it was largely due to de Sade's writing that induced abortion received the impetus which resulted in its subsequent spread in western society.<ref>http://jme.bmj.com/content/6/1/7.abstract</ref>}}

[[Population control]] is based on [[pseudoscience]] and ill founded [[economics|economic]] assumptions.<ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/11/pz_myers_on_abortion040971.html</ref> ''[[CBS News]]'' reported: "According to a mail-in survey of nearly 4,000 British doctors, those who were atheist or agnostic were almost twice as willing to take actions designed to hasten the end of life."<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20014770-10391704.html</ref>

In 2007 the Baptist Press reported:
{{cquote|...a pollster at the University of Lethbridge in [[Alberta]], [[Canada]], found that adults who profess a belief in [[God]] are significantly more likely than atheists to say that forgiveness, patience, generosity and a concern for others are "very important." In fact, the poll found that on 11 of 12 values, there was a double-digit gap between theists and atheists, with theists more likely to label each value "very important."

The survey by sociologist and pollster Reginald Bibby examined the beliefs of 1,600 Canadians, 82 percent who said they believed in "God or a higher power" and 18 percent who said they did not.<ref>http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=26675</ref>}}

Dr. [[William Lane Craig]] states the following regarding the comments of atheist debater Dr. [[Kai Nielson]]:
{{cquote|He doesn’t really defend his point there, but he says, "I have a reason why we should be moral." He says, "It’s in our self-interest to be moral." I was really surprised to hear that coming from him. That sort of purely self-interested motivation for morality is, I think, fatal to the atheistic position because for someone who is sufficiently powerful not to be worried about what others do, self-interest can only lead to a sort of self-aggrandizing hedonism. It leads to the kind of life of a [[Ferdinand Marcos|Marcos]], a Papa Doc Duvalier, a [[Joseph Mobutu|Mobutu]], and so forth. Self-interest will never be able to justify an ethic of compassion. And so I think that was a fatal admission on Dr. Nielsen’s part for the atheistic worldview.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/craig-nielsen5.html</ref>}}
[[Image:998086u.jpg|right|thumbnail|200px|An essay by the Christian apologist Dr. James Spiegel describes [[Bertrand Russell]] as a "misogynistic and a serial adulterer; a chronic seducer of women, especially very young women, even in his old age."<ref>http://www.apologetics.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=469:the-causes-of-atheism&catid=96:bonus-content&Itemid=80</ref>]]
Dr. Phil Fernandes states the following regarding [[atheism]] and [[Moral relativism|moral relativism]]:
{{cquote|[[Friedrich Nietzsche|Nietzsche]] preached that a group of "supermen" must arise with the courage to create their own values through their "will to power." Nietzsche rejected the "soft" values of [[Christianity]] (brotherly love, turning the other cheek, charity, compassion, etc.); he felt they hindered man's creativity and potential....

Many other atheists agree with Nietzsche concerning moral relativism. British philosopher [[Bertrand Russell]] (1872-1970) once wrote, "Outside human desires there is no moral standard." [[A. J. Ayer]] believed that moral commands did not result from any objective standard above man. Instead, Ayer stated that moral commands merely express one's subjective feelings. When one says that murder is wrong, one is merely saying that he or she feels that murder is wrong. [[Jean-Paul Sartre]], a French [[existentialism|existentialist]], believed that there is no objective meaning to life. Therefore, according to Sartre, man must create his own values.

There are many different ways that moral relativists attempt to determine what action should be taken. [[Hedonism]] is probably the most extreme. It declares that whatever brings the most pleasure is right. In other words, if it feels good, do it. If this position is true, then there is no basis from which to judge the actions of [[Adolf Hitler]] as being evil.<ref>http://instituteofbiblicaldefense.com/1997/05/refuting-moral-relativism/</ref>}}

[[Evolution|Evolutionist]] and [[atheism|atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins]] stated in an interview: “What’s to prevent us from saying Hitler wasn’t right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question."<ref>http://byfaithonline.com/page/in-the-world/richard-dawkins-the-atheist-evangelist</ref> The interviewer wrote, regarding the Hitler comment, "I was stupefied. He had readily conceded that his own [[philosophy|philosophical]] position did not offer a rational basis for moral judgments. His intellectual honesty was refreshing, if somewhat disturbing on this point."<ref>http://byfaithonline.com/page/in-the-world/richard-dawkins-the-atheist-evangelist</ref> This underlines the fact that atheists have no moral grounding.

An essay by the Christian apologist Dr. James Spiegel examines the morality of some well known atheists. Dr. Spiegel describes Bertrand Russell as a "misogynistic and a serial adulterer; a chronic seducer of women, especially very young women, even in his old age."<ref>http://www.apologetics.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=469:the-causes-of-atheism&catid=96:bonus-content&Itemid=80</ref> Spiegel refers to the atheist [[Karl Marx]] as a "fiercely anti-semitic; egocentric, slothful, and lecherous; exploitive of friends and unfaithful to his wife; sired an illegitimate son, whom he refused to acknowledge."<ref>http://www.apologetics.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=469:the-causes-of-atheism&catid=96:bonus-content&Itemid=80</ref> In addition, Spiegel refers to atheist Jean-Paul Sartre in the following manner: "in his old age Jean-Paul Sartre—notorious for his sexual escapades with female students, often procured by his colleague and lover [[Simone de Beauvoir]]."<ref>http://www.apologetics.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=469:the-causes-of-atheism&catid=96:bonus-content&Itemid=80</ref>

In addition, there is the historical matter of [[Atheism and deception|deceit being used in a major way to propagate atheism from the time of Charles Darwin onward]] plus the issue of [[Atheism and Mass Murder|of atheistic ideology of communism being involved in the greatest mass murder of mankind in world history.]]

== Atheism, pederasty and NAMBLA ==
[[Image:Harry Hay.jpg|thumbnail|150px|Many consider [[Harry Hay]] to be the founder of the American homosexual movement.]]
''see also:'' [[Atheism, pederasty and NAMBLA]]

Some of the well known atheist advocates of the [[NAMBLA|North American Man-Boy Love Association]] are:

1. The atheist and [[homosexuality|homosexual]] [[David Thorstad]] was a founding member of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA).<ref>http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/abbott/100822</ref>

2. '''[[Harry Hay]]''' (1912 - 2002) was an [[liberal]] advocate of [[statutory rape]] and the widely acknowledged founder and progenitor of the activist [[homosexual agenda]] in the [[United States]]. Hay joined the [[Communist Party of the United States]] (CPUSA) in 1934. <ref>''The Boston Phoenix'', [http://bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/other_stories/documents/02511115.htm The real Harry Hay], Michael Bronski, October 31 - November 7, 2002. </ref> Harry Hay was an [[atheism|atheist]].<ref>http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/ss_politics0010_01_07.asp</ref> He was a vociferous advocate of man/boy love. <ref>The American Spectator Special Report, [http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10450 When Nancy Met Harry], Jeffrey Lord, 10/5/2006.</ref><ref>http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/ss_politics0010_01_07.asp</ref> In 1986, Hay marched in a [[homosexual|gay]] parade wearing a shirt emblazoned with the words "[[NAMBLA]] walks with me."<ref>http://www.mega.nu/ampp/baldwin_pedophilia_homosexuality.pdf</ref>

3. The writer [[Samuel R. Delaney]] is an atheist and a [[homosexuality|homosexual]].<ref>Samuel R. Delaney, ''About writing: seven essays, four letters, and five interviews'', page 36</ref><ref>http://www.enotes.com/contemporary-literary-criticism/delany-samuel-r</ref> Delaney said he was a supporter of NAMBLA.<ref>Delany, Samuel R.; Freedman, Carl (2009). Conversations with Samuel R. Delany. Univ. Press of Mississippi, page 143</ref>
=== Atheist John Maynard Keynes and pederasty ===

[[John Maynard Keynes]] was the founder of [[Keynesian economics]]. Lytton Strachey, his male bed partner, wrote that Keynes was a “A [[liberal]] and a [[homosexuality|sodomite]], An atheist and a statistician.”<ref>http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html</ref> Keynes and his friends made numerous trips to the resorts surrounding the Mediterranean. At the resorts, little boys were sold by their families to bordellos which catered to homosexuals.<ref>http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html</ref>

==Atheism and Uncharitableness==
[[Per capita]] atheists and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] in the United States [[Atheism and Uncharitableness|give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists]].<ref>[http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdateNarrow&BarnaUpdateID=272 Atheists and Agnostics Take Aim at Christians] ''The Barna Update'', 2007.</ref><ref>Brooks, Arthur C., [http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200310/ai_n9340592/Religious faith and charitable giving] ''Policy Review'', Oct-Dec 2003, p.2.</ref><ref>Stossel, John and Kendall, Kristina [http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&page=2 Who Gives and Who Doesn't?] ABC News, November 28, 2006</ref>

== Moral depravity as a causal factor for atheism ==

See also: [[Atheism and moral depravity]]

[[Image:Matthew-henry.jpg|thumbnail|201px|right|[[Matthew Henry]]]]
*'''Moral depravity:''' The history of the atheist community and various studies concerning the atheist community point to moral depravity being a causal factor for atheism.<ref>
*[http://www.apologetics.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=469:the-causes-of-atheism&catid=96:bonus-content&Itemid=80 The causes of atheism]
*[http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5527 The Real Murderers: Atheism or Christianity?]
*[http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&page=2 Who Gives and Who Doesn't? - ABC News]
*[http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200310/ai_n9340592/ Religious faith and charitable giving, Policy Review , Oct-Dec 2003, p.2.]
*[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/5-barna-update/58-practical-outcomes-replace-biblical-principles-as-the-moral-standard Practical Outcomes Replace Biblical Principles As the Moral Standard]
*[http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/12-faithspirituality/102-atheists-and-agnostics-take-aim-at-christians Atheists and Agnostics Take Aim at Christians]</ref> [[Francis Thompson]] wrote: "Maybe the atheist cannot find [[God]] for the same reason a thief cannot find a policeman.". The [[Bible]] asserts that "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good." [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=%20gen%201:30%20;&version=49; (Psalms 14:1 (KJV)).] The biblical fool is said to be lacking in sound judgment and the biblical fool is also associated with moral depravity. For example, the biblical book of [[Proverbs]] states: "A wise man is cautious and turns away from evil, But a fool is arrogant and careless. A quick-tempered man acts foolishly, And a man of evil devices is hated. The naive inherit foolishness, But the sensible are crowned with knowledge."[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=%20proverbs%2014:16-18%20;&version=49; (Proverbs 14:16-18 (NASB)).] The book of Proverbs also has strong words regarding the depravity of biblical fools: "The desire accomplished is sweet to the soul: but [it is] abomination to fools to depart from evil." [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs%2013:19;&version=9; (Proverbs 13:9 (KJV))]. Regarding the deceitfulness of fools Proverbs states: "The wisdom of the sensible is to understand his way, But the foolishness of fools is [[deceit]]." [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs%2014:8;&version=9; (Proverbs 14:8 (KJV)).] Noted Bible commentator and clergyman [[Matthew Henry]] wrote regarding atheism: "A man that is endued with the powers of reason, by which he is capable of knowing, serving, glorifying, and enjoying his Maker, and yet lives without God in the [[earth|world]], is certainly the most despicable and the most miserable animal under the [[sun]]."<ref>http://www.ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhc1.ii.html</ref>

==See Also==
*[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]
*[[Atheism and Mass Murder]]
*[[Atheism and deception]]
*[[Causes of atheism]]
*[[Atheism and satanic deception]]
*[[Atheism and Uncharitableness]]
*[[Abortion and atheism]]
*[[Morality]]

{{Nb Atheism}}

== Notes ==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Atheism]]
[[Category:Morality]]
[[Category: Conservative's masturbatory exercises]]

Atheism and Mass Murder

2011-06-21T02:45:44Z

TriciaS:

[[Image:Stalin.jpg‎ |right|200px|thumb|[[Joseph Stalin]]'s atheistic regime killed tens of millions of people.]]
Concerning '''atheism and mass murder''', [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] Gregory Koukl wrote that "the assertion is that religion has caused most of the killing and bloodshed in the world.
There are people who make accusations and assertions that are empirically false. This is one of them."<ref name="Koukl">Koukl, Gregory, [http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5527 The Real Murderers: Atheism or Christianity?], 1994</ref>
Koukl details the number of people killed in various events involving theism and compares them to the much higher tens of millions of people killed under [[communism|communist]] [[Atheism|atheistic]] regimes.<ref name="Koukl" /> It has been estimated that in less than the past 100 years, governments under the banner of [[communism]] have caused the death of somewhere between 40,472,000 to 259,432,000 human lives.<ref>[http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/finalconflict/fcrevb102.html The Black Book of Communism]</ref><ref>[http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~hpcws/lelivrenoir.htm The Black Book of Communism]</ref><ref>http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM</ref><ref>[http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm Source List and Detailed Death Tolls for the Twentieth Century Hemoclysm]</ref><ref>[http://www.sarasotamagazine.com/blog/template_permalink.asp?id=365 Memory and Ideology]</ref><ref>[http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=2526 The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression]</ref> Dr. R. J. Rummel, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Hawaii, is the scholar who first coined the term democide (death by government). Dr. R. J. Rummel's mid estimate regarding the loss of life due to communism is that communism caused the death of approximately 110,286,000 people between 1917 and 1987.<ref>http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM</ref> [[Richard Dawkins]] has attempted to [[Richard Dawkins, atheists atrocities, and historical revisionism|engage in historical revisionism concerning atheist atrocities and Dawkins was shown to be in gross error]].

Koukl summarized by stating:
{{cquote|It is true that it's possible that religion can produce evil, and generally when we look closer at the detail it produces evil because the individual people are actually living in a rejection of the tenets of Christianity and a rejection of the God that they are supposed to be following. So it can produce it, but the historical fact is that outright rejection of God and institutionalizing of atheism actually does produce evil on incredible levels. We're talking about tens of millions of people as a result of the rejection of God.<ref name="Koukl" />}}
[[Image:Solzhenitsyn.jpg‎|thumb|150px|left|[[Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn]]]]
[[Nobel Prize]] winner [[Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn]] was asked to account for the great tragedies that occurred under the brutal communist regime he and fellow citizens suffered under.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn offered the following explanation:
{{cquote|Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen [[Russia]]: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.'

Since then I have spend well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.' <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/stalins-brutal-faith/</ref>}}

[[Vox Day]] notes concerning atheism and mass murder:
{{cquote|Apparently it was just an amazing coincidence that every Communist of historical note publicly declared his atheism … .there have been twenty-eight countries in world history that can be confirmed to have been ruled by regimes with avowed atheists at the helm … These twenty-eight historical regimes have been ruled by eighty-nine atheists, of whom more than half have engaged in democidal162 acts of the sort committed by Stalin and Mao …

The total body count for the ninety years between 1917 and 2007 is approximately 148 million dead at the bloody hands of fifty-two atheists, three times more than all the human beings killed by war, civil war, and individual crime in the entire twentieth century combined.

The historical record of collective atheism is thus 182,716 times worse on an annual basis than Christianity’s worst and most infamous misdeed, the Spanish Inquisition. It is not only Stalin and Mao who were so murderously inclined, they were merely the worst of the whole Hell-bound lot. For every Pol Pot whose infamous name is still spoken with horror today, there was a Mengistu, a Bierut, and a Choibalsan, godless men whose names are now forgotten everywhere but in the lands they once ruled with a red hand.

Is a 58 percent chance that an atheist leader will murder a noticeable percentage of the population over which he rules sufficient evidence that atheism does, in fact, provide a systematic influence to do bad things? If that is not deemed to be conclusive, how about the fact that the average atheist crime against humanity is 18.3 million percent worse than the very worst depredation committed by Christians, even though atheists have had less than one-twentieth the number of opportunities with which to commit them. If one considers the statistically significant size of the historical atheist set and contrasts it with the fact that not one in a thousand religious leaders have committed similarly large-scale atrocities, it is impossible to conclude otherwise, even if we do not yet understand exactly why this should be the case. Once might be an accident, even twice could be coincidence, but fifty-two incidents in ninety years reeks of causation!<ref>http://creation.com/atheism</ref>}}

==Explanatory links between atheism and mass murders==

Christian philosophers and theologians explain that there are causal links between mass murder and atheism. Atheism, lack belief in God, have the following characteristics that can lend itself to mass murder and can explain why the greatest mass murderers were atheists:<ref>Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Christian apologetics</ref><ref>Joseph de Torre, Christian philosophy</ref><ref>Contemporary Philosophical Issues in Historical Perspective, Manila: UA&P, 2000</ref>
*lack of recognition of an ultimate judge of moral actions and a judge who sets injustice aright in a last judgement, and thus do not recognize the immorality of murder.
*lack of seeing the importance of human beings as images of God and so easily discarding them as merely material things, products of mere chance.
*lack of acknowledging an external standard of moral perfection, thus ending up with self-created standards which can include killing for political survival.
*absence of guidance by divine revelation of the moral law, such as "Thou shalt not kill".
*following an ethic of atheistic evolutionism that is based on the survival and victory of the fittest, which is ultimately a "bloodthirsty ethic", the words of [[Joseph Ratzinger]], that is an ethic that is eager to kill and to maim. This ethic is about conquering others rather than self-conquest.<ref>[ Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance http://www.zenit.org/article-13872?l=english]</ref>.

== China ==
The [[atheist]] [[Mao Zedong]] killed tens of millions during his [[Great Leap Forward]] and many more during the purges and slaughters of the [[Cultural revolution]].
== Recommended books ==

*Dimitry Pospielovsky, (December, 1987), ''A History of Marxist-Leninist Atheism and [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] Antireligious Policies'', Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 0312381328
*Dimitry Pospielovsky, (November, 1987), ''Soviet Antireligious Campaigns and Persecutions (History of Soviet Atheism in Theory and Practice and the Believers, Vol 2)'', Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 0312009054
*Dimitry Pospielovsky, (August, 1988), ''Soviet Studies on the Church and the Believer's Response to Atheism: A History of Soviet Atheism in Theory and Practice and the Believers, Vol 3'', Palgrave Macmillan, hardcover: ISBN 0312012918, paperback edition: ISBN 0312012926

==See Also==
*[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]
*[[Abortion and atheism]]
*[[Atheism and Uncharitableness]]
*[[Atheism and deception]]
*[[Atheism and Morality]]
*[[Atheism and satanic deception]]
*[[Atheism, pederasty and NAMBLA]]
*[[Morality]]

== External Links ==
*[http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1121/p09s01-coop.html Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the mass murders of history] by [[Dinesh D'Souza]]

{{Nb Atheism}}

== Notes ==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Atheism]]
[[Category: Conservative's masturbatory exercises]]

New Atheism

2011-06-21T02:43:57Z

TriciaS:

The term New Atheism which first appeared in the November 2006 edition of ''Wired'' magazine, is frequently applied to a series of six best-selling books by five authors that appeared in the period between 2004–2008. These authors include [[Sam Harris]], [[Daniel Dennett]], [[Richard Dawkins]], [[Victor J. Stenger]] and [[Christopher Hitchens]].<ref>http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/battle.html</ref> The four most prominent writers of the New Atheist movement are [[Richard Dawkins]], [[Sam Harris]], [[Christopher Hitchens]] and [[Daniel Dennett]].

Dissent Magazine declared concerning the New Atheism:
{{cquote|A number of prominent authors and scientists have published books in the past year that advocate a "New Atheism." The books, which include [[Daniel Dennett]]'s ''Breaking the Spell'', [[Richard Dawkins]]'s ''[[The God Delusion]]'', and [[Christopher Hitchens]]'s ''God is Not Great'', have sparked considerable public controversy across the political spectrum.<ref>http://dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=928</ref>}}
[[Image:Mohler.jpg‎|thumbnail|200px|right|Dr. Albert Mohler Jr.]]
Dr. Alfred Mohler Jr. describes some of the key attributes of the "New Atheism":
{{cquote|Now, WIRED magazine comes out with a cover story on atheism for its November 2006 issue. In "The New Atheism," WIRED contributing editor Gary Wolf explains that this newly assertive form of atheism declares a very simple message: "No heaven. No hell. Just science."...

Wolf accomplishes a great deal in his article, thoughtfully introducing the work of [[Militant atheism|militant atheists]] such as Dawkins, [[Sam Harris|Harris]], and [[Daniel Dennett|Dennett]]. At the same time, he probes more deeply into the actual meaning of the New Atheism as a movement and a message.

At the beginning of his article, he gets right to the point: "The New Atheists will not let us off the hook simply because we are not doctrinaire believers. They condemn not just belief in God but respect for belief in God. Religion is not only wrong; it's evil. Now that the battle has been joined, there's no excuse for shirking."<ref>http://www.albertmohler.com/commentary_read.php?cdate=2006-11-21</ref>}}

===Impact of the New Atheism===
The "New Atheism" has not had much of an impact in terms of gaining new adherents to [[atheism]]. In a March 10, 2008 [[USA Today]] article Stephen Prothero stated the following regarding the impact of the "New Atheism":
{{cquote|Numbers lie, but they also tell tales untrustworthy and otherwise. So the key question stirring around the much discussed U.S Religious Landscape Survey released in late February by the [[Pew Forum]] on Religion & Public Life is what tale does it state about the state of the union.

For some, the story of this survey, based on interviews in multiple languages with more than 35,000 adults, is the strength of American Religion.

Not too long ago, I wrote that American atheism was going the way of the freak show. As books by Christopher Hitchens and other "new atheists" climbed the best seller lists, I caught a lot of flak for that prophecy. But atheist make up only 1.6% of respondents to this survey....<ref>American Faith: A Work In Progress by Stephen Prothero, USA Today, March 10, 2008, page 11A</ref>}}

A prime reason for the ineffectiveness of the "new atheism" is the shallowness of its material. For example, even atheist philosopher [[Michael Ruse]] stated that that Richard Dawkins' book ''The God Delusion'' made him "embarrassed to be an atheist".<ref name="TDD3">http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/47052/?page=3</ref>

The "New Atheism" largely has a unfavorable view outside the United States as well. The [[liberal]] leaning British publication [[The Guardian]] stated the following regarding the "New Atheism":
{{cquote|Anti-[[faith]] proselytising is a growth industry. But its increasingly hysterical flag-bearers are heading for a spectacular failure...

These increasingly hysterical books may boost the pension, they may be morale boosters for a particular kind of American atheism that feels victimized - the latest candidate in a flourishing American tradition - but one suspects that they are going to do very little to challenge the appeal of a phenomenon they loathe too much to understand.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2074076,00.html</ref>}}

== Gender and racial demographic data concerning the New Atheist movement ==

Survey data and website tracking data of prominent [[atheism|atheists]]' websites indicate that in the [[Western World]], [[Western atheism and race|the New Atheism movement appears to be significantly less appealing to women and racial minorities]].<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/Western_atheism_and_race</ref><ref>http://www.americanreligionsurvey-aris.org/reports/NONES_08.pdf</ref><ref>http://www.livescience.com/culture/090227-religion-men-women.html</ref><ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism_appears_to_be_significantly_less_appealing_to_women</ref>

== New Atheism leaders and problems with being overweight ==
[[Image:Cerebellum.png|right|thumb|240px|Medical research indicates that excess weight impairs brain function.<ref>
*[http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/content/41/18/25.1.full]
*[http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/brain-and-behavior/articles/2009/08/25/as-waistlines-widen-brains-shrink.html]
*[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21167850]
*[http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100714112832.htm]
*[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/2568718/]</ref>]]
''see also:'' [[New Atheism leadership's problem with excess weight]]

As noted earlier, the main authors of the New Atheism movement include [[Sam Harris]], [[Daniel Dennett]], [[Richard Dawkins]], Victor J. Stenger and [[Christopher Hitchens]].<ref>http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/battle.html</ref> The New Atheism movement claims to be pro-science, yet three out of five of these men have have had issues with being overweight as can be seen [http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_3UXl0oMYPLs/SXgxH_-MgFI/AAAAAAAAAF4/EU-wzxEjOmc/s1600-h/atheist-reason.jpg HERE] and [http://www.flickr.com/photos/7230309@N05/3708479160/ HERE] and [http://news.softpedia.com/newsImage/Quantum-Mechanics-Could-Link-Humans-with-the-Universe-2.jpg/ HERE] [[PZ Myers]] is also a leader within the New Atheism movement and PZ Myers [[PZ Myers|has had issues with being overweight]].

[[Hippocrates]], who was also against [[abortion]], was an early advocate of the health benefits of [[exercise]] and [[nutrition]].[http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/pe/exs190web/exs190history.htm]

On the other hand, [[PZ Myers]] and a significant amount of other New Atheism leaders, seem to lack a full appreciation of the worthiness of [[nutritional science]], [[exercise science]] and the latest findings of [[medical science]]. (see: also [[Atheism and obesity]]). As of May 2011, Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris have not publicly commented on the significant problems the New Atheism leadership has experienced in terms of overweight members.

== See also ==

*[[History of Atheism|History of atheism]]
*[[Atheism 3.0]]
*[[Essay: Richard Dawkins, obesity has enveloped your marketing campaign|Richard Dawkins, obesity has enveloped your marketing campaign]] - [[satire]]
*[[Essay: Where was Sam Harris when the New Atheists needed him?| Where was Sam Harris when the New Atheists needed him?]] - satire

==External Links==

*[http://www.svchapel.org/resources/articles/22-contemporary-issues/587-the-new-atheism The New Atheism] by Gary Gilley
*[http://www.albertmohler.com/2011/02/07/the-new-atheism-and-the-dogma-of-darwinism/ The New Atheism and the Dogma of Darwinism] by Dr. Albert Mohler, Jr.
*[http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/11/if_nature_abhorred_a_vacuum_ne039891.html New Atheist atheology] by Michael Egnor
*[http://www.rzim.org/GlobalElements/GFV/tabid/449/ArticleID/10020/CBModuleId/881/Default.aspx The New Atheism and Morality] by J.M. Njoroge at Ravi Zacharias Ministries
*[http://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/04/believe-it-or-not New Atheists] - by David B. Hart, First things
*[http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010341 The New Atheism] ''Wall Street Journal'', Peter Berkowitz, June 16, 2007
*[http://articles.cnn.com/2006-11-08/world/atheism.feature_1_new-atheists-new-atheism-religion?_s=PM:WORLD The Rise of the New Atheists] - [[CNN]], 2006

'''Video:'''

*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13AjsFRR9Mk The New Atheist Movement] - [[YouTube]] video
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3lWXFoBrzM New Atheism] by [[William Lane Craig]]

{{Nb Atheism}}

==Notes==
{{reflist|2}}
[[Category: New Atheism]]
[[Category: Conservative's masturbatory exercises]]

Atheist Population

2011-06-21T02:43:30Z

TriciaS:

In respect to the '''atheist population''' of the world, there have been many studies in regards to the [[Atheism|atheist]] demographics and in regards to the percentage of atheists in various geographic areas. Concerning the atheist population as a percentage of various countries' populations, specific research on atheists conducted in 2006 [http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID=1131 suggests] that the true proportion of atheists is 4% in the United States, 17% in Great Britain and 32% in France.

[[File:Belief-god.jpg|thumb|550px|Financial Times (FT)/Harris Poll among adults in 5 countries in 2006]]

A survey published in the 2005 ''[[Encyclopedia Britannica]]'' stated that 2.3% of the world's population consists of individuals who profess "atheism, skepticism, disbelief, or irreligion, including the militantly antireligious."<ref>http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9432620</ref> In regards to the 2.3% figure just mentioned, the 2005 survey cited by ''Encyclopedia Britannica'' survey did not include [[Buddhism|Buddhist]] in regards to the 2.3% figure and Buddhism can be [[Theism|theistic]] or atheistic.<ref>http://www.religionfacts.com/buddhism/beliefs/atheism.htm</ref><ref>http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9432620</ref>

== Global decline of atheism ==
In 2011, the ''[[American Spectator]]'' citing research published in the ''International Bulletin of Missionary Research'' reported that atheism is on the decline as a whole in terms of adherents.<ref>http://spectator.org/archives/2011/02/28/thriving-christianity</ref>

The ''American Spectator'' declared:
{{cquote|The report estimates about 80,000 new [[Christianity|Christians]] every day, 79,000 new [[Islam|Muslims]] every day, and 300 fewer atheists every day. These atheists are presumably disproportionately represented in the [[Western World|West]], while religion is thriving in the Global South, where [[Charismatic movement|charismatic Christianity]] is exploding."<ref>http://spectator.org/archives/2011/02/28/thriving-christianity</ref>}}

=== Question evolution! campaign ===

''See also:'' [[Question evolution! campaign]] and [[Atheists doubting the validity of atheism]]

Since [[World War II]] a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the [[evolution|theory of evolution]] which employs [[methodological naturalism]] have been atheists.<ref>
* Dr. Don Batten,[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/737/ A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32, December 1997.
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]
</ref> In 2011, a campaign called the [[Question evolution! campaign]] was launched by the [[Bible|biblical]] [[creation]] organization [[Creation Ministries International]] which is a worldwide "[[grassroots|grass-roots]] movement to challenge the anti-[[Christianity|Christian]] [[dogma]] of [[evolution]]".<ref>[http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign]</ref> The focus of the Question evolution! campaign is on "15 questions that evolutionists cannot answer."<ref>[http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign]</ref> The campaign will be primarily conducted in the [[United States]], the [[United Kingdom]], [[Canada]], [[Europe]], [[Australia]], [[New Zealand]], [[Singapore]] and [[South Africa]].<ref>http://creation.com/question-evolution</ref>

==See Also==

*[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]
*[[Christian apologetics|Evidence for Christianity]]
*[[Views on Atheists]]
*[[Atheism and mass murder]]
*[[Atheism and uncharitableness]]
*[[Atheism and deception]]
*[[New Atheism]]

{{Nb Atheism}}

==External Links==
*[http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_atheist.html The Largest Atheist/Agnostic Populations]
*[http://www.agreeley.com/articles/hardcore.html The Demand for Religion: Hard Core Atheism and "Supply Side" Theory]

==Referemces==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Sociology]]
[[Category: Conservative's masturbatory exercises]]

Samuel R. Delaney

2011-06-21T02:42:34Z

TriciaS:

'''Samuel Ray Delany, Jr.''' (born 1942) is an American author and has served as a professor at many universities. Many of Delaney's books have been in the science fiction genre. Delaney is an [[atheism|atheist]].<ref>Samuel R. Delaney, ''About writing: seven essays, four letters, and five interviews'', page 36</ref> Delaney said he was a supporter of the [[NAMBLA|North American Man-Boy Love Association]] (NAMBLA).<ref>Delany, Samuel R.; Freedman, Carl (2009). Conversations with Samuel R. Delany. Univ. Press of Mississippi, page 143</ref>
===References===
<references/>
[[Category: Authors]]
[[Category: Conservative's masturbatory exercises]]

Atheism, pedophilia and NAMBLA

2011-06-21T02:41:50Z

TriciaS:

[[Image:Harry Hay.jpg|thumbnail|127px|Many consider [[atheism|atheist]] [[Harry Hay]] to be the founder of the American [[homosexuality|homosexual]] movement.]]
Some of the well known [[atheism|atheist]] advocates of the [[North American Man/Boy Love Association]] (NAMBLA) are:

1. The atheist and [[homosexuality|homosexual]] [[David Thorstad]] was a founding member of the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA).<ref>http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/abbott/100822</ref>

2. '''[[Harry Hay]]''' (1912 - 2002) was a [[liberal]] atheist advocate of [[statutory rape]] and the widely acknowledged founder and progenitor of the activist [[homosexual agenda]] in the [[United States]].<ref>http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/ss_politics0010_01_07.asp</ref><ref>The American Spectator Special Report, [http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10450 When Nancy Met Harry], Jeffrey Lord, 10/5/2006.</ref><ref>http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/ss_politics0010_01_07.asp</ref> Hay joined the [[Communist Party of the United States]] (CPUSA) in 1934. <ref>''The Boston Phoenix'', [http://bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/other_stories/documents/02511115.htm The real Harry Hay], Michael Bronski, October 31 - November 7, 2002. </ref> He was a vociferous advocate of man/boy love. <ref>The American Spectator Special Report, [http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10450 When Nancy Met Harry], Jeffrey Lord, 10/5/2006.</ref><ref>http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2010/ss_politics0010_01_07.asp</ref> In 1986, Hay marched in a [[homosexual|gay]] parade wearing a shirt emblazoned with the words "[[NAMBLA]] walks with me."<ref>http://www.mega.nu/ampp/baldwin_pedophilia_homosexuality.pdf</ref>

3. The writer [[Samuel R. Delaney]] is an atheist and a [[homosexuality|homosexual]].<ref>Samuel R. Delaney, ''About writing: seven essays, four letters, and five interviews'', page 36</ref><ref>http://www.enotes.com/contemporary-literary-criticism/delany-samuel-r</ref> Delaney said he was a supporter of NAMBLA.<ref>Delany, Samuel R.; Freedman, Carl (2009). Conversations with Samuel R. Delany. Univ. Press of Mississippi, page 143</ref>

See also: [[Teenage homosexuality]] and [[Homosexuality and pederasty]]

== John Maynard Keynes and pederasty ==
[[File:Keynes.jpg|right|thumbnail|175px|[[John Maynard Keynes]] ]]
''see also:'' [[John Maynard Keynes and pederasty]] and [[Homosexuality and pederasty]]

[[John Maynard Keynes]] was the founder of [[Keynesian economics]]. Lytton Strachey, his male bed partner, wrote that Keynes was a “A [[liberal]] and a [[homosexuality|sodomite]], An atheist and a statistician.”<ref>http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html</ref> Keynes and his friends made numerous trips to the resorts surrounding the Mediterranean. At the resorts, little boys were sold by their families to bordellos which catered to homosexuals.<ref>http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html</ref>

In 2008, ''The Atlantic'' reported:
{{cquote|Keynes obsessively counted and tabulated almost everything; it was a life-long habit. As a child, he counted the number of front steps of every house on his street. Later he kept a running record (not surprisingly) of his expenses and his golf scores. He also counted and tabulated his sex life.

The first diary is easy: Keynes lists his sexual partners, either by their initials (GLS for Lytton Strachey, DG for Duncan Grant) or their nicknames ("Tressider," for J. T. Sheppard, the King's College Provost). When he apparently had a quick, anonymous hook-up, he listed that sex partner generically: "16-year-old under Etna" and "Lift boy of Vauxhall" in 1911, for instance, and "Jew boy," in 1912.<ref>http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2008/01/keyness-jew-boy-quickie/220620/</ref>}}

During his early 20s he kept an extensive record of his sexual activities and throughout the early 1900s he had numerous homosexual encounters. The records he kept are available from the modern archives at King's College, [[Cambridge]].<ref>http://moreintelligentlife.com/node/824</ref>

Zygmund Dobbs wrote in his work ''Keynes at Harvard'':
{{cquote|In 1967 the world was startled by the publication of the letters between Lytton Strachey and Maynard Keynes. Undisputed evidence in their private correspondence shows that Keynes was a life-long sexual deviate. What was more shocking was that these practices extended to a large group. Homosexuality, sado-masochism, [[lesbianism]], and the deliberate policy of corrupting the young was the established practice of this large and influential group which eventually set the political and cultural tone for the British Empire.

Keynes’ sexual partner, Lytton Strachey, indicated that their sexual attitudes could be infiltrated, “subtly, through literature, into the bloodstream of the people, and in such a way that they accepted it all quite naturally, if need be, without at first realizing what it was to which they were agreeing.” He further explained, privately, that, “he sought to write in a way that would contribute to an eventual change in our ethical and sexual mores—a change that couldn’t ‘be done in a minute,’ but would unobtrusively permeate the more flexible minds of young people.” This is a classic expression of the Fabian socialist method of seducing the mind. This was written in 1929 when it was already in practice for over forty years. It is no wonder we are reaping the whirlwind of student disorders where drug addiction and homosexuality rule the day.<ref>http://www.keynesatharvard.org/book/KeynesatHarvard-ch09.html</ref>}}

Keynes was a [[bisexual]] who married Lydia Lopokova. In his work ''The Cambridge Apostles, 1820-1914: Liberalism, Imagination, and Friendship in British Intellectual and Professional Life'', William C. Lubenow expresses the opinion that Keynes was an [[agnosticism|agnostic]].<ref>The Cambridge Apostles, 1820-1914: Liberalism, Imagination, and Friendship in British Intellectual and Professional Life, 1998, Cambridge University Press, page 402</ref>

== New Atheist Sam Harris claims atheist is right next to child molester as a designation ==

''see also:'' [[Views on Atheists]]

Dr. [[Sam Harris]] is a founder of the [[New Atheism]] movement. [[Sam Harris]] is quite aware of the stigma surrounding atheism and has even advocated that atheists no longer call themselves atheists.<ref>http://newsinitiative.org/story/2007/06/19/interview_with_an_atheist</ref> In fact, Dr. Harris has said concerning the label of atheist, "It's right next to child molester as a designation."<ref>http://newsinitiative.org/story/2007/06/19/interview_with_an_atheist</ref>

== Selective outrage on child molestation and so called "gentle pedophiles" ==
[[‎File:668738335 394b3820fb.jpg|thumbnail|300px|right|Ben-Peter Terpstra wrote in the ''Australian Conservative'': "In all truth, Britain’s clean-shaven [[atheism|atheists]] aren’t serious about children’s rights, or they’d be launching venomous attacks against the [[United Nations]], in light of their more recent sex abuse scandals."<ref>http://australianconservative.com/2010/04/preparing-for-richard-dawkins%E2%80%99-crocodile-tears/</ref>.(photo obtained from [http://www.flickr.com/photos/tunnelarmr/668738335/ Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en license agreement]) ]]
''For more information please see:'' [[Richard Dawkins on child molestation and so called "gentle pedophiles"]]

The ''Australian Conservative'' recently published an article by Ben-Peter Terpstra entitled ''Preparing for Richard Dawkins’ crocodile tears'' which charges that [[Richard Dawkins]] exhibits selective outrage on the issue of child molestation.<ref>http://australianconservative.com/2010/04/preparing-for-richard-dawkins%E2%80%99-crocodile-tears/</ref> In the article Terpstra cites Bendan Oneill who wrote:
{{cquote|The [[New Atheism|New Atheist]] campaign to have Pope Benedict XVI arrested when he visits Britain later this year exposes the deeply disturbing, authoritarian and even Inquisitorial side to today’s campaigning secularism...

In 2006, Dawkins criticised ‘hysteria about paedophilia’ and said that, even though he was the victim of sexual abuse at boarding school, he would defend his abusive former teachers if ‘50 years on they had been hounded by vigilantes or lawyers as no better than child murderers’. Yet now he wants to put abusive priests on a par with genocidaires.<ref>http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/8526/</ref>}}

Ben-Peter Terpstra writes: "In all truth, Britain’s clean-shaven atheists aren’t serious about children’s rights, or they’d be launching venomous attacks against the [[United Nations]], in light of their more recent sex abuse scandals."<ref>http://australianconservative.com/2010/04/preparing-for-richard-dawkins%E2%80%99-crocodile-tears/</ref>

Concerning Richard Dawkins recent selective outrage on child molestation the Christian apologetics website [[True Free Thinker]] writes:
{{cquote|His reputation has always been the very same and this Pope related publicity stunt is nothing new. Moreover, why would he oppose the Pope considering that what the Pope may be complicit in, surely, relates to some gentle pedophiles.

What! “Gentle pedophiles”!!!

Oh, no, no, no; those are not my words but Richard Dawkins who, indeed, argues that there are gentle pedophiles and that way too much is made of pedophilia at times.

For these reasons and more Robert Fulford’s referring to Richard Dawkins as a clown is very, very offensive—to clowns. Clowns are lovable and funny whilst Richard Dawkins is belligerent, arrogant, belittling and shockingly lacking in knowledge with regards to many of the issues that he takes on (find ample evidence [http://www.truefreethinker.com/richard-dawkins here]).<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/send-clowns-%E2%80%93-richard-dawkins-obliges</ref>}}

== See also ==

[[Homosexuality]] related links:

*[[Teenage homosexuality]]
*[[Homosexuality and pederasty]]
*[[Homosexual Couples and Domestic Violence]]
*[[Homosexuality and murders]]
*[[Homosexuality and health]]
*[[Homosexuality]]

[[Atheism]] related links:

*[[Atheism and morality]]
*[[Atheism and mass murder]]
*[[Atheism and deception]]
*[[Atheism and uncharitableness]]
*[[Abortion and atheism]]
*[[Atheism and obesity]]

==References==
<references/>
[[Category: Atheism]]
[[Category: Homosexuality]]
[[Category: Liberalism]]
[[Category: Conservative's masturbatory exercises]]

Atheists doubting the validity of atheism

2011-06-21T02:35:51Z

TriciaS:

[[Image:Sartre1.gif|thumb|150px|right|[[Jean-Paul Sartre]]]]
Notable professing [[Atheism|atheists]] have had the characteristic of variability and instability when it came to maintaining thoughts in accordance with atheism. For example, [[Jean-Paul Sartre]] was one of the leading proponents of atheism of the 20th Century. Yet Jean-Paul Sartre made this candid confession:
{{cquote|As for me, I don’t see myself as so much dust that has appeared in the world but as a being that was expected, prefigured, called forth. In short, as a being that could, it seems, come only from a creator; and this idea of a creating hand that created me refers me back to God. Naturally this is not a clear, exact idea that I set in motion every time I think of myself. It contradicts many of my other ideas; but it is there, floating vaguely. And when I think of myself I often think rather in this way, for wont of ''being able to think otherwise''.<ref>[http://www.johnankerberg.org/Articles/apologetics/AP0702W4.htm Is Christianity Alone Fully True and is Jesus Christ Really the Only Way To God? -- Part 4]</ref>}}

[[Image:darwin.jpg|thumb|120px|left|[[Charles Darwin]]]]
[[Charles Darwin]] wrote in his private notebooks that he was a [[materialism|materialist]], which is a type of atheist. (see: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Charles_Darwin#Religious_Views_of_Charles_Darwin religious views of Charles Darwin) ]<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1877 Darwin’s real message: have you missed it?]</ref><ref>American Scientist May 1977:323</ref>

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy states:
{{cquote|In 1885, the Duke of Argyll recounted a conversation he had had with Charles Darwin the year before Darwin's death:
In the course of that conversation I said to Mr. Darwin, with reference to some of his own remarkable works on the Fertilization of [[Orchid]]s, and upon The [[Earthworm]]s, and various other observations he made of the wonderful contrivances for certain purposes in nature — I said it was impossible to look at these without seeing that they were the effect and the expression of Mind. I shall never forget Mr. Darwin's answer. He looked at me very hard and said, “Well, that often comes over me with overwhelming force; but at other times,” and he shook his head vaguely, adding, “it seems to go away. ”(Argyll 1885, 244)<ref>[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/notes.html Notes to Teleological Arguments for God's Existence]</ref>}}

In addition, there have been notable atheists conceding there is compelling evidence for the existence of [[God]] and becoming [[ex-atheist]]. Unlike [[Christianity]], [[Christian apologetics|which is supported by a large body of sound evidence]] (see: [[Christian apologetics]]), atheism [[Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism|has no proof and evidence supporting its ideology]]. As a result, atheism often relies on asserting fragile assumptions that are contrary to the existing evidence.<ref>http://www.examiner.com/x-19682-Atlanta-Church--Culture-Examiner~y2009m8d13-Arguments-Built-upon-Assumptions</ref><ref>http://www.examiner.com/x-19682-Atlanta-Church--Culture-Examiner~y2009m8d10-Atheisms-house-of-cards-Part-3</ref><ref>http://home.earthlink.net/~gbl111/resurrection.htm</ref><ref>http://creation.com</ref> In addition, atheists/skeptics do have a tradition of making assumptions that later have proved errant.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth11.html</ref>

=== Instances of the Weakness of Individuals' Attachment to Atheism Through Secularistic Upbringing ===
According to recent research by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, in the United States, a majority of those surveyed who were raised in atheist or [[agnosticism|agnostic]] households, or where there was no specific religious attachment, later chose to join a religious faith.<ref>http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/defectors-to-faith-mark-a-growing-trend/story-e6frg7ko-1225710667095</ref><ref>http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1204/religion-changes-affiliations-survey</ref> A notable example of a person raised in a atheistic household who later became a Christian is William J. Murray. Mr. Murray is the son of the late atheist [[Madalyn Murray O'Hair]] who founded the organization American Atheists. In 1982, William J. Murray founded the [[Religious Freedom Coalition]].

In addition, as noted earlier, in atheistic [[Communism|Communist]] China, Christianity is experiencing explosive growth.<ref>http://www.millennialstar.org/christianity-exploding-in-china/</ref><ref>http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/shows/cwn/2008/August/Christianity-Growing-in-China-/</ref> On July 3, 2005, the [[New York Times]] reported concerning many countries in the former [[Soviet Union]]: "A return to religion in [[Romania]] and the region's other formerly Communist countries has in many places outrun the speed at which the church can screen and train clergy..."<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/03/international/europe/03romania.html</ref>

== Question evolution campaign ==

''See also:'' [[Question evolution! campaign]]

Since [[World War II]] a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the [[evolution|theory of evolution]] which employs [[methodological naturalism]] have been atheists.<ref>
* Dr. Don Batten,[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/737/ A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32, December 1997.
* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]
</ref> In 2011, a campaign called the [[Question evolution! campaign]] was launched by the [[Bible|biblical]] [[creation]] organization [[Creation Ministries International]] which is a worldwide "[[grassroots|grass-roots]] movement to challenge the anti-[[Christianity|Christian]] [[dogma]] of [[evolution]]".<ref>[http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign]</ref> The focus of the Question evolution! campaign is on 15 questions that evolutionists cannot answer.<ref>[http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign]</ref> The campaign will be primarily conducted in the [[United States]], the [[United Kingdom]], [[Canada]], [[Europe]], [[Australia]], [[New Zealand]], [[Singapore]] and [[South Africa]].<ref>http://creation.com/question-evolution</ref>

== See also ==
*[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]
*[[Christian apologetics|Evidence for Christianity]]
*[[Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism]]
*[[Essay: The question atheists fear|The question atheists fear]]
*[[Essay: Atheist restaurant|Atheist restaurant]] - satire
*[[There Are No Atheists In Foxholes]]
{{Nb Atheism}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category: Atheism]]
[[Category: Conservative's masturbatory exercises]]

Essay: Is Richard Dawkins an intellectually fulfilled atheist?

2011-06-21T02:34:40Z

TriciaS:

[[Image:5712dawkins.jpg|alt=Richard Dawkins|thumbnail|260px|right|[[Richard Dawkins]] ]]
In [[Richard Dawkins]]' intellectual bunnyhole where Dawkins [[Instances of Richard Dawkins ducking debates|hides from the cross examination of strong debate opponents]], Richard Dawkins engages in his public machinations and claims that he is an intellectually fulfilled [[atheism|atheist]]. Dawkins alleges that [[Charles Darwin]] made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist".<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/how-to-be-an-intellectually-fulfilled-atheist-or-not/</ref> Yet, where is Richard Dawkins' intellectual conviction and courage? Certainly, Richard Dawkins has displayed abundant evidence that he lacks true conviction and courage to defend [[atheism]] and the [[evolution|evolutionary paradigm]] (please see the [[satire]] [[Essay: Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?|Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?]]). Also, why did [[Charles Darwin]] have so little intellectual fulfillment? Late in Darwin's life, Charles Darwin told the Duke of Argyll that he frequently had overwhelming thoughts that the natural world was the [[Intelligent design|result of design]].<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/notes.html</ref> Dawkins' [[Richard Dawkins' public refusal to debate creationists|ruses about why he supposedly will not debate creationists]] and [[Instances of Richard Dawkins ducking debates|other strong theist debate opponents]] are a poor substitute for intellectual courage and fulfillment! If Richard Dawkins is an intellectually satisfied atheist then it must take exceedingly little to intellectually satisfy Richard Dawkins! The atheism porridge bowl [[atheism|is certainly empty when it comes to proof and evidence for atheism]]. It is very sad to see Richard Dawkins, the gaunt and hungry intellectual hyena, run away from the [[Christian]] [[Bible]] believing lions when he could do much better. There certainly is an [[Christian apologetics|abundance of evidence pointing to Christianity being true]] and [[atehism|atheism being false]].

== See also ==
*[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]
*[[Evolution]]
*[[Atheism]]
*[[Essay: Proof and evidence that atheism is true]]
*[[Essay: Richard Dawkins' intellectually starving atheist supporters]]
{{Nb Atheism}}

== External links ==
*[http://creation.com/is-richard-dawkins-an-atheist Is Richard Dawkins an atheist?] by [[Creation Ministries International]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category: Richard Dawkins]]
[[Category: Essays]]
[[Category: Atheism]]
[[Category: Conservative's masturbatory exercises]]

John Kenneth Galbraith

2011-06-21T02:05:55Z

TriciaS:

'''John Kenneth Galbraith''' (1908-2006) was a [[liberal]] economist who agitated for more [[John Maynard Keynes|Keynesian]] and [[social democracy|social democratic]] economic policies in the [[United States]].<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/30/obituaries/30galbraith.html</ref> Born in Canada, he became a U.S. citizen in 1937. He was a professor at Harvard University for over 25 years, an adviser to several [[Democratic]] U.S. presidents, U.S. ambassador to India under President John Kennedy, and author of dozens of books. His most famous book, ''The Affluent Society'', was a bestseller in 1958.<ref>http://www.legacy.com/Obituaries.asp?Page=LifeStory&PersonID=17618868</ref>

==References==
<references/>

{{DEFAULTSORT: Galbraith, John Kenneth}}

[[Category:Economists]]

The Coen Brothers

2011-06-20T16:48:51Z

TriciaS: The Coens' ''True Grit'' is not a remake of the John Wayne film. It was directly adapted from the novel.

'''The Coen Brothers''' are the collective name for the film makers Joel and Ethan Coen. They have written and directed a number of critically acclaimed movies since their debut ''Blood Simple'' in 1984. Their film ''No Country For Old Men'' won the Academy Award for Best Picture of 2007.

Their movies are noted for their black humor and frequently bloody violence. The Coens are [[Jewish]], and their movies exhibit a typical [[Hollywood]] [[liberal bias]] of celebrating deviancy and disrespect for the military; e.g, The Dude in ''The Big Lebowski'' is a sympathetically drawn 1960s dropout, while his friend Walter, a Jewish Vietnam veteran, is portrayed as belligerent and stupid. Christians are often portrayed as hypocritical and self-serving, although this is true of many of their characters in general. Their 2009 film ''[[A Serious Man]]'' dealt with a [[Jewish]] [[physics]] professor struggling to understand God, the universe, and causality, and can be variously interpreted through [[Judaism|Jewish theology]], [[quantum physics]], and [[relativity]].

Noted collaborators include [[liberals]] [[George Clooney]], [[Brad Pitt]] and [[Tim Robbins]]. Steve Buscemi, John Turturro, John Goodman, and Frances McDormand also make frequent appearances in their films.

== Filmography ==

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! width="33"|Year
! width="225"|Film
! width="175"|Notes
|-
|1984
|''[[Blood Simple]]''
|
|-
|1987
|''[[Raising Arizona]]''
|
|-
|1990
|''[[Miller's Crossing]]''
|
|-
|1991
|''[[Barton Fink]]''
|Winner of the Palme d'Or at the 1991 Cannes Film Festival
|-
|1994
|''[[The Hudsucker Proxy]]''
|
|-
|1996
|''[[Fargo]]''
|Won the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay and Best Leading Actress for Frances McDormand.
|-
|1998
|''[[The Big Lebowski]]''
|
|-
|2000
|''[[O Brother, Where Art Thou?]]''
|
|-
|2001
|''[[The Man Who Wasn't There]]''
|
|-
|2003
|''[[Intolerable Cruelty]]''
|
|-
|2004
|''[[The Ladykillers]]''
|
|-
|2007
|''[[No Country for Old Men]]''
|Won four Academy Awards for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor (Javier Bardem) and Best Adapted Screenplay.
|-
|2008
|''[[Burn After Reading]]''
|
|-
|2009
|''[[A Serious Man]]''
|
|-
|2010
|''[[True Grit]]''
|Based on the 1968 Charles Portis novel.
|}

{{DEFAULTSORT: Coen Brothers, The}}
[[Category:Directors]]

Talk:The Coen Brothers

2011-06-20T16:46:20Z

TriciaS: Created page with ""The Coens are Jewish, and their movies exhibit a typical Hollywood liberal bias of celebrating deviancy and disrespect for the military...." How are these two clauses meant to b..."

"The Coens are Jewish, and their movies exhibit a typical Hollywood liberal bias of celebrating deviancy and disrespect for the military...." How are these two clauses meant to be related? How is their ethnic/religious background relevant? [[User:TriciaS|TriciaS]] 12:46, 20 June 2011 (EDT)

Student Non-Discrimination Act

2011-06-18T17:59:50Z

TriciaS: working link

The '''Student Non-Discrimination Act''' (SNDA), or H.R. 4530, is a bill introduced in the [[United States Congress]] with the stated purpose of "end[ing] discrimination based on actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity in public schools."<ref>http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-4530</ref> It seems designed merely to protect the homosexual minority from "harassment", but its definition of harassment is "murky", say critics.<ref name=stifle>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/22/anti-lgbt-discrimination-stifle-free-speech-critics-say/ Gay Discrimination Bill Will Stifle Free Speech, Advance 'Homosexual Agenda,' Critics Say] - Fox News</ref>

The bill is supported by the [[ACLU]], the [[pro-gay]] [[Human Rights Campaign]], and [[GLSEN]].

[[Neal McCluskey]] of the [[Cato Institute]] said, "The definition of harassment could be broadly interpreted to censure anybody who expressed a totally legitimate opinion about [[homosexual behavior]]."<ref name=email>(personal correspondence, 6/9/2011)</ref>

==Notes==
<references />

Student Non-Discrimination Act

2011-06-18T17:48:35Z

TriciaS: adding actual stated purpose of bill before opinions

The '''Student Non-Discrimination Act''' (SNDA), or H.R. 4530, is a bill introduced in the [[United States Congress]] with the stated purpose of "end[ing] discrimination based on actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity in public schools."<ref>http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.4530.IH:</ref> It seems designed merely to protect the homosexual minority from "harassment", but its definition of harassment is "murky", say critics.<ref name=stifle>[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/22/anti-lgbt-discrimination-stifle-free-speech-critics-say/ Gay Discrimination Bill Will Stifle Free Speech, Advance 'Homosexual Agenda,' Critics Say] - Fox News</ref>

The bill is supported by the [[ACLU]], the [[pro-gay]] [[Human Rights Campaign]], and [[GLSEN]].

[[Neal McCluskey]] of the [[Cato Institute]] said, "The definition of harassment could be broadly interpreted to censure anybody who expressed a totally legitimate opinion about [[homosexual behavior]]."<ref name=email>(personal correspondence, 6/9/2011)</ref>

==Notes==
<references />

Daniel Ortega

2011-06-18T17:35:56Z

TriciaS: make encyclopedic

'''Daniel Ortega''' (b. 1945) is the president of [[Nicaragua]].

He came to power in [[Nicaragua]] by overthrowing the Somoza dynasty and enforcing a [[Communist]] regime on the country.<ref>As one of the leading commanders of the Sandinista forces that ousted Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza in July 1979, he became head of the ruling junta in the subsequent leftist regime. In disputed elections in November 1984, he was elected president. [http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/18/interviews/ortega/ (CNN)] </ref>
The [[Contras]] rose up to defy his dicatatorship and were supported by United States President [[Ronald Reagan]] including covertly diverting funds to their cause that created the [[Iran-Contra affair]].

After seizing power in Nicaragua, the Sandinista regime instituted dictatorial rule as early as December 1979, and formally announced a State of Emergency in 1982.
Under the new "Law for the Maintenance of Order and Public Security" the "Tribunales Populares Anti-Somozistas" allowed for the indefinite holding of suspected counter-revolutionaries without trial. The State of Emergency, however, most notably affected rights and guarantees contained in the "Statute on Rights and Guarantees of Nicaraguans. Many civil liberties were curtailed or canceled such as the freedom to organize demonstrations, the inviolability of the home, freedom of the press, freedom of speech and, the freedom to strike. <ref>West, W. Gordon. "The Sandista Record on Human Rights in Nicaragua (1979-1990)" http://www.reds.msh-paris.fr/publications/revue/pdf/ds22/ds022-03.pdf (PDF). Réseau Européen Droit et Société. Retrieved 2009-03-30.</ref>
All independent news program broadcasts were suspended. In total, twenty-four programs were cancelled. In addition, Sandinista censor Nelba Cecilia Blandón issued a decree ordering all radio stations to hook up every six hours to government radio station, La Voz de La Defensa de La Patria.<ref>Chomorro Cardenal, Jaime (1988). La Prensa, The Republic of Paper. University Freedom House. p. 20.</ref>
The rights affected also included certain procedural guarantees in the case of detention including habeas corpus.<ref>West, W. Gordon, ibid.</ref> The State of Emergency was not lifted during the 1984 elections. There were many instances where rallies of opposition parties were physically broken up by Sandinsta youth or pro-Sandinista mobs. Opponents to the State of Emergency argued its intent was to crush resistance to the FSLN. James Wheelock justified the actions of the Directorate by saying "... We are annulling the license of the false prophets and the oligarchs to attack the revolution.” <ref>"Behind the State of Emergency". Envío. November 1985. http://www.envio.org.ni/articulo/3413. Retrieved 2008-02-16.</ref>

Jamie Glazov describes human rights under this goverment as follows: "All Nicaraguans had to take part in the Marxist experiment. Thus, in perfect Khmer Rouge style, the Sandinistas inflicted a ruthless forcible relocation of tens of thousands of Indians from their land. Like Stalin, they used state-created famine as a weapon against these "enemies of the people." The Sandinista army committed myriad atrocities against the Indian population, killing and imprisoning approximately 15,000 innocent people. The crimes included not only mass murders of innocent natives themselves, but a calculated liquidation of their entire leadership – as the Soviet army had perpetrated against the Poles in Katyn in 1943. According to the Nicaraguan Commission of Jurists, the Sandinistas carried out over 8,000 political executions within three years of the revolution. The number of "anti-revolutionary" Nicaraguans who had "disappeared" in Sanadinista hands or had died "trying to escape" were numbered in the thousands. By 1983, the number of political prisoners in the Sandinistas' ruthless tyranny were estimated at 20,000. Torture was institutionalized. Numerous human rights organizations, including Amnesty International and the United Nations Human Rights Commission, have documented the atrocious record of Sandinista human rights abuses, which stood as the worst in Latin America. Political prisoners in Sandinista prisons, such as in Las Tejas, were consistently beaten, deprived of sleep and tortured with electric shocks. They were routinely denied food and water and kept in dark cubicles that had a surface of less than one square meter, known as chiquitas (little ones). These cubicles were too small to sit up in, were completely dark and had no sanitation and almost no ventilation.”<ref>http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=25257</ref>

The Sandinistas sent Soviet helicopter gunships and elite army units to attack the Indians; carried out mass arrests, jailings and torture; burned down 65 Indian communities; inflicted ethnic cleansing on 70,000 Indians; and tried to starve the Indians by cutting off food supplies. The Sandinistas boasted that they were “ready to eliminate the last Miskito Indian to take Sandinism to the Atlantic Coast.” <ref>Roger Miranda and William Ratliff, The Civil War in Nicaragua (Transaction Publishers, 1993), pp253-4.</ref>

For decades, Nicaragua had experienced some of the fastest economic growth in the hemisphere. Within a few years of Sandinista rule, wages had been fixed below poverty level and there was mass unemployment. There were shortages of nearly all basic goods, with inflation at 30,000%. Government studies found that three-quarters of schoolchildren suffered from malnutrition, while living standards were lower than Haiti. The World Bank found that Nicaragua was on the economic level of Somalia.

An inability of the Sandanistas to defeat the Contras caused Ortega to call the first free and open elections in Nicaragua since the Communists seized power for 1990. Although he was heavily favored to win, in a shocking turn of events he was defeated in an election for the Presidency of Nicaragua by [[Violetta Chamorro]] in 1990. Ortega stepped down with the defeat, but left much of his power structure behind that would make it difficult for the new government.

His regime was responsible for the deaths of as many as 50,000 people.

Ortega never completely left the political scene and ran and lost again for President in 1996 and 2001, but 16 years later after his initial defeat, he became president of Nicaragua again, this time democratically, after winning the election held on November 5th, 2006. He was aided by a change to the rules that a candidate only needed 35% of the vote to avoid a runoff instead of the previous 45%. He campaigned as the candidate of peace and that land grabbing and attacking the church would no longer be a part of his future as it was his past.<ref>Max Blumenthal, "The Kinder, Gentler Daniel Ortega," http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070205/blumenthal</ref>

== References ==
<references/>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Ortega,Daniel}}

[[Category:Heads of State]]
[[Category:Nicaragua]]

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Songs

2011-06-18T17:32:17Z

TriciaS: /* YMCA? */

See [http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzZkNDU5MmViNzVjNzkzMDE3NzNlN2MyZjRjYTk4YjE= this]. [[User:Stryker|Stryker]] 10:04, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

: The [[neoconservative]] ''National Review'' list is 95% garbage, not [[conservative]] at all. I only found one tune on the list that should be added ours ("Stand by your man"), and National Review had it at #50.

: The contrast here with ''National Review'' illustrates the need for ''Conservapedia''. But thanks for your link.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:31, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Oops... it seems that I added a bunch of songs from that list. Several of mine (Brick, Red Barchetta, I Can't Drive 55, Sweet Home Alabama, and Revolution 1) were on there. That's interesting, though... the NR person and I thought alike on this one. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 17:16, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Sweet Home Alabama? I love that song (and I'm a liberal)! Revolution's great, too.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 18:29, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Sorry? Why was my entry for The Fall's Pseud Mag Ed removed? They have always been the great deflators of liberal complacency. What is going on?

: Post a link to the lyrics of the song here and we'll see. Also, please sign your entries by using the signature button in the row above the edit box. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:16, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

Can a song possibly be just a song, rather than a political statement? - BornAgainBrit

: Uh, sure, there are songs that lack any meaning at all. "I wanna hold your hand," for example, is a pleasant jingle from your homeland. I trust we'd agree that it is not the most meaningful song in the world. That tune is fun for reminiscing.

: But surely you don't deny that many songs do have political meaning. [[Liberal]] attempts to deny political bias are familiar to us and no one here is fooled. Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:37, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

The deletion of Bob Dylan's song was not properly explained. Observing that people serve either the devil or the Lord is a conservative observation, and of course Bob Dylan was a born-again Christian who expressed his faith in song (but don't expect [[liberals]] to tell you that).--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:03, 21 July 2007 (EDT)

:I didn't mean to step on any toes, but apathy towards devil worship doesn't seem to me like a very conservative trait. Unfortunately, the verses of the songs don't give us ''any'' meaning whatsoever, so the only meaning we can glean from the song are the four lines of the chorus, three of which are essentially the same :/ [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 14:06, 21 July 2007 (EDT)

::Paradise by the Dashboard light? I know its a song about having pre-marital sex, but the end is about how it screwed up his life.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 04:45, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

After reading this list, I've gotta ask, just how do you define a 'conservative' song?--[[User:Offeep|Offeep]] 15:27, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

: [[Conservative]] is a term that is well-understood. A "conservative song" reflects some of those values without diluting them with a [[liberal]] message.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:42, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

I can't believe Okie from Muskogie isn't on here. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 23:23, 27 July 2007 (EDT)

I know this is being nitpicky, but I don't like the message of Last Kiss because it seems to suggest a works salvation, that one gets to heaven by doing good rather than accepting Jesus. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 23:30, 27 July 2007 (EDT)

:... and on that note, let's open up a can of [[Mountain Dew]] and get ready to [[Debate:Are we saved by faith or works?]] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:16, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

==Last Kiss==
Somebody just put up "Last Kiss;" actually I recall when it was a hit circa 1964 many adults, parents, teachers and ministers where horrified that a song about death was considered appropriate for young people. My my, how things had changed by 1967.... [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:08, 28 July 2007 (EDT)

Just like 'Teen Angel,' 'Leader of the Pack,' 'Dead Man's Curve,' and 'Tell Laura I Love Her.' [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:35, 29 July 2007 (EDT)

==Possible Addition==

Ok, I have a suggestion, but I want some feedback before putting it on the page. I was listening to the radio today, and Another Brick in the Wall by Pink Floyd came on. I was thinking that the song talks about the way that public schools brainwash children and turn them into "bricks" in the wall that is liberal society. In a way, the song is pro-homeschooling, because it's teachers that need to leave the kids alone so that parents can instruct their children correctly. Maybe I'm reaching a bit here, but I wanted to see what you all thought. [[User:SSchultz|SSchultz]] 00:23, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

: I'm open to comments and suggestions about this, but I've never viewed the famous song "another brick in the wall" as conservative. You may be right that the song properly complains about the effect of schooling, but the song doesn't offer any conservative solution that I can see.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 01:10, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

::"Another Brick In The Wall" is more of a neutral song. Its part of a concept album in which the main character slowly seperates himself from society. Most Pink Floyd songs are about madness, due to their original lead singer going insane. [[User:TobyKeet|TobyKeet]] 05:32, 24 November 2010 (EST)

==Love Me, I'm a Liberal==

:I'm glad the commies were thrown out
:Of the A.F.L. C.I.O. board

Hardly sounds like a Communist critique. Have you read all the lyrics of the song? [http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~trent/ochs/lyrics/liberal.html] It's twitting liberals for their supposed concern for others, which is actually sorely lacking. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:14, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

:That song is pure sarcasm and Ochs assumes the role of a 1960s-era (Cold War era) "liberal" to attack them from the extreme left in a sarcastic way. Read the lyrics again, he is attacking the AFL-CIO for throwing out the commies. He is saying liberals aren't far left ''enough''. It's not a conservative song, it's an extreme leftist one. [[User:Parrothead|Parrothead]] 17:22, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

So there's a song on this list about breaking the law 'I can't Drive 55,' and one about obeying the law 'I fought the law.' Which is the conservative value? And the Bobby Fuller Four's version of the latter was the superior version, BTW. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 10:40, 10 September 2007 (EDT)

== Are these truly conservative? ==

While I understand completely some of these songs being on here, I don't really understand the why Bob Dylan, The Beatles, or Ben Folds (Five) would be on this list. These individual songs may be able to be warped into our mindset, but if one truly looks at these, they become overwhelmingly liberal.

For example: The Beatles - Revolution
While this song does indeed talk about how "Carrying pictures of Chairman Mao" will do no good, it also talks about how war and money can't solve problems. In addition, if a child is to read tis and decide to find out more about The Beatles, they will undoubtedly find some intensely liberal themes. The same idea goes for Bob Dylan. Look at any of his other songs. At the same time, Ben Folds does exactly the same thing.

I cannot argue with the songs and parts on this list, but I wonder if this is a slippery slope?
::It's possible that many of these songs were adopted by conservatives, such as Mike Huckabee playing John Cougar Mellencamp's hits. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:48, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: Many of the songs here have a powerful [[conservative]] message, and demonstrate that the music industry does not have to be [[liberal]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:00, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: P.S. [[Liberals]] do say [[conservative]] things from time to time. We're listing songs here, not artists.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:01, 18 February 2008 (EST)

I would just like add that Revolution 1 was written as a reaction against the protesters against the Vietnam War who were getting violent. All Revolution is saying is for the protesters to protest, but not violently, which is still liberal, but a message than other liberal songs. However, for other Beatles songs, they range from being liberal (Why Don't We Do It in the Road?) to be being kind of conservative (Let It Be). Most however, are pretty much neutral. You usually kind Paul McCartney as being more concervative, and Lennon as liberal. [[User:TobyKeet|TobyKeet]] 05:28, 24 November 2010 (EST)

:One problem with the above analysis: Why Don't We Do It In the Road was McCartney's; Lennon was rather famously not involved at all. Personally I've always thought of it as a kind of parody of the free love movement, though apparently that wasn't McCartney's intention. [[User:Ptorquemada|Ptorquemada]] 17:25, 4 April 2011 (EDT)

== In Your Eyes ==

Okay, the song can be considered to be about God, but that alone does not make it conservative. I think Peter Gabriel himself would object to the song's inclusion in this list. --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 15:23, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: Peter Gabriel can object all he likes. "In Your Eyes" appeals to conservative values, as in "a thousand churches." Do you think we should object when a liberal says something conservative???--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:27, 18 February 2008 (EST)
::Religion is not conservative. Fundamentalism is, but not religion. The presence of religion in a song does not make it conservative, even as adherence to religion does not make a person conservative. Look at me, I'm a Christian, but I'm also a communist. Obviously the two are not mutually exclusive. One's personal merely interpersonally-social morals under religion might be more "conservative", in the loosest sense of the term — not conservative, simply somewhat more so — than they would be otherwise; however, that does not automatically make one politically conservative.--[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 15:50, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::: The single best predictor of how conservative someone votes is how often he attends a place of worship of God. Your argument suggesting that you are a counterexample to that correlation means nothing. See point #2 in [[liberal logic]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:04, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::::That wasn't irrelevant at all. Correlation != causation. --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 16:08, 18 February 2008 (EST)
::::Sorry, my edit summary should have been "basic statistical interpretation". --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 16:09, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::::: Why did you cite your counterexample, if it wasn't an example of the logical fallacy #2 in [[liberal logic]]? Do you really think a counterexample disproves causation?

==Land of Confusion==
Does Genesis' ''Land of Confusion'' belong on the list? I remember the music video portraying Ronald Reagan (in puppet form) as inept, and it parodies several conservative leaders, including Margaret Thatcher, et. al. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|Hello!]] 13:58, 5 March 2009 (EST)

: It's liberal lyric of "too many people" is enough reason to bounce it from the list. Thanks for catching this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:53, 5 March 2009 (EST)

==Should Fortunate Son really be on this list?==

It's vehemently anti-war. Please correct if I'm wrong, but I don't think that's a very conservative belief. [[User:JRobbe|JRobbe]]

:I just looked the lyrics. Pretty confused stuff. I'd agree it's not conservative. Would you like to toss it from the list? Please feel free to do so.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:26, 7 January 2010 (EST)

:Done. [[User:JRobbe|JRobbe]]

== Long Black Train by Josh Turner? ==

To me, this song seems like a good candidate for this list. --[[User:Dfrischknecht|Dfrischknecht]] 07:14, 22 July 2010 (EDT)

== The Decision by Ricky Van Shelton ==

I think this is another good candidate for this list. It's a song about a teenage girl who gives in to peer pressure and gets pregnant and the consequences of that action. --[[User:Dfrischknecht|Dfrischknecht]] 09:02, 22 July 2010 (EDT)

== New Agey ==

I removed the new agey phrase of "the cycle of life, death and rebirth," for the "Lightning Crashes," by Live, but feel free to discuss here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:23, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

: That wasn't meant to seem "new agey" in the least, but I do understand what you're saying. The song presents a view of life as being cyclical, as the baby is being born an old woman dies, and "The confusion that was hers belongs now to the baby down the hall." I think the lyrics really speak to the significance of life (not just at childbirth), but as a whole. I don't think the song is necessarily about the old woman being reincarnated as the newborn child, but it definitely seems to speak of the circle of life.[[User:JaneX|JaneX]] 15:56, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

:: Perhaps a rewording would work then? How about replacing "the cycle of life, death and rebirth" with "the joy of childbirth in contrast with the end of life"?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:59, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

::: I agree that a rewording would work, thank you for working with me. Perhaps we could just say that the song celebrates the significance of life from birth until death, almost in an as one door closes another opens kind of way? [[User:JaneX|JaneX]] 20:00, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

== Song idea ==

"One Man, One Woman" sung by ABBA. Indirectly a tribute to traditional marriage and monogamy.--[[User:TedM|TedM]] 12:14, 12 January 2011 (EST)

: Sounds good by the title, so how about adding it where you think it would be appropriate in the list? Thanks for your insight.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:17, 12 January 2011 (EST)

== Takin' Care of Business ==

This song by BTO is on the list for supporting "Hard work ethic", but its not. The refrain is jokingly ironic. "I love to work at nothing all day; and I've been taking care of business"

The body of the song describes a more easy going life just making music rather than waking up early, catching trains for work, etc.

I'm not saying it makes the song liberal, and not sure why its even necessary to classify songs along political lines, but it sure as heck ain't about working hard.
I'd suggest if someone wants to keep it here because its a good song, and if people can only enjoy it because it conforms to their political views, than change the reason to "Mike Huckabee performed the song" [comment by AndrewJackson]

:You left out how the song praises the self-employed, which is a very conservative, hard-working group of people.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:55, 21 March 2011 (EDT)

::Fair enough, but the praise you speak of is "If you ever get annoyed [with, based on earlier lyrics, either your traditional job or the unpleasant commute involved], look at me, I'm self-employed; I love to work at nothing all day." That could be taken as either "I made so much money as an entepreneur that I no longer need to work" or "My official job title is 'Bum'." Neither one of them really expresses admiration for "hard work" in its own right, though the former is certainly a more positive role model than the latter. I do ''like'' the song, but I'm not entirely sanguine about considering it "conservative." [[User:Ptorquemada|Ptorquemada]] 17:36, 4 April 2011 (EDT)

== Adonai My Lord ==

I'm going to delete this song from the list, as it is from the atheistic industrial metal genre. The lyrics reflect a sort of militant Christianity that does not reflect well on the religion as a whole. For example, this group has a song called "Christf---"...obviously they are not conservative. [[User:DennyW66|DennyW66]] 01:14, 23 March 2011 (EDT)

==No U2?==

Surely -- despite the band's liberal leanings -- one of U2's unashamedly Christian songs should make it in. Gloria seems the obvious choice. The chorus, you may remember, goes: "Gloria, in te domine/ Gloria, exultate/ Gloria, Gloria/ Oh Lord, loosen my lips." --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 12:34, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
:Agreed. Gloria is definitely a good choice. Perhaps "40"; its lyrics are directly lifted from Psalm 40. [[User:DennyW66|DennyW66]] 12:43, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
::You're kidding right? [http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/us-election/u2-honoured-to-be-involved-with-obama-celebrations-14145757.html Conservative indeed..] [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:06, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
:::Bono has had a relationship with every President since Clinton; for instance, he worked with Bush on issues relating to Africa and AIDS awareness. The band is very Christian and in no way ashamed of their Christianity. And, rare for rock stars, three of the four members of the band are married family men. They are known for their charitableness and philanthropy, which are of course [[conservative]] traits. Without a doubt, U2 is a conservative, Christian band and they should have representation on this list. [[User:DennyW66|DennyW66]] 22:21, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

::::''Gloria'''s a good choice, please add it if you agree. But U2 became increasingly liberal the more media attention it obtained.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:07, 29 March 2011 (EDT)

:::::Maybe it's possible to be Christian and pro-family, and yet left-leaning politically. Anyway, I vote for "Beautiful Day" ... The heart is a bloom / Shoots up through the stony ground / But there's no room / No space to rent in this town

:::::Reminds me of how inhospitable this fallen world can be to the spirits of believers trying to lead a godly life in the midst of a secular world which often seems to be ruled by the devil (John 12:31). Yet God's love is there, like sunshine! --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:53, 29 March 2011 (EDT)

== Brothers in Arms - Dure Straits ==

I would like to suggest Brothers in Arms by Dire Straits. It's about war and having ones "brother's in arms" in support. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:32, 4 April 2011 (EDT)
:If there is no argument to it's inclusion I'll add it soon. Let me know your thoughts though...[[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:42, 5 April 2011 (EDT)

== YMCA? ==

I'd always heard that the Village People's YMCA was about [[homosexual]] men seducing other men? That doesn't sound very [[conservative]] to me. Is this just a rumor? --[[User:JustinD|JustinD]] 12:45, 12 May 2011 (EDT)
:This was obviously added as a joke, and no one else seems to have realized it! [[User:TriciaS|TriciaS]] 12:25, 18 June 2011 (EDT)

::Nope - the song is a legitimate tribute to the Young Men's Christian Association.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:19, 18 June 2011 (EDT)
:::Right. And Antony came to bury Caesar, not to praise him. "It's fun to stay at the Y-M-C-A. / They have everything that you need to enjoy, / You can hang out with all the boys..." [[User:TriciaS|TriciaS]] 13:32, 18 June 2011 (EDT)

== Really? Have You Looked Into These Songs? ==

I'd just like to say that I think it's really jacked that you're going around and trying to SAY what these songs mean. For example, Metallica is NOT a conservative band. James Hetfield was a heavy drinker until he went to rehab, Kirk Hammett suffered from drug addiction during his teen years, and if you listen to any other song you hear that they are NOT a conservative band.

Furthermore, Journey is NOT a conservative band. Steve Perry openly voted for Obama in 2008. --[[User:Beanna|Beanna]] 20:04, 24 May 2011 (EDT)

: This isn't a list of conservative bands. It's a list of conservative ''songs''. Even liberals are capable of occasionally singing a conservative song.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:19, 24 May 2011 (EDT)

== An idea... ==

I was looking at this list and realised that most of the songs listed here are big hit numbers. I was thinking that it might be interesting to look at whether the more conservative a song is the better it does on the charts. Even though the artist might be liberal it seems there bigger hits are in fact conservative songs! Maybe by charting something like this we could prove that people respond better to the conservative message and perhaps change the minds of some liberal singers. Just an idea. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 20:31, 27 May 2011 (EDT)
:We could add the respective chart ranking to this page and then collate the results by rank and date. Perhaps, like the conservative words, we might even see the same pattern repeated here! [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 20:48, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

::Great idea!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:01, 27 May 2011 (EDT)
:::It'll be a big project though so it'll be awhile for me to collate the results but I fear that we'll find that the majority of new hits are liberal in nature (particulalry coming from M&M and Usher etc) but I think that is because of the "hollywood" influence. Interestingly artists distanced from "fame" have better messages and ''still'' produce amazing hits. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:11, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

== From a youngin' ==

Citizen/Soldier by 3 Doors Down. I don't know about the band themselves, but any song that supports the National Guard should be listed here, in my honest option. If no one minds, I'll add it.

= Wish you were here =

This is a good list of songs, but as far as I know, ''Wish you were here'' (the title track, along with the entire eponymous album) was not dedicated to a conservative president, but rather to ex-Pink Floyd member Syd Barrett. --[[User:LeonardO|Leo-from-UK]] 19:19, 16 June 2011 (EDT)

Pratibha Patil

2011-06-18T17:24:36Z

TriciaS:

[[Image:Patil.jpg|thumb|right]]
'''Pratibha Patil''' (born December 19, 1934, in Jalgaon, [[Maharashtra]]) is the [[president]] of [[India]]. She became the first woman to hold that office on July 25, 2007. Previously, she was governor of the state of [[Rajasthan]] (2004-07).

Patil is a post-graduate in arts and law. Besides having been president of the Maharashtra [[Indian National Congress|Congress Party]] chapter, she is credited with establishing hostels for "working women" in Mumbai and New Delhi, an engineering college at Jalgaon for rural youth, a women's cooperative bank also at Jalgaon, and schools for poor children in Maharashtra. <ref>[http://www.indiastudychannel.com/resources/98-Pratibha-Patil-Biodata-Biography.aspx Biography]</ref>

She is married to Devisingh Shekhawat, also a Congress Party politician (Married on 7th July, 1965). The couple have a son and a daughter.

She upset Islamic leaders by asking Indian women to abandon their head scarves.

==References==
{{reflist}}

==See also==
*[[Jawaharial Nehru]]
*[[Indira Gandhi]]
*[[Bhagavad Gita]]

==External links==
*[http://www.pr-inside.com/rss/pratibha-patil-indias-first-female-president-r179942.htm Pratibha Patil]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Patil, Pratibha}}

[[Category:India]]
[[Category:Heads of State]]
[[Category:Women]]

Indian National Congress

2011-06-18T17:23:19Z

TriciaS: spelling

'''The Indian National Congress''' is a [[political party]] in [[India]]. It was founded in 1885 by Scotsman, Allan Octavian Hume. In 1947 it became the leading political party of India. Seventy two delegates attended the first meeting held in the December of 1885. In 1907 the party split into two halves. The Garam Dal of Bal Gangadhar Tilak, and the Naram Dal of Gopal Krishna Gokhale. Each party had different feelings toward the British, the Garam Dal were more extreme, and the Naram Dal were more moderate. Today it is led by Sonia Gandhi.

== See also ==
*[[Amritsar Massacre]]
*[[Religion in India]]
*[[Muslim League]]

== External Links ==

* [http://www.congress.org.in/ Official page]
[[category:India]]
[[category:Indian History]]
[[Category:Political Organizations]]

Pratibha Patil

2011-06-18T17:21:24Z

TriciaS:

[[Image:Patil.jpg|thumb|right]]
'''Pratibha Patil''' (born December 19, 1934, in Jalgaon, [[Maharashtra]]) is the [[president]] of [[India]]. She became the first woman to hold that office on July 25, 2007. Previously, she was governor of the state of [[Rajasthan]] (2004-07).

Patil is a post-graduate in arts and law. Besides having been president of the Maharashtra Congress chapter, she is credited with establishing hostels for "working women" in Mumbai and New Delhi, an engineering college at Jalgaon for rural youth, a women's cooperative bank also at Jalgaon, and schools for poor children in Maharashtra. <ref>[http://www.indiastudychannel.com/resources/98-Pratibha-Patil-Biodata-Biography.aspx Biography]</ref>

She is married to Devisingh Shekhawat, also a Congress Party politician (Married on 7th July, 1965). The couple have a son and a daughter.

She upset Islamic leaders by asking Indian women to abandon their head scarves.

==References==
{{reflist}}

==See also==
*[[Jawaharial Nehru]]
*[[Indira Gandhi]]
*[[Bhagavad Gita]]

==External links==
*[http://www.pr-inside.com/rss/pratibha-patil-indias-first-female-president-r179942.htm Pratibha Patil]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Patil, Pratibha}}

[[Category:India]]
[[Category:Heads of State]]
[[Category:Women]]

Science Czar

2011-06-18T17:11:33Z

TriciaS:

'''Science Czar''' is the informal title that has been given to the official heading the [[White House]]'s Office of Science and Technology Policy during the [[George W. Bush]]<ref>http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2004/tc20040316_5366_tc166.htm</ref> and [[Barack Obama]]<ref>http://www.cnsnews.com/node/69081</ref> Administrations.

The current holder of that title is [[John Holdren]], PhD, formerly of the [[Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute]].

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Obama Administration]]

Science Czar

2011-06-18T17:10:13Z

TriciaS:

'''Science Czar''' is the informal title that has been given to the official heading the [[White House]]'s Office of Science and Technology Policy during the [[George W. Bush]]<ref>http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2004/tc20040316_5366_tc166.htm</ref> and [[Barack Obama]]<ref>John Holdren</ref> Administrations.

The current holder of that title is [[John Holdren]], PhD, formerly of the [[Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute]].

==References==

[[Category:Obama Administration]]

Science Czar

2011-06-18T17:03:45Z

TriciaS: improve accuracy

'''Science Czar''' is the informal title that has been given to the official heading the [[White House]]'s Office of Science and Technology Policy during the [[George W. Bush]] and [[Barack Obama]] Administrations.

The current holder of that title is [[John Holdren]], PhD, formerly of the [[Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute]].

[[Category:Obama Administration]]

Science Czar

2011-06-18T16:55:49Z

TriciaS: miscategorized

The title of '''Science Czar''', in the [[Obama Administration]], is the informal title given to an official who holds the following subsidiary titles:

* Assistant to the President for Science and Technology
* Director, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy
* Co-Chair, President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology

The current holder of that title is [[John Holdren]], PhD, formerly of the [[Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute]]

[[Category:Obama Administration]]

Evo Morales

2011-06-18T16:51:13Z

TriciaS:

'''Evo Morales''' (b. 1959) is the president of [[Bolivia]]. He is Bolivia's first indigenous president, and the leader of the Movement for Socialism ([[Spanish]] acronym MAS, for ''Movimiento al Socialismo'') party.

In December 2009 Morales won a second term by a landslide, with 64% of the vote,<ref>http://www.cne.org.bo/PadronBiometrico/COMUNICACION/ACTADECOMPUTONACIONALGENERALES2009.pdf</ref> while MAS won a two-thirds majority in Congress. This result will allow him to implement a new constitution granting new rights to indigenous peoples and to strengthen state control over the economy, which conservatives have denounced as socialism similar to that of [[Hugo Chavez]] in [[Venezuela]].<ref> see [http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_ID=15065929 '"Economist'' report]</ref>

==References==
<references/>
==See also==
*http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1733748_1733757_1735592,00.html
*http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3203752.stm

{{DEFAULTSORT:Morales, Evo}}

[[Category:Heads of State]]
[[Category:Latin America]]
[[Category:Socialism]]

Gertrude Stein

2011-06-18T16:35:34Z

TriciaS: "lover" is a rather outdated term

[[Image:Gertrude Stein.png|right|200px]]
'''Gertrude Stein''' (February 3, 1874 – July 27, 1946) was an American writer (born in Allegheny, Pennsylvania) and one of the leaders of the literary modernism movement. Some of her most famous works include ''The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas'', ''The Making of Americans'', and ''Three Lives''. Noted for being highly innovative in her approach to language and writing, she was enormously influential on several authors such as [[Ernest Hemingway]] and [[F. Scott Fitzgerald]], as well as artist [[Pablo Picasso]]. She was the center and the most dominant personality in the [[Lost Generation]] circle of American ex-patriates in Paris in the 1920s.

Stein studied psychology under [[William James]] (graduated magna cum laude in 1898), and made medical studies at Johns Hopkins Medical School (leaving to Paris with no degree, 1903). In 1922, she and her life-partner Alice B. Toklas received from the French government the ''Medaille de la Reconnaissance Française''.<ref>LitWeb - [http://www.litweb.net/biography/127/Gertrude_Stein.html Gertrude Stein Biography and List of Works]</ref>

===''The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas''===
Stein's autobiography, her first and most successful effort after a long series of failures, was recounted from the perspective of her partner, Alice B. Toklas. This quirky approach, which broke the only real rule of writing an autobiography, was initially engaged upon for the money alone. The fame and success it brought Stein enabled her to bring to light her previous works, which had been mostly ignored by the public at large despite their disproportionate influence.

== Works ==
[[Image:Picasso_Gertrude_Stein.jpg|thumb|Portrait by Pablo Picasso 1903.]]
*Three Lives (1909)
*Tender Button (1915); described as a "verbal collage"
*The Making of Americans. Being a History of a Family's Progress (1925)
*The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas (1933)
*Paris France (1940)

== See also ==
*[[Georges Braque]]
*[[Juan Gris]]

== External links ==
*[http://womenshistory.about.com/od/gertrudestein/a/gertrude_stein.htm Gertrude Stein]
*[http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/gstein.htm Gertrude Stein (1874-1946)]
*[http://www.jewish-theatre.com/visitor/article_display.aspx?articleID=2735 Gertrude Stein in the very heart of an era of great creative output]

== References ==

<references/>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Stein, Gertrude}}

[[Category:Authors]]
[[Category:Women]]

Pablo Picasso

2011-06-18T16:31:28Z

TriciaS: he was a sculptor, not a sculpture

[[Image:Casso.jpg|right|thumb|Pablo Picasso]]
'''Pablo Picasso''' (Malaga, 1881 - Mougins, 1973) was a [[Spain|Spanish]] artist who was both a painter and [[sculpture|sculptor]]. Pablo Picasso co-founded (along with Basque artist [[Georges Braque|George Braque]]) [[Cubism]], which embodied the neuroses (some would say schizophrenia) of artist of his era. He produced a monumental 20,000 artworks during his 70-year career. Picasso’s torrential outpouring of work was so extensive and complex that art historians have divided it into individual periods.<ref>Petite Fleurs. [http://www.allposters.com/gallery.asp?aid=85097&apnum=336396 Pablo Picasso], AllPosters.com</ref> He was the single most dominating figure in modern art.

A prodigy in his youth and the son of an art teacher, Picasso was only 12 when he began exhibiting his first paintings in his famous primitive style in [[Barcelona]]. Picasso enrolled in advanced classes at Barcelona’s [[Royal Academy of Art]] at age 15. The strong geometric forms of his groundbreaking Cubist works redefined art as a medium that could digress from literal images of reality. Passionately creative in every genre from primitive art to sketches to [[Surrealism]], Picasso profoundly impacted 20th century art. Perhaps his most famous painting was [http://www.conservapedia.com/Image:Picasso_._Guernica.jpg ''Guernica''], which was inspired by his outrage at the destruction of a Socialist stronghold during the [[Spanish Civil War]]. Picasso, a lifelong [[Communist]], supported the Republican government defeated by General Franco's forces and never returned to his homeland after Franco's victory.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/april/8/newsid_2523000/2523469.stm 1973: Art master Picasso dies], April 8</ref>

He is immortalized in several of the works of the [[Lost Generation]] of American ex-patriate writers with whom he associated in Paris during the 1920s, including [[Gertrude Stein]] and [[Ernest Hemingway]], by whom he is fondly remembered in their respective autobiographical efforts of that time (''The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas'' and ''A Moveable Feast'').

With his ''Charnel House'' of 1945, Picasso concluded the series of pictures that he had started with ''Guernica''. The connection between the paintings becomes immediately obvious when we consider the rigidly limited color scheme and the triangular composition of the center.<ref>
[http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/459275/Pablo-Picasso Picasso Biography], Britannica: Pablo Picasso: Life and career.</ref>

In spite of his left-wing views, Picasso died a very wealthy man and left a fortune estimated to be $50 million.

 
<center>
<gallery perrow="5">
Image:Picasso - Woman in a Café.jpg|L'Absinthe
Image:Picasso Les Demoiselles d'Avignon.jpg|"Les Demoiselles d'Avignon"
Image:Picasso Jacqueline with Crossed Hands.jpg|Jacqueline with Crossed Hands
Image:Picasso Still-Life.jpg|Still-Life
File:Picasso Nu au Plateau de Sculpteur 1932.jpg|Nu au Plateau de Sculpteur (Nude, Green Leaves and Bust)
</gallery>

<gallery>
Image:Picasso Garçon à la pipe.jpeg|Garçon à la pipe
File:Picasso Dora Maar Au Chat 1941.jpg|Dora Maar Au Chat.
</gallery>

Two of the world's most expensive paintings.

 
[[File:Picasso Head of a Woman.JPG]]

Head of a Woman, sculpture at MOMA.
</center>

==Quotes==
* "I am always doing that which I cannot do, in order that I may learn how to do it." <ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=tnMnO3ZlmgwC&pg=PA157&dq=I+am+always+doing+that+which+I+cannot+do,+in+order+that+I+may+learn+how+to+do+it.&lr=&ei=Ys0_Sq3kFofEywTqno2WBQ Choose peace & happiness P.157] By Susyn Reeve</ref>

*"We all know art is not truth. Art is a lie that makes us realize truth."

{{cquote|

“Cubism is no different from any other school of painting. The same principles and the same elements are common to all. The fact that for a long time cubism has not been understood and that even today there are people who cannot see anything in it, means nothing. I do not read English, and an English book is a blank to me. This does not mean that the English language does not exist, and why should I blame anyone but myself if I cannot understand what I know nothing about?” P. Picasso.
}}

== See also ==
[[Image:Picasso Still-Life with a Pitcher and Apples.jpg|120px|right|Still-Life with a Pitcher and Apples]]
*[[Painting Masterpieces]]
*[[Painting Schools]]
*[[Contemporary painting]]

== External links ==
*[http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/459275/Pablo-Picasso Pablo Picasso], Britannica Online Encyclopedia
*[http://www.allposters.com/gallery.asp?startat=/getthumb.asp&CID=61dafc880c8847fa82a07b4dba32f7f0&sortby=&c=c&page=1&Search=27394 Pablo Picasso], Art Encyclopedia
*[http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/36950780/ns/today-entertainment/ Picasso painting sells for record $106.5 million]
*[http://fundacionpicasso.malaga.eu/opencms/opencms/fundacionpicasso/portal_es/portada Fundación Picasso Málaga.] In Spanish

== References ==
[[File:Picasso Le pigeon aux petits pois 1911.jpg|thumb|Le pigeon aux petits pois, stolen from the Paris Museum of Modern Art in 2010.]]
<references/>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Picasso, Pablo}}

[[Category:Painters|Picasso, Pablo]]
[[Category:Communists|Picasso, Pablo]]

Talk:Essay:Greatest Conservative Songs

2011-06-18T16:25:08Z

TriciaS:

See [http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzZkNDU5MmViNzVjNzkzMDE3NzNlN2MyZjRjYTk4YjE= this]. [[User:Stryker|Stryker]] 10:04, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

: The [[neoconservative]] ''National Review'' list is 95% garbage, not [[conservative]] at all. I only found one tune on the list that should be added ours ("Stand by your man"), and National Review had it at #50.

: The contrast here with ''National Review'' illustrates the need for ''Conservapedia''. But thanks for your link.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:31, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Oops... it seems that I added a bunch of songs from that list. Several of mine (Brick, Red Barchetta, I Can't Drive 55, Sweet Home Alabama, and Revolution 1) were on there. That's interesting, though... the NR person and I thought alike on this one. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 17:16, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Sweet Home Alabama? I love that song (and I'm a liberal)! Revolution's great, too.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 18:29, 17 July 2007 (EDT)

Sorry? Why was my entry for The Fall's Pseud Mag Ed removed? They have always been the great deflators of liberal complacency. What is going on?

: Post a link to the lyrics of the song here and we'll see. Also, please sign your entries by using the signature button in the row above the edit box. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:16, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

Can a song possibly be just a song, rather than a political statement? - BornAgainBrit

: Uh, sure, there are songs that lack any meaning at all. "I wanna hold your hand," for example, is a pleasant jingle from your homeland. I trust we'd agree that it is not the most meaningful song in the world. That tune is fun for reminiscing.

: But surely you don't deny that many songs do have political meaning. [[Liberal]] attempts to deny political bias are familiar to us and no one here is fooled. Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:37, 18 July 2007 (EDT)

The deletion of Bob Dylan's song was not properly explained. Observing that people serve either the devil or the Lord is a conservative observation, and of course Bob Dylan was a born-again Christian who expressed his faith in song (but don't expect [[liberals]] to tell you that).--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:03, 21 July 2007 (EDT)

:I didn't mean to step on any toes, but apathy towards devil worship doesn't seem to me like a very conservative trait. Unfortunately, the verses of the songs don't give us ''any'' meaning whatsoever, so the only meaning we can glean from the song are the four lines of the chorus, three of which are essentially the same :/ [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] 14:06, 21 July 2007 (EDT)

::Paradise by the Dashboard light? I know its a song about having pre-marital sex, but the end is about how it screwed up his life.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 04:45, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

After reading this list, I've gotta ask, just how do you define a 'conservative' song?--[[User:Offeep|Offeep]] 15:27, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

: [[Conservative]] is a term that is well-understood. A "conservative song" reflects some of those values without diluting them with a [[liberal]] message.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:42, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

I can't believe Okie from Muskogie isn't on here. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 23:23, 27 July 2007 (EDT)

I know this is being nitpicky, but I don't like the message of Last Kiss because it seems to suggest a works salvation, that one gets to heaven by doing good rather than accepting Jesus. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 23:30, 27 July 2007 (EDT)

:... and on that note, let's open up a can of [[Mountain Dew]] and get ready to [[Debate:Are we saved by faith or works?]] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:16, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

==Last Kiss==
Somebody just put up "Last Kiss;" actually I recall when it was a hit circa 1964 many adults, parents, teachers and ministers where horrified that a song about death was considered appropriate for young people. My my, how things had changed by 1967.... [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:08, 28 July 2007 (EDT)

Just like 'Teen Angel,' 'Leader of the Pack,' 'Dead Man's Curve,' and 'Tell Laura I Love Her.' [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 00:35, 29 July 2007 (EDT)

==Possible Addition==

Ok, I have a suggestion, but I want some feedback before putting it on the page. I was listening to the radio today, and Another Brick in the Wall by Pink Floyd came on. I was thinking that the song talks about the way that public schools brainwash children and turn them into "bricks" in the wall that is liberal society. In a way, the song is pro-homeschooling, because it's teachers that need to leave the kids alone so that parents can instruct their children correctly. Maybe I'm reaching a bit here, but I wanted to see what you all thought. [[User:SSchultz|SSchultz]] 00:23, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

: I'm open to comments and suggestions about this, but I've never viewed the famous song "another brick in the wall" as conservative. You may be right that the song properly complains about the effect of schooling, but the song doesn't offer any conservative solution that I can see.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 01:10, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

::"Another Brick In The Wall" is more of a neutral song. Its part of a concept album in which the main character slowly seperates himself from society. Most Pink Floyd songs are about madness, due to their original lead singer going insane. [[User:TobyKeet|TobyKeet]] 05:32, 24 November 2010 (EST)

==Love Me, I'm a Liberal==

:I'm glad the commies were thrown out
:Of the A.F.L. C.I.O. board

Hardly sounds like a Communist critique. Have you read all the lyrics of the song? [http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~trent/ochs/lyrics/liberal.html] It's twitting liberals for their supposed concern for others, which is actually sorely lacking. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:14, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

:That song is pure sarcasm and Ochs assumes the role of a 1960s-era (Cold War era) "liberal" to attack them from the extreme left in a sarcastic way. Read the lyrics again, he is attacking the AFL-CIO for throwing out the commies. He is saying liberals aren't far left ''enough''. It's not a conservative song, it's an extreme leftist one. [[User:Parrothead|Parrothead]] 17:22, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

So there's a song on this list about breaking the law 'I can't Drive 55,' and one about obeying the law 'I fought the law.' Which is the conservative value? And the Bobby Fuller Four's version of the latter was the superior version, BTW. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 10:40, 10 September 2007 (EDT)

== Are these truly conservative? ==

While I understand completely some of these songs being on here, I don't really understand the why Bob Dylan, The Beatles, or Ben Folds (Five) would be on this list. These individual songs may be able to be warped into our mindset, but if one truly looks at these, they become overwhelmingly liberal.

For example: The Beatles - Revolution
While this song does indeed talk about how "Carrying pictures of Chairman Mao" will do no good, it also talks about how war and money can't solve problems. In addition, if a child is to read tis and decide to find out more about The Beatles, they will undoubtedly find some intensely liberal themes. The same idea goes for Bob Dylan. Look at any of his other songs. At the same time, Ben Folds does exactly the same thing.

I cannot argue with the songs and parts on this list, but I wonder if this is a slippery slope?
::It's possible that many of these songs were adopted by conservatives, such as Mike Huckabee playing John Cougar Mellencamp's hits. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:48, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: Many of the songs here have a powerful [[conservative]] message, and demonstrate that the music industry does not have to be [[liberal]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:00, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: P.S. [[Liberals]] do say [[conservative]] things from time to time. We're listing songs here, not artists.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:01, 18 February 2008 (EST)

I would just like add that Revolution 1 was written as a reaction against the protesters against the Vietnam War who were getting violent. All Revolution is saying is for the protesters to protest, but not violently, which is still liberal, but a message than other liberal songs. However, for other Beatles songs, they range from being liberal (Why Don't We Do It in the Road?) to be being kind of conservative (Let It Be). Most however, are pretty much neutral. You usually kind Paul McCartney as being more concervative, and Lennon as liberal. [[User:TobyKeet|TobyKeet]] 05:28, 24 November 2010 (EST)

:One problem with the above analysis: Why Don't We Do It In the Road was McCartney's; Lennon was rather famously not involved at all. Personally I've always thought of it as a kind of parody of the free love movement, though apparently that wasn't McCartney's intention. [[User:Ptorquemada|Ptorquemada]] 17:25, 4 April 2011 (EDT)

== In Your Eyes ==

Okay, the song can be considered to be about God, but that alone does not make it conservative. I think Peter Gabriel himself would object to the song's inclusion in this list. --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 15:23, 18 February 2008 (EST)

: Peter Gabriel can object all he likes. "In Your Eyes" appeals to conservative values, as in "a thousand churches." Do you think we should object when a liberal says something conservative???--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:27, 18 February 2008 (EST)
::Religion is not conservative. Fundamentalism is, but not religion. The presence of religion in a song does not make it conservative, even as adherence to religion does not make a person conservative. Look at me, I'm a Christian, but I'm also a communist. Obviously the two are not mutually exclusive. One's personal merely interpersonally-social morals under religion might be more "conservative", in the loosest sense of the term — not conservative, simply somewhat more so — than they would be otherwise; however, that does not automatically make one politically conservative.--[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 15:50, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::: The single best predictor of how conservative someone votes is how often he attends a place of worship of God. Your argument suggesting that you are a counterexample to that correlation means nothing. See point #2 in [[liberal logic]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:04, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::::That wasn't irrelevant at all. Correlation != causation. --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 16:08, 18 February 2008 (EST)
::::Sorry, my edit summary should have been "basic statistical interpretation". --[[User:MakeTomorrow|MakeTomorrow]] 16:09, 18 February 2008 (EST)

::::: Why did you cite your counterexample, if it wasn't an example of the logical fallacy #2 in [[liberal logic]]? Do you really think a counterexample disproves causation?

==Land of Confusion==
Does Genesis' ''Land of Confusion'' belong on the list? I remember the music video portraying Ronald Reagan (in puppet form) as inept, and it parodies several conservative leaders, including Margaret Thatcher, et. al. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|Hello!]] 13:58, 5 March 2009 (EST)

: It's liberal lyric of "too many people" is enough reason to bounce it from the list. Thanks for catching this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:53, 5 March 2009 (EST)

==Should Fortunate Son really be on this list?==

It's vehemently anti-war. Please correct if I'm wrong, but I don't think that's a very conservative belief. [[User:JRobbe|JRobbe]]

:I just looked the lyrics. Pretty confused stuff. I'd agree it's not conservative. Would you like to toss it from the list? Please feel free to do so.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:26, 7 January 2010 (EST)

:Done. [[User:JRobbe|JRobbe]]

== Long Black Train by Josh Turner? ==

To me, this song seems like a good candidate for this list. --[[User:Dfrischknecht|Dfrischknecht]] 07:14, 22 July 2010 (EDT)

== The Decision by Ricky Van Shelton ==

I think this is another good candidate for this list. It's a song about a teenage girl who gives in to peer pressure and gets pregnant and the consequences of that action. --[[User:Dfrischknecht|Dfrischknecht]] 09:02, 22 July 2010 (EDT)

== New Agey ==

I removed the new agey phrase of "the cycle of life, death and rebirth," for the "Lightning Crashes," by Live, but feel free to discuss here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:23, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

: That wasn't meant to seem "new agey" in the least, but I do understand what you're saying. The song presents a view of life as being cyclical, as the baby is being born an old woman dies, and "The confusion that was hers belongs now to the baby down the hall." I think the lyrics really speak to the significance of life (not just at childbirth), but as a whole. I don't think the song is necessarily about the old woman being reincarnated as the newborn child, but it definitely seems to speak of the circle of life.[[User:JaneX|JaneX]] 15:56, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

:: Perhaps a rewording would work then? How about replacing "the cycle of life, death and rebirth" with "the joy of childbirth in contrast with the end of life"?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:59, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

::: I agree that a rewording would work, thank you for working with me. Perhaps we could just say that the song celebrates the significance of life from birth until death, almost in an as one door closes another opens kind of way? [[User:JaneX|JaneX]] 20:00, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

== Song idea ==

"One Man, One Woman" sung by ABBA. Indirectly a tribute to traditional marriage and monogamy.--[[User:TedM|TedM]] 12:14, 12 January 2011 (EST)

: Sounds good by the title, so how about adding it where you think it would be appropriate in the list? Thanks for your insight.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:17, 12 January 2011 (EST)

== Takin' Care of Business ==

This song by BTO is on the list for supporting "Hard work ethic", but its not. The refrain is jokingly ironic. "I love to work at nothing all day; and I've been taking care of business"

The body of the song describes a more easy going life just making music rather than waking up early, catching trains for work, etc.

I'm not saying it makes the song liberal, and not sure why its even necessary to classify songs along political lines, but it sure as heck ain't about working hard.
I'd suggest if someone wants to keep it here because its a good song, and if people can only enjoy it because it conforms to their political views, than change the reason to "Mike Huckabee performed the song" [comment by AndrewJackson]

:You left out how the song praises the self-employed, which is a very conservative, hard-working group of people.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:55, 21 March 2011 (EDT)

::Fair enough, but the praise you speak of is "If you ever get annoyed [with, based on earlier lyrics, either your traditional job or the unpleasant commute involved], look at me, I'm self-employed; I love to work at nothing all day." That could be taken as either "I made so much money as an entepreneur that I no longer need to work" or "My official job title is 'Bum'." Neither one of them really expresses admiration for "hard work" in its own right, though the former is certainly a more positive role model than the latter. I do ''like'' the song, but I'm not entirely sanguine about considering it "conservative." [[User:Ptorquemada|Ptorquemada]] 17:36, 4 April 2011 (EDT)

== Adonai My Lord ==

I'm going to delete this song from the list, as it is from the atheistic industrial metal genre. The lyrics reflect a sort of militant Christianity that does not reflect well on the religion as a whole. For example, this group has a song called "Christf---"...obviously they are not conservative. [[User:DennyW66|DennyW66]] 01:14, 23 March 2011 (EDT)

==No U2?==

Surely -- despite the band's liberal leanings -- one of U2's unashamedly Christian songs should make it in. Gloria seems the obvious choice. The chorus, you may remember, goes: "Gloria, in te domine/ Gloria, exultate/ Gloria, Gloria/ Oh Lord, loosen my lips." --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 12:34, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
:Agreed. Gloria is definitely a good choice. Perhaps "40"; its lyrics are directly lifted from Psalm 40. [[User:DennyW66|DennyW66]] 12:43, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
::You're kidding right? [http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/us-election/u2-honoured-to-be-involved-with-obama-celebrations-14145757.html Conservative indeed..] [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:06, 28 March 2011 (EDT)
:::Bono has had a relationship with every President since Clinton; for instance, he worked with Bush on issues relating to Africa and AIDS awareness. The band is very Christian and in no way ashamed of their Christianity. And, rare for rock stars, three of the four members of the band are married family men. They are known for their charitableness and philanthropy, which are of course [[conservative]] traits. Without a doubt, U2 is a conservative, Christian band and they should have representation on this list. [[User:DennyW66|DennyW66]] 22:21, 28 March 2011 (EDT)

::::''Gloria'''s a good choice, please add it if you agree. But U2 became increasingly liberal the more media attention it obtained.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:07, 29 March 2011 (EDT)

:::::Maybe it's possible to be Christian and pro-family, and yet left-leaning politically. Anyway, I vote for "Beautiful Day" ... The heart is a bloom / Shoots up through the stony ground / But there's no room / No space to rent in this town

:::::Reminds me of how inhospitable this fallen world can be to the spirits of believers trying to lead a godly life in the midst of a secular world which often seems to be ruled by the devil (John 12:31). Yet God's love is there, like sunshine! --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:53, 29 March 2011 (EDT)

== Brothers in Arms - Dure Straits ==

I would like to suggest Brothers in Arms by Dire Straits. It's about war and having ones "brother's in arms" in support. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:32, 4 April 2011 (EDT)
:If there is no argument to it's inclusion I'll add it soon. Let me know your thoughts though...[[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:42, 5 April 2011 (EDT)

== YMCA? ==

I'd always heard that the Village People's YMCA was about [[homosexual]] men seducing other men? That doesn't sound very [[conservative]] to me. Is this just a rumor? --[[User:JustinD|JustinD]] 12:45, 12 May 2011 (EDT)
:This was obviously added as a joke, and no one else seems to have realized it! [[User:TriciaS|TriciaS]] 12:25, 18 June 2011 (EDT)

== Really? Have You Looked Into These Songs? ==

I'd just like to say that I think it's really jacked that you're going around and trying to SAY what these songs mean. For example, Metallica is NOT a conservative band. James Hetfield was a heavy drinker until he went to rehab, Kirk Hammett suffered from drug addiction during his teen years, and if you listen to any other song you hear that they are NOT a conservative band.

Furthermore, Journey is NOT a conservative band. Steve Perry openly voted for Obama in 2008. --[[User:Beanna|Beanna]] 20:04, 24 May 2011 (EDT)

: This isn't a list of conservative bands. It's a list of conservative ''songs''. Even liberals are capable of occasionally singing a conservative song.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:19, 24 May 2011 (EDT)

== An idea... ==

I was looking at this list and realised that most of the songs listed here are big hit numbers. I was thinking that it might be interesting to look at whether the more conservative a song is the better it does on the charts. Even though the artist might be liberal it seems there bigger hits are in fact conservative songs! Maybe by charting something like this we could prove that people respond better to the conservative message and perhaps change the minds of some liberal singers. Just an idea. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 20:31, 27 May 2011 (EDT)
:We could add the respective chart ranking to this page and then collate the results by rank and date. Perhaps, like the conservative words, we might even see the same pattern repeated here! [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 20:48, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

::Great idea!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:01, 27 May 2011 (EDT)
:::It'll be a big project though so it'll be awhile for me to collate the results but I fear that we'll find that the majority of new hits are liberal in nature (particulalry coming from M&M and Usher etc) but I think that is because of the "hollywood" influence. Interestingly artists distanced from "fame" have better messages and ''still'' produce amazing hits. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:11, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

== From a youngin' ==

Citizen/Soldier by 3 Doors Down. I don't know about the band themselves, but any song that supports the National Guard should be listed here, in my honest option. If no one minds, I'll add it.

= Wish you were here =

This is a good list of songs, but as far as I know, ''Wish you were here'' (the title track, along with the entire eponymous album) was not dedicated to a conservative president, but rather to ex-Pink Floyd member Syd Barrett. --[[User:LeonardO|Leo-from-UK]] 19:19, 16 June 2011 (EDT)

Congress of Vienna

2011-06-18T14:01:17Z

TriciaS: rmv commas

The '''Congress of Vienna''' was a conference held in [[Vienna]] between the major powers from September 1814 to June 1815. In the middle [[Napoleon]] returned from exile. The conferees agreed to raise vast armies against him and, after 100 days, he was defeated at Waterloo. The Conference then resumed.

The victors decided how to liquidate the Napoleonic system and restore the conservatives to their thrones. Central players were Lord [[Castlereagh]] of Great Britain, Prince [[Metternich]] of Austria, and Prince [[Talleyrand]] of France. Many other dignitaries attended, including Emperor Francis I of Austria; Tsar Alexander I of Russia; King Frederick William III of Prussia; the Kings of Denmark, Bavaria, and Württemberg; the Duke of Wellington; and Baron Wilhelm von Humboldt, among many others. The [[Ottoman Empire]] and the United States were not invited, but all the other European nations were there.

The purpose of the Congress was to work out a peaceful solution to the disruptions of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars (Napoleon was in exile on Elba when it started); and reinforce the pre-war status quo regarding the Balance of Power in Europe.

The delegates followed two guiding principles: legitimate ruling families had to be restored to their thrones (and illegitimate ones put in by Napoleon removed); secondly, when old boundaries could not be restored compensation would be paid in terms of new territories. The goal was to restore traditions and achieve a stable balance of power.

==Long-term results==
The resulting "Vienna system", or '''"Concert of Europe"'' successfully brought peace to Europe by means of firm, premeditated identification and elimination (or containment) of causes of war. The old instability gave way to political equilibrium and consensus, dynastic politics exited the international scene and wars of succession were eliminated, bellicose values bowed to the rule of peace and law, and effective, institutionalized machinery for international relations overcame the lack of viable solutions for interstate problems.<ref> See Schroeder (1996)</ref>

The backward-looking delegates seriously underestimated the emerging force of nationalism, which was rapidly transforming many countries. People saw their nation and its culture and language as more meaningful to their nation than ruling families. However, Metternich, the Austrian chancellor, considered nationalism a cover for revolution and sought to curb its development through reactionary repression.

By 1848, however, nationalism was a powerful force. The Vienna system did keep the peace in 1848 but was breaking down because it was increassingly was incompatible with the goals of [[Prussia]]. Hostile acts and decay permitted the triumph of 19th-century Realpolitik, typified by [[Otto von Bismark]] and the revival of more sinister versions of former causes of war.

The success of Vienna in 1815 can be contrasted with the failures at Paris in 1919. to guarantee peace. The Congress of Vienna abandoned the kind of revenge, and retribution that had prevailed in Europe before 1815, but the Paris Peace Conference reintroduced these themes at the treaty level in its punishment of Germany. The contracting parties at the Congress of Vienna were strong and willing to enforce their will and decisions. The opposite was true following the Paris Conference, as Germany rearmed and threatened its neighbors.

==Decisions==
The main provisions of the final Treaty of Vienna were:
# Austria would surrender Belgium to the [[History of the Netherlands|Netherlands]], receiving in compensation the Italian provinces of Lombardy and Venetia, and the Illyrian provinces along the Adriatic Sea. Austria also regained the Tirol, but lost its Polish provinces.
# Hapsburg royals were given the thrones of Parma, Modena, and Tuscany in northern Italy.
# [[Prussia]] gained Swedish Pomerania, two fifths of Saxony, and additional territory along the Rhine River, in addition to recovering Posen (part of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw) and some other territories which Napoleon had taken.
# [[History of Russia|Russia]] took the greater part of [[History of Poland|Poland]], later known as "Congress Poland," and obtained Finland from Sweden and Bessarabia from the Ottoman Empire.
# Sweden was compensated with Norway, which was taken from Denmark to punish the latter for persistent loyalty to Napoleon.
# Britain kept nearly all its colonial conquests, securing permanent control from the Netherlands of Cape Colony in southern Africa, Ceylon, and part of Guiana; it also obtained Helgoland, part of Honduras, the Ionian Islands, and the islands of Malta, Mauritius, St. Lucia, Tobago, and Trinidad.<ref>At the same time Britain retained control of Canada but failed to establish an Indian buffer state in the Ohio-Indiana-Michigan area when it failed to win the [{War of 1812]] with the United States.</ref>
# France, now under Bourbon King Louis XVIII, was dealt with in the second Treaty of Paris, in November 1815. All the Napoleonic imperial conquests were removed, and France returned to its 1790 frontiers. France was required to pay an indemnity of 700,000,000 francs and to support an occupation army for five years.
# The Bourbon kings were restored in Spain and in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, while the Kingdom of Sardinia was permitted to incorporate the former Republic of Genoa.
# The pope regained his temporal possessions.
# The neutrality of Switzerland, an independent confederation of 22 cantons, was guaranteed.
# The [[Holy Roman Empire]], which Napoleon ended in 1806, was not restored.
# A Germanic Confederation was created, consisting of 38 states. It was to have a Diet of representatives chosen by the ruling princes and presided over by Austria, which largely dictated the policies of the Confederation.
# The Congress expressed a desire for reforms relating to the abolition of the Atlantic [[Slavery|slave trade]], the opening of international rivers such as the Danube and the Rhine to free commerce and navigation, and the regulation of the rights of precedence among diplomatic representatives.

==Further reading==
* Kissinger, Henry. ''A World Restored: Metternich, Castlereagh and the Problems of Peace 1812-22''. (1957)
* Kissinger, Henry. ''Diplomacy'' (1994)
* Lawday, David. ''Napoleon's Master: A Life of Prince Talleyrand‎'' (2007) 386 pages [http://books.google.com/books?id=kJOxHeWgTOUC&pg=PA274&dq=%22congress+of+vienna%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=1&as_miny_is=2000&as_maxm_is=12&as_maxy_is=2009&num=30&as_brr=3&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpts and text search]
* Nicolson, Harold. ''The Congress of Vienna: A Study in Allied Unity, 1812-1822‎'' (1945); 320 pages; [http://books.google.com/books?id=ZTC3IWC_py8C&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22congress+of+vienna%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=1&as_miny_is=2000&as_maxm_is=12&as_maxy_is=2009&num=30&as_brr=3&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpts and text search]
* Schroeder, Paul. '' The Transformation of European Politics 1763-1848'' (1996) 920 pages; advanced history by a conservative scholar; [http://books.google.com/books?id=BS2z3iGPCigC&pg=PA517&dq=%22congress+of+vienna%22+inauthor:paul+inauthor:schroeder&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=1&as_miny_is=1980&as_maxm_is=12&as_maxy_is=2009&num=30&as_brr=3&as_pt=ALLTYPES excerpt and text search]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:European History]]
[[Category:Diplomacy]]
[[Category:Napoleonic Wars]]

Dexter

2011-06-18T13:48:42Z

TriciaS: bold title

'''''Dexter''''' is a TV series on [[Showtime]], about a crime detective who moonlights as a serial killer who murders other serial killers and disposes of them by cutting up body parts into plastic bags. The show has many female characters that have very unfeminine behaviors, and Dexter himself is an [[atheist]]. Considering these factors, and the fact that the show glorifies a ruthless serial killer, it appeals to [[liberals]] and it is obvious that it is written by liberals. However, the show does depict ''normal people'' being religious, and although Dexter is glorified as a serial killer, the show downplays other criminals, liars, murders, and adulterers. In the very first episode of the series, Dexter criticizes adultery.

Conservative media watchdogs have criticized the show as perverse but liberal television critics give their approval. <ref>[http://www.mrc.org/BozellColumns/entertainmentcolumn/2006/col20061005.asp TV’s Serial Killer Chic, MRC, October 15, 2006]</ref>

==References==
<references/>
[[Category:Television Shows]]