Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
no edit summary
Line 77: Line 77:  
:::Cracker, the two are ever so slightly different... I can't tell from your sarcasm whose side you're on :-).
 
:::Cracker, the two are ever so slightly different... I can't tell from your sarcasm whose side you're on :-).
 
:::Also, JC, the purpose of Conservapedia is not to be biased towards Christianity: it's to allow Christians to air their views ''on equal footing'' with other views.  Am I right?  Teach the controversy?--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 17:08, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
 
:::Also, JC, the purpose of Conservapedia is not to be biased towards Christianity: it's to allow Christians to air their views ''on equal footing'' with other views.  Am I right?  Teach the controversy?--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 17:08, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
−
 
+
::::One of the things that bother me about this site is that the articles don't define what the subject ''is'' so much as getting straight to the refutation about why it's ''wrong''. And yes, AmesG, I do understand the difference bewtixt alchemical and nuclear transmutation.
 
::Exactly. Leave the Christian views on an ''equal footing'' as they are.
 
::Exactly. Leave the Christian views on an ''equal footing'' as they are.
 
::[[User:JC|JC]] 17:19, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
 
::[[User:JC|JC]] 17:19, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
412

edits

Navigation menu