Changes

::Let's see... after reading [[Homosexuality]], I'd like to know more about [[anal sex]] (which is mentioned in the former article). Whoops, no luck on Conservapedia. Let's try Google. The top three results are: Wikipedia's entry, "AskMen.com - Anal Sex" (description: "Anal Sex- The best and worst parts about lovemaking from behind.") and "Anal Sex Porn Links < PenisBot" (description: "Quality Anal Sex porn links, Anal Sex pictures, videos and stories."). Hmmmmmmmmm... yes, that's ''much'' better than a stub here about what anal sex is all about.

::Let's see... after reading [[Homosexuality]], I'd like to know more about [[anal sex]] (which is mentioned in the former article). Whoops, no luck on Conservapedia. Let's try Google. The top three results are: Wikipedia's entry, "AskMen.com - Anal Sex" (description: "Anal Sex- The best and worst parts about lovemaking from behind.") and "Anal Sex Porn Links < PenisBot" (description: "Quality Anal Sex porn links, Anal Sex pictures, videos and stories."). Hmmmmmmmmm... yes, that's ''much'' better than a stub here about what anal sex is all about.

::Conservapedia is a filter. I think we can agree on that. You don't want your visitors to be exposed to certain things. That's why I think that it's strategically dumb to link people to a place on Wikipedia from which they can easily access things you don't want them to be exposed to. It's like saying "Hey, don't think about [insert gross mental image here]!" - it will have the opposite result. And if you want your filter (and thus, your encyclopedia) to be complete (meaning that people don't leave your site to look things up), you should include those things here - in an environment in which you have control over what they see. If you say "I won't tell you about this", people will look for the information elsewhere. They won't say "Oh, Mr. Schlafly doesn't want me to learn anything about this, so I'll just stay here and forget about it". --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 14:48, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

::Conservapedia is a filter. I think we can agree on that. You don't want your visitors to be exposed to certain things. That's why I think that it's strategically dumb to link people to a place on Wikipedia from which they can easily access things you don't want them to be exposed to. It's like saying "Hey, don't think about [insert gross mental image here]!" - it will have the opposite result. And if you want your filter (and thus, your encyclopedia) to be complete (meaning that people don't leave your site to look things up), you should include those things here - in an environment in which you have control over what they see. If you say "I won't tell you about this", people will look for the information elsewhere. They won't say "Oh, Mr. Schlafly doesn't want me to learn anything about this, so I'll just stay here and forget about it". --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 14:48, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

::I sorta hope for humor's sake someone goes to look up goatse.  But on a serious note, I'll agree with Sid's points.  By mentioning that wikipedia has such content, pandora's box was opened and now curious people will go look for the info.  You have much more control over what people can learn/read if you hold the information here, what they'll learn elsewhere is unknown. [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 14:58, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:::I sorta hope for humor's sake someone goes to look up goatse.  But on a serious note, I'll agree with Sid's points.  By mentioning that wikipedia has such content, pandora's box was opened and now curious people will go look for the info.  You have much more control over what people can learn/read if you hold the information here, what they'll learn elsewhere is unknown. [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 14:58, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

: More generally, the above two comments by people who I assume are liberals are enlightening.  They use conservative arguments to oppose exposing a liberal project!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:06, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

: More generally, the above two comments by people who I assume are liberals are enlightening.  They use conservative arguments to oppose exposing a liberal project!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:06, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

::Like I said above: I don't have anything against that stuff myself (I find most of it enlightening and/or entertaining) - I just find it hilarious that ''you'' point at it with a giant arrow that reads "SEX STUFF HERE". --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 14:48, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

::Like I said above: I don't have anything against that stuff myself (I find most of it enlightening and/or entertaining) - I just find it hilarious that ''you'' point at it with a giant arrow that reads "SEX STUFF HERE". --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 14:48, 2 April 2007 (EDT)