Changes

<br>Also, when you make assertions such as ''Liberalism and atheism have over the last few centuries done tremendous harm to humanity'', you'll have to prepare for [[tu quoque]] arguments from the opposition.  It's very easy to cite atheists and atheistic policies as a source of human misery, but you should know that liberals and atheist have an equally lengthy list.  To counter such arguments, you'd have to either establish a difference between your brand of Christianity from, say, Torquemada's, or attempt to justify any atrocities they accuse you of (I'd pick the first one).  You could also deny some of their accusations, but that may not sit well with people.  As an example, denying the various blood libels, or more particularly the ones motivated by purported miracles, would do no credit to your movement.  Let me be clear that the things you will be accused of will likely have nothing to do with you, and that you would never commit such acts in good conscience.  I am merely noting that an argument such as that will attract similar arguments against you.<br><br>

<br>Also, when you make assertions such as ''Liberalism and atheism have over the last few centuries done tremendous harm to humanity'', you'll have to prepare for [[tu quoque]] arguments from the opposition.  It's very easy to cite atheists and atheistic policies as a source of human misery, but you should know that liberals and atheist have an equally lengthy list.  To counter such arguments, you'd have to either establish a difference between your brand of Christianity from, say, Torquemada's, or attempt to justify any atrocities they accuse you of (I'd pick the first one).  You could also deny some of their accusations, but that may not sit well with people.  As an example, denying the various blood libels, or more particularly the ones motivated by purported miracles, would do no credit to your movement.  Let me be clear that the things you will be accused of will likely have nothing to do with you, and that you would never commit such acts in good conscience.  I am merely noting that an argument such as that will attract similar arguments against you.<br><br>

My great solution for Conservapedia would be to post liberal assertions and refute them.  That way, whenever someone inserts a liberal talking point into an article, another editor refutes that point.  Simply reverting such edits only arouses cries of "censorship!" and lends credence to the liberal world view.  Naturally, we do not want to fall victim to the balance fallacy, but we must also consider that on occasion opposing viewpoints may need to be taken seriously, if not for ourselves then for others to learn from.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 23:43, 24 May 2011 (EDT)

My great solution for Conservapedia would be to post liberal assertions and refute them.  That way, whenever someone inserts a liberal talking point into an article, another editor refutes that point.  Simply reverting such edits only arouses cries of "censorship!" and lends credence to the liberal world view.  Naturally, we do not want to fall victim to the balance fallacy, but we must also consider that on occasion opposing viewpoints may need to be taken seriously, if not for ourselves then for others to learn from.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 23:43, 24 May 2011 (EDT)

::Some great suggestions I've added one of your ideas to the list. [[User:JimmyRa|JimmyRa]] 23:59, 24 May 2011 (EDT)

::Some great suggestions, I've added one of your ideas to the list. [[User:JimmyRa|JimmyRa]] 23:59, 24 May 2011 (EDT)