Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Jingoism

2013-01-21T02:40:59Z

ZetaSonic: /* Mention of World War II */

==Mention of World War II==
(First of all I'll mention that I'm kind of insulted that Mr. Schlafly summarized his edit to the page as "removed liberal biase [sic]")

Coming from the conservative perspective, I don't think ''anybody'' would call the way that Roosevelt reacted in World War II "jingoist" (in direct response to the attack on Pearl Harbor + to support our allies = he didn't "start" it as a result of an overly aggressive foreign policy), so I think it should be removed from the list of references of Presidents whose foreign policies were not labeled jingoist by liberals. If nobody objects, I'll remove it in the next few days. I'm perfectly okay with the other two. -[[User:Ilikecake|Ilikecake]] 19:28, 26 December 2008 (EST)
:You're absolutely right. I went ahead and made the edit. --[[User:SStaples|SStaples]] 23:29, 16 March 2009 (EDT)

==Internet Atheism==

Let's face it, this is their primary tool they employ to give off the facade that they're superior when they're not. --[[User:ZetaSonic|ZetaSonic]] 21:40, 20 January 2013 (EST)

Talk:J. Edgar Hoover

2013-01-21T01:17:37Z

ZetaSonic: /* Crossdressing */

How is Hoover's well known and well-publicized vendetta against MLK unsubstantiated? I tried to include various sources, but the spam filter wouldn't allow it. The paper source I've listed substantiates it plenty. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 20:44, 30 June 2007 (EDT)

The editors here claim that Hoover's well-documented persecution of the civil rights movement is unsourced, though there is a paper source right there. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 20:58, 12 September 2007 (EDT)
:Seems someone's a little disengenous with a source [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=J._Edgar_Hoover&diff=next&oldid=292002]. That source actually says,

::"U.S. Attorney General '''[[Robert F. Kennedy]]''' committed what is widely viewed as one of the most ignominious acts in modern American history: he authorized the Federal Bureau of Investigation to begin wiretapping the telephones of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.[http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200207/garrow]

:Doesn't even mention Hoover. ''Awh garr-un-tee'', the banhammer is coming down if this type of trolling continues. Don't even begin getting involved on a page like this unless (a) you know your material, and (b) you have valid, qualified sources, in hand. [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 21:47, 12 September 2007 (EDT)

It is ''literally'' in my hand. It's called a book. It's the only reference on the page. I never even looked at the internet reference. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 23:01, 12 September 2007 (EDT)

==FYI==
[[Lyndon Johnson]] kept a recording procured by the [[wiretap]] RFK authorized of Dr. King in a motel room with a hooker on his desk and would play it for laughs to visitor's in the [[Oval Office]]. 3 point bonus question : what source is this verifiable information reported in? [[User:RobS|The Banhammer]] 21:56, 12 September 2007 (EDT)

==Crossdressing==
So... do we put in Hoover's little quirk, or leave it out as it is not family friendly? [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 22:24, 6 March 2008 (EST)

:Actually, the whole "Transvestite Hoover" rumor was set forward by the wife of a mobster he busted called Susan Rosenstiel. Nobody took her story seriously; Truman Capote (who was far from a fan of the FBI Director) found the story so ludicrous that he told it to everyone within range. In fact, Capote didn't even care if Rosenthiel's claims had any basis. As a result, a smear without concrete evidence lived through the ages. [[User:ZetaSonic|ZetaSonic]] 20:16, 20 January 2013 (EST)

=="Spying on conservatives"==
:"In 1934 President [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] secretly directed Hoover to investigate and monitor the activities of American Nazis and Nazi sympathizers"

What are you saying RJ, conservatives are Nazis? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:47, 8 August 2009 (EDT)
::no--FDR authorized spying on all his enemies. I'll rephrase that. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 15:08, 8 August 2009 (EDT)
:::Geez it sounds worse now that you rewrote it. It's the subhead and the opening sentence that can easily be misconstrued. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 15:22, 8 August 2009 (EDT)
::::OK, I tried again. see what you think. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 15:28, 8 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::Then let's examine the text of the Articles of Impeachment:
::::::"'''He misused the Federal Bureau of Investigation''', the Secret Service, and other executive personnel, '''in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, by directing or authorizing such agencies or personnel to conduct or continue electronic surveillance or other investigations for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; he did direct, authorize, or permit the use of information obtained thereby for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; and he did direct the concealment of certain records made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of electronic surveillance'''.
::::::Seems pretty clear, "'''in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, by directing or authorizing such agencies or personnel to conduct or continue electronic surveillance;''' don't see anything about coverup in that language. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:44, 10 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::Yes, but Hoover was not involved in any of the that and the FBI was involved only in a negative fashion (told not to investigate Watergate). This is an article on J. Edgar Hoover. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 18:48, 10 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::True; it'll have to go elsewhere. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 19:58, 10 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::yes, it fits in an article regarding Nixon's impeachment. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 20:04, 10 August 2009 (EDT)

Talk:J. Edgar Hoover

2013-01-21T01:16:52Z

ZetaSonic: /* Crossdressing */

How is Hoover's well known and well-publicized vendetta against MLK unsubstantiated? I tried to include various sources, but the spam filter wouldn't allow it. The paper source I've listed substantiates it plenty. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 20:44, 30 June 2007 (EDT)

The editors here claim that Hoover's well-documented persecution of the civil rights movement is unsourced, though there is a paper source right there. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 20:58, 12 September 2007 (EDT)
:Seems someone's a little disengenous with a source [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=J._Edgar_Hoover&diff=next&oldid=292002]. That source actually says,

::"U.S. Attorney General '''[[Robert F. Kennedy]]''' committed what is widely viewed as one of the most ignominious acts in modern American history: he authorized the Federal Bureau of Investigation to begin wiretapping the telephones of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.[http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200207/garrow]

:Doesn't even mention Hoover. ''Awh garr-un-tee'', the banhammer is coming down if this type of trolling continues. Don't even begin getting involved on a page like this unless (a) you know your material, and (b) you have valid, qualified sources, in hand. [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 21:47, 12 September 2007 (EDT)

It is ''literally'' in my hand. It's called a book. It's the only reference on the page. I never even looked at the internet reference. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 23:01, 12 September 2007 (EDT)

==FYI==
[[Lyndon Johnson]] kept a recording procured by the [[wiretap]] RFK authorized of Dr. King in a motel room with a hooker on his desk and would play it for laughs to visitor's in the [[Oval Office]]. 3 point bonus question : what source is this verifiable information reported in? [[User:RobS|The Banhammer]] 21:56, 12 September 2007 (EDT)

==Crossdressing==
So... do we put in Hoover's little quirk, or leave it out as it is not family friendly? [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 22:24, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Actually, the whole "Transvestite Hoover" rumor was set forward by the wife of a mobster he busted called Susan Rosenstiel. Nobody took her story seriously; Truman Capote (who was far from a fan of the FBI Director) found the story so ludicrous that he told it to everyone within range. In fact, Capote didn't even care if Rosenthiel's claims had any basis. As a result, a smear without concrete evidence lived through the ages. [[User:ZetaSonic|ZetaSonic]] 20:16, 20 January 2013 (EST)

=="Spying on conservatives"==
:"In 1934 President [[Franklin D. Roosevelt]] secretly directed Hoover to investigate and monitor the activities of American Nazis and Nazi sympathizers"

What are you saying RJ, conservatives are Nazis? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:47, 8 August 2009 (EDT)
::no--FDR authorized spying on all his enemies. I'll rephrase that. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 15:08, 8 August 2009 (EDT)
:::Geez it sounds worse now that you rewrote it. It's the subhead and the opening sentence that can easily be misconstrued. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 15:22, 8 August 2009 (EDT)
::::OK, I tried again. see what you think. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 15:28, 8 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::Then let's examine the text of the Articles of Impeachment:
::::::"'''He misused the Federal Bureau of Investigation''', the Secret Service, and other executive personnel, '''in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, by directing or authorizing such agencies or personnel to conduct or continue electronic surveillance or other investigations for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; he did direct, authorize, or permit the use of information obtained thereby for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; and he did direct the concealment of certain records made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of electronic surveillance'''.
::::::Seems pretty clear, "'''in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, by directing or authorizing such agencies or personnel to conduct or continue electronic surveillance;''' don't see anything about coverup in that language. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:44, 10 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::Yes, but Hoover was not involved in any of the that and the FBI was involved only in a negative fashion (told not to investigate Watergate). This is an article on J. Edgar Hoover. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 18:48, 10 August 2009 (EDT)
::::::True; it'll have to go elsewhere. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 19:58, 10 August 2009 (EDT)
:::::::yes, it fits in an article regarding Nixon's impeachment. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 20:04, 10 August 2009 (EDT)

Talk:Essay: Beautiful songs written about atheism

2013-01-19T20:40:00Z

ZetaSonic:

I'm tempted to write an essay ''Beautiful crowns made for presidents'' - this would be similarly farcical. [[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:09, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
:John Lennon's "Imagine" advocates atheism, and while it may be wrong in doing so, shockingly, it is quite a beautiful song. --[[User:FrederickT3|FrederickT3]] 09:06, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
:::Didn't John Lennon treat his girlfriends/wives and his son cruelly?[http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/item_CiGDOKXUtPlMvbNoopX1lN;jsessionid=9158CE06FE04328DD206807FA1E577BB][http://www.ahlanlive.com/john-lennon-angry-young-man--19524.html] I believe John Lennon had an ugly heart and Imagine was an ugly song which conspicuously failed to mention that atheists have been the world's biggest mass murders in history. (see: [[Atheism and mass murder]]). Instead, Lennon just engaged in unrealistic atheist utopian thinking which atheists have shown they have a penchant in doing (communism, etc. etc.). Now here is a collection of [[Essay: Beautiful Christian songs|Beautiful Christian songs]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:06, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
::::I agree with Conservative here. Imagine was an atrocious song. Also, note some of the things Lennon said about Jesus.--[[User:JamesWilson|James Wilson]] 11:14, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
:::::Also, please notice the title of the satire was "Beautiful <big>'''songs'''</big> written about atheism" as in more than one song. I do find it telling that no atheists could name 2 beautiful songs about atheism. [[Atheism is a religion|Atheism is an ugly religion]] with no beautiful songs and [[Essay: Great and inspiring art by atheists on atheism|no beautiful works of art.]] Plus, as [[Henny Youngman]] pointed out, atheism has no holidays. Atheism is a gloomy and [[Atheism|errant religion]] and its adherents have higher than average suicide rates (see: [[Atheism and suicide]]). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:35, 15 October 2011 (EDT)

: I don't know most of those songs, but I always thought Lennon's "God" was a totally nihilist song rather than anything about atheism. It includes the line "I don't believe in Beatles", for instance. [[User:RobertE|RobertE]] 15:59, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
::::I think you are mistaken about Johny Cash being an atheist. Second, it seems all of the songs merely whine about religion and none of them talk about the alleged beauty of atheism. Is that because atheism has no beauty? Is atheism a ugly duckling religion? Whining is not beautiful. A list of Christianity's most beautiful songs would not include a list of songs knocking Islam, atheism or Hinduism. Atheist Dan Barker belongs to some high IQ societies, including the Prometheus Society, which has an entrance requirement at the 99.997th percentile. From what I understand he wrote some Christian songs which were pretty good when he was a Christian. Yet, Dan Barker, the atheist boy genius, was unable to write a single atheist song which was good. All of Dan Barker's atheism songs were lousy songs which is very telling. The atheist community has a history of being: the greatest mass murders in history, a community with a higher suicide rate plus under its schema the universe burns out due to the second law of thermodynamics and ends in futility. In short, atheist song writers don't have anything to work with if they tried to write a song about the alleged beauty of atheism. Also, ''Wired Magazine'' said that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged male nerds. If you are looking for the next beautiful song amongst a group of song writers, a group of quarrelsome, socially challenged male nerds is probably not the best pool of song writers. By the way, anyone who would take the trouble to join a high IQ society and then brag about it is a nerd so it is not surprising that Dan Baker's atheist songs were all lousy songs. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:54, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
::An addendum, Mahalia Jackson's songs are very soulful and sincere songs are her vocal range which God blessed her with was remarkable as can be seen [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eiI52WluF0 HERE]. Let's face it, Dan Barker, the atheist genius, can't compete against Mahalia Jackson when it comes to beautiful songs. The race isn't even close.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:11, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
:::Your approach shows that you have a very strong connection to relativism conservative. --[[User:MeredithBr|MeredithBr]] 00:57, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
::::Meredith, I have noticed that atheists have a penchant for making claims without supporting them and your post to me is a continuation of this trend. All you have to do is provide me two beautiful songs which talk about the supposed beauty of atheism. Do you know of any upbeat and beautiful atheist songs which talk about all the suns burning out and the universe being lifeless due to the second law of thermodynamics? You might as well face it, there aren't any beautiful atheist songs. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Atheism is too filled with deceit, mass murder and quarrelsome nerdiness for their ever to be a beautiful song about atheism (see: [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Atheism and mass murder]] and [[Atheism and women|Atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged males]]). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:23, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
:::::By the way, I went to YouTube and looked up the song "Atheist peace" and there was nothing peaceful sounding or beautiful in that song. Plus, I checked out the AniDefranco song "What's if nobody's watching?" and it stunk. I then listed to the beginning of her song 32 flavors and it was much better. It seems as if atheists can't make a beautiful song about the ugly ideology of atheism which is not surprising. By the way, DiFranco couldn't have found atheism to be that beautiful because now she is an ex-atheist.[http://www.lyricsfreak.com/a/ani+difranco/biography.html] :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:40, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
::::Also, Gershin's song "It ain't necessarily so" was not beautiful. For example, when Cab Calloway sang the song "It ain't necessarily song" it wasn't half as good as his song "Minnie the Moocher". Let's face it. It is impossible to write a beautiful song about atheism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:51, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSgiXGELjbc This song is especially beautiful]. I am a Christian and find this extremely poetic. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:21, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
::I wonder how much [[Carl Sagan|reefer Carl Sagan smoked]] before coming up with that. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:39, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
:::None because a) he didn't come up with this song and b) he is dead. nonetheless this is clearly an atheist centered song about the universe and its wonder. Which I believe fits your definition. Whether or no you ''personally'' like the song is irreverent. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 21:09, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
The Barna Group found concerning [[atheism and morality]] that those who hold to the worldviews of '''atheism or agnosticism''' in America were more likely, than theists in America, to look upon the following behaviors as morally acceptable: '''illegal drug use'''; excessive drinking; sexual relationships outside of marriage; abortion; cohabitating with someone of opposite sex outside of marriage; obscene language; gambling; pornography and obscene sexual behavior; and engaging in homosexuality/bisexuality.[http://www.conservapedia.com/atheism] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:19, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
::::That's great but Sagan didn't write this - he is dead. And the point is this song, about the wonders of the universe is a beautiful song, this has nothing to do with the Barna Group. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 21:21, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
:::::As far as the United States, it really doesn't matter what you believe concerning this matter since very few atheists will hear this song in the future given that the [[Question evolution! campaign]] will CUT atheism [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbmAn3M8r0I by at least 50%] so atheism will go from being a squeak in society to merely being a half a squeak in society (and no doubt it will affect atheism in other countries as well). In addition, every day there are [[Global Christianity|300 less atheists in the world]] to hear a poorly done song about atheism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:38, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
::::::At least you agree that this is considered an atheists song and does have a beauty. As to the atheist population - not an issue for me so don't care. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 21:43, 16 October 2011 (EDT)

Oh, I can think of a few songs inspired by atheism:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhtBTgW0Gz4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2MpX2GhPZA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOHxHFjEu8A

[[User:ZetaSonic|ZetaSonic]] 15:39, 19 January 2013 (EST)

Talk:Essay: Beautiful songs written about atheism

2013-01-19T20:39:26Z

ZetaSonic:

I'm tempted to write an essay ''Beautiful crowns made for presidents'' - this would be similarly farcical. [[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 08:09, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
:John Lennon's "Imagine" advocates atheism, and while it may be wrong in doing so, shockingly, it is quite a beautiful song. --[[User:FrederickT3|FrederickT3]] 09:06, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
:::Didn't John Lennon treat his girlfriends/wives and his son cruelly?[http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/item_CiGDOKXUtPlMvbNoopX1lN;jsessionid=9158CE06FE04328DD206807FA1E577BB][http://www.ahlanlive.com/john-lennon-angry-young-man--19524.html] I believe John Lennon had an ugly heart and Imagine was an ugly song which conspicuously failed to mention that atheists have been the world's biggest mass murders in history. (see: [[Atheism and mass murder]]). Instead, Lennon just engaged in unrealistic atheist utopian thinking which atheists have shown they have a penchant in doing (communism, etc. etc.). Now here is a collection of [[Essay: Beautiful Christian songs|Beautiful Christian songs]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:06, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
::::I agree with Conservative here. Imagine was an atrocious song. Also, note some of the things Lennon said about Jesus.--[[User:JamesWilson|James Wilson]] 11:14, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
:::::Also, please notice the title of the satire was "Beautiful <big>'''songs'''</big> written about atheism" as in more than one song. I do find it telling that no atheists could name 2 beautiful songs about atheism. [[Atheism is a religion|Atheism is an ugly religion]] with no beautiful songs and [[Essay: Great and inspiring art by atheists on atheism|no beautiful works of art.]] Plus, as [[Henny Youngman]] pointed out, atheism has no holidays. Atheism is a gloomy and [[Atheism|errant religion]] and its adherents have higher than average suicide rates (see: [[Atheism and suicide]]). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 11:35, 15 October 2011 (EDT)

: I don't know most of those songs, but I always thought Lennon's "God" was a totally nihilist song rather than anything about atheism. It includes the line "I don't believe in Beatles", for instance. [[User:RobertE|RobertE]] 15:59, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
::::I think you are mistaken about Johny Cash being an atheist. Second, it seems all of the songs merely whine about religion and none of them talk about the alleged beauty of atheism. Is that because atheism has no beauty? Is atheism a ugly duckling religion? Whining is not beautiful. A list of Christianity's most beautiful songs would not include a list of songs knocking Islam, atheism or Hinduism. Atheist Dan Barker belongs to some high IQ societies, including the Prometheus Society, which has an entrance requirement at the 99.997th percentile. From what I understand he wrote some Christian songs which were pretty good when he was a Christian. Yet, Dan Barker, the atheist boy genius, was unable to write a single atheist song which was good. All of Dan Barker's atheism songs were lousy songs which is very telling. The atheist community has a history of being: the greatest mass murders in history, a community with a higher suicide rate plus under its schema the universe burns out due to the second law of thermodynamics and ends in futility. In short, atheist song writers don't have anything to work with if they tried to write a song about the alleged beauty of atheism. Also, ''Wired Magazine'' said that atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged male nerds. If you are looking for the next beautiful song amongst a group of song writers, a group of quarrelsome, socially challenged male nerds is probably not the best pool of song writers. By the way, anyone who would take the trouble to join a high IQ society and then brag about it is a nerd so it is not surprising that Dan Baker's atheist songs were all lousy songs. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:54, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
::An addendum, Mahalia Jackson's songs are very soulful and sincere songs are her vocal range which God blessed her with was remarkable as can be seen [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eiI52WluF0 HERE]. Let's face it, Dan Barker, the atheist genius, can't compete against Mahalia Jackson when it comes to beautiful songs. The race isn't even close.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:11, 15 October 2011 (EDT)
:::Your approach shows that you have a very strong connection to relativism conservative. --[[User:MeredithBr|MeredithBr]] 00:57, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
::::Meredith, I have noticed that atheists have a penchant for making claims without supporting them and your post to me is a continuation of this trend. All you have to do is provide me two beautiful songs which talk about the supposed beauty of atheism. Do you know of any upbeat and beautiful atheist songs which talk about all the suns burning out and the universe being lifeless due to the second law of thermodynamics? You might as well face it, there aren't any beautiful atheist songs. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Atheism is too filled with deceit, mass murder and quarrelsome nerdiness for their ever to be a beautiful song about atheism (see: [[Atheism and deception]] and [[Atheism and mass murder]] and [[Atheism and women|Atheists tend to be quarrelsome, socially challenged males]]). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:23, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
:::::By the way, I went to YouTube and looked up the song "Atheist peace" and there was nothing peaceful sounding or beautiful in that song. Plus, I checked out the AniDefranco song "What's if nobody's watching?" and it stunk. I then listed to the beginning of her song 32 flavors and it was much better. It seems as if atheists can't make a beautiful song about the ugly ideology of atheism which is not surprising. By the way, DiFranco couldn't have found atheism to be that beautiful because now she is an ex-atheist.[http://www.lyricsfreak.com/a/ani+difranco/biography.html] :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:40, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
::::Also, Gershin's song "It ain't necessarily so" was not beautiful. For example, when Cab Calloway sang the song "It ain't necessarily song" it wasn't half as good as his song "Minnie the Moocher". Let's face it. It is impossible to write a beautiful song about atheism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:51, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSgiXGELjbc This song is especially beautiful]. I am a Christian and find this extremely poetic. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:21, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
::I wonder how much [[Carl Sagan|reefer Carl Sagan smoked]] before coming up with that. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:39, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
:::None because a) he didn't come up with this song and b) he is dead. nonetheless this is clearly an atheist centered song about the universe and its wonder. Which I believe fits your definition. Whether or no you ''personally'' like the song is irreverent. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 21:09, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
The Barna Group found concerning [[atheism and morality]] that those who hold to the worldviews of '''atheism or agnosticism''' in America were more likely, than theists in America, to look upon the following behaviors as morally acceptable: '''illegal drug use'''; excessive drinking; sexual relationships outside of marriage; abortion; cohabitating with someone of opposite sex outside of marriage; obscene language; gambling; pornography and obscene sexual behavior; and engaging in homosexuality/bisexuality.[http://www.conservapedia.com/atheism] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:19, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
::::That's great but Sagan didn't write this - he is dead. And the point is this song, about the wonders of the universe is a beautiful song, this has nothing to do with the Barna Group. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 21:21, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
:::::As far as the United States, it really doesn't matter what you believe concerning this matter since very few atheists will hear this song in the future given that the [[Question evolution! campaign]] will CUT atheism [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbmAn3M8r0I by at least 50%] so atheism will go from being a squeak in society to merely being a half a squeak in society (and no doubt it will affect atheism in other countries as well). In addition, every day there are [[Global Christianity|300 less atheists in the world]] to hear a poorly done song about atheism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:38, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
::::::At least you agree that this is considered an atheists song and does have a beauty. As to the atheist population - not an issue for me so don't care. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 21:43, 16 October 2011 (EDT)

Oh, I can think of a few songs inspired by atheism:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhtBTgW0Gz4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2MpX2GhPZA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOHxHFjEu8A

[[User:ZetaSonic|ZetaSonic]] 15:39, 19 January 2013 (EST)

Talk:The Internationale

2013-01-19T20:33:02Z

ZetaSonic: Forgot the sig!

==Oh the irony!==

The fine-print is strong with this song! Let's observe...

''Stand up all victims of oppression,''
''for the tyrants fear your might'' -- As evidenced by all the uprisings that happened during the Lenin years and the Tienanmen Square massacre!

''"Don't cling so hard to your possessions,"'' -- For the state forbids private ownership!

''"Let racist ignorance be ended..."'' -- Didn't stop [[Karl Marx|Marx]], [[Friedrich Engels|Engels]], and [[Che Guevara|Che]] and their prejudices toward Blacks and Jews! (Notice that I left out Stalin and his Doctor's Plot! Done because some socialists want to distance themselves from him!)

''"Let no one build walls to divide us, walls of hatred or walls of stone,"'' -- Just ignore the [[Berlin Wall|Berlin Wall]], people! [[User:ZetaSonic|ZetaSonic]] 15:33, 19 January 2013 (EST)

Talk:The Internationale

2013-01-19T20:25:10Z

ZetaSonic: Created page with "==Oh the irony!== The fine-print is strong with this song! Let's observe... ''Stand up all victims of oppression,'' ''for the tyrants fear your might'' -- As evidenced by all t..."

Talk:Jack Chick

2013-01-18T23:26:54Z

ZetaSonic:

Love him, hate him...those tracts were ALWAYS the bestest. --[[User:Cracker|Cracker]][[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]] 23:01, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:I read my first one at a campground near Bar Harbor when I was a kid. I thought it was simultaneously cool and ridiculous. It was the Rapture one, where they declare One Church, the Pope is a tool of the Devil, and the little kid rats out his grandfather for being a Christian. Love love LOVE those things.--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 23:08, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

::I first came across them in high school when I was volunteering at a soup kitchen in Denver that was handing them out. They had the "this was your life" one, which isn't especially controversial. I didn't realize until later just how controversial some of his tracts are. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 23:09, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:::I was linked to one during a session of debate on IRC - we were making fun of the way he invaraiably shows pro-evolution teachers as wrinkly, old, crabby, irritable and aggressive. His tracts are highly entertaining, but I wouldn't think such shallow arguments make effective evangelism. He basicly just repeats 'Join us or go to hell' in different variations. - [[User:Suricou|Suricou]]

But that's the way it is! "I am the way, the truth and the life; no one comes to the Father but by me." Are you gonna call Jesus a liar? He's the Son of God!! '''Scorpion'''[[User_Talk:Scorpion|Vote for Pedro]] 16:10, 7 December 2007 (EST)

== Cool? ==

I saw a cool comment was made in regards to this guys work and I admit to being baffled. I think the guy is a crackpot but hey, this is America and he is entitled to his opinion, as long as he isn't inciting violence or a restriction of lifestyle against others. Wait, he probably is doing that.
--[[User:AGivenVoice|AGivenVoice]] 19:14, 31 July 2007 (EDT)

:Yeah, all fundamentalists are going to be viewed as such by intolerant liberals. I think this guy is right-on. If you don't accept Jesus alone as salvation, you're not going to be saved! It's pretty simple, it is. '''Scorpion'''[[User_Talk:Scorpion|Vote for Pedro]] 11:28, 4 December 2007 (EST)

::But Jesus Christ did not support legalism, which is what the pharisees, and this guy, believe in. I believe that homosexuality is wrong, but is that a reason to depict them burning? Win people over with love, not fear. [[User:Saksjn|Saksjn]] 20:21, 27 April 2008 (EDT)

:Perhaps I was a bit hasty in my radical acceptance of his views. I don't endorse the "Join me or go to hell and burn forever and ever!" evangelism (I don't even view hell as fire, see Tektonics' article [http://www.tektonics.org/uz/2muchshame.html here]. Plus he views the KJV as the "only" true version of the Bible, which is totally whacked-out! '''Scorpion'''[[User_Talk:Scorpion|Vote for Pedro]] 17:24, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

Chick and his tracts should concentrate on leading people to The Lord and less on his personal paranoias. I'm pretty sure when I'm in Heaven I'm going to see [[Sean Hannity]] (Catholic) and [[Ben Stein]] (Jewish) there
:How about Carrie Underwood? and why wouldn't Catholics go to Heaven?!?!?
[[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 14:29, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

Jack Chick says Catholics don't go to Heaven I say there will be Catholics that go to Heaven and there will be Jewish people that will go to Heaven. You're really angry I dont like Carrie Underwood huh? Sorry not everyone is a fan.--[[User:Jedisqrl|Jedisqrl]] 23:27, 7 June 2008 (EDT)

==Hmmm...==

I wonder if the lack of scholarship in these served as secondary sources for evangelical atheists.--[[User:ZetaSonic|ZetaSonic]] 18:26, 18 January 2013 (EST)

User talk:ZetaSonic

2013-01-04T07:23:03Z

ZetaSonic: /* A suggestion */

{{welcome}}

== A suggestion ==

I suggest you use <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to sign your posts. Signing your posts with different dates to the actual ones is frowned upon. [[User:Dvergne|Dvergne]] 21:46, 3 January 2013 (EST)

WHERE in the posts? [[User:ZetaSonic|ZetaSonic]] 02:22, 4 January 2013 (EST)

Oh, never mind. [[User:ZetaSonic|ZetaSonic]] 02:23, 4 January 2013 (EST)

User talk:ZetaSonic

2013-01-04T07:22:39Z

ZetaSonic: /* A suggestion */

User talk:ZetaSonic

2013-01-04T07:22:11Z

ZetaSonic: /* A suggestion */

{{welcome}}

== A suggestion ==

I suggest you use <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> to sign your posts. Signing your posts with different dates to the actual ones is frowned upon. [[User:Dvergne|Dvergne]] 21:46, 3 January 2013 (EST)

WHERE in the posts? [[User:ZetaSonic|ZetaSonic]] 02:22, 4 January 2013 (EST)[[User:ZetaSonic|ZetaSonic]] 02:21, 3 January 2013 (EST)

User talk:ZetaSonic

2013-01-04T07:21:43Z

ZetaSonic: /* A suggestion */

Talk:Bible Adventures

2013-01-03T02:14:08Z

ZetaSonic:

I'm going to make a couple of additings about the game cartrige and issues with NES.

Popular? Do you have any sales figures or similar to back this up? From what I have heard of the game, it's not that good as a game. I think the creators were so focused on getting the Christian message across, they forgot that a game is supposed to be fun. - NewCrusader
:This is true, the game was universally panned as a dreadful experience, not because it had a Christian message, but because it was simply a terrible game and no fun to play.--[[User:IanG|IanG]] 18:46, 22 October 2008 (EDT)

Who can forget Moses lifting five large animals at once? --[[User:ZetaSonic|ZetaSonic]] 18:46, 2 January 2013 (EST)

Talk:Big Think

2012-12-28T23:03:07Z

ZetaSonic: /* Bigthink on YouTube */

== Bigthink on YouTube ==

Is this the same one as the atheist propaganda organ on YouTube where they got Dawkins, Tyson, Jillette, and Krauss? [ZetaSonic|ZetaSonic] 18:01 12 December, 2012 (EST)

Talk:Big Think

2012-12-28T23:02:46Z

ZetaSonic: /* Bigthink on YouTube */

== Bigthink on YouTube ==

Is this the same one as the atheist propaganda organ on YouTube where they got Dawkins, Tyson, Jillette, and Krauss? ZetaSonic 18:01 12 December, 2012 (EST)

Talk:Big Think

2012-12-28T23:01:49Z

ZetaSonic: Created page with "== Bigthink on YouTube == Is this the same one as the atheist propaganda organ on YouTube where they got Dawkins, Tyson, Jillette, and Krauss? 18:01 12 December, 2012 (EST)"

== Bigthink on YouTube ==

Is this the same one as the atheist propaganda organ on YouTube where they got Dawkins, Tyson, Jillette, and Krauss? 18:01 12 December, 2012 (EST)