Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎Liberal Deceit: unsigned and reply
Line 85: Line 85:  
: {{unsigned|Mcai9mh3}}
 
: {{unsigned|Mcai9mh3}}
 
: It was designed to mock creationism, not dogmatism.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 20:42, 23 January 2008 (EST)
 
: It was designed to mock creationism, not dogmatism.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 20:42, 23 January 2008 (EST)
:: It was designed to mock beleif in particular gods, not specifically creationism. My point is that it does not ridicule beleif in a creator, just what non-theists consider 'man-made' religions. Therefore, it is not inherintly atheist.
+
:: It was designed to mock beleif in particular gods, not specifically creationism. My point is that it does not ridicule beleif in a creator, just what non-theists consider 'man-made' religions. Therefore, it is not inherintly atheist. {{unsigned|Mcai9mh3}}
 +
::: It was designed, as the article indicates, as a response to the decision to allow teaching of Intelligent Design in Kansas.  In the minds of anti-ID people, ID is creationism.  Therefore, it was designed to mock ID and creationism.  It does ridicule belief in a creator, by implying that believing in God is equivalent to believing in the spaghetti monster.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 20:51, 24 January 2008 (EST)
    
:It's fine if you believe it, but this is an encyclopedia not an op ed section. The [[Conservapedia:Commandments|Comandments]] state "Everything you post must be true and verifiable" and "Always cite and give credit to your sources" and "Do not post personal opinion on an encyclopedia entry."
 
:It's fine if you believe it, but this is an encyclopedia not an op ed section. The [[Conservapedia:Commandments|Comandments]] state "Everything you post must be true and verifiable" and "Always cite and give credit to your sources" and "Do not post personal opinion on an encyclopedia entry."
nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254

edits

Navigation menu