Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
20,682
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 122:
Line 122: + + +
Debate:Is Conservapedia fair and balanced? (view source)
Revision as of 04:03, May 6, 2007
, 04:03, May 6, 2007→No
Okay, I'm a Homeschooler (Well, I was, I'm in college now) and a Christian, and I see this as biased. I mean, I see both as biased in they're own way (Conservapedia and Wikipedia). If there is a theory of evolution on here, the creationism should be also viewed as theory or such. "Religious doctrine" as on wikipedia. And again, with what a few people have said, you need BOTH sides of an argument. If you made this due to the left-wing bias (I refrain from saying Anti-American, Anti-Christian because it's down right silly), then don't show right-wing bias, give us neutrality.
Okay, I'm a Homeschooler (Well, I was, I'm in college now) and a Christian, and I see this as biased. I mean, I see both as biased in they're own way (Conservapedia and Wikipedia). If there is a theory of evolution on here, the creationism should be also viewed as theory or such. "Religious doctrine" as on wikipedia. And again, with what a few people have said, you need BOTH sides of an argument. If you made this due to the left-wing bias (I refrain from saying Anti-American, Anti-Christian because it's down right silly), then don't show right-wing bias, give us neutrality.
Truth is the only thing that matters. I read all the dissenting arguements; Wikipedia is not this or not that. Wikipedia has a diversity of contributors. If wikipedia is liberal it must be based on reality. Give me a break. Thats is all fluff, if the article misrepresents the truth what do you actually learn. I see Conservapedia as striving for truth in everything. The same can't be said of others that place their agenda first.--[[User:Jpatt|jp]] 00:03, 6 May 2007 (EDT)