Talk:Atheism/archive14

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Atheism Quotes section

The majority, if not all, of these quotes are anti-atheist. To reduce bias, shouldn't we have an even amount of pro and anti-athiest quotes? Or have I misinterpreted the point of this encyclopaedia? FriendofaFriend 09:42, 23 June 2009 (EDT)

  • Yes, you have misinterpreted. We are not "NPOV". Perhaps your somehow missed that this is a conservative and Christian friendly encyclopedia? Anything out of the mouth of an atheist is a lie, surely you know that? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 10:52, 23 June 2009 (EDT)
Why is it called The Trustworthy Encyclopedia then? It only caters to Christians and within that group of people, Conservatives. So it's useless for anyone that's not conservative and not a Christian.
Friendofafriend, you haven't shown that authors of the Conservapedia atheism article have an inclination which prevented an unprejudiced consideration of the invalidity of atheism.[1] I also suggest you read this essay: Bulverism conservative 13:15, 23 June 2009 (EDT)
Whoa, alright. I totally understand Conservapedia is a Christian and conservative friendly encyclopedia site, it is very honest and straightforward about this fact. However, do you honestly believe all

atheists say nothing but lies? Or was that just hyperbole? BMcP 15:27, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

I found this entire article, but this section particularly to be downright insulting. I understand that your point of view is that atheists are all sadly mistaken, but is there any chance this section could be toned down as far as blatant hatred is concerned? EDT 9 August 2009 Neostorm

A biased conservative arguing with a student about how Wikipedia is all lies and it's okay to be biased after you claim your not and slander those who actually aren't

I'd like to point out the irony that the atheism page is longer than the Christianity page. Spending more time slandering the opposing religion rather than supporting your own, especially in such a blatant mannor, is extremely childish. Also, it's extremely biased and shortsighted to say everything out of the mouth of an athiest is a lie. They choose not to believe in God, and that is the only difference between them and anyone else on the planet. Athiests don't go around spreading lies and complaining about religion, they simply prefer to trust science instead of God. Are you trying to say science is a lie? Is it not possible that someone can believe something other than you divine as the only truth? And isn't Christianity supposed to support love and understanding? Correct me if I misunderstand something.

Nothing on this site is unbiased. You didn't 'consider the invalidity of atheism', you flat-out said it was wrong, and proceeded to give examples. An unprejiduced consideration would present both sides of the argument equally. At least Wikipedia gives real facts and doesn't show a preference to any side. You pick and choose facts that will make your own point of view seem true. I'm ashamed of whoever calls this site unbiased and fair, they obviously choose to remain ignorant of all other opinions and truths besides their own. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wiki4life (talk) --- 08:59, 24 June 2009

  • Given your ignorance of this encyclopedia project, you are obviously the product of Public Schools, unable to ground yourself in facts, but instead always going with your "feelings" Wiki4lies. We don't claim No Point Of View, we are a factual conservative/Christian friendly encyclopedia. We do have a POV, and unlike Wikipedia which claims NPOV and doesn't live up to it, we are not run by the liberal "Mobocracy" herd of sheep. If you had bothered to read about us, rather than just post the typical liberal clap trap, you would have known that. We are biased in favor of Jesus Christ, and that kind of "bias" is completely fair. Open your mind to the truths you have been taught to ignore, and it will truly set you free! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 16:11, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

I don't always go with my 'feelings'. Actually, that's a pretty bad argument, considering most religion isn't grounded in facts, it's more belief and your so-called 'feelings'. I'm not liberal, but I am Christian. I believe in God and Jesus Christ. I have not been taught to ignore anything; I am well-versed in both science and religion. There is nothing wrong with being biased in favor of Jesus Christ, but it's intolerable to be biased against raw fact. You have a problem against Wikipedia because it does favor your point of view; rather, it favors actual fact. You cannot blame it for making a mistake, like 1889 instead 1989 (I have no idea if this is an actual error or not), considering it is edited freely by anyone, and especially since you have such blatant errors yourself. I do go to public school, and I don't think they've taught me anything but humanities, English, French, and the most basic science you can possibly imagine. Excuse me for having beliefs. You seem so ready to defend yours, and yet you cannot bear anyone else to believe anything else. - wiki4life

Considering you threw out the charge of slander and made other charges as well, I do find it rather humorous that you did not point out one factual error in the Conservapedia article. Please do not expect to be taken seriously. conservative 21:54, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

I didn't throw out any claims. Everything I said still stands, I just didn't feel the need to repeat myself. You're one to talk about being taken seriously, considering no one except more biased conservative Christians would take this site or you seriously.

People take this site seriously because it is committed to ending liberal bias in the media. You cannot claim that Wikipedia 'gives real facts' and then explain moments later that it has many errors due to user ignorance. This is nonsensical. I am personally delighted to see that the Atheism page is longer than the Christianity page. Right-thinking people are already sound in their knowledge of the Lord and do not necessarily require a raft of further information. Thanks to public schools, media bias and professor values, many good Christians are unaware of the immense threat presented by the Atheist agenda in action. CP's article is therefore apposite; I would suggest that it is not yet long enough! EnglishBob 20:15, 6 July 2009 (CDT)
Wiki4life, you misspelled the word atheist. conservative 23:50, 27 July 2009 (EDT)