Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Homosexual Agenda

2012-01-12T06:57:52Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

{{Homosexuality}}
The '''Homosexual Agenda''', or [[Homosexuality|homosexual]] ideology, consists of a set of beliefs and objectives designed to promote and even mandate acceptance and approval of homosexuality, and the strategies used to implement such. This article notes that the goals and means of this movement include indoctrinating students in [[public school]], restricting the free speech of opposition, obtaining [[special rights|special treatment]] for homosexuals, distorting Biblical teaching and science, and interfering with freedom of association. Advocates of the homosexual agenda seek special rights for [[homosexuals]] that other people don't have, such as immunity from criticism (see [[hate speech]], [[hate crime]]s). Such special rights will necessarily come [[zero-sum game|at the expense]] of the rights of broader society.

Among all the [[liberal]] belief systems, the homosexual ideology is the most self-centered or selfish.

Supreme Court Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] referred to the "so-called homosexual agenda" in ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'', 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (dissenting opinion).

== The Homosexual Agenda ==

Joseph P. Gudel, in ''That Which is Unnatural''<ref>[http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/web/crj0108a.html "That Which is Unnatural" Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture] Part Two in a Two-Part Series on Homosexuality, from the Christian Research Journal, Winter 1993, page 8</ref> contended that the homosexual movement,

:has been militantly demanding not just the homosexuals' right to do whatever they wish to do behind closed doors, but, more importantly, that society fully accept their lifestyle as both healthy and normal, even demanding special rights and legislation as an "oppressed minority." Gudel quotes various sources evidencing this.

In a 1987 speech to the National Press Club in Washington, homosexual spokesperson Jeff Levi proclaimed,

:We are no longer seeking just a right to privacy and a protection from wrong. We also have a right — as heterosexual Americans already have — to see government and society affirm our lives. <ref>Jeff Levi, in William Dannemeyer, Shadow in the Land (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989), 86.</ref>

In an article entitled "Gays on the March" in 1975, Time magazine quoted gay activist Barbara Gittings who stated:

:What the homosexual wants, and here he is neither willing to compromise nor morally required to compromise — is acceptance of homosexuality as a way of life fully on a par with heterosexuality." In response, Time opined, "It is one thing to remove legal discrimination against homosexuals. It is another to mandate approval....It is this goal of full acceptance, which no known society past or present has granted to homosexuals, that makes many Americans apprehensive.<ref>Gays on the March," Time, 8 Sept. 1975, 43</ref>

A primary goal of the homosexual agenda is to promote the lifestyle in [[public schools]]. This occurred quickly and intensely after gay marriage was imposed in Massachusetts, where homosexual relationships are taught to children as young as kindergartners, as recounted by the decision of ''[[Parker v. Hurley]]''.<ref>The ''Parker v. Hurley'' decision explained, "In January 2005, when Jacob Parker ("Jacob") was in kindergarten, he brought home a 'Diversity Book Bag.' This included a picture book, Who's in a Family?, which depicted different families, including single-parent families, an extended family, interracial families, animal families, a family without children, and — to the concern of the Parkers — a family with two dads and a family with two moms. The book concludes by answering the question, 'Who's in a family?': 'The people who love you the most!' The book says nothing about marriage."</ref>

In a 1992 report by John Leo in U.S. News and World Report, he notes some books which were part of New York City's public school curriculum.

The first-grade book, "Children of the Rainbow", stated on page 145, which states that teachers must "be aware of varied family structures, including...gay or lesbian parents," and "children must be taught to acknowledge the positive aspects of each type of household." Another children book is Heather Has Two Mommies, which is about a lesbian couple having a child through artificial insemination. Another book, Gloria Goes to Gay Pride, states, "Some women love women, some men love men, some women and men love each other. That's why we march in the parade, so everyone can have a choice."

Leo commented,

:A line is being crossed here; in fact, a brand new ethic is descending upon the city's public school system. The traditional civic virtue of tolerance (if gays want to live together, it's their own business) has been replaced with a new ethic requiring approval and endorsement (if gays want to live together, we must 'acknowledge the positive aspects' of their way of life).<ref>John Leo, "Heather Has a Message," U.S. News & World Report, 17 Aug. 1992, 16.</ref>

Dr. Judith A. Reisman in her extensive ''Crafting “Gay” Children'',<ref>http://www.defendthefamily.com/_docs/resources/6390601.pdf</ref> reports that Harvard homosexual Toby Morotta, PhD, stated that in the 1970s, members of the Gay Activists Alliance - who were trained in the “zapping" of any who rebuffed homosexuality.<ref> Toby Marotta: THE POLITICS OF HOMOSEXUALITY: HOW LESBIANS AND GAY MEN HAVE MADE THEMSELVES A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL FORCE IN MODERN AMERICA, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1981 at 319</ref> And that these formed the “Gay Academic Union,” (GAU) which was made up of faculty and students in major universities. She states that the GAU has long fought for domination of its worldview within the academic community, and professional journals commonly assigned GAU and other homosexual peer reviewers to research touching on homosexuality, generally resulting in a quick death to possible unfavorable findings. <ref>See extensive reports in regular NARTH Bulletins as well as Ray Johnson, “American Psychology: The Political Science, at 53-57.</ref>

This and the general agenda is seen to be overall implementing a marketing strategy explained in a book called ''After the Ball,'' by [[gay rights]] activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in the late 1980s, in which a six-point plan was set forth as to how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior in a decade-long time frame:
:"The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior." <ref name="Winn07252003">''After the Ball'' (1989), quoted from Winn, Pete (7-25-2003) [ ''Q&A: The Homosexual Agenda''] Citizenlink</ref> "Thus propagandistic advertising can depict all opponents of the gay movement as homophobic bigots who are 'not Christian' and the propaganda can further show them [homosexuals]] as being criticized, hated and shunned..."<ref>After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's, by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen (Author) (p. 152-153)</ref>

[[Focus on the Family]] provides additional quotes from After the Ball, outlining key points of the homosexual agenda:<ref name="Winn07252003"/><ref>Kirk, Marshall K. and Erastes Pill (11-1987) ''The Overhauling of Straight America'' Available at [http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/overhauling.htm ''STRATEGIES OF THE HOMOSEXUAL MOVEMENT: "The Overhauling of Straight America"'']</ref>

#"Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible." (They use late night air waves and special channels, as well as their right to peacefully assemble to do so.)
#"Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers."
#"Give homosexual protectors a just cause."
#"Make gays look good."
#"Make the victimizers look bad."
#"Get funds from corporate America."

[[United States Supreme Court]] Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] wrote:
{{cquote|Today's opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.<ref>[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=02-102#dissent1 ''LAWRENCE et al. v. TEXAS''] at findlaw.com</ref>}}

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vic_Eliason Vic Eliason] of [http://www.crosstalkamerica.com Crosstalk America] rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies.

== Specific goals ==

The goals of the homosexual movement include:

#Ignoring Christian morals and discouraging religiously based laws.
#Reminding the world that marriage is a legal term and standing the in US, not a spiritual one as believed by Christians.
#Ignore the clear message of the [[Bible]] that [[homosexuality]] is a sin and an abomination unto [[God]] because their first amendment rights allow them to.
#Remind conservatives that there cannot be a gay gene, just like like there cannot be a "black gene" because complex things like these are caused by complex interactions between genes.
#Censoring evidence that the "gay gene" is a hoax. After all, it would have to be multiple genes interacting together.<ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08a/born_gay_hoax/smith_0329/index.html ''Lesbian activists at Smith College riot, shut down Ryan Sorba speech on "The Born Gay Hoax" as police watch. See exclusive videos.''] Mass Resistance</ref>
#Censoring speech against homosexuality by branding it to possibly be "hate-speech"<ref>[http://www.silencingchristians.com Video:Silencing Christians]</ref><ref>[http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2009/06/homosexuality-its-crime-in-england-to.html Homosexuality: It’s a Crime in England to State Christian Views]</ref><ref>[http://www.ccfon.org/view.php?id=745 Bishops fight for right to criticize homosexual lifestyle, 25th May 2009]</ref>
#Censoring biblical statements condemning homosexuality<ref>White, Hilary (04-21-2006) [http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06042105.html ''Court Upholds School Ban on "Homosexuality is Shameful" T-Shirt''] LifeSiteNews.com</ref>
#Lobbying for equal employment rights.<ref>The Crimson Staff (10-13-2006) [http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=514950 ''A Box of Their Own?''] (opinion) The Crimson</ref><ref>www.afa.net, Homosexual Agenda Platforms from 1972 - 2000</ref>
#Expand hate crimes legislation to include sexual orientation, which would be equally wrong for heterosexuals to do.<ref>Pelosi, Nancy Office of (09-28-2004) [http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/Sept04/HateCrimes092804.html ''Pelosi: "Hate Crimes Prevention Legislation is Right Thing to Do, Long Overdue"''] From the office of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi</ref>
#Ending the military's and Boy Scout's restrictions on homosexuality<ref>''Boy Scouts of Am. v. Dale'', 530 U.S. 640 (2000) (Boy Scouts); "Matlovich v. Secretary of the Air Force (591 F.2d 852, DC Circ. 1 978) (military)</ref>
#Stopping children as young as 5 years old from attending therapy to repair their sexual preference<ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/reports_and_research/youth_in_the_crosshairs National Gay and Lesbian Task Force:Youth in the Crosshairs]</ref>
#Teach tolerance of homosexuals in schools.
#In places like Massachusetts and California, where the gay lobby is the strongest, it starts as early as preschool. They tell seven- or eight-year-old boys, "If you only like boys, there's a chance you may be homosexual," or "If you only like girls, maybe you are lesbian." Children at that age also do not have the hormones to experience sexual attraction, so they cannot understand this yet.
#Demands protections from job discrimination. <ref>[http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/nondiscrimination/ENDA_main_page Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) | National Gay and Lesbian Task Force</ref>
#Suing an online dating website for discrimination. This was because sexual orientation is a federally protected group, as such, this company was breaking the law. <ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,454904,00.html Fox News - eHarmony to Provide Gay Dating Service after Lawsuit]</ref>
#Undermining the [[Essay:Quantifying_Mental_Strength|resolve]] of [[Homosexuality_and_choice#Choice_and_Genetics|latent homosexuals]] so that their will becomes too weak to resist the temptations of homosexuality<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/activist_center/resources_and_tools/challenge_exgay</ref>
#Pushing for legalized adoption by gay individuals and couples<ref>http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/parenting_and_family</ref>

The state-by-state push for same-sex marriage can be viewed as a means to the above goals, or a goal in itself.<ref>[[Lewis v. Harris]]</ref> An example of this would be the recent New Hampshire law that makes same-sex civil unions legal.<ref>http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/06/01/new_hampshire_law_makes_same_sex_civil_unions_legal/</ref>

Although notable gains toward achieving its goals continue to manifest, homosexual activists have recently been expressing a high level of dissatisfaction with the Obama administration. Commenting on such, Massresistance.org, an organization which opposes the homosexual agenda in [[Massachusetts]], noted that the President has,

TROLLsigned an order extending federal benefits to same-sex partners.

TROLLpushed an extreme hate crimes bill in Congress.

TROLLdeclared his intention to repeal the Defense of Marriage.

TROLLpushed a pro-homosexual and transgender version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

TROLLappointed homosexual activists to high level positions, including Harry Knox, of the homosexual lobby group Human Rights Campaign, and Kevin Jennings, founder of the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which educates kids in the public schools.

TROLLdeclared February to be "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month."

TROLLDemanded the State Department allow gay couples to use their married names (from marriages or civil unions) on US passports.<ref>update@massresistance.org 6/24/2009 11:56 PM</ref>

=== Strategies and psychological tactics ===

Homosexual activists are often seen as engaging in [[homosexual logic|specious argumentation]], such as attempts to controvert the consistent teaching of the Bible on homosexual relations (see [[homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]), and using false analogies, in order to gain acceptance of homosexuality. One common argument used by homosexual activists seeks to compare their quest for equal rights to that of others.<ref>Miner, Homosexuality, Civil Rights, and the Church</ref> This argument is countered by the observation that blacks were able to peacefully argue that mankind should not be "judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character"<ref>[http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm, Speech by Martin Luther King Jr.]</ref>, as the former yields no certain moral distinction. In contrast, homosexual activists seek acceptance of an immoral practice(s), and in addition, engage in certain coercive and manipulative means to do so. This includes the use of demonstrative protests, which appear to be designed to censure and intimidate those who oppose them in any way.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/socialsciences/sellinghomosexuality.html</ref><ref>http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.htm</ref><ref>http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89526</ref><ref>http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08c/Prop8/church_attacks.html</ref><ref>http://rebuildtheparty.ning.com/video/exodus-protest-park-street</ref><ref>http://theway2k.vox.com/library/post/homosexuals-persecuting-christians-and-mormons.html</ref><ref>http://www.hamiltonsquare.net/articlesRiotsSep1993.htm</ref><ref>http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/may/08050205.html</ref><ref>http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95296</ref><ref>Muehlenberg, Bill, [http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2009/06/04/another-nail-in-the-christian-coffin/ Another Nail in the Christian Coffin], [[4 June]] [[2009]]</ref><ref>[http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09a/feder_0311/index.html Loud homosexual activists disrupt and halt Don Feder speech at UMass Amherst, despite police presence"]</ref> In addition, one pro-homosexual commentator recently took the homosexual community to task for being racist in their practice of homosexuality.<ref>LZ Granderson, ''Commentary: Gay is not the new black'', Cable News Network,July 16, 2009</ref>

While not all homosexuals agree with the use of deceptive psychological tactics, these have been promoted by leading homosexual activists. The aforementioned book, ''After the Ball'', is widely regarded as the handbook for the gay agenda, in which Harvard-trained marketing experts and social scientists Marshall Kirk (1957 - 2005) and Hunter Madsen advocated avoiding portraying gays as aggressive challengers, but as victims, while making those who opposed them as evil persecutors. As a means of the latter, they promoted jamming, in which Christians, traditionalists, or anyone else who opposes the gay agenda are publicly smeared. In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector. The purpose of victim imagery is to make straight people feel very uncomfortable, they suggested.

Jamming homophobia (disagreement with homosexual behaviors) by linking it to Nazi horror was the strategy of Kirk and Madsen. Associate all who oppose homosexuality with images of Klansmen demanding that gays be slaughtered, hysterical backwoods preachers, menacing punks, and a tour of Nazi concentration camps where homosexuals were tortured and gassed. Thus, "propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths..."<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/socialsciences/sellinghomosexuality.html http://www.article8.org/docs/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.htm </ref>

Kirk and Madsen's open admission of their deceptive tactics is noted as most revealing: [O]ur effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof. "...the person's beliefs can be altered whether he is conscious of the attack or not"<ref>After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s, p. 152-153 (1989, Doubleday/Bantam)</ref> “The campaign we outline in this book, though complex, depends centrally upon a program of unabashed propaganda, firmly grounded in long-established principles of psychology and advertising.”<ref>Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.xxvi</ref><ref>[http://banap.net/ Behavior and Not a Person]</ref>

Similarly, author Robert Bauman additionally records: "It makes no difference that the ads are lies... because were using them to ethically good effect, to counter negative stereotypes that are every bit as much lies, and far more wicked ones."<ref>The Gentleman from Maryland: The Conscience of a gay Conservative, by Robert Bauman, 1986, page 163.</ref>

The need for Kirk and Madsen to engage in such manipulation may be seen as being due to their sober realization of the nature of the homosexual lifestyle.

“In short, the gay lifestyle - if such a chaos can, after all, legitimately be called a lifestyle - it just doesn’t work: it doesn’t serve the two functions for which all social framework evolve: to constrain people’s natural impulses to behave badly and to meet their natural needs. While it’s impossible to provide an exhaustive analytic list of all the root causes and aggravants of this failure, we can asseverate at least some of the major causes. Many have been dissected, above, as elements of the Ten Misbehaviors; it only remains to discuss the failure of the gay community to provide a viable alternative to the heterosexual family.”<ref>Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay’s in the 90s, p.363</ref>

Marshall Kirk died in 2005 at the age of 48. The cause of death has not been publicly revealed.

Often cited as an early example of such tactics was the role of homosexual activists in persuading the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders (DSM-II). Dr. Ronald Bayer, though being himself a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, described this removal as being the result of power politics, threats, and intimidation, rather than any new scientific discoveries.<ref>[http://www.traditionalvalues.org/urban/eleven.php Exposed: The Myth That Psychiatry Has Proven That Homosexual Behavior Is Normal]</ref> In so doing, like slavery before it, the homosexual agenda is seen to threaten basic freedoms, principally the First Amendment.<ref>Adams, Guy (11-8-2008) [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mormon-stars-face-backlash-after-gay-marriage-ban-1003967.html ''Mormon stars face backlash after gay marriage ban''] The Independent</ref>

The charge of [[homophobia]] has also been increasingly evidenced as being part of a means of intimidation used in promoting the homosexual agenda. Due to what homophobia has been made to denote, that of being a repressed homosexual, or possessing an irrational fear of being approached by homosexuals, or of being a bigot persecuting victims, the widespread use of the term "homophobic" attaches a powerful stigma to anyone who may even conscientiously oppose the practice of homosexuality, thus silencing many who might otherwise object to it.<ref>[http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/1995papers/socarides.html Thought Reform And The Psychology of Homosexual Advocacy
Charles W. Socarides, M.D.]</ref>

In relation to such oppression, psychologist Nicholas Cummings, former president of the American Psychological Association (APA), observed, "Homophobia as intimidation is one of the most pervasive techniques used to silence anyone who would disagree with the gay activist agenda." As an example of such fear within the APA, in addressing 100 fellow professionals Cummings related that while writing "Destructive Trends in Mental Health," with psychologist Rogers Wright, a number of fellow psychologists were invited to participate. However, these flatly turned them down, as they feared loss of tenure, loss of promotion, and other forms of professional retaliation. "We were bombarded by horror stories," Dr. Cummings said. "Their greatest fear was of the gay lobby, which is very strong in the APA.<ref>[Psychology Losing Scientific Credibility, Say APA Insiders http://www.narth.com/docs/insiders.html]</ref>

Noted homosexual activist and pornographer Clinton Fein, in his article, ''The Gay Agenda stated'': "Homophobic inclinations alone, even without any actions, should be criminal and punishable to the full extent of the law."

Erik Holland, author of ''The Nature of Homosexuality'', perceives that homosexuals have become so reckless in labeling others homophobic that "anyone who questions their labeling someone [is] a homophobe himself. Even quoting factual statistics about the connection between homosexuality and AIDS is allegedly homophobic." In addition, according to pro-homosexual author Vernon A. Wall, "even acceptance of homosexuality can be seen as a form of homophobia, because to talk about the acceptance of homosexuality is to imply that there is something about homosexuality that needs acceptance."<ref>http://www.homosexinfo.org/Homophobia/HomePage</ref>

It may be speculated that if the liberal use of the term homophobia is not primarily a psychological tactic, then it indicates a psychological condition on the part of those who use it in which they imagine that those who oppose them are fearful of them, or of being one.

===Influence in the academic world===

Professor Jerry Z. Muller described in an article titled ''First Things'' (Aug/Sept. 1993) how the homosexual lobby has gained widespread acceptance in the educational realm.
{{cquote|[Their] strategy has been remarkably successful. With a rapidity largely attributable in large part to a total lack of articulate resistance, homosexual ideology has gained an unquestioned and uncontested legitimacy in American academic life. Within the academy, as within nonacademic elite culture, the definition of opposite to homosexuality as "homophobia - a definition which implies that it is impossible to give good reasons for the cultural disapproval of homosexuality - is the best evidence of the success of this strategy.<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=cbfVg_1qhe0C&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&dq=David+W.+Virtue+scots+college&source=bl&ots=aDW7a615Gn&sig=Y1cLsx5sCQTgUUDJ88b5AKPRkNg&hl=en&ei=8skISpP1AcGktgfi2PzsCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPR14,M1 Homosexuality, by F. Earle Fox, David W. Virtue, p. 12]</ref>}}

== Opposing Christian Agenda ==

Liberals are critical of Christian groups that oppose homosexuality. These criticisms include Christian activities of:

TROLLThreatening to shut all the soup kitchens in New York if they cannot exclude homosexuals from employment <ref>[http://chicago.gopride.com/news/article.cfm/ArticleID/1824489]Salvation Army Uses Homeless To Fight Gay Benefits </ref>
TROLLEncouraging email activism
TROLLProducing and disseminating gay reform information
TROLLInfluencing local media in what stories they produce
TROLLLobbying local, state and federal government officials to vote in the desired way on pending legislation<ref>[http://www.cwfa.org/about.asp Concerned Women For America] About page</ref>
TROLLCalling anyone who supports gay rights a 'sinner' or other untrue insults.

==Opponents of the Homosexual Agenda ==
Some well known individuals/groups in the [[United States]] who actively oppose the homosexual agenda are: [[Focus on the Family]], [[Peter LaBarbera]]'s American's for Truth, the [[Traditional Values Coalition]] ([[Louis Sheldon]] is a chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition), and [[Matt Barber]] of [[Concerned Women of America]].

==Further reading==
TROLL[http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html Homosexuality and the Nazi Party] by Scott Lively. Excellent discussion of the anti-Christian and homosexual origins of the Nazism.
TROLL[http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/BPCollectionNews.asp?ID=131 2008 McDonald's and the Homosexual Agenda], Baptist Press
TROLL[http://www.couplescompany.com/FEATURES/politics/2004/Selling%20Homosexuality.pdf Paul E. Rondeau, Selling homosexuality to America (PDF)] [http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/730694/posts Or html form]

==See also==
TROLL[[ACT-UP]]
TROLL[[Anti-Defamation League]]
TROLL[[Homosexual belief system]]
TROLL[[Gay rights]]
TROLL[[Homophobia]]
TROLL[[Hate speech]], [[Hate crime]]
TROLL[[Homosexual logic]], used to justify and promote the homosexual agenda
TROLL[[Homosexuality]]
TROLL[[Homosexuality and biblical interpretation]]
TROLL[[Intimate Partner Violence]]
TROLL[[Homosexualization]]

== References ==

{{reflist|2}}

{{liberalism}}

[[Category:Homosexual Agenda]]
[[Category:Homosexuality]]
[[Category: Liberal Deceit]]

Solids

2012-01-12T06:57:46Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

In [[calculus]], '''solids''' are formed by rotating a curve around an axis and integrating to find the volume. Typically the [[integration]] is of slices cut vertically to the axis of the rotation that formed the solid. Those slices are then integrated from one end of the solid to the other.

== Example ==

Consider the region in the first quadrant that has an upper bound of <math>y = \sqrt 2</math> and a lower bound of <big><math>y = (\sec{x})\,(\tan{x})</math></big>, and bounded on the left side by the ''y-axis''. Find the volume of the solid formed by rotating the region about the line <math>y = \sqrt 2</math>.

[[Calculus]] provides an elegant way to determine the volume of this solid. First, find where the curves intersect in order to ascertain the end-point of the integration. The boundaries intersect where

:<math>y = \sqrt 2 = (\sec{x})(\tan{x})</math>

or

:<math>\sqrt 2 = \frac{\sin{x}}{\cos^2{x}}</math>

This is best solved by trial-and-error. Since

:<math>\sin{\frac{\pi}{4}} = \cos{\frac{\pi}{4}}=\frac{\sqrt 2}{2}</math>,

that is the solution. The [[integral]] to find the volume of the solid must therefore be taken from ''x=0'' on one side to:

:<math>x=\frac{\pi}{4}</math>

on the other side.

We are now ready to find the volume. Note first that:

:<math> dV = {\pi}r^2dx</math>

and thus

:<math>V = \int_0^\frac{\pi}{4} {\pi}r^2\,dx</math>

The next insight is to express ''r'' in terms of ''x''. The variable ''r'' is the distance of the boundary from the axis about which it is rotated:

:<math>r = \sqrt 2 - \sec{x}\,\tan{x}</math>

The volume then becomes:

:<math>V = \int_0^\frac{\pi}{4} {\pi}(\sqrt 2 - \sec{x}\,\tan{x})^2\,dx</math>

:<math>V = \int_0^\frac{\pi}{4} {\pi}(2 - 2\sqrt2\sec{x}\,\tan{x} + (\sec{x}\,\tan{x})^2\,dx</math>

The only challenging part of this [[integral]] is the last term, which must be [[integrated by parts]]:

:<math>\int_0^\frac{\pi}{4}(\sec{x}\,\tan{x})^2\,dx</math>

:<math> = \int_0^\frac{\pi}{4}\sin{x}\,(\frac{\sin{x}}{\cos^4{x}})\,dx</math>

:<math> = \frac{\sin{x}}{3\cos^3{x}} - \int_0^\frac{\pi}{4}\frac{\sec^2{x}}{3},\,dx</math>

Recall that:

:<big><math>\int\sec^2{x}\,dx = \tan{x}</math></big>

and the solution to the overall integral is easy to obtain.
[[category:mathematics]]
[[category:calculus]]

Cepheid

2012-01-12T06:57:45Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

A '''Cepheid''', more commonly referred to as a '''Cepheid variable''', is a type of pulsating [[variable star]] whose periods of variability is directly related to their absolute luminosity. This precise relationship between the star's pulsation period and luminosity makes the stars invaluable indicators of astronomical distances. Today Cepheid variables are one of the methods astronomers use to determine the distances to celestial objects in the universe, known collectively as the [[cosmic distance ladder]]. They are seen as ''standard candles'', that is astronomical objects that have a known luminosity. The best known and closest Cepheid variable to us is the current North Star [[Polaris]].

Cepheid stars pulsate in regular intervals typically in the range from 1 to 100 days. The stars themselves are yellowish giants or [[supergiant|supergiants]], five to twenty times more massive than and up to 30,000 times as luminous as the [[Sun]]. This intense brightness allows for Cepheids to be measured in other [[galaxy|galaxies]] for extra-galactic distances.<ref>http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/C/Cepheid_variable.html</ref>

==Discovery and History==

The star [[Eta Aquilae]] was the first star to be discovered to have observable variability in 1784, and is the first known representative of a Cepheid. A few months later, [[Delta Cepheid]] was also discovered to be a regular variable star and became the namesake of Cepheid variables. It wasn't until 1908 though, that the regular period-luminosity relation of Cepheids were discovered when [[Henrietta Swan Leavitt]] observed the effect in her observations of thousands of variable stars in the [[Magellanic Clouds]].<ref>http://www.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1908AnHar..60...87L</ref><ref>http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1912HarCi.173....1L</ref>

In the early 20th century it was debated wither or not other galaxies existed independent of the [[Milky Way]], which accumulated in the 1920 [[Curtis-Shapley debate]], of which the period-luminosity relationship of Cepheid variables was a point of contention. This debate was finally settled in the discovery of Cepheid variables in the [[Andromeda galaxy]] by [[Edwin Hubble]] in 1924, showing once and for all the Milky Way and the Universe were not synonymous, and that other galaxies do exist.<ref>http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1925Obs....48..139H</ref>

==Characteristics and Causes of Cepheid variation==

The cause of this regular variation in luminosity is the result of the Cepheid regularly oscillating between two states, compact and expanded. In the compact state increasing temperature and pressure builds up in the star, eventually causing it to expand and become more luminous. As the star expands to maximum, there pressure from within the star weakens considerably. At this point there is no longer enough pressure against gravity to maintain the expanded size, and the star contracts once again. This cycle repeats itself in regular, timed intervals.<ref>http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/mysteries_l1/cepheid.html</ref>

The shape of the light curve of a Cepheid is commonly referred to as the ''shark fin'' when plotted as luminosity versus periods of time. This characteristic shape shows during the Cepheid's regular period of variation, there is a rapid rise to maximum brightness, followed by a brief period at peak brightness before a smooth and slow decline to minimum. Although this curve is considered the normal behavior of such a star, in observations and plotting, there is considerable scatter around such a curve.<ref>http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/astro/cepheid.html#c2</ref>

==Types of Cepheids==

Cepheid variables fall into one of two categories, Type I, also known as ''classical Cepheids'' or [[Delta Cepheid]] stars, and Type II, also known as [[W Virginis star|W Virginis stars]]. The Type I Cepheids are extreme [[Metallicity|population I stars]] located in the spiral arms of galaxies. Metal rich and some 4 times as luminous as Type II Cepheids, these stars typically have a variation period lasting 5 to 10 days in lenght. Type II Cepheids on the other hand are [[Metallicity|metal-poor population II stars]]. Their periods of variability typically ranges from 10 to 30 days in length, and are primarily found in [[elliptical galaxy|elliptical galaxies]], [[globular cluster|globular clusters]], and galactic halos.<ref>http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002PASP..114..689W</ref>

== Sources ==
[http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/lib/glossary.html#cepheid APOD Glossary]

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Astronomy]]

Algebra Terms K

2012-01-12T06:57:43Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

{{Algebra Index}}

[[Category:Algebra Terms]]

Corsica

2012-01-12T06:57:40Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

'''Corsica''' is an island in the [[Mediterranean Sea]], currently part of [[France]].

It was conquered by the Romans in 237 BC - it has had a checquered history of occupation, finding itself variously under [[Vandal]], [[Byzantine]], [[Arab]] and [[Genoa|Genoese]] control, finally being sold to [[France]] in 1768.

In [[World War II]], Corsica was the first French territory to be liberated by the Allies, in October 1943.

By far its most famous native was [[Napoleon]].

[[Category:Islands]]

Mello Yello

2012-01-12T06:57:38Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

'''Mello Yello™''' is a citrus-flavored, carbonated beverage manufactured by [[Coca-Cola]] that contains high levels of [[caffeine]]. Introduced in 1972, it is a competitor to [[PepsiCo]]'s [[Mountain Dew]].

[[category:food and Drink]]

Cheddar

2012-01-12T06:57:36Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

'''Cheddar''' is an incredibly popular [[cheese]] first created in [[England]].

[[category:Dairy products]]

Chemistry Terms S

2012-01-12T06:57:34Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

{{Chemistry Index}}

[[Saturated solution]]

[[Scientific Law]]

[[Solubility]]

[[Standard Temperature and Pressure (STP)]]

Arraignment

2012-01-12T06:57:32Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

An '''arraignment''' is the hearing at which the accused is brought before the [[court]] and informed of the charges against him in his [[indictment]]. He may plead "guilty," "not guilty," or, where permitted, "nolo contendere." (See [[preliminary hearing]].) [[Category:Legal Terms]]

Purple

2012-01-12T06:57:30Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

'''Purple''' is a non-primary color. It is made by combining [[blue]] and [[red]]. Purple has been considered to be the color of royalty.

[[Category: Colors]]

Everquest

2012-01-12T06:57:28Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

[[Image:Hg64r7.jpg|right|frame]]
'''Everquest''' (Also known as EQ) ([[ESRB]] ratings: T) is a very successful [[Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game]] (MMORPG or MMO) that was released by [[Sony Online Entertainment]] in 1999. In the game, players can choose from many classes and [[race]]s and log on to explore and battle [[monster]]s with other players from around the world.

The popularity of Everquest has fallen in recent years because of many players leaving to play newer MMOs such as [[Final Fantasy XI]] & [[World of Warcraft]].

Everquest has been subject to criticism due to its sexualized characters, its [[Occult]]ic themes and its tendense to cause addiction.

[[category:Video Games]]

104th United States Congress

2012-01-12T06:57:26Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

The '''104th United States Congress''' was the sessions of Congress that occurred from January 3, 1995 to January 3, 1997. Due to the [[Contract with America]] and dissatisfaction with Democratic policies, the elections of 1994 finally saw an increase in the [[Republican]] majority of [[Congress]]. House speaker [[Newt Gingrich]] declared Congress "under new management" during this Congress. This Congress was able to pass much excellent conservative pro-American legislation despite [[liberal]] and impeached president [[Bill Clinton]] being in office. Coincidentally, the ushering in of a Republican dominated Congress exactly coincided with the success of the US economy, a strong economy that lasted until the [[Democrats]] surprisingly won power back in 2006. Not surprisingly, the economy then dropped sharply, as did Congressional opinion polls.

The 104th Congress was the most productive in nearly 50 years. President [[Bill Clinton]], fearing defeat in 1996, signed many good bills into law. The accomplishments of the 104th Congress included:

TROLL[[DOMA]]
TROLLWelfare reform
TROLLPrisoner litigation reform
TROLLthe [[Solomon Amendment]]

(add to list)

[[Category:United States Congress]]

Mount Snowdon

2012-01-12T06:57:24Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

[[Image:Snowdon.jpg|right|thumb|150px|Snowdon as viewed from Llyn Lydaw]]

'''Mount Snowdon''' is the highest mountain in [[Wales]] and the highest British mountain south of the Scottish Highlands. It is located within the [[Snowdonia National Park]] (in Welsh: Parc Cenedlaethol Eryri), and its summit is known as Yr Wyddfa (meaning 'the grave') at an altitude of 1,085 m (3,560 ft) above sea level. The English name Snowdon comes from the Saxon "Snow Dun", meaning "snow hill".

Snowdon is notable for having one of the wettest climates in Great Britain, receiving an annual average of more than 4,500 mm (180 in) of precipitation. Despite this, over 350,000 visitors reach the summit on foot or via the rack-and-pinion Snowdon Mountain Railway every year.<ref>http://www.snowdonrailway.co.uk/</ref> As well as appreciating the magnificent views, during the summer months they can take advantage of the refreshment area at the summit. Originally built in 1935 by the renowned architect Sir Clough Williams-Ellis, it is now owned by Snowdonia National Park Authority. However, this building was commonly regarded as one of the worst eyesores in the whole of Britain, and a planning application <ref> see [http://www.eryri-npa.co.uk/images/recreation/summit/application.pdf here] for the 2003 planning application to redevelop the summit "cafe"</ref> for its redevelopment was submitted in 2003. Work commenced in September 2006, and the cafe was finally demolished to great cheers. The new centre, which will be completed by spring 2008, will have up to date facilities giving visitors the chance to learn more about Wales' highest mountain and its environment<ref> see: [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_west/5338752.stm BBC News September 2006]</ref>

==References==
<References/>

[[category:European Mountains]]

Primates in the Church

2012-01-12T06:57:22Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

The term '''Primate''' refers to the senior churchman in a 'province'. Thus, in the [[Church of England]], the [[archbishop]]s of [[Canterbury]] and [[York]] are primates, as is the [[Roman Catholic]] archbishop of [[Westminster]].

[[category:religion]]

DonExodus2

2012-01-12T06:57:20Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

'''DonExodus2''' is a popular [[YouTube]] [[evolution|evolutionist]]. At the time his channel was created, he was a Christian,<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eXxFapw5GM</ref> but he recently became an [[atheism|atheist]]. DonExodus2 pulled out of his debate with a YouTube [[creationism|creationist]].<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z22kmGpq6A</ref> The YouTube [[Christian]] [[shockofgod]] quipped that he [[evolution|evolved]] into a chicken.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z22kmGpq6A</ref>

Generally speaking, [[Atheism and Debate|leading evolutionists no longer debate creation scientists]] because [[creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]].<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/811/</ref>
== See also ==

TROLL[[Atheism and the internet]]
TROLL[[Comedy and satires concerning atheism and evolution]] ('''large collection''' of comedy/satire concerning [[atheism]] and [[evolution]])
TROLL[[Atheism and the internet]]
TROLL[[AronRa]]
TROLL[[Thunderf00t]]
TROLL[[Matt Dillahunty]]

== External links ==

TROLL[http://www.youtube.com/user/DonExodus2 DonExodus2 YouTube channel]
TROLL[http://www.blogtv.com/people/DonExodus2 DonExodus2 BlogTV.com]
==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category: Shockofgod]]

Oath Keepers

2012-01-12T06:57:18Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

'''Oath Keepers''' "Guardians of the Republic" is a non-partisan organization of civil servants and veterans, any [[American]] who has taken an oath. Open membership to all, Citizen Associate Member, as long as you take an oath to defend the Constitution. The group is founded by and run by Stewart Rhodes, formerly a U.S. Army paratrooper.

Their motto, "Not on our Watch."

{{cquote|To support and defend the [[Constitution]] against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us [[God]]." }}

"This site is dedicated to the memory of John William Adams (1925-2006), Marine and Oath Keeper extraordinaire."

==External Links==
TROLL [http://oathkeepers.org Official website]
TROLL [https://plus.google.com/u/0/105704077843332512159/ Google+ page]
TROLL [http://www.youtube.com/user/OathKeepersOK YouTube channel page]
TROLL [http://www.facebook.com/groups/163945586998396 Facebook page]
TROLL [https://twitter.com/#!/Oathkeepers Twitter page]

[[Category:Conservative Organizations]]

George Clinton

2012-01-12T06:57:14Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

{{President
|image=George clinton.jpg
|office=vice
|seq=4
|term_start=March 4, 1805
|term_end=April 20, 1812
|party=
|pres=Thomas Jefferson
|pres_dates=1805-1809
|2pres=James Madison
|2pres_dates=1809-1812
|previous=Aaron Burr
|next=Elbridge Gerry
|birth_date=July 26, 1739
|birth_place=Little Britain, New York
|death_date=April 20, 1812
|death_place=Washington, D.C.
|spouse=Sarah Cornelia Tappen
|religion=
}}
:For other George Clintons, see [[George Clinton (disambiguation)]]. 
'''George Clinton''' was the fourth Vice President of the United States, serving under [[James Madison]], from March 4, 1813 until his death a year and a half later. He was the first Vice Presidential candidate to be under the [[12th Amendment]]. He cast the tie breaking vote against rechartering the first Bank of the United States. <ref> [[Fandex]], Workman Publishing. </ref>

==References==
<references/>

{{USVicePresidents}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Clinton, George}}
[[Category:Vice Presidents of the United States]]

Liberal gossip

2012-01-12T06:57:10Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

'''Liberal gossip''' is the trait whereby liberals care more about gossipy facts than about genuine issues.

==Examples of Liberal Gossip==
TROLL[[Wikipedia]], which obsesses with guilt by association, to the point of being called the "National Enquirer of the internet".<ref>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1924058/posts</ref>
TROLLLiberals' reaction to Alaskan governor [[Sarah Palin]]'s selection as [[John McCain]]'s running mate, obsessing over trivial details of her family rather than her strong conservative policy message.
TROLLSpreading false and destructive rumours about prominent [[conservative]] figures, such as [[Rush Limbaugh]], [[John Schlafly]],[[Sean Hannity]] and [[Charlie Crist]].

== References ==
{{reflist}}

{{liberalism}}

American History Homework Nine Answers - Student 37

2012-01-12T06:57:08Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

Joining late, just to see how I do...

1. Arguably, it has its similarities to Carter's victory over Ford: Carter rose to victory on a promise that, unlike Nixon, "[he] would never lie to you." Of course, there are serious differences too: despite, LBJ's passage of the Civil Rights Act, which "lost the South for a generation," Carter still carried the South, and Carter's victory was quite narrow, both in popular terms and relative to the electoral vote. Obama's victory, on the other hand, was only narrowly due to the South, and was a near electoral landslide. Coupled with Obama's promise of running a post-partisan Presidency, there are trace elements of Clinton (monumental electoral victory; moderate, charismatic Democrat, with less-than-average experience) and elements of Reagan (the latent possibility of realignment). Overall, I think it's too early to judge.

:Over-emphasis on the size of the victory, which is meaningful only if the candidate has a clear agenda. Obama did not.

2. Imperialism is a monumental failure, in each of its many iterations (nota bene: I'll confine discussion of the term "imperialism" to actual, rather than "soft" or "cultural" imperialism). In the most recent case, imperialism's failures have only become painstakingly evident in hindsight: European powers left colonized states with ramshackle infrastructure, and failed to adequately secure that each state they created when devolving power was, actually, a "nation-state" with a coherent identity. Many colonial powers grouped different "nations" into one state: see, for example, Nigeria. The result is bloodshed, civil war, and violence, as the decolonized fight to secure for themselves a nation built on imaginary borders.

:This is American history, so your examples should be of American imperialism, such as Cuba or Hawaii or the Philippines. (Minus 2).

3. No doubt the progressive movement secured important gains to the populace, from an end to child labor, uniform suffrage, and product safety guidelines (to correct Upton Sinclair's damning judgment of the food industry). The ensuing regulatory framework, however, solicited a judicial backlash that would push the Court and FDR to the brink of constitutional crisis some years later (See: Lochner). It also created separation of powers concerns that linger to this day (what, exactly, is the relationship between the administrative "branch" and the other branches of government?). The end result is unabashedly positive, but it took some time for that outcome to be clear, and it still poses some lingering problems for the legal order.

:You assume as true what the question asks you to explain and justify. (Minus 1).

4. The cartoon addresses the predicament of what America could do about Cuba: fund the potential for revolution, or stay out of the picture, and let the national order of things take its course. The cartoonist is plainly sympathetic to Cuba's plight, and spins American inaction as tantamount to throwing Cuba into the Spanish abyss.

: Nope, far off target here. See model answers. (Minus 3).

H2. It's important to remember that "objectivity" is not "neutrality." No doubt the media was "biased" against Sarah Palin in its portrayal of her, but, objectively, Palin as a candidate had serious problems. To the extent that the media addressed legitimate shortcomings, it was objective, if not neutral. Where the media really went too far, delving into yellow journalism, was in the immediately post-election week, as Fox News ran with invented stories about additional "gaffes" committed by Sarah Palin.

: What about the ''presidential'' candidates??? (Minus 1).

H3. Regarding the election, we should seriously ponder the question of whether the religious right has lost its death-grip on the Republican Party, and indeed on America. Upon picking John McCain to run for President, it could be said that, for the GOP, "two roads diverged in a forest": they could have taken to their moderate, bipartisan nominee, and run a moderate campaign, or convinced their moderate nominee to run a far-right, religiously-themed, get-out-the-base Rove-style campaign. No doubt the GOP chose the latter, and they lost. Big. The lesson should probably be that the nation can only stand so much partisanship, or that social issues pale when the possibility of economic disaster is squarely presented. Either way, the religious right may be out of power for some time. Of course, they've been known to mount a comeback before.

: I think the election polling showed that McCain ran weak with the base, with weak turnout, while Obama ran strong with his base. But you're certainly right that economic disaster, or its potential, will overwhelm social issues in a presidential election. The difference comes when the House faces the electorate in a mid-term election.

: Good first effort, but you're lagging behind most of the class. Score: 53/60.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:49, 15 November 2008 (EST)
[[Category:American History Homework Nine Answers]]

Limited government

2012-01-12T06:57:06Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

'''Limited government''' as defined, a type of government in which its functions and powers are prescribed, limited, and restricted by law. The [[U.S. Constitution]] provides the means of limited government whereby the people shall not be infringed upon by the government. That the government is given enumerated powers by the people. The role of the federal government is limited by the [[Delegated Powers]] set forth in [[United_States_Constitution:Article_I#Section_Eight|Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution]] and by the [[Ninth Amendment|Ninth]] and [[Tenth Amendment|Tenth]] Amendments. The people and the states are the final authority in most matters. Limited government is [[libertarian]], [[conservative]] in concept and is the basis of [[Republicanism]]. The power of the people, as opposed to federal power, enables the government to be kept in-check from authoritarian or totalitarian influences and defends the people's interests from [[judicial activism]] and other [[undemocratic]] encroachments. Additional federal limitations can be found in the [[Bill of Rights]]. The Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Articles of the Bill of Rights specify procedures designed to keep the government from acting arbitrarily or capriciously or unfairly.

The roots of limited government can be found in the [[Declaration of Independence]], the self-evident or "unalienable rights" clause. Liberty is a blessing we have received from God himself and limited government is an extension of that right.

{{cquote| First, that all men are created equal; second, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; and, third, that it is precisely in order to secure these rights that governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. <ref>[http://www.fff.org/freedom/0291c.asp The Roots of Limited Government, Alan Barth, February 1991]</ref> }}

Also as a basis of limited government, the English prescribed the [[Magna Carta]] in the Seventeenth century. This proclaims, ''"No free man shall be taken or imprisoned or dispossessed or outlawed or banished, or in any way destroyed ... except by the legal judgment of his peers or by the law of the land."''

==References==
<references/>

[[Category: United States Government]]
[[Category: United States Law]]
[[Category: Republicanism]]

Debate:Is illegal immigration control the answer to illegal immigration?

2012-01-12T06:57:04Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

==Yes==
Is one civilization responsible for the well being of another civilization?
Is an influx of uneducated people into your country beneficial to your country?

In my humble opinion, in terms of whats best for the country, I would say no to both questions.
: Seekcommon has made a number of interesting points, but he/she is simply wrong. The FBI arrested several men who were plotting to kill american soldiers, many were illegal and in the US for several years. It is imperative that the FEDS go all out to round up all illegals and deport them to whereever they came from. What the heck, they have broken the law anyway and contribute nothing to this society of law abiding and God fearing citizens. [[User:dninsafbicia]]

==No==
Legal immigration control is the answer to illegal immigration. That way people will know what is legal and illegal. Legal=civility while illegal=jail time.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 12:40, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

: I agree. It is time that the White man who killed the original inhabitants of the country we call the US of A should leave. Christopher Columbus thought he had reached India when he did not and he allowed for the killings that followed. More recently, so many Irish came to the US, many illegally, we should demand proof that they are here legally. Every one who was not born of parents who were not here on this land originally ought to be asked to demand proof that they belong here and are not here illegally. Great idea. [[User:Seekcommon]]

::Well, that is what is called racism. It has nothing to do with immigrating from one sovereign country to another in a legal means by todays standards of civilization. But let us go farther back in time when succesive waves of people "immigrated" to the Americas. Each one killing their way across the continents until they became the dominant culture. If you can go back far enough to find the first person to inhabit the Americas then it won't mean nothing since they probably no longer exist. But their ancestors weren't originally born here either if you go back far enough. So how about putting a clamp on the racism?--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 09:25, 23 April 2007 (EDT)
::: I see "racism" in the current vitriol being thrown at "illegal" immigration, yes, "illegal". The fact is that, "illegal" immigration happens because we have a flawed/inhumane "legal" immigration policy. Today's immigrants (legal and illegal) are very different from the ones that came in the early 20th century/late 19th century. The fact is that without the illegals, much of our economy will crawl. Using the pretext of "illegal" immigration, demagogues like Lou Dobbs of CNN unload on "legal" immigration - issues of H-1 visas for technical people and such - claiming that "such immigrants" take jobs away from "natives". Rubbish, says that most radical of all newspapers, The Wall Street Journal. [[User:Seekcommon] PS - My comments about the white man and such were, obviously meant to make a point that we are ALL immigrants and many came illegally. Inspite of all this, I have always believed that of ALL countries in the world, the US of A remains the most humane and welcoming of ALL foreigners, immigrants - Let's keep it that way, is what I hope we do. [[User:Seekcommon]]

::No, illegal immigrants aren't "helping" the economy. The exploitation of illegal immigrants is the slave mentality. Just as on the cotton plantations of the 19th century, today we have the idea of businesses exploiting illegal immigrants for their own profit. You are right about the existance of flawed policy. That we have sanctuary cities and towns that protect criminal business practices who exploit cheap labor. All about the money, right? They don't lose their business or go to jail even if their under paid workers are rounded up and deported. There are always plenty of American citizens in line to replace them. But if you were given the choice of paying someone five bucks an hour or fifteen bucks then the decision is simple. I've also noticed that only those that don't see a problem with the illegal exploitation of illegal aliens are always screaming about racism. The flawed/inhumane legal immigration policy of the United States allows the "legal" immigration of more people then any other country on the planet. Perhaps the real answer to illegal immigration would be throwing American Citizens in jail for the inhumane monetary exploitation of their fellow human beings. Until that happens, people will immigrate illegally to work as cheap labor.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 15:58, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

::: The fundamental reason our country, the US of A is a magnet for the rest of the world is the simple fact that each person has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. By any measure, we have benefited enormously by both legal AND illegal immigration, I know you disagree. Fine. The workers who are "exploited" are still better off than they would have been in their own country (yes, that includes legal AND illegal immigrants). In fact what is happening is that because the world is slowly trying to catch up to the US and as more opportunities are made available to people in those countries, there is less and less interest and pressure for many to emigrate from their native lands and immigrate to the US - these trends are evident in Higher Education, for sure. Unlike other countries, we are dynamic - people who are laid off, do find other ways to survive/thrive. Yes, many are hurt irreversibly and never recover. No system is perfect, what we have in the US comes close. Adam Smith explained it best - supply and demand. It is OUR demand for goods/services and OUR refusal to pay any more than what we WANT to pay that results in producers trying to find ways to reduce their costs and OUR costs. Yes, the producers DO MAKE money by using cheap labor, but millions of people do have jobs and do very well. No matter what I say or write (or what the Wall Street Journal writes), you will hold steadfast to your view that "illegal" immigration hurts us all and does not help the economy. I disagree. You can make a difference. Stop shopping at Walmart, do not buy a car or a computer or a shirt or a pant that is NOT made in the US A and before you buy anything, ask if the people who made them were paid a "decent wage" and were "not exploited" or whatever. [[User:Seekcommon]]

Apparently illegal border crossings have slowed by more than 10% this year according to a report cited by the Wall Street Journal, today May 2, 2007.
But instead of rigorous enforcement as many would have us believe, this reflects supply and demand, again according to the Wall Street Journal. The slump in the housing market is cited as the main reason as to why fewer illegals are crossing the border and it indicates, again as the Wall Street Journal reports, that immigrants come here to work and not idle and collect welfare. I should add they work and improve OUR standard of living while accepting jobs that go abegging. Many on our unemployed rolls are unwilling to take these jobs or perhaps do not even have those skills necessary or simply refuse because they can and sit and complain about illegal immigration or something else. I'd recommend that they complain to the Wall Street Journal and tell them that the Journal is being unpatriotic and UnAmerican. [[User:Seekcommon]]

: I seem to have some difficulty in providing a link to any interested reader. The article is at online.wsj.com/article/SB117807233027389126.html

I suppose I see immoral behavior anywhere when it comes to immigrants and their current status in the US (particularly Mexican, Chinese, Korean or other non-caucasian, non-white). Even for a litigious society like the US, this surely takes first prize - the story of a Judge that sues a dry cleaner for 65 million dollars - taking it out on immigrants who have done good I suppose.
[www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/25/AR2007042502763_pf.html Here is the article by Marc Fisher] I am curious as to what the position (if any) of the conservatives on this board about whether of not the law suit has any merit. And why there has been no significant outcry - Could it be because the affected party is not white or black? Where is Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton when working people like the Cheungs are being victimized by the system? Or does it have to do something about the race and color of the affected parties and the one that is doing the suing? No, I do not know if the Most Eminent Judge Pearson is black or white - BUT I can guess He is black since nary a word from Jackson or Sharpton. Replace black with "African American" if it offends and I am aware that certain words are to be used only by certain people at certain times under certain conditions after getting permission from Jackson and Sharpton. [[User:Seekcommon]]
: The Most Honorable Judge Pearson is an African American, there was a video. Now it makes perfect sense as to why Jackson and Sharpton are not protecting the cleaners against this blatant racist, anti-immigrant fervor of an officer of the Court in these United States of America - after all, he is one of them and so cannot be bad. Shame on the establishment for allowing such obvious attempts at persecuting hard working immigrants. I can only imagine the treatment meted out to the poor illegals that cross the border to find work and take jobs that others refuse to take [[User:Seekcommon]]

These jobs that americans won't take are a myth. There is no such thing. What is really happening is they are taking jobs at a salary lower than that which americans will take, and in most cases lower than americans are allowed to take due to minimum wage. --[[User:BenjaminS|Ben]] [[User Talk:BenjaminS|Talk]] 09:30, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

==British point of view==
So far this debate has been US-centred, but we have immigration problems of a different kind in the [[United Kingdom]]. Let me say that I believe, in principle, in the value of immigrants to a society, both economically and socially. But our problem is that our country's immigration policies are inadequately enforced by an incompetent bureaucracy. At present, people may be living in the UK and waiting for up to 5 years before the [[Home Office]] processes their application for indefinite leave to remain, or for asylum status. They're in a sort of limbo - they don't have the proper documentation, so they find it hard to get a job, so they can't contribute to society. This isn't the immigrants' fault - it's the incompetence of our [[Labour Party|Labour]] government, who have simply failed in their duty to provide a system that works. Not to mention, we're now getting mass immigration from Eastern Europe due to those countries joining the [[European Union]]. This isn't a bad thing in itself, but we've had a few cases of people with criminal records entering the UK - and our immigration services don't even bother to check their background before letting them in. Once again, the Labour government failed to plan for the future. What a dismal record of failure. [[User:Palace1|Palace1]] 13:13, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

==Student POV==
I don't see why we have to reform American laws concerning immigrantion. Indeed our side of the fence has already solved the problem way back when. The reformation has to occur on the other side of the tortilla wall. If los presidentes of the latin nations would reform their own laws conserning work where people don't earn 10 bucks a day, then we wouldn't have a problem. Secondly, the people of those nations need a spine transplant. They need to learn that governments break with pressure. I hate tools who come into my country demanding that we change our laws. They need to go back and reform their country that they love oh so much. [[User:Dfairlyxed13|Dfairlyxed]] June 25 2007

== OTHER ==

jez could you ask the question in a better format?

IMMIGRATION control is the answer to ILLEGAL immigration....

a country that doesnt have borders isnt much of a country....

--[[User:Wally|Wally]] 19:37, 26 June 2007 (EDT)

we should just tell border security personnel to shoot the illegal in the head in be done with it...one less problem...a billion upon billion more to go...and growing...--[[User:Shateldo|Shateldo]] 22:48, 13 October 2009 (EDT)

==People who work aren't the problem==
Illegal immigrants who come here and work hard and pay their bills aren't the problem. It's people who DON'T work who are the problem. As Milton Friedman said, you can't have open borders and a welfare state. Some number of illegal immigrants are a burden to society. They collect welfare, they occupy subsidized housing, they don't pay for their medical treatment, they get free education, reduced college tuition, etc. Americans are infuriated by those who are parasites on the taxpayers. The majority (?) of illegal immigrants are not burdens, they are contributors. They work hard, producing valuable goods and services. They pay their bills, they follow the rules (except for the obvious illegal immigration).

There is often a difference between immorality and illegality. The voluntary transaction between worker and employer is not inherently immoral but it is illegal if the immigrant is illegal. The involuntary transaction between welfare recipient and taxpayer is immoral but may be illegal.

We should invite into our country those who will be a positive contribution to our American society. We should deport those who are a burden on society.

(To those Conservapedia users who are not US citizens I apologize for writing with a US point of view. I am an American - for which I make no apologies.) [[User:Sbowers3|Sbowers3]] 09:19, 29 September 2007 (EDT)
[[Category:Conservapedia Debates]]

Well logically there shouldn't be any reason they're illegal in the first place if they're hard working...its not like citizenship will kill them. But
if they do work hard for a while and make some money they should go and get citizenship. People on welfare tho that are on welfare cuz they have too
many children should get deported though...--[[User:Shateldo|Shateldo]] 22:54, 13 October 2009 (EDT)

Advantage

2012-01-12T06:57:02Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

'''Advantage''' is any [[state]], circumstance, opportunity, or means specially favorable to success, interest, or any desired end. It is a position of superiority.

[[Category:Dictionary]]

Alzheimer's disease

2012-01-12T06:57:00Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

[[File:PET Alzheimer.jpg|thumbnail|250px|right|A PET scan of the brain of an individual with Alzheimer's disease reveals a loss of function in the [[Temporal lobes|temporal lobe]].]]
'''Alzheimer's disease''' (AD) is the most common form of [[dementia]] among older people. Dementia is a brain disorder that seriously affects a person's ability to carry out daily activities.

Alzheimer's disease is "characterised by loss of neurons and synapses in the [[cerebral cortex]] and certain subcortical regions. This loss results in gross atrophy of the affected regions, including degeneration in the [[temporal lobes|temporal lobe]] and [[parietal lobe]], and parts of the frontal cortex and cingulate gyrus.<ref>http://www.news-medical.net/health/Neurodegeneration-in-Alzheimers-and-Parkinsons.aspx</ref> Some of the primary symptoms of alzheimer's disease are: memory problems, mood swings, emotional outbursts, brain stem damage which impairs function in the heart, lungs plus causes disruption of various other bodily processes.<ref>http://www.dementiacarecentral.com/node/559</ref>

An abstract of the medical study entitled ''Measures to Assess the Noncognitive Symptoms of Dementia in the Primary Care Setting'' by Brent P. Forester, M.D. and Thomas E. Oxman, M.D. inidcated "Noncognitive symptoms associated with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias include psychosis, mood disturbances, personality changes, agitation, aggression, pacing, wandering, altered sexual behavior, changed sleep patterns, and appetite disturbances. These noncognitive symptoms of dementia are common, disabling to both the patient and the caregiver, and costly."<ref>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC419385/</ref>

According to the Center for Neuro Skills:
{{cquote|Kolb & Wishaw (1990) have identified eight principle symptoms of temporal lobe damage: 1) disturbance of auditory sensation and perception, 2) disturbance of selective attention of auditory and visual input, 3) disorders of visual perception, 4) impaired organization and categorization of verbal material, 5) disturbance of language comprehension, 6) impaired long-term memory, 7) altered personality and affective behavior, 8) altered sexual behavior.<ref>http://www.neuroskills.com/tbi/btemporl.shtml</ref>}}

AD begins slowly. It first involves the parts of the brain that control thought, memory and language. People with AD may have trouble remembering things that happened recently or names of people they know. Over time, symptoms get worse. People may not recognize family members or have trouble speaking, reading or writing. They may forget how to brush their teeth or comb their hair. Later on, they may become anxious or aggressive, or wander away from home. Eventually, they need total care.

[[Image:Odds of Developing Alzheimer's.png|right]]
AD usually begins after age 60. The risk goes up as you get older. <ref>Hebert, LE; Scherr, PA; Bienias, JL; Bennett, DA; Evans, DA. “Alzheimer Disease in the U.S. population; Prevalence Estimates Using the 2000 Census.” Archives of Neurology. August 2003; 60 (8): 1119 –1122; National Academy on an Aging Society. “Alzheimer’s Disease and Dementia: A Growing Challenge.” September, 2000. Graphic used on page 7 of the National Alzheimer's Strategic Plan, March 25, 2009</ref> Your risk is also higher if a family member has had the disease.

No treatment can stop the disease. However, some drugs may help keep symptoms from getting worse for a limited time.

[[Ronald Reagan]] famously suffered Alzheimer's disease in his later years.
== Alzheimer's disease and obesity ==

See also: [[Obesity and Alzheimer's disease]]

In 2005, WebMD published:
{{cquote|People with diabetes are at particularly high risk of Alzheimer's disease. But now there's strong evidence that people with high [[insulin]] levels -- long before they get diabetes -- already are on the road to Alzheimer's disease.

As the body becomes more and more [[Obese|overweight]], it becomes more and more resistant to the blood-sugar-lowering effects of insulin. To counter this insulin resistance, the body keeps making more insulin...

'''Insulin Triggers Amyloid Buildup'''

High insulin levels are known to cause [[blood vessel]]s to become inflamed....

One dangerous effect of this insulin-caused brain inflammation is increased brain levels of beta-amyloid. Beta-amyloid is the twisted protein that's the main ingredient in the sticky plaques that clog the brains of people with Alzheimer's disease.

"What was striking was the magnitude of the effect," Craft tells WebMD. "Inflammation can be a result of amyloid elevations but can also create an environment in which amyloid is made more readily. Inflammation can be both the result and cause of amyloid production."<ref>[http://www.webmd.com/alzheimers/guide/20061101/obesity-alzheimers-risk Obesity and Alzheimer's: High Insulin Levels Linked to Alzheimer's]</ref>}}
=== Health effects of Alzheimer's disease ===

''See also:'' [[Effects of Alzheimer's disease on the brain]]

[[File:Temporal lobe animation small.gif|thumb|right|200px|An animation of a human left [[temporal lobes|temporal lobe]] (right is side similar).
 
(photo obtained from [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Temporal_lobe_animation_small.gif Wikimedia commons], see: [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Temporal_lobe_animation_small.gif license agreement])]]

An abstract of the medical study entitled ''Measures to Assess the Noncognitive Symptoms of Dementia in the Primary Care Setting'' by Brent P. Forester, M.D. and Thomas E. Oxman, M.D. inidcated "Noncognitive symptoms associated with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias include psychosis, mood disturbances, personality changes, agitation, aggression, pacing, wandering, altered sexual behavior, changed sleep patterns, and appetite disturbances. These noncognitive symptoms of dementia are common, disabling to both the patient and the caregiver, and costly."<ref>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC419385/</ref>

According to the Center for Neuro Skills:
{{cquote|Kolb & Wishaw (1990) have identified eight principle symptoms of temporal lobe damage: 1) disturbance of auditory sensation and perception, 2) disturbance of selective attention of auditory and visual input, 3) disorders of visual perception, 4) impaired organization and categorization of verbal material, 5) disturbance of language comprehension, 6) impaired long-term memory, 7) altered personality and affective behavior, 8) altered sexual behavior.<ref>http://www.neuroskills.com/tbi/btemporl.shtml</ref>}}

=== Obesity, dementia, Alzheimer's disease and prevention ===

''See also:'' [[Alzheimer's disease and prevention]]

Weili Xu, a researcher at the [[Karolinska Institute]] in [[Stockholm]], declared: "Our results contribute to the growing evidence that controlling body weight or losing weight in middle age could reduce your risk of [[dementia]]".<ref>[http://www.alzheimersreadingroom.com/2011/05/obesity-in-middle-age-may-increase-risk.html Obesity in Middle Age May Increase Risk of Dementia]</ref>

For more information please see: [[Alzheimer's disease and prevention]]

== References ==

{{reflist}}

==External links==
TROLL[http://www.alz.org/index.asp Alzheimer’s Association] Official Website
TROLL[http://www.alzstudygroup.org/Portals/0/National_Alzheimers_Strategic_Plan.pdf A National Alzheimer’s Strategic Plan: The Report of the Alzheimer’s Study Group], The National Alzheimer's Strategic Plan was released at a hearing before the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging on March 25, 2009.

[[Category: Alzheimer's disease]]
[[Category:Diseases]]

Explorers W

2012-01-12T06:56:57Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

[[Explorers A|A]]-[[Explorers B|B]]-[[Explorers C|C]]-[[Explorers D|D]]-[[Explorers E|E]]-[[Explorers F|F]]-[[Explorers G|G]]-[[Explorers H|H]]-[[Explorers I|I]]-[[Explorers J|J]]-[[Explorers K|K]]-[[Explorers L|L]]-[[Explorers M|M]]-[[Explorers N|N]]-[[Explorers O|O]]-[[Explorers P|P]]-[[Explorers Q|Q]]-[[Explorers R|R]]-[[Explorers S|S]]-[[Explorers T|T]]-[[Explorers U|U]]-[[Explorers V|V]]-[[Explorers W|W]]-[[Explorers X|X]]-[[Explorers Y|Y]]-[[Explorers Z|Z]]

{{History Terms}}[[Category:Explorers]]

Robin Williams

2012-01-12T06:56:54Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

'''Robin Williams''' is a stand-up comedian and actor who first came to national attention in [[Mork and Mindy]]. His breakthrough role was as a hip, wisecracking, anti-establishment DJ in "[[Good Morning, Vietnam]].
He has frequently portrayed doctors or therapists; in [[Good Will Hunting]] he played a professor of psychology treating an underachieving genius ([[Matt Damon]]).

In a couple of movies he plays a character who becomes popular due to a fraud. In the first, he's elected president when a computer program gives the wrong election result. In "[[World's Greatest Dad]]" his character provides the fraud when he palms off his own writing as that of his dead son.

Many of his movies deal with death. He played an Alaskan murderer; a pediatrician who dies in a car accident (and then his wife commits suicide) in "[[What Dreams May Come]]".

{{DEFAULTSORT:Williams, Robin}}
[[category:Actors]]

Essay:Accuracy vs. neutrality on Conservapedia

2012-01-12T06:56:53Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

{{essay By|Philip J. Rayment}}
[[Wikipedia]] has a policy of neutrality, the intention apparently being to minimise [[bias]].<ref name="bias">The word "bias" is here used to mean a "predisposition toward one belief before another". It is ''not'' used to mean a prejudice or an "unreasoned judgement".</ref>
Conservapedia, in contrast, has no such policy, and openly acknowledges its bias<ref name="bias" /> towards conservative ideas.
In practice, this includes accepting the [[Bible]] for what it claims to be.
Thus it is Christian and tends to be [[Young Earth creationism|young-Earth creationist]].

Conservapedia also aims to be [[accuracy|accurate]].
Many editors question how an [[encyclopedia]] which admits to having a bias can also be accurate.
This page aims to explain how the two are compatible.

== Clarifying terms ==

Before getting on to the main issue, let's clarify a couple of terms:

=== Evidence ===

Definitions of "evidence" include:
TROLL "information or signs indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid"<ref>[http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/evidence Evidence] in Compact Oxford English Dictionary</ref>
TROLL "an outward sign : indication"<ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/evidence Evidence] in Merriam Webster</ref>
TROLL "ground for belief; that which tends to prove or disprove something<ref name="Mac">The Penguin Macquarie Dictionary</ref>

=== Proof ===

Definitions of "proof" include:
TROLL "evidence establishing a fact or the truth of a statement"<ref>[http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/proof?view=uk Proof] in Compact Oxford English Dictionary</ref>
TROLL "the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact"<ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=proof Proof] in Merriam Webster</ref>
TROLL "Evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth"<ref name="Mac" />
There are of course other definitions, such as photographic proofs and mathematical proofs, but this discussion is not concerned with those sorts of proofs.

=== The difference between the two ===

Although the two terms are sometimes used interchangeably, it's probably best to think of ''evidence'' as the facts that are used to try and ''prove'' something, and ''proof'' as evidence sufficient to establish something as true, as one of the definitions above says.
The key word there, though, is "sufficient".

=== How much is enough? ===

The question then arises, how much evidence is sufficient to establish something as true?
The answer depends on the situation.

==== Criminal cases ====

In a criminal court case, the charges have to be ''proven'' true ''beyond reasonable doubt''.
That is, there is still ''some'' room for doubt, but not much.
This recognises that such things can rarely (if ever) be proved beyond any doubt at all.
Even if the defendant confesses to the crime, it's still possible to consider that he's confessed to protect someone else, or has been forced to confess, for example.
It's generally not possible to remove absolutely all doubt.
But being unable to remove absolutely all doubt does not prevent society from deciding guilt in such cases, even when the consequences of doing so are considerable, such as the defendant being found guilty and executed.

==== Civil cases ====

In civil court cases the "standard of proof" is lower.
In such cases, the decision is made on the basis of which side is ''more likely'' to be true.
There are valid reasons for having a different standard, but the point to note here is that different levels of "proof" are applicable in different circumstances.

==== Science ====

In science, it is often said that nothing can ever be proved.<ref>Mathematics is different, as theorems can be proved in maths.</ref><ref>[[Karl Popper]], in particular, argued this.</ref>
For example, no matter how many tests are conducted showing that water boils at 100 degrees Celsius, there remains the possibility, no matter how remote, that the next experiment might return a different result.

In that sense, the "standard of proof" for science can be said to be beyond ''all'' doubt.
But it's because there could always be ''some'' doubt, no matter how small, that science can never be said to "prove" anything.
(What it ''can'' do, is ''disprove'' something. And failure to disprove something, despite repeated attempts, is sufficient to consider the thing to be reasonably certain.)

== "Proving" God ==

<div style="border:black 1px solid; margin:5px; padding:5px; float:right; width:12em">A newspaper cartoon in the 1960s in Australia<ref>Either ''The Potts'' or ''Dad and Dave'', from memory.</ref> showed a man pointing to a television showing a photograph of Earth taken from space, and telling his elderly father that this proved that the Earth really was round, not flat. The unconvinced father replied, "I'm wise to their trick photography".</div>

Sceptics frequently argue not only that nobody has ever proved God's existence, but that such a proof is impossible because God is beyond being tested.
Such sceptics seem to be arguing for a ''scientific'' proof of God.
And indeed, in that respect, they are correct: God cannot be ''scientifically'' tested, as science can only test the ''natural'' world, whereas God is ''supernatural''.

However, such sceptics go further, and argue that there is ''no evidence'' for God's existence.
Sometimes, they appear to be using the word "evidence" as a synonym for "proof", and more specifically, for ''scientific proof'' (despite there being no such thing).

However, what such sceptics overlook is that there ''is evidence'' for God's existence.
Whether that ''evidence'' is "sufficient to establish something as true" in their minds is another matter.
Indeed, the evidence may well not convince them. And in that sense God's existence will indeed not be "proved".
But the evidence may well be enough to convince ''some people''. So for ''those'' people, God's existence ''has'' been proved.

It is therefore unreasonable to say that God's existence ''cannot'' be proved.
God's existence indeed ''can'' be proved, depending on what evidence it takes to convince one.

== Wikipedia and neutrality ==

Wikipedia has a "Neutral Point of View" policy, which essentially says that Wikipedia is not to take sides in an issue, but to present both sides of an issue fairly.

In practice, however, points of view that are popular (among the active editors) tend to predominate.
Thus evolution is presented as true, and opposing views such as creation and Intelligent Design are treated as pseudo science.

The controlling editors use various arguments to support this bias.
For example, they argue that minority views should not be given undue weight.
This argument is properly used to ensure that crackpot ideas such as a hollow Earth are not presented as equally likely to be true as opposing ideas.
However, it is also used to marginalise ideas such as creation and Intelligent Design for which there is widespread support, on the grounds that the ideas don't have widespread support among scientists.

What this demonstrates, however, is that being neutral is very difficult if not impossible to achieve, and in some cases is not actually desirable.

== Conservapedia and neutrality ==

Conservapedia gets around the difficulty of achieving neutrality by not trying to be neutral.
Unlike Wikipedia, which is not neutral but claims to be, Conservapedia is not claiming to be something that it is not (in this regard at least).

But that doesn't mean that Conservapedia cannot be truthful or factual.
Taking the view that the Earth is solid, not hollow, for example, is something that is reasonable to do, on the basis that it has been proved.
That is, there exists what we consider to be sufficient evidence to be certain that the Earth is solid.

Similarly, the people in charge of Conservapedia consider there to be sufficient evidence to believe that [[God]] exists, that [[Jesus]] is God, that the Bible is true, and that evolution (in the sense of common descent) is false.

No, none of these things has been ''scientifically'' proved.
But as explained above, that is not the only sort of proof.

People with opposing views are, of course, welcome to edit Conservapedia.
And they are definitely welcome to correct errors of fact.
They are even welcome to argue that there is ''not'' sufficient evidence to consider something proven.

However, it is inappropriate to insist that Conservapedia is being unreasonably biased, is wrong to claim certainty on certain matters (such as the existence of God), and that opposing views deserve as much space.

== Encyclopedias and neutrality ==

But is it appropriate for an encyclopedia to have a bias?
As mentioned above, Wikipedia does have a bias, despite its policy of neutrality.
Similar applies to traditional encyclopedias.
Britannica, Encarta, World Book, etc. all talk about evolution as though it is true, and are thus not neutral to the creation/evolution issue.

This is due to the view that predominates among those that write the encyclopedia.
The first edition of Encyclopedia Britannica, written at a time before Darwin made evolution popular, and even before there had been much change to the long-held idea of Earth being 6,000 years old, gave "the age of the earth as thousands of years, and [described] the global Flood of Noah as a real historical event."<ref>Walker, Tas., [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5440/ Believe it or not—the earth is young!], 28th November, 2007 (Creation Ministries International).</ref>

Conservapedia is no different.
It presents as truth what it believes to ''be'' truth.
In doing so, it is not claiming infallibility—mistakes are always possible.
But it is not being intellectually dishonest in doing so whilst at the same time claiming to be accurate, trustworthy, and factual.<ref>This is the principle. How well it works in practice, with the possibility of a given editor or editors with sufficient power pushing a particular view, is another matter.</ref>

== References ==
{{reflist}}

Fibonacci

2012-01-12T06:56:50Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

[[Image:Fibonacci.jpg|thumb|right|200px]]
'''Leonardo of Pisa''', better known as '''Fibonacci''', was a medieval European [[mathematician]] who is best known for having discovered the [[Fibonacci sequence]].

The Fibonacci sequence is a mathematical [[sequence]] which begins with two ones and in which each subsequent number is the sum of the previous two numbers. Therefore the first 14 numbers of the Fibonacci sequence are 1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89,144,233,377. Fibonacci discovered this sequence while studying the reproductive patterns of some rabbits he owned. This mathematical sequence has many practical applications in biology, e.g., in studying reproduction and the spiraling patterns of flowers.<ref>[http://britton.disted.camosun.bc.ca/fibslide/jbfibslide.htm]</ref> He wrote a math textbook called ''Liber Abaci'', which translates into [[English]] as ''The Book of the Abacus''.

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Mathematicians]]

Department of Justice Terms W

2012-01-12T06:56:47Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

<div style="width: 550px; text-align: center; border: 1px solid #999; background: #ccc; margin: .5em auto .5em auto; padding: 5px;">Department of Justice Terms: [[Department of Justice Terms A|A]]-[[Department of Justice Terms B|B]]-[[Department of Justice Terms C|C]]-[[Department of Justice Terms D|D]]-[[Department of Justice Terms E|E]]-[[Department of Justice Terms F|F]]-[[Department of Justice Terms G|G]]-[[Department of Justice Terms H|H]]-[[Department of Justice Terms I|I]]-[[Department of Justice Terms J|J]]-[[Department of Justice Terms K|K]]-[[Department of Justice Terms L|L]]-[[Department of Justice Terms M|M]]-[[Department of Justice Terms N|N]]-[[Department of Justice Terms O|O]]-[[Department of Justice Terms P|P]]-[[Department of Justice Terms Q|Q]]-[[Department of Justice Terms R|R]]-[[Department of Justice Terms S|S]]-[[Department of Justice Terms T|T]]-[[Department of Justice Terms U|U]]-[[Department of Justice Terms V|V]]-[[Department of Justice Terms W|W]]-[[Department of Justice Terms X|X]]-[[Department of Justice Terms Y|Y]]-[[Department of Justice Terms Z|Z]]</div>

[[warrant]]

[[witness]]

[[writ]]

[[writ of certiorari]]

[[Category:Department of Justice Terms]]

Jewish holidays

2012-01-12T06:56:45Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

'''Jewish holidays''' are the "holy days" observed according to the [[Judaism]]. They are cycled on a [[lunar calendar]] as opposed to [[Christian]] holidays which are cycled on the solar calendar. Unlike many lunar calendars such as the [[Islam|Islamic]] calendar the Jewish calendar has leap years to keep it aligned with the solar year.

The following are all the main holidays traditionally observed on the |Jewish calendar:

== Biblical holidays ==

TROLL '''[[Rosh Hashanah]]''' - 1-2 Tishrei - Rosh Ha-Shanah is the Jewish new year and day of judgement, in which [[God]] judges each person individually according to their deeds, and makes a decree for the following year. The holiday is characterized by the special mitzvah of blowing the shofar. The better people are "inscribed in the [[Book of Life]]."
TROLL '''[[Yom Kippur]]''' ('''Day of Atonement''') - 10 Tishrei - Yom Kippur is considered by Jews to be the holiest and most solemn day of the year. Its central theme is atonement and reconciliation. Eating, drinking, bathing, anointing with oil, and marital relations are prohibited. Fasting begins at sundown, and ends after nightfall the following day. Yom Kippur services begin with the prayer known as "Kol Nidrei", which must be recited before sunset.
TROLL '''[[Sukkot]]''' - 15-21 Tishrei - Sukkot is a 7-day festival, also known as the Feast of Booths, the Feast of Tabernacles, or just Tabernacles. It is one of the three pilgrimage festivals mentioned in the Bible. The word sukkot is the plural of the Hebrew word sukkah, meaning booth. Jews are commanded to "dwell" in booths during the holiday. This generally means taking meals, but some sleep in the sukkah as well. There are specific rules for constructing a sukkah. The seventh day of the holiday is called Hoshanah Rabbah.
TROLL '''Simchat Torah''' - 22 (23) Tishrei - Simchat Torah means "rejoicing with the Torah". It actually refers to a special ceremony which takes place on the holiday of Shemini Atzeret. This holiday immediately follows the conclusion of the holiday of Sukkot. In Israel, Shemini Atzeret is one day long and includes the celebration of Simchat Torah. Outside Israel, Shemini Atzeret is two days long and Simchat Torah is observed on the second day, which is often referred to by the name of the ceremony. The last portion of the Torah is read, completing the annual cycle, followed by the first chapter of Genesis. Services are especially joyous, and all attendees, young and old, are involved.
TROLL '''[[Pesach]]''' ('''[[Passover]]''') - 14-22 Nisan - Pesach (Passover) commemorates the liberation of the Israelite slaves from Egypt. No leavened food is eaten during the week of Pesach, in commemoration of the fact that the Jews left Egypt so quickly that their bread did not have enough time to rise.
TROLL '''Shavuot''' - 6, 7 Sivan - Shavuot, The Feast of Weeks is one of the three pilgrim festivals (Shalosh regalim) ordained in the Torah, Shavuot marks the end of the counting of the Omer, the period between Passover and Shavuot. According to Rabbinic tradition, the [[Ten Commandments]] were given on this day. During this holiday the Torah portion containing the [[Ten Commandments]] is read in the synagogue, and the biblical Book of Ruth is read as well. It is traditional to eat dairy meals during Shavuot.
TROLL '''Shabbat''' ('''Shabbas''') - Every seventh day - Jewish law accords the Sabbath the status of a holiday. Jews celebrate a ''Shabbat'', a day of rest, on the seventh day of each week. Jewish law defines a day as ending at nightfall, which is when the next day then begins. Thus, ''Shabbat'' begins at sundown Friday night, and ends at nightfall Saturday night.
:In many ways Jewish law gives ''Shabbat'' the status of being the most important holy day in the Jewish calendar.
:TROLLIt is the first holiday mentioned in the ''[[Tanakh]]'' (Hebrew Bible), and [[God]] was the first one to observe it.
:TROLLThe Jewish services treats the Sabbath as a bride and queen (along with God the groom).
:TROLLThe [[Torah]] reading on the Sabbath has more sections of Torah readings than on Yom Kippur, the most of any Jewish holiday.
:TROLLThere is a tradition that the [[Messiah]] will come if every Jew observes the Sabbath twice in a row. Additionally, Orthodox Jews observe 39 restrictions on the Sabbath. These include not cooking, lighting fires (includes using electricity), extinguishing fires, writing, cutting, etc.
TROLL '''[[Purim]]''' - 14 Adar (2 Adar leap year) - Purim commemorates the events that took place in the Book of Esther. It is celebrated by reading or acting out the story of Esther, and by making disparaging noises at every mention of Haman (the antagonist)'s name. This is by far more fun than Hanukkah.

== Non-Biblical holidays ==

TROLL '''[[Chanukah]]''' - 25 Kislev - 2, 3 Tevet - The story of Hanukkah is preserved in the books of the First and Second Maccabees. These books are not part of the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible), they are apocryphal books instead. The miracle of the one-day supply of oil miraculously lasting eight days is first described in the [[Talmud]].
TROLL '''[[Tu Bishva]]t''' - 15 Shevat - Tu Bishvat is the new year for trees. According to the Mishnah, it marks the day from which fruit tithes are counted each year, and marks the timepoint from which the Biblical prohibition on eating the first three years of fruit and the requirement to bring the fourth year fruit to the Temple in Jerusalem were counted. In modern times, it is celebrated by eating various fruits and nuts associated with the Land of [[Israel]].

[[Category:Holidays]][[Category:Judaism]]

Dixie Chicks

2012-01-12T06:56:40Z

Alexpolem: Reverted edits by Billtannan (talk) to last version by Aschlafly

The '''Dixie Chicks''' have the distinction of being the highest selling female group in any musical [[genre]]. They are the only country group, and the only female group, of any genre to earn two consecutive Diamond Awards, which are given for albums that sell 10 million copies. <ref>http://www.dixiechicks.com/</ref>

The Dixie Chicks' career started in 1990, from their home in [[Dallas]], [[Texas]]. There were originally four singers and instrumentalists combining the sound of [[Country and Western]] and [[Bluegrass]] music: sisters Martie and Emily Erwin, Laura Lynch and Robin Lynn Macy, although the latter left the group in 1992.

In 1995 Laura Lynch left the group and Natalie Maines was recruited as their new lead singer. By this time the Erwin sisters had married and played under the names of Martie (Erwin) Siedel and Emily (Erwin) Robison. The success of their albums ''Wide Open Spaces'', ''Fly'', and ''Home'' led to their being asked, in 2003, to perform "The Star-Spangled Banner" at Super Bowl XXXVII.

Later in 2003 Natalie Maines made an unguarded comment at a concert in London, saying:

<blockquote>''Just so you know, we’re on the good side with y’all. We do not want this war, this violence, and we’re ashamed that the President of the United States is from [[Texas]].''</blockquote>

Directly after this, co-band member Emily Robison said that the band supported the American troops.<ref> ''Shut Up And Sing'', 2006</ref>

Maines' comment angered many people, who believed she should not have criticized the President during the approach to a war. For a time, their career foundered, because of the vociferous opposition of people who disagreed with them. Demonstrations were held, and death threats made towards them. Ironically, their right to make their remark was defended by President [[George W. Bush]], who said:

<blockquote>''Freedom is a two-way street. I don't really care what the Dixie Chicks said. I want to do what I think is right for the American people, and if some singers or Hollywood stars feel like speaking out, that's fine. That's the great thing about America.''</blockquote>

Maines later apologised, saying:

<blockquote>''As a concerned American citizen, I apologize to President Bush because my remark was disrespectful. I feel that whoever holds that office should be treated with the utmost respect. We are currently in Europe and witnessing a huge anti-American sentiment as a result of the perceived rush to war. While war may remain a viable option, as a mother, I just want to see every possible alternative exhausted before children and American soldiers' lives are lost. I love my country. I am a proud American.''<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/2867221.stm</ref> </blockquote>

However, the recent documentary film ''Shut Up And Sing'', which chronicled the whole affair, and the success of their album ''Taking The Long Way Round'', seems to indicate that this was a short-term [[hiccup]] in a story of solid musical success. <ref>http://www.dixie-chicks.com/</ref>

==Discography==

''Thank Heavens for Dale Evans'' (1990) 
''Little Ol' Cowgirl'' (1992) 
''Shouldn't a Told You That'' (without Robin Lynn Macy) (1993) 
''Wide Open Spaces'' (with Natalie Maines replacing Laura Lynch) (1998) 
''Fly'' (1999) 
''Home'' (2002) 
''Top of the World Tour: Live'' (live concert album) (2003) 
''Taking the Long Way'' (2006)

==References==

<references/>

[[Category: Anti-war Movements]]
[[category:Bands]]
[[category:Liberal Activists]]