Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

United States Department of Education

2011-03-17T03:46:21Z

WillS:

The '''United States Department of Education,''' or ED for short, is a [[US]] Cabinet-level department. Over the 31 years since it's creation by liberal failure [[Jimmy Carter]], the ED has systematically and unconstitutionally intruded on the freedom of the States, promoted [[liberal]]-style '[[multiculturalism]]' and racist [[affirmative action]] programs, discriminated against [[Christians]] working in local schools and promoted the secular, [[atheist]] ideology which is one of the main factors behind the decline of educational standards in both primary and secondary education. The current [[Secretary of Education]] is Chicago thug [[Arne Duncan]].

[[category:United States Department of Education]]

==Purpose==

The mission of the Department of Education, as described on its website, is "to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access. It engages in four major types of activities:

-Establishes policies related to federal education funding, administers distribution of funds and monitors their use.

-Collects data and oversees research on America's schools.

-Identifies major issues in education and focuses national attention on them.

-Enforces federal laws prohibiting discrimination in programs that receive federal funds.<ref>http://www2.ed.gov/about/what-we-do.html</ref>"

Conservatives critics allege that not only is the mission of the ED unconstitutional, but a waste of the $64 billion the Department spends every year (since local schools and state voters are not only Constitutionally allowed, but in fact better suited, to make decisions regarding their own children's education).<ref>http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/budget.pdf</ref>

==Controversies==

The federal role in education is a violation of the 10th amendment of the United States Constitution which states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Nowhere in the Constitution is the federal government delegated the power to regulate or fund elementary or secondary education.<ref>http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html</ref> In general, the existence of the Department of Education is indicative of the growing size of government, far beyond what the Founding Fathers intended for the Executive Branch. However, several conservative critics have pointed out that the ED is even ''more'' illegal (and unnecessary) than many of the other Executive branches, since unlike regulating transportation (Department of Transportation) or the environment (Environmental Protection Agency), grade school education is not typically commercial ''or'' interstate.

The Home School Legal Defense Foundation, in particular, has done research on the toxic effect the ED has had on public school achievement. The Foundation found that since the Department of Education was created, per-pupil spending has nearly doubled, while SAT scores have dropped by 35 points, a third more college freshmen require remedial classes, and literacy rates have dropped by more than 6%.<ref>http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000000/00000063.asp</ref>

2) Specific Issues
a) Anti-Christian Bias
b) 'Multiculturalism'
c) Affirmative Action

When the Department of Education was founded in 1979 liberal supporters pledged that the Department would be relatively small, with a budget of less than $15 billion and only 100 employees. Today, however, the ED enjoys a budget of $63.7 and employs nearly 6,000 people.<ref>http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/index.html</ref> The education spending rate since the department’s founding has risen six times as fast as non-defense discretionary programs (59% versus 8%).

3) Incidents
a) Shotgun Buy
b) Obama Speech

4) Quotes

Even Democratic big-government liberal have admitted that the Department of Education is a failure.

"This is a back-room deal, born out of a squalid politics. Everything we had thought we would not see happening to education is happening here.” Senator Patrick Moynihan (D-NY)<ref>http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=4518</ref>

“No matter what anyone says, the Department of Education will not just write checks to local school boards. They will meddle in everything. I do not want that.” Representative Pat Schroeder (D-CO)<ref>http://www.etherzone.com/2010/bren092210.shtml</ref>

“A national Department may actually impede the innovation of local programs as it attempts to establish uniformity throughout the Nation.” Representative Joseph Early (D-MA)<ref>http://www.etherzone.com/2010/bren092210.shtml</ref>

“We will be minimizing the roles of local and State education officials; we should recognize that the States are responsible for the education policies of the children in the is country.” Representative Shirley Chisholm (D-NY)<ref>http://www.hs.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=139765369372171</ref>

==Conservative Proposals==

Since the Reagan campaign in 1980, Conservatives have proposed numerous policy changes to address the flaws with the American education system. Most involve giving responsibility for education back to the only entity with Constitutional power to legislate on the issue- the states- and abolishing the Department of Education. Unfortunately, like Reagan's pledge to dismantle the Department of Education, liberals in the House of Representitives have been able to block these attempts to enforce the Constitution.<ref>http://www.pbs.org/newshour/backgrounders/department_of_education.html</ref>

The 1996 GOP Presidential Platform contained the lines:

''Our formula is as simple as it is sweeping: The federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in school curricula or to control jobs in the workplace. That is why we will abolish the Department of Education, end federal meddling in our schools, and promote family choice at all levels of learning.''

''We therefore call for prompt repeal of the Goals 2000 program and the School-To-Work Act of 1994, which put new federal controls, as well as unfunded mandates, on the States. We further urge that federal attempts to impose outcome- or performance-based education on local schools be ended.<ref>[http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=27895 Worldnet Daily; Department of Education must be abolished]</ref>''

During the Presidency of [[George W. Bush]], the Republican effort to abolish the Department of Education was temporarily halted. Bush massively expanded Federal intrusion into local school districts with [[No Child Left Behind ]], a move which dismayed many conservatives. With the advent of the [[TEA Party]] in 2009-2010, however, the movement has again begun to grow and may in fact gain the power needed to achieve it's goals in the massive TEA Party victories expected in the [[2010 Midterm Elections]].

== References ==
----

<references/>

Woodpecker

2011-03-17T03:44:41Z

WillS: evidence for creation

[[Image:Woodpecker.jpg|right|250px|thumb|An acorn woodpecker.]]
A '''woodpecker''' is a [[bird]] that pounds its [[beak]] into a [[tree]]'s surface to find [[food]].<ref>http://www.defenders.org/wildlife_and_habitat/wildlife/woodpeckers.php</ref> There are 21 species of woodpeckers in the United States. <ref>Internet Center for Wildlife Damage Management, ''WOODPECKERS'', by Rex E. Marsh, 2005 [http://icwdm.org/handbook/birds/woodpeckers.asp]</ref>

== Evidence against [[Evolution]] ==
The skull of the woodpecker is uniquely suited to absorb the intense shocks generated by its feeding habits. If the skull was weaker at some point in the past, the bird could not have fed in such a manner. But if the bird didn't feed in such a manner, then why would it have 'evolved' a thicker skull? [[Liberals]] can't answer questions like this, which is why they resort to silencing the opposition with harassment and vandalism!

== References ==
<references/>
== External Links ==
http://creagrus.home.montereybay.com/woodpeckers.html

[[Category:Birds]]

User talk:Martyp

2011-03-17T03:41:21Z

WillS: /* Helping out */

{{cquote|<big><big><big>Where Free Unions and Collective Bargaining are Forbidden, Freedom is Lost.</big></big></big>}}

{{cquote|<big><big><big>Collective bargaining in the years since has played a major role in America’s economic miracle. Unions represent some of the freest institutions in this land. There are few finer examples of participatory democracy to be found anywhere. </big></big></big>}} -[[Ronald Reagan]], 1980.

{{Welcome|sig=--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 18:52, 5 November 2010 (EDT)}}

== -elect category ==

That is lots of work....but remember it needs to be emptied shortly after the first of the year when they no longer will be ____elect! --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 00:38, 7 November 2010 (EDT)

== conflict over [[Obama]] article ==

Hi Marty,

I temporarily blocked you just as a notice to resolve the conflict you seem to be having with another user over the [[Obama]] article. How about we settle the issue about the authorization of oil drilling on the [[Talk:Barack_Hussein_Obama|talk page]] instead of constantly reverting each other's edits? [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 17:55, 1 January 2011 (EST)
:>I'm not interested in edit-warring either--I'll allow the more senior admins to rule on the issue. Cheers! [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 20:08, 1 January 2011 (EST)
::That would be appropriate. Just be sure to raise your concerns on one of their talk pages or the talk page for the article to make sure that everyone remembers. Thanks! [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 21:06, 1 January 2011 (EST)

== [[Hernan Lara Zavala]] ==

Thank you! --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 13:31, 30 January 2011 (EST)

== Thanks ==

...for undoing the troll. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 18:26, 3 February 2011 (EST)
:Not a problem. Would be easier without going through the captcha each time. [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 18:28, 3 February 2011 (EST)

== Good stuff ==

My job is more of a speaking position than a writing position, I appreciate your help on the [[Sarah Palin]] article. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 21:30, 8 February 2011 (EST)
:A pleasure. I live to edit. [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 22:03, 8 February 2011 (EST)

== Nice ==

Will you be celebrating Fidel's 100th birthday in 2026? --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 09:45, 7 March 2011 (EST)
:Of course not. He's dead. [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 17:27, 7 March 2011 (EST)

==Vandalism==
thanks for helping me deal with all that vandalism, it looks like someone got into my account and strated messing it all up. [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 16:00, 11 March 2011 (EST)

== Helping out ==

Thanks for adding links to the articles I've been editing. I appreciate the help from someone who is much more wiki-savvy than I!
--[[User:WillS|WillS]] 23:41, 16 March 2011 (EDT)

User talk:Martyp

2011-03-17T03:41:02Z

WillS: /* Helping out */ new section

Real America

2011-03-17T03:37:05Z

WillS:

'''Real America''' is a term used by [[Sarah Palin]] and others to describe the real spirit and attitude of the [[United States]]. "Real America" generally refers to small-town values, [[gun rights|gun ownership]], religious followers, and [[conservative]] ideology. [[John McCain]] used the term to describe citizens in central [[Pennsylvania]], whereas Palin used the term in [[South Carolina]] (at least). [[Liberal]]s do not believe in this term and do not acknowledge that small towns are the core of the country.

Primarily, [[red state]]s can be considered Real America, thought an extremely small number of towns in [[blue state]]s (usually not close to cities) can be described this way (since small-town values often take precedence over corrupting liberal beliefs).
[[Category:United States]]

Alcoholism

2011-03-17T03:34:26Z

WillS:

'''Drunkenness''', often referred to as 'alcoholism' by bible-denying pagan liberals, refers to [[addiction]] to [[Alcoholic Drinks|alcoholic beverages]]. The medical term used to refer to drunkenness is ''alcohol dependence''. A person can be diagnosed with alcohol dependence if at least three of these criteria occur during the same 12-month span: (a) tolerance (i.e., more alcohol is needed to produce the same effect); (b) alcohol withdrawal; (c) alcohol is used in larger amounts or over longer periods than intended (i.e., loss of control); (d) chronic desire or unsuccessful attempts to reduce drinking; (e) a great deal of time is spent obtaining or using alcohol; (f) other activities are reduced in order to use or recover from using alcohol; (g) drinking continues despite persistent problems that it either causes or makes worse<ref>American Psychiatric Association (1994). ''Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders'', Fourth Edition. APA, Washington, D.C.</ref>.

==Health and other effects==
Drunkards have difficulty controlling their drinking, and thus tend to continue to drink despite problems that it causes. For example, being intoxicated or hung over can cause poor performance at school or work, leading to poor grades or loss of employment. Intoxication also impairs judgment, which may lead to legal problems when people engage in behaviors that they would think better of when sober (e.g., driving under the influence). Drunkenness can also be damaging to the family, leading to marital discord or divorce, and can contribute to [[domestic violence]].

Alcohol intoxication is commonly associated with crime; in cases where husbands murder their wives, about 66% of the cases involved drinking.<ref>http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/spousfac.pr</ref>

Chronic, heavy drinking also causes a number of health problems, including cirrhosis of the liver, heart disease, cancer, pancreatitis, sexual dysfunction, and alcohol-induced dementia.

==Alcohol withdrawal==
As noted above, alcohol withdrawal is a primary feature of drunkenness. Withdrawal can occur when a person who is normally a heavy drinker tries to quit or is unable to obtain alcohol. Unlike withdrawal from other drugs, alcohol withdrawal can lead directly to death. Heavy drinking reduces the brain's supply of [[GABA]]. Both alcohol and GABA limit the firing of [[synapse]]s in the brain. When neither is present in sufficient amounts, uncontrolled firing of synapses may occur, causing [[delirium tremens]] ("the DTs"). Symptoms of delirium tremens include hallucinations, convulsions, seizures, and heart failure. Delirium tremens can be controlled fairly easily with medical supervision, often with the use of [[benzodiazepine]]s.

==Treatment==
A number of treatments are available for drunkards, including detoxification, [[psychotherapy]], self-help groups, and medications.

'''Detoxification''' is an abrupt cessation of drinking, often accompanied by medications such as [[benzodiazepine]]s to minimize withdrawal symptoms. Detoxification helps a person to cope with the physiological effects of chronic heavy drinking, but does not help with issues such as urges to drink or underlying reasons for alcohol dependence. Consequently, additional treatment is usually required for a successful outcome.

'''Psychotherapy''' for alcohol dependence can occur in individual or group format. This treatment helps an individual to be aware of underlying issues that may have led or contributed to drunkenness (e.g., depression). Psychotherapy also provides an individual with skills to help prevent relapse, such as avoiding situations in which not drinking would be difficult.

'''Self-help groups''' are commonly used by drunkards. The best known is [[Alcoholics Anonymous]], in which members acknowledge their problems with alcohol and provide support for other members.

'''Medications''' are often used to discourage alcohol use. ''Antabuse'' (disulfiram) interrupts the metabolization of alcohol, increasing the amount of acetaldehyde in the body and leading to substantial hangover symptoms shortly after drinking and discouraging those who have taken the medication from drinking. ''Naltrexone'' is a medication that binds to opioid receptors in the brain, decreasing alcohol cravings and promoting abstinence.

'''[[Faith]] in [[God]]''': The Christian group [[Teen Challenge]] reported the following:
{{Cquote|Teen Challenge claims of a 70% cure rate for the drug addicts graduating from their program attracted the attention of the U.S. Federal Government in 1973. Most secular drug rehabilitation programs only experienced a cure rate of 1-15% of their graduates. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), part of the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, funded the first year of this study to evaluate the long term results of the Teen Challenge program.<ref>http://teenchallengeusa.com/studies2.php</ref>}}

Teen Challenge has a number of studies that indicate the high effectiveness of their drug treatment program compared to other programs.<ref>http://teenchallengeusa.com/studies.php</ref>

==See also==

*[[Alcohol abuse]]
*[[American Medical Association]]
*[[Doctor]]

==References==
<references/>
[[Category:Medicine]]

Alcoholics Anonymous

2011-03-17T03:33:58Z

WillS: fighting secularized language

'''Alcoholics Anonymous''' is a program created to help drunkards on the path to recovery from [[alcoholism|drunkenness]]. Founded on June 10th, 1935 in Akron, [[Ohio]] by Bill W. and Dr. Bob, it utilizes a twelve step program to help those suffering from [[alcoholic drink|alcohol]] [[addiction]] to overcome their addiction, relying on [[faith]] in a "higher power". Both Wilson and Smith were members of the Oxford Group, a Christian reform movement started by Lutheran minister Frank Buchman, until about 1939 when the book "Alcoholics Anonymous" was published.

== The Twelve Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous ==
#We admitted we were powerless over alcohol—that our lives had become unmanageable.
#Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.
#Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.
#Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.
#Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.
#Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.
#Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.
#Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.
#Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.
#Continued to take personal inventory and when we were wrong promptly admitted it.
#Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God, as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and the power to carry that out.
#Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these Steps, we tried to carry this message to drunkards, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

==The Success of 12-Step Programs==
The inclusiveness and support of 12-step programs has led to the model being extended to other addictions, such as narcotics, gambling, and illicit sex.

==Higher Power==
The "higher power" cited in Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12-step groups does not necessarily refer to [[God]]. The phrase "God ''as we understood Him''" allows members to choose other gods or "powers" to help them in their recovery. However, the [[Christian]] foundation of A.A. is evident by the inclusion of several quotes from the bible in the book "Alcoholics Anonymous" and the use of the terms "Father" and "Creator" when referring to God.

==Prayers of Alcoholics Anonymous==
The Third Step Prayer

"God, I offer myself to Thee- to build with me and to do with me as Thou wilt. Relieve me of the bondage of self that I may better do Thy will. Take away my difficulties, that victory over them may bear witness to those I would help of Thy Power, Thy Love, and Thy Way of life. May I do Thy will always!"

The Seventh Step Prayer

"My Creator, I am now willing that you should have all of me, good and bad. I pray that you now remove from me every single defect of character that stands in the way of my usefulness to you and my fellows. Grant me strength, as I go out from here, to do your bidding. Amen."

The Eleventh Step Prayer (The prayer of St. Francis of Assisi)

"Lord, make me a channel of thy peace - that where there is hatred, I may bring love- that where there is wrong, I may bring the spirit of forgiveness- that where there is discord, I may bring harmony- that where there is error, I may bring truth- that where there is doubt, I may bring faith- that where there is despair, I may bring hope- that where there are shadows, I may bring light- that where there is sadness, I may bring joy. Lord grant that I may seek rather to comfort than to be comforted- to undersand than to be understood- to love, than to be loved. For it is by self-forgetting that one finds. It is by forgiving that one is forgiven. It is by dying that one awakens to Eternal Life. Amen"

==Guiding Principles==
The Twelve Traditions of Alcoholics Anonymous.
#Our common welfare should come first; personal recovery depends upon A.A. unity.
#For our group purpose there is but one ultimate authority - a loving God as He may express Himself in our group conscience. Our leaders are but trusted servants; they do not govern.
#The only requirement for A.A. membership is a desire to stop drinking.
#Each group should be autonomous except in matters affecting other groups or A.A. as a whole.
#Each group has but one primary purpose-to carry its message to the alcoholic who still suffers.
#An A.A. group ought never endorse, finance or lend the A.A. name to any related facility or outside enterprise, lest problems of money, property and prestige divert us from our primary purpose.
#Every A.A. group ought to be fully self-supporting, declining outside contributions.
#Alcoholics Anonymous should remain forever nonprofessional, but our service centers may employ special workers.
#A.A., as such, ought never be organized; but we may create service boards or committees directly responsible to those they serve.
#Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the A.A. name ought never be drawn into public controversy.
#Our public relations policy is based on attraction rather than promotion; we need always maintain personal anonymity at the level of press, radio and films.
#Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our traditions, ever reminding us to place principles before personalities.

==See also==
*[[Serenity Prayer]]

==External Links==
http://www.alcoholics-anonymous.org/

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Organizations]]

Alcoholism

2011-03-17T03:33:05Z

WillS: fighting secularized language

'''Drunkenness''', often referred to as 'alcoholism' by bible-denying pagan liberals, refers to [[addiction]] to [[Alcoholic Drinks|alcoholic beverages]]. The medical term used to refer to alcoholism is ''alcohol dependence''. A person can be diagnosed with alcohol dependence if at least three of these criteria occur during the same 12-month span: (a) tolerance (i.e., more alcohol is needed to produce the same effect); (b) alcohol withdrawal; (c) alcohol is used in larger amounts or over longer periods than intended (i.e., loss of control); (d) chronic desire or unsuccessful attempts to reduce drinking; (e) a great deal of time is spent obtaining or using alcohol; (f) other activities are reduced in order to use or recover from using alcohol; (g) drinking continues despite persistent problems that it either causes or makes worse<ref>American Psychiatric Association (1994). ''Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders'', Fourth Edition. APA, Washington, D.C.</ref>.

==Health and other effects==
Drunkards have difficulty controlling their drinking, and thus tend to continue to drink despite problems that it causes. For example, being intoxicated or hung over can cause poor performance at school or work, leading to poor grades or loss of employment. Intoxication also impairs judgment, which may lead to legal problems when people engage in behaviors that they would think better of when sober (e.g., driving under the influence). Drunkenness can also be damaging to the family, leading to marital discord or divorce, and can contribute to [[domestic violence]].

Alcohol intoxication is commonly associated with crime; in cases where husbands murder their wives, about 66% of the cases involved drinking.<ref>http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/spousfac.pr</ref>

Chronic, heavy drinking also causes a number of health problems, including cirrhosis of the liver, heart disease, cancer, pancreatitis, sexual dysfunction, and alcohol-induced dementia.

==Alcohol withdrawal==
As noted above, alcohol withdrawal is a primary feature of drunkenness. Withdrawal can occur when a person who is normally a heavy drinker tries to quit or is unable to obtain alcohol. Unlike withdrawal from other drugs, alcohol withdrawal can lead directly to death. Heavy drinking reduces the brain's supply of [[GABA]]. Both alcohol and GABA limit the firing of [[synapse]]s in the brain. When neither is present in sufficient amounts, uncontrolled firing of synapses may occur, causing [[delirium tremens]] ("the DTs"). Symptoms of delirium tremens include hallucinations, convulsions, seizures, and heart failure. Delirium tremens can be controlled fairly easily with medical supervision, often with the use of [[benzodiazepine]]s.

==Treatment==
A number of treatments are available for drunkards, including detoxification, [[psychotherapy]], self-help groups, and medications.

'''Detoxification''' is an abrupt cessation of drinking, often accompanied by medications such as [[benzodiazepine]]s to minimize withdrawal symptoms. Detoxification helps a person to cope with the physiological effects of chronic heavy drinking, but does not help with issues such as urges to drink or underlying reasons for alcohol dependence. Consequently, additional treatment is usually required for a successful outcome.

'''Psychotherapy''' for alcohol dependence can occur in individual or group format. This treatment helps an individual to be aware of underlying issues that may have led or contributed to drunkenness (e.g., depression). Psychotherapy also provides an individual with skills to help prevent relapse, such as avoiding situations in which not drinking would be difficult.

'''Self-help groups''' are commonly used by drunkards. The best known is [[Alcoholics Anonymous]], in which members acknowledge their problems with alcohol and provide support for other members.

'''Medications''' are often used to discourage alcohol use. ''Antabuse'' (disulfiram) interrupts the metabolization of alcohol, increasing the amount of acetaldehyde in the body and leading to substantial hangover symptoms shortly after drinking and discouraging those who have taken the medication from drinking. ''Naltrexone'' is a medication that binds to opioid receptors in the brain, decreasing alcohol cravings and promoting abstinence.

'''[[Faith]] in [[God]]''': The Christian group [[Teen Challenge]] reported the following:
{{Cquote|Teen Challenge claims of a 70% cure rate for the drug addicts graduating from their program attracted the attention of the U.S. Federal Government in 1973. Most secular drug rehabilitation programs only experienced a cure rate of 1-15% of their graduates. The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), part of the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, funded the first year of this study to evaluate the long term results of the Teen Challenge program.<ref>http://teenchallengeusa.com/studies2.php</ref>}}

Teen Challenge has a number of studies that indicate the high effectiveness of their drug treatment program compared to other programs.<ref>http://teenchallengeusa.com/studies.php</ref>

==See also==

*[[Alcohol abuse]]
*[[American Medical Association]]
*[[Doctor]]

==References==
<references/>
[[Category:Medicine]]

Hurricane Katrina

2011-03-17T03:28:46Z

WillS:

[[Image:NOAA-Hurricane-Katrina-Aug28-05.jpg|right|300px|thumb|Hurricane Katrina, on August 28, 2005]]
'''Hurricane Katrina''' in August 2005 was one of the strongest and most devastating storms to impact the coast of the [[United States]] during the last 100 years. With sustained winds during landfall of 125 mph (110 kts) (a strong category 3 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson scale) and minimum central pressure the third lowest on record at landfall (920 mb), Katrina caused widespread devastation along the central Gulf Coast states of the U.S., with the cities of [[New Orleans]], [[Louisiana]], [[Mobile]], [[Alabama]], and Gulfport, [[Mississippi]] bearing the brunt of Katrina's force, which caused $81.2 billion in damage.

==The hurricane==
Hurricane Katrina developed initially as a tropical depression (TD #12 of the season) in the southeastern [[Bahamas]] on August 23rd. This tropical depression strengthened into Tropical Storm Katrina the next day. It then moved slowly along a northwesterly then westerly track through the Bahamas, increasing in strength during this time. A few hours before landfall in south Florida at around 6.30 EDT on August 25th, Katrina strengthened to become a category 1 (wind speeds of 75mph or greater) hurricane. Landfall occurred between Hallandale Beach and North [[Miami]] Beach, [[Florida]], with wind speeds of approximately 80 mph (70 kts). Gusts of above 90 mph (78 kts) were measured as Katrina came ashore. As the storm moved southwest across the tip of the Florida peninsula, Katrina's winds decreased slightly before regaining hurricane strength in the Gulf of Mexico. Given that Katrina spent only seven hours over land, its strength was not significantly diminished and it quickly re-intensified shortly after moving over the warm waters of the Gulf.
[[File:President Casino Barge After Katrina PD WC.jpg|300px|left|A Barge was washed ashore after Katrina|left]]
Katrina moved almost due westward after entering the Gulf of Mexico. A mid-level ridge centered over Texas weakened and moved westward allowing Katrina to gradually turn to the northwest and then north into the weakness in the ridging over the days that followed. Atmospheric and sea-surface conditions (an upper level anticyclone over the Gulf and warm SSTs) were conducive to cyclone's rapid intensification, which lead to Katrina attaining 'major hurricane' status on the afternoon of the 26th.

Continuing to strengthen and move northwards during the next 48 hours, Katrina reached maximum wind speeds on the morning of Sunday August 28th of over 170 mph (150 kts, category 5), and its minimum central pressure dropped that afternoon to 902 mb - the 4th lowest on record for an Atlantic storm. Although Katrina, at its peak strength was comparable to Camille's intensity, it was a significantly larger storm and impacted a broader area of the Gulf coast.

Although tropical cyclones of category 5 strength are rarely sustained for long durations (due to internal dynamics), Katrina remained a strong category 4 strength hurricane despite the entrainment of dryer air and an opening of the eyewall to the south and southwest before landfall on the morning of the 29th. Landfalling wind speeds at Grand Isle, Louisiana were approximately 125 mph (110 kts) (strong category 3 intensity) with a central pressure of 920mb - the 3rd lowest on record for a landfalling Atlantic storm in the US. Rainfall amounts for Louisiana and along the Gulf are described below along with other impacts of the storms.

==Rain, wind, and storm surge==
===Eastern Florida===
During its initial landfall in southern Florida, Katrina generated over 5 inches of rainfall across a large area of southeastern Florida. An analysis by NOAA's Climate Prediction Center shows that parts of the region received heavy rainfall, over 15 inches in some locations, which caused localized flooding.

Winds at landfall north of Miami were 80 mph (category 1 strength), leading to some damage and extensive power outages.

===Gulf Coast===
Rainfall from Katrina's outer bands began affecting the Gulf coast well before landfall. As Katrina came ashore on August 29th, rainfall exceeded rates of 1 inch/hour across a large area of the coast. NOAA's Climate Reference Network Station in Newton, MS (60 miles east of Jackson, Mississippi) measured rainfall rates of over an inch an hour for 3 consecutive hours, with rates of over 0.5 in/hr for 5 hours during August 29th. Precipitation analysis from NOAA's Climate Prediction Center show that rainfall accumulations exceeded 8-10 inches along much of the hurricane's path and to the east of the track.

Wind speeds over 140 mph were recorded at landfall in southeastern Louisiana while winds gusted to over 100 mph in New Orleans, just west of the eye. As the [[hurricane]] made its second landfall on the Mississippi/Louisiana border, wind speeds were approximately 110 kts (125 mph). Gusts of over 80mph were recorded in Mobile and 90 mph in Biloxi, Mississippi.

The central pressure at landfall was 920 mb, which ranked 3rd lowest on record for U.S.-landfalling storms behind Camille (August 17, 1969, 909 mb) and the Labor Day hurricane that struck the Florida Keys on September 2, 1935 (892 mb). Hurricane Andrew in 1992 dropped to fourth, as its central pressure was 922 mb at landfall. Katrina also reached a minimum central pressure of 902 mb at its peak, ranking 4th lowest on record for all Atlantic basin hurricanes.

===Inland===
As the storm moved inland and weakened to a tropical storm on the 29th, rainfall became the primary impact. Rainfall amounts exceeded 2-4 inches across a large area from the Gulf coast to the Ohio Valley. As a result, flood watches and warnings were common across these regions. Rain bands from Katrina also produced tornadoes causing further damage in areas such as Georgia.

==Impacts==
===Loss of Life===
From the Gulf states (principally Louisiana and Mississippi), the loss of life is estimated to be 1,836 people. It is clearly one of the most devastating acts of God in recent US history. From Katrina's first landfall in Florida, while it was at category one strength, initial estimates suggest 11 deaths resulted.
===Flooding===
[[File:Katrina flooding New Orleans.jpg|right|200px|thumb|Extent of flood damage within the city of New Orleans (NOAA)]]
The loss of life and property damage was worsened by breaks in the levees that separate New Orleans from surrounding lakes. At least 80% of New Orleans was under flood water on August 31st, largely as a result of levee failures from Lake Pontchartrain. The combination of strong winds, heavy rainfall and storm surge led to breaks in the earthen levee after the storm passed, leaving some parts of New Orleans under 20 feet of water. Storm surge from Mobile Bay led to inundation of Mobile, Alabama causing imposition of a dusk-to-dawn curfew for the City. Large portions of Biloxi and Gulfport, Mississippi were underwater as a result of a 20 to 30+ foot storm surge which flooded the cities.
===Oil industry===
A major economic impact for the nation was the disruption to the [[oil]] industry from Katrina. Preliminary estimates from the [[Mineral Management Service]] suggest that oil production in the Gulf of Mexico was reduced by 1.4 million barrels per day (or 95 % of the daily Gulf of Mexico production) as a result of the hurricane. [[Gasoline]] had reached a record high price-per-gallon as of Monday August 30th with concerns over refinery capacity apparently driving the increase.

In addition, the hurricane caused 44 oil spills in Southeast Louisiana, totaling approximately 7 million gallons.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9365607/ 44 oil spills found in southeast Louisiana]</ref> The vast majority of oil spilled was from on-shore industrial plants and above ground storage depots plus other facilities. Damage to pipelines and oil platforms was very significant. 45 oil platforms were destroyed and 54 pipelines were damaged (10" or larger). <ref> http://www.mms.gov/ooc/press/2006/press0501.htm </ref> 70 oil spills (one barrel or larger) totaling over 11,000 gallons of crude oil and other refined products were reported. 211 minor pollution incidents were also reported. Minor pollution incidents are categorized as incidents involving less than 500 barrels of oil that do not reach the coast line. No significant spills from any offshore wells were reported. <ref> http://www.mms.gov/tarprojects/581/44814183_MMS_Katrina_Rita_PL_Final%20Report%20Rev1.pdf</ref>

===Power outages===
Over 1.7 million people lost power as a result of the storm in the Gulf states, with power companies estimating that it would take more than several weeks to restore power to some locations. Drinking water was also unavailable in New Orleans due to a broken water main that serves the city. Power was lost to 1.3 million customers in southeastern Florida from the initial landfall on August 24th.
===Travel===
Both of New Orleans' airports were flooded and closed on August 30th and bridges of Interstate 10 leading east out of the city were destroyed. Most of the coastal highways along the Gulf were impassable in places and most minor roads near the shore were still underwater or covered in debris as of August 30th. Katrina also disrupted travel as it headed inland, with more than 2 inches of rain falling across a large area from the coast to parts of Ohio during the 48 hours after Katrina made landfall.

==Recovery==

An August 2008 report by Oxfam America showed that while progress has taken place, it is behind expectations, and that much work remains to be done:
*More than 35,000 individuals are still living in FEMA trailers in the Gulf Coast
*Only 12 percent of African-American evacuees who returned to New Orleans after the hurricanes were able to find work, compared with 45 percent of white evacuees
*In Louisiana 82,000 apartments were damaged or destroyed by Katrina and Rita, but the highest official estimate proposes to replace only about 25,000 affordable units
*In Mississippi, federal money that was mandated for use in rebuilding low-income housing was, instead, diverted to improving the shipyards in Biloxi
*Compliance with federal labor laws has been ignored, with frequent occurrences of safety and health violations, wage theft and exploitative treatment of immigrant workers.<ref>http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/president-bushs-legacy-question-visit/story.aspx?guid={D68D716B-779E-496B-A75E-0B1B1014F888}&dist=hppr</ref>

==Political repercussions==
[[File:Mer2006-03p1a.jpg|right|200px|thumb|Flooded school buses in New Orleans]]
The disaster fueled partisan criticism of the response of federal officials, causing significant political damage to the administration of President [[George W. Bush]]. In particular, deaths of 1,836 people were rather pointedly blamed on President Bush and his appointees, on the grounds that their response was "too little, late."

Independent sociological studies have shown that nearly all the deaths were due to people waiting too long to obey the evacuation orders. Also, the Democratic governor and Democratic mayor refused (for as long as it was politically viable) to accept federal help. Internally, resources such as school buses were simply abandoned instead of being used to shuttle out the poor (i.e., black) residents of New Orleans.

==External links==
*[http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/reports/tech-report-200501z.pdf NOAA report, in .pdf format]

{{License|license = This work is in the [[public domain]] in the United States because it is a work of the United States Federal Government under the terms of Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 105 of the US Code.| source = [http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/2005/katrina.html]}}

[[category:Reagan Era]]
[[category:The South]]
[[Category:Natural Disasters]]

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

Falsifiable

2011-03-17T03:28:36Z

WillS: this line suggested that black holes exist, even if we don't know what's inside them- black holes are a liberal myth

A proposition or theory is '''falsifiable''' if it is hypothetically possible for a test or observation to prove it false, regardless of the accuracy of the proposition.<ref>[http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O87-falsifiability.html Definition] A Dictionary of Psychology, Andrew M. Colman, via encyclopedia.com</ref> A proposal or theory that can never be shown to be false is not falsifiable.

To be considered [[scientific]], a [[hypothesis]] must be "[[falsifiable]]", i.e., capable of being proven false. If no one, not even the supporters of the hypothesis, can think of a way the hypothesis might be proven false, then most scientists would agree that it is not part of science (see [[pseudoscience]]). However, the [[history of science]] is full of examples whereby supporters of various theories refused to consider the prospect that someone might prove them wrong. Supporters of the [[evolution]] and [[global warming]] theories are like this.

For example, the suggestion that I would be very happy if I were ten years younger is not falsifiable, because it is impossible to test the hypothesis by making myself ten years younger and seeing how I feel.

Falsifiability is commonly used as a criterion for whether a particular proposition is "scientific." Philosopher [[Karl Popper]] popularized this criterion, arguing that science progresses through the process of "Observation, speculation, falsification;" That is, we observe the universe, we develop a speculative hypothesis about the universe, and we test our hypothesis. If our hypothesis is proven false, we discard it. If our hypothesis is not proven false, we can consider it provisionally true. According to Popper, there is no such thing as ''scientific certainty;'' on the contrary, all our beliefs are properly held ''provisionally,'' and always subject to the possibility that they will someday be disproven by experiment.

Popper, and those who agree with him, categorize many types of ideas as unfalsifiable, particularly in psychology and religion. For example, the proposition "Joe beats his children because his father beat him" is unfalsifiable, because we cannot perform a test in which Joe was ''not'' beaten by his father, and see if Joe still beats his children. Because the proposition is not testable, according to falsificationism, it is no better than any other hypothesis, and therefore not useful, and not scientific.

==Carl Sagan==

In his book, ''Demon-Haunted World'' [[Carl Sagan]], a noted [[astronomer]], gives an example of a statement with this sort of premise saying: "There is a dragon in my garage." In order for one to prove or disprove the statement they are allowed to ask questions.

*''Q. Can I see the dragon?''
*A. No, the dragon is invisible.

*''Q. Can I touch the dragon?''
*A. No, my dragon is incorporeal.

*''Q. Can I hear the dragon?''
*A. No, my dragon is silent.

and so on...

In this way, every question can be answered and therefore the existence of the dragon is unfalsifiable. However, in the absence of physical or other evidence of its existence, whether the dragon actually exists or not is a matter of faith.

== G.K. Chesterton ==
[[G.K. Chesterton]], a Christian [[Christian apologetics|apologist]] of the early 20th century, articulated the problem of falsifiability several years before Popper. He wrote:<ref>G.K. Chesterton, ''Everlasting Man'', II.</ref>

{{QuoteBox|Science is weak about these prehistoric things in a way that has hardly been noticed. The science whose modern marvels we all admire succeeds by incessantly adding to its data. In all practical inventions, in most natural discoveries, it can always increase evidence by experiment. But it cannot experiment in making men; or even in watching to see what the first men make. An inventor can advance step by step in the construction of an aeroplane, even if he is only experimenting with sticks and scraps of metal in his own back-yard. But he cannot watch the Missing Link evolving in his own back-yard. If he has made a mistake in his calculations, the aeroplane will correct it by crashing to the ground. But if he has made a mistake about the arboreal habitat of his ancestor, he cannot see his arboreal ancestor falling off the tree. He cannot keep a cave-man like a cat in the back-yard and watch him to see whether he does really practice cannibalism or carry off his mate on the principles of marriage by capture. He cannot keep a tribe of primitive men like a pack of hounds and notice how far they are influenced by the herd instinct. If he sees a particular bird behave in a particular way, he can get other birds and see if they behave in that way; but if he finds a skull, or the scrap of a skull, in the hollow of a hill, he cannot multiply it into a vision of the valley of dry bones. In dealing with a past that has almost entirely perished, he can only go by evidence and not by experiment. And there is hardly enough evidence to be even evidential. Thus while most science moves in a sort of curve, being constantly corrected by new evidence, this science flies off into space in a straight line uncorrected by anything. But the habit of forming conclusions, as they can really be formed in more fruitful fields, is so fixed in the scientific mind that it cannot resist talking like this. It talks about the idea suggested by one scrap of bone as if it were something like the aeroplane which is constructed at last out of whole scrapheaps of scraps of metal. The trouble with the professor of the prehistoric is that he cannot scrap his scrap. The marvellous and triumphant aeroplane is made out of a hundred mistakes. The student of origins can only make one mistake and stick to it.}}

== See also ==
*[[Falsifiability of evolution]]
*[[Deduction]]
*[[Induction]]
[[category:science]]
[[category:philosophy]]
== Reference ==
<references/>

Natural disaster

2011-03-17T03:25:53Z

WillS:

An '''act of God''' is a large scale destructive event mislabeled as a 'natural disaster' by pagan liberal who refuse to accept that God has a plan beyond human understanding. An example would be a [[volcano]] eruption, [[earthquake]], or a [[hurricane]].

Insurance agencies often refer to so-called natural disasters as "Acts of God".<ref>http://www.chiff.com/personal_finance/insurance-acts-god.htm</ref> Many policies have provisions that companies will not insure against such occurrences. For instance home owner's insurance in southern California does not cover damage done as a result of earthquakes. Earthquake protection must be purchased separately.

The original reference to "Acts of God" in regard to insurance claims came through a court case in 1803.<ref>http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/23550.html</ref>

==References==
<references />

[[Category:Legal Terms]]
[[Category:Natural Disasters]]

Natural disaster

2011-03-17T03:25:39Z

WillS:

A '''Act of God''' is a large scale destructive event mislabeled as a 'natural disaster' by pagan liberal who refuse to accept that God has a plan beyond human understanding. An example would be a [[volcano]] eruption, [[earthquake]], or a [[hurricane]].

Insurance agencies often refer to so-called natural disasters as "Acts of God".<ref>http://www.chiff.com/personal_finance/insurance-acts-god.htm</ref> Many policies have provisions that companies will not insure against such occurrences. For instance home owner's insurance in southern California does not cover damage done as a result of earthquakes. Earthquake protection must be purchased separately.

The original reference to "Acts of God" in regard to insurance claims came through a court case in 1803.<ref>http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/23550.html</ref>

==References==
<references />

[[Category:Legal Terms]]
[[Category:Natural Disasters]]

Natural disaster

2011-03-17T03:25:17Z

WillS: fighting secularized language

A '''Act of God''' is a large scale destructive event mislabeled as a 'natural disaster' by pagan liberal who refuse to accept that God has a plan beyond human understanding. An example would be a [[volcano]] eruption, [[earthquake]], or a [[hurricane]].

Insurance agencies often refer to natural disasters as "Acts of God".<ref>http://www.chiff.com/personal_finance/insurance-acts-god.htm</ref> Many policies have provisions that companies will not insure against such occurrences. For instance home owner's insurance in southern California does not cover damage done as a result of earthquakes. Earthquake protection must be purchased separately.

The original reference to "Acts of God" in regard to insurance claims came through a court case in 1803.<ref>http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/23550.html</ref>

==References==
<references />

[[Category:Legal Terms]]
[[Category:Natural Disasters]]

Mardi Gras

2011-03-17T03:18:51Z

WillS: fighting secularized language

'''Shrove Tuesday''', also known by pagan liberals as Fat Tuesday, Mardi Gras, or Pancake Tuesday, is the day before [[Ash Wednesday]], the day that marks the beginning of the [[Christianity|Christian]] season of [[Lent]]. It is scheduled to occur 46 days before [[Easter]], otherwise known as [[Resurrection Sunday]]. Since the date of Resurrection Sunday varies from year to year, Shrove Tuesday can occur on any Tuesday from February 3 to March 9.<ref name="cq">[http://www.coolquiz.com/trivia/explain/docs/fat_tuesday.asp What is Fat Tuesday?]</ref> Because the [[Catholic Church]] forbids the eating of meat and meat products every Friday during Lent, and because Catholics are required to fast on Ash Wednesday, it became common to make Shrove Tuesday a day of feasting and celebration. Historically, however, the day was known as Shrove Tuesday because it was set aside for a sacramental confession of one's sins, hence the penitent was said to have been "shriven," or absolved, of his sins. "Shrove Tuesday" remains the term used on the church calendar.

Mardi Gras is the [[French]] term for Shrove Tuesday, and the holiday was brought to the [[United States]] by the [[French]]. The very first Mardi Gras celebration was believed to have been observed in 1703 in Mobile, [[Alabama]].<ref>[http://www3.kumc.edu/diversity/other/mardigra.html Mardi Gras or Shrove Tuesday (United States)]</ref> However [[New Orleans]], [[Louisiana]] is the city most associated with Mardi Gras. In New Orleans it is an official holiday, and has been an event for two centuries, except during the two World Wars.<ref name="cq" /> Every year, residents and guests stage elaborate and boisterous parades and balls.

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Holidays]]

Resurrection Sunday

2011-03-17T03:17:02Z

WillS:

'''Resurrection Sunday''' (also known as '''Easter''' by pagan liberals) is the [[Christian]] holiday marking the [[resurrection of Jesus Christ]] three days after His crucifixion on [[Good Friday]], and is the most important festival of the [[liturgical year]].

== Date of Resurrection Sunday ==

In 325, the Council of [[Nicaea]] declared that Resurrection Sunday would be celebrated on the first Sunday after the [[full moon]] of the vernal equinox.

Resurrection Sunday doesn't fall on a fixed date in the calendar. Instead, it is based on a lunar calendar like that used by the Jews. At the [[Nicaean Council]] in 325 AD it was decided that Resurrection Sunday would be celebrated on the Sunday after the first full moon on or after the day of the vernal equinox. The date of the [[full moon]] was to be determined by using the [[Metonic Cycle]]. Eastern Orthodox Churches still use the Julian calendar when determining the date of Resurrection Sunday and thus have a different date for the celebration.

== Lent ==
[[Image:Konrad Witz – Petri fiskafänge.jpg|thumb|The Miraculous Draught of Fishes by Konrad Witz.]]
Resurrection Sunday marks the end of the 46 days of [[Lent]], a period of fasting and penitence in preparation for Resurrection Sunday, which begins on [[Ash Wednesday]] and ends on Resurrection Sunday. However, Lent really only comprises 40 days since the 6 Sundays during this period are excluded from the Lenten fast, and are days that are set apart to commemorate Resurrection Sunday and Jesus Christ, who rose from the dead, defeated the grave and guaranteed eternal life to those who believe.

The days before Resurrection Sunday also are special in the Christian tradition: the Sunday before is [[Palm Sunday]], and the last three days before Resurrection Sunday are [[Holy Thursday]], [[Good Friday]] and [[Silent Saturday]]. These days commemorate Jesus' entry into [[Jerusalem]], the [[Last Supper]] and the [[Crucifixion]].

== Origin of the name "Easter" ==

The term "Easter" is likely derived from ''Eastre'' or ''Isthar'', who was the pagan goddess of fertility for whom the Festival of Ishtar was celebrated each spring. [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5695/#easter Others suggest] that the word comes from the anglo-saxon word for "passover". In biblical times the Jewish [[Passover]], which commemorates the sparing of the [[Hebrew]] firstborns, was celebrated at roughly the same time as the [[vernal equinox]] or this “Eastre” festival. The theory of pagan origin surmises that while the Gospel was being spread to the pagans, the celebration of Eastre and the celebration of the resurrection became combined and the Christians adopted the name that the pagans had used for their festival.

==The name "Resurrection Sunday"==

This name is used in [[Mexico]]: "Domingo de Resurrección," which translates as Resurrection Sunday. In the [[United States]], most Christian churches continue to prefer the word ''Easter,'' although ''Resurrection Sunday'' has gained favor in some Protestant churches in recent years, most often as a response to the possibly pagan origins of the name "Easter."<ref>http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t020.html</ref>

== Feast of Mercy ==

Some Christians celebrate the Feast of Mercy on the first Sunday after Easter. ''The mercy of Christ to and for us—and our demonstration of that mercy to those within and outside the Body of Christ is the key to the future of the Church, to mission and stewardship, to living our Christian lives together in love and forgiveness, to moving boldly and confidently into the future with courage in the Gospel.'' Matthew Harrison. <ref> [http://www.cph.org/cphstore/product.asp?part_no=124313 Christ Have Mercy: How to Put Your Faith in Action.]</ref>

== Pentecost ==

[[Pentecost]] is seven weeks after Resurrection Sunday. Those seven weeks are celebrated as the Season of Easter in the [[Catholic Church]].

== See also ==

*[[Ascension of Christ]]
*[[Christianity in Conservapedia]]
*[[Jesus Christ]]

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Observances]][[category:Holidays]]

Resurrection Sunday

2011-03-17T03:16:45Z

WillS:

'''Resurrection Sunday''' (also known as '''Easter''' by pagan liberals) is the [[Christian]] holiday marking the [[resurrection of Jesus Christ]] three days after His crucifixion on [[Good Friday]], and is the most important festival of the [[liturgical year]].

== Date of Resurrection Sunday ==

In 325, the Council of [[Nicaea]] declared that Easter would be celebrated on the first Sunday after the [[full moon]] of the vernal equinox.

Resurrection Sunday doesn't fall on a fixed date in the calendar. Instead, it is based on a lunar calendar like that used by the Jews. At the [[Nicaean Council]] in 325 AD it was decided that Resurrection Sunday would be celebrated on the Sunday after the first full moon on or after the day of the vernal equinox. The date of the [[full moon]] was to be determined by using the [[Metonic Cycle]]. Eastern Orthodox Churches still use the Julian calendar when determining the date of Resurrection Sunday and thus have a different date for the celebration.

== Lent ==
[[Image:Konrad Witz – Petri fiskafänge.jpg|thumb|The Miraculous Draught of Fishes by Konrad Witz.]]
Resurrection Sunday marks the end of the 46 days of [[Lent]], a period of fasting and penitence in preparation for Resurrection Sunday, which begins on [[Ash Wednesday]] and ends on Resurrection Sunday. However, Lent really only comprises 40 days since the 6 Sundays during this period are excluded from the Lenten fast, and are days that are set apart to commemorate Resurrection Sunday and Jesus Christ, who rose from the dead, defeated the grave and guaranteed eternal life to those who believe.

The days before Resurrection Sunday also are special in the Christian tradition: the Sunday before is [[Palm Sunday]], and the last three days before Resurrection Sunday are [[Holy Thursday]], [[Good Friday]] and [[Silent Saturday]]. These days commemorate Jesus' entry into [[Jerusalem]], the [[Last Supper]] and the [[Crucifixion]].

== Origin of the name "Easter" ==

The term "Easter" is likely derived from ''Eastre'' or ''Isthar'', who was the pagan goddess of fertility for whom the Festival of Ishtar was celebrated each spring. [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5695/#easter Others suggest] that the word comes from the anglo-saxon word for "passover". In biblical times the Jewish [[Passover]], which commemorates the sparing of the [[Hebrew]] firstborns, was celebrated at roughly the same time as the [[vernal equinox]] or this “Eastre” festival. The theory of pagan origin surmises that while the Gospel was being spread to the pagans, the celebration of Eastre and the celebration of the resurrection became combined and the Christians adopted the name that the pagans had used for their festival.

==The name "Resurrection Sunday"==

This name is used in [[Mexico]]: "Domingo de Resurrección," which translates as Resurrection Sunday. In the [[United States]], most Christian churches continue to prefer the word ''Easter,'' although ''Resurrection Sunday'' has gained favor in some Protestant churches in recent years, most often as a response to the possibly pagan origins of the name "Easter."<ref>http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t020.html</ref>

== Feast of Mercy ==

Some Christians celebrate the Feast of Mercy on the first Sunday after Easter. ''The mercy of Christ to and for us—and our demonstration of that mercy to those within and outside the Body of Christ is the key to the future of the Church, to mission and stewardship, to living our Christian lives together in love and forgiveness, to moving boldly and confidently into the future with courage in the Gospel.'' Matthew Harrison. <ref> [http://www.cph.org/cphstore/product.asp?part_no=124313 Christ Have Mercy: How to Put Your Faith in Action.]</ref>

== Pentecost ==

[[Pentecost]] is seven weeks after Resurrection Sunday. Those seven weeks are celebrated as the Season of Easter in the [[Catholic Church]].

== See also ==

*[[Ascension of Christ]]
*[[Christianity in Conservapedia]]
*[[Jesus Christ]]

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Observances]][[category:Holidays]]

Halloween

2011-03-17T03:15:08Z

WillS: fighting secularized language

'''Hallowed Eve''', is a tradition originating in [[Ireland]] and celebrated on the evening of October 31, before All Hallows Day (or [[All Saints Day]]). Hallowed Eve continues to be related to the harvest and represents a participative ritualization not only of the timeless fears of uncertainty and death but also of the modern fears of transition from rural to urban life. Liberal Pagans refer to Hallowed Eve as 'Halloween.'
[[Image:Halloween.gif|right|300px]]
==Customs==
[[File:Pumpkin carved.jpg|thumb|250px|Carved pumpkin.]]
In the [[United States]], Hallowed Eve is marked by the activity of trick-or-treating. Trick-or-treat traditionally involves the children dressing in costumes, and going to various locations, generally houses, requesting candy at each.

Colors orange and black are traditionally associated with Hallowed Eve as well as costumes of witches, ghosts, famous monsters, skeletons, and devils; also seasonal foods like caramel apples, pumpkins, pumpkin pie, caramel corn, and candies. Black when used as a color commonly represents death, and orange is used to represent the harvest.

==Origins==
Its origins are traced to the ancient Celts who celebrated the harvest and the passing of the old year and the beginning of the new; the day itself was the first of the Celtic calendar. The Celts believed that it was a time when the spirits of the dead roamed; gifts of food were required to protect the living. Christianity incorporated the Celtic tradition and renamed it 'All Saints' Day,' a day of respect for the dead. Hence the name "all-hallow's-eve" became "Hallowed Eve", over time.

==History==
[[File:Halloween.jpg|200px|left]]
From a pagan holiday traceable to the ancient Celts, the event became known as All Saints Day during the 8th century. Waning belief in ghosts, goblins, and witches toward the end of the 18th century further transformed All Saints' Day into a ripsnorting holiday in Ireland and especially in Scotland. [[Irish Catholics]] in America in the late 19th century introduced the event as a copy of Irish traditional folklore. They substituted pumpkins for turnips and secular costumes for those of saints by the mid-19th century. By the 1920s community efforts tried to sanitize the carnival spirit and reduce vandalism. Trick-or-treating became common around 1940, further transformed Hallowed Eve into a rite of consumerism and moving the age profile to younger children.
===World War II===
Halloween flourished as an inexpensive fall festival that did not involve travel. Cities made it into "Conservation Day" and Hallowed Eve parties were enlisted in the war effort. Civic parties were held with patriotic admission prices, such as 150 pounds of salvaged paper. Towns turned Hallowed Eve parades into celebrations of civic volunteering, featuring Red Cross Units, Air Raid Wardens, and Auxiliary Police Units, all in costume. The climax of the parade was typically a War Bond Auction with prizes donated by local merchants and sold for war bond pledges.<ref>Hybertsen (1993), p. 152 </ref>
===Recent===
Starting in the 1960s trick-or-treating declined in some places and was closely monitored elsewhere because of (false) rumors of poisoned treats; "The Razor Blade in the Apple" was a made-up urban legend that truly frightened parents.<ref>Joel Best and Gerald T. Horiuchi, "The Razor Blade in the Apple: the Social Construction of Urban Legends," ''Social Problems'' 1985 32(5): 488-499</ref>, and in the 1990s the holiday has increasingly drawn upon the cult-horror genre for its inspiration. Hallowed Eve in America by the late 20th century was a big moneymaker for candy makers and costumers.

==Hell houses==
Pellegrini (2007) and Fletcher (2007) examine the rising phenomenon of hell houses, evangelical alternatives to haunted houses, in reaction to the perceived occult and pagan nature of Hallowed Eve. Religious feelings are communicated by the medium of theater presented in these hell houses. Evangelicals such as Rev. [[Pat Robertson]] have decried the celebration of Hallowed Eve as 'performing Satanic rituals' since the 1970s, but they decided to present alternative educational devices for children. Beginning with [[Jerry Falwell]]'s ScareMare in 1972, an increasing number of evangelical churches have turned to performances in order to missionize younger generations. In the 2001 documentary 'Hell House' that such evangelical tools became well known. The theater of the houses also offers an opportunity for the church members to face their fears rather than avoid them, and it offers participants the 'fun' of being evil without engaging in pagan rituals.<ref>Ann Pellegrini, "'Signaling Through the Flames': Hell House Performance and Structures of Religious Feeling," ''American Quarterly'' 2007 59(3): 911-935; John Fletcher, "Tasteless as Hell: Community Performance, Distinction, and Countertaste in Hell House, ''Theatre Survey'' 2007 48(2): 313-330. </ref>
==Mexico==
[[File:Posada Lagartijo.jpeg|thumb|100px|Lagartijo (Dandy) by José Guadalupe Posada.]]
Although Hallowed Eve symbols have long been a part of the Mexican culture, particularly in the northern states of Mexico, since the 1990s these symbols have been denounced by intellectuals and religious leaders as elements of Yankee imperialism. Mexico's counterpart to Hallowed Eve, the Day of the Dead, has its roots in the Spanish colonial period, when Spain brought the [[Catholic]] holidays of All Saints' Day and All Souls' Day to the New World. Nevertheless, the celebration of the Day of the Dead from 31 October to 2 November has come to symbolize national unity to many Mexicans. Even though the Day of the Dead has always had materialistic elements such as the sugar paste '(afteniqué)' figures, traditionally given to children, cultural nationalists have upheld the Mexican Day of the Dead religious rituals as a contrast to the economic and materialist motives behind American Hallowed Eve traditions. These cultural nationalists insist that Hallowed Eve activities, which have entered across Mexico's northern border, profane the sacredness of the Day of the Dead.<ref> Stanley Brandes, "The Day of the Dead, Hallowed Eve, and the Quest for Mexican National Identity," ''Journal of American Folklore'' 1998 111(442): 359-380, [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=96430235 in QUESTIA]</ref>

==Further reading==

* Hybertsen, Karen Sue. "'The Return of Chaos': The Uses and Interpretations of Halloween in the United States from the Victorian Era to the Present", ''Dissertation Abstracts International'' PhD dissertation Drew University 1993 54(6): 2185-A. DA9331586, 286p.
* Rogers, Nicholas. ''Halloween: From Pagan Ritual to Party Night'' (2003) [http://www.amazon.com/Halloween-Pagan-Ritual-Party-Night/dp/0195168968/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257043763&sr=1-3 excerpt and text search]
* Santino, Jack. "Halloween in America: Contemporary Customs and Peformances," ''Western Folklore'' 1983 42(1): 1-20, [http://www.jstor.org/stable/1499461 in JSTOR]
* Santino, Jack, ed. ''Halloween and Other Festivals of Death and Life,'' (U. of Tennessee Press, 1993). 280 pp. academic study
==External links==
* [http://www.godestiny.org/hell_house/HH_kit.cfm The Hell House Outreach Kit], from an [[Assemblies of God]] church near Denver
====References====
<references/>
[[category:Holidays]]

Talk:Secularized Language

2011-03-17T03:11:42Z

WillS: /* Fighting Secularized Language */

I'd like to organize these into categories - not divided up, maybe - with secularized expressions at the top (e.g., Thank God => thank goodness). Terms indicating a total shift of concept like Bible Study => fundamentalism might come later. Everyone okay with this? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 08:43, 22 February 2011 (EST)

: Sounds good to me! How about giving it a try and let's see how it looks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:32, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::To be fair, many more conservative Christians (my mother, for example), use some of the so-called "secular expressions" because they take a strict line on taking the Lord's name in vain. She would, for example, rather not say "Thank God" unless she was quite literally thanking the deity. Indeed, I believe that is how the "thank goodness" construction originally evolved. --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 12:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::That might well be, Jdixon--certainly, it's laudable to take seriously the commandment not to take the Lord's name in vain--but I don't think very many Christians would see a heartfelt "Thank God!" as inappropriate in many circumstances. Thus, while your mother's conscientiousness is admirable, I don't think such conscientiousness is a sufficient explanation for the systematic removal of religious language from the public square. Certainly, I think that some people choose "Thank goodness" out of a concern for propriety, but I think many more choose it out of a desire to avoid giving offense, or simply because it's what they're most used to hearing. Perhaps a section on differing reasons for using these terms could be included in the article; after all, this is supposed to be an examination of the issue. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 13:34, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== Washington's Birthday/President's Day ==

While this is a case of P.C., it's not a case of secularized language. Last I checked, George Washington was not a sacred personage. [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 13:47, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:Washington was a prominent Christian whose habit of praying and appealing to God for assistance is well-known. He was a kind of saint, and the downplaying of his (indisputable) significance is due to his Christianity. If he had been an atheist then you'd see the opposite effect.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:20, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::What kind of a saint was George Washington? --[[User:JohannesZ|JohannesZ]] 15:52, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::The kind that wins wars. There have been other examples. Have you ever heard of [[Joan of Arc]]?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:02, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::Canonized in 1920, right? When did the Church recognize Washington as a saint? [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 16:17, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::@Andy: Aye. She still needed miracles credited to her. [http://www.stjoan-center.com/novelapp/joaap04.html] --[[User:JohannesZ|JohannesZ]] 16:20, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::I don't think all Christian churches have the same rules.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:23, 22 February 2011 (EST)
::::::Undoubtedly. So which churches DO recognize Washington as a saint or other type of sacred being? [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 16:26, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::::: Perhaps the church of Satan does, or perhaps atheists simply dislike Washington. Wouldn't that be enough to explain the misnaming of the holiday as described in the entry?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:31, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::::I'm pretty sure that The Church of Satan does not acknowledge George Washington as divine. If there's any evidence -- a tract from an angry atheist decrying a celebration of the Christian Washington and demanding a holiday that accommodates the Presidents that were not Christians, I've yet to find one. [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 16:37, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::::::::Marty, bias doesn't work that way. You're not likely to find such an angry tract about ''any'' of the items on the list.

::::::::::Atheistic bias, like other forms of bias, seeks to downplay and minimize Christianity. Washington was a leading, accomplished Christian. Lincoln far less so, other presidents even lesser still, and the office of president not Christian at all. An atheistic bias pushes language from the Christian recognition to the more atheistic substitute.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:15, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::::::::I agree with Andy here; the greater the Christianity of an historical figure, the more the atheistic revisionists will try to downplay his significance. [[User:PeterUker|PeterUker]] 18:24, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::::::::: How can President's Day even be considered remotely secularized as it was never a religiously themed event to begin with? The reason we have President's Day is due to the hesitation and the unwillingness of conservatives in the southeast to celebrate Lincoln's birthday as vilified he was as in infringing on "state's rights," and removing their "Peculiar institution." This contrasts to other locations in the country who celebrated both Washington's birthday and Lincoln's birthday in two different events. Furthermore, the Federal Government was disinterested in granting two Monday's off for federal employees, so came the compromise of celebrating a day between Lincoln's and Washington's birthday.[[User:JustinU|JustinU]] 21:46, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::::::::::: Lincoln never had a stature comparable to Washington, and it's not merely because southerners disliked Lincoln. The attempt to equate Lincoln to Washington as a joint federal holiday was a farce and never got off the ground.

::::::::::::: But atheists downplay Washington just as they downplay other accomplished Christians. It's irrelevant whether the holiday was ever "religiously themed." A day honoring a prominent Christian has been diluted and even misnamed. It's the same secularization seen in replacing "Merry Christmas" with "Happy Holidays."--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:27, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::::::::::: Mr. Aschlafly, I am unsure if you are purposefully misapplying my point so that your argument appears to be stronger, but I feel that your point is less than successively argued. In fact, the reason that Lincoln is trumpeted as being one of the greatest Presidents to have ever had the honor of holding the office is because, pointedly, history holds him comparable to George Washington in regards to leadership and vision for the country. I am also at ends with your rather presuming statement of Washington's Christianity, considering the well documented Enlightenment-era beliefs he held associated with his principles as a Freemason, a largely deist organization.[[User:JustinU|JustinU]] 00:44, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::::::::::JustinU, it is well documented in Washington's own writings as well as the writings of those who knew him that he was a committed Christian within the Episcopalian Church. The "deist" allegation is from the late-20th century only. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 00:57, 23 February 2011 (EST)
[[Image:C log-dancer.gif|thumbnail|right|150px|Maybe we should have a annual parade for St. George Washington like we do for St. Patrick. :)]]
:::The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia correctly declares and supports the doctrine that every true Christian believer is a saint.[http://eastonsbibledictionary.com/saints.htm] The [[Apostle Paul]] wrote: "Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the <big>'''saints'''</big> which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus: Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved." (Ephesians 1: 1-6) Washington appears to have been a true Christian.[http://www.christiananswers.net/q-wall/wal-g011.html] Therefore, George Washington was a saint. Maybe we should have a annual parade for St. George Washington like we do for St. Patrick. :) [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:33, 23 February 2011 (EST)

== A few questions ==

A few of the words here don't really seem to fit in the list.
For example:
*'''Resurrection Sunday''' -> '''Easter'''
::"Easter" does have pagan origins, but the Pope says "Easter Sunday", not "Resurrection Sunday" - see[http://www.vatican.va/liturgical_year/liturgico_en/easter.html] and [http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/calendar/ns_liturgy_calendar_en.html#APRIL_2011]. In fact, a Google search of the Vatican website doesn't find "Resurrection Sunday" at all, except a few times with commas in between.

*'''Washington's Birthday''' -> '''President's Day'''
::It's not secularization as far as I can tell. And President's Day honors Lincoln as well. Silly political correctness, maybe. Secularization, no.

*'''Pagan''' -> '''Secular'''
::Pagan usually refers to belief in multiple gods, while secular refers to something separate from religion (e.g. the Turkish government is secular because there is no state religion).

*'''God bless you''' -> '''Gesundheit'''
::Gesundheit is what Germans have always said after a sneeze. Many European countries have the same kind of response. Nobody ever says "God bless you" in German. "Gesundheit" is as old as "God bless you", and the people who say it got the idea from German-Americans.

[[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 14:18, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:Pagan definition: one who has little or no religion. Secular definition: not overtly or specifically religious. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:31, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::Merriam-Webster Online: [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pagan?show=0&t=1298483529 Pagan] [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/secular Secular]
::The first definition for "pagan" is ''a follower of a polytheistic religion'' - notice "polytheistic religion". Secular is ''not overtly or specifically religious''. There's a difference, and in order to claim that "secular" is a redefinition of "pagan" you have to completely ignore the ''first'' definition of "pagan". There's probably another word that could be used as the precursor of "secular" (Atheist?), but it's not "pagan". [[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 12:58, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::To clarify: I '''do''' think that the word "secular" and maybe "pagan" belong on this list, but not together. Maybe "atheist" -> "secular" and "pagan" -> "Wiccan" or such? [[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 18:28, 23 February 2011 (EST)

== The Saint's Days ==
* Valentine's Day is no longer officially the feast day for St. Valentine, which definitely explains on some level why the "St" has been dropped from the name. February 14th is now the feast day for Cyril and Methodius, this changed in 1969 under Pope Paul the V, I think.

*Paddy for St. Patrick's Day makes logical sense in that Paddy is a celtic diminutive for Padrig, which is Anglicized to Patrick. I've never actually heard it as Paddy's Day, I've always heard it as "St. Paddy's Day"

*Resurrection Sunday has been called Easter since at the very least the AD 600s. St. Bede's ''Ecclesiastical History of the English People'' written in the early 700s refers to it as Easter, although he does admit it is tied to the Pagan festival of Eostre he still uses the term Easter. I don't think it is logical to use Easter as an example of modern society trying to erase Christian influence from daily life, I think it is simply a continuation of a name that is well over 1,000 years old.

just my thoughts, good luck.--[[User:IScott|IScott]] 19:13, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:Interesting comments, but they don't contradict the observation of bias. Practicing Catholics are a small minority in the United States and Western Europe, so the relevance of the Church's changing of the feast day for St. Valentine hardly seems dispositive. As to your second point, the "logical sense" is very strained in denying credit where it is due. As to your third point, Christians refer to Easter as Resurrection Sunday to this day, just fewer of them. And there was bias in 600 A.D. too.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:13, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::I too have never heard paddy's day, it is always proceeded by the "St.". While catholics may be a minority in the west one exception to that is Ireland (the only country in the EU with out abortion) and I think the secular consciousness still associates Ireland with Catholicism. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 21:50, 22 February 2011 (EST)

: I agree that the actual Saint's days have been marginalized, and that the meaning of the holidays hold almost no religious meaning anymore. Irish-Americans celebrate St. Patrick's Day not as a saint's feast but as a day to meaninglessly celebrate their Irish-ness and dye rivers green and over-indulge in drinking alcohol, and Valentine's Day is a day to celebrate love and has very little to do with the old saint's feast.
: However, I stand firm on my third point, I find it highly unlikely that '''Saint Bede''', venerated in both the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion, who is also considered a '''Doctor of the Church''' to be biased towards an unchristian term. In the 700s Bede refers to it as Easter and it has been called Easter by the English people and English speakers since at least then. For well over 1,000 years the majority of devout English Christians have called it Easter, and thus its use cannot be a modern attempt to try to obscure Christian origins.--[[User:IScott|IScott]] 23:22, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::I agree that the use of Easter is not a ''modern'' secularization, but I still wonder whether its use was influenced by pagan tendencies in the first millennium. I have no quarrel with Saint Bede but am not sure he named it. He may well have been an expert about God but that does not make one an expert about bias. Quite the contrary: Jesus said the people of [[faith]] do not quickly recognize the tricks of the worldly.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:45, 22 February 2011 (EST)

A small correction about one of my role models. Bede is not a saint although, as IScott pointed out, he is a Doctor of the Church. His tomb, in Durham Cathedral, is worth a visit! [[User:Rafael|Rafael]]

:Thanks for correcting that!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 01:05, 1 March 2011 (EST)

::I don't mean to be harsh, but you are mistaken Rafael, Bede is a Saint. He is often refered to as just "the venerable" but he is a Saint so I can see where you might be confused. He is venerated in the Anglican Communion as well as the Roman Catholic Church. Even Conservapedia's own entry on [[Bede]] has an icon that says "St. Bede." Furthermore a google search of Saint Bede shows that there are a variety of churches named in his honor, in Williamsburg, VA there is a Catholic Church called St. Bede's Catholic Church, as well as an Anglican Church of St. Bede in Scarborough, ON, Canada, and a variety of churches and Parish schools in England. In the Episcopal Church Bede's feast day is May 25th. Bede is very much a Saint. Hope that clears up the Sainthood of Bede!--[[User:IScott|IScott]] 16:42, 2 March 2011 (EST)

== Perversion diversity ==

As I understand it this is a list of words that are backward compatible to former religious meanings. We could stop saying Happy Holidays as a society and say Merry Christmas. I'd hate to think of what bigots we would appear to be if we started calling diversity perversion. "Have a lot of people off all different races, creeds, and colors working at your company, you are perverted!" or "A black man marrying a white woman, that's a perverted couple!" Since I doubt that anyone here thinks that way (and if they do maybe they should find somewhere else to be) then I think that should be pulled from the list for now. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 20:01, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:'Diversity' is a word used often by liberals and others who push the [[homosexual agenda]], claiming that ongoing [[homosexualization]] is in the name of diversity. As a conservative and one who reads the Bible daily, I find same-sex marriage perverse, yet liberals such as yourself would refer to such things as diverse. Hence, your non-sequiturs aside, I feel the entry should remain. [[User:PeterUker|PeterUker]] 20:10, 22 February 2011 (EST)
::A) You didn't address my point
::B) Perversion isn't a religious word any more than right and wrong. Are math teachers helping to keep Christianity vibrant and alive by assigning problems which are later graded as right and wrong?
::C) How ever often you claim to read the bible doesn't really matter here. This is the internet, anyone can claim to read the bible. however much they want. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 20:32, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:::I'd have to weigh in with [[User:AlaskanEconomy|AE]] on this. Although, specifically, "diversity" is ''becoming'' a by-word, diversity is an [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/diversity old word] and refers to more than ''just'' homosexualization, by keeping it as is '''gives''' those advocates legitimacy and (in the end) we end up losing a serviceable word. [[User:DevonJ|DevonJ]] 21:06, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::We could make several categories of terms which have normal vs. liberal counterparts. Not all such pairs are examples of secularization. Some merely reflect the liberal worldview. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 22:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::Diversity is more an example of liberals distorting the meaning of a word, the way I see it. I wouldn't call the original meaning of "diversity" an example of perversion, but advocates of the homosexual agenda ''try'' to make it into a different word. [[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 18:40, 23 February 2011 (EST)

== Dead/Passed ==

I'm not quite sure this fits. While "passed" or "passed on" is certainly a euphemism for "dead," surely it carries with it the connotation of passing on to God's judgment? It seems to me like, if anything, "dead" is the more atheist-friendly term, since they're fond of claiming that once you're dead, you're dead. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 22:52, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:You seem to be correct, perish->dead maybe? Do what you feel is right.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== Use of Christian Language in non-Religious Context ==

Based on the introduction to this page, the list is supposed to contain Christian expressions that have been replaced by secular expressions. But some examples are Christian expressions that are being used in non-Religious context. (Examples on this page include "Saintly"/"Well-behaved" and "Angelic"/"Pretty." Other examples I thought of are "Oh my God!" instead of "Oh no!" and calling something "divine" instead of "delicious" or "in excellent taste.") Maybe this page can have one list of Christian expressions that are being replaced with different secular terms, and one list that contains Christian expressions that have been inappropriately adopted by the secular crowd for non-religious use. Does this make sense? Or do you think this all belongs in the same list? --[[User:Toadaron|Toadaron]] 12:25, 24 February 2011 (EST)

== Gesundheit means "God Bless you!" in German==
Gesundheit litterally translates to "God Bless you!" in German. I don't think there is any malice or Secularized Language in this phrase. I think it was just a custom started by German-American Immigrants that caught on. As a descendant of German-American immigrants I feel obliged to point this out. Thank you, --[[User:Davidkon|Davidkon]] 14:30, 24 February 2011 (EST)
:As a speaker of German, I can tell you that Gesundheit means "Health". Gott segne dich! [[User:EricAlstrom|EricAlstrom]] 15:03, 24 February 2011 (EST)
:Sorry to disagree with you, Davidkon, but "geshundheit" means "good health" as this entry[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gesundheit] states. The German word for God is "Gott", and this word is not part of gesundheit. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 15:07, 24 February 2011 (EST)

== Changes ==

I made a start at the categories Ed suggested, and organized the terms alphabetically within each category. I did remove the example of "Jesus!" to "Gee whiz!", as I really think that's primarily a case of people trying not to use the Lord's name in a profane fashion. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 13:10, 26 February 2011 (EST)

: Your improvements are superb. But I didn't know that "Gee whiz" was a secularization of "Jesus"! I'd be inclined to leave that in for informative purposes, even though you're reason for deleting it is probably. Perhaps with a footnote?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:19, 26 February 2011 (EST)

:: I can certainly see your point as far as the informative value, and this isn't, after all, just supposed to be an article about language that was secularized for malicious reasons. It seems like we really do need a section exploring possible reasons for the secularization of language, and the ways in which even benign motives can contribute to the trend. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 15:20, 26 February 2011 (EST)

:::Hmm...that being the case, should similar euphemistic alterations like "Jeepers Creepers" be added in, too? --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 15:23, 26 February 2011 (EST)

:::: You win. Let's keep that junk out. :-) --[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:45, 26 February 2011 (EST)

== Government ==

Hello,
I was wondering wondering what the rational of "State -> Government", along with "Govern -> Rule". I don't particularly see how either is Christian or secular, and beyond that, it seems like these to contradict each other. Just wanting to hear some thoughts. [[User:EricAlstrom|EricAlstrom]] 18:52, 26 February 2011 (EST)

:Seems straightforward: the more atheistic one is, the more he views government as the church, and officials in government as rulers. In contrast, the term "state" includes the people (e.g., "State of Rhode Island"), and governing connotes an element of service rather than purely ruling.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:04, 26 February 2011 (EST)

== Christmas/Xmas ==

I would like to point out that the English letter X looks exactly like the Greek letter Chi, which is the first letter of 'Christ' in Greek. That is the origin of 'Xmas' and it is not an attempt to take Christ out. I submit that 'Xmas' should be removed from this list.
--[[User:Lordofthemarsh|Lordofthemarsh]] 11:51, 2 March 2011 (EST)

:That's a slippery slope: referring the "X" to "Christ". Let's keep it in for now.

:Eventually, we can expand this topic, branching out to all sorts of language differences between conservatives and liberals. The religious-secular division is just one such difference.

:By the way, I'd prefer you to use your real name (unless Andy has given you specific permission to use a pseudonym). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:50, 2 March 2011 (EST)

::The transliteration of Christ in Greek is Χριστός, for what it is worth.
::I thought the point of the article was how we all talk about the same things but that the sacredness has been removed by substituting a synonym to remove the holiness of the original words.
::I suppose, conversely, one could make the point that LORD is a "secularized" version of the tetragrammaton. This was done for the reason that YHWH was too sacred to be uttered. [[User:DevonJ|DevonJ]] 17:37, 2 March 2011 (EST)

== "Notes" section ==

I added a "notes" section for things myself and others in the Talk page have pointed out. Let me know what you think. -[[User:Danq|danq]] 23:50, 2 March 2011 (EST)

== Shrove Tuesday/Mardi Gras ==

"Mardi Gras" is the '''''only''''' way to say "Shrove Tuesday" in French. Shrove Tuesday is a specific English tradition of a confessional before Lent. In French culture, the last day before Lent is ''Mardi Gras'', '''''never''''' a French translation of "Shrove Tuesday". The Vatican liturgical calendar doesn't even include the day before Ash Wednesday. [http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/calendar/ns_liturgy_calendar_en.html#MARCH_2011] [[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 15:04, 9 March 2011 (EST)

== Fighting Secularized Language ==

Would it be appropriate to comb through Conservapedia articles for instances of secularized language on this list, and change them to reflect the correct words? I haven't been active in a while, and I thought such a project might be a good re-introduction to the community.
--[[User:WillS|WillS]] 19:43, 13 March 2011 (EDT)

:That's a great idea!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:23, 13 March 2011 (EDT)

::Thanks! I'm on it. One question; is there any way to edit page titles? For example, the 'birth control' pill should really be called the 'abortion' pill; I think that's both fighting secular language and much more accurate, anyways (not that there's any chance of secular thought being mistaken as logical!).--[[User:WillS|WillS]] 22:58, 16 March 2011 (EDT)
:::If doing so would require more user rights than I have, I could also compile a list for a moderator to look at when they're not busy. I'm running into quite a few; '[[Halloween]]' should be renamed 'Hallowed Eve,' for example.--[[User:WillS|WillS]] 23:10, 16 March 2011 (EDT)

Talk:Secularized Language

2011-03-17T03:10:56Z

WillS:

I'd like to organize these into categories - not divided up, maybe - with secularized expressions at the top (e.g., Thank God => thank goodness). Terms indicating a total shift of concept like Bible Study => fundamentalism might come later. Everyone okay with this? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 08:43, 22 February 2011 (EST)

: Sounds good to me! How about giving it a try and let's see how it looks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:32, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::To be fair, many more conservative Christians (my mother, for example), use some of the so-called "secular expressions" because they take a strict line on taking the Lord's name in vain. She would, for example, rather not say "Thank God" unless she was quite literally thanking the deity. Indeed, I believe that is how the "thank goodness" construction originally evolved. --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 12:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::That might well be, Jdixon--certainly, it's laudable to take seriously the commandment not to take the Lord's name in vain--but I don't think very many Christians would see a heartfelt "Thank God!" as inappropriate in many circumstances. Thus, while your mother's conscientiousness is admirable, I don't think such conscientiousness is a sufficient explanation for the systematic removal of religious language from the public square. Certainly, I think that some people choose "Thank goodness" out of a concern for propriety, but I think many more choose it out of a desire to avoid giving offense, or simply because it's what they're most used to hearing. Perhaps a section on differing reasons for using these terms could be included in the article; after all, this is supposed to be an examination of the issue. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 13:34, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== Washington's Birthday/President's Day ==

While this is a case of P.C., it's not a case of secularized language. Last I checked, George Washington was not a sacred personage. [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 13:47, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:Washington was a prominent Christian whose habit of praying and appealing to God for assistance is well-known. He was a kind of saint, and the downplaying of his (indisputable) significance is due to his Christianity. If he had been an atheist then you'd see the opposite effect.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:20, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::What kind of a saint was George Washington? --[[User:JohannesZ|JohannesZ]] 15:52, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::The kind that wins wars. There have been other examples. Have you ever heard of [[Joan of Arc]]?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:02, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::Canonized in 1920, right? When did the Church recognize Washington as a saint? [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 16:17, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::@Andy: Aye. She still needed miracles credited to her. [http://www.stjoan-center.com/novelapp/joaap04.html] --[[User:JohannesZ|JohannesZ]] 16:20, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::I don't think all Christian churches have the same rules.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:23, 22 February 2011 (EST)
::::::Undoubtedly. So which churches DO recognize Washington as a saint or other type of sacred being? [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 16:26, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::::: Perhaps the church of Satan does, or perhaps atheists simply dislike Washington. Wouldn't that be enough to explain the misnaming of the holiday as described in the entry?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:31, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::::I'm pretty sure that The Church of Satan does not acknowledge George Washington as divine. If there's any evidence -- a tract from an angry atheist decrying a celebration of the Christian Washington and demanding a holiday that accommodates the Presidents that were not Christians, I've yet to find one. [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 16:37, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::::::::Marty, bias doesn't work that way. You're not likely to find such an angry tract about ''any'' of the items on the list.

::::::::::Atheistic bias, like other forms of bias, seeks to downplay and minimize Christianity. Washington was a leading, accomplished Christian. Lincoln far less so, other presidents even lesser still, and the office of president not Christian at all. An atheistic bias pushes language from the Christian recognition to the more atheistic substitute.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:15, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::::::::I agree with Andy here; the greater the Christianity of an historical figure, the more the atheistic revisionists will try to downplay his significance. [[User:PeterUker|PeterUker]] 18:24, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::::::::: How can President's Day even be considered remotely secularized as it was never a religiously themed event to begin with? The reason we have President's Day is due to the hesitation and the unwillingness of conservatives in the southeast to celebrate Lincoln's birthday as vilified he was as in infringing on "state's rights," and removing their "Peculiar institution." This contrasts to other locations in the country who celebrated both Washington's birthday and Lincoln's birthday in two different events. Furthermore, the Federal Government was disinterested in granting two Monday's off for federal employees, so came the compromise of celebrating a day between Lincoln's and Washington's birthday.[[User:JustinU|JustinU]] 21:46, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::::::::::: Lincoln never had a stature comparable to Washington, and it's not merely because southerners disliked Lincoln. The attempt to equate Lincoln to Washington as a joint federal holiday was a farce and never got off the ground.

::::::::::::: But atheists downplay Washington just as they downplay other accomplished Christians. It's irrelevant whether the holiday was ever "religiously themed." A day honoring a prominent Christian has been diluted and even misnamed. It's the same secularization seen in replacing "Merry Christmas" with "Happy Holidays."--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:27, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::::::::::: Mr. Aschlafly, I am unsure if you are purposefully misapplying my point so that your argument appears to be stronger, but I feel that your point is less than successively argued. In fact, the reason that Lincoln is trumpeted as being one of the greatest Presidents to have ever had the honor of holding the office is because, pointedly, history holds him comparable to George Washington in regards to leadership and vision for the country. I am also at ends with your rather presuming statement of Washington's Christianity, considering the well documented Enlightenment-era beliefs he held associated with his principles as a Freemason, a largely deist organization.[[User:JustinU|JustinU]] 00:44, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::::::::::JustinU, it is well documented in Washington's own writings as well as the writings of those who knew him that he was a committed Christian within the Episcopalian Church. The "deist" allegation is from the late-20th century only. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 00:57, 23 February 2011 (EST)
[[Image:C log-dancer.gif|thumbnail|right|150px|Maybe we should have a annual parade for St. George Washington like we do for St. Patrick. :)]]
:::The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia correctly declares and supports the doctrine that every true Christian believer is a saint.[http://eastonsbibledictionary.com/saints.htm] The [[Apostle Paul]] wrote: "Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the <big>'''saints'''</big> which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus: Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved." (Ephesians 1: 1-6) Washington appears to have been a true Christian.[http://www.christiananswers.net/q-wall/wal-g011.html] Therefore, George Washington was a saint. Maybe we should have a annual parade for St. George Washington like we do for St. Patrick. :) [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:33, 23 February 2011 (EST)

== A few questions ==

A few of the words here don't really seem to fit in the list.
For example:
*'''Resurrection Sunday''' -> '''Easter'''
::"Easter" does have pagan origins, but the Pope says "Easter Sunday", not "Resurrection Sunday" - see[http://www.vatican.va/liturgical_year/liturgico_en/easter.html] and [http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/calendar/ns_liturgy_calendar_en.html#APRIL_2011]. In fact, a Google search of the Vatican website doesn't find "Resurrection Sunday" at all, except a few times with commas in between.

*'''Washington's Birthday''' -> '''President's Day'''
::It's not secularization as far as I can tell. And President's Day honors Lincoln as well. Silly political correctness, maybe. Secularization, no.

*'''Pagan''' -> '''Secular'''
::Pagan usually refers to belief in multiple gods, while secular refers to something separate from religion (e.g. the Turkish government is secular because there is no state religion).

*'''God bless you''' -> '''Gesundheit'''
::Gesundheit is what Germans have always said after a sneeze. Many European countries have the same kind of response. Nobody ever says "God bless you" in German. "Gesundheit" is as old as "God bless you", and the people who say it got the idea from German-Americans.

[[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 14:18, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:Pagan definition: one who has little or no religion. Secular definition: not overtly or specifically religious. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:31, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::Merriam-Webster Online: [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pagan?show=0&t=1298483529 Pagan] [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/secular Secular]
::The first definition for "pagan" is ''a follower of a polytheistic religion'' - notice "polytheistic religion". Secular is ''not overtly or specifically religious''. There's a difference, and in order to claim that "secular" is a redefinition of "pagan" you have to completely ignore the ''first'' definition of "pagan". There's probably another word that could be used as the precursor of "secular" (Atheist?), but it's not "pagan". [[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 12:58, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::To clarify: I '''do''' think that the word "secular" and maybe "pagan" belong on this list, but not together. Maybe "atheist" -> "secular" and "pagan" -> "Wiccan" or such? [[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 18:28, 23 February 2011 (EST)

== The Saint's Days ==
* Valentine's Day is no longer officially the feast day for St. Valentine, which definitely explains on some level why the "St" has been dropped from the name. February 14th is now the feast day for Cyril and Methodius, this changed in 1969 under Pope Paul the V, I think.

*Paddy for St. Patrick's Day makes logical sense in that Paddy is a celtic diminutive for Padrig, which is Anglicized to Patrick. I've never actually heard it as Paddy's Day, I've always heard it as "St. Paddy's Day"

*Resurrection Sunday has been called Easter since at the very least the AD 600s. St. Bede's ''Ecclesiastical History of the English People'' written in the early 700s refers to it as Easter, although he does admit it is tied to the Pagan festival of Eostre he still uses the term Easter. I don't think it is logical to use Easter as an example of modern society trying to erase Christian influence from daily life, I think it is simply a continuation of a name that is well over 1,000 years old.

just my thoughts, good luck.--[[User:IScott|IScott]] 19:13, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:Interesting comments, but they don't contradict the observation of bias. Practicing Catholics are a small minority in the United States and Western Europe, so the relevance of the Church's changing of the feast day for St. Valentine hardly seems dispositive. As to your second point, the "logical sense" is very strained in denying credit where it is due. As to your third point, Christians refer to Easter as Resurrection Sunday to this day, just fewer of them. And there was bias in 600 A.D. too.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:13, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::I too have never heard paddy's day, it is always proceeded by the "St.". While catholics may be a minority in the west one exception to that is Ireland (the only country in the EU with out abortion) and I think the secular consciousness still associates Ireland with Catholicism. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 21:50, 22 February 2011 (EST)

: I agree that the actual Saint's days have been marginalized, and that the meaning of the holidays hold almost no religious meaning anymore. Irish-Americans celebrate St. Patrick's Day not as a saint's feast but as a day to meaninglessly celebrate their Irish-ness and dye rivers green and over-indulge in drinking alcohol, and Valentine's Day is a day to celebrate love and has very little to do with the old saint's feast.
: However, I stand firm on my third point, I find it highly unlikely that '''Saint Bede''', venerated in both the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion, who is also considered a '''Doctor of the Church''' to be biased towards an unchristian term. In the 700s Bede refers to it as Easter and it has been called Easter by the English people and English speakers since at least then. For well over 1,000 years the majority of devout English Christians have called it Easter, and thus its use cannot be a modern attempt to try to obscure Christian origins.--[[User:IScott|IScott]] 23:22, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::I agree that the use of Easter is not a ''modern'' secularization, but I still wonder whether its use was influenced by pagan tendencies in the first millennium. I have no quarrel with Saint Bede but am not sure he named it. He may well have been an expert about God but that does not make one an expert about bias. Quite the contrary: Jesus said the people of [[faith]] do not quickly recognize the tricks of the worldly.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:45, 22 February 2011 (EST)

A small correction about one of my role models. Bede is not a saint although, as IScott pointed out, he is a Doctor of the Church. His tomb, in Durham Cathedral, is worth a visit! [[User:Rafael|Rafael]]

:Thanks for correcting that!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 01:05, 1 March 2011 (EST)

::I don't mean to be harsh, but you are mistaken Rafael, Bede is a Saint. He is often refered to as just "the venerable" but he is a Saint so I can see where you might be confused. He is venerated in the Anglican Communion as well as the Roman Catholic Church. Even Conservapedia's own entry on [[Bede]] has an icon that says "St. Bede." Furthermore a google search of Saint Bede shows that there are a variety of churches named in his honor, in Williamsburg, VA there is a Catholic Church called St. Bede's Catholic Church, as well as an Anglican Church of St. Bede in Scarborough, ON, Canada, and a variety of churches and Parish schools in England. In the Episcopal Church Bede's feast day is May 25th. Bede is very much a Saint. Hope that clears up the Sainthood of Bede!--[[User:IScott|IScott]] 16:42, 2 March 2011 (EST)

== Perversion diversity ==

As I understand it this is a list of words that are backward compatible to former religious meanings. We could stop saying Happy Holidays as a society and say Merry Christmas. I'd hate to think of what bigots we would appear to be if we started calling diversity perversion. "Have a lot of people off all different races, creeds, and colors working at your company, you are perverted!" or "A black man marrying a white woman, that's a perverted couple!" Since I doubt that anyone here thinks that way (and if they do maybe they should find somewhere else to be) then I think that should be pulled from the list for now. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 20:01, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:'Diversity' is a word used often by liberals and others who push the [[homosexual agenda]], claiming that ongoing [[homosexualization]] is in the name of diversity. As a conservative and one who reads the Bible daily, I find same-sex marriage perverse, yet liberals such as yourself would refer to such things as diverse. Hence, your non-sequiturs aside, I feel the entry should remain. [[User:PeterUker|PeterUker]] 20:10, 22 February 2011 (EST)
::A) You didn't address my point
::B) Perversion isn't a religious word any more than right and wrong. Are math teachers helping to keep Christianity vibrant and alive by assigning problems which are later graded as right and wrong?
::C) How ever often you claim to read the bible doesn't really matter here. This is the internet, anyone can claim to read the bible. however much they want. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 20:32, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:::I'd have to weigh in with [[User:AlaskanEconomy|AE]] on this. Although, specifically, "diversity" is ''becoming'' a by-word, diversity is an [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/diversity old word] and refers to more than ''just'' homosexualization, by keeping it as is '''gives''' those advocates legitimacy and (in the end) we end up losing a serviceable word. [[User:DevonJ|DevonJ]] 21:06, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::We could make several categories of terms which have normal vs. liberal counterparts. Not all such pairs are examples of secularization. Some merely reflect the liberal worldview. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 22:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::Diversity is more an example of liberals distorting the meaning of a word, the way I see it. I wouldn't call the original meaning of "diversity" an example of perversion, but advocates of the homosexual agenda ''try'' to make it into a different word. [[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 18:40, 23 February 2011 (EST)

== Dead/Passed ==

I'm not quite sure this fits. While "passed" or "passed on" is certainly a euphemism for "dead," surely it carries with it the connotation of passing on to God's judgment? It seems to me like, if anything, "dead" is the more atheist-friendly term, since they're fond of claiming that once you're dead, you're dead. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 22:52, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:You seem to be correct, perish->dead maybe? Do what you feel is right.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== Use of Christian Language in non-Religious Context ==

Based on the introduction to this page, the list is supposed to contain Christian expressions that have been replaced by secular expressions. But some examples are Christian expressions that are being used in non-Religious context. (Examples on this page include "Saintly"/"Well-behaved" and "Angelic"/"Pretty." Other examples I thought of are "Oh my God!" instead of "Oh no!" and calling something "divine" instead of "delicious" or "in excellent taste.") Maybe this page can have one list of Christian expressions that are being replaced with different secular terms, and one list that contains Christian expressions that have been inappropriately adopted by the secular crowd for non-religious use. Does this make sense? Or do you think this all belongs in the same list? --[[User:Toadaron|Toadaron]] 12:25, 24 February 2011 (EST)

== Gesundheit means "God Bless you!" in German==
Gesundheit litterally translates to "God Bless you!" in German. I don't think there is any malice or Secularized Language in this phrase. I think it was just a custom started by German-American Immigrants that caught on. As a descendant of German-American immigrants I feel obliged to point this out. Thank you, --[[User:Davidkon|Davidkon]] 14:30, 24 February 2011 (EST)
:As a speaker of German, I can tell you that Gesundheit means "Health". Gott segne dich! [[User:EricAlstrom|EricAlstrom]] 15:03, 24 February 2011 (EST)
:Sorry to disagree with you, Davidkon, but "geshundheit" means "good health" as this entry[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gesundheit] states. The German word for God is "Gott", and this word is not part of gesundheit. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 15:07, 24 February 2011 (EST)

== Changes ==

I made a start at the categories Ed suggested, and organized the terms alphabetically within each category. I did remove the example of "Jesus!" to "Gee whiz!", as I really think that's primarily a case of people trying not to use the Lord's name in a profane fashion. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 13:10, 26 February 2011 (EST)

: Your improvements are superb. But I didn't know that "Gee whiz" was a secularization of "Jesus"! I'd be inclined to leave that in for informative purposes, even though you're reason for deleting it is probably. Perhaps with a footnote?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:19, 26 February 2011 (EST)

:: I can certainly see your point as far as the informative value, and this isn't, after all, just supposed to be an article about language that was secularized for malicious reasons. It seems like we really do need a section exploring possible reasons for the secularization of language, and the ways in which even benign motives can contribute to the trend. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 15:20, 26 February 2011 (EST)

:::Hmm...that being the case, should similar euphemistic alterations like "Jeepers Creepers" be added in, too? --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 15:23, 26 February 2011 (EST)

:::: You win. Let's keep that junk out. :-) --[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:45, 26 February 2011 (EST)

== Government ==

Hello,
I was wondering wondering what the rational of "State -> Government", along with "Govern -> Rule". I don't particularly see how either is Christian or secular, and beyond that, it seems like these to contradict each other. Just wanting to hear some thoughts. [[User:EricAlstrom|EricAlstrom]] 18:52, 26 February 2011 (EST)

:Seems straightforward: the more atheistic one is, the more he views government as the church, and officials in government as rulers. In contrast, the term "state" includes the people (e.g., "State of Rhode Island"), and governing connotes an element of service rather than purely ruling.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:04, 26 February 2011 (EST)

== Christmas/Xmas ==

I would like to point out that the English letter X looks exactly like the Greek letter Chi, which is the first letter of 'Christ' in Greek. That is the origin of 'Xmas' and it is not an attempt to take Christ out. I submit that 'Xmas' should be removed from this list.
--[[User:Lordofthemarsh|Lordofthemarsh]] 11:51, 2 March 2011 (EST)

:That's a slippery slope: referring the "X" to "Christ". Let's keep it in for now.

:Eventually, we can expand this topic, branching out to all sorts of language differences between conservatives and liberals. The religious-secular division is just one such difference.

:By the way, I'd prefer you to use your real name (unless Andy has given you specific permission to use a pseudonym). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:50, 2 March 2011 (EST)

::The transliteration of Christ in Greek is Χριστός, for what it is worth.
::I thought the point of the article was how we all talk about the same things but that the sacredness has been removed by substituting a synonym to remove the holiness of the original words.
::I suppose, conversely, one could make the point that LORD is a "secularized" version of the tetragrammaton. This was done for the reason that YHWH was too sacred to be uttered. [[User:DevonJ|DevonJ]] 17:37, 2 March 2011 (EST)

== "Notes" section ==

I added a "notes" section for things myself and others in the Talk page have pointed out. Let me know what you think. -[[User:Danq|danq]] 23:50, 2 March 2011 (EST)

== Shrove Tuesday/Mardi Gras ==

"Mardi Gras" is the '''''only''''' way to say "Shrove Tuesday" in French. Shrove Tuesday is a specific English tradition of a confessional before Lent. In French culture, the last day before Lent is ''Mardi Gras'', '''''never''''' a French translation of "Shrove Tuesday". The Vatican liturgical calendar doesn't even include the day before Ash Wednesday. [http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/calendar/ns_liturgy_calendar_en.html#MARCH_2011] [[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 15:04, 9 March 2011 (EST)

== Fighting Secularized Language ==

Would it be appropriate to comb through Conservapedia articles for instances of secularized language on this list, and change them to reflect the correct words? I haven't been active in a while, and I thought such a project might be a good re-introduction to the community.
--[[User:WillS|WillS]] 19:43, 13 March 2011 (EDT)

:That's a great idea!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:23, 13 March 2011 (EDT)

::Thanks! I'm on it. One question; is there any way to edit page titles? For example, the 'birth control' pill should really be called the 'abortion' pill; I think that's both fighting secular language and much more accurate, anyways (not that there's any chance of secular thought being mistaken as logical!).--[[User:WillS|WillS]] 22:58, 16 March 2011 (EDT)
:::If doing so would require more user rights than I have, I could also compile a list for a moderator to look at when they're not busy. I'm running into quite a few; '[[Holloween]]' should be renamed 'Hallowed Eve,' for example.--[[User:WillS|WillS]] 23:10, 16 March 2011 (EDT)

Ku Klux Klan

2011-03-17T03:07:25Z

WillS:

[[File:KKKrally1946.JPG|right|300px|thumb|Ku Klux Klan rally, unknown location, August, 1951]]
The name '''Ku Klux Klan''' has been used by three entirely different organizations in the U.S. While these copied the same name and regalia, they had very different goals and activities.

The Klan of the 1860s was a violent effort by white Southern [[Democrats]] to fight [[Reconstruction]]; it was suppressed by the federal government.

The second Klan flourished nationwide for a few years in the 1920s as state and district organizers profited handsomely by signing up millions of members, selling them distinctive white-robe costumes. The Klan voiced strong support for prohibition, opposed sexual immorality and promoted racism, liberalism, anti-Semitism, anti-Catholicism and immigration restriction. Dramatic scandals inside the organization and lack of organizational structure caused the Klan to collapse quickly in the late 1920s. By 1928 it was practically defunct.

The third Klan comprised unrelated hate groups that sprang up in the South in the 1960s to fight integration.
* the Klan largely fell apart in the 1980s [http://www.fumento.com/arson/wsjfire.html]

==First KKK==
[[Image:Artoon.jpg|right|200px|thumb|A political cartoon depicting the KKK and the Democratic party as continuations of the Confederacy]]
The first KKK was an unorganized movement of white Southerners who opposed [[Reconstruction]] in the late 1860s by inflicting violence against black leaders and white Republicans. Local Klans were entirely separate; there was no organization or coordination above the county level, and no county or state officers. The Klan was broken up by President [[Ulysses S. Grant]] and the U.S. Army using the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (also known as the Ku Klux Klan Act). It had disappeared by 1872, although similar violent groups persisted in some localities around the South.

==Second KKK: The 1920s==
The second KKK was a nonviolent membership organization in the 1920s that reached hundreds of thousands—possibly millions—of men in every state. It was mostly a [[Ponzi scheme]], whereby the organizers took all the money (for initiation fees and costumes). When they had organized an area they moved on, leaving local chapters without money or leadership. No prominent American admitted he was a member at the time, but state organizers claimed vast powers. There is a possibility that some local Klans in the deep South engaged in violence against blacks, but historians are unsure; allegations of systematic violence were common but have not been verified. In recent years historians have found enough records to show that local chapters were primarily discussion groups, often with speakers who denounced Catholics, Jews, crime and violation of the prohibition laws.
[[File:RR-KKK.jpg|thumb|300px|Ronald Reagan starred as the crusading district attorney battling the Klan in this 1951 film.<ref> See [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044075/usercomments analysis of film]</ref>]]

A series of scandals ruined the KKK's reputation and the group faded away after 1925, except for some remote areas like West Virginia. [[Robert Byrd]], now a Senator, was an organizer in West Virginia in the 1940s, and has apologized repeatedly for it. Supreme Court Justice [[Hugo Black]] admitted in 1939 that he had been a member in the 1920s.

==Third Klan==
The third Klan currently exists and comprises a few thousand members in local chapters. There is no real organization, and the group sponsors vehement hate talk as well as occasional violent threats and actions. It is racist and aims at the suppression of African-American, Jewish, homosexual, and Catholic interests. The current Klan presents itself as a Christian organization, but all denominations have rejected it as inherently non-Christian.

[[David Duke]] was a [[Democrat]] at the time of his official membership with the Klan. He has ties to white supremacist organizations like the NAAWP, which he founded. After leaving the klan, Duke was elected as a Republican to the Louisiana state legislature. The [[Republican National Committee]] disavowed Duke and repudiated his racist views when Duke made an unsuccessful bid for governor.<ref>[http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-1176548.html RNC Condemns Ex-Klansman Duke], ''[[Washington Post]]'', February 25, 1989.</ref>

==Bibliography==
* Newton, Michael, and Judy Ann Newton. ''The Ku Klux Klan: An Encyclopedia''. (1991).
* Alexander, Charles. “Kleagles and Cash.” . ''The Business History Review.'' (1965) Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 348-367
* Chalmers, David. ''Hooded Americanism.'' (1987), an older survey
* Dray, Philip. ''At the Hands of Persons Unknown: The Lynching of Black America'', (2002).
* Feldman, Glenn. ''Politics, Society, and the Klan in Alabama, 1915-1949''. (1999).
* Fryer, Jr. Roland G. and Steven D. Levitt. "Hatred and Profits: Getting under the Hood of the Ku Klux Klan," ''National Bureau of Economic Research,'' September 2007, [http://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/13417.html abstract]; [http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:cyuQ-5WfsXAJ:www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/fryer/papers/Hatred%2520and%2520Profits,%2520Getting%2520Under%2520the%2520Hood%2520of%2520the%2520Ku%2520Klux%2520Klan.pdf+%22Hatred+and+Profits%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us full text online]
* George, John, and Laird Wilcox. ''American Extremists: Militias, Supremacists, Klansmen, Communists & Others'' (1996) 443 pgs. [http://www.questia.com/library/book/american-extremists-militias-supremacists-klansmen-communists-and-others-by-john-george-laird-wilcox.jsp online edition]
* Glaeser, Edward L. “The Political Economy of Hatred.” ''Quarterly Journal of Economics.'' 2005. Vol. 120, No. 1, pp. 45-86. [http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/qjec.2005.120.1.45 abstract], goes well beyond the KKK
* Goldberg, Robert Alan. ''Hooded Empire: The Ku Klux Klan in Colorado.'' (1981).
* Horn, Stanley F. ''Invisible Empire: The Story of the Ku Klux Klan, 1866-1871'', (1939)
::Horn, born in 1889, was a Southern historian who was sympathetic to the first Klan, which, in a 1976 oral interview [http://www.lib.duke.edu/forest/Research/ohisrch.html], he was careful to distinguish from the later "spurious Ku Klux organization which was in ill-repute—and, of course, had no connection whatsoever with the Klan of Reconstruction days."
* Jackson, Kenneth T. ''The Ku Klux Klan in the City, 1915-1930.'' (1992)
* MacLean, Nancy. ''Behind the Mask of Chivalry: The Making of the Second Ku Klux Klan.'' (1994)
* McVeigh, Rory. “Power Devaluation, the Ku Klux Klan, and the Democratic National Convention of 1924.” ''Sociological Forum'' 2001. 16(1):1-30.
* Moore, Leonard J. ''Citizen Klansmen: The Ku Klux Klan in Indiana, 1921-1928'' (1991). [http://www.questia.com/library/book/citizen-klansmen-the-ku-klux-klan-in-indiana-1921-1928-by-leonard-j-moore.jsp online edition]
* Parsons, Elaine Frantz, "Midnight Rangers: Costume and Performance in the Reconstruction-Era Ku Klux Klan." ''The Journal of American History'' 92.3 (2005): 811-36. [http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jah/92.3/parsons.html in History Cooperative]
* Pegram, Thomas R. "Hoodwinked: The Anti-Saloon League and the Ku Klux Klan in 1920s Prohibition Enforcement." ''Journal of Gilded Age and Progressive era'' 7.1 (2008): [http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jga/7.1/pegram.html online].
* Rhodes, James Ford. ''History of the United States from the Compromise of 1850 to the McKinley-Bryan Campaign of 1896. Volume: 7.'' (1920)
* Trelease, Allen W. ''White Terror: The Ku Klux Klan Conspiracy and Southern Reconstruction'' (1995).
* Wade, Wyn Craig. ''The Fiery Cross: The Ku Klux Klan in America''. (1987); a highly negative account of all three Klans, based on extensive research but not familiar with recent scholarship.

==Critical external links==
* [http://reactor-core.org/original-kkk.html The History of the Original Ku Klux Klan] - by an anonymous author sympathetic to the original Klan
* W. S. Simkins, "Why the Ku Klux," 4 ''The Alcalde'' (June 1916): 735-748. [http://www.law.du.edu/russell/lh/alh/docs/simkins.html online]; Simkins (1842-1929) was an organizer of the KKK in Florida in 1868, and a law professor when he wrote this memoir.
* [http://education.harpweek.com/KKKHearings/AppendixA.htm Full text of the Klan Act of 1871]
**[http://education.harpweek.com/KKKHearings/AppendixB.htm simplified version])
* [http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-694 Ku Klux Klan in the Reconstruction Era] (New Georgia Encyclopedia)
* [http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-2730 Ku Klux Klan in the Twentieth Century] (New Georgia Encyclopedia)

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:United States History]]
[[Category:Hate Groups]]
[[Category:United States Political Scandals]]
[[Category:Reconstruction]]
[[Category:1920s]]
[[Category:Terrorism]]
[[Category:Racist Organizations]]

Ku Klux Klan

2011-03-17T03:06:49Z

WillS:

[[File:KKKrally1946.JPG|right|300px|thumb|Ku Klux Klan rally, unknown location, August, 1951]]
The name '''Ku Klux Klan''' has been used by three entirely different organizations in the U.S. While these copied the same name and regalia, they had very different goals and activities.

The Klan of the 1860s was a violent effort by white Southern Democrats to fight [[Reconstruction]]; it was suppressed by the federal government.

The second Klan flourished nationwide for a few years in the 1920s as state and district organizers profited handsomely by signing up millions of members, selling them distinctive white-robe costumes. The Klan voiced strong support for prohibition, opposed sexual immorality and promoted racism, liberalism, anti-Semitism, anti-Catholicism and immigration restriction. Dramatic scandals inside the organization and lack of organizational structure caused the Klan to collapse quickly in the late 1920s. By 1928 it was practically defunct.

The third Klan comprised unrelated hate groups that sprang up in the South in the 1960s to fight integration.
* the Klan largely fell apart in the 1980s [http://www.fumento.com/arson/wsjfire.html]

==First KKK==
[[Image:Artoon.jpg|right|200px|thumb|A political cartoon depicting the KKK and the Democratic party as continuations of the Confederacy]]
The first KKK was an unorganized movement of white Southerners who opposed [[Reconstruction]] in the late 1860s by inflicting violence against black leaders and white Republicans. Local Klans were entirely separate; there was no organization or coordination above the county level, and no county or state officers. The Klan was broken up by President [[Ulysses S. Grant]] and the U.S. Army using the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (also known as the Ku Klux Klan Act). It had disappeared by 1872, although similar violent groups persisted in some localities around the South.

==Second KKK: The 1920s==
The second KKK was a nonviolent membership organization in the 1920s that reached hundreds of thousands—possibly millions—of men in every state. It was mostly a [[Ponzi scheme]], whereby the organizers took all the money (for initiation fees and costumes). When they had organized an area they moved on, leaving local chapters without money or leadership. No prominent American admitted he was a member at the time, but state organizers claimed vast powers. There is a possibility that some local Klans in the deep South engaged in violence against blacks, but historians are unsure; allegations of systematic violence were common but have not been verified. In recent years historians have found enough records to show that local chapters were primarily discussion groups, often with speakers who denounced Catholics, Jews, crime and violation of the prohibition laws.
[[File:RR-KKK.jpg|thumb|300px|Ronald Reagan starred as the crusading district attorney battling the Klan in this 1951 film.<ref> See [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044075/usercomments analysis of film]</ref>]]

A series of scandals ruined the KKK's reputation and the group faded away after 1925, except for some remote areas like West Virginia. [[Robert Byrd]], now a Senator, was an organizer in West Virginia in the 1940s, and has apologized repeatedly for it. Supreme Court Justice [[Hugo Black]] admitted in 1939 that he had been a member in the 1920s.

==Third Klan==
The third Klan currently exists and comprises a few thousand members in local chapters. There is no real organization, and the group sponsors vehement hate talk as well as occasional violent threats and actions. It is racist and aims at the suppression of African-American, Jewish, homosexual, and Catholic interests. The current Klan presents itself as a Christian organization, but all denominations have rejected it as inherently non-Christian.

[[David Duke]] was a [[Democrat]] at the time of his official membership with the Klan. He has ties to white supremacist organizations like the NAAWP, which he founded. After leaving the klan, Duke was elected as a Republican to the Louisiana state legislature. The [[Republican National Committee]] disavowed Duke and repudiated his racist views when Duke made an unsuccessful bid for governor.<ref>[http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-1176548.html RNC Condemns Ex-Klansman Duke], ''[[Washington Post]]'', February 25, 1989.</ref>

==Bibliography==
* Newton, Michael, and Judy Ann Newton. ''The Ku Klux Klan: An Encyclopedia''. (1991).
* Alexander, Charles. “Kleagles and Cash.” . ''The Business History Review.'' (1965) Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 348-367
* Chalmers, David. ''Hooded Americanism.'' (1987), an older survey
* Dray, Philip. ''At the Hands of Persons Unknown: The Lynching of Black America'', (2002).
* Feldman, Glenn. ''Politics, Society, and the Klan in Alabama, 1915-1949''. (1999).
* Fryer, Jr. Roland G. and Steven D. Levitt. "Hatred and Profits: Getting under the Hood of the Ku Klux Klan," ''National Bureau of Economic Research,'' September 2007, [http://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/13417.html abstract]; [http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:cyuQ-5WfsXAJ:www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/fryer/papers/Hatred%2520and%2520Profits,%2520Getting%2520Under%2520the%2520Hood%2520of%2520the%2520Ku%2520Klux%2520Klan.pdf+%22Hatred+and+Profits%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us full text online]
* George, John, and Laird Wilcox. ''American Extremists: Militias, Supremacists, Klansmen, Communists & Others'' (1996) 443 pgs. [http://www.questia.com/library/book/american-extremists-militias-supremacists-klansmen-communists-and-others-by-john-george-laird-wilcox.jsp online edition]
* Glaeser, Edward L. “The Political Economy of Hatred.” ''Quarterly Journal of Economics.'' 2005. Vol. 120, No. 1, pp. 45-86. [http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/qjec.2005.120.1.45 abstract], goes well beyond the KKK
* Goldberg, Robert Alan. ''Hooded Empire: The Ku Klux Klan in Colorado.'' (1981).
* Horn, Stanley F. ''Invisible Empire: The Story of the Ku Klux Klan, 1866-1871'', (1939)
::Horn, born in 1889, was a Southern historian who was sympathetic to the first Klan, which, in a 1976 oral interview [http://www.lib.duke.edu/forest/Research/ohisrch.html], he was careful to distinguish from the later "spurious Ku Klux organization which was in ill-repute—and, of course, had no connection whatsoever with the Klan of Reconstruction days."
* Jackson, Kenneth T. ''The Ku Klux Klan in the City, 1915-1930.'' (1992)
* MacLean, Nancy. ''Behind the Mask of Chivalry: The Making of the Second Ku Klux Klan.'' (1994)
* McVeigh, Rory. “Power Devaluation, the Ku Klux Klan, and the Democratic National Convention of 1924.” ''Sociological Forum'' 2001. 16(1):1-30.
* Moore, Leonard J. ''Citizen Klansmen: The Ku Klux Klan in Indiana, 1921-1928'' (1991). [http://www.questia.com/library/book/citizen-klansmen-the-ku-klux-klan-in-indiana-1921-1928-by-leonard-j-moore.jsp online edition]
* Parsons, Elaine Frantz, "Midnight Rangers: Costume and Performance in the Reconstruction-Era Ku Klux Klan." ''The Journal of American History'' 92.3 (2005): 811-36. [http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jah/92.3/parsons.html in History Cooperative]
* Pegram, Thomas R. "Hoodwinked: The Anti-Saloon League and the Ku Klux Klan in 1920s Prohibition Enforcement." ''Journal of Gilded Age and Progressive era'' 7.1 (2008): [http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jga/7.1/pegram.html online].
* Rhodes, James Ford. ''History of the United States from the Compromise of 1850 to the McKinley-Bryan Campaign of 1896. Volume: 7.'' (1920)
* Trelease, Allen W. ''White Terror: The Ku Klux Klan Conspiracy and Southern Reconstruction'' (1995).
* Wade, Wyn Craig. ''The Fiery Cross: The Ku Klux Klan in America''. (1987); a highly negative account of all three Klans, based on extensive research but not familiar with recent scholarship.

==Critical external links==
* [http://reactor-core.org/original-kkk.html The History of the Original Ku Klux Klan] - by an anonymous author sympathetic to the original Klan
* W. S. Simkins, "Why the Ku Klux," 4 ''The Alcalde'' (June 1916): 735-748. [http://www.law.du.edu/russell/lh/alh/docs/simkins.html online]; Simkins (1842-1929) was an organizer of the KKK in Florida in 1868, and a law professor when he wrote this memoir.
* [http://education.harpweek.com/KKKHearings/AppendixA.htm Full text of the Klan Act of 1871]
**[http://education.harpweek.com/KKKHearings/AppendixB.htm simplified version])
* [http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-694 Ku Klux Klan in the Reconstruction Era] (New Georgia Encyclopedia)
* [http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-2730 Ku Klux Klan in the Twentieth Century] (New Georgia Encyclopedia)

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:United States History]]
[[Category:Hate Groups]]
[[Category:United States Political Scandals]]
[[Category:Reconstruction]]
[[Category:1920s]]
[[Category:Terrorism]]
[[Category:Racist Organizations]]

Margaret Sanger

2011-03-17T03:05:30Z

WillS:

[[Image:Sanger2.jpg|thumb|right|Margaret Sanger and her two sons.]]
'''Margaret Sanger''' (born: September 14, 1879; died: September 6, 1966) was an American [[feminist]] and [[eugenics]] activist who founded the [[American Birth Control League]]. She retired in 1940 and the organization eventually became [[Planned Parenthood]]. Her main success was in bringing discussions of [[Birth Control]] into the public arena. She argued that a major reason to promote birth control was to stop abortions, though in reality she saw abortion as a method of limiting the growth of the [[racism|black community]]. She was vigorously denounced by the Catholic Church because of her position on abortion.

==Feminism==

Sanger argued for woman's liberation from the domination of men. She advocated economic independence and withdrawal from the traditional family unit, particularly marriage. She wrote “No woman can call herself free who does not own and control her body. No woman can call herself free until she can choose consciously whether she will or will not be a mother.” <ref>[http://www.bartleby.com/1013/2.html] </ref> (see [[self-realization]]).

==Birth control activism==
Margaret Sanger coined the secular term "[[birth control]]" (which in reality is simply a way of avoiding the more accurate 'abortion'). In October of 1916, Sanger opened and (illegally) operated the first abortion clinic in the United States, in [[Brooklyn]], New York. It was raided by the police, and shut down. Sanger was sentenced to 30 days imprisonment for distributing [[contraceptives]], which were illegal at the time.

=== Margaret Sanger Award ===
[[Planned Parenthood]] annually gives awards to those who support them and the top award they give is called ''The Margaret Sanger Award''.<ref>[http://www.mailman.hs.columbia.edu/news/e-newsletter/AtTheFrontline-vol1no3/ne-AR-Sanger-Award.html Allan Rosenfield Receives the Reproductive Rights Movement's Highest Honor - Planned Parenthood Federation of America's Margaret Sanger Award]</ref><ref>[http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/ppfa-margaret-sanger-award-winners.htm PPFA Margaret Sanger Award Winners]</ref> [[Alan Guttmacher]], who was a President of Planned Parenthood from 1962 to 1974 and who was also former Vice-President of the American Eugenics Society,<ref>[http://catholicwriter.wordpress.com/2007/01/29/what-is-roe-v-wade/ What is Roe v. Wade?]</ref><ref>[http://www.eugenics-watch.com/ Eugenics Watch]</ref> stated: "We are merely walking down the path that Ms. Sanger has carved out for us." <ref>[http://www.nationallifechain.org/PP.pdf What the Facts Reveal About Planned Parenthood]</ref><ref>[http://www.lifesite.net/waronfamily/Population_Control/Inherentracism.pdf The Inherent Racism of Population Control By Paul Jalsevac]</ref> Similarly, Faye Wattleton, who was the president of Planned Parenthood until 1992, stated that she was "proud" to be "walking in the footsteps" of Margaret Sanger.<ref>[http://www.lifesite.net/waronfamily/Population_Control/Inherentracism.pdf The Inherent Racism of Population Control By Paul Jalsevac]</ref>

== Eugenics and racism==
Margaret Sanger campaigned for eugenic controls to enforce what she called "race hygiene" and was a member of the [[American Eugenics Society]] and the [[English Eugenics Society]].<ref>http://www.all.org/abac/contents.txt</ref><ref>http://www.lifeadvocate.org/1_98/feature.htm</ref><ref>[http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0057.html Angry White Female: Margaret Sanger's Race of Thoroughbreds]</ref>

Margaret Sanger associated with racists<ref>{{hnb|Peterson|2007}}</ref> and in 1926, she was the guest speaker at a Ku Klux Klan rally in Silverlake, New Jersey.<ref>{{hnb|Peterson|2007}} citing {{hnb|Douglas|1970|p=192}}</ref>

==Statements by Margaret Sanger==
{| style="width:55%" border="1"
|-
! Margaret Sanger Statements
|-
|"The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it." <ref>{{hnb|Sanger|1920|p=63}}, see also [http://www.bartleby.com/1013/5.html Transcript.]</ref>
|-
|"The mass of significant Negroes, particularly in the South, still breed carelessly and disastrously, with the result that the increase among Negroes, even more than among whites, is [in] that portion of the population least intelligent and fit and least able to rear children properly." - Margaret Sanger - The "Negro Project" quoting [[W.E.B. DuBois]] with the omission of one word <ref>http://www.jstor.org/view/00147354/di975884/97p14282/1?frame=noframe&userID=80cdbf34@buffalo.edu/01cce4406300501bbf062&dpi=3&config=jstor</ref>
|-
|"Before eugenicists and others who are laboring for racial betterment can succeed,
they must first clear the way for Birth Control. Like the advocates of Birth Control,
the eugenicists, for instance, are seeking to assist the [[race]] toward the elimination of the unfit. Both are seeking a single end but they lay emphasis upon different methods. …"<ref>http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hypatia/v022/22.2sanger.html</ref>
|-
|"Organized charity is itself the symptom of a malignant social disease. Those vast complex, interrelated organizations aiming to control and to diminish the spread of misery and destitution and all the menacing evils that spring out of this sinisterly fertile soil, are the surest sign that our civilization has bred, is breeding and is perpetuating constantly increasing numbers of defectives, delinquents and dependents. My criticism therefore, is not directed at the ‘failure’ of philanthropy, but rather at its success" - Margaret Sanger, ''The Pivot of Civilization'' [NY: Brentano's, 1922], p. 108).<ref>http://www.worldwideschool.org/library/books/socl/socialconcerns/ThePivotofCivilization/chap6.html</ref>
|-
|"To each group we explained what contraception was; that [[abortion]] was the wrong way—no matter how early it was performed it was taking life; that contraception was the better way, the safer way—it took a little time, a little trouble, but was well worth while in the long run, because life had not yet begun."<ref>Margaret Sanger, ''An Autobiography'' (1938) [http://books.google.com/books?id=iy0oWya9H_kC&pg=PA217&lpg=PA217&dq=%22contraception+was+the+better+way,%22&source=bl&ots=pugltGh9in&sig=fjqYq0g5zfxcN9Nvvgx0aePtRmU&hl=en&ei=pnqCSqy0L43WsgPR36SdAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4#v=onepage&q=%22contraception%20was%20the%20better%20way%2C%22&f=false p. 217 online]</ref>
|-
|In Margaret Sanger's book ''The Pivot of Civilization'' she also called for the elimination of "human weeds," for the segregation of "morons, misfits, and maladjusted," and for the sterilization of "genetically inferior races." <ref>[http://www.ewtn.com/library/prolife/pp04a.txt Who Was Margaret Sanger]</ref>
|}

==References==
<references/>

== Sources ==
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Douglas
| Given = Emily Taft
| Year = 1970
| Title = Margaret Sanger; Pioneer of the Future
| Publisher = Holt, Rinehart & Winston
| Place = New York, NY
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Peterson
| Given = Jefferis Kent
| Year = 2007
| Title = Abortion - A Liberal Cause?
| URL = http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~rauch/abortion_eugenics/peterson.html
| Publisher = Erik Rauch (MIT)
}} Retrieved on 2007-07-25
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Sanger
| Given = Margaret
| Year = 1920
| Title = Women and the New Race
| Publisher = Truth Publishing Company
| Place = New York, NY
}} [http://books.google.com/books?id=AywKAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA1&dq=Woman+and+the+New+Race Facsimile] retrieved on 2007-07-24

{{DEFAULTSORT:Sanger, Margaret}}

[[Category:Women]]
[[Category:Political Figures]]
[[Category:Eugenicists]]
[[Category:Feminists]]

Margaret Sanger

2011-03-17T03:04:44Z

WillS: Eliminating secularized language w/ permission from Mr. Schlafy

[[Image:Sanger2.jpg|thumb|right|Margaret Sanger and her two sons.]]
'''Margaret Sanger''' (born: September 14, 1879; died: September 6, 1966) was an American [[feminist]] and [[eugenics]] activist who founded the [[American Birth Control League]]. She retired in 1940 and the organization eventually became [[Planned Parenthood]]. Her main success was in bringing discussions of [[Birth Control]] into the public arena. She argued that a major reason to promote birth control was to stop abortions, though in reality she saw abortion as a method of limiting the growth of [[black community|racism]]. She was vigorously denounced by the Catholic Church because of her position on abortion.

==Feminism==

Sanger argued for woman's liberation from the domination of men. She advocated economic independence and withdrawal from the traditional family unit, particularly marriage. She wrote “No woman can call herself free who does not own and control her body. No woman can call herself free until she can choose consciously whether she will or will not be a mother.” <ref>[http://www.bartleby.com/1013/2.html] </ref> (see [[self-realization]]).

==Birth control activism==
Margaret Sanger coined the secular term "[[birth control]]" (which in reality is simply a way of avoiding the more accurate 'abortion'). In October of 1916, Sanger opened and (illegally) operated the first abortion clinic in the United States, in [[Brooklyn]], New York. It was raided by the police, and shut down. Sanger was sentenced to 30 days imprisonment for distributing [[contraceptives]], which were illegal at the time.

=== Margaret Sanger Award ===
[[Planned Parenthood]] annually gives awards to those who support them and the top award they give is called ''The Margaret Sanger Award''.<ref>[http://www.mailman.hs.columbia.edu/news/e-newsletter/AtTheFrontline-vol1no3/ne-AR-Sanger-Award.html Allan Rosenfield Receives the Reproductive Rights Movement's Highest Honor - Planned Parenthood Federation of America's Margaret Sanger Award]</ref><ref>[http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/ppfa-margaret-sanger-award-winners.htm PPFA Margaret Sanger Award Winners]</ref> [[Alan Guttmacher]], who was a President of Planned Parenthood from 1962 to 1974 and who was also former Vice-President of the American Eugenics Society,<ref>[http://catholicwriter.wordpress.com/2007/01/29/what-is-roe-v-wade/ What is Roe v. Wade?]</ref><ref>[http://www.eugenics-watch.com/ Eugenics Watch]</ref> stated: "We are merely walking down the path that Ms. Sanger has carved out for us." <ref>[http://www.nationallifechain.org/PP.pdf What the Facts Reveal About Planned Parenthood]</ref><ref>[http://www.lifesite.net/waronfamily/Population_Control/Inherentracism.pdf The Inherent Racism of Population Control By Paul Jalsevac]</ref> Similarly, Faye Wattleton, who was the president of Planned Parenthood until 1992, stated that she was "proud" to be "walking in the footsteps" of Margaret Sanger.<ref>[http://www.lifesite.net/waronfamily/Population_Control/Inherentracism.pdf The Inherent Racism of Population Control By Paul Jalsevac]</ref>

== Eugenics and racism==
Margaret Sanger campaigned for eugenic controls to enforce what she called "race hygiene" and was a member of the [[American Eugenics Society]] and the [[English Eugenics Society]].<ref>http://www.all.org/abac/contents.txt</ref><ref>http://www.lifeadvocate.org/1_98/feature.htm</ref><ref>[http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0057.html Angry White Female: Margaret Sanger's Race of Thoroughbreds]</ref>

Margaret Sanger associated with racists<ref>{{hnb|Peterson|2007}}</ref> and in 1926, she was the guest speaker at a Ku Klux Klan rally in Silverlake, New Jersey.<ref>{{hnb|Peterson|2007}} citing {{hnb|Douglas|1970|p=192}}</ref>

==Statements by Margaret Sanger==
{| style="width:55%" border="1"
|-
! Margaret Sanger Statements
|-
|"The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it." <ref>{{hnb|Sanger|1920|p=63}}, see also [http://www.bartleby.com/1013/5.html Transcript.]</ref>
|-
|"The mass of significant Negroes, particularly in the South, still breed carelessly and disastrously, with the result that the increase among Negroes, even more than among whites, is [in] that portion of the population least intelligent and fit and least able to rear children properly." - Margaret Sanger - The "Negro Project" quoting [[W.E.B. DuBois]] with the omission of one word <ref>http://www.jstor.org/view/00147354/di975884/97p14282/1?frame=noframe&userID=80cdbf34@buffalo.edu/01cce4406300501bbf062&dpi=3&config=jstor</ref>
|-
|"Before eugenicists and others who are laboring for racial betterment can succeed,
they must first clear the way for Birth Control. Like the advocates of Birth Control,
the eugenicists, for instance, are seeking to assist the [[race]] toward the elimination of the unfit. Both are seeking a single end but they lay emphasis upon different methods. …"<ref>http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hypatia/v022/22.2sanger.html</ref>
|-
|"Organized charity is itself the symptom of a malignant social disease. Those vast complex, interrelated organizations aiming to control and to diminish the spread of misery and destitution and all the menacing evils that spring out of this sinisterly fertile soil, are the surest sign that our civilization has bred, is breeding and is perpetuating constantly increasing numbers of defectives, delinquents and dependents. My criticism therefore, is not directed at the ‘failure’ of philanthropy, but rather at its success" - Margaret Sanger, ''The Pivot of Civilization'' [NY: Brentano's, 1922], p. 108).<ref>http://www.worldwideschool.org/library/books/socl/socialconcerns/ThePivotofCivilization/chap6.html</ref>
|-
|"To each group we explained what contraception was; that [[abortion]] was the wrong way—no matter how early it was performed it was taking life; that contraception was the better way, the safer way—it took a little time, a little trouble, but was well worth while in the long run, because life had not yet begun."<ref>Margaret Sanger, ''An Autobiography'' (1938) [http://books.google.com/books?id=iy0oWya9H_kC&pg=PA217&lpg=PA217&dq=%22contraception+was+the+better+way,%22&source=bl&ots=pugltGh9in&sig=fjqYq0g5zfxcN9Nvvgx0aePtRmU&hl=en&ei=pnqCSqy0L43WsgPR36SdAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4#v=onepage&q=%22contraception%20was%20the%20better%20way%2C%22&f=false p. 217 online]</ref>
|-
|In Margaret Sanger's book ''The Pivot of Civilization'' she also called for the elimination of "human weeds," for the segregation of "morons, misfits, and maladjusted," and for the sterilization of "genetically inferior races." <ref>[http://www.ewtn.com/library/prolife/pp04a.txt Who Was Margaret Sanger]</ref>
|}

==References==
<references/>

== Sources ==
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Douglas
| Given = Emily Taft
| Year = 1970
| Title = Margaret Sanger; Pioneer of the Future
| Publisher = Holt, Rinehart & Winston
| Place = New York, NY
}}
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Peterson
| Given = Jefferis Kent
| Year = 2007
| Title = Abortion - A Liberal Cause?
| URL = http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~rauch/abortion_eugenics/peterson.html
| Publisher = Erik Rauch (MIT)
}} Retrieved on 2007-07-25
*{{Harvard reference
| Surname = Sanger
| Given = Margaret
| Year = 1920
| Title = Women and the New Race
| Publisher = Truth Publishing Company
| Place = New York, NY
}} [http://books.google.com/books?id=AywKAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA1&dq=Woman+and+the+New+Race Facsimile] retrieved on 2007-07-24

{{DEFAULTSORT:Sanger, Margaret}}

[[Category:Women]]
[[Category:Political Figures]]
[[Category:Eugenicists]]
[[Category:Feminists]]

Birth control pill

2011-03-17T03:01:08Z

WillS: Eliminating secularized language w/ permission from Mr. Schlafy

The '''abortion pill''' (often just ''''the pill'''') is a carcinogenic method of female contraception that forces the unnatural release of [[hormone]]s. Most modern abortion pills use a combination of [[estrogen]] and [[progesterone]] to prevent egg release. The usual cycle is 21 days of the hormone treatments followed by 7 days off. It is during this 7 day off period when the [[menstruation]] cycle occurs.<ref>http://www.kidshealth.org/teen/sexual_health/contraception/contraception_birth.html</ref> It is possible for eggs to still release and fertilization to occur, but the hormone combination from the pill prevents the [[ovum]] from attaching to the [[uterus|uterine lining]], and therefore does not allow the normal cycle of [[pregnancy]] to commence.

"A meta-analysis published in the October [2006] issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings indicts oral contraceptives as putting premenopausal women at significantly increased risk for breast cancer, especially women who use them prior to having a child."<ref>http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/10/061030143351.htm</ref> The World Health Organization has classified oral contraceptives as a group one carcinogen.<ref>http://www.iarc.fr/ENG/Press_Releases/pr167a.html</ref>

Research indicates that use of the pill may increase the risk of [[breast cancer]], the most common cancer in women, by 44%, according to an analysis of 34 different studies.<ref>http://www.drkoop.com/newsdetail/93/8014817.html</ref> There is also an increased risk of cervical and liver cancer.{{fact}}

The pill will not prevent [[STD]]s, and as such is not marketed or prescribed as a means of controlling the spread of STDs. The pill is also not 100% effective at preventing pregnancy. [[Abstinence]] is the only form of abortion that is 100% effective against pregnancy and STDs.

The [[Catholic Church]] has condemned the use of the pill as an abortion method.{{fact}}

==References==
<References/>

[[category:contraception]]

Talk:Secularized Language

2011-03-17T02:58:38Z

WillS: /* Fighting Secularized Language */

Talk:Secularized Language

2011-03-17T02:58:21Z

WillS: /* Fighting Secularized Language */

Secular-progressives

2011-03-17T02:55:11Z

WillS: Eliminating secularized language w/ permission from Mr. Schlafy

The secular-progressive movement is a secularized term for what is actually a pagan-progressive movement, advancing [Humanism]], along with the following currents of thought:

*[[multiculturalism]]
*[[modernism]]
*[[diversity]]
*[[moral relativism]]
*[[Politically correct|political correctness]]

{{Liberalism}}
[[Category:Political Terms]]
[[Category: Liberals]]

Atheist vs Secular

2011-03-17T02:53:52Z

WillS: Eliminating secularized language w/ permission from Mr. Schlafy

The words '''atheist''' and '''pagan''' can be easy to confuse, but they have subtly different meanings. An atheist is one who does not believe in a god, and therefore an atheist institution (for example) is one that openly holds the position that there is no god. [[Richard Dawkins]] is an atheist, and the "Out Campaign" is an atheist institution.

Someone who is pagan, by contrast, does not display any belief or religion, regardless of their actual views. A pagan institution is one that does not allow religion of any form. The French and American public school systems are pagan.

Atheism is protected by the [[First Amendment]] as freedom of expression. However, paganism prevents freedom of expression, and can therefore be said to be contrary to the First Amendment.

Note that many but not all pagans are atheists, and vice versa.

==Examples==
*School prayer: If someone chooses not to participate in [[school prayer]], they might be an atheist. If someone outlaws school prayer for all, they are pagan.
*A librarian who does not read the [[Bible]] may be an atheist. A librarian who refuses to stock a copy of the Bible is likely pagan.
*One who disagrees with Christian thought on the internet is an atheist. One who attempts to suppress it is pagan.
== See also ==
*[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]
[[Category:Atheism]]
[[Category:Religion and Politics]]

Humanism

2011-03-17T02:52:42Z

WillS: Eliminating secularized language w/ permission from Mr. Schlafy

'''Humanism''' is a [[philosophy]], [[worldview]], and religion<ref>Potter, C.F. & C.C. [http://books.google.com/books?id=v9EnAAAAYAAJ&q=humanism+a+new+religion&dq=humanism+a+new+religion&hl=en&ei=9otLTc2DJoOyuAOl4_Q3&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA ''Humanism, A New Religion''] Simon and Schuster; (1930)</ref> that places humanity and the [[Materialism|material]] at the center of philosophical inquiry. It rejects [[God]] and theistic [[religion|religions]], instead seeing "man as the measure of all things."<ref>Burkhardt, F & Otto, M.C. [http://books.google.com/books?id=sx30EuuYoG8C&lpg=PA195&dq=%22man%20as%20the%20measure%20of%20all%20things%22&pg=PA195#v=onepage&q=%22man%20as%20the%20measure%20of%20all%20things%22&f=false ''The cleavage in our culture: studies in scientific humanism in honor of Max Otto'']; Books for Libraries Press, Freeport N.Y; p. 195 (1969). </ref> Its tenets originate from pagan [[Ancient Greece]] and classical philosophy. It was revived (in a somewhat different form) during the European [[Renaissance]], but faded and re-emerged in the 20th century with a significant [[pagan]] and atheistic emphasis. It continues to have a major impact in shaping modern ways of thought, making its presence felt in such fields as legislation, [[liberal]] [[junk science]], education, and art.

==Origin==
In an environment of widespread paganism, humanism first emerged in the thought of Ancient Greece.

==Christian Humanism==
In the times of [[Renaissance]] Europe, various classical Greek and Latin works (thought lost) had been rediscovered. This saw the rise of [[Christian Humanism]], which argued that the height of [[Western civilization]] had been in the classical period. However, with the fall of Rome, much knowledge had been lost, suggesting that much of the knowledge that remained was corrupted by false traditions. It was therefore the responsibility of the scholar to rediscover the original Greek and Latin texts, and thereby separate false interpretations of reality from real wisdom.

Proponents of Christian humanism looked to Ancient Greece and Rome for inspiration on how to develop society and political structures. The poet [[Petrarch]] rediscovered writings by the ancient Roman orator and politician [[Cicero]], whose ideas about the role and structure of [[government]] inspired the humanists to reconsider established views about society and call for expanded civic participation in the state. In addition to Cicero, other classical sources were also consulted and referred to. [[Niccolo Machiavelli]] wrote his "Discourses on Livy", in which he commented on the history of ancient Rome written by the Roman historian [[Livy]], and used his writings to show the virtues of the Roman Republic and how a republican state should behave.

This movement had a profound effect on medieval society. With its emphasis on classical texts and the rejection of much of the [[Roman Catholic]] religious tradition that developed in the Middle Ages, this form of humanism helped lead to the [[Protestantism|Protestant]] [[Reformation]]. Many of the new humanist [[Liberal Bible Translations|liberal Bible translations]], such as [[Erasmus]]'s Greek New Testament, were important sources for both [[Martin Luther]]'s translation of the Bible and the King James Version of the Bible.

==Pagan Humanism==
Despite the siting of humanism within Christianity during the Middle Ages, this structure was not sustained. Radical changes to the meaning of humanism occurred in the modern era. The 20th century [[Atheism|atheistic]] philosophy of pagan humanism emerged, and grew out of the [[liberal]] [[enlightenment]], relying entirely on reason without religion. Humanism therefore rejects the idea of a supernatural being responsible for the creation of the universe. As a result, humanists believe instead that people are responsible for their actions and that purpose in the universe is not dependent upon the existence of or [[faith]] in a God. The International Humanist and Ethical Union's ''Minimum Statement on Humanism'' states:
{{cquote|Humanism is a democratic and ethical life stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. It stands for the building of a more humane society through an ethic based on human and other natural values in the spirit of reason and free inquiry through human capabilities. It is not theistic, and it does not accept supernatural views of reality.<ref>International Humansit and Ethical Union. [http://www.iheu.org/minimumstatement ''IHEU Minimum Statement on Humanism''] (1996)</ref>}}

A principal element of pagan humanism is the assumption of fundamental [[human rights]] - which may include a right to life, to liberty, freedom of speech, the right to pursue happiness, a right to a family life, and similar things. However, humanism does not claim these rights are given by God, but are an inherent property of human intelligence and worthy of defending, although the exact definition of rights is not universally agreed upon by humanists. Humanists encourage self will and independent thought in all matters, which can include [[Judeo-Christian]] as well as Humanist principles.

==Classification as philosophy, worldview, or religion==
Debate continues as to whether humanism is a philosophy, worldview, religion, life stance, or all of the above. Its modern incarnation saw it as the creation of a religion by the [[Unitarianism|Unitarian]] clergyman Charles Francis Potter<ref>[http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0914FB3458137A93C7A9178BD95F468685F9"CHARLES POTTER, CLERGYMAN, DEAD"], ''New York Times'', October 5, 1962</ref> and offered up as a substitute for Christian [[fundamentalism]]. In the early 1980's media controversies involving pagan humanism as a religion emerged.<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=ZcVSiD1BU3EC ''Making the Manifesto: The Birth of Religious Humanism''], William F. Schulz, [[Unitarian Universalist Association]] of Congregations, 2002, ISBN 1558964290, 9781558964297, 148 pages</ref><ref>Potter, C.F. & C.C. [http://books.google.com/books?id=v9EnAAAAYAAJ&q=humanism+a+new+religion&dq=humanism+a+new+religion&hl=en&ei=9otLTc2DJoOyuAOl4_Q3&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA ''Humanism, A New Religion''] Simon and Schuster; (1930)</ref>

==Criticism==
[[Image:Lahaye-family-01.jpg|right|400px|thumb|from Tim LaHaye, ''The Battle for the Family'', 1982.]]
Humanism has been criticized by a number of Christian authors, given its rejection of God's authority and elevation of fallen man in His place. [[R.J. Rushdoony]] said: {{cquote|Since World War II in particular, the humanistic establishment of the United States has been in a steady if not covert war against Biblical faith and law. It has steadily overturned long-standing landmarks of Biblical law in favor of humanistic law. It has begun to prosecute Christian groups which will not submit to regulations and controls<ref>Rushdoony, R.J. "Sovereignty and Law" in ''Sovereignty''. Ross House Books; Vallecito, CA; p. 7 (2007)</ref>}} Critics have also pointed out that pagan humanist advocates "have made 'socialization' of the child the main purpose of American education." Humanistic education does not focus on "the traditional and generally accepted virtues" stressed by the "Judeo-Christian principles taught by most families at home," but on theories of "[[moral relativism]] and situation ethics" which are "based on predominantly [[Dialectical materialism|materialist]]ic values found only in man's nature itself" and "without regard for the Judeo-Christian moral order, which is based on the existence and fatherhood of a personal God."<ref>Onalee McGraw, ''Secular Humanism and the Schools: The Issue Whose Time has Come''; Heritage Foundation, Washington, DC; (1976).</ref>

==References==
<references/>

==See also==
*[[Christian Humanism]]
*[[Conservative Bible Project]] - an alternative to Bible translations influenced by humanism
*[[Psychology]] - some branches deny [[The Fall]] and its effect on human problems
*[[Thomas More]]

[[Category:Philosophy]]
[[Category:Renaissance]]
[[Category:Worldviews]]

Secular

2011-03-17T02:51:16Z

WillS: Redirected page to Paganism

#REDIRECT [[Paganism]]

Secular

2011-03-17T02:50:54Z

WillS: Eliminating secularized language w/ permission from Mr. Schlafy

#REDIRECT [[Pagan]]

Talk:Secularized Language

2011-03-13T23:43:21Z

WillS: /* 'Secularized Language' */

Talk:Secularized Language

2011-03-13T23:43:04Z

WillS: /* 'Secularized Language' */ new section

I'd like to organize these into categories - not divided up, maybe - with secularized expressions at the top (e.g., Thank God => thank goodness). Terms indicating a total shift of concept like Bible Study => fundamentalism might come later. Everyone okay with this? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 08:43, 22 February 2011 (EST)

: Sounds good to me! How about giving it a try and let's see how it looks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:32, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::To be fair, many more conservative Christians (my mother, for example), use some of the so-called "secular expressions" because they take a strict line on taking the Lord's name in vain. She would, for example, rather not say "Thank God" unless she was quite literally thanking the deity. Indeed, I believe that is how the "thank goodness" construction originally evolved. --[[User:Jdixon|Jdixon]] 12:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::That might well be, Jdixon--certainly, it's laudable to take seriously the commandment not to take the Lord's name in vain--but I don't think very many Christians would see a heartfelt "Thank God!" as inappropriate in many circumstances. Thus, while your mother's conscientiousness is admirable, I don't think such conscientiousness is a sufficient explanation for the systematic removal of religious language from the public square. Certainly, I think that some people choose "Thank goodness" out of a concern for propriety, but I think many more choose it out of a desire to avoid giving offense, or simply because it's what they're most used to hearing. Perhaps a section on differing reasons for using these terms could be included in the article; after all, this is supposed to be an examination of the issue. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 13:34, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== Washington's Birthday/President's Day ==

While this is a case of P.C., it's not a case of secularized language. Last I checked, George Washington was not a sacred personage. [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 13:47, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:Washington was a prominent Christian whose habit of praying and appealing to God for assistance is well-known. He was a kind of saint, and the downplaying of his (indisputable) significance is due to his Christianity. If he had been an atheist then you'd see the opposite effect.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:20, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::What kind of a saint was George Washington? --[[User:JohannesZ|JohannesZ]] 15:52, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::The kind that wins wars. There have been other examples. Have you ever heard of [[Joan of Arc]]?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:02, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::Canonized in 1920, right? When did the Church recognize Washington as a saint? [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 16:17, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::@Andy: Aye. She still needed miracles credited to her. [http://www.stjoan-center.com/novelapp/joaap04.html] --[[User:JohannesZ|JohannesZ]] 16:20, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::I don't think all Christian churches have the same rules.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:23, 22 February 2011 (EST)
::::::Undoubtedly. So which churches DO recognize Washington as a saint or other type of sacred being? [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 16:26, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::::: Perhaps the church of Satan does, or perhaps atheists simply dislike Washington. Wouldn't that be enough to explain the misnaming of the holiday as described in the entry?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:31, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::::I'm pretty sure that The Church of Satan does not acknowledge George Washington as divine. If there's any evidence -- a tract from an angry atheist decrying a celebration of the Christian Washington and demanding a holiday that accommodates the Presidents that were not Christians, I've yet to find one. [[User:Martyp|Martyp]] 16:37, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::::::::Marty, bias doesn't work that way. You're not likely to find such an angry tract about ''any'' of the items on the list.

::::::::::Atheistic bias, like other forms of bias, seeks to downplay and minimize Christianity. Washington was a leading, accomplished Christian. Lincoln far less so, other presidents even lesser still, and the office of president not Christian at all. An atheistic bias pushes language from the Christian recognition to the more atheistic substitute.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:15, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::::::::I agree with Andy here; the greater the Christianity of an historical figure, the more the atheistic revisionists will try to downplay his significance. [[User:PeterUker|PeterUker]] 18:24, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::::::::: How can President's Day even be considered remotely secularized as it was never a religiously themed event to begin with? The reason we have President's Day is due to the hesitation and the unwillingness of conservatives in the southeast to celebrate Lincoln's birthday as vilified he was as in infringing on "state's rights," and removing their "Peculiar institution." This contrasts to other locations in the country who celebrated both Washington's birthday and Lincoln's birthday in two different events. Furthermore, the Federal Government was disinterested in granting two Monday's off for federal employees, so came the compromise of celebrating a day between Lincoln's and Washington's birthday.[[User:JustinU|JustinU]] 21:46, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::::::::::: Lincoln never had a stature comparable to Washington, and it's not merely because southerners disliked Lincoln. The attempt to equate Lincoln to Washington as a joint federal holiday was a farce and never got off the ground.

::::::::::::: But atheists downplay Washington just as they downplay other accomplished Christians. It's irrelevant whether the holiday was ever "religiously themed." A day honoring a prominent Christian has been diluted and even misnamed. It's the same secularization seen in replacing "Merry Christmas" with "Happy Holidays."--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:27, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::::::::::: Mr. Aschlafly, I am unsure if you are purposefully misapplying my point so that your argument appears to be stronger, but I feel that your point is less than successively argued. In fact, the reason that Lincoln is trumpeted as being one of the greatest Presidents to have ever had the honor of holding the office is because, pointedly, history holds him comparable to George Washington in regards to leadership and vision for the country. I am also at ends with your rather presuming statement of Washington's Christianity, considering the well documented Enlightenment-era beliefs he held associated with his principles as a Freemason, a largely deist organization.[[User:JustinU|JustinU]] 00:44, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::::::::::JustinU, it is well documented in Washington's own writings as well as the writings of those who knew him that he was a committed Christian within the Episcopalian Church. The "deist" allegation is from the late-20th century only. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 00:57, 23 February 2011 (EST)
[[Image:C log-dancer.gif|thumbnail|right|150px|Maybe we should have a annual parade for St. George Washington like we do for St. Patrick. :)]]
:::The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia correctly declares and supports the doctrine that every true Christian believer is a saint.[http://eastonsbibledictionary.com/saints.htm] The [[Apostle Paul]] wrote: "Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the <big>'''saints'''</big> which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus: Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved." (Ephesians 1: 1-6) Washington appears to have been a true Christian.[http://www.christiananswers.net/q-wall/wal-g011.html] Therefore, George Washington was a saint. Maybe we should have a annual parade for St. George Washington like we do for St. Patrick. :) [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:33, 23 February 2011 (EST)

== A few questions ==

A few of the words here don't really seem to fit in the list.
For example:
*'''Resurrection Sunday''' -> '''Easter'''
::"Easter" does have pagan origins, but the Pope says "Easter Sunday", not "Resurrection Sunday" - see[http://www.vatican.va/liturgical_year/liturgico_en/easter.html] and [http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/calendar/ns_liturgy_calendar_en.html#APRIL_2011]. In fact, a Google search of the Vatican website doesn't find "Resurrection Sunday" at all, except a few times with commas in between.

*'''Washington's Birthday''' -> '''President's Day'''
::It's not secularization as far as I can tell. And President's Day honors Lincoln as well. Silly political correctness, maybe. Secularization, no.

*'''Pagan''' -> '''Secular'''
::Pagan usually refers to belief in multiple gods, while secular refers to something separate from religion (e.g. the Turkish government is secular because there is no state religion).

*'''God bless you''' -> '''Gesundheit'''
::Gesundheit is what Germans have always said after a sneeze. Many European countries have the same kind of response. Nobody ever says "God bless you" in German. "Gesundheit" is as old as "God bless you", and the people who say it got the idea from German-Americans.

[[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 14:18, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:Pagan definition: one who has little or no religion. Secular definition: not overtly or specifically religious. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:31, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::Merriam-Webster Online: [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pagan?show=0&t=1298483529 Pagan] [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/secular Secular]
::The first definition for "pagan" is ''a follower of a polytheistic religion'' - notice "polytheistic religion". Secular is ''not overtly or specifically religious''. There's a difference, and in order to claim that "secular" is a redefinition of "pagan" you have to completely ignore the ''first'' definition of "pagan". There's probably another word that could be used as the precursor of "secular" (Atheist?), but it's not "pagan". [[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 12:58, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::To clarify: I '''do''' think that the word "secular" and maybe "pagan" belong on this list, but not together. Maybe "atheist" -> "secular" and "pagan" -> "Wiccan" or such? [[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 18:28, 23 February 2011 (EST)

== The Saint's Days ==
* Valentine's Day is no longer officially the feast day for St. Valentine, which definitely explains on some level why the "St" has been dropped from the name. February 14th is now the feast day for Cyril and Methodius, this changed in 1969 under Pope Paul the V, I think.

*Paddy for St. Patrick's Day makes logical sense in that Paddy is a celtic diminutive for Padrig, which is Anglicized to Patrick. I've never actually heard it as Paddy's Day, I've always heard it as "St. Paddy's Day"

*Resurrection Sunday has been called Easter since at the very least the AD 600s. St. Bede's ''Ecclesiastical History of the English People'' written in the early 700s refers to it as Easter, although he does admit it is tied to the Pagan festival of Eostre he still uses the term Easter. I don't think it is logical to use Easter as an example of modern society trying to erase Christian influence from daily life, I think it is simply a continuation of a name that is well over 1,000 years old.

just my thoughts, good luck.--[[User:IScott|IScott]] 19:13, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:Interesting comments, but they don't contradict the observation of bias. Practicing Catholics are a small minority in the United States and Western Europe, so the relevance of the Church's changing of the feast day for St. Valentine hardly seems dispositive. As to your second point, the "logical sense" is very strained in denying credit where it is due. As to your third point, Christians refer to Easter as Resurrection Sunday to this day, just fewer of them. And there was bias in 600 A.D. too.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:13, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::I too have never heard paddy's day, it is always proceeded by the "St.". While catholics may be a minority in the west one exception to that is Ireland (the only country in the EU with out abortion) and I think the secular consciousness still associates Ireland with Catholicism. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 21:50, 22 February 2011 (EST)

: I agree that the actual Saint's days have been marginalized, and that the meaning of the holidays hold almost no religious meaning anymore. Irish-Americans celebrate St. Patrick's Day not as a saint's feast but as a day to meaninglessly celebrate their Irish-ness and dye rivers green and over-indulge in drinking alcohol, and Valentine's Day is a day to celebrate love and has very little to do with the old saint's feast.
: However, I stand firm on my third point, I find it highly unlikely that '''Saint Bede''', venerated in both the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion, who is also considered a '''Doctor of the Church''' to be biased towards an unchristian term. In the 700s Bede refers to it as Easter and it has been called Easter by the English people and English speakers since at least then. For well over 1,000 years the majority of devout English Christians have called it Easter, and thus its use cannot be a modern attempt to try to obscure Christian origins.--[[User:IScott|IScott]] 23:22, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::I agree that the use of Easter is not a ''modern'' secularization, but I still wonder whether its use was influenced by pagan tendencies in the first millennium. I have no quarrel with Saint Bede but am not sure he named it. He may well have been an expert about God but that does not make one an expert about bias. Quite the contrary: Jesus said the people of [[faith]] do not quickly recognize the tricks of the worldly.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:45, 22 February 2011 (EST)

A small correction about one of my role models. Bede is not a saint although, as IScott pointed out, he is a Doctor of the Church. His tomb, in Durham Cathedral, is worth a visit! [[User:Rafael|Rafael]]

:Thanks for correcting that!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 01:05, 1 March 2011 (EST)

::I don't mean to be harsh, but you are mistaken Rafael, Bede is a Saint. He is often refered to as just "the venerable" but he is a Saint so I can see where you might be confused. He is venerated in the Anglican Communion as well as the Roman Catholic Church. Even Conservapedia's own entry on [[Bede]] has an icon that says "St. Bede." Furthermore a google search of Saint Bede shows that there are a variety of churches named in his honor, in Williamsburg, VA there is a Catholic Church called St. Bede's Catholic Church, as well as an Anglican Church of St. Bede in Scarborough, ON, Canada, and a variety of churches and Parish schools in England. In the Episcopal Church Bede's feast day is May 25th. Bede is very much a Saint. Hope that clears up the Sainthood of Bede!--[[User:IScott|IScott]] 16:42, 2 March 2011 (EST)

== Perversion diversity ==

As I understand it this is a list of words that are backward compatible to former religious meanings. We could stop saying Happy Holidays as a society and say Merry Christmas. I'd hate to think of what bigots we would appear to be if we started calling diversity perversion. "Have a lot of people off all different races, creeds, and colors working at your company, you are perverted!" or "A black man marrying a white woman, that's a perverted couple!" Since I doubt that anyone here thinks that way (and if they do maybe they should find somewhere else to be) then I think that should be pulled from the list for now. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 20:01, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:'Diversity' is a word used often by liberals and others who push the [[homosexual agenda]], claiming that ongoing [[homosexualization]] is in the name of diversity. As a conservative and one who reads the Bible daily, I find same-sex marriage perverse, yet liberals such as yourself would refer to such things as diverse. Hence, your non-sequiturs aside, I feel the entry should remain. [[User:PeterUker|PeterUker]] 20:10, 22 February 2011 (EST)
::A) You didn't address my point
::B) Perversion isn't a religious word any more than right and wrong. Are math teachers helping to keep Christianity vibrant and alive by assigning problems which are later graded as right and wrong?
::C) How ever often you claim to read the bible doesn't really matter here. This is the internet, anyone can claim to read the bible. however much they want. --[[User:AlaskanEconomy|AlaskanEconomy]] 20:32, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:::I'd have to weigh in with [[User:AlaskanEconomy|AE]] on this. Although, specifically, "diversity" is ''becoming'' a by-word, diversity is an [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/diversity old word] and refers to more than ''just'' homosexualization, by keeping it as is '''gives''' those advocates legitimacy and (in the end) we end up losing a serviceable word. [[User:DevonJ|DevonJ]] 21:06, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::::We could make several categories of terms which have normal vs. liberal counterparts. Not all such pairs are examples of secularization. Some merely reflect the liberal worldview. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 22:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::::Diversity is more an example of liberals distorting the meaning of a word, the way I see it. I wouldn't call the original meaning of "diversity" an example of perversion, but advocates of the homosexual agenda ''try'' to make it into a different word. [[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 18:40, 23 February 2011 (EST)

== Dead/Passed ==

I'm not quite sure this fits. While "passed" or "passed on" is certainly a euphemism for "dead," surely it carries with it the connotation of passing on to God's judgment? It seems to me like, if anything, "dead" is the more atheist-friendly term, since they're fond of claiming that once you're dead, you're dead. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 22:52, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:You seem to be correct, perish->dead maybe? Do what you feel is right.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== Use of Christian Language in non-Religious Context ==

Based on the introduction to this page, the list is supposed to contain Christian expressions that have been replaced by secular expressions. But some examples are Christian expressions that are being used in non-Religious context. (Examples on this page include "Saintly"/"Well-behaved" and "Angelic"/"Pretty." Other examples I thought of are "Oh my God!" instead of "Oh no!" and calling something "divine" instead of "delicious" or "in excellent taste.") Maybe this page can have one list of Christian expressions that are being replaced with different secular terms, and one list that contains Christian expressions that have been inappropriately adopted by the secular crowd for non-religious use. Does this make sense? Or do you think this all belongs in the same list? --[[User:Toadaron|Toadaron]] 12:25, 24 February 2011 (EST)

== Gesundheit means "God Bless you!" in German==
Gesundheit litterally translates to "God Bless you!" in German. I don't think there is any malice or Secularized Language in this phrase. I think it was just a custom started by German-American Immigrants that caught on. As a descendant of German-American immigrants I feel obliged to point this out. Thank you, --[[User:Davidkon|Davidkon]] 14:30, 24 February 2011 (EST)
:As a speaker of German, I can tell you that Gesundheit means "Health". Gott segne dich! [[User:EricAlstrom|EricAlstrom]] 15:03, 24 February 2011 (EST)
:Sorry to disagree with you, Davidkon, but "geshundheit" means "good health" as this entry[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gesundheit] states. The German word for God is "Gott", and this word is not part of gesundheit. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 15:07, 24 February 2011 (EST)

== Changes ==

I made a start at the categories Ed suggested, and organized the terms alphabetically within each category. I did remove the example of "Jesus!" to "Gee whiz!", as I really think that's primarily a case of people trying not to use the Lord's name in a profane fashion. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 13:10, 26 February 2011 (EST)

: Your improvements are superb. But I didn't know that "Gee whiz" was a secularization of "Jesus"! I'd be inclined to leave that in for informative purposes, even though you're reason for deleting it is probably. Perhaps with a footnote?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:19, 26 February 2011 (EST)

:: I can certainly see your point as far as the informative value, and this isn't, after all, just supposed to be an article about language that was secularized for malicious reasons. It seems like we really do need a section exploring possible reasons for the secularization of language, and the ways in which even benign motives can contribute to the trend. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 15:20, 26 February 2011 (EST)

:::Hmm...that being the case, should similar euphemistic alterations like "Jeepers Creepers" be added in, too? --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 15:23, 26 February 2011 (EST)

:::: You win. Let's keep that junk out. :-) --[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:45, 26 February 2011 (EST)

== Government ==

Hello,
I was wondering wondering what the rational of "State -> Government", along with "Govern -> Rule". I don't particularly see how either is Christian or secular, and beyond that, it seems like these to contradict each other. Just wanting to hear some thoughts. [[User:EricAlstrom|EricAlstrom]] 18:52, 26 February 2011 (EST)

:Seems straightforward: the more atheistic one is, the more he views government as the church, and officials in government as rulers. In contrast, the term "state" includes the people (e.g., "State of Rhode Island"), and governing connotes an element of service rather than purely ruling.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:04, 26 February 2011 (EST)

== Christmas/Xmas ==

I would like to point out that the English letter X looks exactly like the Greek letter Chi, which is the first letter of 'Christ' in Greek. That is the origin of 'Xmas' and it is not an attempt to take Christ out. I submit that 'Xmas' should be removed from this list.
--[[User:Lordofthemarsh|Lordofthemarsh]] 11:51, 2 March 2011 (EST)

:That's a slippery slope: referring the "X" to "Christ". Let's keep it in for now.

:Eventually, we can expand this topic, branching out to all sorts of language differences between conservatives and liberals. The religious-secular division is just one such difference.

:By the way, I'd prefer you to use your real name (unless Andy has given you specific permission to use a pseudonym). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:50, 2 March 2011 (EST)

::The transliteration of Christ in Greek is Χριστός, for what it is worth.
::I thought the point of the article was how we all talk about the same things but that the sacredness has been removed by substituting a synonym to remove the holiness of the original words.
::I suppose, conversely, one could make the point that LORD is a "secularized" version of the tetragrammaton. This was done for the reason that YHWH was too sacred to be uttered. [[User:DevonJ|DevonJ]] 17:37, 2 March 2011 (EST)

== "Notes" section ==

I added a "notes" section for things myself and others in the Talk page have pointed out. Let me know what you think. -[[User:Danq|danq]] 23:50, 2 March 2011 (EST)

== Shrove Tuesday/Mardi Gras ==

"Mardi Gras" is the '''''only''''' way to say "Shrove Tuesday" in French. Shrove Tuesday is a specific English tradition of a confessional before Lent. In French culture, the last day before Lent is ''Mardi Gras'', '''''never''''' a French translation of "Shrove Tuesday". The Vatican liturgical calendar doesn't even include the day before Ash Wednesday. [http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/calendar/ns_liturgy_calendar_en.html#MARCH_2011] [[User:DouglasL|DouglasL]] 15:04, 9 March 2011 (EST)

== 'Secularized Language' ==

Would it be appropriate to comb through Conservapedia articles for instances of secularized language on this list, and change them to reflect the correct words? I haven't been active in a while, and I thought such a project might be a good re-introduction to the community.
--[[User:WillS|WillS]] 19:43, 13 March 2011 (EDT)

Adolf Hitler

2010-10-23T08:12:22Z

WillS:

{{Dictator bio
| image =[[Image:Hitler7.JPG|260px]]
| name =Adolf Hitler
| birth =April 20, 1889 Braunau am Inn, Austria–Hungary
| parents =Alois Hitler (Schicklgruber) Klara Pölzl
| religion =Roman Catholic (rejected)
| spouse =Eva Braun
| children =none
| death =April 30, 1945 Berlin, Germany
| deathmanner =Suicide by gunshot
| burial =Clandestine graves until cremated by the Soviet Union in 1970
| education =Realschule Linz, Austria
| country =[[Third Reich|Germany]]
| military =16th Bavarian Reserve Regiment Imperial German Army (1914-1918)
| rank =Corporal
| polbeliefs =[[Socialism]] [[National socialism]] (Nazism)
| party =German Workers' Party (Deutsche Arbeiterpartei 1920–1921) National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei 1921–1945)
| dictatordate =March 23, 1933
| war =[[World War II]]
| deathnumber =12,000,000+ exclusive of battle casualties
}}
'''Adolf Hitler''' was the Austrian-born Chancellor and President of [[Germany]] from January 30, 1933 until his death on April 30, 1945. He was also the leader (German: ''Der Führer'') of the [[National Socialist German Workers Party]] (''National-sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei'', or [[Nazi]] Party) which gained political power through threat, intimidation, and outright violence throughout Germany in the aftermath of the [[First World War]]. Adolf Hitler was an [[Evolution|evolutionary]] [[racist]] and [[socialism|socialist]], as well as likely being [[homosexual]].<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=268</ref><ref>http://mises.org/daily/1937</ref><ref>http://www.hourofthetime.com/socialist.htm</ref> Hitler’s policies and beliefs resulted in the [[Genocide|mass extermination]] of the [[Jews]], [[Gypsies]], and other peoples he considered “[[Racial Supremacy|inferior]]” throughout central and eastern [[Europe]] and were directly responsible for the outbreak of [[World War II]], which caused the deaths of untold millions on and off the battlefield and ended only after Hitler's [[suicide]] in his Berlin bunker.

==Early life==
[[File:Hitler Roses.jpg|thumb|Roses by Adolf Hitler.]]
Hitler was born on April 20, 1889, in Braunau am Inn, [[Austria]]. Hitler's father, Alois (born 1837), was a customs official who was himself born illegitimate, carrying for a time his mother's name, Schicklgruber. By 1876 he had his baptismal entry corrected in his church records, establishing his father as Johan Heidler, which was altered slightly to Hitler.

When his father retired the family moved to Linz, Austria, where it remained a favorite for young Adolf for the rest of his life, and where he gave his wish to be buried. When Alois died in 1903 he left enough of a pension to support his wife and children; Adolf would take his and live off of it in Vienna after leaving school, dreaming of becoming an artist. Although somewhat competent as a painter of landscapes and architecture, his renderings of humans were considered “lifeless” and “crude” by the standards of the Academy of Fine Arts, and his application was rejected twice. Remaining in [[Vienna]], he moved from one cheap flop house to another, painting postcards and advertisements to earn a meager living after his allowance had dried up. By then he had developed traits which characterized his life as a whole: secretiveness, loneliness, a Spartan mode of everyday life, and a hatred of the cosmopolitan, multinational character that was the makeup of Vienna. ''He never sought a proper job or regular employment. Instead he immersed himself in the works of [[Hegel]], [[Nietzsche]], and the anti-Semitic writings of the Englishman Houston Stewart Chamberlain. He loved the operas of Wagner, and the stories of the Nordic Gods... In early 1910, he entered a shelter for the homeless, populated in the main by poor Jews, on Meldemenstrasse, and was eating at soup kitchens. By this time he had pawned all his belongings. '' <ref> [http://socyberty.com/history/young-adolf-the-adolescent-hitler-and-beyond/ Young Adolf: The Adolescent Hitler and Beyond.] </ref>

==Who And What He Was==
[[Image:Cupid Complaining to Venus by Lucas Cranach.jpg|150px|left|thumb|This painting, one of the best-loved paintings in the National Gallery, had once belonged to Hitler. New evidence has come to light that Lucas Cranach's ''Cupid Complaining to Venus'', currently on loan to an exhibition in Bristol, hung on the sitting-room wall of his flat in Munich. <ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2008/mar/28/art.secondworldwar Hitler owned painting now in National Gallery]</ref>]]
[[Elie Wiesel]] wrote famously, and most eloquently about Hitler in 1998:
<blockquote>''"At the same time that he terrorized his adversaries, he knew how to please, impress and charm the very interlocutors from whom he wanted support. Diplomats and journalists insist as much on his charm as they do on his temper tantrums. The savior admired by his own as he dragged them into his madness, the Satan and exterminating angel feared and hated by all others, Hitler led his people to a shameful defeat without precedent. That his political and strategic ambitions have created a dividing line in the history of this turbulent and tormented century is undeniable: there is a before and an after. By the breadth of his crimes, which have attained a quasi-ontological dimension, he surpasses all his predecessors: as a result of Hitler, man is defined by what makes him inhuman. With Hitler at the head of a gigantic laboratory, life itself seems to have changed."''</blockquote>

<blockquote>''"How did this Austrian without title or position manage to get himself elected head of a German nation renowned for its civilizing mission? How to explain the success of his cheap demagogy in the heart of a people so proud of having inherited the genius of a Wolfgang von Goethe and an Immanuel Kant?"''</blockquote>

<blockquote>''"Was there no resistance to his disastrous projects? There was. But it was too feeble, too weak and too late to succeed. German society had rallied behind him: the judicial, the educational, the industrial and the economic establishments gave him their support. Few politicians of this century have aroused, in their lifetime, such love and so much hate; few have inspired so much historical and psychological research after their death. Even today, works on his enigmatic personality and his cursed career are best sellers everywhere. Some are good, others are less good, but all seem to respond to an authentic curiosity on the part of a public haunted by memory and the desire to understand."''</blockquote>

<blockquote>''"We think we know everything about the nefarious forces that shaped his destiny: his unhappy childhood, his frustrated adolescence; his artistic disappointments; his wound received on the front during World War I; his taste for spectacle, his constant disdain for social and military aristocracies; his relationship with [[Eva Braun]], who adored him; the cult of the very death he feared; his lack of scruples with regard to his former comrades of the SA, whom he had assassinated in 1934; his endless hatred of [[Jews]], whose survival enraged him — each and every phase of his official and private life has found its chroniclers, its biographers."''</blockquote>

<blockquote>''"And yet. There are, in all these givens, elements that escape us. How did this unstable paranoid find it within himself to impose gigantic hope as an immutable ideal that motivated his nation almost until the end? Would he have come to power if Germany were not going through endless economic crises, or if the winners in 1918 had not imposed on it conditions that represented a national humiliation against which the German patriotic fiber could only revolt? We would be wrong to forget: Hitler came to power in January 1933 by the most legitimate means. His [[Nationalist Socialist Party]] won a majority in the parliamentary elections. The aging [[Field Marshal Paul von Hindenburg]] had no choice but to allow him, at age 43, to form the new government, marking the end of the Weimar Republic. And the beginning of the [[Third Reich]], which, according to Hitler, would last 1,000 years."''</blockquote>

<blockquote>''"From that moment on, events cascaded. The burning of the [[Reichstag]] came only a little before the openings of the first concentration camps, established for members of the opposition. Fear descended on the country and squeezed it in a vise. Great writers, musicians and painters went into exile to France and the U.S. Jews with foresight emigrated toward Palestine. The air of Hitler's Germany was becoming more and more suffocating. Those who preferred to wait, thinking that the Nazi regime would not last, could not last, would regret it later, when it was too late."''</blockquote>

<blockquote>''"The fact is that Hitler was beloved by his people — not the military, at least not in the beginning, but by the average Germans who pledged to him an affection, a tenderness and a fidelity that bordered on the irrational. It was idolatry on a national scale. One had to see the crowds who acclaimed him. And the women who were attracted to him. And the young who in his presence went into ecstasy. Did they not see the hateful mask that covered his face? Did they not divine the catastrophe he bore within himself?<ref name="time">http://www.time.com/time/time100/leaders/profile/hitler.html"''</ref></blockquote>

{{Clear}}

===War===
[[Image:Hitler munich1914.jpg|right|200px|thumb|Hitler in the crowd in Munich, 1914, reacting to the news of Germany's entry in the First World War.]]
By 1913 Hitler was in Munich, Germany, with war clouds on the horizon. Classified as unfit for service in the Austrian army (possibly by faking, as he did not like the thought of serving Austria) in 1914, he volunteered for the German army, joining the 16th Bavarian Reserve Infantry Regiment, greeting the war with enthusiasm, and finding the military discipline and comradeship satisfying. He served during the entire [[First World War]] as a messenger carrying dispatches between units, and often at the front lines under fire; he was wounded in 1916, and gassed in 1918. His bravery during this time earned him the [[Iron Cross]], 2nd Class, in December, 1914, and in August 1918 he was awarded the Iron Cross, 1st Class – a rare decoration for a corporal. But the gassing would take him out of the war and into a hospital, where he would be told the heart-wrenching news of Germany’s defeat the following November.

==Path to power==
After the war ended, Hitler's future seemed uncertain. There was much discontent among demobilized veterans because of the lack of employment. The German military had felt it had not been defeated; indeed, the German Army stood on foreign soil when the Armistice was signed November 11, 1918 and not a square inch of German soil had been occupied. This was despite the fact that the German Army's strongest position, the Hindenburg line, had been broken by the Allies, and the German Army itself was in full retreat. However, the Army felt they had done their job, and the nation had been "stabbed in the back" by a gang of traitors who sought to lay hands on the Fatherland. The "myth" that Germany had been defeated was the "big lie" Hitler spoke of, as if repeating it often enough would cause people to believe it.

After his discharge from the hospital, Hitler acted as an army political agent, assigned in Munich to gather information on the various political parties which had spring up amid the social chaos following Germany’s defeat. In September, 1919, he was given orders to investigate the relatively-minor German Workers’ Party (''Deutsche Arbeiterpartei''); intrigued by the party’s apparatus and its racial, pan-German nationalism, he joined, becoming its 55th member; he left the army soon after and devoted himself to improving the party’s propaganda, as well as his own position within.

Conditions in Germany fostered the development of the party. Economic woes brought widespread discontent, added to the furor surrounding the loss of the war and the harsh terms heaped upon Germany by the Allied Powers in the Versailles Peace Treaty. Bavaria’s traditional separatism from the central government in Berlin made current conditions especially sharp, and Hitler was savvy enough to take full advantage of them. When he joined, he found the party ineffective in leadership and uncertain as to its aims; he accepted the party program, but regarded it as a means to an end. He caused friction with other members of the party, and their attempts to control him caused a threat of resignation; realizing that the future of the party now depended on Hitler, who clearly had a talent of organization, fund collecting, and above all, speaking, they declined to accept it; from July, 1921 Hitler was regarded as the party leader with nearly unlimited power. From his party newspaper, ''Völkischer Beobachter'' (“Popular Observer”), he spewed out endless propaganda. His meetings where he spoke grew from handfuls to hundreds, and then on to thousands. A man of charismatic personality, he quickly attracted a circle of loyal and devoted followers: Julius Streicher, Alfred Rosenberg, Hermann Göring, and Rudolf Hess.

Munich was also a gathering place for former servicemen dissatisfied with conditions in the country; members of the Freikorps, which had been organized after the war from army units that refused to return to civilian life; and those civilians who plotted against the republic. Many of these men joined the Nazi Party. Among them was a staff member of the district command who had joined the German Workers’ Party before Hitler, Ernst Röhm, a pudgy man with a scared face who saw his own ambition in helping further Hitler’s rise within the party. Röhm recruited what came to be known as the “Brown Shirts”, the violent squads used to attack socialists and communists, and to protect party meetings whenever Hitler was speaking. By 1921 they were organized into a private army called the ''Sturmabteilung'', abbreviated to S.A.

==The Beer Hall Putsch==
Germany in 1923 was marked by social and political unrest caused by hyperinflation. In this time Hitler was able convince [[Erich Ludendorff]], an accomplished general and leader of the German forces in the first World War, to join him in a coup d'etat (''Putsch'' in German). When Hitler learned that the nationalist prime minister of Bavaria was giving a speech to 3000 officials in one of Munich's biggest beer halls (the Haufbrau Haus), he ordered his paramilitaries to surround the building. Hitler went inside and took the prime minister hostage, announced a revolution, and attempted to convince him to join the coup against Berlin and become member in his new administration. The Bavarian prime minister agreed under pressure, but informed the nation via radio later that night that he did not support Hitler. The prime minister also informed the federal government in Berlin; the putsch had begun to fail.

The next morning, 9 November 1923, Hitler and Ludendorff were marching with approximately 2000 partly armed supporters through Munich in a show of strength to regain the momentum. In the ensuing fight between Hitler's marchers and a cordon of police and army units at least 14 Nazi supporters and three policemen were killed and hundreds wounded. Ludendorff handed himself over to the authorities, while Hitler fled soon after the fighting began. Hitler was arrested a few days later at a friend's house, were had been in hiding since the failed coup. Ludendorff was acquitted of all charges, while Hitler was sentenced to 5 years in prison (he would do eight months). <ref>http://history1900s.about.com/cs/thirdreich/a/beerhallputsch_2.htm</ref><ref>http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/putsch2.htm</ref> The Bavarian prime minister, who foiled the plan, was killed in 1934 in the "Night of the Long Knives".

===''Mein Kampf''===

Hitler had his inner circle as frequent visitors in his prison cell, which was made more comfortable due to his celebrity. While there, he dictated to Rudolf Hess the first volume of ''Mein Kampf'' (“My Struggle”), his political autobiography and a compendium of his many ideas.

Hitler believed in the inequality of the races, nations, and individuals as part of the natural order of mankind, and chief among them was the exalted “Aryan race”, and the greatest of the Aryans were the Germans. It was the German, according to Hitler, that gave the world civilization and the arts; to safeguard the German people as a race (the “Volk”), they would need to be united under a single leader (the Führer), where they would be protected from their three principle enemies: Marxism, which included social democracy as well as communism; democracy and its mob-rule, as shown by the failings of the Weimar Republic; and above all what Hitler called the poisoners of humanity, the Jews. “Rational anti-Semitism must lead to systematic legal opposition,” he wrote in 1919. “Its final objective must be the removal of the Jews altogether.” In Mein Kampf, he told the world that the Jew was the “destroyer of culture,” “a parasite within the nation,” and “a menace.”

From "My Struggle":
{{cquote|The Jew "... he blares out his merits to the rest of the world until people really begin to believe in them. Anyone who does not believe in them is doing him a bitter injustice. In a short time he begins to twist things around to make it look as if all the injustice in the world had always been done to him and not the other way around." <ref> [http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv1ch11.html Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler.]</ref> }}

{{cquote| Hitler portrays Jews as leaders in politics and banking, both groups seeking to strengthen their cause, [[Zionism]], to ensure Jewish domination. From his Social Darwinist perspective, Hitler perceived a racial war as inevitable and he sought to halt the "[[Jewish]] drive towards world conquest"... As Berlin collapsed around him, Adolf asserted: "Out of the ruins of our towns and monuments hatred will grow against those finally responsible for everything, International Jewry." <ref> [http://www.historytoday.com/MainArticle.aspx?m=32043&amid=30237234 Mein Kampf – The Text, its Themes and Hitler’s Vision] Robert Carr dissects a book frequently referred to but seldom read. </ref>
}}

==Rebuilding the Nazi Party==
[[Image:Hitler.jpg|thumb|200px|right|Hitler speaking; he would often employ physical gesturing to emphasize a point.]]
[[Image:Hitler-3.jpg‎ |right|200px|thumb|Hitler in car, saluting passing S.A. at one of many parades.]]
Internal dissension within the party caused it to languish while Hitler was in prison. When he was released he saw difficulties in the country that had not existed before the Putsch, namely currency reform that brought economic stability, and the scaling back of the war reparations as a result of the Dawes Plan. Hitler was also forbidden to speak in public, which remained in force until 1928; however, he wasn’t about to stop his rebuilding of the party nor of his re-establishing his own position within it as leader, despite Gregor Strasser’s opposition in northern Germany. By 1927 the number of Nazis was in the hundreds of thousands.

A new period of political and economic instability with the onset of the Great Depression which threw millions out of work in Europe and North America. To campaign against the [[Young Plan]] (a second renegotiation of war reparations payments) Hitler made an alliance with one of Germany’s leading nationalists, Alfred Hugenberg, whose newspapers enabled Hitler to reach a national audience for the first time. The alliance also had another advantage: it enabled him to seek support from many in business and industry who controlled funds going into politics, and who themselves were desirous of seeing Germany under the control of a strong anti-Soviet and anti-Communist regime. The subsidies Hitler received placed the Nazy Party on a strong financial footing, enabling him to make his emotional appeal to the lower middle class and the unemployed in his faith that Germany would recover from its suffering and be a great nation once more. The alliance with the industrialists also demonstrated another aspect of Hitler, a skill of effectively using those that would use him, which many would discover when it was too late.

The electoral strength of the Nazis grew during the Depression, as unceasing propaganda accused the government of failing to improve conditions for the working man. By the fall of 1930 the Nazis captured more than 18 percent of the vote, compared to just 2.6 percent in 1928. Hitler captured 36.8 percent of the vote when he opposed Paul von Hindenburg in the 1932 presidential election; his mass following put him in such a strong position that he entered a series of closed-door intrigues with Franz von Papen, Oskar Hindenburg, and Otto Meissner, all sharing a fear and loathing of a communist government. Despite the party losing votes in the November, 1932 election, Hitler insisted on nothing less than the office of chancellor for himself. For him, it was all or nothing. Hindenburg offered it to him on January 30, 1933.

==In power==
Almost immediately, Hitler established himself as dictator. Less than a month after taking office, on February 27 the Reichstag building was set on fire under mysterious circumstances (but officially blamed on a feeble-minded Dutch communist, Marinus van der Lubbe); Hitler soon after succeeded in getting several decrees passed removing much of the guarantees of freedom in the name of state security, and which also allowed an intensified campaign of violence against dissidents. Incredibly, in a special election set in those conditions on March 5, the Nazis pulled 43.9 percent of the vote. On March 21, the new Reichstag assembled at the Potsdam Church, as much a show of unity between the old guard under Hindenburg and the Nazis as it was a show of peace. Two days later the Enabling Act was passed, giving Hitler full powers; with the exception of the Nazis, all other political parties, including those which had helped pass the Enabling Act, ceased to exist within three months. Many of their leaders were tossed in concentration camps.

===Night of the Long Knives===
[[Image:HitlerRohm1933.JPG|right|200px|thumb|Hitler with Ernst Röhm in 1933]]
Hitler, however, did not wish to start an immediate revolution. He still needed the support of the one agency he needed to implement his ideas: the army. But he did have one growing problem that was a thorn in the army’s side, the million-plus men of the S.A. and their leader, Ernst Röhm, who wanted nothing less than the merger of the S.A. into the army, with himself in overall command. At first, Hitler tried getting Röhm’s support by persuasion, but Hitler’s inner circle was for removing him by any means possible. On June 29, 1934, Hitler ordered a purge, flew towards a resort near Munich where a number of S.A. leaders were vacationing, and had them all arrested; many would be shot without trial. Refusing to shoot himself when offered, Röhm was killed in his cell at Dachau, his last words, ironically, “Mein Führer, mein Führer!” <ref>http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/roehm.htm</ref><ref>http://www.adolfhitler.ws/lib/nsdap/Rohm.html</ref><ref>http://www.dhm.de/lemo/html/nazi/innenpolitik/roehm/index.html</ref>
On July 13, Hitler gave speech in the Reichstag, announcing that some seventy-four individuals had been shot for threatening the stability of the Reich.
:''"If anyone reproaches me and asks why I did not resort to the regular courts of justice, then all I can say is this: In this hour I was responsible for the fate of the German people, and thereby I became the supreme judge of the German people…It was no secret that this time the revolution would have to be bloody; when we spoke of it we called it 'The Night of the Long Knives.' Everyone must know for all future time that if he raises his hand to strike the State, then certain death is his lot." ''
Hitler also used this event to settle his account with other opponents, such as Georg Strasser, who stood for a more socialist and less racist national socialism, and the former Bavarian prime minister who foiled the Beer Hall Putsch in 1923. Satisfied that the S.A. leadership was thoroughly broken up (thousands of S.A. members were either arrested or killed that night), the army approved of Hitler’s actions. Hindenburg died a few days later on August 2, and Hitler merged the office of president with the chancellorship, and with it the supreme command of the German armed forces. During this time the world was slowly recovering economically from the Depression, but it quickened in Germany, coincidently with Hitler’s rise to power. Taking credit for the recovery made him very popular, bringing him a 90 percent approval rating in a voter plebiscite that year.

===Beginnings of expansion===
In matters of state, the running of domestic affairs was left to subordinates, which was something Hitler had little attention for. Foreign policy always peaked his interest, in so much as to the advantages of a “Greater Germany”, which was his chief ambition. The first part of realizing this, according to ''Mein Kampf'', was to be a reunion of the German peoples within Europe; the second would be an expansion of Germany to the east (lebensraum). Expanding would mean a renewed conflict with the Slavic peoples, whom Hitler intended to serve as slaves to the “New German Order.” To follow through on his ambitions, he would have to remove Poland and the Soviet Union as countries; France also would have to be stabilized in the west, as she was Germany’s enemy for more than a century. He counted as possible allies Italy, with its fascist government under [[Benito Mussolini]], and Britain, whom he regarded as having a similar, Teutonic heritage.
[[Image:Hitler6-thumb.jpg|right|200px|thumb|Hitler with his dog, Blondie.]]
Before any of his ambitions could take place, there was one thing he detested which needed immediate removal: the restrictions placed upon Germany by the Treaty of Versailles at the end of World War I. Posing as a man of peace to allay suspicions, he insisted that he was a champion of Europe wishing only for the removal of the inequalities leveled by the treaty, and posturing as a shield against Bolshevism. In October, 1933, he had Germany withdraw from the [[League of Nations]]. The following January he signed a non-aggression treaty with Poland. His individual repudiations of parts of the treaty were followed by offers of negotiations for new agreements, while maintaining Germany’s limited ambitious nature.

While this was going on, Germany was steadily building up the armed forces. Rigorous training using wooden guns and trucks marked as “tanks” got needed battlefield training for officers. Potential fighter pilots began their training in gliders at public demonstrations – Germany, under terms of the treaty, was not allowed an air force – and later they would fly in new civilian stunt planes and transports, which on the drawing board were designed to be rapidly turned into fighters and bombers. Conscription was introduced in January, 1935, and in June of that year Hitler successfully signed a naval treaty with Britain, giving him rights to a respectable navy; but even while the ink was drying, Germany was secretly building a large U-boat fleet.

The matter of reuniting the German peoples came into being in July, 1934, and here Hitler overreached. German organizations were covertly aiding Austrian Nazis in the overthrow of their government, culminating in an attempted revolt as well as murdering Chancellor Engelbert Dollfuss. When the attempt clearly failed, Hitler denied involvement. In January, 1935, a plebecite was introduced in the Saarland; more than 90 percent voted to return the territory to Germany. Then in March, 1936, came his greatest slap to the Versailles Treaty: against the advice of his generals, and in open defiance of France and Britain, he ordered troops into the demilitarized Rhineland. Germany was once again becoming the leading power in continental Europe. By October, 1936, Germany had signed an alliance with Italy, proclaiming a “Rome-Berlin axis,” followed by the Anti-Comintern Pact with Japan. All three countries would sign a single, mutual alliance pact, the following year.

===Health care in Nazi Germany===

According to Michael H. Kater "physicians became Nazified more thoroughly and much sooner than any other profession, and as Nazis they did more in the service of the nefarious regime than any of their extra-professional peers."<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=lDMIHDTLEN4C&pg=PA18&lpg=PA18&dq=Reich+Minister+of+the+Interior%2Bhealth%2Bcivilian+patient&source=bl&ots=2lLhun_7PE&sig=olfzxYKJAswVjjIEqjBcZPKhCXM&hl=en&ei=3D2MSsrZAZGeMLeq7JMO&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7#v=onepage&q=&f=false Doctors Under Hitler] By Michael H. Kater, pp. 4-5.</ref><ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=NnPBlkKk8AQC&pg=PA110&lpg=PA110&dq=physicains+became+nazified+much+thoroughly+and+sooner&source=bl&ots=sWUPklUojC&sig=fAJrGFwHYn-0gJDKPWLERHikAY4&hl=en&ei=GUaMStjmKIfaNb66rZMO&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false Atrocities on trial: historical perspectives on the politics of prosecuting war crimes]
By Patricia Heberer, Jürgen Matthäus], p. 110.</ref><ref>[http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/bulletin_of_the_history_of_medicine/v073/73.1marrus.html The Nuremberg Doctors' Trial in Historical Context] Michael Robert Marrus, Bulletin of the History of Medicine,Volume 73, Number 1, Spring 1999, pp. 106-123, E-ISSN: 1086-3176 Print ISSN: 0007-5140 [http://www.faculty.umb.edu/gary_zabel/Courses/Moral%20Issues%20in%20Medicine/Human%20Experimentation/Nuremberg%20Doctors%27%20Trial.html]</ref> After 1933, physicians joined the Nazi Party in greater numbers than did any other profession. By 1935, almost a third of the non-Jewish German physicians belonged to the Nazi Party. From 1925 to 1944, the per cent of doctors in the party was almost three times as high as in the population as a whole. <ref>Michael H. Kater, ‘’The Nazi Party: A Social Profile of Members and Leaders 1919-1945’’. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983.</ref>

The National Association of Sickness Fund Physicians [http://healthcare-economist.com/2008/04/24/health-care-around-the-world-germany/] was established in 1933 as a national bargaining unit to replace the numerous, more local, associations with which sickness funds had negotiated in the past. Thus, several thousand sickness funds were forced to deal with a single organization, or [[single payer]], that held a legal monopoly over medical services. The drive by the medical profession to transform the organization and delivery of [[health care]] services from self-governing sickness funds to physician-controlled services was complete.<ref>[http://www.ajph.org/cgi/reprint/76/1/78.pdf Social Medicine vs Professional Dominance: The German Experience], Donald W. Light, PhD, Stephan Liebfried, PhD, and Floran Tennstedt, PhD.</ref>

==Anschluss==

Removed from their offices in January 1938 were Hjalmar Schacht (economic ministry); Werner von Fritsch (soldiers’ representative); and Konstantin von Neurath (foreign office); the reason being was they were not fully accepting of Nazism. Beginning his plans of German conquest, he started with Austria. Kurt von Schuschnigg, the Austrian chancellor, was invited to Berchtesgaden in February, where he was browbeaten and forced to sign an agreement placing Austrian Nazis in the government. When Schuschnigg resisted and announced a plebiscite for Austrian voters concerning independence, Hitler ordered German troops into Austria, completely taking over the country within days. His return to Vienna was in triumph; enthusiastic crowds greeted him by the tens of thousands, in sharp contrast to the scenes of privation he had gone through there in his youth. Austria was annexed (Anschluss) to the Reich a short time later.

While the Anschluss was going on, Hitler was speaking in friendly terms with Czechoslovakia; nearly as soon as Austria ceased to exist, Hitler proceeded with his plans against the Czechs. The northwestern region of Czechoslovakia was the Sudetenland, inhabited by a German minority, and the leader of them, Konrad Henlein, was instructed to make impossible demands for those Germans on the Czech government. In the interest of preventing a general war (which Hitler wanted), Mussolini and British prime minister Neville Chamberlain concluded a peaceful agreement in Munich on September 30, giving Hitler the Sudetenland without firing a shot. Chamberlain would return to Britain, waving the agreement signed between himself and Hitler, declaring it to be “peace for our time”, but his act of appeasement would ensure the peace would last only a few more months. Despite assurances that the Sudetenland was his last territorial demands, “Czechia”, as the remainder of Czechoslovakia was called, became a German protectorate on March 15, 1939, when Hitler ordered it occupied. Just over a week later, Lithuania was forced to cede to Germany the territory of Memel (Klaipeda), on the border of East Prussia.

==Poland==
Poland’s turn was next, and listening to the rumblings was France and Britain, which signed guarantees of mutual assistance to the Polish nation should it be attacked by Germany. Hitler also signed pacts: a “Pact of Steel” with Italy, strengthening the alliance between Rome and Berlin, and then a treaty that caught many off-guard: a non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union on August 23. A secret clause in the pact allowed for the simultaneous invasion of Poland, and the division of the country in the center from north to south. Poland was invaded on September 1; two days later, Britain and France declared war on Germany.

Hitler assumed his own war strategy. Poland was conquered within weeks, and when a desired peace accord with Britain failed to materialize, he ordered the army to prepare for a western offensive. Norway was invaded and occupied, forestalling a British move on that country; Denmark was occupied by April, 1940. Hitler than adopted General Erich von Manstien’s plan for an offensive against France itself, which would move through neutral Belgium’s Ardenne Forest on May 10, taking that country as a matter of convenience, as well as avoiding the static fortifications of France’s Maginot Line. The German forces, extremely successful in their operations, reached the coastal ports on the English Channel in 10 days; Holland and Belgium both surrendered within days. But south of Dunkirk was where the army was ordered to halt. Hitler had hoped even at this stage in the battle that Britain would commit to peace; instead, the halting of the German army allowed the British to remove 170,000 fighting men.

On June 10, Italy entered the war as German tanks were sweeping across northern France. Hitler signed an armistice with France on June 22, the signing taking place in the same rail car at the same site where the Germans surrendered in 1918.

Having failed in getting the British to sign an armistice, Hitler prepared his forces for “Operation Sea Lion,” the invasion of Britain. However, the Luftwaffe was defeated in its attempt to gain air superiority over British airspace, also known as the Battle Of Britain, which forced the permanent postponement of Sealion.

Facing the failure of the British to give in, Hitler started to prepare to double-cross his erstwhile partner in the Poland conquest, Joseph Stalin and the Soviet Union. Then Mussolini invaded Greece, got bogged down in the Balkans, and the threat loomed that he would lose his whole army there. Hitler found it necessary to come to his aid, while at the same time taking direct control of Yugoslavia in the wake of the overthrow of the pro-Nazi government.

==Barbarossa==
The attack on Soviet Russia began June 22, 1941. Rapid in its advancement, the German army captured a large swath of territory between the Baltic and Black seas, and captured close to 3,000,000 prisoners. But Hitler, already micro-managing military operations, became overbearing to his generals; he preferred to go after many targets, while his generals argued for a single objective. A few miles in front of Moscow, the German army was halted by a Russian offensive in December, as well as something he had absolutely no control over: the severe Russian winter.

In the lands already occupied by German forces, S.S. chief Heinrich Himmler was preparing the ground for Hitler’s new German order. Expelling the Jews from Germany was the first step, and this was carried out by laws and decrees beginning in 1933; the Germans would switch to outright force in 1939, as Jews were first deported en-masse to Poland, then walled into ghettos after the occupation began. By 1941, a policy crafted under S.S. general Reinhard Heydrich had changed expulsion for extermination in what was called "a final solution to the Jewish question" (''die Endlösung der Judenfrage''). The system of concentration camps was supplemented by the creation of specialized killing centers in the occupied countries, especially in Poland, where camps such as Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor, and Belzac “processed” thousands of victims daily. Some six million Jews died during what was called the [[Holocaust]], as well as an additional five million Slavs, Gypsies, the handicapped, the aged, and many others that the Nazis considered “subhuman” in accordance with German racial policies.<ref>http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/riseofhitler/burns.htm</ref>

==Beginning of the end==
[[Image:Adolf_hitler6.jpg‎ |right|200px|thumb|Hitler in 1944, by now looking tired and strained.]]
Hitler grew increasingly strained by the end of 1942, depending on large amounts of drugs supplied by his physician, Theodor Morell, as a result of the twin defeats of El Alamein (which he lost the bulk of his Afrika corps to British general Montgomery), and Stalingrad (where he lost an entire army of 250,000 men to the Russians). He spent more time in his headquarters in East Prussia, and his time in the public eye ceased to exist. He refused to visit bombed German cities, and, as with Stalingrad, refused to allow German armies to withdraw from the battlefield when the situation was lost. Still, he could make stunning, decisive decisions when called for, such as the commando raid that resulted in the rescue of Benito Mussolini from Italian partisans in July, 1943.

But the defeat of Germany in the war was looming closer. Hitler’s relations with his leading commanders grew strained, the more so as he allowed units of the S.S. to take positions traditionally held by the army. The line at the eastern front was slowly being pushed back by the Soviets, while in the Atlantic his U-boats campaign had faltered. German cities were constantly being bombed, and a successful invasion on the Normandy coast of France in June, 1944 marked the beginning of the end.

===Assassination attempt===
[[Image:NWT Hitler dead.jpg|left|200px|thumb|Hitler's death as covered by the ''New York Times'', May 2, 1945.]]
Seeing Germany’s chances of surviving the war were desperate, a group of officers plotted to assassinate Hitler, planning several attempts in 1943-44, but nearly successful on July 20, 1944, when a bomb hidden in a briefcase by Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg went off under a table that Hitler and others were leaning over; four were killed outright, several suffered injuries, but Hitler escaped relatively unharmed (the bomb itself was set down away from Hitler behind a solid oak table leg, saving him). The conspirators were quickly rounded up; Stauffenberg was shot. The remainder were put on show trials and condemned to hang on meat hooks with piano wire. It was said that Hitler enjoyed watching film of their executions. As a result of the bomb, Nazi members were employed at key positions within the army, removing any trace of the army’s independence.

Within months nearly all of the territory occupied by Germany was now in Allied hands. A last offensive in December, 1944 to take the port of Antwerp, Belgium, failed. Hitler had by them grown ill; his hopes for a German victory bordered on the fantastical and the imagination. By January, 1945 he had moved into his command bunker in Berlin, where he gave orders deploying fictional divisions to counter the ever-closer Soviets. When all seemed lost, he gave out his final orders: first, appointing Admiral Karl Dönitz as head of the state and his successor, and Josef Goebbels as chancellor; and second, dictating his last political will which was an attempt to justify his life’s work.

On April 29, he committed the one truly-chivalrous act of his life: he married Eva Braun, his long-time mistress. After retiring to his room in the bunker the next day, Eva took poison, and Hitler put a bullet in his head. In accordance with his wishes, both bodies were burned. His Third Reich would outlive him for another week.

[[Elie Wiesel]] wrote the following in [[Time Magazine]] regarding Hitler:
{{cquote|Adolf Hitler or the incarnation of absolute evil; this is how future generations will remember the all-powerful Fuehrer of the criminal Third Reich. Compared with him, his peers [[Mussolini]] and [[Franco]] were novices. Under his hypnotic gaze, humanity crossed a threshold from which one could see the abyss. "Before Hitler, we thought we had sounded the depths of human nature," argues Ron Rosenbaum, author of "Explaining Hitler." "He showed how much lower we could go, and that's what was so horrifying. It gets us wondering not just at the depths he showed us but whether there is worse to come. The power of Hitler was to confound the modernist notion that judgments about good and [[evil]] were little more than matters of taste, reflections of social class and power and status. Although some modern scholars drive past the notion of evil and instead explain Hitler's conduct as a reflection of his childhood and self-esteem issues, for most survivors of the 20th century he is confirmation of our instinctive sense that evil does exist. It moves among us; it leads us astray and deploys powerful, subtle weapons against even the sturdiest souls." <ref name="time" />}}

==Hitler and the Theory of Evolution==
''For more information please see:'' [[Evolutionary racism]]

[[Image:Hitlerrisetopower.jpg|right|225px|thumb]]
The staunch [[evolution|evolutionist]] Stephen Gould admitted the following:
{{cquote|[[Ernst Haeckel|[Ernst] Haeckel]] was the chief apostle of evolution in [[Germany]].... His evolutionary racism; his call to the German people for racial purity and unflinching devotion to a "just" state; his belief that harsh, inexorable laws of evolution ruled human civilization and nature alike, conferring upon favored races the right to dominate others; the irrational mysticism that had always stood in strange communion with his brave words about objective science - all contributed to the rise of Nazism. - Stephen J. Gould, "Ontogeny and Phylogeny," Belknap Press: Cambridge MA, 1977, pp.77-78).<ref>http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/social.html</ref>}}

In regards to evolutionary racism, Hitler wrote the following in his work ''[[Mein Kampf]]'':
{{cquote|The Germans were the higher race, destined for a glorious evolutionary future. For this reason it was essential that the [[Jew]]s should be segregated, otherwise mixed marriages would take place. Were this to happen, all nature’s efforts “to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being may thus be rendered futile.”<ref>http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1675</ref>}}<ref>[http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200601.txt ''Mein Kampf,'' from Project Gutenberg Australia]</ref>

Hitler also wrote in ''Mein Kampf'':
{{cquote|The stronger must dominate and not blend with the weaker, thus sacrificing his own greatness. Only the born weakling can view this as cruel, but he, after all, is only a weak and limited man; for if this law did not prevail, any conceivable higher development (Hoherentwicklung) of organic living beings would be unthinkable.<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=268</ref>}}

Dr. Robert E.D. Clark wrote in his work ''Darwin, Before and After'' the following regarding Hitler and the theory of evolution: “Adolf Hitler’s mind was captivated by evolutionary teaching — probably since the time he was a boy. Evolutionary ideas — quite undisguised — lie at the basis of all that is worst in Mein Kampf — and in his public speeches”.<ref name="courier">http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/read/the_holocaust_why_did_it_happen</ref>
[[Image:5712dawkins.jpg|alt=Richard Dawkins|right|thumbnail|200px|[[Richard Dawkins]] is a prominent [[atheism|atheist]] and [[evolution|evolutionist]]. [[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> ]]
Richard Hickman in his work ''Biocreation'' concurs and wrote the following:
{{cquote|It is perhaps no coincidence that Adolf Hitler was a firm believer in and preacher of evolutionism. Whatever the deeper, profound, complexities of his [[psychosis]], it is certain that [the concept of struggle was important for]. . . his book, Mein Kampf clearly set forth a number of evolutionary ideas, particularly those emphasizing struggle, survival of the fittest and extermination of the weak to produce a better society. <ref>http://www.creationism.org/csshs/v08n3p24.htm</ref>}}

Noted evolutionary [[anthropology|anthropologist]] Sir [[Arthur Keith]] conceded the following in regards to Hitler: “The German Fuhrer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practices of Germany conform to the theory of evolution”.<ref name="courier" />

[[Pulitzer Prize]]-winning author [[Marilynne Robinson]] wrote the following regarding Hitler's racism in the November 2006 issue of ''[[Harper’s]]'' magazine:
{{cquote|While it is true that persecution of the Jews has a very long history in [[Europe]], it is also true that science in the twentieth century revived and absolutized persecution by giving it a fresh rationale — Jewishness was not religious or cultural, but genetic. Therefore no appeal could be made against the brute fact of a Jewish grandparent.

[[Richard Dawkins|[Richard] Dawkins]] deals with all this in one sentence. Hitler did his evil "in the name of ... an insane and unscientific [[eugenics]] theory." But eugenics is science as surely as totemism is religion. That either is in error is beside the point. Science quite appropriately acknowledges that error should be assumed, and at best it proceeds by a continuous process of criticism meant to isolate and identify error. So bad science is still science in more or less the same sense that bad religion is still religion. That both of them can do damage on a huge scale is clear. The prestige of both is a great part of the problem, and in the modern period the credibility of anything called science is enormous. As the history of eugenics proves, science at the highest levels is no reliable corrective to the influence of cultural prejudice but is in fact profoundly vulnerable to it.

There is indeed historical precedent in the [[Spanish Inquisition]] for the notion of hereditary Judaism. But the fact that the worst religious thought of the sixteenth century can be likened to the worst scientific thought of the twentieth century hardly redounds to the credit of science.<ref>http://solutions.synearth.net/2006/10/20</ref><ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/someone-finally-said-it-dawkinss-hysterical-scientism/</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>

== Adolf Hitler and Abortion ==

''For more information see:'' [[Abortion and Adolf Hitler]]

In 1942 Adolf Hitler declared:
{{cquote|In view of the large families of the Slav native population, it could only suit us if girls and women there had as many abortions as possible. We are not interested in seeing the non-[[German]] population multiply…We must use every means to instill in the population the idea that it is harmful to have several children, the expenses that they cause and the dangerous effect on woman's health… It will be necessary to open special institutions for abortions and doctors must be able to help out there in case there is any question of this being a breach of their professional ethics. <ref>http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/sep/07090708.html</ref>}}

== External links ==
[[File:Hitler Siegestor Munich Victory Gate.jpg|thumb|Watercolor of the Arch of Triumph in Munich by Hitler.]]
*[http://www.eucontest.org/go.php?pdf=www1.yadvashem.org/odot_pdf/Microsoft%20Word%20-%201994.pdf Extracts From Mein Kampf by Hitler]
*[http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/ Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler.] Full text.
*[http://www.snyderstreasures.com/pages/hartworks.htm Adolf Hitler ORIGINAL Watercolor Artworks.]

==Further reading==
*[http://www.ushmm.org/research/doctors/medical.htm STATE MEDICAL SERVICES OF THE THIRD REICH], FROM THE OPENING STATEMENT BY TELFORD TAYLOR, Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10. Nuremberg, October 1946–April 1949. Washington, D.C.: U.S. G.P.O, 1949–1953.] Retrieved from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.

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

==Sources==
*[http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hitler-adolf/oss-papers/text/profile-index.htmlA Psychological Analysis of Adolf Hitler, His Life and Legend], Walter C. Langer, Office of Strategic Services, Washington, D.C.

{{DEFAULTSORT: Hitler, Adolf}}

[[Category:Dictators]]
[[Category:Atheists]]
[[Category:Mass Murderers]]
[[Category:Nazis]]
[[Category:Evolutionists]]
[[Category:Totalitarianism]]
[[Category:Anti-Semitism]]
[[Category:German History]]
[[Category:World War II]]
[[Category:Evolutionary Racists]]
[[Category: Lunatics]]

Geocentric theory

2010-10-23T08:08:13Z

WillS: /* Ptolemy's system */

[[Image:Ptolemaicsystem-small.png|right|thumb|Rendition of a geocentric system from the Middle Ages.]]

A '''Geocentric theory''' is an astronomical theory which describes the universe as a ''Geocentric system'', i.e., a system which puts the Earth in the center of the universe, and describes other objects from the point of view of the Earth. The Greek philosophers Aristotle and Plato described such a theory wherein all celestial bodies move on spheres around the earth, the moon on the innermost one and the fixed stars on the outermost one.

==Ptolemy's system==
Ptolemy invented the most elaborated geocentric system, allowing the planets not only to move on circles around the earth, but using epicycles. By adding further ideas, he was able to predict the motion of the planets quite well. Ptolemy's model was extremely popular from ancient times until the 1600s, as it had better agreement with observation than any alternative. His model was particularly effective at cosmological predictions.

However, during the 1500s and 1600s, alternatives were proposed. The [[Denmark|Danish]] astronomer [[Tycho Brahe]] made the most accurate observations possible before the invention of the telescope. These showed discrepancies within Ptolemy's system.

With the invention of the [[telescope]], the observations became more precise, and new phenomena were discovered: In particular, [[Galileo]]'s use of the [[telescope]] to look at the skies revealed that [[Jupiter]] had at least four moons, and Venus had phases like the [[Moon]]: both phenomena were not predicted by Ptolemy's model.

[[Johannes Kepler]] used Brahe's measurements to improve the [[Heliocentrism|heliocentric]] system Copernicus had proposed, showing that planets had elliptical orbits around the sun. When [[Isaac Newton]] applied the newly discovered [[gravitation|universal theory of gravitation]] to the data, he used a heliocentric model. By the 1800s, the spectacular successes of Newtonian theory and [[Maxwell's equations]] for electromagnetism had convinced practically everyone that the Sun is a preferred frame of reference, and that the laws of physics must be applied in that frame. The geocentric theory was considered to be profoundly mistaken at that time.

Since the advent of relativity theory in the early 1900s, the laws of physics have been written in covariant equations, meaning that they are equally valid in any frame. Heliocentric and geocentric theories are both used today, depending on which allows more convenient calculations. However, relativity is itself a highly suspect scientific 'theory,' which has been [[Counterexamples to Relativity|largely discredited]].

== Scripture Quoted to justify Geocentric Theory ==
A few [[Bible]] quotes use geocentric terms. While some attempt to use these quotes to discredit the Bible's hold on science, others dispute this usage, claiming that the usage of the terms is similar to the way people today use terms like "sunrise" and "sunset". In this account, the terminology is not wrong, but merely reflects the observer's view.

*"He has fixed the earth firm, immovable." (1 Chronicles 16:30)
*"Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ..." (Psalm 93:1)
*"Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken." (Psalm 104:5)
*"...who made the earth and fashioned it, and himself fixed it fast..." (Isaiah 45:18)
*"The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose." (Ecclesiastes 1:5)
*"Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day." (Joshua 10, 12-13)

[[Category:Astronomy]]

Geocentric theory

2010-10-23T08:07:46Z

WillS: /* Ptolemy's system */

[[Image:Ptolemaicsystem-small.png|right|thumb|Rendition of a geocentric system from the Middle Ages.]]

A '''Geocentric theory''' is an astronomical theory which describes the universe as a ''Geocentric system'', i.e., a system which puts the Earth in the center of the universe, and describes other objects from the point of view of the Earth. The Greek philosophers Aristotle and Plato described such a theory wherein all celestial bodies move on spheres around the earth, the moon on the innermost one and the fixed stars on the outermost one.

==Ptolemy's system==
Ptolemy invented the most elaborated geocentric system, allowing the planets not only to move on circles around the earth, but using epicycles. By adding further ideas, he was able to predict the motion of the planets quite well. Ptolemy's model was extremely popular from ancient times until the 1600s, as it had better agreement with observation than any alternative. His model was particularly effective at cosmological predictions.

However, during the 1500s and 1600s, alternatives were proposed. The [[Denmark|Danish]] astronomer [[Tycho Brahe]] made the most accurate observations possible before the invention of the telescope. These showed discrepancies within Ptolemy's system.

With the invention of the [[telescope]], the observations became more precise, and new phenomena were discovered: In particular, [[Galileo]]'s use of the [[telescope]] to look at the skies revealed that [[Jupiter]] had at least four moons, and Venus had phases like the [[Moon]]: both phenomena were not predicted by Ptolemy's model.

[[Johannes Kepler]] used Brahe's measurements to improve the [[Heliocentrism|heliocentric]] system Copernicus had proposed, showing that planets had elliptical orbits around the sun. When [[Isaac Newton]] applied the newly discovered [[gravitation|universal theory of gravitation]] to the data, he used a heliocentric model. By the 1800s, the spectacular successes of Newtonian theory and [[Maxwell's equations]] for electromagnetism had convinced practically everyone that the Sun is a preferred frame of reference, and that the laws of physics must be applied in that frame. The geocentric theory was considered to be profoundly mistaken at that time.

Since the advent of relativity theory in the early 1900s, the laws of physics have been written in covariant equations, meaning that they are equally valid in any frame. Heliocentric and geocentric theories are both used today, depending on which allows more convenient calculations. However, relativity is itself a highly suspect scientific 'theory,' which has been [[largely discredited|Counterexamples to Relativity]].

== Scripture Quoted to justify Geocentric Theory ==
A few [[Bible]] quotes use geocentric terms. While some attempt to use these quotes to discredit the Bible's hold on science, others dispute this usage, claiming that the usage of the terms is similar to the way people today use terms like "sunrise" and "sunset". In this account, the terminology is not wrong, but merely reflects the observer's view.

*"He has fixed the earth firm, immovable." (1 Chronicles 16:30)
*"Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ..." (Psalm 93:1)
*"Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken." (Psalm 104:5)
*"...who made the earth and fashioned it, and himself fixed it fast..." (Isaiah 45:18)
*"The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose." (Ecclesiastes 1:5)
*"Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day." (Joshua 10, 12-13)

[[Category:Astronomy]]

Public Opinion Poll

2010-10-07T20:25:18Z

WillS: /* Polling organizations */

A '''public opinion poll''' is a survey of attitudes from a particular sample of the population at interest. Opinion polls represent the opinions of the total population by asking a sample of size N, where N is large enough for reliable results (usually expressed as a 95% confidence of +/- Z%. For most polls, N = 400 to 1000 people.

The sample had to be a ''valid'' representation of the population, which means that each person in the target population has a known chance of being sampled.<ref> In unweighted samples, each person has an equal chance. If people have a known but unequal chance, they are weighted to make the chances appear equal.</ref> Unscientific public opinion polls, made by collecting information from a haphazard sample, date from the '''straw polls''' in American elections in the 1820s. As soon as modern statistical sampling theory was invented around 1930, [[George Gallup]] and other advertisers started created nationwide public opinion polls, using about 1500 cases. The American public became fascinated with polls and they spread to many democratic countries by 1940. Totalitarian countries did not allow them.

==History of Polling==

The first known example of an opinion poll was a local straw vote conducted by a newspaper ''The Harrisburg Pennsylvanian'' in 1824; it showed [[Andrew Jackson]] leading [[John Quincy Adams]] by 335 votes to 169 in the contest for the presidency. Such straw votes—unweighted and unscientific— gradually became more popular; but they remained local, usually city-wide phenomena. In 1916, the large-circulation U.S. magazine ''[[Literary Digest]]'' embarked on a national survey (partly as a circulation-raising exercise) and correctly predicted Woodrow Wilson's election as president. Mailing out millions of postcards and simply counting the returns, the ''Digest'' correctly called the following four presidential elections.

In 1936, however, the ''Digest'' came unstuck. Its 2.3 million "voters" constituted a huge sample; however they were generally more affluent Americans who tended to have Republican sympathies. The ''Literary Digest'' saw the bias but did not know how to correct it. The week before election day, it reported that [[Alf Landon]] was far ahead of Franklin D. Roosevelt. At the same time, [[George Gallup]] conducted a far smaller, but more scientifically-based survey, in which he polled a demographically representative sample. Gallup correctly predicted Roosevelt's landslide victory. The ''Literary Digest'' went out of business soon afterwards, while the polling industry started to take off .

[[Gallup]] launched a subsidiary in Britain, where it correctly predicted Labour's victory in the 1945 general election, in contrast with virtually all other commentators, who expected the Conservative Party, led by Winston Churchill, to win easily.

By the 1950s, polling had spread to most democracies. Nowadays they reach virtually every country, although in more autocratic societies they tend to avoid sensitive political topics. In Iraq, surveys conducted soon after the 2003 war helped to measure the true feelings of Iraqi citizens to Saddam Hussein, post-war conditions and the presence of US forces.

For many years, opinion polls were conducted mainly face-to-face, either in the street or in people's homes. This method remains widely used, but in some countries it has been overtaken by telephone polls, which can be conducted faster and more cheaply. Because of the common practice of telemarketers to sell products under the guise of a telephone survey and due to the proliferation of residential call screening devices and use of cell phones, response rates for phone surveys have been plummeting. Mailed surveys have become the data collection method of choice among local governments that conduct a [[citizen survey]] to track service quality and manage resource allocation. In recent years, [[Internet]] and [[short message service]] (SMS, or text) surveys have become increasingly popular, but most of these draw on whomever wishes to participate rather than a scientific sample of the population, and are therefore not generally considered accurate.

==Potential for inaccuracy==
===Sampling error===

All polls based on samples are subject to [[sampling error]] which reflects the effects of chance in the sampling process. Too many of this group happen to fall in the sample, and too few of that group. This produces a bias that is inevitable when people are picked at random. The percentage error gets smaller as the sample size increases. The uncertainty is often expressed as a [[margin of error]]. A poll with a random sample of 1,000 people has margin of sampling error of 3% for the estimated percentage of the whole population. A 3% margin of error means that 95% of the time the procedure used would give an estimate within 3% of the percentage to be estimated. The margin of error can be reduced by using a larger sample, however if a pollster wishes to reduce the margin of error to 1% they would need a sample of around 10,000 people. In practice pollsters need to balance the cost of a large sample against the reduction in sampling error and a sample size of around 500-1,000 is a typical compromise for political polls. (Note that to get 500 complete responses it may be necessary to make thousands of phone calls.)[http://www.publicagenda.org/polling/polling_error.cfm]

The margin of error does not reflect other sources of error, such as poorly defined or ambiguous questions, or overlooking groups of people who might have different opinions. The ''Literary Digest'' sampled automobile and telephone owners in 1936 and thus got too many rich Republicans and too few poor Democrats. Today nearly all interviews are done by telephone or over the internet. Researchers today are studying whether people who only have cell phones are much different from people with land lines. (In general the differences are quites small.) Researchers have found that people who volunteer for a poll--say, on the internet--tend to be different; they are younger, better educated and more sure of their opinions.
===Nonresponse bias===

Since some people do not answer calls from strangers, or refuse to answer the poll, poll samples may not be representative samples from a population. Because of this [[selection bias]], the characteristics of those who agree to be interviewed may be markedly different from those who decline. That is, the actual sample is a biased version of the universe the pollster wants to analyze. In these cases, bias introduces new errors, one way or the other, that are in addition to errors caused by sample size. Error due to bias does not become smaller with larger sample sizes. If the people who refuse to answer, or are never reached, have the same characteristics as the people who do answer, the final results will be unbiased. If the people who do not answer have different opinions then there is bias in the results. In terms of election polls, studies suggest that bias effects are small, but each polling firm has its own formulas on how to adjust weights to minimize selection bias.[http://abcnews.go.com/images/pdf/responserates.pdf]

===Response bias===

Survey results may be affected by [[response bias]], where the answers given by respondents do not reflect their true beliefs. This may be deliberately engineered by unscrupulous pollsters in order to generate a certain result or please their clients, but more often is a result of the detailed wording or ordering of questions (see below). Respondents may deliberately try to manipulate the outcome of a poll by e.g. advocating a more extreme position than they actually hold in order to boost their side of the argument or give rapid and ill-considered answers in order to hasten the end of their questioning. Respondents may also feel under social pressure not to give an unpopular answer. For example, respondents might be unwilling to admit to unpopular attitudes like racism or sexism, and thus polls might not reflect the true incidence of these attitudes in the population. If the results of surveys are widely publicized this effect may be magnified - the so-called "spiral of silence."

===Wording of questions===

It is well established that the wording of the questions, the order in which they are asked and the number and form of alternative answers offered can influence results of polls. Thus comparisons between polls often boil down to the wording of the question. On some issues, question wording can result in quite pronounced differences between surveys. [http://www.publicagenda.org/issues/red_flags.cfm?issue_type=higher_education#affirmative_action][http://www.publicagenda.org/issues/red_flags.cfm?issue_type=gay_rights#benefits][http://www.publicagenda.org/issues/red_flags.cfm?issue_type=abortion#mixed] This can also, however, be a result of legitimately conflicted feelings or evolving attitudes, rather than a poorly constructed survey.[http://www.publicagenda.org/polling/polling_stages.cfm] One way in which pollsters attempt to minimize this effect is to ask the same set of questions over time, in order to track changes in opinion. Another common technique is to rotate the order in which questions are asked. Many pollsters also [[split-sample]]. This involves having two different versions of a question, with each version presented to half the respondents.

The most effective controls, used by [[attitude (psychology)|attitude]] researchers, are:

* asking enough questions to allow all aspects of an issue to be covered and to control effects due to the form of the question (such as positive or negative wording), the adequacy of the number being established quantitatively with [[psychometrics|psychometric]] measures such as reliability coefficients, and

* analyzing the results with psychometric techniques which synthesize the answers into a few reliable scores and detect ineffective questions.

These controls are not widely used in the polling industry.

===Coverage bias===

Another source of error is the use of samples that are not representative of the population as a consequence of the methodology used, as was the experience of the ''Literary Digest'' in 1936. For example, telephone sampling has a built-in error because in many times and places, those with telephones have generally been richer than those without. Several studies of mobile phone users by the Pew Research Center in the U.S. concluded that the absence of mobile users was not unduly skewing results, at least not yet. [http://pewresearch.org/obdeck/?ObDeckID=80]

An oft-quoted example of opinion polls succumbing to errors was the British election of 1992. Despite the polling organizations using different methodologies virtually all the polls in the lead up to the vote (and [[exit poll]]s taken on voting day) showed a lead for the opposition Labour party but the actual vote gave a clear victory to the ruling Conservative party.

In their deliberations after this embarrassment the pollsters advanced several ideas to account for their errors, including:

* '''Late swing'''. The Conservatives gained from people who switched to them at the last minute, so the error was not as great as it first appeared.

* '''Nonresponse bias'''. Conservative voters were less likely to participate in the survey than in the past and were thus underrepresented.

* The '''spiral of silence'''. The Conservatives had suffered a sustained period of unpopularity as a result of economic recession and a series of minor scandals. Some Conservative supporters felt under pressure to give a more popular answer.

The relative importance of these factors was, and remains, a matter of controversy, but since then the polling organizations have adjusted their methodologies and have achieved more accurate predictions in subsequent elections.

==Polling organizations==

There are many polling organizations. The most famous remains the very first one, the Gallup poll, created by [[George Gallup]].

Other major polling organizations in the U.S. include:

*The Pew Research Center conducts polls concentrating on media and political beliefs.
*The Harris Poll.
*The Roper Poll.
*The World Public Opinion provides in-depth information and analysis on public opinion from around the world on international issues.
*Nielsen Ratings, virtually always for television.
*Rasmussen Reports (often accused of Republican bias- however, like FOX news, is only conservative by comparison to liberal groups)
*Garin Hart Yang (Democratic)
*Ayres, McHenry & Associates (Republican)
*Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates (Democratic)
*Moore Information (Republican)
*Frederick Polls (Democratic)
*OnMessage Inc. (Republican)
*Hickman-Maslin Research (Democratic)
*The Tarrance Group (Republican)
*Greenberg Quinlan Rosner (Democratic)
*Public Opinion Strategies (Republican)
*Quinnipiac Polls, run by Quinnipiac University in Hamden, Connecticut, and started as a student project.*The National Opinion Research Center.
*Public Agenda, conducts research bridging the gap between what American leaders think and what the public really thinks.

In Britain the most notable "pollsters" are:
*MORI. This polling organization is notable for only selecting those who say that they are "likely" to vote. This has tended to favour the Conservative Party in recent years.
*YouGov, an online pollster.
*GfK NOP
*ICR/International Communications Research|ICR
*ICM (polling)|ICM
*Populus, official The Times pollster.

In Australia the most notable companies are:
*Newspoll - published in News Limited|News Limited's ''The Australian'' newspaper
*Roy Morgan Research - published in the Crikey email reporting service
*Galaxy Research|Galaxy Polling - published in News Limited|News Limited's tabloid papers
*ACNielsen|AC Nielsen Polling - published in Fairfax Media|Fairfax newspapers

In Canada the most notable companies are:
*Angus Reid Strategies
*Ipsos-Reid
*Environics
*Ekos
*Decima
*Leger
*CROP

In Nigeria the most notable polling organization is:
*NOI poll|NOI-Gallup poll

All the major television networks, alone or in conjunction with the largest newspapers or magazines, in virtually every democratic country, operate polling operations.

Several organizations monitor the behaviour of pollsters and the use of polling data, including PEW and, in Canada, the Laurier Institute for the Study of Public Opinion and Policy.[http://www.wlu.ca/lispop/lispop]

==Famous Failures==
The best-known failure of opinion polling to date in the U.S. was the prediction in 1948 that Thomas Dewey would defeat Harry S. Truman. Major polling organizations, including Gallup and Roper, indicated a landslide victory for Dewey.

In Britain, most polls failed to predict the Conservative election victories of 1970 and 1992, and Labour's victory in 1974. However, their figures at other elections have been generally accurate.
==Exit polls==
[[Exit poll|Exit polls]] ask voters just after they leave the booth how they voted. The results are tabulated within minutes and allow news agencies to make a prediction of who will win (or if it is "too close to call".)

==Influence ==

By providing information about voting intentions, opinion polls can sometimes influence the behaviour of electors. The various theories about how this happens can be split up into two groups: bandwagon/underdog effects, and strategic ('tactical') voting.

A [[Bandwagon effect]] occurs when the poll prompts voters to back the candidate shown to be winning in the poll. The idea that voters are susceptible to such effects is old, stemming at least from 1884; Safire (1993: 43) reported that it was first used in a political cartoon in the magazine Puck in that year. It has also remained persistent in spite of a lack of empirical corroberation until the late 20th century. [[George Gallup]] spent much effort in vain trying to discredit this theory in his time by presenting empirical research. A recent meta-study of scientific research on this topic indicates that from the 1980's onward the Bandwagon effect is found more often by researchers (Irwin & van Holsteyn 2000).

The opposite of the bandwagon effect is the [[Underdog effect]]. It is often mentioned in the media. This occurs when people vote, out of sympathy, for the party perceived to be 'losing' the elections. There is less empirical evidence for the existence of this effect than there is for the existence of the Bandwagon effect (Irwin & van Holsteyn 2000).

The second category of theories on how polls directly affect voting is called strategic or [[tactical voting]]. This theory is based on the idea that voters view the act of voting as a means of selecting a government. Thus they will sometimes not choose the candidate they prefer on ground of ideology or sympathy, but another, less-preferred, candidate from strategic considerations. An example can be found in the general election of 1997. Then Cabinet Minister, Michael Portillo's constituency of Enfield was believed to be a [[safe seat]] but opinion polls showed the Labour candidate Stephen Twigg steadily gaining support, which may have prompted undecided voters or supporters of other parties to support Twigg in order to remove Portillo. Another example is the Boomerang effect where the likely supporters of the candidate shown to be winning feel that s/he is "home and dry" and that their vote is not required, thus allowing another candidate to win.

These effects only indicate how opinion polls ''directly'' affect political choices of the electorate. Other effect can be found on journalists, politicians, political parties, civil servants etc. in, among other things, the form of media framing and party ideology shifts.

==Bibliography==
* Asher, Herbert, 1998: Polling and the Public. What Every Citizen Should Know, fourth edition, Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
* Bourdieu, Pierre. "Public Opinion does not exist" in ''Sociology in Question'', London, Sage (1995)
* Bradburn, Norman M. and Seymour Sudman. ''Polls and Surveys: Understanding What They Tell Us'' (1988)
* Cantril, Hadley. ''Gauging Public Opinion'' (1944)
* Converse, Jean M. ''Survey Research in the United States: Roots and Emergence 1890-1960'' (1987), the standard history
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=8971691 Crespi, Irving. ''Public Opinion, Polls, and Democracy'' (1989)]
* Gallup, George. ''Public Opinion in a Democracy'' (1939)
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=100501261 Glynn, Carroll J., Susan Herbst, Garrett J. O'Keefe, and Robert Y. Shapiro. ''Public Opinion'' (1999)] textbook
* Irwin, Galen A. and Joop J. M. Van Holsteyn. ''Bandwagons, Underdogs, the Titanic and the Red Cross: The Influence of Public Opinion Polls on Voters'' (2000).
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=28537852 Lavrakas, Paul J. et al eds. ''Presidential Polls and the News Media'' (1995)]
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=8540600 Moore, David W. ''The Superpollsters: How They Measure and Manipulate Public Opinion in America'' (1995)]
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=28621255 Niemi, Richard G., John Mueller, Tom W. Smith, eds. ''Trends in Public Opinion: A Compendium of Survey Data'' (1989)]
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=104829752 Oskamp, Stuart and P. Wesley Schultz; ''Attitudes and Opinions'' (2004)]
* Robinson, Claude E. ''Straw Votes'' (1932).
* Robinson, Matthew ''Mobocracy: How the Media's Obsession with Polling Twists the News, Alters Elections, and Undermines Democracy'' (2002)
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=89021667 Rogers, Lindsay. ''The Pollsters: Public Opinion, Politics, and Democratic Leadership'' (1949)]
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=71288534 Traugott, Michael W. ''The Voter's Guide to Election Polls''] 3rd ed. (2004)
* James G. Webster, Patricia F. Phalen, Lawrence W. Lichty; ''Ratings Analysis: The Theory and Practice of Audience Research'' Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=59669912 Young, Michael L. ''Dictionary of Polling: The Language of Contemporary Opinion Research'' (1992)]

==Primary sources==
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=98754501 Cantril, Hadley and Mildred Strunk, eds. ''Public Opinion, 1935-1946'' (1951)], massive compilation of many public opinion polls from US, Britain, Canada, Australia, and elsewhere.
* Gallup, Alec M. ed. ''The Gallup Poll Cumulative Index: Public Opinion, 1935-1997'' (1999) lists 10,000+ questions, but no results
* Gallup, George Horace, ed. ''The Gallup Poll; Public Opinion, 1935-1971'' 3 vol (1972) summarizes results of each poll.

==External links==
* [http://www.angus-reid.com/index.cfm Angus Reid Global Monitor - The world's largest free-access online public opinion database]
* [http://www.worldpublicopinion.org WorldPublicOpinion.org - Online publication covering worldwide opinion on international policy issues]
* [http://www.publicagenda.org/ Public Agenda - Nonpartisan, nonprofit group that tracks public opinion data in the United States]
* [http://www.ncpp.org/?q=home National Council on Public Polls - An association of polling organizations in the United States devoted to setting high professional standards for surveys]
* [http://answers.vizu.com/ Vizu Answers - Online Opinion Polling]
==See Also==
*[[Gallup Poll]]

====References====
<references/>

[[Category:Sociology]]
[[Category:Media]]
[[Category:Statistics]]
[[category:political Terms]]

Public Opinion Poll

2010-10-07T20:19:23Z

WillS: /* Polling organizations */

A '''public opinion poll''' is a survey of attitudes from a particular sample of the population at interest. Opinion polls represent the opinions of the total population by asking a sample of size N, where N is large enough for reliable results (usually expressed as a 95% confidence of +/- Z%. For most polls, N = 400 to 1000 people.

The sample had to be a ''valid'' representation of the population, which means that each person in the target population has a known chance of being sampled.<ref> In unweighted samples, each person has an equal chance. If people have a known but unequal chance, they are weighted to make the chances appear equal.</ref> Unscientific public opinion polls, made by collecting information from a haphazard sample, date from the '''straw polls''' in American elections in the 1820s. As soon as modern statistical sampling theory was invented around 1930, [[George Gallup]] and other advertisers started created nationwide public opinion polls, using about 1500 cases. The American public became fascinated with polls and they spread to many democratic countries by 1940. Totalitarian countries did not allow them.

==History of Polling==

The first known example of an opinion poll was a local straw vote conducted by a newspaper ''The Harrisburg Pennsylvanian'' in 1824; it showed [[Andrew Jackson]] leading [[John Quincy Adams]] by 335 votes to 169 in the contest for the presidency. Such straw votes—unweighted and unscientific— gradually became more popular; but they remained local, usually city-wide phenomena. In 1916, the large-circulation U.S. magazine ''[[Literary Digest]]'' embarked on a national survey (partly as a circulation-raising exercise) and correctly predicted Woodrow Wilson's election as president. Mailing out millions of postcards and simply counting the returns, the ''Digest'' correctly called the following four presidential elections.

In 1936, however, the ''Digest'' came unstuck. Its 2.3 million "voters" constituted a huge sample; however they were generally more affluent Americans who tended to have Republican sympathies. The ''Literary Digest'' saw the bias but did not know how to correct it. The week before election day, it reported that [[Alf Landon]] was far ahead of Franklin D. Roosevelt. At the same time, [[George Gallup]] conducted a far smaller, but more scientifically-based survey, in which he polled a demographically representative sample. Gallup correctly predicted Roosevelt's landslide victory. The ''Literary Digest'' went out of business soon afterwards, while the polling industry started to take off .

[[Gallup]] launched a subsidiary in Britain, where it correctly predicted Labour's victory in the 1945 general election, in contrast with virtually all other commentators, who expected the Conservative Party, led by Winston Churchill, to win easily.

By the 1950s, polling had spread to most democracies. Nowadays they reach virtually every country, although in more autocratic societies they tend to avoid sensitive political topics. In Iraq, surveys conducted soon after the 2003 war helped to measure the true feelings of Iraqi citizens to Saddam Hussein, post-war conditions and the presence of US forces.

For many years, opinion polls were conducted mainly face-to-face, either in the street or in people's homes. This method remains widely used, but in some countries it has been overtaken by telephone polls, which can be conducted faster and more cheaply. Because of the common practice of telemarketers to sell products under the guise of a telephone survey and due to the proliferation of residential call screening devices and use of cell phones, response rates for phone surveys have been plummeting. Mailed surveys have become the data collection method of choice among local governments that conduct a [[citizen survey]] to track service quality and manage resource allocation. In recent years, [[Internet]] and [[short message service]] (SMS, or text) surveys have become increasingly popular, but most of these draw on whomever wishes to participate rather than a scientific sample of the population, and are therefore not generally considered accurate.

==Potential for inaccuracy==
===Sampling error===

All polls based on samples are subject to [[sampling error]] which reflects the effects of chance in the sampling process. Too many of this group happen to fall in the sample, and too few of that group. This produces a bias that is inevitable when people are picked at random. The percentage error gets smaller as the sample size increases. The uncertainty is often expressed as a [[margin of error]]. A poll with a random sample of 1,000 people has margin of sampling error of 3% for the estimated percentage of the whole population. A 3% margin of error means that 95% of the time the procedure used would give an estimate within 3% of the percentage to be estimated. The margin of error can be reduced by using a larger sample, however if a pollster wishes to reduce the margin of error to 1% they would need a sample of around 10,000 people. In practice pollsters need to balance the cost of a large sample against the reduction in sampling error and a sample size of around 500-1,000 is a typical compromise for political polls. (Note that to get 500 complete responses it may be necessary to make thousands of phone calls.)[http://www.publicagenda.org/polling/polling_error.cfm]

The margin of error does not reflect other sources of error, such as poorly defined or ambiguous questions, or overlooking groups of people who might have different opinions. The ''Literary Digest'' sampled automobile and telephone owners in 1936 and thus got too many rich Republicans and too few poor Democrats. Today nearly all interviews are done by telephone or over the internet. Researchers today are studying whether people who only have cell phones are much different from people with land lines. (In general the differences are quites small.) Researchers have found that people who volunteer for a poll--say, on the internet--tend to be different; they are younger, better educated and more sure of their opinions.
===Nonresponse bias===

Since some people do not answer calls from strangers, or refuse to answer the poll, poll samples may not be representative samples from a population. Because of this [[selection bias]], the characteristics of those who agree to be interviewed may be markedly different from those who decline. That is, the actual sample is a biased version of the universe the pollster wants to analyze. In these cases, bias introduces new errors, one way or the other, that are in addition to errors caused by sample size. Error due to bias does not become smaller with larger sample sizes. If the people who refuse to answer, or are never reached, have the same characteristics as the people who do answer, the final results will be unbiased. If the people who do not answer have different opinions then there is bias in the results. In terms of election polls, studies suggest that bias effects are small, but each polling firm has its own formulas on how to adjust weights to minimize selection bias.[http://abcnews.go.com/images/pdf/responserates.pdf]

===Response bias===

Survey results may be affected by [[response bias]], where the answers given by respondents do not reflect their true beliefs. This may be deliberately engineered by unscrupulous pollsters in order to generate a certain result or please their clients, but more often is a result of the detailed wording or ordering of questions (see below). Respondents may deliberately try to manipulate the outcome of a poll by e.g. advocating a more extreme position than they actually hold in order to boost their side of the argument or give rapid and ill-considered answers in order to hasten the end of their questioning. Respondents may also feel under social pressure not to give an unpopular answer. For example, respondents might be unwilling to admit to unpopular attitudes like racism or sexism, and thus polls might not reflect the true incidence of these attitudes in the population. If the results of surveys are widely publicized this effect may be magnified - the so-called "spiral of silence."

===Wording of questions===

It is well established that the wording of the questions, the order in which they are asked and the number and form of alternative answers offered can influence results of polls. Thus comparisons between polls often boil down to the wording of the question. On some issues, question wording can result in quite pronounced differences between surveys. [http://www.publicagenda.org/issues/red_flags.cfm?issue_type=higher_education#affirmative_action][http://www.publicagenda.org/issues/red_flags.cfm?issue_type=gay_rights#benefits][http://www.publicagenda.org/issues/red_flags.cfm?issue_type=abortion#mixed] This can also, however, be a result of legitimately conflicted feelings or evolving attitudes, rather than a poorly constructed survey.[http://www.publicagenda.org/polling/polling_stages.cfm] One way in which pollsters attempt to minimize this effect is to ask the same set of questions over time, in order to track changes in opinion. Another common technique is to rotate the order in which questions are asked. Many pollsters also [[split-sample]]. This involves having two different versions of a question, with each version presented to half the respondents.

The most effective controls, used by [[attitude (psychology)|attitude]] researchers, are:

* asking enough questions to allow all aspects of an issue to be covered and to control effects due to the form of the question (such as positive or negative wording), the adequacy of the number being established quantitatively with [[psychometrics|psychometric]] measures such as reliability coefficients, and

* analyzing the results with psychometric techniques which synthesize the answers into a few reliable scores and detect ineffective questions.

These controls are not widely used in the polling industry.

===Coverage bias===

Another source of error is the use of samples that are not representative of the population as a consequence of the methodology used, as was the experience of the ''Literary Digest'' in 1936. For example, telephone sampling has a built-in error because in many times and places, those with telephones have generally been richer than those without. Several studies of mobile phone users by the Pew Research Center in the U.S. concluded that the absence of mobile users was not unduly skewing results, at least not yet. [http://pewresearch.org/obdeck/?ObDeckID=80]

An oft-quoted example of opinion polls succumbing to errors was the British election of 1992. Despite the polling organizations using different methodologies virtually all the polls in the lead up to the vote (and [[exit poll]]s taken on voting day) showed a lead for the opposition Labour party but the actual vote gave a clear victory to the ruling Conservative party.

In their deliberations after this embarrassment the pollsters advanced several ideas to account for their errors, including:

* '''Late swing'''. The Conservatives gained from people who switched to them at the last minute, so the error was not as great as it first appeared.

* '''Nonresponse bias'''. Conservative voters were less likely to participate in the survey than in the past and were thus underrepresented.

* The '''spiral of silence'''. The Conservatives had suffered a sustained period of unpopularity as a result of economic recession and a series of minor scandals. Some Conservative supporters felt under pressure to give a more popular answer.

The relative importance of these factors was, and remains, a matter of controversy, but since then the polling organizations have adjusted their methodologies and have achieved more accurate predictions in subsequent elections.

==Polling organizations==

There are many polling organizations. The most famous remains the very first one, the Gallup poll, created by [[George Gallup]].

Other major polling organizations in the U.S. include:

*The Pew Research Center conducts polls concentrating on media and political beliefs.
*The Harris Poll.
*The Roper Poll.
*The World Public Opinion provides in-depth information and analysis on public opinion from around the world on international issues.
*Nielsen Ratings, virtually always for television.
*Rasmussen Reports (Republican)
*Garin Hart Yang (Democratic)
*Ayres, McHenry & Associates (Republican)
*Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates (Democratic)
*Moore Information (Republican)
*Frederick Polls (Democratic)
*OnMessage Inc. (Republican)
*Hickman-Maslin Research (Democratic)
*The Tarrance Group (Republican)
*Greenberg Quinlan Rosner (Democratic)
*Public Opinion Strategies (Republican)
*Quinnipiac Polls, run by Quinnipiac University in Hamden, Connecticut, and started as a student project.*The National Opinion Research Center.
*Public Agenda, conducts research bridging the gap between what American leaders think and what the public really thinks.

In Britain the most notable "pollsters" are:
*MORI. This polling organization is notable for only selecting those who say that they are "likely" to vote. This has tended to favour the Conservative Party in recent years.
*YouGov, an online pollster.
*GfK NOP
*ICR/International Communications Research|ICR
*ICM (polling)|ICM
*Populus, official The Times pollster.

In Australia the most notable companies are:
*Newspoll - published in News Limited|News Limited's ''The Australian'' newspaper
*Roy Morgan Research - published in the Crikey email reporting service
*Galaxy Research|Galaxy Polling - published in News Limited|News Limited's tabloid papers
*ACNielsen|AC Nielsen Polling - published in Fairfax Media|Fairfax newspapers

In Canada the most notable companies are:
*Angus Reid Strategies
*Ipsos-Reid
*Environics
*Ekos
*Decima
*Leger
*CROP

In Nigeria the most notable polling organization is:
*NOI poll|NOI-Gallup poll

All the major television networks, alone or in conjunction with the largest newspapers or magazines, in virtually every democratic country, operate polling operations.

Several organizations monitor the behaviour of pollsters and the use of polling data, including PEW and, in Canada, the Laurier Institute for the Study of Public Opinion and Policy.[http://www.wlu.ca/lispop/lispop]

==Famous Failures==
The best-known failure of opinion polling to date in the U.S. was the prediction in 1948 that Thomas Dewey would defeat Harry S. Truman. Major polling organizations, including Gallup and Roper, indicated a landslide victory for Dewey.

In Britain, most polls failed to predict the Conservative election victories of 1970 and 1992, and Labour's victory in 1974. However, their figures at other elections have been generally accurate.
==Exit polls==
[[Exit poll|Exit polls]] ask voters just after they leave the booth how they voted. The results are tabulated within minutes and allow news agencies to make a prediction of who will win (or if it is "too close to call".)

==Influence ==

By providing information about voting intentions, opinion polls can sometimes influence the behaviour of electors. The various theories about how this happens can be split up into two groups: bandwagon/underdog effects, and strategic ('tactical') voting.

A [[Bandwagon effect]] occurs when the poll prompts voters to back the candidate shown to be winning in the poll. The idea that voters are susceptible to such effects is old, stemming at least from 1884; Safire (1993: 43) reported that it was first used in a political cartoon in the magazine Puck in that year. It has also remained persistent in spite of a lack of empirical corroberation until the late 20th century. [[George Gallup]] spent much effort in vain trying to discredit this theory in his time by presenting empirical research. A recent meta-study of scientific research on this topic indicates that from the 1980's onward the Bandwagon effect is found more often by researchers (Irwin & van Holsteyn 2000).

The opposite of the bandwagon effect is the [[Underdog effect]]. It is often mentioned in the media. This occurs when people vote, out of sympathy, for the party perceived to be 'losing' the elections. There is less empirical evidence for the existence of this effect than there is for the existence of the Bandwagon effect (Irwin & van Holsteyn 2000).

The second category of theories on how polls directly affect voting is called strategic or [[tactical voting]]. This theory is based on the idea that voters view the act of voting as a means of selecting a government. Thus they will sometimes not choose the candidate they prefer on ground of ideology or sympathy, but another, less-preferred, candidate from strategic considerations. An example can be found in the general election of 1997. Then Cabinet Minister, Michael Portillo's constituency of Enfield was believed to be a [[safe seat]] but opinion polls showed the Labour candidate Stephen Twigg steadily gaining support, which may have prompted undecided voters or supporters of other parties to support Twigg in order to remove Portillo. Another example is the Boomerang effect where the likely supporters of the candidate shown to be winning feel that s/he is "home and dry" and that their vote is not required, thus allowing another candidate to win.

These effects only indicate how opinion polls ''directly'' affect political choices of the electorate. Other effect can be found on journalists, politicians, political parties, civil servants etc. in, among other things, the form of media framing and party ideology shifts.

==Bibliography==
* Asher, Herbert, 1998: Polling and the Public. What Every Citizen Should Know, fourth edition, Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
* Bourdieu, Pierre. "Public Opinion does not exist" in ''Sociology in Question'', London, Sage (1995)
* Bradburn, Norman M. and Seymour Sudman. ''Polls and Surveys: Understanding What They Tell Us'' (1988)
* Cantril, Hadley. ''Gauging Public Opinion'' (1944)
* Converse, Jean M. ''Survey Research in the United States: Roots and Emergence 1890-1960'' (1987), the standard history
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=8971691 Crespi, Irving. ''Public Opinion, Polls, and Democracy'' (1989)]
* Gallup, George. ''Public Opinion in a Democracy'' (1939)
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=100501261 Glynn, Carroll J., Susan Herbst, Garrett J. O'Keefe, and Robert Y. Shapiro. ''Public Opinion'' (1999)] textbook
* Irwin, Galen A. and Joop J. M. Van Holsteyn. ''Bandwagons, Underdogs, the Titanic and the Red Cross: The Influence of Public Opinion Polls on Voters'' (2000).
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=28537852 Lavrakas, Paul J. et al eds. ''Presidential Polls and the News Media'' (1995)]
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=8540600 Moore, David W. ''The Superpollsters: How They Measure and Manipulate Public Opinion in America'' (1995)]
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=28621255 Niemi, Richard G., John Mueller, Tom W. Smith, eds. ''Trends in Public Opinion: A Compendium of Survey Data'' (1989)]
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=104829752 Oskamp, Stuart and P. Wesley Schultz; ''Attitudes and Opinions'' (2004)]
* Robinson, Claude E. ''Straw Votes'' (1932).
* Robinson, Matthew ''Mobocracy: How the Media's Obsession with Polling Twists the News, Alters Elections, and Undermines Democracy'' (2002)
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=89021667 Rogers, Lindsay. ''The Pollsters: Public Opinion, Politics, and Democratic Leadership'' (1949)]
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=71288534 Traugott, Michael W. ''The Voter's Guide to Election Polls''] 3rd ed. (2004)
* James G. Webster, Patricia F. Phalen, Lawrence W. Lichty; ''Ratings Analysis: The Theory and Practice of Audience Research'' Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=59669912 Young, Michael L. ''Dictionary of Polling: The Language of Contemporary Opinion Research'' (1992)]

==Primary sources==
* [http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=98754501 Cantril, Hadley and Mildred Strunk, eds. ''Public Opinion, 1935-1946'' (1951)], massive compilation of many public opinion polls from US, Britain, Canada, Australia, and elsewhere.
* Gallup, Alec M. ed. ''The Gallup Poll Cumulative Index: Public Opinion, 1935-1997'' (1999) lists 10,000+ questions, but no results
* Gallup, George Horace, ed. ''The Gallup Poll; Public Opinion, 1935-1971'' 3 vol (1972) summarizes results of each poll.

==External links==
* [http://www.angus-reid.com/index.cfm Angus Reid Global Monitor - The world's largest free-access online public opinion database]
* [http://www.worldpublicopinion.org WorldPublicOpinion.org - Online publication covering worldwide opinion on international policy issues]
* [http://www.publicagenda.org/ Public Agenda - Nonpartisan, nonprofit group that tracks public opinion data in the United States]
* [http://www.ncpp.org/?q=home National Council on Public Polls - An association of polling organizations in the United States devoted to setting high professional standards for surveys]
* [http://answers.vizu.com/ Vizu Answers - Online Opinion Polling]
==See Also==
*[[Gallup Poll]]

====References====
<references/>

[[Category:Sociology]]
[[Category:Media]]
[[Category:Statistics]]
[[category:political Terms]]

Center for Constitutional Rights

2010-10-07T20:16:52Z

WillS:

The '''Center for Constitutional Rights''' describe themselves as the premiere legal institution of the [[progressive]] movement. Their mission is "committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change." <ref>[http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/about/mission_vision.asp CCR: About us]</ref> The group was founded in 1966 by [[William Kunstler]]. They were largely overlooked until they allied themselves with the captives at Guantanamo Bay, most of whom are terrorists captured after illegally attacking American troops or innocent civilians.

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[category:United States Political Organizations]]

University of Michigan

2010-10-05T07:42:42Z

WillS:

{{University
|name=University of Michigan
|image=
|text=#002654
|background=#Fcd116
|type=Public
|city=Ann Arbor, Michigan
|sports=baseball, basketball, cross country, field hockey, football, golf, gymnastics, ice hockey, rowing, soccer, softball, swimming/diving, tennis, track/field, volleyball, water polo, wrestling<ref>http://www.mgoblue.com/home/</ref>
|colors=maize, navy blue
|mascot=Wolverines
|website=http://www.umich.edu/
}}
The '''University of Michigan''' is a state run, public [[university]] serving [[Michigan]] in [[Ann Arbor]], Dearborn, and Flint. The University was founded in 1817, and today the enrollment is over 41,000 students. Most of the University's departments rank within the top 10 in the nation; particularly notable are the Ford School of Public policy, ranked 2nd in the nation, and the University's American Political Science program, ranked 1st in the nation.<ref>http://www.businessweek.com/bschools/rankings/undergraduate_mba_profiles/michigan.html</ref> The Ann Arbor campus is known for being especially liberal and is very accepting of drug use and homosexuals. It is a common place for liberal demonstrations, which often draw a large supporting crowd. Visitors preaching conservatism usually get heckled and harassed by the liberal students.

Varsity sports teams at the U of M are Wolverines.

==References==
<References/>

==Links==
[http://www.umich.edu| University of Michigan Official Website]

[http://www.mgoblue.com/ GoBlue University of Michigian Athletics]

{{Nb_US_universities‎}}

Talk:Biblical scientific foreknowledge

2010-10-05T07:36:08Z

WillS: /* Lifespan */

{{Wikiproject Religion}}

I wanted to fix the formatting here, but it has already been locked. So I guess maybe you could do it, Conservative? I was going to change the final sentence from being a single huge link, to only having one word linked, or possibly made a reference.--[[user:TomMoore|Tom Moore]][[User talk:TomMoore|fiat justitia ruat coelum]] 20:21, 25 May 2008 (EDT)
:::Thanks but I prefer it be the way it is as the [[CreationWiki]] article is the best article on the internet on the subject in my estimation. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:24, 25 May 2008 (EDT)
:::: Is that the reason for the redundant link? [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 20:34, 25 May 2008 (EDT)

==Counter-argument==
RE: The bible prohibits homosexuality because of diseases. One, if God did not want homosexuality, then it seems more probable that the diseases would be the result of His dislike, rather than vice versa. More likely reasons for why God would prohibit homosexuality would be either, one, that He designed men and women to copulate together, therefore to copulate in an unintended way is abhorrent, or two, two men who are homosexual and are not married are two less people who could have contributed to increasing the overall size of the population of the Ancient Hebrews, at a time where their survival was a daily worry, and a large population would have helped many of their problems (that was a run-on sentence, and I do apologize). Either way, it seems unlikely that the ban on homosexuality is because of the diseases associated with it. [[User:ZTak|ZTak]] 16:58, 26 May 2008 (EDT)

There is much more that needs to be discussed:

The paragraph about blood-letting
is completely off-topic. The article is about providing scientific knowledge, that was already in the bible long before scientists found them. This whole paragraph has nothing to do with it. It just says, that Pilate was surprised about the quick death of Jesus but he himself had no explanation for it. So the fact that the loss of blood hastens death was not known by the author or at least he deemed it too insignificant to mention it.

Maximum human height:
Goliaths height is still absurd considering he was supposed to be some kind of warrior. The reason Robert Wadlow grew that big, was because of a pituitary adenoma. And he required leg splints for walking, because of his weakened bones. Someone like this would be utterly unqualified to be the lead fighter of an army.
:''Robert Wadlow is cited because of his height and the symptoms related to his height, not because of his weakened legs. Goliath is written in the Bible as having one of those symptoms, but as to his legs he was not Wadlow, nor was he the exact same as any other man who had that condition. Part of his armor was a pair of bronze grieves strapped to his legs; if necessary, they would have doubled as braces...provided he had weakened legs.''
::Alright, now I get it.

Feasibility of Abiogenesis:
No, abiogenesis is not the process of forming life from nothing. It's the theory of forming life from simple organic molecules.
Also the sentence "God creates life from nothing" is far from "depicting clearly". It just gives rise to many more questions like "How did God create that life?"
:''You're changing the very meaning of the word here, when it was used for generations to describe life spontaneously arising from non-life[http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp]. As to your assumption about God, the Bible is very clear on the act of Creation: He spoke it into existence. If I was to say to the hat "make a rabbit come out" and the rabbit did just that, then I would have spoke it into existence; but since I am not God, I cannot create something from nothing.''
::Ok, but "non-life" is still far from being just "nothing" as mentioned in the article. It seemed to me like you are mixing the Big Bang theory with abiogenesis, which are completely different things. So "He spoke it into existence." And that doesn't give rise to question of what it is, that lets God do that, or what is behind the ability of "speaking something into existence"? For you this is just supernatural and therefore not comprehensible by our natural means and that's it? I'm sorry, if that sounds like something from a douche. I apologize if it happens to be that questions like those are considered inappropriate.

Earth free floating in space:
Yes, it's clearly in the bible that "god hangs the earth on nothing". However, it is not entirely clear, whether the author of that text really meant with "nothing" the vacuum. I think that in ancient times people referred even to air as being "nothing". After all it was Otto von Guericke in 1654 who proofed with his Experiment, the "Magdeburger hemispheres", the existence of our atmosphere.
:''And the writers of the Bible should have been experimenting instead of writing?''
::I didn't suggest that, I just meant that we cannot know if he, the writer, meant with "nothing" really nothing (vacuum) or just air. Vacuum is a very abstract thing. It's not occurring naturally and its existence is therefor not obvious. I just mentioned the "Magdeburger hemispheres" experiment to make it clear that in the past there were times, when "nothing" and "air" were synonymous. And if the author thought that God hung the earth into air (instead of really nothing/vacuum), then this paragraph about the earth floating in space is also off-topic, has got nothing to do with scientific foreknowledge and should be removed. I mean, surely this site is not being edited by amateurs isn't it?

Meteorites:
This is completely out of context. Nowhere is there mentioned that those "great mountains burning with fire" are basically nothing more than the shooting stars that one can see at night, only bigger. Furthermore it's not fire that lights meteorites but black body radiation from frictional heat with the atmosphere.
:''And to an earth-bound mortal without the benefit of schooling, meteorites would look exactly like those "great mountains burning with fire."''
::Ok, I give you that. But if you see it that way, then this is unscientific. It also hasn't got anything to do with scientific foreknowledge then. It's just a statement, that someone observed a meteorite and therefor is off-topic in this article.

Stellar proper movement:
I don't understand this. Not a single sane religious person would have had the guts to tell from this, that the stars that make up Orion's belt are moving apart from each other before the proper observations were made. The phrase "Among those challenges, two are remarkable:" sounds like there are thousands of challenges mentioned but in only two cases Job was lucky and guessed right. How can we hope from this to gain knowledge just from reading the bible?
:''Try reading the Bible as an historical record concerning the salvation of man from sin through Jesus Christ instead.''
::But then, what is that scientific knowledge from the bible good for? You guys are using this to show, that the people's minds of those who wrote the bible were many centuries ahead of their time, right? But the thing is, you are always interpreting the bible that way, after science has caught up. Job named some challenges that really no man can do, I get this point. But I think it's only coincidence, that these actions are happening in the way Job guessed them. I don't think that Job himself knew, that Orion's belt is really almost literally "unfolding". And therefore this is again off-topic and has nothing to do with scientific foreknowledge. And if in some miraculous way Job really did know that Orion's belt is unfolding, then shouldn't all those other challenges, not only those two in particular, also be true? You see, I have no doubts about Job's genius but I believe, that if he did not just randomly guess those challenges, that he would not be deceitfully mixing true facts in between utter nonsense.
::''tldr:'' There are several ways now on how to proceed: 1.) Acknowledging that this paragraph has got nothing to do with scientific foreknowledge, because Job only guessed them and had no evidence for them. 2.) Leaving the paragraph as it is, but believing in Jobs sincerity and also declaring all those other challenges as scientific foreknowledge. 3.) Acknowledging that Job tried to deceive us, because he mixed in true facts with nonsense.

Existence of the Jet Stream:
The Jet Stream goes from west to east by the way.

Existence of dinosaurs:
How can we know that from the bible? The only things the bible tells us about the behemoth are (Job 40:15-24):
- that "He eats grass like an ox."
- "He moves his tail like a cedar" whatever that is supposed to mean
- "His bones are like beams of bronze, His ribs like bars of iron."
Why could that NOT be an elephant or an hippopotamus. This description is way to vague.
:''And the description is too vague to be an elephant or a hippo. Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible as well as Job; he was educated in the highest court of Egypt; he has seen both elephants and hippos, and his description of the behemoth just doesn't match either animal. Neither has a tail that looks like a cedar, and the branches of cedar trees are pretty big.''
::Okay, if you mean that Job would have had a word for elephant or hippopotamus at hand instead of "behemoth" that we would recognize as such, then I can agree with you.

Lions' killing methods:
Citation needed. The german wikipedia says that lions bite the necks of small animals and clamp the trachea of bigger animals with their jaws.
:''The German Wikipedia is subject to editing by amateurs.''
::Okay, but the content of this paragraph is still in need of a citation, because we don't really want anyone to think that conservapedia is subject to editing by amateurs, don't we. I just can't believe this particular paragraph without an objective source.

Engineering examples:
Whoever put this in, has he read those biblical verses that foretell those engineering examples? I just read Revelation 9:1-11 in hope to read something about submarines. You should also do that and think about it. Nevertheless, if something like this is suggested, you should directly provide said biblical verses.
:''The writer of Revelation was speaking in the terms he knew; he saw a vision of warfare in the future, for example, and he wrote "chariots"; he didn't know the words "tank" or "jeep" or "submarine" or "MiG 25".''
::It is claimed that these verses are a foretelling of submarines. I just don't buy it by reading the mentioned biblical verses. Why would the author use a comparison with locusts and not something bigger, without wings, something that would be a better resemblance to a submarine. Why did he call them even locusts and not "some strange things like locusts". If I would assume that this passage really is a foretelling of submarines, then I would come to the conclusion that the author is trying do deceive me by calling his visions really locusts. And even if I'm completely wrong about this (which could be entirely true), because I'm not smart enough to see the submarines in that passage, you should still provide the verses directly inside this article, that suggest the foretelling of those engineering examples.

Again, it a case of someone clutching at straws, trying to make contradictions where none exist. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:57, 19 August 2010 (EDT)
:I do not try to make contradictions. I'm generally trying to point out that some of the things mentioned here are off-topic or are lacking citations.

== Examples? ==

Where are the examples of the Christian Bible detailing scientific knowledge? Is the prohibition of homosexuality the lone example? {{unsigned|Zeitgeisted}}

Yeah, you're forgetting how many times it was wrong, like how it said that the earth was flat, that the sun went around the earth, and that the moon was unreachable, and that you could make a tower to physically reach heaven, just to name a few.
--[[User:JackSmith|JackSmith]] 16:00, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

It is not simply the bible that is full of inspired scientific foresight. Divinely inspired authors such as Jules Verne or scientists such as Konstantin Tsiolkovsky saw technological glimpses centuries ahead of their time. Given the abundance of science fiction and scientific papers, one cannot help but see God's hand in the revelation of technological advances. God's ability to reveal technological glimpses of the future is only distantly rivaled by Satan's ability to pervert God's teachings with concepts like homosexuality, atheism, and evolution, which are clearly not divinely inspired concepts.
Other great scientists, like Albert Einstein, were clearly divinely inspired, seeing details of the universe that defied intuition of other scientists of his day, and could not have been known without the direct intervention of god. The mathematical techniques that Einstein built upon were developed by God for centuries under the guise of Lorentz, Gauss, Riemann, and others. The fact that the Bible did not specifically foresee the development of the computer revolution, the standard model of particle physics, the automobile, airplanes, or high oil prices is simply a function of its limited text, with verbosity suppressed in order to provide a more accessible text for mankind.

This page is a joke right. It includes one lone example that itself is somewhat dodgy. Homosexual people on average have a greater number of STI's than the heterosexual population, but surely this is more because during the 80's it was assumed that homosexual men didn't need to use condoms, thus increasing the spread of disease.
We also make the point at this time that statistical information of this nature isn't actually scientific knowledge. If the bible said "God created light, such that it would always travel at the same speed" that would be impressive. This is not.

==Atheism==

What does that have to do with bible scientific foreknowledge? I assume it's a mistake and I'll be removing it shortly. [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 00:04, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
:I was ''going'' to remove it, since it's quite inappropriate, but I failed to notice that the article has been locked, for no apparent reason except that it falls under Conservative's atheism pet project. [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 23:00, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

==A Thought==

I won't offer you a deep philosohpical argument on why I feel that this article does more harm to the Christian cause than it does good, I will merely state what affect it had for me, browsing this website. When I found this page I was exploring the entries on atheism, with interest on why there was such a concentration on communism, as if to imply by analogy that the tens of millions of innocent deaths from Communist regimes have a bad influence on atheist, and I found this page. The problem is merely it smacks of desparation, or clutching at straws.

:Surely you mean "desperation", not "desparation". ;-) [[User:PhyllisS|PhyllisS]] 21:44, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

== Not until it's done ==

I like where this article is going, but for the moment is is terribly unfinished and perhaps shouldn't be present quite yet? I'm currently working on a degree in Christian Theology so I'd be glad to help, and can offer a few examples, but we would really need a trained eye to comb through the Bible for this sort of thing. May I suggest going through the Old Law and deducting the practical reasons those laws existed? An example, just off the top of my head, would be the prohibition of eating pork due to the dangers in eating improperly cooked pork. Another example is that the curse given to Adam in Genesis, "remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return", coupled with how Man was formed, could be taken as an early description of the carbon cycle.

Secondly, it may be prudent to keep a keen focus on the theological and historical context of each reference where appropriate. I noticed someone mention earlier "building a tower to Heaven", obviously missing that this was said of those building the tower, not God. This misunderstanding of the Tower of Babel story is a great example of what I mean here: we need people that realize that the tower was destroyed as its purpose was as a landmark for man to stay all together, violating God's command for man to "spread to all the corners of the earth." It had nothing to do with their possibly reaching Heaven. When looking for examples, we need to be wary of making mistakes such as that. Sorry for all the paraphrasing :-P

Forgive me if I didn't sign or post this properly, as I'm new to all this. [[User:Rev|Rev]] 16:47, 28 June 2009 (EDT)

== Creation Ministries International and scientific foreknowledge ==

I'm a little bit uncomfortable with the claim that CMI supports the idea of scientific foreknowledge, given that they include it on their list of "doubtful" arguments. While they don't dismiss it out of hand, they certainly don't seem to embrace the concept, either:

'':There is amazing modern scientific insight in the Bible.’ We should interpret the Bible as the author originally intended, and as the intended readership would have understood it. Therefore we should be cautious in reading modern science into passages where the readers would not have seen it. This applies especially to poetic books like Job and Psalms. For example, Job’s readers would not have understood Job 38:31 to be teaching anything about gravitational potential energy of Orion and Pleiades. Rather, the original readers would have seen it as a poetic illustration of God’s might, i.e. that God, unlike Job, could create the Pleiades in a tightly-knit cluster which is what it looks like; while God created Orion as a well spread out constellation, again something well beyond Job’s ability. Similarly, Job 38:14 is not advanced scientific insight into the Earth’s rotation, because the earth is not being compared to the turning seal but to the clay turning from one shape into another under the seal.
''

(Creation Ministries International, "What Arguments are Doubtful, Hence Inadvisable to Use?")

--[[User:Benp|Benp]] 12:55, 27 November 2009 (EST)
::::Creation Ministries International believes in the judicious use of biblical scientific foreknowledge claims and here is an example: http://creation.com/modern-medicine I agree with them that you have to be judicious and use sound exegesis. For the most part, except for a statement they made concerning the Mosaic law, the [http://creationwiki.org/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge CreationWiki article on Bible scientific foreknowledge] is very good and very comprehensive. With a few alterations, I would have liked to copy the CreationWiki article over to Conservapedia, but the fairly restrictive GNU license prevented that. Sometimes people get overzealous in making Bible scientific foreknowledge claims and that is the reason why I have not edited the article in a long time as I decided a while back that sooner or later I was going to butt heads with another editor or editors and I decided that I wanted to spend my time addressing other priorities instead. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 14:25, 19 August 2010 (EDT)

== Beginning of the universe ==

While the Big Bang theory may be more in line with Genesis than a steady-state theory, most Biblican literalists would argue the Big Bang theory is false. Since it's false, Genesis saying something ''kind of'' like it isn't really scientific foreknowledge, and I feel this part should be removed. Thoughts, anybody? [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 14:59, 8 February 2010 (EST)

== Eyesight ==

I just read the part about eye sight and was trying to find out more information about this and am rather curious. Is there any source for this or anyone know about what what medical techniques it is referring to in the article or even the doctor that confirmed this? Thank you in advance [[User:Johnfranklin|Johnfranklin]] 19:42, 10 June 2010 (EDT)

:Your question is a good one. This NPR story describes superficially one woman's experience in having her sight restored. [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112933586] It doesn't go into as much detail as the biblical account so more citations would be welcome. I'll continue to look as well.

:: Please let us know I would love to read it and we could also put it as the reference to the article. Thanks Andy! [[User:Johnfranklin|Johnfranklin]] 22:39, 10 June 2010 (EDT)

::: This account from Friday's newspaper in the [[U.K.]] is analogous but doesn't specifically mention the experience of seeing people walking as the eyesight is restored. It does, however, capture the overall sensation. (cite moved to content page)

:::: I looked in the history of the article and show that you added this on 24 November 2009. Do you remember where this information came from? Was it from a medical journal or newspaper or something different? [[User:Johnfranklin|Johnfranklin]] 23:08, 10 June 2010 (EDT)

::::: I heard it from a medical source -- an eye surgeon I believe -- which may not have been published. The foregoing newspaper accounts come close but if the editors become aware of the similarity with the biblical account, then I doubt they would publish it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:25, 10 June 2010 (EDT)

:::::: Sounds like an interesting story wish I was able to read it. Maybe I will come across it in the future. Also in cases where there is no written source how should these types of things be referenced on conservapedia? [[User:Johnfranklin|Johnfranklin]] 11:41, 11 June 2010 (EDT)

::::::: Unlike Wikipedia, Conservapedia recognizes liberal bias in newspapers. Accordingly, not all newspapers citations are valid (due to bias), and some citations are difficult to find because liberals are censoring the information in publications they control. In the latter case, we keep looking when there is reason to think a statement is true, rather than censoring the truth to the detriment of visitors. Conservapedia is a leader, not a follower.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:56, 11 June 2010 (EDT)

(unident) I hope this isn't taken the wrong way, but it sounds as though you are saying Add content to articles that is believed to be valid and then find sources that match rather than finding useful information and then putting it into the article. If you can't then just leave it unsourced. In that case I should add information about volcanoes since some believe that information in the bible (Sodom and Gomorrah) predates scientific knowledge. I however don't have sources for this. [[User:Johnfranklin|Johnfranklin]] 13:55, 11 June 2010 (EDT)

Until we have a citation for the medical knowledge that verifies the phenomenon of "trees walking", this "eyesight" portion has no factual basis and should be removed. [[User:PhyllisS|PhyllisS]] 21:43, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

== Engineering ==

Hmm... How does Joel 2:3-4 predict automobiles? Also, there is no Isaiah 31:56... although I definitely see how Ecc 10:20 could be a reference to radio! [[User:JacobB|JacobB]][[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]] 23:46, 11 June 2010 (EDT)

: It was a suggestion taken from a credible site. I admit my skepticism about these alleged predictions of engineering developments also, but have an open mind about them. Obviously if there is no Isaiah 31:56, then that is a real problem! Please feel free to revise as you think appropriate.

: Of course, when [[Leonardo da Vinci]] sketched something flying, every atheist claims he had foreknowledge of the airplane!!!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:52, 11 June 2010 (EDT)
::Haha - ironic considering that though he disagreed with the Church of his day on many topics, he was nevertheless a practicing Catholic!
::A little bit of digging reveals Isaiah 40:31, which reads ''"But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint."'' I wonder if that's the passage they meant? I'll change it to that, since 31:56 doesn't exist, although I confess your skepticism that these are actual references to airplanes. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]][[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]] 00:09, 12 June 2010 (EDT)

::: I do believe that this was meant to be Isaiah 31:5 and the 6 was a mistake("Like birds hovering overhead, the LORD Almighty will shield Jerusalem; he will shield it and deliver it, he will 'pass over' it and will rescue it.") however I think the point the referenced article was trying to make was that one should not try to reinterpret biblical passages to make it fit what you want instead look at the context of what it it is trying to say and not just the verse. In this case Isaiah 31:5 is more about God keeping Jerusalem safe from Egypt and not about Airplanes flying over head. Unless of course God is keeping it safe with F-14. [[User:Johnfranklin|Johnfranklin]] 11:43, 13 June 2010 (EDT)

:::: I have an open mind about this, but admit that it struck me as too much of a reach.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:45, 13 June 2010 (EDT)

::::: Well, in the Six-Day War the Israeli Air Force did keep Jerusalem and Israel defended and safe from Eyptian planes by destroying most of them while they were still on the ground. Maybe the verses were telling contemporary Israelites and the future Israelis they were safe, but only the latter would understand that the birds represented air planes. It's possible. As Mr. Schlafly says, we should keep an open mind. --[[User:ReligiousRight|ReligiousRight]] 01:21, 14 June 2010 (EDT)

== Reversion explained ==

The opinion was reverted because it did not apply to the specific examples.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:56, 27 June 2010 (EDT)

== Incorrect value of Pi ==

''Pi when expressed as one digit is equal to 3'' - I think this sentence should be suppressed, because the text gives Pi with '''two''' decimal places, as the ratio of 30 cubits to 10 cubits. [[User:Sunda62|Sunda62]] 16:43, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

: No, "30 cubits to 10 cubits" is only one significant digit apiece.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:29, 6 July 2010 (EDT)

:: Aren't we overlooking 1 Kings 7:26? "And it was a hand breadth thick,.." The thickness must be taken into consideration. Using the equation 30C ÷ 3.1415962 + 2H = 10C. C=cubits, H=hand breadth. We are able to solve the equation using my cubit (18.5 inches), and we get:

::555 inches (30 x 18.5) circumference

::176.662 inches (555 ÷ 3.14159) diameter

::The difference between 185 inches(10x18.5) and 176.662 inches is 8.338 inches. This is two of my hand breadths!(8.338÷2=4.169) Remember, you must take into account two hand breadths, one for the opposite sides of the circular object.

::You can measure your own cubit from elbow to longest finger tip, and the difference will be two of your hand breadths!!

::This example of Pi should be in the foreknowledge section. Pi is in the Bible 1000 B.C. before the Greeks rediscovered Pi!--[[User:Bryantjwb|Bryantjwb]] 22:47, 8 August 2010 (EDT)

::: Interesting. Any comments by others on the validity of the above suggestion?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:51, 8 August 2010 (EDT)

:::: It can also be solved by using the description in scripture, 1 Kings 7:26 "...and its brim was made like the brim of a cup, as a lily blossom;"NASB In other words, the brim flared outward like a flowering lily. So, the diameter was measured from 'brim to brim' which flared out further than the body of the bath. [[http://creation.com/images/creation_mag/vol17/p24_moltensea.jpg]] Click to see illustration.--[[User:Bryantjwb|Bryantjwb]] 21:27, 19 August 2010 (EDT)

::::http://creation.com/does-the-bible-say-pi-equals-3

::::The calculation is the same as using the handbreadth equation above, the difference being the amount of flare beyond the body of the bath round about.--[[User:Bryantjwb|Bryantjwb]] 21:27, 19 August 2010 (EDT)

:::::There's a specific thing we all overlooked: people's bodily measurements for cubits and handbreadths are of different sizes. My personal handbreadth is 8.25 inches; my personal cubit is 18 inches exactly. Someone who is about 6.3 feet tall will have slightly-larger measurements. Moses was educated in Egypt, and he was familiar with the Royal Egyptian cubit of about 22 inches. So, I'm a bit curious here. Take my measurements and make some new calculations based on what was said above; take Andy's and do the same; take your's, Bryant, and do the same, and let's see what we get. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 22:53, 19 August 2010 (EDT)

::::::The size difference is not an issue, because they used a standard. The Hebrew standard cubit was about 18 inches and the handbreadth was about 4 inches. I used my cubit (18.5) in the equation above. Karajou, your handbreadth would be 4.125 with 8.25 being two handbreadths. Using the standard Hebrew cubit and handbreadth, plug in the numbers, 18 x 10 cubits = 180 - 8 = 172 inches

::::::Circumference = diameter x pi
::::::..............= 172 in x 3.14
::::::..............= 540 inches
::::::..............= 30 cubits (540 ÷ 18)--[[User:Bryantjwb|Bryantjwb]] 00:43, 20 August 2010 (EDT)

This section has a false title. The Bible does not "give a value of pi" but rather relates the circumference of a particular structure to its diameter:

* He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits [a] from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits [b] to measure around it.

Ten cubits doesn't mean 220 inches, plus or minus one inch. It's obviously a [[round number]]. Atheists are grasping at straws if they think the rim to rim distance was being givin to within less than 5 percent.

The tip off should be that both numbers were a multiple of ten. Now, if we saw a number like 35 cubits for the diameter, '''then''' we might expect a more precise value for the circumference, i.e., 110 cubits.

By drawing such foolish conclusions, atheists and liberals just show how inconsistent their own reasoning is, rather than "pointing out" any supposed error in the Bible.

I'd like to take it back to the Nobel Peace Prize they gave Al Gore and them all for ignoring the fact that [[correlation is not causation]] and deciding that atmospheric temperature is driven by carbon dioxide levels. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:10, 1 October 2010 (EDT)

== Biblical Hindsight is 20/20 ==

Biblical Hindsight is 20/20
The "eyesight" portion should be removed, not only as there is yet no ''citation for the medical knowledge that verifies the phenomenon of "trees walking"'' as [[User:PhyllisS]] states above, but because there is the dubious statement that ''This perception was first confirmed nearly 2000 years later as physicians developed medical techniques for restoring eyesight'', thereby inferring that the 20th century saw the first restored eyesights. In fact, couching the cataract - an operation which can restore eyesight - is very ancient, sanctioned as early as in the [[Code of Hammurabi]], was practiced by Celsus (25BC-50AD) during the lifetime of Jesus Christ and later [http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.02.0137:book=25:chapter=92&highlight=couching mentioned] by [[Pliny the Elder]] (23-79 AD), a contemporary of Mark (see [http://www.rila.co.uk/issues/free/001/2001/v4n2/p61_65/p61_65.html A short history of cataract surgery]). So, there were eyewitnesses for the phenomena go along with regaining your sight in the time of Mark.
[[User:FrankC|FrankC aka ComedyFan]] 13:06, 7 July 2010 (EDT)

:Interesting, and I'd like to learn more, especially whether "couching the cataract" restored sight to the blind.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:00, 7 July 2010 (EDT)

:P.S. The cite explaining the history above does not describe the sensation of restoring sight from complete blindness.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:06, 7 July 2010 (EDT)

== Unclean hands and food ==

I may have misunderstood what you are trying to say perhaps, but to the best of my knowledge, washing one's hands before cooking and/or eating is one of the basic rules of hygiene, extremely important in the prevention of disease. My father is a doctor, and if he didn't perform this very simple step very seriously, after visiting patients with all sorts of ailments, his health would undoubtedly be threatened. And the importance of this simple procedure, to the best of my scientific knowledge, is very important not only for doctors, but for everyone.
Likewise, eating "unclean" food can and WILL make you ill - poorly conserved and poorly cooked food can have high amounts of patogens that can cause all sorts of trouble, from bacteria to viruses to tapeworms.

Matthew 15:11, "It is not what enters into the mouth that defiles the man, but what proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles the man" does not, in my opinion, refer to the health of the human body, but rather to the health of the soul. No matter what you eat or how you eat it, your soul will not suffer because of it, is what, in my opinion, Jesus is saying. But the body can, and will, suffer, depending on what enters your mouth, and that is undeniable.

To say - as I think the article is stating - that unclean hands or unclean food do not cause disease is to turn your back on the very thing that extended the life expectancy of mankind so much in the past 1000 years, namely, proper hygiene. It also has the potential to cause harm to anyone who actually believes it, and thinks that eating "unclean" food or not following proper hygiene rules cannot really harm his health.

If you know of any relevant scientific source that says that eating "unclean food" or eating with "unclean hands" is not unadvisable, please post it for all to see.

Thank you, --[[User:MarcoT2|MarcoT2]] 08:59, 11 July 2010 (EDT)

: Thank you for your comment, but it illustrates how the medical misunderstanding of digestion persists even 2000 years after Jesus stated the real truth. It is not in Matthew 15:11 where Jesus explained why it is not necessary always to wash one's hands before eating, but somewhere in Mark (I think).

: Good hygiene is helpful and has extended lifespan, but usually not by protecting the digestive system. The digestive system is powerful enough to destroy nearly everything that is harmful. The reason people are told today to wash their hands is typically not to protect what they eat, but to avoid spreading to their eyes and nose and others, particularly to those with weak immune systems.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:27, 11 July 2010 (EDT)

:: Dear Andrew,
:: Thanks for answering so quickly! Unfortunately, I cannot say I agree with you. Proper handwashing, especially before preparing or consuming meals, does prevent diseases - not only related to contact of patogens with eyes and nose, but also with contacts of patogens with the oral cavity, where they eventually end up in the stomach. According to the World Health Organization, ''Handwashing with soap is among the most effective and inexpensive ways to prevent diarrheal diseases and pneumonia, which together are responsible for the majority of child deaths.''<ref>http://www.who.int/gpsc/events/2008/Global_Handwashing_Day_Planners_Guide.pdf</ref> Diarrheal diseases, needless to say, involve the DIGESTIVE system. Stomach flu is also another disease of the digestive system which can be prevented in many cases by proper handwashing. Not washing one's hands before preparing or consuming a meal also provides helminths (aka worms) with an easy way in to your intestine. Again, another potential problem to the digestive trait whose risk can be easily cut by handwashing. So the digestive system does not appeas to "destroy nearly everything that is harmful" as you seem to claim. Of course, our immunitary system does a good job, but it is not an invincible shield. And, of course people with weak immune systems (children, old people, people with immunitary diseases) will have even more risks, but not washing one's hands is a potential health hazard for healthy people, as well.
::For more information please refer to this WHO document about the importance of handwashing. http://www.who.int/gpsc/events/2008/Global_Handwashing_Day_Planners_Guide.pdf
::If you have any scientific source which supports your point of view, by all means provide a link or a reference, I'm always happy to examine other points of view too.
::Thank you,
::--[[User:MarcoT2|MarcoT2]] 11:05, 11 July 2010 (EDT)
::<references />

:::Catching disease by having unclean hands at a meal is a grossly exaggerated risk, like other phobias. Worse, educated people who should know better are the ones who exaggerate this risk the most. I'm not saying the risk is zero; other exaggerated fears have some theoretical basis also. But Jesus was right in debunking this fear and the theory behind it. Science is still trying to catch up to where Jesus was 2000 years ago on this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:57, 11 July 2010 (EDT)

::::(link dump reverted) Marco, I reverted your dump of links. I looked at the first two and found them to be barely related to the point at issue here. This site is a place for reasoned argument. Please address my statement above or make another reasoned argument, supported by your best link or two. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:49, 11 July 2010 (EDT)

:::::Washing one's hands reduces the risk that you'll put germs into your eyes.

:::::*As you touch people, surfaces and objects throughout the day, you accumulate germs on your hands. In turn, you can infect yourself with these germs by touching your eyes, nose or mouth. [http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/hand-washing/HQ00407]

:::::You don't have to worry about germs getting into your food unless you've been touching human waste. But if you serve hundreds of people, the law requires you to wash your hands after using the bathroom. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:57, 11 July 2010 (EDT)

:::::: In response to the indented comment above, it says nothing about touching food with unclean hands and eating it, which is the point of this discussion. Ed's point about the law requiring hand-washing by food preparers after handling human waste is well-taken, but the law does not required this of the people who eat the food.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:07, 11 July 2010 (EDT)

::::::: Dear Andy, I don't understand why you "found my links to be barely related to the point at issue here". Let's see if we can agree on the following points:

:::::::1. The point at issue here is the importance of handwashing as a precautionary hygienic measure.
:::::::2. What is at issue is also whether such measure is especially important before consuming food.
:::::::3. The links I have provided, and which I can provide again should you so desire, were scientific studies examining the incidence of several diseases, most of them involving the digestive trait, in subjects that routinely wash their hands, and subjects that don't.
:::::::4. Such studies concluded that the incidence of said diseases was considerably lower in those who wash their hands.

:::::::In light of this, I don't see why you claimed that the links I provided were only "barely related". I also don't see why you reverted my edit and deleted it, instead of simply replying to my post saying that the links were only marginally related. Had you done so, people could have accessed them and decided for themselves whether it was true that they were unrelated or not. As it is, they only have your word that they were.

:::::::I can spend my time and energies to provide you with a reasoned, sourced refutation of your point, but before I do so, I need your assurance that it will not be censored. (I will of course not be abusive or offensive in any way: I will only expose my point of view, and back it up with sources.)

:::::::If you assure me that my post will not be reverted and deleted, I will write it. Otherwise, I will refrain from commenting further on this debate.

:::::::Sincerely yours, --[[User:MarcoT2|MarcoT2]] 16:34, 11 July 2010 (EDT)

::::::::Marco, I pointed out that Jesus was right in debunking an irrational phobia about eating with unclean hands. You responded with a link dump that lacked any sense of proportionality (risk), or applicability to the typical situation that Jesus was addressing. It's as though I said that the typical fear of flying is irrational, whereby you respond with a link dump of news stories about random plane crashes!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:41, 11 July 2010 (EDT)

:::::::::Ok, we can agree on that, one will not automatically die every time he has lunch without washing his hands. The risk is not high, and scaremongering is unnecessary. Yet, in my opinion, handwashing before eating should be considered an important hygienic practice, and, in some contexts, even vital. The importance is especially evident in underdeveloped countries, where even the adoption of a simple practice like this can save many lives. What I think we can agree on is, "not washing hands before eating is not deadly nor incredibly dangerous, but it is nonetheless very advisable."
:::::::::This said, we can consider this debate concluded and move on to more constructive matters (personally, I like to spend my time on Conservapedia spellchecking articles :) )
:::::::::Regards, --[[User:MarcoT2|MarcoT2]] 17:09, 11 July 2010 (EDT)

::::::::::Marco, I appreciate your gracious reply, but I do feel compelled to emphasize that it was Jesus who was right 2000 years ago, not me. Moreover, I'm not trying to persuade you, but rather to observe that to this day even the smartest among us exaggerate the risk of eating with unwashed hands contrary to what Jesus simply stated. This risk is not zero, as you point out, but (like the risk of plane crashes) it is small enough to rebuke the fear-mongering.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:34, 11 July 2010 (EDT)

<- Andy, you are right when you are thinking about bacterial infections. But what about [http://newyorkhealth.gov/diseases/communicable/pinworm/fact_sheet.htm pinworms], [http://www.fsis.usda.gov/factsheets/parasites_and_foodborne_illness/index.asp#7 tapeworms], or [http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dpd/parasites/giardiasis/factsht_giardia.htm Giardia]? Especially under the more interesting hygienic conditions of the Near East, it is consoling to know that the man who breaks your bread has scrubbed his hands clean from all the worm's eggs which are designed to be taken in orally. [[User:FrankC|FrankC aka ComedyFan]] 11:54, 13 July 2010 (EDT)

:Your links are not applicable to the typical situation, as addressed by Jesus. This illustrates why Conservapedia favors reasoned argument, with a superb cite, rather than lack of argument with many cites.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:01, 13 July 2010 (EDT)

::''Your links are not applicable to the typical situation, as addressed by Jesus. ''
::What the typical situation, as addressed by Jesus? We read in Mark 7:1-5 (NIV)
:::''1The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus and 2saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were "unclean," that is, unwashed. 3(The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. 4When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.)''
::Or taken from the [[Conservapedia Bible Project]] Mark 7:3-4
:::''3The reason for this was that the Pharisees, along with all the other Jews, had a tradition never to eat unless they had washed their hands.4When they came from the public square, they did not eat unless they had washed first. They retained many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pots, kettles, and tables.''
::This seems to be an excellent advice if you want for instance to minimize the chance of an infection with [[Intestinal Roundworm]]s (the most common human worm infection with the highest prevalence in tropical and subtropical regions, and areas with inadequate sanitation [http://www.dpd.cdc.gov/dpdx/html/ascariasis.htm]) in the ''typical situation'' in Galilee for centuries to come!
::Please keep in mind that what we think to be the ''typical situation'', i.e., Western standards of food preparation and disposition of fecal matters, is in fact an historical and geographical exception!
::[[User:FrankC|FrankC aka ComedyFan]] 12:07, 14 July 2010 (EDT)

== Other religions ==

Hello! I know that this is a preeminently Christian site, and I am a Christian myself, but I wanted to point out that other religions also claim that their sacred texts possess remarkable scientific foreknowledge. The Muslim have found passages in the Quran that, they claim, prove that the text was inspired by God, as they denote (in their opinion) a scientific knowledge ahead of the time. Also, the Hindu claim that ALL knowledge is contained in the Vedic texts. I believe it would be interesting to make a comparative study of that too, not of course in this article (which is devoted to the Bible) but in other articles. Does anyone else think that it would be interesting? --[[User:MarcoT2|MarcoT2]] 13:24, 12 July 2010 (EDT)

: I don't mind if you want to start different entries, as you suggest.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:34, 12 July 2010 (EDT)

== Mathematics suggestion ==

Here is the text of a suggestion I made that was reverted, which I submit for further discussion: --[[User:LanceS|LanceS]] 11:22, 25 September 2010 (EDT)

=== Axiomatization of Arithmetic ===
The full set of axioms for integer arithmetic may be found in the Bible, as demonstrated by J.C. Keister in [http://www.trinityfoundation.org/PDF/027a-MathandtheBible.pdf this article]. For example, [[Luke 9-16 (Translated)|Luke 12:52]] is a striking statement of the commutative law for addition: "For from this point forward there will be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three." This understanding presaged both later attempts at the axiomatization of arithmetic by Peano and the development of [[abstract algebra]] in the 19th and 20th centuries.

:Your suggestion is interesting and the article by Keister appears to be legitimate. Perhaps the weakness is a lack of weightier examples. I welcome comments by others about this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:35, 25 September 2010 (EDT)

::I appreciate the need for examples, but Keister gives extensive references for this claim in his article. I anxiously await the input of other editors.
::Could you clarify how Jesus walking on water is related to wave-particle duality, and how the scripture demonstrates foreknowledge of this? I think that showing foreknowledge of a phenomenon should be distinguished from merely documenting an instance of it. The Bible describes the Sun, but that fact alone does not mean that it shows foreknowledge of the specific mechanisms of nuclear fusion. --[[User:LanceS|LanceS]] 11:31, 27 September 2010 (EDT)

::: Go ahead and reinsert your material about axioms for integer arithmetic.

::: Will respond to your other question a bit later. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:20, 27 September 2010 (EDT)

::: As to your comment that "I think that showing foreknowledge of a phenomenon should be distinguished from merely documenting an instance of it," that's not the approach taken by the Nobel Prize committee. It recognizes the discovery of phenomena (such as cosmic background radiation) regardless of whether the scientists understand its theoretical basis. Obviously many people refuse to read the Bible and thus miss out on the benefit of its foreknowledge. Had scientists carefully studied the walking on water with an open mind, then it may not have taken 1900 years before they recognized the existence of wave-particle duality. Ditto for many other phenomena.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:30, 27 September 2010 (EDT)

== Wave particle Duality ==

I have to disagree that the Bible passage that is included describes wave-particle duality, and therefore that this is scientific foreknowledge. The sentence "Particles are subject to gravity; waves are not." is not completely true, as sources of high gravity can affect waves. This, though is not my real concern.

My main concern is that, for Jesus to act like a wave, he would have to have been moving very fast. Using the De Broglie Theory of Matter, <math></math>λ=h/p
where λ is the wavelenght, h is Planck constant (ie, 6.63*10-34) and p is momentum (p=mv). Using that equation and some assumptions, Mass of about 70kg, 2ms-1 walking speed (average walking speed is about 1 - 1.5 ms-1), this would give a wavelenght that is undetectable to human beings (~4.735*10-36), especially without modern equipment.

However, it would be possible for it to happen if the water had properties like that of custard. But as I said at the start, I do not think this is a piece of scienctific foreknowledge. If I am completely honest, it seems more like an attempt to make sciencetific theories appear to have been shown in the bible.

On a completely differnet point, the stars being unnumerable, I feel that any person at that time, that looked up to the sky at night could be able to make the assumption that the stars are unnumerable. Just because science hasn't confirmed something, doesn't mean it is not true. Science probably was unable to confirm something because the technology was not present at teh time. [[User:Griffirg|Griffirg]] 14:24, 27 September 2010 (EDT)

: Griffirg, your spelling is atrocious. As to your basic point, waves can take on many different forms.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:20, 27 September 2010 (EDT)
:: As for the stars, reasonable people at that time thought that there were just some 2,000 stars. The 6,000 stars was an extrapolation, including unseen stars in the Southern Hemisphere. I came across this 2,000-stars number some time ago, probably in [[Hyginus]]'s Astronomica. In Hyginus, the Milky Way is ''not'' formed by stars - see the last chapter. [[User:Sunda62|Sunda62]] 14:08, 29 September 2010 (EDT)

== Lifespan ==

The deletion of material was reverted. The deletion was of more insights than the comment could justify. Please discuss here if anyone wants to defend the deletion.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:50, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

:Jeanne Calment lived to be 122, but obviously she was a woman, so I'm not sure if that point even matters. Also, Shigechiyo Izumi's age was disputed, and research after his death claims that he actually died at the ripe old age of 105, which is still impressive. [[User:JaneX|JaneX]] 11:05, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

:: Thanks for the info, but the underlying point remains the same. I think Izumi's age is recognized by at least one authority to have been 120 years old.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:18, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

::: What would it mean for Biblical scientific foreknowledge if a man lives to 121? Do you suggest that this cannot possibly occur, in accordance with the passage from Genesis? --[[User:LanceS|LanceS]] 11:24, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

:::: Well, for starters, it hasn't happened in modern times. So the question is a bit like asking what a mathematician would say if someone proved 2+2=5.

:::: Beyond that, as in the math example, I'd look for possible explanations ... such as human error.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:01, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

::::: But if it were to happen in the future, and there was incontrovertible evidence of this lifespan, would a logical person be forced to reject the Bible? I think the answer is yes. I agree that this is akin to 2+2=5, but it is an important point to consider -- it is a scientifically testable prediction from the Bible, foreknowledge at its purest. Of course we as Christians know the result in advance, but perhaps this will convince some atheists. --[[User:LanceS|LanceS]] 12:17, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

:::::: Lance, you seem to be applying a higher [[double standard]] to the Bible than you do to math and science, both of which make predictions that for a variety of reasons (including human error) may encounter exceptions. No one would immediately throw out '''''all''''' of math or science because of merely one unexplained anomaly. Moreover, the anomaly you propose ''does not exist''.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:07, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

:::::: In math, one exception disproves a theorem. But I agree that this isn't the case in science. So maybe I should rework my question: "If lifespans over 120 years become commonplace in the future, must a logical person reject the Bible?" A scientific theory admitting many exceptions would be rejected. I am curious about your answer; again, mine is "yes". But of course I do not believe that this could ever happen.
:::::: True, this anomaly ''does not exist''. But, for an atheist, there is no obvious reason that it shouldn't: this is an illustration of the predictive power of the Bible. Considering counterfactual situations is an important part of any logical thinking, and I see no reason that we can't analyze the possibility.
:::::: I believe that this page would be considerably strengthened if it made specific and falsifiable claims about science not yet discovered. One such would be the assertion that typical human lifespans will never exceed 120 years. Are there any other instances of specific Biblical foreknowledge you can suggest which deal with topics still not understood by science today? (And whose falsity, though counterfactual, would provide a valid [[Counterexamples to the Bible|counterexample to the Bible]]) Such claims would prove without question the validity of the Bible to atheists who do not yet accept this. --[[User:LanceS|LanceS]] 13:26, 4 October 2010 (EDT)
Didn't Moses live to be several hundred years old? If so that would be a biblical inconsistency--[[User:CainR|CainR]] 13:31, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

'''''Response to Lance and Cain''''': science isn't about speculation or "what if." It's about observation. This is a scientific entry, so it focuses on what is predicted and what is observed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:50, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

:Point taken. Still, can we make some new specific predictions, based on the Bible, dealing with something not yet discovered by secular science? This would be more impressive than pointing out examples in hindsight.
:Perhaps it is only because of the timidity of earlier theologians towards making scientific predictions that quantum mechanics was not developed in the 7th or 8th century! The Biblical evidence for this subject is impressive. Let us not make this mistake again! --[[User:LanceS|LanceS]] 15:01, 4 October 2010 (EDT)
::One suggestion -- CP has pointed out numerous flaws in the theory of relativity. Can we leverage Bible scientific foreknowledge (BSF) to find a superior replacement for Newtonian mechanics? Have any such BSF-inspired physical theories been posited before? --[[User:LanceS|LanceS]] 15:06, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

:::Your suggestion about BSF-inspired theories is superb. Indeed, this is how several key scientists made breakthrough discoveries in the past. Please feel free to create a new entry in pursuit of your suggestion.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:12, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

::::I was the one who originally removed the section, because the Bible gives several examples of individuals living longer than 120 years; Noah lived until 950, for example. I can provide citations to Biblical passages if needed; I guess I'm confused as to why this is controversial. --[[User:WillS|WillS]] 21:26, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

:::::And Jesus lives forever. Your saintly exceptions don't disprove the rule, and certainly don't justify your removal of the biblical foreknowledge about average lifespan of man, and the average lifespan of a good-living man.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:48, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

::::::Ok, I see your point; God can obviously intervene to 'break the rules,' so Noah, Shem, and so on don't really count. Thanks for taking the time to explain, and I apologize for making an unwarranted deletion.--[[User:WillS|WillS]] 03:36, 5 October 2010 (EDT)

Talk:Biblical scientific foreknowledge

2010-10-05T01:26:33Z

WillS: /* Lifespan */

William Shakespeare

2010-10-04T14:42:43Z

WillS: removed anti-American bias

[[Image:Foliou.jpg|right|thumb|[[portraits|Portrait]] of William Shakespeare on the cover of the First Folio (1623), the first collected edition of his plays]]
'''William Shakespeare''' (1564-1616) is generally regarded as the greatest British playwright--indeed, the greatest British ''writer''--of all time. Many of his plays are required reading in school curricula throughout the English-speaking world and beyond; those taught in schools often include ''[[Romeo and Juliet]]'', ''[[Macbeth]]'', ''[[A Midsummer-Night's Dream]]'' and ''[[Hamlet]]''.

Shakespeare wrote 17 comedies, 10 tragedies, 10 historical plays, 154 love [[sonnet]]s, and several other works of non-dramatic poetry. All his plays are freely available on the internet.<ref>
http://www-tech.mit.edu/Shakespeare/</ref>

Shakespeare spent his early years in Stratford-upon-Avon, [[Warwickshire]] and is also known as "the Bard of Avon." Because of sharing the name "Stratford," the towns of Stratford, Ontario, in Canada and Stratford, Connecticut, have become the homes of Shakespeare festivals where his plays are performed on a regular basis.

Shakespeare did not become famous until late in his life and few details are known about his early life. He attended Stratford-Upon-Avon Grammar School, where he received a sound education in the Latin and Greek classics, reflected in many of his plays. The social class from which he came could be described as wealthy tradesment. His father, John Shakespeare, was a glove-maker who became mayor of Stratford-upon-Avon despite almost certainly being a Roman Catholic (in the early part of the reign of Elizabeth I, penalties against Catholics were light and often not imposed). His mother, Mary Arden, the daughter of a farmer, was certainly Catholic. William Shakepeare himself knew many of the Warwickshire Catholic gentry who later led the Gunpowder Plot to overthrow King James VI. Shakespeare himself did not adhere publicly to the Roman religion and it is not known if, like many Catholics, he practised it in private.<ref> ''In Search of Shakespeare'', by Michael Wood. BBC Books, 2003.</ref> There are few pictures of him but his near-contemporary as a playwright, Ben Jonson, stated that the famous engraving by Martin Droeshout, shown on this page, was a good likeness.

The idea of an ill-educated (to his contemporaries) person coming among them and making a success was upsetting to the University-educated playwrights of the time. It is believed that the poet, Philip Green, was referring to Shakespeare when he wrote
{{cquote|There is an upstart crow beautified with our feathers
that, with his '''tiger's heart wrapped in a player's hide'','
supposes he is as well able to bombast out a blank verse
as the best of you; being an absolute Johannes Factotum,
in his conceit the only ''shake-scene'' in a country.}}
The 'tiger's heart wrapped in a player's hide' is a reference to one of Shakespeare's plays, ''[[The Third Part of King Henry VI]]'',<ref> [[Great Books, Shakespeare: I]], Edited by Mortimer J. Adler, 1952. </ref> while 'shake-scene' is a pun or play on words on Shakespeare's name.

His plays seem to show so much education and erudition that many theories have arisen that those works must have been written by someone else, famous candidates being the [[Oxfordian|Earl of Oxford]] and Sir [[Francis Bacon]]. Most scholars reject these theories, but there are enough questions that new theories of Shakespearean authorship continue to arise.

A long-standing theatrical [[superstition]] holds that it is bad luck to refer to ''Macbeth'' directly by its name while inside a theatre, and accordingly, actors traditionally refer to it obliquely as "the Scottish play." It is considered acceptable to voice the play's name only while rehearsing or performing the production itself.

Because Shakespeare's plays are so familiar, there are innumerable references to them in English literature. Sometimes his stories are recast into a different form. The musical ''West Side Story'' is a retelling of ''Romeo and Juliet,'' and the classic science-fiction movie ''Forbidden Planet'' is a transformed version of ''The Tempest.''

The reverence in which Shakespeare is held, and the archaic language of his plays (from the same era as the King James translation of the Bible) should not obscure the fact that his plays were (and still are) fabulously successful.

He is also famous for his 154 [[sonnet]]s, short poems written in a very strict [[rhyme scheme]]. The sonnets fall into series or sequences. Most of them are usually read as expressions of romantic or platonic love; some appear to be written to a married woman known in the sonnets as the "Dark Lady," some to a young man known as the "Fair Lord."

Considering his major themes, Shakespeare is undoubtedly a conservative figure by today's standards. Major conservative themes in his works include the sacred nature of the familial structure in [[King Lear]], the recognition of God in his plays and personal life, the existence of necessary war in [[The Famous Life of Henry V]], and the exposed injustice of taxation in [[Coriolanus]]. Not surprisingly, modern [[liberal]] literary critics often ignore these themes because of their place on the modern political spectrum.

Shakespeare wrote in his will, "I commend my soul into the hands of God, my Creator, hoping and assuredly believing, through the only merits of Jesus Christ, my Saviour, to be made partaker of life everlasting."<ref>http://www.amerisearch.net/index.php?date=2004-04-23&view=View</ref>

His tomb in Holy Trinity Church, Stratford-on-Avon, England, reads as follows:<ref>''Id.''</ref>
{{cquote|Good Friend For Jesus Sake Forbeare, To Digg The Dust Enclosed Heare. Blese Be Ye Man Spares Thes Stones, And Curst Be He Moves My Bones.}}

== List of Plays by Shakespeare[http://absoluteshakespeare.com/trivia/bibliography/bibliography.htm] ==

=== Comedies ===
[[File:Shakespeare f. Reuters.jpg|right]]
*[[Two Gentlemen of Verona]] (1589)
*[[The Comedy of Errors]] (1589)
*[[The Taming of the Shrew]] (1593)
*[[Love's Labour's Lost]] (1594)
*[[A Midsummer-Night's Dream]] (1595)
*[[The Merchant of Venice]] (1596)
*[[The Merry Wives of Windsor]] (1597)
*[[Much Ado About Nothing]] (1598)
*[[As You Like It]] (1599)
*[[Twelfth Night]] (1601)
*[[All's Well That Ends Well]] (1602)
*[[Measure for Measure]] (1603)
*[[Pericles, Prince of Tyre]] (1607)
*[[Cymbeline]] (1609)
*[[The Winter's Tale]] (1609)
*[[The Tempest]] (1610)
*[[The Two Noble Kinsmen]] (1611)

=== Histories ===
*[[The Life and Death of King John]] (1590)
*[[The First Part of King Henry VI]] (1590)
*[[The Second Part of King Henry VI]] (1592)
*[[The Third Part of King Henry VI]] (1593)
*[[The Tragedy of King Richard III]] (1593)
*[[The Tragedy of King Richard II]] (1595)
*[[The First Part of King Henry IV]] (1596)
*[[The Second Part of King Henry IV]] (1597)
*[[The Famous Life of King Henry V]] (1599)
*[[The Famous Life of King Henry VIII]] (1613)

=== Tragedies ===
*[[Titus Andronicus]] (1591)
*[[Romeo and Juliet]] (1594)
*[[Julius Caesar (Play)|Julius Caesar]] (1599)
*[[Troilus and Cressida]] (1600)
*[[Hamlet]] (1600)
*[[Othello]] (1603)
*[[Timon of Athens]] (1604)
*[[King Lear]] (1605)
*[[Macbeth]] (1606)
*[[Coriolanus]] (1608)
*[[Antony and Cleopatra]] (1608)

== Trivia ==
* "Shakespeare" was spelled many ways before English spelling was standardized. Some of the more unexpected forms are "Shaxper," "Shaxberd," and "Shaksper."<ref>http://shakespeareauthorship.com/name1.html</ref>

== See also ==

*[[Leo Tolstoy]]
*[[Miguel De Cervantes Saavedra]]

== External links ==

*[http://books.mirror.org/gb.shakespeare.html An Index to Online Great Books]

==References==
<references/>

-----

{{DEFAULTSORT:Shakespeare, William}}

[[Category:Playwrights|Shakespeare, William]]
[[category:poets|Shakespeare, William]]
[[Category:Authors]]
[[Category:British History]]
[[Category:Renaissance]]
[[Category:Theater]]

Biblical scientific foreknowledge

2010-10-04T10:47:16Z

WillS: Noah lived until he was 950- GENESIS 9:29, and several other lived well past 200 (Shem comes to mind, I know there are more)

[[File:Newton.png|thumb|alt=scientific foreknowledge in the bible|250px|[[Isaac Newton]], cornerstone of the [[scientific revolution]], based his research on the scientific authority of the Bible and sought enlightenment in scripture.]]‎
'''Biblical scientific foreknowledge''' is how the [[Bible]] shows a comprehension of scientific knowledge far ahead of its time. ''A [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness|closed-mindedness]] against the Bible limits the advance of science, which benefits from its insights.''

'''[[Atheist]]ic organizations and scientists, particularly [[evolution]]ists, engage in [[liberal denial]] about how the Bible was correct long before science could discover the same truths'''.

== Geology ==

Modern scientists long opposed the suggestion that cataclysmic flooding, such as the [[Great Flood]] described in the Bible, shaped the landscape. But the discovery in the Northwest of "giant ripple marks, 50 feet high and 200-500 feet apart" proved that a cataclysmic flood did indeed occur. As a result, "[a]mong geologists, the concept of a catastrophic flood came to be accepted by the late 1950s."<ref>[http://www.iafi.org/floods.html</ref>

==Health and Biology==

===Bloodletting hastens death===
At the time of Jesus and for centuries afterward, arteries and veins were thought to be filled with air, and blood was viewed as something to be used up rather than recirculate. Bloodletting -- the practice of intentionally draining blood from a patient -- was common medical practice through the time of [[George Washington]], hastening his death prematurely for reasons not understood until years later.<ref>http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/37212.php</ref>

Most victims of crucifixion in Roman times languished on the cross for days. But the Bible describes how Pilate, who crucified many, was surprised at how quickly Jesus passed away. 2000 years later, scientific knowledge has advanced to understand that this was caused by his prior loss of blood during his scourging (being brutally whipped), a punishment typically given ''instead of'' crucifixion.

===Homosexuality and disease===
The Bible's prohibition against [[homosexuality]] predated knowledge about the [[Homosexuality and Health|many diseases and disorders associated with homosexuality]], and thus showed scientific wisdom prescient for its time.

=== Eyesight ===

The description in the [[Mark 1-8 (Translated)|Gospel of Mark 8:24]] for the sensation when one's eyesight is restored includes his perception of "trees walking." This perception was first confirmed nearly 2000 years later as physicians developed medical techniques for restoring eyesight.<ref>This newspaper account is not specific but describes the overall sensation of restored sight: [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-138886/Robot-eye-restore-lost-sight-20-years.html]</ref>

=== Maximum Human Height ===

Atheists thought the size of [[Goliath]] in the Bible to be absurdly large (over nine feet tall), until [[Robert Wadlow]] grew to nearly 9 feet tall and was still growing when he died at a young age in 1940.

=== Leprosy and Contagion ===

At the time of Jesus, leprosy was thought to be highly contagious. Jesus rejected that prevailing view and welcomed lepers. Not until the 20th century was it realized that leprosy is very rarely contagious.

=== Digestive System ===

It was common thought throughout history that infections and illness resulted from the digestive system, based on unclean hands or food. Jesus rejected that view, and declared hand-washing before meals to be typically unnecessary. It took many centuries before science caught up to the Bible on this.

=== Feasibility of [[Abiogenesis]] ===
Although scientists dismissed ideas involving [[Abiogenesis|abiogenesis]], or the process from which life emerges from nothing, as nothing more than archaic beliefs in [[spontaneous generation]], the Bible very clearly depicts an occurrence of this phenomenon, for beginning in Genesis 1:20, [[God]] creates life from nothing. It was not until the early 20th century that science finally began to accept the viability of abiogenesis, a view that the Bible had held for almost 2000 years, except that [[atheists]] falsely claim that abiogenesis is somehow possible without a creator.

=== Awareness while Unborn ===
[[Abortion]] advocates argue that it is ok to terminate a baby while dismissing the pain inflicted by ending an innocent life. They argue that a fetus cannot feel pain because senses are incomplete. There is a heart-beating human in the womb that can feel even though still unborn and developing. In modern times, we now know the baby in the womb is alert, aware of their mother's emotions, recognizes voices, responds to stimuli and music. The Bible tells us the baby feels (1 Luke 44), ''"the babe leaps for joy in Elizabeth’s womb at the sound of Mary’s voice."'' The inwomb developing baby, John the Baptist, notices the presence of the unborn [[Lord]] in [[Mary]], and is excited. In addition (St. Paul to the Galatians 1:15), ''"God… from my mother’s womb had set me apart and called me through his grace."'' Paul's very first thought, feeling, awareness began while unborn.

=== The significance of blood ===

The Old Testament teaches that the [[life]] of all flesh is its [[blood]] ({{Bible ref|book=Leviticus|chap=17|verses=13-14|version=KJV}}). Secular science remained ignorant of the properties and circulation of blood until the 17th century A.D.

==Cosmology==
===Number of Stars===

The [[Bible]] repeatedly refers to the number of stars as being innumerable,<ref>''See'' Genesis 15:5, Jeremiah 33:22 and Hebrews 11:12.</ref> despite scientists insisting throughout most of history that there were only about 6000 stars. In the early 17th century [[Galileo]] turned a telescope to the heavens and discovered a great number of stars that had been previously invisible to the naked eye. [http://galileo.rice.edu/lib/student_work/astronomy95/orionpleiades.html]

Not until the 20th century did scientists discover the tremendous number of stars:

:There are "10 times as many stars as grains of sand on all the world's beaches and deserts," totaling "7 followed by 22 zeros or, more accurately, 70 sextillion." [http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/07/22/stars.survey/index.html]

===Spherical Earth===
The Book of Isaiah establishes that the true shape of the earth is a sphere:
{{cquote|It is He who sits above the circle of the earth... - Isaiah 40:22 (KJV)}}
Here, the translation "circle" is inapt, as the Hebrew term entailed something spherical, not flat.

Note that Isaiah was written circa the 8th century BC, centuries before Greek philosophers, beginning with [[Pythagoras]], theorized the earth was round.

=== Earth free floating in space ===
The book of Job states that God "hangs the earth on nothing." This presaged the fact that space is in fact empty, which wasn't known until the dawn of the 20th century, when ether theory was disproved. It also contrasts with pagan mythologies such as [[Atlas]] holding up the earth or the earth being supported by a giant turtle, as in ancient Hindu and native American myths.

=== Darkness, and Unexplained Ripples in Cosmic Background Radiation ===

[[Genesis 1-8 (Translated)|Genesis Chapter 1]] explains that [[God]] created light first, rather than merely stars. A "big bang" would result in light everywhere, without darkness, and without ripples in cosmic background radiation. Yet in the 21st century ripples were discovered in cosmic background radiation, which can only be plausibly explained by recognizing that light was created first.

=== Meteoroids ===
The Revelation of Saint John notes,
{{cquote|And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood; And the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, and had life, died; and the third part of the ships were destroyed. Revelation 8:8-9 (KJV)}}
This accurately describes meteoroids, essentially large chunks of rock lit on fire by the shock of entering the earth's atmosphere. They were not discovered until 1801, and their composition was not otherwise known until the 20th century.

=== Stellar proper movement ===
In [[Job]], there is a list of challenges that are constructed in the form of questions, with the idea that man can't do it, but God can.

Among those challenges, two are remarkable: one mentions the ''untying'' of Orion's belt, and the other is the ''binding'' of the Pleiades. One recently astronomers could measure the proper movement of those stars; Orion's belt is moving apart, with each star going in a different direction, while the Pleiades are moving together.

=== Space flight ===

Many theorize that the book of [[Ezekiel]] contains descriptions of spaceships and rockets, as they would have been described by someone thousands of years ago. [http://www.spaceshipsofezekiel.com/ Author Blumrich] has even published an entire book about this.

== Meteorology ==
=== Existence of the [[Jet Stream]] ===
Ecclesiastes 1:6 notes, "The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits." This described the jet stream long before its 19th-20th century discovery.

=== Water cycle ===

The existence of the water cycle was not known until imperial Roman times, but the Bible described it over a thousand years before that!
See [[Ecclesiastes]] 11:3, [[Job]] 26:8 and [[Amos]] 9:6

== Physics ==

=== Light and Color ===

Prior to the work of [[Isaac Newton]], white was considered to be the fundamental color of light, and other colors (such as red, green and blue) were formed by adding to white light. Under that traditional theory, the fullness of all light (a combination of all colors of light) would result in something other than pure white.

The transfiguration of Jesus is described with remarkable consistency in all three synoptic [[Gospel]]s: in the fullness of light Jesus and his clothing display an intense white, whiter than any bleach could produce. This illustrates what was not discovered and accepted until nearly 1700 years later: that white is the combination of other fundamental colors, and the purest white light is formed by a perfectly full combination (see [[Prism]]).

=== [[Quantum Mechanics]] ===

==== Observation of the Wave Function ====
The second chapter of the [[Gospel of John]] describes the conversion of water into wine by [[Jesus]] at a wedding reception. John 2:9 states: "When the host of the wedding feast tasted the water, it had been made into wine." This passage implies that the drink was not wine until it had been tasted, or observed. Possibly, the drink was a superposition of the state of wine and the state of water until it was observed as wine.

==== [[Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle]] ====

Both the Old and New Testaments refer to a fundamental uncertainty that requires observation to resolve, akin to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle discovered in the 1920s:

* "The earth came to exist in an utterly formless and empty state." [[Genesis 1-8 (Translated)|Genesis 1:2]].
* The master refusing to order the removal of the weeds sowed among the wheat because of the uncertainty in distinguishing between the two until later: [[Matthew 10-19 (Translated)|Matthew 13:24-30]].

==== Wave-Particle Duality ====

Particles are subject to gravity; waves are not. Wave-particle duality, first discovered in the 20th century, allows for a particle to sometimes be subject to gravity and sometimes not.

The wave-particle duality was described nearly 2000 years earlier in the Gospel account of Jesus walking on water: [[Mark 1-8 (Translated)|Mark 6:45-54]]. A close reading of the passage reveals the wave-like (or light-like) characteristic of the walking on water:
{{cquote|he walked on the surface of the lake and came to the boat, ''nearly passing it''. But when they saw him walking on water, they thought it must have been ''a ghost'', and cried out.}}
[[Mark 1-8 (Translated)|Mark 6:48-49]] (italics added).

=== Classical Relativity ===
Romans 10:6-7: But the righteousness that is by faith says: "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?'" (that is, to bring Christ down) 7"or 'Who will descend into the deep?'" (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).

Equating ascending into heaven to bringing Christ down is an example of the fact that there is no universal reference frame, and only relative speeds matter.

=== [[Second Law of Thermodynamics]] ===

The [[Genesis 1-8 (Translated)|Book of Genesis]] states that the darkness or chaos in the universe can never overcome the light, or order. This same concept was not discovered in physics until the development of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which holds that heat (or order or light) always travels in the direction of cold (or disorder or darkness), and never in the opposite direction.

=== The nature of air ===

Until about 300 years ago, common knowledge believe that the air was "empty" and didn't weigh anything. But [[Job]] 28:25 says "To establish a '''weight''' for the wind, And apportion the waters by measure" indicating that the divinely inspired author knew the air had substance and weight.

== Mathematics ==

=== [[Banach-Tarski Paradox]] ===
The only miracle described in all four [[Gospels]] is the multiplication of loaves and fish by [[Jesus]], thought for thousands of years to be a mathematical and physical impossibility. But the 20th century discovery of the so-called [[Banach-Tarski Paradox]] proved a mathematical basis for creating identical copies of an object.

=== Axiomatization of Arithmetic ===
The full set of axioms for integer arithmetic may be found in the Bible, as demonstrated by J.C. Keister.<ref>http://www.trinityfoundation.org/PDF/027a-MathandtheBible.pdf</ref> For example, [[Luke 9-16 (Translated)|Luke 12:52]] is a striking statement of the commutative law for addition: "For from this point forward there will be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three." This understanding presaged both later attempts at the axiomatization of arithmetic by Peano and the development of [[abstract algebra]] in the 19th and 20th centuries.

== Zoology ==

===Existence of dinosaurs===
[[Dinosaur]] fossils were not discovered until the 19th century, but the book of [[Job]] describes enormous creatures called behemoth and leviathan, the descriptions being similar to dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures. It may also have referred to another similarly giant now-extinct species.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i2/behemoth.asp</ref>

===Lions' killing methods===

Until the 1970s naturalists believed that lions killed their prey by biting through the neck or by breaking the neck with a swat of a paw, while the Bible says that lions strangled their prey. (Nahum 2:12) It was not until the 1970s that it was discovered that the [[Bible]] was correct.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BLions87.htm</ref>

=== Giant sea creatures and Jonah ===

The [[Jonah (Translated)|Book of Jonah]] describes his survival in the belly of a giant sea creature for 2.5 to 3 days. Scientists declared this to be impossible due to powerful stomach acids that quickly break down any material.

Then, in 2010, scientists were astonished to find the following materials intact in the belly of a gray whale that had died after being stranded on a Northwest beach:<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/19/pair-sweat-pants-garbage-beached-whales-stomach/</ref>

*a pair of sweat pants
*a golf ball
*over 20 plastic bags
*small towels
*duct tape
*surgical gloves
*a functioning laptop accessing ''Conservapedia'' (just kidding about this last item)

Of course, many sea creatures have gone extinct in the thousands of years since Jonah lived.

==Linguistics==

The [[theory of evolution]] suggests that all languages are descended from a common ancestral language, and for a century (1860 to about 1960) scientists clung to that view. But now most linguists identify many different families of languages that have no common ancestor, just as described in Genesis 11 with the [[Tower of Babel]].

==Engineering examples==

Biblical scientific foreknowledge about these engineering developments has been proposed:<ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2191</ref>

{{cquote|automobiles (Joel 2:3-4); airplanes (Isaiah 31:5, also 40:31); submarines (Revelation 9:1-11); radio (Ecclesiastes 10:20); and television (Revelation 11:3-12)}}

== Alleged absurdities and contradictions ==

Biblical scientific foreknowledge is an underpinning of creation science, and is widely credited by Christian scientists and apologists, including the organizations [[Creation Ministries International]], [[Answers in Genesis]], and [[CreationWiki]].<ref>http://creationwiki.org/index.php/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge.</ref><ref>[http://creationwiki.org/index.php/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible Scientific Foreknowledge]</ref><ref>http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1718/</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v17/i1/medicine.asp</ref>

Atheists unsuccessfully attempt to discredit the Bible based on science. Here are some examples:

=== Bat as a bird ===
A favorite evolutionist canard is that Leviticus 11:13-19 labels the [[bat]], a [[mammal]], as a [[bird]]. But this is an obvious failure of translation, as the Hebrew term '' 'owph'' did not entail the "clade" of birds, but was a non-biological category referring to any winged creature, mammalian, avian, or insect. The KJV translation as "fowl" is simply incorrect.

=== Incorrect value of Pi ===
Two sections of the bible (1 Kings 7, 23-26, 2 Chronicles, 4, 2-5) appear to indicate that the correct value of [[Pi]] is 3, whereas Pi is in fact an irrational number, equalling approximately 3.14159. It has alleged by atheists, including [[Sam Harris]] and [[Richard Dawkins]], that this value indicates the fallacious nature of scripture.<ref>The Richard Dawkins Foundation, ''Reply to a Christian'', Sam Harris - [http://richarddawkins.net/articles/139]</ref> However, a simple explanation of the claimed "contradiction" is that the Bible records the ratio of the actual object which Hiram created, not that of a mathematical [[sphere]]. The claim that it was round all about does not equate to a claim that it was a perfect sphere, as atheists have claimed.<ref>''Theology'', Volume 59, Issues 427-438, Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge (Great Britain), London, 1956, p. 23 </ref>

Moreover, [[Pi]], when expressed as one significant digit, is equal to 3.

==See Also==
*[[Christianity and Science]]
*[[Creation vs. Evolution Videos]]
*[[The Bible]]
*[[Evolution]]
*[[Atheism]]

==External Links==
*[http://www.creationwiki.org/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible scientific foreknowledge] by [[CreationWiki]]
{{Template:Creation vs. evolution}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}
[[Category:Bible]]
[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Creationism]]

Public schools in the United States

2010-10-01T07:58:31Z

WillS: removed liberal slur

[[File:800px-Warning signs at CHS.jpg|thumb|250px|right|One of the first things one sees when entering the visitor's parking lot at Charlotte High School, a public school in Punta Gorda, Florida, is a sign informing vistors of the on-campus surveillance cameras.]]
[[Public schools]] in the [[United States]] are [[liberal]] and [[atheistic]]<ref>[http://www.exodusmandate.org/art_exodus_from_public_schools_gets_helping_hand.htm Exodus from "public schools" gets a helping hand], Exodus Mandate, Sept 15, 1998</ref><ref>For example, "in 2005, officials at East Brunswick High School adopted a policy prohibiting representatives of the school district from participating in student-initiated prayer." [http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61806]</ref><ref>From 2004 to 2006, a [[public school]] banned [[Bible]] study by children ... ''during recess''. A teacher complained about the use of the Bible and the principal then censored the study activity, according to a sworn statement by a teacher told to stop it. Principal "Summa, having learned of a complaint by a teacher and of the students' Bible study, told fourth-grade teacher Virginia Larue to nix the group's recess meeting. ... Larue later told one of Luke's Bible study colleagues the group could no longer meet at recess."[http://knoxnews.com/news/2008/jan/03/recess-bible-study-spurs-lawsuit/]</ref><ref>[[Atheists]] routinely impose their views on [[public schools]], though liberals deny it. For example, a court prohibited a moment of silence in [[Illinois]] "Township High School District 214 after atheist activist Rob Sherman challenged" it.[http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-moment_of_silence_bothmay30,0,7722271.story]</ref>
government institutions that employ 3 million people and spend $411.5 billion annually at a cost of $10,770 per student.<ref>[http://www.edreform.com/index.cfm?fuseAction=section&pSectionID=15&cSectionID=97 Statistics about education]</ref> Spoken [[prayer]], the [[Ten Commandments]], and sharing of [[faith]] are expressly forbidden in public schools' classrooms during school hours, and teaching of [[morality]] is implicitly disfavored.<ref>''See, e.g.'', ''[[Stone v. Graham]]'' (1980) (excluding Ten Commandments from public school).</ref><ref>A public school banned [[Bible]] study by children ... ''during recess''. A teacher complained about the use of the Bible and the principal then censored the study activity, according to a sworn statement by a teacher told to stop it. [http://knoxnews.com/news/2008/jan/03/recess-bible-study-spurs-lawsuit/]</ref> [[Homosexual Agenda|Homosexual indoctrination]] is common as early as elementary school in more [[liberal]] states.<ref>http://www.massresistance.org/media/video/brainwashing.html</ref>

The following are characteristics of public schools:

*30% fail to graduate from high school,<ref name="graduate">"Only 70% of all students in public high schools graduate, and only 32% of all students leave high school qualified to attend four-year colleges."[http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ewp_03.htm]</ref> and more than 40% of minorities fail to graduate;<ref>"Only 71 percent of kids graduate from high school within four years, and for minorities the numbers are even worse -- 58 percent for Hispanics and 55 percent for African Americans," [Bill Gates] wrote. "If the decline in childhood deaths [in developing countries] is one of the most positive statistics ever, these are some of the most negative."[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/29/AR2009032901353.html?wpisrc=newsletter]</ref> the real drop-out rate may be 50%<ref>http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/47272207.html</ref>
*Nearly 70% leave high school unqualified to go on to four-year college.<ref name="graduate"/>
*77% have used illicit drugs. Fatal overdoses are common but underreported; public schools are required to present [[Drug education|drug "education"]] to kids<ref>According to Monitoring the Future, a study funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, illicit drug use is up among students between eighth and 12th grade. In 1991, 62 percent had used illicit drugs. In 2007, the number jumped to 77 percent. [http://www.battlecreekenquirer.com/article/20081207/NEWS08/812070305/1002] Fatal overdoses are common, although often underreported.[http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B01E5DB123EF932A25750C0A9629C8B63 Reporting of a heroin overdose by 16-year-old [[public school]] student was an exception to the underreporting].</ref>
*More than 60% of public school teenagers (in one regional study) watch more than 3 hours of television a day, compared with a national average of 35%<ref>http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/dec/01/memphis-youth-make-progress-on-risky-behavior/ (study of Memphis students)</ref>
*About half of the pregnancies among girls attending public school end in [[abortion|abortions]] and about half end in birth. Public schools "[[Sex education|educate]]" kids about sex.<ref>"There is zero shame [to [[teenage pregnancy]]]," the school nurse observed.[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/12/AR2008121203507.html]</ref>
*"About 160,000 students miss school daily because they [[fear]] being [[Bully|bullied]]," and students viciously fight each other and post videos of it on [[YouTube|Youtube.com]].<ref>One victim is now "being [[homeschooled]] at state expense."[http://starbulletin.com/2008/05/18/news/story01.html]</ref>
*20% go on dangerous "[[binge drinking]]," and 50% drink illegally<ref name="Oregon">http://www.mlive.com/chronicle/news/index.ssf/2008/12/ottawa_co_youth_survey_surpris.html</ref>
*10-20% become addicted to cigarettes<ref name="Oregon"/><ref>http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/dec/01/memphis-youth-make-progress-on-risky-behavior/</ref>
*35% are overweight<ref name="health">http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/nov/29/students-health-needs-attention/</ref>
*Nearly 10% have mental health problems<ref name="health"/>
*More than 10% of public high schools have a pro-homosexual student club
*The majority of public school students are completely ignorant about the [[Bible]], even as [[Bible history|history]] and literature
*California public schools, largest in the nation, now rank at the bottom in academic achievement. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/us/us_california_broken_schools/2009/06/21/227552.html High-Spending California School System Collapsing] AP, June 21, 2009</ref>

==History==

===United States===

In 1647, [[Massachusetts]] [[Puritans]] enacted the second law, after Scotland in 1616,<ref>The Social, Economic & Political Reasons for the Decline of Gaelic in Scotland [http://www.scottishhistory.com/articles/highlands/gaelic/gaelic_page1.html]</ref> establishing universal public [[school]]s in the English-speaking world to block the attempts by "ould deluder Satan to keepe men from the whole knowledge of the Scriptures".<ref>''Family Encyclopedia of American History'' (Reader's Digest 1975)</ref> Each settlement larger than 50 families was required to pay a [[teacher|schoolmaster]] to teach reading, writing and religious doctrine to the [[children]] in the community. Beginning in 1670, Massachusetts provided [[taxation|tax]] funding for school maintenance. This model was then copied throughout the colonies, and even throughout the world.

Many children did not attend public school for the first two centuries. It was not until 1852 that Massachusetts became the first state to require attendance by students aged 6 through 16, and it was not until 1918 that all states had [[compulsory attendance]] laws. High schools did not generally exist until after the [[Civil War]], and the first American [[kindergarten]] didn't exist until 1856 in Watertown, Wisconsin.

===United Kingdom===
In the [[United Kingdom]], the term "public school" means the exact opposite of its American usage, and refers to the most expensive and prestigious ''private'' schools, such as [[Eton College]], [[Harrow]], and a few others. The term public was used because the school was open to all public applicants, albeit ones that could afford to pay the fees. The UK equivalent of US public schools are called state schools which provide education for free to all pupils.

The first UK state school, Beverley Grammar School, was founded in 700AD. Despite the fact that around 90% of UK children are educated at one, state schools are looked down upon and derided. This is especially so of the 'Bog Standard Comprehensive' where images of teachers wearing stab vests and knife arches and invoked.

==Views on morals==

===So-called "character education"===

In response to the perception that public schools have stopped teaching morality, many state education departments have or are in the process of developing "morality" that avoid good and evil, right and wrong, and instead present under the heading of "character" education.<ref>[http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3971/is_199910/ai_n8866284]</ref> The lack of appreciation for right and wrong can surprise outsiders, and even school principals. When one public school student was charged with [[felony]] [[computer crime]] for altering the grades of 20 students, the principal said, we "want to teach them what's right and wrong, and it's tough for some kids to catch on to the idea that changing grades is the wrong thing to do."<ref>http://cw2.trb.com/news/kwgn-student-grade-felony,0,7871401.story</ref> The impact of the removal of morality from the [[public school]] curriculum (which is also used in private schools) is that "more than one in three boys (35 percent) and one-fourth of the girls (26 percent) — a total of 30 percent overall — admitted stealing from a store within the past year."<ref>http://charactercounts.org/programs/reportcard/index.html</ref>

=== Prayer ===

The White House announced the release of Revised Religious Guidelines for America's Public Schools on May 29, 1998. Within this announcement, President Clinton stated, "Nothing in the First Amendment converts our public schools into religion-free zones, or requires all religious expression to be left behind at the school house door." --President Clinton, July 12, 1995<ref>http://www.ed.gov/PressReleases/05-1998/wh-0530.html</ref>

In 2003, the Education Department released the following guidelines that clarified and added requirements to Public Schools to ensure the religious rights of students.<ref>http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=17550</ref>
<blockquote>
Schools that don’t allow students to pray outside the classroom or that prohibit teachers from holding religious meetings among themselves could lose federal money, the Education Department said late last week. 
 
The guidance reflects the Bush administration’s push to ensure that schools give teachers and students as much freedom to pray as the courts have allowed. 
The department makes clear that teachers cannot pray with students or attempt to shape their religious views.
The instructions, released by the department on Feb. 7, broadly follow the same direction given by the Clinton administration and the courts. Prayer is generally allowed provided it happens outside the class and is initiated by students, not by school officials. 
 
The department, however, also offered some significant additions, including more details on such contentious matters as moments of silence and prayer in student assemblies. And for the first time, federal funds are tied to compliance with the guidelines. The burden is on schools to prove compliance through a yearly report.
</blockquote>

===Teaching the Bible in Public Schools ===
The [[National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools]]<ref>http://www.bibleinschools.net/</ref> (NCBCPS) provides a program for teaching the Bible in public schools. Currently, the NCBCPS's Bible curriculum has been voted into 462 school districts (over 1,900 high schools) in 38 states. Over 210,000 students have already taken this course nationwide, on the high school campus, during school hours, for credit.

==Educational outcomes==

===Declining literacy ===
Since the rapid expansion and liberalization of public schools after [[World War II]], students' [[literacy]] levels have dropped significantly. While the average 14-year-old had a vocabulary of 25,000 words in 1945, the equivalent student in 2000 had a vocabulary of only 10,000 words, a severe disadvantage in an increasingly textual world.<ref>''Utne Reader'' (July-August 2000), 28-9.</ref>

===Liberal bias in textbooks===
Textbooks (K-12) have been systematically analyzed in a study funded by the U.S. government. The 1986 findings were that massive, systematic [[liberal]] bias exists, resulting in several information blackouts in four key areas of modern American life—marriage, religion, politics, and business. While an actual conspiracy was then ruled out, the cause was found to be a "a very widespread secular and liberal mindset" pervading "the leadership in the world of education [and textbook publishing]"<ref> ''Censorship: Evidence of Bias in Our Children's textbooks'', [[Paul C. Vitz]], Servant Books, 1986, ISBN 0-89283-305-X</ref>.

Professor Larry Schwikart, of the University of Dayton, wrote a book about biased textbooks. False claims common in those texts included that the founders wanted a "wall of separation" between church and state, that "Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation only because he needed black soldiers", and that "Mikhail Gorbachev, not Ronald Reagan, was responsible for ending the Cold War". <ref>http://www.emailwire.com/release/20086-Controversial-Historian-on-the-Price-of-Business-Show.html</ref>

===Non-Dismissal of Tenured Teachers===
Due to the strength of the nation's teachers' union, it is nearly impossible to fire a bad performing teacher with tenure. The process can take years and involves countless steps to even attempt. The union claims that the protections are needed against arbitrary and malicious lawsuits.

The New York public schools system has approximately 700 teachers accused of insubordination to sexual misconduct. They remain in seclusion from the classroom but are paid full salaries until their cases are heard, sometimes from months to years later. All because their union contract makes it extremely difficult to fire them. <ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/us_rubber_rooms/2009/06/22/227959.html 700 NYC Teachers Paid to Do Nothing] AP, June 22, 2009</ref>

[[File:Pathtodismissal.JPG|center|thumb|800px| Flow chart for firing teachers in the nations second largest school district, Los Angeles Unified School district]]

==Graduates==
=== Before 1962 ===
Given that public schools educate about 90% of [[Americans]], it is astounding how few prominent Americans attended public school after the banning of school prayer in 1962. Here is an impressive list of prominent Americans who attended public schools ''before'' the banning of prayer.

*[[Ronald Reagan]]<ref>http://www.dixonil.com/reagan/reagan2.htm</ref> graduated from Dixon High School, Illinois
*[[Dwight D. Eisenhower]]<ref>http://www.eisenhower.archives.gov/press_releases/2007/PR07_11_August_02_2007_Eisenhower_Co_Sponsor_Little_Rock.pdf</ref> attended Abilene High School in Abilene, Kansas
*[[Richard M. Nixon]]<ref>http://www.nndb.com/edu/836/000068632/</ref> attended Fullerton and Whittier High Schools, California
*[[Gerald Ford]]<ref>http://www.visitgrandrapids.org/ford-facts.php</ref> attended Grand Rapids South High School, Michigan
*[[Lyndon B. Johnson]]<ref>http://www.nndb.com/people/062/000023990/</ref> attended Johnson City High School, Texas
*[[Harry S Truman]]<ref>http://www.nps.gov/nr/twhp/wwwlps/lessons/103truman/103visual1.htm</ref> attended Independence High School, Missouri
*[[H. Ross Perot]]<ref>http://www.famoustexans.com/rossperot.htm</ref> attended public schools and Texarkana Junior College, Texas
*[[Richard Cheney]]<ref>http://www.nndb.com/people/598/000022532/</ref> graduated from Natrona County High School in Casper, Wyoming.
*[[Colin Powell]] graduated from Morris High School, NY in 1954 and received his B.A. in geology from the City College of New York in 1958 <ref>http://gale.cengage.com/free_resources/bhm/bio/powell_c.htm</ref>
*[[Billy Graham]] graduated from Sharon High School, NC in May 1936<ref>http://online-bibleconcordance.com/Ministers/BillyGraham.aspx</ref>
*[[Michael Medved]] graduated from Palisades High School, CA <ref>michaelmedved.townhall.com/About.aspx</ref>
*[[The Wright Brothers]] attended public schools in Richmond, India and Dayton OH but did not graduate <ref>http://www.kyrene.org/schools/brisas/sunda/inventor/wright/index.html</ref>
*[[Roy Jay Glauber]], Nobel laureate, graduated from Bronx High School of Science, Bronx, NY in 1941. <ref>http://www.nndb.com/people/738/000138324/</ref>
*[[Frederick Reines]], Nobel laureate, attended Union Hill High School, NJ, during the late 1930's. <ref>http://www.nndb.com/people/052/000099752/</ref>
*[[Oliver North]], US Army Officer, political commentator, graduated from Ockawamick High School in 1961. <ref>http://libraryoflibrary.com/E_n_c_p_d_Ollie_North.html</ref>

=== After 1962 ===
Here is a much less impressive list of celebrities and others who attended public school ''after'' prayer was banned in 1962:

*Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon.com, attended Miami Palmetto Senior High School FL.<ref>http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/bez0bio-1
</ref>
*Jerry Yang, co-founder of Yahoo.com, graduated from Sierramont Middle School, and Piedmont Hills High School, CA.<ref>http://goldsea.com/Innovators/Yangjerry/yangjerry3.html</ref>
*David Filo, co-founder of Yahoo.com graduated from Sam Houston High School TX.<ref>http://www.nndb.com/people/301/000123929/</ref>
*[[Kathryn D. Sullivan]], NASA astronaut and first American woman to walk in space, graduated from Taft High School, Woodland Hills, California, in 1969. <ref>http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/sullivan-kd.html</ref>
*[[S. Christa Mcauliffe]], astronaut participant, graduated from Marian High School, Framingham, Massachusetts, in 1966. <ref>http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/mcauliffe.html
</ref>
*[[Mae C. Jemison]], NASA astronaut and first African-America woman in space, graduated from Morgan Park High School, Chicago, Illinois, in 1973. <ref>http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/jemison-mc.html
</ref>
*[[Ellen Ochoa]], NASA astronaut and the first Hispanic-American woman astronaut, graduated from Grossmont High School, La Mesa, California, in 1975. <ref>http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/ochoa.html</ref>
*[[Jeana Yeager]], aviator, graduated from Commerce High School GA in 1970.<ref>http://www.tamu-commerce.edu/mrp/pdf/today/12-07-05.pdf
</ref>
*[[Brad Pitt]], actor, graduated from Kickapoo High School in Springfield, Missouri, 1981; dropped out of college.<ref>http://www.rolemodel.net/brad_pitt.cfm
</ref>
*[[Tom Cruise]], actor, attended several public high schools including Glen Ridge High School, New Jersey during the 1970's. <ref>http://www.nndb.com/people/791/000022725/
</ref>
*[[John Sununu]], former one-term Senator from [[New Hampshire]], graduated from Salem High School in the 1970's.<ref>http://www.sununu.senate.gov/biography.html
</ref>
*[[John Edwards]], former one-term Senator from [[North Carolina]] and two-time unsuccessful candidate for nomination for president, attended public school in Robbins, N.C. during the 1960's.<ref>http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2004/primaries/edwards_bio.html</ref>
*[[Spike Lee]], producer, actor, graduated from John Dewey High School, Brooklyn, NY.<ref>http://movies.nytimes.com/person/99175/Spike-Lee/biography</ref>
*[[Bill Gates]], founder of Microsoft, ''left'' public school after attending in Seattle until the age of twelve.<ref>http://www.thocp.net/biographies/gates_bill.htm</ref>
*[[Rush Limbaugh]] graduated from Central High School, MO in 1969 and attended Southeast Missouri State University for two semesters <ref>http://www.phillytalkradio.com/shows/show.php?show_id=limb</ref>
*[[Frank Wilczek]], Nobel laureate, attended Martin Van Buren High School, Queens, NY, during the late 1960's.<ref>http://www.nndb.com/people/720/000140300/</ref>
*Sgt. 1st Class [[Randall Shughart]], U.S. Army, Battle of Mogadishu hero, Medal of Honor recipient; graduated from Big Spring High School in Newville, PA in 1976.<ref> http://www.pbs.org/weta/americanvalor/stories/shughart.html\</ref>
*Sgt. 1st Class [[Paul Ray Smith]], U.S. Army, Iraq War hero, Medal of Honor recipient; graduated from Tampa Bay Vocational Technical High School, FL in 1988. <ref>http://www.army.mil/medalofhonor/smith/profile/index.html</ref>
*Cpl. [[Jason Dunham]], U.S. Marines, Iraq War hero, Medal of Honor recipient; graduated from Scio High School NY, in 2002.<ref> http://copthetruth.typepad.com/cop_the_truth/2007/03/uss_jason_dunha.html</ref>
*Lt. [[Michael Murphy]], Navy SEAL, Afghanistan War hero, Medal of Honor recipient; graduated from Patchogue-Medford High School in 1994. <ref> http://www.pat-med.k12.ny.us/Schools/HS/articles/0708/murphy/index.html</ref>
*[[Laura Bush]] attended James Bowie Elementary School, San Jacinto Junior High School, and Midland Lee High School in Midland, Texas (Graduated 1964); came out in support of [[gay marriage]] and [[abortion]] in 2010.<ref>http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/laura-bush-supports-gay-marriage-abortion/story?id=10629213</ref>
*[[John Cromwell Mather]], Nobel laureate, graduated from Newton High School, Newton, NJ in 1964. <ref>http://www.nndb.com/people/915/000137504/</ref>
*[[George Fitzgerald Smoot]], Nobel laureate, graduated from Upper Arlington High School, Upper Arlington, OH in 1962.<ref>http://www.nndb.com/people/921/000137510/</ref>
*[[Hugh David Politzer]], Nobel laureate, graduated from Bronx High School of Science, Bronx, NY in 1966.<ref>http://www.nndb.com/people/716/000140296/</ref>
*[[William J. Clinton]]<ref>http://www.hotsprings.org/things_to_do/historic_hotsprings/presidents_hometown.asp</ref> graduated from Hot Springs High School in Arkansas in 1964, and became the only president impeached in the 20th century.
*[[Pat Tillman]], former NFL football player and US Army soldier (tragically killed by friendly fire) who graduated from Leland High School CA.<ref>http://www.biography.com/search/article.do?id=197041</ref>

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

==See Also==

*[[Public school culture]]
*[[Teacher Pay]]

[[category:Schools]]
[[category:United States History]]

Talk:Essay:Passages Most Likely to Convert

2010-09-24T06:56:33Z

WillS:

As someone who was brought up Christian and so never converted, I'd be keen to hear from any Conservapedia editors who are converts. Which passages did you find most important in your conversion?

Also, are there any extra-biblical texts that can have a similar effect? Perhaps biographies of famous people who have converted?--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 07:17, 8 January 2009 (EST)
:I don't know how many others find it inspiring, but I would certainly cite ''Confessions'' by [[Saint Augustine]] as a powerful example. [[User:Tzoran|Tzoran]] 00:04, 13 February 2010 (EST)

::Your suggestion is an interesting one, and all are certainly welcome to the work that you cite. But I find liberals seem to promote that work at the expense of others that I would consider to be more effective. The [[Prodigal Son]], for example, seems to get the message across far more efficiently and effectively than ''Confessions'' does. Yet I never hear a liberal praising that parable.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:13, 13 February 2010 (EST)

:::There's no doubt that it's one of the greatest parables, but the Prodigal Son isn't so much about the conversion of the non-Christian as the ''return'' of the lost sheep. Do you think it's really effective at converting those who were never part of the flock to begin with? [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 00:42, 13 February 2010 (EST)

I put Psalm 23 at the top of the list because I believe that it is literally the most beautiful and most perfect piece of writing, ever:

''The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.''
''He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.''
''He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.''
''Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.''
''Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.''
''Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever.''

When I have had my faith shaken Psalm 23 has always saved me. If other people disagree, of course feel free to revert; I'd love to hear which passages matter the most to other Christians as well.--[[User:WillS|WillS]] 02:56, 24 September 2010 (EDT)

Talk:Essay:Passages Most Likely to Convert

2010-09-24T06:56:07Z

WillS:

Talk:Essay:Passages Most Likely to Convert

2010-09-24T06:55:39Z

WillS:

As someone who was brought up Christian and so never converted, I'd be keen to hear from any Conservapedia editors who are converts. Which passages did you find most important in your conversion?

Also, are there any extra-biblical texts that can have a similar effect? Perhaps biographies of famous people who have converted?--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 07:17, 8 January 2009 (EST)
:I don't know how many others find it inspiring, but I would certainly cite ''Confessions'' by [[Saint Augustine]] as a powerful example. [[User:Tzoran|Tzoran]] 00:04, 13 February 2010 (EST)

::Your suggestion is an interesting one, and all are certainly welcome to the work that you cite. But I find liberals seem to promote that work at the expense of others that I would consider to be more effective. The [[Prodigal Son]], for example, seems to get the message across far more efficiently and effectively than ''Confessions'' does. Yet I never hear a liberal praising that parable.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:13, 13 February 2010 (EST)

:::There's no doubt that it's one of the greatest parables, but the Prodigal Son isn't so much about the conversion of the non-Christian as the ''return'' of the lost sheep. Do you think it's really effective at converting those who were never part of the flock to begin with? [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 00:42, 13 February 2010 (EST)

I put Psalm 23 at the top of the list because I believe that it is literally the most beautiful and most perfect piece of writing, ever:

''The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.
He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.
He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me
Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.
Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever.''

When I have had my faith shaken Psalm 23 has always saved me. If other people disagree, of course feel free to revert; I'd love to hear which passages matter the most to other Christians as well.

Talk:Essay:Passages Most Likely to Convert

2010-09-24T06:54:44Z

WillS:

As someone who was brought up Christian and so never converted, I'd be keen to hear from any Conservapedia editors who are converts. Which passages did you find most important in your conversion?

Also, are there any extra-biblical texts that can have a similar effect? Perhaps biographies of famous people who have converted?--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 07:17, 8 January 2009 (EST)
:I don't know how many others find it inspiring, but I would certainly cite ''Confessions'' by [[Saint Augustine]] as a powerful example. [[User:Tzoran|Tzoran]] 00:04, 13 February 2010 (EST)

::Your suggestion is an interesting one, and all are certainly welcome to the work that you cite. But I find liberals seem to promote that work at the expense of others that I would consider to be more effective. The [[Prodigal Son]], for example, seems to get the message across far more efficiently and effectively than ''Confessions'' does. Yet I never hear a liberal praising that parable.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:13, 13 February 2010 (EST)

:::There's no doubt that it's one of the greatest parables, but the Prodigal Son isn't so much about the conversion of the non-Christian as the ''return'' of the lost sheep. Do you think it's really effective at converting those who were never part of the flock to begin with? [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 00:42, 13 February 2010 (EST)

I put Psalm 23 at the top of the list because I believe that it is literally the most beautiful and most perfect piece of writing, ever:

The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.

He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.

He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.

Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever.

When I have had my faith shaken Psalm 23 has always saved me. If other people disagree, of course feel free to revert; I'd love to hear which passages matter the most to other Christians as well.

Essay:Passages Most Likely to Convert

2010-09-24T06:51:44Z

WillS:

Which passages of the [[Bible]] are most likely to convert when read by someone who has lost his or her [[faith]]? Put another way, suppose you have the opportunity to read one passage to a depressed, faithless individual. Which would you read or describe?

Possibilities include, in order of likelihood:

#Psalm 23
#[[The Prodigal Son]]
#John 1:1
#[[Lazarus (brother of Mary)|The raising of Lazarus]]
#Passages relating to [[Hell]]
#Faith moving mountains (Matthew 17:20)
#The [[Good Thief]]
#[[Doubting Thomas]]
#The beginning of [[Genesis]]
#The description of the birth of [[Christ]] at the beginning of the [[Gospel of Luke]]
#The [[Passion]]
#Stranger on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-35)
#1 Matthew 7:7
#Kings 19:11-12
#Isaiah Chapter 53

(please add more or change order)
[[Category:Essays]]