Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,795
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 16:
Line 16: − − == Open Letter == − − Sharon, I wrote you an open letter on RW! Feel free to reply! -AmesG − − :And meantime, they've continued to vandalize and add obscenities, and discussed on RW other new ways to add vandalism and obscenity. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. [[Image:User Fox.png]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] <small>([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])</small> 13:13, 20 June 2007 (EDT) − − == Open Letter == − − <center><small>original work by '''[[user:AmesG|AmesG]]'''</small></center> − − − <center>''A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by petty statesmen...''</center> − <center>''Whoso would be a Man must be a nonconformist...''</center> − <center>- Ralph Waldo Emerson</center> − − Dear SharonS, − − I saw the quote attributed to you in the LA Times today. Of course we knew instantly it was you; your interests are fairly unique, and we're not as dumb as we look. However, some of your statements saddened me. I would like to take the time to address what I feel are misconceptions about the RW and Conservapedia projects. I thank you, in advance, for your time in reading this. I write this only because I care about the education that you are receiving through Conservapedia, and as an American and a man of some education, there is nothing that I consider more important than the proper education of those younger than myself. − − '''I.''' − − First, I apologize for the vandalism attacks on Conservapedia. I can say categorically that I have no hand in them myself. I can also say that this site is not the launching point of the more recent or persistent ones. Certainly there is a small vandal group here, but that is not all this website is. As a smart person, I am sure you can see past that small facade into the rest of the goals of the project. − − '''II.''' − − Because it always bears repeating, I want to enumerate again the goals of this project and of the Conservapedia "resistance." We are not pushing an ideology. We are not pushing a world-view. We are not suppressing faith. We respect faith. However, we do not respect the use of ideology and shallow Biblical literalism to confine the world to a narrow frame of reference, ignoring all of the contrasts and questions that otherwise enrich life, and we do not respect the same shallow literalism, which also confines faith in too narrow a frame of reference. We will continue to spend our time resisting those evils. − − Here is the problem. At Conservapedia, you are getting one perspective, and one perspective only. Worse, you are being sectioned off from anything that might challenge you. You are isolated from controversy and told that, where debate exists, the answers have been solved in black and white in your favor. But the world is much more complicated than that: so little is black and white in the world, and most of the great questions of our day are shades of gray. And these shades are what make life compelling, and interesting. By shielding you from the shades of gray, and teaching you only one perspective, Mr. Schlafly is doing you a great disservice. For the mind to grow, it ''must'' be exposed to shades of gray. Not only are you not learning; you're also not learning ''how'' to learn! To become a full person, you must grapple with dissent, and all of the myriad complexity of the world, with full academic freedom. − − '''III.''' − − You said in your interview that RW seeks your destruction. We do not seek your destruction; rather, we seek your growth, and the growth of all of humanity through free academic discourse. But we are in favor of some forms of destruction. In brief, insofar as we seek the destruction of barriers to free learning, we do seek Conservapedia's destruction. Insofar as we seek the destruction of ideologies that discourage free thought, the exchange of ideas, and valuable learning (God's gift to Man), we do seek the destruction of Conservapedia. Insofar as we seek the destruction of groups that abuse religion to force a political agenda and keep their followers willfully blind to the world around themselves, we seek the destruction of Conservapedia. − − However, we do not seek the destruction of Christianity or Christian beliefs. Religion is a powerful force for good. When followed as God intends it, it impels the human spirit forwards to great heights of charity and grace. The truly devout and truly religious do great things in this world. However, ''no good is ever accomplished by suppressing independent thought, or by approaching the world from a narrow perspective which assumes the preferred outcome''. Rather, that is the great evil of all of human history. I will always encourage religion in its pure, unadulterated sense, but where religion goes too far - in seeking to control public policy or redefine science - religion harms those disciplines and itself. We at RW, as members of the scientific community of freethinking adults, seek to separate religion from science and politics not for the preservation of science and politics, and the hindrance of religion, but rather for the protection of ''religion, science, and politics'' jointly and severally. Only when the mind approaches the world free of religious agenda can the mind be free, and only when religion confines itself to the truly spiritual can it reach the levels of transcendence of which it is capable. − − '''IV.''' − − To conclude, I urge you to look beyond Conservapedia, and beyond what you have read before, and read what you have ''not''. I urge you to challenge yourself: pick up an "evolutionist" textbook, and wrestle with the text and the ideas it contains. Pick up a volume on Christian history, or a volume of early Christian theology, and see how St. Augustine of Hippo ''himself'' spoke against unifying religion and science. Read about other religions. Read about other countries, and other lifestyles. '''''Expand yourself'''', and see how you think of the world afterwards. If, after all is said and done, you remain firm in your convictions, then your convictions will be firmer for the testing. But if they have changed... − − '''V.''' − − Please feel free to write to any of us at RW. I can answer any questions you have about the law, society, Christian history, and ancient history. My e-mail is Ames@NYU.edu. Many other people are willing to help you, too. You have only to ask. We have nothing to hide. − − − − == Comments: == − − :*'''HAHAHAHAHAHA''' Thats a load of trash. I can count so many blatant lies its not even funny. If you want to know about their RW, talk to TK. He'll tell you what they're really about.[[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]] 20:23, 20 June 2007 (EDT) − − *Except for a few deletions made by management, and deleted from their database, (since at RW users are ''forced'' by the authoritarian management to keep everything put on their "talk" pages archived, or the abusive sysops there will do it) everyone is invited to see just how they actually deal with those who don't agree with them, in my own archives there on RW. ''In those archives you will see exactly what they think about Christians, Conservapedia, vandalism, and even the United States.'' when it isn't some prepackaged [[deceit|deceitful]] spiel from one of their most polished and erudite spokespersons. If anyone browses there, be sure to look into not only the talk pages, but the attached archives as well. It will be a learning experience, to be sure. I think there are many good people there. But make no mistake, the "leaders" there (and they claim to have none, but it is readily apparent who calls the shots) encourage a mobocracy that attacks users there who they don't agree with, with never-ending, pounding personal insults, and invective. If you fight back on their terms, they invent rules, make some retro-active, twist them in an attempt to silence you. --[[User:TK|<small>Sysop-</small>TK]] <sub>[[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]]</sub> 22:15, 20 June 2007 (EDT) − − ::I find the whole open letter thing to be incredibly patronizing too. "''Many other people are willing to help you, too.''" Like being rescued from a cult! Having said that, that's what I've seen them express in their discussion about this. They actually say that homeschooled kids here should be forcibly removed from their families!!! (To be re-educated Khmer Rouge style no doubt, that's their mentality.) [[Image:User Fox.png]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] <small>([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])</small> 22:23, 20 June 2007 (EDT) − :::The "forcibly remove children from their families" thing was the sickest, most depraved comment I have seen there yet. [[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]] 22:27, 20 June 2007 (EDT) − ::::Quote:"''the only hope for these kids is to be completely removed from their families somehow''" (compliments of user Myar). [[Image:User Fox.png]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] <small>([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])</small> 22:34, 20 June 2007 (EDT) − *I think we owe SharonS an apology for cluttering this page. [[User:Bohdan|Bohdan]] 22:36, 20 June 2007 (EDT)
talk page is one's castle here
:Wow! Your trip sounds like great fun. Any pictures you have would be great. ~ <font color="Turquoise">[[User:SharonS|Sharon]]<sup>[[User talk:SharonS|Talk]]</sup></font> 16:39, 19 June 2007 (EDT)
:Wow! Your trip sounds like great fun. Any pictures you have would be great. ~ <font color="Turquoise">[[User:SharonS|Sharon]]<sup>[[User talk:SharonS|Talk]]</sup></font> 16:39, 19 June 2007 (EDT)