Conservapedia

[Alleged_Alec]

I find it funny how some articles do not have any of these stupid things in them (WoW, DnD, stuff like that), but others are so full of them that it's just not funny any more.

Abortion and Breast Cancer

The vast majority of scientific studies have shown that abortion causes an increase in breast cancer, including 16 out of 17 statistically significant studies.[5] Studies showing that abortion increases breast cancer predate the political controversy.[6] It is undisputed that childbirth protects against breast cancer, and thus early termination of pregnancy must increase the risk of cancer for the mother compared to carrying that same pregnancy to birth. Yet the abortion industry conceals this increased risk, just as the tobacco industry concealed its cancer risk for decades.[7]

A liberal supports many of the following political positions and practices:
# Support of obscenity and pornography as a First Amendment right[4]
# Calling anyone they agree with a "professor" regardless of whether he earned that distinction based on a real peer review of his work (see, e.g., Richard Dawkins and Barack Obama).

http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Search?search=homosexuality&ns0=1&searchx=Search

Really, this site should be put down, and so should the people who've made it.

 

[Lord Krunk]

Really, this site should be put down, and so should the people who've made it.

No way.

Its even more hilarious than uncyclopedia!

 

[Jamanticus]

Does anyone else think that these people are fucked up

In short, yes... I've rarely felt sicker than when I read its article on evolution... Talk about a completely skewed argument that's been so twisted, it resembles a box of Arby's curly-fries

 

[Omnidum]

From what I've read, I don't even dare to click the links now.

 

[zirnitra]

for those who don't know. the people on websites like encyclopaedia dramatica and 4chan banded together to constantly vandalise conservipedia then send links to it to make the evil evil republicans seem even more evil. The weird thing is they very rarely edit it back.

did anyone else notice that when he was talking about how wikipedia started off with good intentions he had to fight with himself to stop himself going "until the foreigners and lie-berals came on and started killing it!"


I do love though how they said that Darwin's theory of evolution was not created by years of research but rather him having a 'psychiatric illness'

 

[smallharmlesskitten]

Top 10 pages for Wikipedia 2007

1- Main page
3- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
5- Guitar hero 3
6- The United States
8- Deaths in 2007
9 Heroes the TV series
10- Transformers the movie

Top 10 pages for conservapedia 2007

1- Main Page
2- Homosexuality
3- Homosexuality and Hepatitis
4- Homosexuality and Promiscuity
5- Homosexuality and Parasites
6- Homosexuality and gonorrhea
7- Homosexuality and domestic violence
8- gay bowel syndrome
9- Homosexuality and syphilis
10-Homosexuality and mental health

description of Bill Clintons presidency

Clinton was known for his positive and outspoken tolerance of Homosexuality

What in the name of the Cake is wrong with conservatives

 

[Jamanticus]

What in the name of the Cake is wrong with conservatives

I've gotta believe it's not all of them, mate... If it is, then I think I might move to Antarctica

 

[zirnitra]

haha! you should see their page on Richard Dawkins! I am genuinely surprised they did not photoshop on horns and give him red eyes.

 

[brenflood]

I've always been disturbed by the unwillingness of radical conservative Christians to hear (or allow their children to hear) ideas that disagree with their own.
Why is hearing a different idea such a bad thing? If God is truly a part of their lives, why would a dissenting view change any of that? I would think a scholarly argument about faith would only serve to strengthen ones convictions and bring him/her closer to God.
However certain radical Christians seem to have a fear of opinions that differ from their own. For example, the cinematic release of The Golden Compass caused quite a stir because of its Atheist author and Anti-church plot elements. Some radical Christians saw this movie as a sort of gateway drug into atheism. I can understand the idea that a young kid who likes the movie could potentially want to read the books, but still, the best gateway to Atheism is Catholic school or any other sort of private faith-based school.

I declare no allegiance to any particular religion, but my mind is open to the ideas each one has to offer, and such hateful crap like this even if edited by member of 4chan is just horrifying. The video still harshly condemned homosexuality. I just think content like that belongs in an encyclopedia unless the words "Radical Christian believe that" preface such hate.

 

[dalek sec]

haha! you should see their page on Richard Dawkins! I am genuinely surprised they did not photoshop on horns and give him red eyes.

Just give them time, they need to work in him eatting a baby too.

 

[smallharmlesskitten]

I wonder if they have an article on Spore or Porn

They DO!!!! for spore i mean haven't checked for porn yet

It has next to nothing....

lol Porn is the spawn of Satan

 

[dalek sec]

Well they do need time to create lies, generate false findings from studies and other such things.

 

[smallharmlesskitten]

true... true.... They will just take stuff from anti spore

 

[Lord Krunk]

Well, I was reading it, because it was comedy gold, but I've just gotten to the point where I can't take it any more.

That is one hell of a retarded site.

 

[dalek sec]

The thing that scares me the most about these freaks is they honestly believe in these lies so much.

 

[smallharmlesskitten]

can we scan peoples brains and exterminate them

 

[Alleged_Alec]

Gheghe, I just looked up the sims on it, and this is the (entire) article.

The Sims (ESRB rating: T) is a very popular life simulation game and a series made by EA Games and Maxis. It was the game that started the massive line of well known video games that is known all over the world today. It was surpassed in 2004 by the new version "The Sims 2" which comes with updated graphics, new items and much better things in general.

Unlike what the ratings suggest, the games allow players to indulge in immoral behavior, including homosexual sex, and allow homosexual couples to adopt children. It also contains polygamy, nudity, astrology as a religion and supports the belief that materialism leads to happiness.[1]

EDIT: Looked up diablo 2 after that.

Diablo II (ESRB rating: M) is a role-playing video game and successor of Diablo. It contains occultic and demonic imagery, extreme violence and gore.[1] The player assumes the role of one out of seven classes (the classes to choose are: Paladin, Rogue, Barbarian, Sorcerer and Necromancer, with Druid and Assassin added in the expansion pack) and fight against the forces of a Satan-like creature called Diablo--who despite his defeat in the previous game has returned--his brothers Baal and Mephisto, and their numerous minions and corrupted slaves. The game, despite its rather Biblical imagery in choice of enemies, is not set in a Biblical context, but a more Zoroastrian flavor.

So... The Sims is about as evil (or maybe even more so) then diablo 2?

 

[dalek sec]

can we scan peoples brains and exterminate them

We could use a creative mind like your's in the cult of skaro.

 

[smallharmlesskitten]

Ooooh shiny! a cult!

 

[smallharmlesskitten]

Apparently you can't be a liberal if you enjoy shooting