Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Dollar (U.S.)

2007-06-23T17:12:44Z

Be not dismayed: The exchange rate of the US dollar to the Euro is about 1.35:1. The Euro is worth more than the US dollar. Inflation rates in Europe are about 2.5%, in US it is 5.5%

The United States Dollar is the official currency of the United States. It is also widely used as a reserve currency outside of the United States.

Until 1974, the value of the United States dollar was fixed to a value of a fixed amount of a precious metal. Between the late 18th century and the late 19th century, the [[United States]] dollar was fixed to the value of either gold or silver in a system known as bimetallism. In the early 1970's, the [[trade deficit]] and [[inflation]] in the United States, caused a run on the gold reserves used to back the United States dollar. This forced the United States to delink the value of the dollar from a specific amount of gold. Currently, the issuance of currency is controlled by the Federal Reserve Banking system.

==The Currency==
The dollar symbol $ is a corruption of the monogram of the initials U.S., and is often used in a derogatory fashion. Ayn Rand once said that "Do you know that the United States is the only country in history that has ever used its own monogram as a symbol of depravity? Ask yourself why. Ask yourself how long a country that did that could hope to exist, and whose moral standards have destroyed it." This statement would not be true if we took it to mean that some US citizens used the monogram in a derogatory fashion, since that is, and has been, a common form of protest. What differs the US from other nations to allow that kind of statement is our strong national heritage in which an act by one citizen is taken to be one of the whole nation. This is the reason that the Roman fasces often appears on our currency.

There are several symbols which appear on the dollar, and it is often said by the [[Federal Reserve]] that they are there to prevent counterfeiting. This may be true, but the symbols contain a great deal of [[Freemasonry|Masonic]] symbolism<ref>http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20Government/Federal%20Reserve%20Scam/satan_on_our_dollar.htm</ref>. Some modern Christians think this to be an innocuous link to the Masonic lifestyle of the [[Founding Fathers]], while other modern Christians think it to be a link to a secretive organization bent of establishing a New World Order through the [[United Nations]].

The Dollar Bill currently features George Washington but, in 2000, at the request of leftists who were upset at George Washington's ownership of slaves, the US Mint began to issue Sacagawea Dollars in the interest of multiculturalism. The coins were not particularly popular because the American public was more interested in having the Father of America on their unital denomination of their currency than Sacagawea, whose contributions to the Lewis & Clark expedition were probably overstated. Also, in late 1999, secular pressures were mounting for "In God We Trust" to be removed from the dollar coin for the reasons that Sacagawea wasn't a Christian, and because liberal secularists thought it violated the separation of church and state (not stopping to think that it didn't name a specific deity). In the end, "In God We Trust" was added to the coin. Unfortunately, it won't be on the new Presidential series<ref>http://www.alainsnewsletter.com/s/spip.php?article346</ref>

==References==
<references/>

SaveNetRadio

2007-06-23T17:07:36Z

Be not dismayed: New page: SaveNetRadio is a website devoted to stopping the royalties proposed by the Copyright Royalty Board. The Copyright Royalty Board is planning to raise the current rates on July 15, 2007. Th...

SaveNetRadio is a website devoted to stopping the royalties proposed by the Copyright Royalty Board. The Copyright Royalty Board is planning to raise the current rates on July 15, 2007. The new rates will be for commercial and for larger non-commercial webcasters are based on a pay-per-play rate of $.0008 for 2006, $.0011 for 2007, $.0014 for 2008, $.0018 for 2009 and $.0019 for 2010.

SaveNetRadio.org is currently lobbying to stop the hikes which, it claims, will "kill music". They dub July 15 "the day music dies"

In response to the new royalties, many webcasters are participating in a "Day of Silence" which is to take place June 22, 2007. On June 22, millions of webcasters will shut off their internet streams to protest the new royalties.

[http://www.savenetradio.org/]

Regnat populus

2007-06-23T16:53:49Z

Be not dismayed: New page: Regnat populus is a Latin phrase meaning "(The) People Rule) and is the state motto of Arkansas. It was first proposed by the Arkansas legislature in 1864 as ''Regnant populi'' but was cha...

Regnat populus is a Latin phrase meaning "(The) People Rule) and is the state motto of Arkansas. It was first proposed by the Arkansas legislature in 1864 as ''Regnant populi'' but was changed to its current form as of May 23, 1907.

Ditat Deus

2007-06-23T16:49:29Z

Be not dismayed: New page: Ditat Deus is Latin meaning "God enriches". It is the state motto of Arizona. Richard Cunningham McCormick, the Secretary of the Arizona Territory, first put it in the Seal of Arizona.

Ditat Deus is Latin meaning "God enriches". It is the state motto of Arizona. Richard Cunningham McCormick, the Secretary of the Arizona Territory, first put it in the Seal of Arizona.

North to the future

2007-06-23T16:46:06Z

Be not dismayed: New page: North to the future is the state motto of Alaska. In 1963 the Alaska Centennial Commission sponsored a contest for anyone to come up with a centennial motto. The prize was $300.00. After r...

North to the future is the state motto of Alaska. In 1963 the Alaska Centennial Commission sponsored a contest for anyone to come up with a centennial motto. The prize was $300.00. After receiving 761 entries, the commission chose Richard Peter's motto who was a Juneau journalist.

Sic semper tyrannis

2007-06-23T16:35:17Z

Be not dismayed: New page: Sic semper tyrannis is a Latin phrase which means "Thus always to tyrants". Reportedly, Marcus Brutus said it at the assassination of Julius Caesar. It is the Commonwealth motto of Virgin...

Sic semper tyrannis is a Latin phrase which means "Thus always to tyrants". Reportedly, Marcus Brutus said it at the assassination of Julius Caesar.

It is the Commonwealth motto of Virginia and the motto of Allentown, Pennsylvania.

It was also shouted by John Wilkes Booth after he shot Abraham Lincoln.

Chalk

2007-06-23T15:04:54Z

Be not dismayed: New page: Chalk is a white, Sedimentary rock, composed of calcite. When chalk is formed naturally on a hill, it is called downland. Nowadays, chalk has been replaced by other substances. For exampl...

Chalk is a white, Sedimentary rock, composed of calcite. When chalk is formed naturally on a hill, it is called downland.

Nowadays, chalk has been replaced by other substances. For example, the "chalk" that is used in blackboard writing or in sidewalk chalk is actually gypsum.

Newspaper

2007-06-23T04:16:52Z

Be not dismayed:

'''News papers''' are a common sight in the [[United States of America]]. They are published daily or weekly, and contain news about what's going on in America and sometimes overseas. The newspaper industry is currently on the decline, because of the influence of the 24 hour news channels like [[Fox News]] and [[CNN]] and the internet.

Despite being an older media, newspapers in the United States tend to slant liberal: ''[[The New York Times]]'' or ''[[The Washington Post]]'', for example.[http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/biasbasics1.asp]

Newspapers do have one advantage over news channels that have helped them stay afloat: there is no way to send [[comics]] over the airwaves. Therefore, newspapers make money by publishing comic strips like "For Better Or For Worse", "Mallard Fillmore", and the popular "Mutts".

Roman Numerals

2007-06-23T04:13:58Z

Be not dismayed:

'''Roman Numerals''' are the letters used by the Roman Empire to show numeric values.

* I = 1
* V = 5
* X = 10
* L = 50
* C = 100
* D = 500
* M = 1000

== Large Numbers ==
To write large numbers, like for instance five thousand, Romans would not use MMMMM. Rather, they would write V and put a bar over it. A bar over a letter represents one thousand times that letter.

== Subtraction ==
Letters are put in order from greatest to least. A lesser letter occurring before a greater letter is subtraction. When subtracting, only subtracting powers of ten such as I, X, or C is allowed. You cannot subtract with V, for example. Too, you can only subtract one digit away. For example, IIX is not 8 but rather use VIII for 8. Finally, you cannot subtract one letter from another letter if it is ten times greater than it, so one would not be able to subtract X from M since M is one hundred times greater than X, yet you can subtract X from either L or C.

They can still be found today when showing dates for movies or television shows.

* Example: MCMLXXXIII = 1983
* Example: MCC = 1200

Sound of Majesty

2007-06-23T04:05:35Z

Be not dismayed: New page: Sound of Majesty is a syndicated radio program hosted by Greg Wheatley. It features "music of the church" including hymns, anthems, classical music, and spirituals. It is featured on the M...

Sound of Majesty is a syndicated radio program hosted by Greg Wheatley. It features "music of the church" including hymns, anthems, classical music, and spirituals. It is featured on the Moody Broadcasting Network.

[http://www.mbn.org/GenMoody/default.asp?sectionID=FFBF849BB87F45348AF053D442D6441D]

Huey Long

2007-06-23T03:51:25Z

Be not dismayed: New page: Huey Long was an American Democratic politician from Louisiana during the late twenties to the mid thirties. He was the governor of Louisiana from 1928-1932 and Senator from Louisiana from...

Huey Long was an American Democratic politician from Louisiana during the late twenties to the mid thirties. He was the governor of Louisiana from 1928-1932 and Senator from Louisiana from 1932-1935.

== Governor ==
While governor of Louisiana , he was tried for impeachment after he tried to impose a five-cent tax on oil to pay for his social programs. The State Legislature did not approve of this and tried to impeach him. This backfired, and Huey Long went after his enemies fiercely.

== Senator ==
While Senator, Huey Long originally supported the New Deal program, but later he recanted his support for it. He wanted President Roosevelt to implement a "Share Our Wealth" program in which no American could have a personal fortune of more than $5,000,000, receive an income of greater than $1,000,000, or receive an inheritance of over $5,000,000. Any money earned after this would be divvied up and supposedly families would receive $2,000 to $2,500.

== Death ==
Huey Long was assassinated September 8, 1935 by Carl Weiss, a medical doctor. Carl was then shot to death by Long's bodyguards. Carl's family denies that he shot him, and rather some suggest that Carl merely punched Long and that one of the stray bullets of the bodyguards had hit Long.

Huey Long's book, ''My First Days in the White House'', was published posthumously.

ICQ

2007-06-23T03:35:12Z

Be not dismayed: New page: ICQ is an instant messaging service which is owned by AOL. It was originally owned by Mirabilis, an Israeli company. It was launched November of 1996, and on June 8, 1998 it was sold to A...

ICQ is an instant messaging service which is owned by AOL. It was originally owned by Mirabilis, an Israeli company.

It was launched November of 1996, and on June 8, 1998 it was sold to AOL for $407,000,000.

The main difference that users notice between AIM and ICQ is that ICQ issues a Universal Internet Number, or UIN, whereas AIM lets users choose their own screen name. Both AIM and ICQ are owned by the same corporation, Time Warner, so AIM users and ICQ users can freely message each other without the need of having to download any other software.

Ron Paul

2007-06-23T03:27:54Z

Be not dismayed: /* 2008 Presidential Campaign */

[[Image:Ronpaul.jpg|right|thumb]]

'''Ronald Ernest “Ron” Paul''' (born 20 August, 1935) is a 10th-term Congressman, medical doctor ([[M.D.]]) and a 2008 [[presidential candidate]] from the U.S. state of [[Texas]]. As a [[Republican Party|Republican]], he has represented [[Texas's 14th congressional district]] in the [[United States House of Representatives|U.S. House of Representatives]] since 1997, and had previously served as the representative from Texas's 22nd district in 1976 and from 1979 to 1985.

Paul advocates the limited role of government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to monetary policies based on commodity-backed currency. He has earned the nickname "Dr. No" for voting against any bill he believes violates the Constitution. In the words of former Treasury Secretary William Simon, Paul is the "one exception to the Gang of 535" on Capitol Hill. He has never voted to raise taxes or congressional pay. He has always voted against the [[USA PATRIOT Act]], the [[Military Commissions Act of 2006]], and the [[Iraq War]].

==Congressional record==

*He has never voted to raise taxes.
*He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
*He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
*He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
*He has never taken a government-paid junket.
*He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
*He voted against the Patriot Act.
*He voted against regulating the Internet.
*He voted against the Iraq war.
*He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
*He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.
*He introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any other single member of Congress.

== Early life and education ==

Dr. Ron Paul was born in [[Pittsburgh]], Pennsylvania to Howard Caspar Paul and Margaret Paul.<ref>http://dailypaul.com/node/53</ref><ref>http://www.wargs.com/political/paul.html</ref> He graduated from Dormont High School in Dormont, Pennsylvania, in 1953. Paul attended Gettysburg College, receiving his [[Bachelor of Arts]] degree in 1957, and the [[Duke University School of Medicine]], receiving [[Doctor of Medicine|M.D.]] in 1961. He did his [[internship]] and [[Residency (medicine)|residency]] at [[Henry Ford Hospital]] in [[Detroit]], Michigan, from 1961 to 1962, and was a [[flight surgeon]] in the [[United States Air Force]] from 1963 to 1968. He and his wife Carol moved to Texas in 1968, where he began his medical practice in Brazoria County. As a specialist in [[obstetrics]]/[[gynecology]], Dr. Paul has delivered more than 4,000 babies. He and Carol, who reside in Lake Jackson, Texas, are the proud parents of five children and have seventeen grandchildren.

===Political affiliations and support===
Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas and is also a Libertarian. Paul remains on good terms with the Libertarian Party and addressed its national convention as recently as 2004.<ref>[http://www.theadvocates.org/liberator/vol-09-num-10.htm Liberator online archive] on Advocates for self-governing accessed at March 4, 2007</ref>

Paul served as honorary chairman and is a current member of the [[Republican Liberty Caucus]], a political action organization dedicated to promoting the ideals of individual rights, limited government and free enterprise within the Republican Party.<ref>[http://fl.rlc.org/ Republican Liberty Caucus of Florida] accessed at March 4, 2007</ref>

Unlike many political candidates, Paul receives the overwhelming majority of his campaign contributions (96.8% in 2005-2006), from individuals. [http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.asp?CID=N00005906&cycle=2006/]

===Political Views===

Paul wants to "reinstate the [[United States Constitution|Constitution]] and restore the [[Republic]]." He rejects a [[welfare state]] or [[nanny state]] role for the federal government, and advocates a strong [[non-interventionism|non-interventionist]] [[foreign policy]].

He voted against the [[Iraq War]] in 2002 and has offered alternatives such as granting the President authority to grant [[Letters of Marque and Reprisal]], and arming [[pilot]]s. He is the only Republican presidential candidate to have voted against the Iraq War.

Paul's desire to secure U.S. borders remains a key topic in his 2008 presidential campaign. He opposes the [[North American Union]] proposition and its proposed integration of Mexico, the United States of America, and Canada. Paul voted "yes" on the [[Secure Fence Act of 2006]], which authorizes the construction of an additional 700 miles of double-layered fencing between the U.S and Mexico. Paul opposes illegal immigration as well as amnesty for illegal immigrants.

In the May 3, 2007 GOP Debate, Ron Paul stated that as President, he would seek the immediate abolition of the [[Internal Revenue Service|IRS]] and the abolition of the income tax. As Congressman, he has long fought for the [[Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Section_9:_Limits_on_Congress|prohibition of direct taxes]] by repeal of the [[16th Amendment to the United States Constitution|16th Amendment]] which created the [[income tax]].

==2008 Presidential Campaign==

Paul formally declared his candidacy for the Presidential election in 2008 in 12 March, 2007 as a guest on [[Washington Journal]] on [[C-SPAN]].<ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA031207.paul2008.EN.74141d9.html | title = Paul formally launches presidential bid | first = Gary | last = Martin | work = San Antonio Express-News | date = 2007-03-12 | accessdate = 2007-03-13}}</ref> <ref>[http://chbn.com/Clip.aspx?key=1CD9E3A0397BCBEC Ron Paul announcing candidacy on C-SPAN]</ref>. In regards to his candidacy, he had a 30-minute interview with online political analyst [[James Kotecki]] regarding foreign policy, Congress and the Constitution, and personal liberties. <ref>[http://www.youtube.com/jameskotecki James Kotecki interviews Ron Paul]</ref>

Paul participated (along with nine other Republican presidential candidates) in the [[Ronald Reagan Presidential Library]]'s 2008 Republican Presidential Candidates Debate on May 3, 2007. Ron Paul finished first in the MSNBC poll following the GOP primary debate with 43 percent -- beating second place [[Mitt Romney]] by 5 percentage points.[http://www.ronpaul2008.typepad.com/]

Paul seemed to have dropped slightly in the polls that followed the second Republican debate in Columbia, South Carolina, to 25 percent. This was probably as a result of his suggestion that weekly bombing of [[Iraq]] following [[Operation Desert Fox]] in December 1998 may have contributed sufficiently to [[Arab]] anger at the United States as to make the [[September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks]] inevitable. Paul was excoriated by [[Rudy Giuliani]], who said that this was the most bizarre explanation for the attacks he had ever heard. Other Republican commentators sought to explain Paul's continued strength in post-debate polls as the result of multiple votes by his supporters or voting by non-Republicans. In response to Rudy Giuliani, the next day at the National Press Club, Ron Paul offered Rudy a book list to read regarding the issue of American foreign policy. These books are ''Imperial Hubris'' by Michael Scheuer, ''Dying to Win'' by Robert Pape, ''Blowback'' by Chalmers Johnson, and ''The 9-11 Commission Report'' by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks.

Eric Dondero, a former Ron Paul staffer, has declared himself a candidate against Paul in the 2008 Republican primary election to represent the 14th District of Texas in Congress.

==Books by Ron Paul==
* ''Challenge to Liberty''. Lake Jackson, Tex.: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education
* ''Gold, Peace, and Prosperity''. Lake Jackson, Tex.: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education
* ''Ten Myths About Paper Money''. Lake Jackson, Tex.: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education
* ''The Case for Gold''. Reprinted by Cato Institute, 1982; Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2007. ISBN 0-932790-31-3. ([http://www.mises.org/books/caseforgold.pdf])
* ''A Republic, If You Can Keep It''
* ''Mises and Austrian Economics: A Personal View''. Auburn, Ala.: [[Ludwig von Mises Institute]], 1984.
* ''Freedom Under Siege: The U.S. Constitution After 200 Years''. Lake Jackson, Tex.: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, 1987. ([http://www.dailypaul.com/node/65] Book distributed with permission in 7 parts in pdf-format)
* ''A Foreign Policy of Freedom''. Lake Jackson, Tex.: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, 2007. ISBN 0-912453-00-1

== References ==

* Gwynne, Sam ([[1 October]] [[2001]]). ''Texas Monthly''.
* Bernstein, Alan ([[23 May]] [[1996]]). “Newsletter excerpts offer ammunition to Paul's opponent; GOP hopeful quoted on race, crime”, ''The Houston Chronicle'', p. A33.

==External Links==
*[http://www.ronpaul2008.com/ Official Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign Site]
*[http://www3.webng.com/ronpaul Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign Overview]
*[http://www.myspace.com/congressmanronpaul Ron Paul's MySpace page]
*[http://www.house.gov/paul/ Official web site of Congressman Ron Paul]
*[http://www.ronpaul08.blog-city.com/ Ron Paul 2008 Blog]
*[http://antiwar.com/paul/ Rep. Ron Paul's Column for Antiwar.com]
* [http://RonPaulReport.SquareSpace.com/ The Ron Paul Report]
* [http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/allsummary.asp?CID=N00005906 OpenSecrets.org - Congressional campaign contributions]
* [http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2008/primaries/candidates/paul.html Vote 2008: Ron Paul - Online NewsHour with Jim Lehrer]
* [http://ronpaul.ning.com Ron Paul 2008 social network]
* [http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/can_detail/P80000748 Federal Election Commission - Presidential campaign contributions]
* [http://senate.ontheissues.org/Ron_Paul.htm On the Issues - Ron Paul] issue positions and quotes
* [http://vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=BC031929 Project Vote Smart - Ron Paul]
* [http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ron_Paul SourceWatch Congresspedia - Ron Paul]
* [http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/p000583/ Voting record maintained by the Washington Post]
* [http://www.ronpaul08.blog-city.com/ Ron Paul 2008 Blog]
* [http://electronpaul.blogspot.com/ Ron Paul for President 2008 Blog and Links]
* [http://www.theadvocates.org/celebrities/ron-paul.html Advocates for Self-Government profile of Ron Paul]
* [http://www.medicalmarijuanaprocon.org/BiosInd/Paul.htm Congressman Ron Paul and Medical Marijuana]
* [http://www.321gold.com/editorials/taylor/taylor031706.html Congressman Ron Paul Talks About Gold, Oil & the Economy]
* [http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2004/pr042104.htm National Taxpayers Union Honors Ron Paul as one of 29 Congressmen who are "Taxpayer's Friends"]
* [http://www.mediamonitors.net/ronpaul2.html Commentary by Rep. Paul on U.S. policy in the Middle East]
* [http://www.virtuemag.org/articles/ron-paul Virtue Magazine Political profile of Ron Paul]
* [http://www.counterpunch.org/paul03182004.html The Broadcast Indecency Act, An Indecent Attack on the First Amendment] by Ron Paul
* [http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2002/cr062702.htm Is America a Police State?], speech before the U.S. House of Representatives on June 27, 2002
* [http://dailypaul.com/node/53 The American Dream - Through the Eyes of Mrs. Ron Paul] by Mrs. Ron Paul on TheDailyPaul.

[[Category:US Representative]]

JCFaith

2007-06-23T03:21:44Z

Be not dismayed: New page: JCFaith is a Christian alternative to MySpace. It "seeks to bring Christians together that have a passion for God, life, community and technology."[http://www.jcfaith.com/default.php?sub_s...

JCFaith is a Christian alternative to MySpace. It "seeks to bring Christians together that have a passion for God, life, community and technology."[http://www.jcfaith.com/default.php?sub_section=about_us]. It was launched April 24, 2006.

On Jan. 9, 2007, it launched a Christian viral video website- JCFaithTV. [http://www.jcfaithtv.com/]

Alex Jones

2007-06-23T03:14:53Z

Be not dismayed: New page: Alex Jones is a controversial talk show radio host. His show usualyl deals with government conspiracies, governmental failures, the coming police state, and constitutionalism. He is a 9/1...

Alex Jones is a controversial talk show radio host. His show usualyl deals with government conspiracies, governmental failures, the coming police state, and constitutionalism.

He is a 9/11 truther, believing that 9/11 was pulled off entirely by the United States Government.

He has made many documentaries in which he sets out to expose how the government is entrenching on our rights or to expose the truth about 9/11.

== External Links ==
*[http://www.prisonplanet.com/]
*[http://www.infowars.com/]
*[http://www.jonesreport.com/]

Talk radio

2007-06-23T03:08:06Z

Be not dismayed: New page: Talk radio is a radio format which predominately features a host who talks about various issues, whether items in the news, book reviews, or political issues. Talk radio saw a dramatic ri...

Talk radio is a radio format which predominately features a host who talks about various issues, whether items in the news, book reviews, or political issues.

Talk radio saw a dramatic rise when the FCC repealed the Fairness Doctrine which mandated that equal air time be given to opposing views. Since the repeal, talk radio has been dominated largely by conservative voices such as [[Rush Limbaugh]], [[Sean Hannity]], and [[Michael Savage]]. Generally, [[liberal]] talk radio has failed, as Air America Radio, a [[liberal]] radio network, went bankrupt on October 13, 2006.

Talk radio also inclueds topics such as gardening, the supernatural, relationships, advice, sports, health, and home improvement.

User talk:Be not dismayed.

2007-06-23T02:55:59Z

Be not dismayed: New page: You have come into a page that does not exist; does anything exist on the web? Can I feel it? Taste it? Smell it? The internet only exists as long as other humans exist; it in itself is no...

You have come into a page that does not exist; does anything exist on the web? Can I feel it? Taste it? Smell it? The internet only exists as long as other humans exist; it in itself is nonexistent, yet it spurs people to exist.

It fosters thought, yet does thought exist?

Are all actions logical if you reason them through your mind? If so, were the Nuremberg trials unreasonable?

Martin Luther

2007-06-23T01:40:29Z

Be not dismayed:

'''Martin Luther''' (November 10, 1483 - February 18,1546) was the leader of the German [[Reformation]].

In 1505, Martin Luther was a law student caught outside in the middle of a thunderstorm. A bolt of [[lightning]] struck the ground near him. Terrified, he cried out to St. Anne for protection and promised to become a [[monk]] if he survived the storm. He did survive, and then left law school to join an Augustinian monastery.

At the monastery, Martin Luther felt plagued by the [[devil]] and realized how corrupt the [[Catholic church]] was. He began to form his own opinions.

Martin Luther founded Protestantism in Europe on October 31, 1517, when he nailed [[the 95 Theses]] or issues to the door of his Wittenberg Church in what is now Germany. The source of Luther's complaint was a project to rebuild St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, for which church officials were offering [[indulgences]] in exchange for donations. Martin Luther objected and list 95 complaints to spark public debate.

Here were two of Luther's most important Theses:

Thesis 82: ''Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial.''

Thesis 86: ''Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?''

Pope Leo X spent his time on the beauty flourishing during the Renaissance, and was a patron of the great artist Raphael. Pope Leo X probably never recognized the significance of Martin Luther and his followers. Some historians feel that if the pope had responded more seriously, then the subsequent schism in Germany would not have occurred.

But German nobles did not like the flow of money to Rome, and they backed Martin Luther in order to cut off the donations by Germans to support Rome.

In 1520, Pope Leo X announced the papal bull Exsurge Domine, which required Luther to withdraw 41 of his 95 Theses or be excommunicated. Luther refused and was then excommunicated by the Catholic Church.

It was then up to [[German]] authorities to take any legal action against Luther. The 21-year-old Holy Roman Emperor Charles V ordered him to stand trial before an assembly (a "[[Diet]]") of estates of the Holy Roman Empire that met in Worms, a small town in what is now Germany. This famous assembly is therefore known as the "Diet of Worms." The verdict (the "Edict of Worms") was "guilty". Luther was declared an outlaw who should be arrested.

But Luther had already left the trial before the verdict was rendered. He hid at Wartburg Castle at Eisenach, where Frederick the Wise, Elector of Saxony, protected him. Luther took the pseudonym Junker Jorg (Nobleman George), grew a wide beard and dressed like a knight. While in hiding he translated the New Testament from Greek into German in 1522. (By 1534, Luther had translated all of the Old Testament from Hebrew to German also.)

Luther translated Romans 3:28 by adding an extra German word for "alone" (alleine or alleyn) after the phrase: "justified by faith": "So halten wir nun dafür, daß der Mensch gerecht werde ohne des Gesetzes Werke, alleyn durch den Glauben." Luther believed that man is justified by faith alone, and that salvation comes only from faith. The Catholic Church (and [[Eastern Orthodox Church]]) taught that man is justified by faith, good works and confession to the Church authorities.

A remarkable invention awaited Luther's German translation of the [[Bible]]: in 1447 the German [[Johannes Gutenberg]] had already invented the movable-type printing press. This enabled Luther's translation to be printed for the public in September 1522. The Christian world would never be the same again. (The Gutenberg Bible, which put the Latin Vulgate in book format, had been printed in 1455 and it is the oldest existing book in the West.)

Charles V tried to stop the spread of Lutheranism. In 1544, Charles V sent armies against the German princes, but the Peace of Augsburg in 1555 gave each German ruler the right to choose the religion for his state. The princes in southern Germany selected Roman Catholicism, but the princes in northern Germany chose Lutheranism. After World War II, when Germany split into West and East Germany, the West German part contained the predominantly Roman Catholic regions and the East German part consisted of the mostly Lutheran regions.

Martin Luther continued to write, and taught at a German university for his financial support. He wrote extremely harsh things about the pope and about Jewish people, even urging the destruction of their homes and the burning of synagogues and schools. Historians debate today whether Luther's anti-Semitic writings were responsible, directly or indirectly, for the Holocaust by the Germans in World War II. Luther harshly criticized many peoples in addition to Jews; a pamphlet of his in 1545 was entitled "Against the Roman Papacy an Institution of the Devil," and he urged burning witches to death. Some of Luther’s writings seem quite vulgar by today's standards.

Lutheranism has only 70 million adherents today, which is only about 7% of the Catholic population. But nearly all Christians, even Catholics, have sung a famous hymn written by Luther: "A Mighty Fortress is Our God." Moreover, hundreds of millions of Christians worldwide agree with Luther that justification is by faith alone.

Luther passed away in February, 1546, having lived his latter years in poor health.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Luther, Martin}}
[[Category:Religious people]]

Debate:Which Christian denomination is the most true to the central teachings of Christianity?

2007-06-23T01:38:12Z

Be not dismayed:

The Episcopalians, but that's personal preference :P

I would say either Presbyterian or Reformed Baptist. I belong to a non-denominational church and Reformed Baptist is everything I believe. The only thing I disagree with about Presbyterians is infant baptism. I could never baptize my child for any reasons.

I tend to be distrustful about denominations in general, but I tend to go with the Southern Baptists or the Methodists. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 20:03, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

: Is that what ''you'' believe? Or would say, Ethiopian Orthodox[http://ethiopianorthodox.org/english/indexenglish.htm][http://sellassie.ourfamily.com/culture/church.html] be closer to what was taught in old times? Alternatively, are you suggesting that the central teachings of Christianity have changed through time? I am fairly sure it is trivial to show that the Ethiopian Orthodox Church has not changed its teachings for at least a few hundred (if not a thousand or more) years - long before North America was a scribble on a map. And thus I ask, how can the Baptist church be closer to the central teachings of Christianity? And even more to the point - what are those central teachings? --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 20:10, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Well, I don't really have a horse in this race, but I'll go for a long shot with Mormons.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 20:05, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

I foresee a hornet's nest here, especially seeing as one of our best editors is a Mormon and has already come under fire for that on this site. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 20:06, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Another reason this whole page should be AFD'd. What a ridiculous question, prima facie.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 20:07, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

The answer to this question: Whatever denomination the answerer belongs to, probably. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 20:07, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Not for me...i picked the one I just thought sounded cool. The one you pick is most closely related to the one your parents picked.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 20:08, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Hey, BTW, which one is the Mormon??? JK. I don't think anyone should be forced to reveal their personal beliefs to the world at large unless they wish to.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 20:09, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Crocoite is openly Mormon. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 20:11, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

NP. Some of my best friends....--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 20:12, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

The whole question strikes me as "Richard-ish"[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 20:12, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Hijole (ee ho lay), seems like the Catholics are the furthest while the original Protestants were the closest. Either way, i think God is the best judge of that one. [[User: Dfairlyxed13|Dfairlyxed13]]

:I suppose this might be ''true'' if Christianity became static upon the Ascension (or maybe upon the death of the last original Apostle). However, Christianity is not static, it changes (I wouldn't want to use the term ''evolves'' on Conservapedia...). To whom did Christ say 'You are the Rock upon whom I found my Church'? Wasn't it Peter, the first Bishop of Rome (and therefore the first Pope). And didn't Christ say to Peter and the Apostles 'Let what you bind be bound, and what you loose be loosed'? And didn't Peter and the other Apostles, given this and other privileges, create a hierarchical Church and establish the Apostalic Succession? And who chose the books of the Bible that Protestants take as the only guiding light in their religion? Why don't Protestants add other books into the Bible that the much-maligned Catholic Church deemed not to be Sacred Scripture? Was there not a single other document that Protestants could be reconciled with but not Catholics, perhaps regarding differing opinions on the Trinity. And what if Thomas had written a very moving, beautiful letter through Divine Inspiration outlining the Church's doctrine on the Divine Mother? Would you accept that? If the Church's Catechism directly contradicted the Scriptures, there might be issues. However, the Catechism and the Bible are extraordinarily well reconciled--nearly two thousand years of scholastic endeavor have assured that. Indeed, Catholicism is probably the most self-consistent Christian religion. Nevertheless, the original question asks about most true to the 'central teachings' of Christianity. Well, if you take those teachings to be Christ's or Peter's, then Catholicism probably stands near the top. If you take Paul to be the spokeman for 'central teachings' then some other denominations become more competitive. However, I don't think that many of Christ's teachings would be well received on a Conservapedia.

::The thing is that Catholic mass has become a empty ritual. Christ didn't ask for religion, he asked for a intimate relationship. How are you supposed to have a relationship with the Christ when you go around praying to humans. God is the only one anyone should pray too. Not a human who died. Jesus died and came back and is alive. That's the main reason why the Catholics are not close at all. [[User:Dfairlyxed13|Dfairlyxed13]]
==None==
If you are following people who require you to follow their teachings in order for your salvation, it's a good bet that you no longer adhere to the original disciples of the Son of God. Read the Bible and study it. It is spiritual manna. No human that places their teachings between you and the bible should be trusted before it. I only benefit from those that only teach the Bible without inserting their own liberal interpretations. Just about all that I know of have denominated their own words in addition to His word.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 13:28, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

: Is it OK with you if they insert their own conservative interpretations? Reading the Bible is going to demand interpretations, some trivial, some of much more serious import. Even the selection of a specific version demands a selection of interpretations. [[User:Boomcoach|Boomcoach]] 13:37, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

::You should be able to go back to the original Hebrew text. Get a Concordance and get a good study Bible that hasn't been reinterpreted into something that's merely politically correct or denominational. Study history, language, anthropology, etc. Biblical truths don't change because of different translations. The only interpretation you should be looking for is the original one when it was written. Looking for the truth wasn't meant to be easy, was it?--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 17:41, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:::For the NT, it would be the original Greek or Aramaic, and AFAIK, these are not available. There is a whole field of study devoted to trying to figure out what the original text said. Much is known, but much is still conjecture. A "good study Bible that hasn't been reinterpreted into something that's merely politically correct or denominational" is simply choosing one that matches your own preconceptions. In the end, any reading of the Bible is an interpretation, and the vast majority of people do not have the ability or the time to find the most original texts, learn a couple ancient languages, then create their own interpretation.

:::By definition, any translation changes from the original, so anyone's translation becomes an interpretation. The vast majority of people have little choice but to select a denomination that most closely matches their own preconceptions. [[User:Boomcoach|Boomcoach]] 10:56, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

When choosing to denominate yourself to someone elses you have accepted their interpretation. You accept their conjecture. You will be required to accept the extra traits they have added to original scripture. Be wary of following others interpretations. Seek the truth from the original writer. Reject the preconceptions of people that have prejudiced themselves with their own traditions. There is only one Christian Church. Do not let others divide you amongst each other. This is the divide to weaken tact used to keep Christians in easily controllable groups. Don't fall for that trap. You belong to the Son of God and not any man-made denomination.--[[User:Roopilots6|Roopilots6]] 19:02, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

== Not a simple question ==
I submit that the only true and central teachings of Christianity are what came directly from the mouth of Jesus Christ. After that, the moment the very first organized denomination established itself, there came into existence points of divergence, by the sheer fundemental nature of such a concept of a denomination. If different denominations all practiced and preached nothing but the central teachings of their shared faith, there would in effect be no actual denominations at all. As we all know, this is not so.
[[User:Jros83|Jros83]] 21:29, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Alfred Kinsey

2007-06-23T01:02:15Z

Be not dismayed:

{{protect|RobS}}
==“He used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated.” ==

The following is a source by source explanation for my removal of the sentence ““He used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated.” from this article.

I removed the source “Felicity Barringer, "Sex Survey of American Men Finds 1% Are Gay," The New York Times, April 15, 1993, p. A- 1.” because the source did not say anything about “He [Kinsey] used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated.” It did say the numbers were lower than those reported by Kinsey, but not that his methods were in any way flawed. Did not support the claim it claimed to support, so removed.

I removed the source “Boyce Rensberger, "How Many Men in U.S. Are Gay?," The Washington Post, April 17, 1993, p. A-1.” because the source contradicts the first sentence of the article (it says that Kinsey estimated the percentage at 4%), and because source does not claim that he “used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated.” – it does say “Kinsey's numbers were not based on a statistically valid sample.” But that is a much weaker claim than the article here makes. Additionally, the full title of the article should be given, it is “How Many Men in U.S. Are Gay? Estimates Vary By Millions” not “How Many Men in U.S. Are Gay?”

I removed the source “Barbara Vobejda, "Survey Finds Most Adults Sexually Staid," Washington Post, October 7, 1994, p. A-1.” because it like the previous source does not accuse Kinsey of trying to baffle the unsophisticated, it simply says, “While studies of Americans' sexual practices date back to the work of Alfred Kinsey in the 1940s, much research in the field has focused on fertility, teenage sex or behavior related to AIDS. Many of the studies, including Kinsey's, were not based on a representative sample of the population.” (Very week criticism, if criticism at al,l compared to what the article claims.) Additionally the full title is “Survey Finds Most Adults Sexually Staid; Americans' Average Is Once Per Week”.

I removed the source “Judith A. Reisman, Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences the Red Queen and the Grand Scheme” because it does not contain the accusation that Kinsey intended to “baffle the unsophisticated” with his statistics—it does not support the claim it is used to support. Additionally Dr. Reisman has a degree in Communications, not statistics, biology, human behavior, or any relevant field and so is not really an appropriate source for this article at all. (She is also the major proponent of “erototoxins” a theory that has no science to support it—not even any she has produced—which pushes her views so far to the fringe that even if her background were in a relevant field—which, I repeat, it isn’t—she shouldn’t be used as a source here).

I removed the source “Tom W. Smith, "Adult Sexual Behavior in 1989: Number of Partners, Frequency of Intercourse and Risk of AIDS," Family Planning Perspectives, Vol. 23, No. 3, May/June 1991, p. 104.” because it does not even mention Kinsey – it mentions his institute and a 1970 study conducted by it, but does not even touch on the issue of the statistics used in Kinsey’s major studies. It does not support the claim it allegedly supported, and so was removed.

I removed the source “Franklin D. Jones and Ronald J. Koshes, "Homosexuality and the Military," American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 152, No. 1, January 1995, pp. 16.” because it contains the 4% number not the 10% number, and because it does not criticize Kinsy’s statistical methods. It does not support the claim it allegedly supported, and so needed to be removed.

I removed the source “Stuart N. Seidman and Ronald O. Rieder, "A Review of Sexual Behavior in the United States," American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 151, March 1994, p. 339.” because it notes that the Kinsey studies had “severe methodological limitations” but not the stronger claim that “He [Kinsey] used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated.” This source goes on to use the Kinsey data to make some evaluations of behavior, while noting the limitations of the data.

None of the 7 sources listed to support the claim, “He [Kinsey] used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated,” in fact support that claim. Since after seven tries no good source to support the claim was provided I removed the claim all together as it will likely not be supported.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 14:52, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

:I removed these again, sine the revert seemed targeted at the 10% number not this claim.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:06, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::Is there a reason this edit was reverted again? I’ve explained in great detail why each and every single one of these sources does not support the claim it is being used to support and why it was removed. Is there a problem with any of my explanation or is there a quote from one of these sources I’m missing? If the revert could be explained I would greatly appreciate it. I’ve seen no objection to this edit (the only objection I’ve seen to any of my edits to this page is that “everyone knows” the 10% which this edit did not touch—see below for why I made that edit), could the problem with it be explained?--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:27, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:::I’ve seen a lot of discussion on this page by the reverting sysop, but only about the other edit I made that was reverted, nothing about this edit. I assume that this means that this edit was inadvertently reverted and if I see no objections I will make it again shortly.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 09:47, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
::::Ok, seeing no objection. I will remove this material again.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:08, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
:::::I see that my edit has been reverted and the page is now locked because of an “Edit war”. I’ve still seen no reason why this edit is not ok, please explain.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 11:00, 12 May 2007 (EDT)

== Reisman ==

For the reasons stated above, I would advocate removing Reisman (and especially the reference here [http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/reisman.html] )from this article. I also want to add a few additional reasons here. First, she is not the first person to point out the statistical flaws with Kinsey’s methodology—so she can hardly be said to have “debunked” him. Second, Kinsey’s data, when the limitations of it are recognized, is still valuable and used in scientific papers – one of the sources above used it. Third, her quote stops short of the conclusion it seems to be used to support, in context she goes on to say:
<blockquote> Under scrutiny is the role of Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey and his contention that Americans are 10% to 47%, more or less, homosexual. Kinsey's percentage was seized upon by Harry Hay, the father of the homosexual "civil rights" movement, when Hay formed the Mattachine Society, urging that homosexuality be seen no longer as an act of sodomy but as a 10% minority class. Today, scores of homosexual activists cite Kinsey as the man who made the homosexual movement possible.[3] </blockquote>
<blockquote>But what if all of Kinsey's work was fraudulent, or worse? What if it reflects unethical scientists conducting unprosecuted criminal acts? For example, is it possible that scientists have conducted sexual experiments on children? Or that they could allow or encourage child abusers to conduct such experiments? The possibility that this actually occurred-and indeed that the claimed results of such experiments have played a critical and sustained role in our law and public policy-has led Congress to submit legislation which calls for an examination of the relevant facts. The legislation focuses on the research and publications of Dr. Alfred Kinsey and his colleagues ("The Kinsey Institute") conducted at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana from the late 1930s to the early 1950s. The legislation is known as H.R. 2749, "The Child Protection and Ethics in Education Act.”</blockquote>
Fourth, she questions his results on homosexuality because:
<blockquote> However, without question, any "scientists" who reprint and encourage production of data on child sexuality which have been taken from child sex offenders engaged in "manual or oral" sex with babies and children, are not scientists but propagandists-indeed guilty of admitted criminal sexual conduct, by the descriptions in their publications, whether the sexual offender(s) were identified and prosecuted or not. To trust anything these men or their disciples produce is to put one's faith in those who use the language of science to accomplish personal, criminal, and/or sexual interests. Hence, whatever Kinsey's claims of homosexual percentages and normality were, these become, pragmatically, as invalid as his child sexuality data.</blockquote>
That is, she finds some of his subject area distasteful and therefore we should reject all his data. This is (at best) a moral critique of the study of sex research, it is far from a scientific critique. Fifth, her “evidence” of criminal wrongdoing on the part of Kinsey and his associates is minimal at best—I see lots of hand waving and hysteria, but no actual evidence—and even if Kinsey were guilty of encouraging the sexual abuse of children (a fact I highly doubt, but am open to the possibility of being wrong on) that doesn’t invalidate his other numbers.

I would suggest immediate removal of this section from the article for all of these reasons.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 15:19, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:I’m seeing no objections to removing this information. I plan to act on it in the next day or so if I see none.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 14:39, 11 May 2007 (EDT)

== Unreliable source? ==

The referenced article 'The re-whitewashing of pedophile Alfred Kinsey' seems to be quite suspect. Its published by Renew America, who have political disputes with Kinsey's work, and seems to be concerned mainly not with criticisms of his research but a combination of personal accusations and claims that Kinsey was and still is destroying society. Look at some of these:

''This collection comprised nudist magazines that contained pictures and drawings of nude men and boys, and Kinsey would show them to his young male charges in his tent — alone — late at night.''

Source, perhaps? No? Was Kinsey ever charged with any type of sex crime? Nope. Are there any witnesses or accounts of these late-night showings? Nope.

''Kinsey is without a doubt one of the most vile, destructive and perverted individuals I have ever had the displeasure of studying.''

Could it be that the writer is just the tiniest bit biased against Kinsey?

A lot of the claims made are also dubious. The entire section on Dr. Fritz Von Balluseck, for example - the Nazi Pedophile who the article claims Kinsey protected and encouraged. If you do a bit of research on that, just a little googling, it seems that this claim was pulled out of the blue by a British TV program called 'Kinsey's Pedophiles' - which based its claims on 'newspaper findings' without nameing any specific newspaper. A claim which it appears to have in turn pulled from the claims of one Dr. Judith Reisman - who the author of the re-whitewashing article seems to hold in high estem.

This Reisman is also reaponsible for many of the other claims repeated - most, if not all. Yet her own credability is pathetic. She appears to be on an anti-Kinsey crusade, publishing a series of books and a website attacking him, and making numerous claims which I can see at a glance to be nonsense. For example, the ''Kinsey's 'research' alleged that 10% of American males were homosexual'' line, which is actually just a misreading of his definition (The research actually claimed that 10% of males had homosexual tendencies, which could include bisexuality, or even heterosexuals who had recurring homosexual thoughts or fantasies even if not acted upon). And she makes some very dubious claims - once stateing that watching pornography caused the formation of toxic chemicals in the brain.

The re-whitewashing writer seems to have a bit of a nazi obcession, comparing Kinsey to them no less than five times. Including one time where he argues that Kinsey must be like the Nazis because they both supported eugenics - well, eugenics was hugely popular at that time, quite a few US states passed eugenics laws and yet noone calls those representatives Nazis. It was in fashion.

I just dont think we should refer to this collection of unfounded accusations and lies, written by a peddler of unfounded accusations and lies, in turn repeated by the creator of unfounded accusations and lies and without a spec of credability at any chain. I advise that it be removed, and never refered to here again, in the name of retaining what little credability Conservapedia has.

I have not seen such an appallingly bad source used on Conservapedia since the article that claimed the Nazi Party encouraged homosexuality.

Suricou, the annoyed raven.

== 10% or 4% ==

Two of the references use on the original version of this page show that Kinsey claimed that 4% not 10% of the American public was homosexual—no references have been provided supporting the 10% claim—I think that if my addition is going to be reverted, at least some sources should be provided. The articles make a point of saying the Kinsey was misunderstood to be claiming the 10% number, so a reference to “everybody knows” Kinsey said it is not sufficient here.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:04, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:It's common knowledge. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:06, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::The sources point out that common knowledge is wrong.
::And I didn’t change the 10% number so the revert you just did put back the bad sources discussed above not here.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:09, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

:Waht we need is the GAO report from here. [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c104:H.R.2749:] [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:37, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::This link says nothing about the 10% number. It says that Congress considered a bill to have the GAO look into whether or not Kinsey did anything wrong—that has nothing to do with what number he reported.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:39, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::If you look here [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d104:HR02749:@@@X], you will see that the bill was never voted on (it went to a subcommittee where the Republican controlled House let it die) so no GAO report was ever made.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:42, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:::The report was ordered because the 10% made is way into federally funded school texts for 30 odd years. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:45, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::::First, the report was never ordered—see the link I provided. Second, the report was considered because of the child sexuality information not the homosexuality information—see section 2 of the bill. Third, the number is not in the link you provided.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:47, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:::::No one said the number was in the link. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:00, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::::::Ok. Then how is it relevant? It is not about homosexuality at all, it doesn’t talk about homosexuality, and the bill was never passed—so no report was ever made. How is this at all relevant to the subject under debate here (whether Kinsey claimed that 10% of American men were homosexual or whether he claimed 4% were).?
::::::Also, Please do not forget to address my points numbered 1 and 2 above.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 17:05, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
(<--) There is no debate. Kinsey made the claim. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:07, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:I provided two sources that clearly say he did not make the claim, but that people commonly misunderstand him to have made the claim. (They were “Boyce Rensberger, "How Many Men in U.S. Are Gay?, Estimates Vary By Millions" The Washington Post, April 17, 1993, p. A-1.” and “Franklin D. Jones and Ronald J. Koshes, "Homosexuality and the Military," American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 152, No. 1, January 1995, pp. 16.”) You have asserted that “It’s common knowledge.” I have explained that the common knowledge is false and provided two reputable sources to back this up. You have responded by linking to a bill that was never passed suggesting that Kinsey be investigated for sexually abusing children (a bit of a non sequitur, apparently since you have stopped talking about it). You have not suggested that my sources are unreliable, you have not suggested that you have a more reliable source, you have not provided any source (let alone a reliable one) supporting the 10% you have repeated that everyone knows it to be true—despite the fact that I have explained why common knowledge is not to be trusted in this case. The 10% is a misrepresentation of Kinsey’s work.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 17:15, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:Not supported by the evidence. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:24, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::What evidence? You have provided no evidence for me to look at. Simply asserting a thing to be true, especially when the evidence I have provided says that what most people believe is false, is not evidence.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 17:28, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:The discussion has moved on to [[User:Conservative/socialeffectevolution]]. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:53, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

::There is no need to move the discussion—especially to the page of a user rather than to the appropriate article (I’ve not been invited to post on that user’s page, and will not violate the rule that a user’s page is his castle to pursue this discussion with you)—or to a page that is tangentially related at best—we are discussing what number Kinsey gave on a page about Kinsey, we are not discussing anything about Darwin and so I think talking about this on a page about the impact on society of Darwin’s theory is inappropriate. I will therefore respond here, as this is the relevant location.
::Most of the “evidence” posted on the page you linked to comes from Dr. Reisman, who for all the reasons I listed above is not a reliable source—and I still see no reason to trust her. The other “evidence” you post pertains to the bill we have discussed at length here—which for all the reasons discussed above is still not relevant to this discussion—the Eagle Forum piece on the bill reemphasizes that it deals with child sexuality not homosexuality—that is it is not. So the evidence offered is 1 untrustworthy source and the discussion of an bill never passed (or voted on) that deals with a separate issue. Compared to the two reliable sources (remember they were and are both used in the version of the article you have twice reverted back to) that I have provided for the 4% number—including 1 from a peer reviewed journal in a relevant field, psychiatry.
::To attempt to forestall further misunderstanding let me quote the relevant sources.
::From “Franklin D. Jones and Ronald J. Koshes, "Homosexuality and the Military," American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 152, No. 1, January 1995, pp. 16 (citing to Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Male.):
::<blockquote>Kinsey et al. found that 4% of men are exclusively homosexual past adolescence. </blockquote>
::There it is in plain English, from a peer reviewed article in a journal on psychiatry - Kinsey gave the 4% number.
::From Boyce Rensberger, "How Many Men in U.S. Are Gay?, Estimates Vary By Millions" The Washington Post, April 17, 1993, p. A-1:
::<blockquote> Although that figure is so much a part of conventional wisdom that a year-old San Francisco gay magazine is called Ten Percent, Kinsey never intended it as a measure of the proportion of homosexual men. The pioneering sexologist recognized that human sexuality encompasses a range of behaviors shading from exclusively heterosexual to exclusively homosexual.</blockquote>
::<blockquote>Kinsey estimated that just 4 percent of men were purely homosexual (that extrapolates to 5 million men in the United States), but said the population could be as high as 10 percent (12.5 million) if men were included who had been "more or less exclusively homosexual" for at least three years out of a lifetime that was otherwise heterosexual. </blockquote>
::There, from a reliable newspaper you have the 4% number given again and an explanation of where the 10% mythos comes from. Kinsey was interested not just in behavior over a life time, but in snapshots of behavior as well—the additional 6% comes from misunderstanding what Kinsey said. He said that 6% of the people he surveyed went through, what we might now call, a homosexual phase, they were not homosexual, they engaged in heterosexual behavior for most of their lives, but they experienced a prolonged period of exclusively homosexual behavior at some point in time. In modern parlance we would call these people bisexual.
::So you can see the reliable sources on this, and how the 10% figure came to be the dominant one in the popular imagination.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 22:45, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

== Additions ==

Perhaps some information on when Kinsey was born and died and what he did for a living would be appropriate as well. A brief discussion of his overall work might be beneficial. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 20:12, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

:His overall work was to justify and legitimize sexual perversion. He was a homosexual sadomasochist. I don't think any part of his 'overall work' has been beneficial. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 20:44, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

::I have not seen anything to point towards homosexuality, and he was married to Clara McMillen and they had four children. If you could show me a document that proves he was homosexual I would appriciate it. --[[User:Be not dismayed|Be not dismayed]]

:You didn't follow the CWA link I supplied? Maybe <s>you</s> we need to make it more prominent - once you find it - so that other readers can find it too. <s>Would you do that for me, please? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 20:57, 22 June 2007 (EDT)</s> --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 20:58, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

::Here's the source the CWA used- ''James H. Jones, Alfred C. Kinsey: A Public/Private Life (New York, London: W.W. Norton & Company,1997), pp. 81-85 and 603-604.'', though it would be factual if you mentioned that he was married and had 4 children [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/kinsey/peopleevents/p_mac.html]

Talk:Alfred Kinsey

2007-06-23T00:56:24Z

Be not dismayed:

Talk:Alfred Kinsey

2007-06-23T00:56:01Z

Be not dismayed:

{{protect|RobS}}
==“He used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated.” ==

The following is a source by source explanation for my removal of the sentence ““He used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated.” from this article.

I removed the source “Felicity Barringer, "Sex Survey of American Men Finds 1% Are Gay," The New York Times, April 15, 1993, p. A- 1.” because the source did not say anything about “He [Kinsey] used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated.” It did say the numbers were lower than those reported by Kinsey, but not that his methods were in any way flawed. Did not support the claim it claimed to support, so removed.

I removed the source “Boyce Rensberger, "How Many Men in U.S. Are Gay?," The Washington Post, April 17, 1993, p. A-1.” because the source contradicts the first sentence of the article (it says that Kinsey estimated the percentage at 4%), and because source does not claim that he “used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated.” – it does say “Kinsey's numbers were not based on a statistically valid sample.” But that is a much weaker claim than the article here makes. Additionally, the full title of the article should be given, it is “How Many Men in U.S. Are Gay? Estimates Vary By Millions” not “How Many Men in U.S. Are Gay?”

I removed the source “Barbara Vobejda, "Survey Finds Most Adults Sexually Staid," Washington Post, October 7, 1994, p. A-1.” because it like the previous source does not accuse Kinsey of trying to baffle the unsophisticated, it simply says, “While studies of Americans' sexual practices date back to the work of Alfred Kinsey in the 1940s, much research in the field has focused on fertility, teenage sex or behavior related to AIDS. Many of the studies, including Kinsey's, were not based on a representative sample of the population.” (Very week criticism, if criticism at al,l compared to what the article claims.) Additionally the full title is “Survey Finds Most Adults Sexually Staid; Americans' Average Is Once Per Week”.

I removed the source “Judith A. Reisman, Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences the Red Queen and the Grand Scheme” because it does not contain the accusation that Kinsey intended to “baffle the unsophisticated” with his statistics—it does not support the claim it is used to support. Additionally Dr. Reisman has a degree in Communications, not statistics, biology, human behavior, or any relevant field and so is not really an appropriate source for this article at all. (She is also the major proponent of “erototoxins” a theory that has no science to support it—not even any she has produced—which pushes her views so far to the fringe that even if her background were in a relevant field—which, I repeat, it isn’t—she shouldn’t be used as a source here).

I removed the source “Tom W. Smith, "Adult Sexual Behavior in 1989: Number of Partners, Frequency of Intercourse and Risk of AIDS," Family Planning Perspectives, Vol. 23, No. 3, May/June 1991, p. 104.” because it does not even mention Kinsey – it mentions his institute and a 1970 study conducted by it, but does not even touch on the issue of the statistics used in Kinsey’s major studies. It does not support the claim it allegedly supported, and so was removed.

I removed the source “Franklin D. Jones and Ronald J. Koshes, "Homosexuality and the Military," American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 152, No. 1, January 1995, pp. 16.” because it contains the 4% number not the 10% number, and because it does not criticize Kinsy’s statistical methods. It does not support the claim it allegedly supported, and so needed to be removed.

I removed the source “Stuart N. Seidman and Ronald O. Rieder, "A Review of Sexual Behavior in the United States," American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 151, March 1994, p. 339.” because it notes that the Kinsey studies had “severe methodological limitations” but not the stronger claim that “He [Kinsey] used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated.” This source goes on to use the Kinsey data to make some evaluations of behavior, while noting the limitations of the data.

None of the 7 sources listed to support the claim, “He [Kinsey] used faulty statistical sampling methods to baffle the unsophisticated,” in fact support that claim. Since after seven tries no good source to support the claim was provided I removed the claim all together as it will likely not be supported.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 14:52, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

:I removed these again, sine the revert seemed targeted at the 10% number not this claim.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:06, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::Is there a reason this edit was reverted again? I’ve explained in great detail why each and every single one of these sources does not support the claim it is being used to support and why it was removed. Is there a problem with any of my explanation or is there a quote from one of these sources I’m missing? If the revert could be explained I would greatly appreciate it. I’ve seen no objection to this edit (the only objection I’ve seen to any of my edits to this page is that “everyone knows” the 10% which this edit did not touch—see below for why I made that edit), could the problem with it be explained?--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:27, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:::I’ve seen a lot of discussion on this page by the reverting sysop, but only about the other edit I made that was reverted, nothing about this edit. I assume that this means that this edit was inadvertently reverted and if I see no objections I will make it again shortly.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 09:47, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
::::Ok, seeing no objection. I will remove this material again.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:08, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
:::::I see that my edit has been reverted and the page is now locked because of an “Edit war”. I’ve still seen no reason why this edit is not ok, please explain.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 11:00, 12 May 2007 (EDT)

== Reisman ==

For the reasons stated above, I would advocate removing Reisman (and especially the reference here [http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/reisman.html] )from this article. I also want to add a few additional reasons here. First, she is not the first person to point out the statistical flaws with Kinsey’s methodology—so she can hardly be said to have “debunked” him. Second, Kinsey’s data, when the limitations of it are recognized, is still valuable and used in scientific papers – one of the sources above used it. Third, her quote stops short of the conclusion it seems to be used to support, in context she goes on to say:
<blockquote> Under scrutiny is the role of Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey and his contention that Americans are 10% to 47%, more or less, homosexual. Kinsey's percentage was seized upon by Harry Hay, the father of the homosexual "civil rights" movement, when Hay formed the Mattachine Society, urging that homosexuality be seen no longer as an act of sodomy but as a 10% minority class. Today, scores of homosexual activists cite Kinsey as the man who made the homosexual movement possible.[3] </blockquote>
<blockquote>But what if all of Kinsey's work was fraudulent, or worse? What if it reflects unethical scientists conducting unprosecuted criminal acts? For example, is it possible that scientists have conducted sexual experiments on children? Or that they could allow or encourage child abusers to conduct such experiments? The possibility that this actually occurred-and indeed that the claimed results of such experiments have played a critical and sustained role in our law and public policy-has led Congress to submit legislation which calls for an examination of the relevant facts. The legislation focuses on the research and publications of Dr. Alfred Kinsey and his colleagues ("The Kinsey Institute") conducted at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana from the late 1930s to the early 1950s. The legislation is known as H.R. 2749, "The Child Protection and Ethics in Education Act.”</blockquote>
Fourth, she questions his results on homosexuality because:
<blockquote> However, without question, any "scientists" who reprint and encourage production of data on child sexuality which have been taken from child sex offenders engaged in "manual or oral" sex with babies and children, are not scientists but propagandists-indeed guilty of admitted criminal sexual conduct, by the descriptions in their publications, whether the sexual offender(s) were identified and prosecuted or not. To trust anything these men or their disciples produce is to put one's faith in those who use the language of science to accomplish personal, criminal, and/or sexual interests. Hence, whatever Kinsey's claims of homosexual percentages and normality were, these become, pragmatically, as invalid as his child sexuality data.</blockquote>
That is, she finds some of his subject area distasteful and therefore we should reject all his data. This is (at best) a moral critique of the study of sex research, it is far from a scientific critique. Fifth, her “evidence” of criminal wrongdoing on the part of Kinsey and his associates is minimal at best—I see lots of hand waving and hysteria, but no actual evidence—and even if Kinsey were guilty of encouraging the sexual abuse of children (a fact I highly doubt, but am open to the possibility of being wrong on) that doesn’t invalidate his other numbers.

I would suggest immediate removal of this section from the article for all of these reasons.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 15:19, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:I’m seeing no objections to removing this information. I plan to act on it in the next day or so if I see none.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 14:39, 11 May 2007 (EDT)

== Unreliable source? ==

The referenced article 'The re-whitewashing of pedophile Alfred Kinsey' seems to be quite suspect. Its published by Renew America, who have political disputes with Kinsey's work, and seems to be concerned mainly not with criticisms of his research but a combination of personal accusations and claims that Kinsey was and still is destroying society. Look at some of these:

''This collection comprised nudist magazines that contained pictures and drawings of nude men and boys, and Kinsey would show them to his young male charges in his tent — alone — late at night.''

Source, perhaps? No? Was Kinsey ever charged with any type of sex crime? Nope. Are there any witnesses or accounts of these late-night showings? Nope.

''Kinsey is without a doubt one of the most vile, destructive and perverted individuals I have ever had the displeasure of studying.''

Could it be that the writer is just the tiniest bit biased against Kinsey?

A lot of the claims made are also dubious. The entire section on Dr. Fritz Von Balluseck, for example - the Nazi Pedophile who the article claims Kinsey protected and encouraged. If you do a bit of research on that, just a little googling, it seems that this claim was pulled out of the blue by a British TV program called 'Kinsey's Pedophiles' - which based its claims on 'newspaper findings' without nameing any specific newspaper. A claim which it appears to have in turn pulled from the claims of one Dr. Judith Reisman - who the author of the re-whitewashing article seems to hold in high estem.

This Reisman is also reaponsible for many of the other claims repeated - most, if not all. Yet her own credability is pathetic. She appears to be on an anti-Kinsey crusade, publishing a series of books and a website attacking him, and making numerous claims which I can see at a glance to be nonsense. For example, the ''Kinsey's 'research' alleged that 10% of American males were homosexual'' line, which is actually just a misreading of his definition (The research actually claimed that 10% of males had homosexual tendencies, which could include bisexuality, or even heterosexuals who had recurring homosexual thoughts or fantasies even if not acted upon). And she makes some very dubious claims - once stateing that watching pornography caused the formation of toxic chemicals in the brain.

The re-whitewashing writer seems to have a bit of a nazi obcession, comparing Kinsey to them no less than five times. Including one time where he argues that Kinsey must be like the Nazis because they both supported eugenics - well, eugenics was hugely popular at that time, quite a few US states passed eugenics laws and yet noone calls those representatives Nazis. It was in fashion.

I just dont think we should refer to this collection of unfounded accusations and lies, written by a peddler of unfounded accusations and lies, in turn repeated by the creator of unfounded accusations and lies and without a spec of credability at any chain. I advise that it be removed, and never refered to here again, in the name of retaining what little credability Conservapedia has.

I have not seen such an appallingly bad source used on Conservapedia since the article that claimed the Nazi Party encouraged homosexuality.

Suricou, the annoyed raven.

== 10% or 4% ==

Two of the references use on the original version of this page show that Kinsey claimed that 4% not 10% of the American public was homosexual—no references have been provided supporting the 10% claim—I think that if my addition is going to be reverted, at least some sources should be provided. The articles make a point of saying the Kinsey was misunderstood to be claiming the 10% number, so a reference to “everybody knows” Kinsey said it is not sufficient here.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:04, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:It's common knowledge. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:06, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::The sources point out that common knowledge is wrong.
::And I didn’t change the 10% number so the revert you just did put back the bad sources discussed above not here.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:09, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

:Waht we need is the GAO report from here. [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c104:H.R.2749:] [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:37, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::This link says nothing about the 10% number. It says that Congress considered a bill to have the GAO look into whether or not Kinsey did anything wrong—that has nothing to do with what number he reported.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:39, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::If you look here [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d104:HR02749:@@@X], you will see that the bill was never voted on (it went to a subcommittee where the Republican controlled House let it die) so no GAO report was ever made.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:42, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:::The report was ordered because the 10% made is way into federally funded school texts for 30 odd years. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 16:45, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::::First, the report was never ordered—see the link I provided. Second, the report was considered because of the child sexuality information not the homosexuality information—see section 2 of the bill. Third, the number is not in the link you provided.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 16:47, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:::::No one said the number was in the link. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:00, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::::::Ok. Then how is it relevant? It is not about homosexuality at all, it doesn’t talk about homosexuality, and the bill was never passed—so no report was ever made. How is this at all relevant to the subject under debate here (whether Kinsey claimed that 10% of American men were homosexual or whether he claimed 4% were).?
::::::Also, Please do not forget to address my points numbered 1 and 2 above.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 17:05, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
(<--) There is no debate. Kinsey made the claim. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:07, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:I provided two sources that clearly say he did not make the claim, but that people commonly misunderstand him to have made the claim. (They were “Boyce Rensberger, "How Many Men in U.S. Are Gay?, Estimates Vary By Millions" The Washington Post, April 17, 1993, p. A-1.” and “Franklin D. Jones and Ronald J. Koshes, "Homosexuality and the Military," American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 152, No. 1, January 1995, pp. 16.”) You have asserted that “It’s common knowledge.” I have explained that the common knowledge is false and provided two reputable sources to back this up. You have responded by linking to a bill that was never passed suggesting that Kinsey be investigated for sexually abusing children (a bit of a non sequitur, apparently since you have stopped talking about it). You have not suggested that my sources are unreliable, you have not suggested that you have a more reliable source, you have not provided any source (let alone a reliable one) supporting the 10% you have repeated that everyone knows it to be true—despite the fact that I have explained why common knowledge is not to be trusted in this case. The 10% is a misrepresentation of Kinsey’s work.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 17:15, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:Not supported by the evidence. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:24, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::What evidence? You have provided no evidence for me to look at. Simply asserting a thing to be true, especially when the evidence I have provided says that what most people believe is false, is not evidence.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 17:28, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:The discussion has moved on to [[User:Conservative/socialeffectevolution]]. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:53, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

::There is no need to move the discussion—especially to the page of a user rather than to the appropriate article (I’ve not been invited to post on that user’s page, and will not violate the rule that a user’s page is his castle to pursue this discussion with you)—or to a page that is tangentially related at best—we are discussing what number Kinsey gave on a page about Kinsey, we are not discussing anything about Darwin and so I think talking about this on a page about the impact on society of Darwin’s theory is inappropriate. I will therefore respond here, as this is the relevant location.
::Most of the “evidence” posted on the page you linked to comes from Dr. Reisman, who for all the reasons I listed above is not a reliable source—and I still see no reason to trust her. The other “evidence” you post pertains to the bill we have discussed at length here—which for all the reasons discussed above is still not relevant to this discussion—the Eagle Forum piece on the bill reemphasizes that it deals with child sexuality not homosexuality—that is it is not. So the evidence offered is 1 untrustworthy source and the discussion of an bill never passed (or voted on) that deals with a separate issue. Compared to the two reliable sources (remember they were and are both used in the version of the article you have twice reverted back to) that I have provided for the 4% number—including 1 from a peer reviewed journal in a relevant field, psychiatry.
::To attempt to forestall further misunderstanding let me quote the relevant sources.
::From “Franklin D. Jones and Ronald J. Koshes, "Homosexuality and the Military," American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 152, No. 1, January 1995, pp. 16 (citing to Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Male.):
::<blockquote>Kinsey et al. found that 4% of men are exclusively homosexual past adolescence. </blockquote>
::There it is in plain English, from a peer reviewed article in a journal on psychiatry - Kinsey gave the 4% number.
::From Boyce Rensberger, "How Many Men in U.S. Are Gay?, Estimates Vary By Millions" The Washington Post, April 17, 1993, p. A-1:
::<blockquote> Although that figure is so much a part of conventional wisdom that a year-old San Francisco gay magazine is called Ten Percent, Kinsey never intended it as a measure of the proportion of homosexual men. The pioneering sexologist recognized that human sexuality encompasses a range of behaviors shading from exclusively heterosexual to exclusively homosexual.</blockquote>
::<blockquote>Kinsey estimated that just 4 percent of men were purely homosexual (that extrapolates to 5 million men in the United States), but said the population could be as high as 10 percent (12.5 million) if men were included who had been "more or less exclusively homosexual" for at least three years out of a lifetime that was otherwise heterosexual. </blockquote>
::There, from a reliable newspaper you have the 4% number given again and an explanation of where the 10% mythos comes from. Kinsey was interested not just in behavior over a life time, but in snapshots of behavior as well—the additional 6% comes from misunderstanding what Kinsey said. He said that 6% of the people he surveyed went through, what we might now call, a homosexual phase, they were not homosexual, they engaged in heterosexual behavior for most of their lives, but they experienced a prolonged period of exclusively homosexual behavior at some point in time. In modern parlance we would call these people bisexual.
::So you can see the reliable sources on this, and how the 10% figure came to be the dominant one in the popular imagination.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 22:45, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

== Additions ==

Perhaps some information on when Kinsey was born and died and what he did for a living would be appropriate as well. A brief discussion of his overall work might be beneficial. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 20:12, 19 June 2007 (EDT)

:His overall work was to justify and legitimize sexual perversion. He was a homosexual sadomasochist. I don't think any part of his 'overall work' has been beneficial. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 20:44, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

:I have not seen anything to point towards homosexuality, and he was married to Clara McMillen and they had four children. If you could show me a document that proves he was homosexual I would appriciate it. --[[User:Be not dismayed|Be not dismayed]]

Martin Luther

2007-06-23T00:51:40Z

Be not dismayed: superfluous

'''Martin Luther''' (November 10, 1483 - February 18,1546) was the leader of the German [[Reformation]].

In 1505, Martin Luther was a law student caught outside in the middle of a thunderstorm. A bolt of [[lightning]] struck the ground near him. Terrified, he cried out to St. Anne for protection and promised to become a [[monk]] if he survived the storm. He did survive, and then left law school to join an Augustinian monastery.

At the monastery, Martin Luther felt plagued by the [[devil]] and realized how corrupt the [[Catholic church]] was. He began to form his own opinions.

Martin Luther founded Protestantism in Europe on October 31, 1517, when he nailed [[the 95 Theses]] or issues to the door of his Wittenberg Church in what is now Germany. The source of Luther's complaint was a project to rebuild St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, for which church officials were offering [[indulgences]] in exchange for donations. Martin Luther objected and list 95 complaints to spark public debate.

Here were two of Luther's most important Theses:

Thesis 82: ''Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial.''

Thesis 86: ''Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?''

Pope Leo X spent his time on the beauty flourishing during the Renaissance, and was a patron of the great artist Raphael. Pope Leo X probably never recognized the significance of Martin Luther and his followers. Some historians feel that if the pope had responded more seriously, then the subsequent schism in Germany would not have occurred.

But German nobles did not like the flow of money to Rome, and they backed Martin Luther in order to cut off the donations by Germans to support Rome.

In 1520, Pope Leo X announced the papal bull Exsurge Domine, which required Luther to withdraw 41 of his 95 Theses or be excommunicated. Luther refused and was then excommunicated by the Catholic Church.

It was then up to [[German]] authorities to take any legal action against Luther. The 21-year-old Holy Roman Emperor Charles V ordered him to stand trial before an assembly (a "[[Diet]]") of estates of the Holy Roman Empire that met in Worms, a small town in what is now Germany. This famous assembly is therefore known as the "Diet of Worms." The verdict (the "Edict of Worms") was "guilty". Luther was declared an outlaw who should be arrested.

But Luther had already left the trial before the verdict was rendered. He hid at Wartburg Castle at Eisenach, where Frederick the Wise, Elector of Saxony, protected him. Luther took the pseudonym Junker Jorg (Nobleman George), grew a wide beard and dressed like a knight. While in hiding he translated the New Testament from Greek into German in 1522. (By 1534, Luther had translated all of the Old Testament from Hebrew to German also.)

Luther translated Romans 3:28 by adding an extra German word for "alone" (alleine or alleyn) after the phrase: "justified by faith": "So halten wir nun dafür, daß der Mensch gerecht werde ohne des Gesetzes Werke, alleyn durch den Glauben." Luther believed that man is justified by faith alone, and that salvation comes only from faith. The Catholic Church (and [[Eastern Orthodox Church]]) taught that man is justified by faith, good works and confession to the Church authorities.

A remarkable invention awaited Luther's German translation of the [[Bible]]: in 1447 the German [[Johannes Gutenberg]] had already invented the movable-type printing press. This enabled Luther's translation to be printed for the public in September 1522. The Christian world would never be the same again. (The Gutenberg Bible, which put the Latin Vulgate in book format, had been printed in 1455 and it is the oldest existing book in the West.)

Charles V did all he could to stop this knew Christian religion we now call Lutheranism. In 1544, Charles V even sent armies against the German princes. But the Peace of Augsburg in 1555 gave each German ruler the right to choose the religion for his state. The princes in southern Germany selected Roman Catholicism, but the princes in northern Germany chose Lutheranism. After World War II, when Germany split into West and East Germany, the West German part contained the predominantly Roman Catholic regions and the East German part consisted of the mostly Lutheran regions.

Martin Luther continued to write, and taught at a German university for his financial support. He wrote extremely harsh things about the pope and about Jewish people, even urging the destruction of their homes and the burning of synagogues and schools. Historians debate today whether Luther's anti-Semitic writings were responsible, directly or indirectly, for the Holocaust by the Germans in World War II. Luther harshly criticized many peoples in addition to Jews; a pamphlet of his in 1545 was entitled "Against the Roman Papacy an Institution of the Devil," and he urged burning witches to death. Some of Luther’s writings seem quite vulgar by today's standards.

Lutheranism has only 70 million adherents today, which is only about 7% of the Catholic population. But nearly all Christians, even Catholics, have sung a famous hymn written by Luther: "A Mighty Fortress is Our God." Moreover, hundreds of millions of Christians worldwide agree with Luther that justification is by faith alone.

Luther passed away in February, 1546, having lived his latter years in poor health.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Luther, Martin}}
[[Category:Religious people]]

Martin Luther

2007-06-23T00:47:05Z

Be not dismayed: superfluous

'''Martin Luther''' (November 10, 1483 - February 18,1546) was the leader of the German [[Reformation]].

In 1505, Martin Luther was a law student caught outside in the middle of a thunderstorm. A bolt of [[lightning]] struck the ground near him. Terrified, he cried out to St. Anne for protection and promised to become a [[monk]] if he survived the storm. He did survive, and then left law school to join an Augustinian monastery.

At the monastery, Martin Luther felt plagued by the [[devil]] and realized how corrupt the [[Catholic church]] was. He began to form his own opinions.

Martin Luther founded Protestantism in Europe on October 31, 1517, when he nailed [[the 95 Theses]] or issues to the door of his Wittenberg Church in what is now Germany. The source of Luther's complaint was a project to rebuild St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, for which church officials were offering [[indulgences]] in exchange for donations. Martin Luther objected and list 95 complaints to spark public debate.

Here were two of Luther's most important Theses:

Thesis 82: ''Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial.''

Thesis 86: ''Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?''

Pope Leo X spent his time on the beauty flourishing during the Renaissance, and was a patron of the great artist Raphael. Pope Leo X probably never recognized the significance of Martin Luther and his followers. Some historians feel that if the pope had responded more seriously, then the subsequent schism in Germany would not have occurred.

But German nobles did not like the flow of money to Rome, and they backed Martin Luther in order to cut off the donations by Germans to support Rome.

In 1520, Pope Leo X announced the papal bull Exsurge Domine, which required Luther to withdraw 41 of his 95 Theses or be excommunicated. Luther refused and was then excommunicated by the Catholic Church.

It was then up to [[German]] authorities to take any legal action against Luther. The 21-year-old Holy Roman Emperor Charles V ordered him to stand trial before an assembly (a "[[Diet]]") of estates of the Holy Roman Empire that met in Worms, a small town in what is now Germany. This famous assembly is therefore known as the "Diet of Worms." The verdict (the "Edict of Worms") was "guilty". Luther was declared an outlaw who should be arrested.

But Luther had already left the trial before the verdict was rendered. He hid at Wartburg Castle at Eisenach, where Frederick the Wise, Elector of Saxony, protected him. Luther took the pseudonym Junker Jorg (Nobleman George), grew a wide beard and dressed like a knight. While in hiding he translated the New Testament from Greek into German in 1522. (By 1534, Luther had translated all of the Old Testament from Hebrew to German also.)

Luther translated Romans 3:28 by adding an extra German word for "alone" (alleine or alleyn) after the phrase: "justified by faith": "So halten wir nun dafür, daß der Mensch gerecht werde ohne des Gesetzes Werke, alleyn durch den Glauben." Luther believed that man is justified (saved) by faith alone, and that salvation comes only from faith. The Catholic Church (and [[Eastern Orthodox Church]]) taught that man is justified (saved) by faith, good works and confession to the Church authorities.

A remarkable invention awaited Luther's German translation of the [[Bible]]: in 1447 the German [[Johannes Gutenberg]] had already invented the printing press (with movable type). This enabled Luther's translation to be printed for the public in September 1522. The Christian world would never be the same again. (The Gutenberg Bible (in Latin, not German), had been printed in 1455 and it is the oldest existing (extant) book in the West.)

Charles V did all he could to stop this knew Christian religion we now call Lutheranism. In 1544, Charles V even sent armies against the German princes. But the Peace of Augsburg in 1555 gave each German ruler the right to choose the religion for his state. The princes in southern Germany selected Roman Catholicism, but the princes in northern Germany chose Lutheranism. After World War II, when Germany split into West and East Germany, the West German part contained the predominantly Roman Catholic regions and the East German part consisted of the mostly Lutheran regions.

Martin Luther continued to write, and taught at a German university for his financial support. He wrote extremely harsh things about the pope and about Jewish people, even urging the destruction of their homes and the burning of synagogues and schools. Historians debate today whether Luther's anti-Semitic (anti-Jewish) writings were responsible, directly or indirectly, for the Holocaust by the Germans in World War II. Luther harshly criticized many peoples in addition to Jews; a pamphlet of his in 1545 was entitled "Against the Roman Papacy an Institution of the Devil," and he urged burning witches to death. Some of Luther’s writings seem quite vulgar by today's standards.

Lutheranism has only 70 million adherents today, which is only about 7% of the Catholic population. But nearly all Christians, including Catholics, have sung a famous hymn written by Luther: "A Mighty Fortress is Our God." Moreover, hundreds of millions of Christians worldwide agree with Luther that justification or salvation is by faith alone.

Luther passed away in February, 1546, having lived his latter years in poor health.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Luther, Martin}}
[[Category:Religious people]]

Martin Luther

2007-06-23T00:46:21Z

Be not dismayed: superfluous

'''Martin Luther''' (November 10, 1483 - February 18,1546) was the leader of the German [[Reformation]].

In 1505, Martin Luther was a law student caught outside in the middle of a thunderstorm. A bolt of [[lightning]] struck the ground near him. Terrified, he cried out to St. Anne for protection and promised to become a [[monk]] if he survived the storm. He did survive, and then left law school to join an Augustinian monastery.

At the monastery, Martin Luther felt plagued by the [[devil]] and realized how corrupt the [[Catholic church]] was. He began to form his own opinions.

Martin Luther founded Protestantism in Europe on October 31, 1517, when he nailed [[the 95 Theses]] or issues to the door of his Wittenberg Church in what is now Germany. The source of Luther's complaint was a project to rebuild St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, for which church officials were offering [[indulgences]] in exchange for donations. Martin Luther objected and list 95 complaints to spark public debate.

Here were two of Luther's most important Theses:

Thesis 82: ''Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of the dire need of the souls that are there, if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a Church? The former reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial.''

Thesis 86: ''Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?''

Pope Leo X spent his time on the beauty flourishing during the Renaissance, and was a patron of the great artist Raphael. Pope Leo X probably never recognized the significance of Martin Luther and his followers. Some historians feel that if the pope had responded more seriously, then the subsequent schism in Germany would not have occurred.

But German nobles did not like the flow of money to Rome, and they backed Martin Luther in order to cut off the donations by Germans to support Rome.

In 1520, Pope Leo X announced the papal bull Exsurge Domine, which required Luther to withdraw 41 of his 95 Theses or be excommunicated. Luther refused and was then excommunicated (kicked out) by the Catholic Church.

It was then up to [[German]] authorities to take any legal action against Luther. The 21-year-old Holy Roman Emperor Charles V ordered him to stand trial before an assembly (a "[[Diet]]") of estates of the Holy Roman Empire that met in Worms, a small town in what is now Germany. This famous assembly is therefore known as the "Diet of Worms." The verdict (the "Edict of Worms") was "guilty". Luther was declared an outlaw who should be arrested.

But Luther had already left the trial before the verdict was rendered. He hid at Wartburg Castle at Eisenach, where Frederick the Wise, Elector of Saxony, protected him. Luther took the pseudonym Junker Jorg (Nobleman George), grew a wide beard and dressed like a knight. While in hiding he translated the New Testament from Greek into German in 1522. (By 1534, Luther had translated all of the Old Testament from Hebrew to German also.)

Luther translated Romans 3:28 by adding an extra German word for "alone" (alleine or alleyn) after the phrase: "justified by faith": "So halten wir nun dafür, daß der Mensch gerecht werde ohne des Gesetzes Werke, alleyn durch den Glauben." Luther believed that man is justified (saved) by faith alone, and that salvation comes only from faith. The Catholic Church (and [[Eastern Orthodox Church]]) taught that man is justified (saved) by faith, good works and confession to the Church authorities.

A remarkable invention awaited Luther's German translation of the [[Bible]]: in 1447 the German [[Johannes Gutenberg]] had already invented the printing press (with movable type). This enabled Luther's translation to be printed for the public in September 1522. The Christian world would never be the same again. (The Gutenberg Bible (in Latin, not German), had been printed in 1455 and it is the oldest existing (extant) book in the West.)

Charles V did all he could to stop this knew Christian religion we now call Lutheranism. In 1544, Charles V even sent armies against the German princes. But the Peace of Augsburg in 1555 gave each German ruler the right to choose the religion for his state. The princes in southern Germany selected Roman Catholicism, but the princes in northern Germany chose Lutheranism. After World War II, when Germany split into West and East Germany, the West German part contained the predominantly Roman Catholic regions and the East German part consisted of the mostly Lutheran regions.

Martin Luther continued to write, and taught at a German university for his financial support. He wrote extremely harsh things about the pope and about Jewish people, even urging the destruction of their homes and the burning of synagogues and schools. Historians debate today whether Luther's anti-Semitic (anti-Jewish) writings were responsible, directly or indirectly, for the Holocaust by the Germans in World War II. Luther harshly criticized many peoples in addition to Jews; a pamphlet of his in 1545 was entitled "Against the Roman Papacy an Institution of the Devil," and he urged burning witches to death. Some of Luther’s writings seem quite vulgar by today's standards.

Lutheranism has only 70 million adherents today, which is only about 7% of the Catholic population. But nearly all Christians, including Catholics, have sung a famous hymn written by Luther: "A Mighty Fortress is Our God." Moreover, hundreds of millions of Christians worldwide agree with Luther that justification or salvation is by faith alone.

Luther passed away in February, 1546, having lived his latter years in poor health.

{{DEFAULTSORT:Luther, Martin}}
[[Category:Religious people]]

Talk:Chuck Norris

2007-06-22T20:58:03Z

Be not dismayed:

Chuck Norris does not believe in a vast atheist conspiracy. Moreover, no one is trying, at a national level, to "outlaw" Christianity.

Talk:Chuck Norris

2007-06-22T20:56:09Z

Be not dismayed: reason for the deletion of obvious lies about Chuck Norris

Chuck Norris does not believe in a vast atheist conspiracy.

Chuck Norris

2007-06-22T19:23:33Z

Be not dismayed:

[[Image:chuck_norris.jpg|right|Chuck Norris publicity shot from official website.]]

'''Chuck Norris''' is a popular martial artist, star of the television series ''[[Walker, Texas Ranger]]'', world-record powerboat racer<ref name="bio">[http://www.chucknorris.com/html/biog.html Official Chuck Norris Biography]</ref>, Humanitarian, book author, and columnist at [[WorldNetDaily.com]].

Through his columns, Norris has been an outspoken critic of [[evolution]]<ref>[http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52567 "On Chuck Norris 'mania' sweeping the Net"], by Chuck Norris</ref>, the teaching of which he holds partially responsible for school shootings: "We teach our children they are nothing more than glorified apes, yet we don't expect them to act like monkeys."<ref>[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55333 "The heroes of America's academic halls"], by Chuck Norris</ref>

To thwart the menace of secularization, Norris has light-heartedly promised that if elected [[President of the United States of America | President]] he would "tattoo an American flag with the words, 'In God we trust.' on the forehead of every atheist" and deport all [[Liberals]]. <ref>[http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56107 "If I am elected president"], by Chuck Norris</ref>

Norris is active in many Christian causes, including the [[Billy Graham Evangelistic Association]] and [[Feed the Children]]<ref>[http://www.chucknorris.com/html/christian.aspx Chuck Norris Official Website: Christian]</ref>. He and his wife are the spokespersons for the [[National Council on Bible Curriculum]], which seeks to bring state certified [[Bible]] courses to public high schools nationwide<ref>[http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/21073870.html "Actor Chuck Norris and Wife Gena Join National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools Board of Directors"], ''Christian Newswire''</ref>.

==Links==
[http://www.chucknorris.com/ Chuck Norris Official Website]

==References==
<references/>
{{DEFAULTSORT: Norris, Chuck}}
[[category:actors]]

Chuck Norris

2007-06-22T03:29:52Z

Be not dismayed:

[[Image:chuck_norris.jpg|right|Chuck Norris publicity shot from official website.]]

'''Chuck Norris''' is a popular martial artist, star of the television series ''[[Walker, Texas Ranger]]'', world-record powerboat racer<ref name="bio">[http://www.chucknorris.com/html/biog.html Official Chuck Norris Biography]</ref>, Humanitarian, book author, and columnist at [[WorldNetDaily.com]].

Through his columns, Norris has been an outspoken critic of [[evolution]]<ref>[http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52567 "On Chuck Norris 'mania' sweeping the Net"], by Chuck Norris</ref>, the teaching of which he holds partially responsible for school shootings: "We teach our children they are nothing more than glorified apes, yet we don't expect them to act like monkeys."<ref>[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55333 "The heroes of America's academic halls"], by Chuck Norris</ref>

To thwart this menace of secularization, Norris has light-heartedly promised that if elected [[President of the United States of America | President]] he would "tattoo an American flag with the words, 'In God we trust.' on the forehead of every atheist" and deport all [[Liberals]]. <ref>[http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56107 "If I am elected president"], by Chuck Norris</ref>

Norris is active in many Christian causes, including the [[Billy Graham Evangelistic Association]] and [[Feed the Children]]<ref>[http://www.chucknorris.com/html/christian.aspx Chuck Norris Official Website: Christian]</ref>. He and his wife are the spokespersons for the [[National Council on Bible Curriculum]], which seeks to bring state certified [[Bible]] courses to public high schools nationwide<ref>[http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/21073870.html "Actor Chuck Norris and Wife Gena Join National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools Board of Directors"], ''Christian Newswire''</ref>.

==Links==
[http://www.chucknorris.com/ Chuck Norris Official Website]

==References==
<references/>
{{DEFAULTSORT: Norris, Chuck}}
[[category:actors]]

Chuck Norris

2007-06-22T01:35:45Z

Be not dismayed:

[[Image:chuck_norris.jpg|right|Chuck Norris publicity shot from official website.]]

'''Chuck Norris''' is a popular martial artist, star of the television series ''[[Walker, Texas Ranger]]'', world-record powerboat racer<ref name="bio">[http://www.chucknorris.com/html/biog.html Official Chuck Norris Biography]</ref>, Humanitarian, book author, and columnist at [[WorldNetDaily.com]].

Through his columns, Norris has been an outspoken critic of [[evolution]]<ref>[http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52567 "On Chuck Norris 'mania' sweeping the Net"], by Chuck Norris</ref>, the teaching of which he holds partially responsible for school shootings: "We teach our children they are nothing more than glorified apes, yet we don't expect them to act like monkeys."<ref>[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55333 "The heroes of America's academic halls"], by Chuck Norris</ref>

Norris is active in many Christian causes, including the [[Billy Graham Evangelistic Association]] and [[Feed the Children]]<ref>[http://www.chucknorris.com/html/christian.aspx Chuck Norris Official Website: Christian]</ref>. He and his wife are the spokespersons for the [[National Council on Bible Curriculum]], which seeks to bring state certified [[Bible]] courses to public high schools nationwide<ref>[http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/21073870.html "Actor Chuck Norris and Wife Gena Join National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools Board of Directors"], ''Christian Newswire''</ref>.

==Links==
[http://www.chucknorris.com/ Chuck Norris Official Website]

==References==
<references/>
{{DEFAULTSORT: Norris, Chuck}}
[[category:actors]]

Mitt Romney

2007-06-21T22:42:00Z

Be not dismayed:

[[Image:Xnmhv.jpg|right|thumb]]
'''Willard "Mitt" Romney''' (born March 12, 1947), served as the governor of [[Massachusetts]] from 2002 to 2006 and is a [[Republican]] candidate in the 2008 presidential election. If elected, he would become the first [[Mormon]] president.

== Personal ==
Currently, Romney is gaining popularity because his stable marriage attracts conservative audiences who are unhappy with [[John McCain]], [[Rudy Giuliani]], and [[Newt Gingrich]]'s many divorces. The irony that the Mormon has been married the least times of all the candidates was pointed out by Romney's wife, Ann, who said the difference between her husband and the other Republican candidates is that "he's had only one wife."<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070224/ap_on_el_pr/romney_polygamy]</ref> While Romney himself has only one wife, polygamy is in his family history. His great-grandfather had five wives and at least one of his great-great grandfathers had twelve.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,254362,00.html]</ref>

Romney is the son of former Michigan Governor and presidential candidate George Romney, a "Rockefeller Republican," according to Lisa McGirr, in the book Suburban Warriors, Copyright 2001, Princeton University Press, p. 141, 222. Many Massachusetts Republicans do not connect the father's politics with the son's, much like Presidents George Herbert Walker Bush and George Walker Bush.

== Political Views ==

===Abortion===
"I am pro-life. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother. I wish the people of America agreed, and that the laws of our nation could reflect that view. But while the nation remains so divided over abortion, I believe that the states, through the democratic process, should determine their own abortion laws and not have them dictated by judicial mandate." (Boston Globe, Mitt Romney Editorial, July 26, 2005)
<ref>[http://www.mittromney.com/Issue-Watch/Values America's Culture and Values] mittromney.com</ref> 

In a 1994 debate with Senator Edward Kennedy, Romney said that abortion should be legal, declaring that "regardless of one's beliefs about choice, you would hope it would be safe and legal." "Many years ago, I had a dear, close family relative that was very close to me who passed away from an illegal abortion", Romney said. "It is since that time my mother and my family have been committed to the belief that we can believe as we want, but we will not force our beliefs on others on that matter. And you will not see me wavering on that." [http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/07/03/clarity_sought_on_romneys_abortion_stance/?page=2]

In his campaign literature for the 2002 Massachusetts gubernatorial election Mitt Romney expressed a willingness to defend that States pro-choice status quo.[http://web.archive.org/web/20021218005104/www.romneyhealey.com/issues/4]

===Civil Unions===
Romney is opposed to the idea of gay marriage, however he has voiced support for domestic partnership benefits and equal rights for homosexuals.[http://web.archive.org/web/20021218005104/www.romneyhealey.com/issues/3]

===Economic Agenda===
As President, Governor Mitt Romney will pursue a Conservative, Pro-Growth Economic Agenda. Governor Romney's number one economic priority will be to grow the economy — helping to create good jobs, raise incomes and preserve American strength. He will work to rein in excessive government spending and reform entitlements. To ensure America's continued economic growth, he will fight to cut taxes — the Death Tax, savings taxes, corporate taxes and marginal tax rates.

Governor Romney will also promote trade, bring market forces to bear in health care, pursue national tort and liability reform, eliminate excessive regulations that put a burden on our economy and strengthen American families.
====Overall Economic Priorities====
*Lowering Taxes: Proposes lowering tax rates for all Americans.
*Spending: Believes Washington's focus should be on cutting spending.
*National Tort Reform: Supports nationwide reforms to our tort system.
*Union Card Check Legislation: Supports the rights of workers to decide whether to join a union or not.
*Regulatory Reform and Sarbanes-Oxley: Believes the Washington regulatory burden is too high.

===Immigration===
<blockquote>Immigration has been an important part of our nation's success. The current system, however, puts up a concrete wall to the best and brightest, yet those without skill or education are able to walk across the border. We must reform the current immigration laws so we can secure our borders, implement a mandatory biometrically enabled, tamper proof documentation and employment verification system, and increase legal immigration into America. [http://www.mittromney.com/Issue-Watch/Immigration]</blockquote>
*[http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070323/NEWS09/703230396/-1/politics Des Moines Register: Romney: Reform Immigration, Allow Students To Stay]
*[http://www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=91722 IowaPolitics.com: Romney Touts Strong Stance On Illegal Immigration]

:On 5/24/07, Romney spoke about how he was tolerant about Gays and then he discussed the current illegal immigration bill before Congress:
<blockquote>He expressed less tolerance for illegal immigrants, and said he and President Bush have a difference of opinions on a bill that would provide a path toward legalization for an estimated 12 million people unlawfully in the country.

"He has his view, and other people have their views and I have my own," Romney said. "This is for all intents and purposes a form of amnesty in that everyone who is here illegally today will be able to stay under this bill."

The bill is unfair to people who are trying to come to the country legally, he said. People here illegally should be able to apply to come to the United States, but under the same terms as everyone else and behind those who have already applied.

"I don't think that we're going to round up 11 or 12 or however many million people and bus them out of the country. That's not what I'm talking about," Romney said. "Those who committed felonies, of course, would be deported. Those who require government assistance to stay here would surely need to get off government assistance and ultimately could not remain here on government assistance."[http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007May24/0,4670,RomneyGays,00.html]</blockquote>

===Stem Cell Research===
Mitt Romney supports the right of scientists to research on embryos created during fertility treatments.[http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/02/11/romneys_stem_cell_view_may_upset_the_right/2]

==Criticism==
Romney's critics attack his inconsistent track record on issues such as [[abortion]] and [[Homosexuality|gay marriage]] to the point where he has gotten the nickname "Multiple Choice Mitt." A man dressed as a dolphin calling himself Flipper has appeared at some recent conservative gatherings to bring attention to Romney's inconsistent stands on abortion and gay marriage. Although Romney now identifies himself as pro-life and anti-same sex marriage, he claimed to be pro choice and supported same-sex rights as late as 2002. These swaps coupled with his [[Mormon]] affiliation puts him at odds with much of the Evangelical right, but a PollingReport.com chart from March 3, 2007 indicates that Mitt was still polling at approximately 7% within the GOP primary forecasts.

Mitt Romney also changed his positions on gun control. He was originally for it, but recently joined the NRA, an organization opposed to it, despite having hunted only twice in his life at the time.

==References==
<References/>

==External links==
*[http://www.mittromney.com Mitt Romney for President 2008]
*[http://mormonwiki.org/Mitt_Romney_and_Mormonism Mitt Romney and Mormonism] - MormonWiki.org

==Blogs==
*[http://www.mymanmitt.com/mitt-romney/ My Man Mitt]
*[http://conservativesagainstromney.com/ Conservatives Against Romney]

[[Category:Political people|Romney, Mitt]]

Mitt Romney

2007-06-21T22:41:02Z

Be not dismayed: /* Is Romney's Faith Christian? */

[[Image:Xnmhv.jpg|right|thumb]]
'''Willard "Mitt" Romney''' (born March 12, 1947), served as the governor of [[Massachusetts]] from 2002 to 2006 and is a [[Republican]] candidate in the 2008 presidential election. If elected, he would become the first [[Mormon]] president.

== Personal ==
Currently, Romney is gaining popularity because his stable marriage attracts conservative audiences who are unhappy with [[John McCain]], [[Rudy Giuliani]], and [[Newt Gingrich]]'s many divorces. The irony that the Mormon has been married the least times of all the candidates was pointed out by Romney's wife, Ann, who said the difference between her husband and the other Republican candidates is that "he's had only one wife."<ref>[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070224/ap_on_el_pr/romney_polygamy]</ref> While Romney himself has only one wife, polygamy is in his family history. His great-grandfather had five wives and at least one of his great-great grandfathers had twelve.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,254362,00.html]</ref>

Romney is the son of former Michigan Governor and presidential candidate George Romney, a "Rockefeller Republican," according to Lisa McGirr, in the book Suburban Warriors, Copyright 2001, Princeton University Press, p. 141, 222. Many Massachusetts Republicans do not connect the father's politics with the son's, much like Presidents George Herbert Walker Bush and George Walker Bush.

== Political Views ==

===Abortion===
"I am pro-life. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother. I wish the people of America agreed, and that the laws of our nation could reflect that view. But while the nation remains so divided over abortion, I believe that the states, through the democratic process, should determine their own abortion laws and not have them dictated by judicial mandate." (Boston Globe, Mitt Romney Editorial, July 26, 2005)
<ref>[http://www.mittromney.com/Issue-Watch/Values America's Culture and Values] mittromney.com</ref> 

In a 1994 debate with Senator Edward Kennedy, Romney said that abortion should be legal, declaring that "regardless of one's beliefs about choice, you would hope it would be safe and legal." "Many years ago, I had a dear, close family relative that was very close to me who passed away from an illegal abortion", Romney said. "It is since that time my mother and my family have been committed to the belief that we can believe as we want, but we will not force our beliefs on others on that matter. And you will not see me wavering on that." [http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/07/03/clarity_sought_on_romneys_abortion_stance/?page=2]

In his campaign literature for the 2002 Massachusetts gubernatorial election Mitt Romney expressed a willingness to defend that States pro-choice status quo.[http://web.archive.org/web/20021218005104/www.romneyhealey.com/issues/4]

===Civil Unions===
Romney is opposed to the idea of gay marriage, however he has voiced support for domestic partnership benefits and equal rights for homosexuals.[http://web.archive.org/web/20021218005104/www.romneyhealey.com/issues/3]

===Economic Agenda===
As President, Governor Mitt Romney will pursue a Conservative, Pro-Growth Economic Agenda. Governor Romney's number one economic priority will be to grow the economy — helping to create good jobs, raise incomes and preserve American strength. He will work to rein in excessive government spending and reform entitlements. To ensure America's continued economic growth, he will fight to cut taxes — the Death Tax, savings taxes, corporate taxes and marginal tax rates.

Governor Romney will also promote trade, bring market forces to bear in health care, pursue national tort and liability reform, eliminate excessive regulations that put a burden on our economy and strengthen American families.
====Overall Economic Priorities====
*Lowering Taxes: Proposes lowering tax rates for all Americans.
*Spending: Believes Washington's focus should be on cutting spending.
*National Tort Reform: Supports nationwide reforms to our tort system.
*Union Card Check Legislation: Supports the rights of workers to decide whether to join a union or not.
*Regulatory Reform and Sarbanes-Oxley: Believes the Washington regulatory burden is too high.

===Immigration===
<blockquote>Immigration has been an important part of our nation's success. The current system, however, puts up a concrete wall to the best and brightest, yet those without skill or education are able to walk across the border. We must reform the current immigration laws so we can secure our borders, implement a mandatory biometrically enabled, tamper proof documentation and employment verification system, and increase legal immigration into America. [http://www.mittromney.com/Issue-Watch/Immigration]</blockquote>
*[http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070323/NEWS09/703230396/-1/politics Des Moines Register: Romney: Reform Immigration, Allow Students To Stay]
*[http://www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=91722 IowaPolitics.com: Romney Touts Strong Stance On Illegal Immigration]

:On 5/24/07, Romney spoke about how he was tolerant about Gays and then he discussed the current illegal immigration bill before Congress:
<blockquote>He expressed less tolerance for illegal immigrants, and said he and President Bush have a difference of opinions on a bill that would provide a path toward legalization for an estimated 12 million people unlawfully in the country.

"He has his view, and other people have their views and I have my own," Romney said. "This is for all intents and purposes a form of amnesty in that everyone who is here illegally today will be able to stay under this bill."

The bill is unfair to people who are trying to come to the country legally, he said. People here illegally should be able to apply to come to the United States, but under the same terms as everyone else and behind those who have already applied.

"I don't think that we're going to round up 11 or 12 or however many million people and bus them out of the country. That's not what I'm talking about," Romney said. "Those who committed felonies, of course, would be deported. Those who require government assistance to stay here would surely need to get off government assistance and ultimately could not remain here on government assistance."[http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007May24/0,4670,RomneyGays,00.html]</blockquote>

===Stem Cell Research===
Mitt Romney supports the right of scientists to research on embryos created during fertility treatments.[http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/02/11/romneys_stem_cell_view_may_upset_the_right/2]

==Criticism==
Romney's critics attack his inconsistent track record on issues such as [[abortion]] and [[Homosexuality|gay marriage]] to the point where he has gotten the nickname "Multiple Choice Mitt." A man dressed as a dolphin calling himself Flipper has appeared at some recent conservative gatherings to bring attention to Romney's inconsistent stands on abortion and gay marriage. Although Romney now identifies himself as pro-life and anti-same sex marriage, he claimed to be pro choice and supported same-sex rights as late as 2002. These swaps coupled with his [[Mormon]] affiliation puts him at odds with much of the Evangelical right, but a PollingReport.com chart from March 3, 2007 indicates that Mitt was still polling at approximately 7% within the GOP primary forecasts.

Mitt Romney also changed his positions on gun control. He was originally for it, but recently joined the NRA, an organization opposed to it, despite having hunted only twice in his life at the time.

==Is Romney's Faith Christian?==
There are many--especially within Evangelical Christianity--who seek to define Christianity in a much narrower sense that conforms to particular points of doctrine. By this narrow definition, wide swaths of Christian believers, including Catholics, Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh-Day Adventists, Pentecostals, and Mormons would not be considered "Christian." In fact, many Evangelicals do not consider the Church of Christ to be "Christian" because of its particular salvation doctrines.

In this narrow sense, it may be accurate to say that Romney's faith is not Christian, but it would be much more accurate to say that Mormonism is not a Protestant denomination, or that it is not considered part of Evangelical Christianity. Otherwise the statement only makes sense to those few who define "Christianity" as "Evangelical Christianity" or in a similarly narrow sense.

By way of example, the statement "Mitt Romney's faith is not Christian" conveys as much information as the statement "Muqtada al-Sadr's faith is not Islam." It is obvious to any outside observer that the person making such a statement has a vested interest in some rival sect of the religion in question. The differences between Mormons and, say, Baptists are as insignificant to most outside observers as the differences between Sunnis and Shiites to most non-Muslims. However, within their respective religious communities, the differences are so important that each sect is considered by its rival to be heretical, i.e. non-Muslim or non-Christian.

==References==
<References/>

==External links==
*[http://www.mittromney.com Mitt Romney for President 2008]
*[http://mormonwiki.org/Mitt_Romney_and_Mormonism Mitt Romney and Mormonism] - MormonWiki.org

==Blogs==
*[http://www.mymanmitt.com/mitt-romney/ My Man Mitt]
*[http://conservativesagainstromney.com/ Conservatives Against Romney]

[[Category:Political people|Romney, Mitt]]

Rupert Murdoch

2007-06-21T22:34:27Z

Be not dismayed:

'''Rupert Murdoch''' (born Keith Rupert Murdoch in 1931) is an Australian-born media executive. He is the owner of the media conglomerate News Corporation. Some of the most well known of the News Corporation's dozens of holdings include the Fox Broadcasting Company, the FOX News Channel, MySpace, TV Guide, the ''New York Post'', HarperCollins. He became a naturalized American citizen in 1985. [http://www.nndb.com/people/420/000023351/]

In 2007, Murdoch announced that he was formally bidding to buy the ''[[Wall Street Journal]]''. [http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/04/business/04murdoch.php]

Assault on Reason

2007-06-21T21:15:50Z

Be not dismayed:

''The Assault on Reason'' is a political book <ref>Gore still says he has no plans to run for president, but his latest book, "The Assault On Reason," is so nakedly political and sharply critical it's hard to discern what his plans may be. [http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3192596 ABC News] </ref>
by [[Al Gore]] which he denies is political. <ref>"I'm not a candidate and this is not a political book, this is not a candidate book," Gore told Diane Sawyer on Good Morning America. [http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3192596 ABC News] </ref>
In the book, Gore accuses [[President Bush]] of having an unprincipled hunger for power.

ABC's Jake Tapper wrote
:"The Assault On Reason" is an assault on President George W. Bush -- 308 pages of professorially rendered, liberal red meat . . . [http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3192596 ]

In the book, Al Gore discusses how he thinks that the American democracy has been undermined by the current administration's intrusions of power. While claiming that the book is not political, Gore attacks the current President and his administration relentlessly.

Some have criticized Al Gore's hypocrisy. Id est, in the book Al Gore denounces the media saying that they put little difference, if any difference at all, between news and celebrity, yet he is an ex Vice President of the United States and an Academy Award winner.

==Notes==
<references/>

==See Also==
:[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JE48XHKG64 Video of Al Gore blasts George H. W. Bush for ignoring Iraq's ties to terrorism]

[[category:book]]

Assault on Reason

2007-06-21T21:08:30Z

Be not dismayed:

''The Assault on Reason'' is a political book <ref>Gore still says he has no plans to run for president, but his latest book, "The Assault On Reason," is so nakedly political and sharply critical it's hard to discern what his plans may be. [http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3192596 ABC News] </ref>
by [[Al Gore]] which he denies is political. <ref>"I'm not a candidate and this is not a political book, this is not a candidate book," Gore told Diane Sawyer on Good Morning America. [http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3192596 ABC News] </ref>
In the book, Gore accuses [[President Bush]] of having an unprincipled hunger for power.

ABC's Jake Tapper wrote
:"The Assault On Reason" is an assault on President George W. Bush -- 308 pages of professorially rendered, liberal red meat . . . [http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3192596 ]

The book starts with a complaint about a lack of public debate leading up to the Iraq War.<ref>http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1622015,00.html</ref>

Gore also makes one very good point, which will be appreciated by conservatives who distrust the media elite:
:Television not only creates a dynamic that runs contrary to [[Thomas Jefferson]]'s desire for a "well-informed citizenry" but puts viewers in a "quasi-hypnotic state" that "partially immobilizes" them and allows unreasoned communicators to sell false bills of goods.

==Notes==

<references/>

Paul Wolfowitz

2007-06-21T21:04:25Z

Be not dismayed:

[[Image:89698iukhbn.jpg|right|thumb|Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz briefs reporters at the [[The_Pentagon|Pentagon]] about the on-going campaign against the [[al Qaeda]] terrorist organization and the military capability of [[Taliban]] regime in [[Afghanistan]].
]]
'''Paul Dundes Wolfowitz''' (b. December 22, 1943) is a [[Jewish-American]] academic, [[neoconservative]] thinker and political figure; he was a prominent architect of the foreign policy of the [[George W. Bush]] administration and the [[Iraq War]]. In the early 1970s, Paul Wolfowitz served as an aide to [[Democratic Party]] Senator Henry M. "Scoop" Jackson; from 1986 to 1989, he served as ambassador to the Republic of Indonesia; from 2001 to 2005, he served as the Deputy Secretary of Defense in the George W. Bush administration; he is currently the President of the [[World Bank]]. Wolfowitz described himself as a "Scoop Jackson Republican".

Other nations have been critical of Wolfowitz, and the criticisms intensified to calls for his ouster upon disclosure that in April of 2007 he allegedly obtained a large pay raise and promotion for his girlfriend, Shaha Ali Riza, a former bank official.<ref>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/14/MNGHNP8M941.DTL</ref> He resigned on May 17, 2007 (effective June 30, 2007), as a result of an investigation by the World Bank Group's board of executive directors, which accepted his resignation, "ending a protracted and tumultuous battle over his stewardship, sparked by a promotion he arranged for his companion."<ref name=WBGS2> [http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:21339650~menuPK:34463~pagePK:34370~piPK:34424~theSitePK:4607,00.html "Statements of Executive Directors and President Wolfowitz"], ''[[World Bank Group]]'', May 17, 2007, accessed May 17, 2007.</ref><ref name=JonesUK>Matthew Jones, [http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKSP8524620070518 "Wolfowitz Exit Seen Clearing Way for Progress"], ''[[Reuters]]'' (UK), May 18, 2007, accessed May 18, 2007. </ref>

==Education==
Paul Wolfowitz's father Jacob Wolfowitz, was a Professor of Mathematics at Cornell University. Paul Wolfowitz has a bachelor's degree in mathematics and chemistry from Cornell University; a Master's degree and Ph.D. in political science from the University of Chicago.<ref>http://www.whitehouse.gov/results/leadership/bio_466.html</ref> From 1994-2001, Paul Wolfowitz served as Dean and Professor of International Relations at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies of The Johns Hopkins University.<ref>[http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTABOUTUS/ORGANIZATION/EXTOFFICEPRESIDENT/0,,contentMDK:20519590~menuPK:64260190~pagePK:51174171~piPK:64258873~theSitePK:1014541,00.html Paul Wolfowitz's biography at World Banks site]</ref> [[Lewis "Scooter" Libby]] was one of his students when Wolfowitz taught courses in the Department of Political Science at Yale University.<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1449631,00.html</ref>

Eric Schmitt described Paul Wolfowitz as a "soft-spoken former aspiring-mathematician-turned-policymaker … [whose] world views … were forged by family history and in the halls of academia rather than in the jungles of Vietnam or the corridors of Congress … [His father] … escaped Poland after World War I. The rest of his father's family perished in the Holocaust." David Dudley described Wolfowitz as "liv[ing] in a world haunted by atrocities" and deeply affecting his son's personal and intellectual development. Speaking directly of the influence of the Holocaust on his own world-views, Wolfowitz said: "That sense of what happened in Europe in World War II has shaped a lot of my views … It's a very bad thing when people exterminate other people, and people persecute minorities. It doesn't mean you can prevent every such incident in the world, but it's also a mistake to dismiss that sort of concern as merely humanitarian and not related to real interest."

In August 1963, Paul Wolfowitz joined the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom led by [[Martin Luther King, Jr]].

==Books==
Lewis D. Solomon, Van Vleck Professor of Law at George Washington University, has recently published a biography of Paul Wolfowitz titled ''Paul D. Wolfowitz: Visionary Intellectual, Policymaker, and Strategist''<ref>http://www.amazon.com/Paul-Wolfowitz-Intellectual-Policymaker-Strategist/dp/0275995879</ref>.

==Interviews==
*[http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-7037799_ITM Bush's Brain Trust] by Sam Tanenhaus, ''Vanity Fair'', July 2003.
*[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7306587/site/newsweek/ 'I'm Not a Unilateralist': Paul Wolfowitz Wants the World to Understand Him] by Lally Weymouth, ''Newsweek'', April 4, 2005.

==See Also==
*[http://www.slate.com/id/2115170/ That Bleeding Heart Wolfowitz] by [[Christopher Hitchens]], ''Slate'', March 22, 2005.
*[http://www.newsmeat.com/washington_political_donations/Paul_Wolfowitz.php Paul Wolfowitz's political donations] by ''Newsmeat''.
*[http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:21319422~pagePK:34370~piPK:34424~theSitePK:4607,00.html Communication from the Executive Directors of the World Bank Group], ''World Bank Group'', May 1, 2007.
*[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18628587/site/newsweek/ With the Best of Intentions] by Michael Hirsh, ''Newsweek'', May 21, 2007.

== References ==
<references/>
{{DEFAULTSORT: Wolfowitz, Paul}}
[[category:Political people]]
[[category:political scientists]]

New International Version

2007-06-21T21:00:52Z

Be not dismayed:

The New International Version (NIV) of the [[Bible]] is a leading evangelical translation. More than one hundred scholars, beginning in the late 1960s, undertook the project of retranslating the Bible for the best extant (existing) originals in [[Hebrew]] and [[Greek]] texts. Their goal was that the translation be:<ref>http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/index.php?action=getVersionInfo&vid=31#books&version=31;</ref>

:an Accurate, Beautiful, Clear, and Dignified translation suitable for public and private reading, teaching, preaching, memorizing, and liturgical use. The translators were united in their commitment to the authority and infallibility of the Bible as God's Word in written form. They agreed that faithful communication of the meaning of the original writers demands frequent modifications in sentence structure (resulting in a "thought-for-thought" translation) and constant regard for the contextual meanings of words.

The International Bible Society (formerly the New York Bible Society) funded this project, and owns the copyright.<ref>http://www.ibs.org/</ref>

== Criticism ==

There are Christians opposed to the use of the New International Version. Their argument is that it was based offo f faulty texts, that certain doctrines have been slipped in by the various trasnlators, and that the language is not as beautiful as the King James Version.

----

'''Sources:''' <references/>

McDonald's

2007-06-21T20:44:49Z

Be not dismayed:

'''McDonald's''' is an American fast food chain. McDonald's operates more than 30,000 restaurants in more then 100 countries on 6 continents. [http://www.supersizeme.com/home.aspx?page=bythelb]

==Criticism==
McDonald's has often been accused of knowingly selling unhealthy food<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=yNFN1OpnkBkC&dq=fast+food+nation&pg=PP1&ots=l_kkxv7x65&sig=M0lMjzxa92mnxMp4CXMS3VaYpLk&prev=http://www.google.com/search%3Fq%3Dfast%2Bfood%2Bnation%26ie%3Dutf-8%26oe%3Dutf-8%26aq%3Dt%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26client%3Dfirefox-a&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title#PPA2,M1 Fast Food Nation]</ref>. McDonald's states that health is not only an issue of food but also of a balanced active lifestyle<ref>[http://www.mcdonalds.com/usa/eat.html McDonald's Corporate website]</ref>; this is why many McDonald's restaurants have a jungle gym for the children to play in and be active. McDonald's also sells salads and water, two healthy food items, and several drinks that are artificially flavored to taste like fruit. The [[schlockumentary]] '[[Super Size Me]]' aimed at proving that McDonald's had no interest in healthy customers whatsoever<ref>[http://www.supersizeme.com/ Super Size Me]</ref>.

=== McLibel Trial ===

In 1990, McDonald's sued for [[libel]] several members of Greenpeace London (an organisation which at the time of the incident was no longer connected with Greenpeace), who had been writing and distributing leaflets criticizing McDonald's. Of the five defendants, three repented due to lack of money for legal costs. The remaining two, [[Helen Steel]] and [[Dave Morris]], decided to take the case to court in 1994 with [[pro bono]] legal representation and public donations. This became known as the [[McLibel]] Trial.<ref>[http://www.mcspotlight.org/case/trial/story.html The McLibel Trial]</ref>

On day 102 in court - March 13th 1995 - McLibel became the longest ever UK libel trial, beating the previous record of 101 days in the Daily Mail vs The Moonies (1982).

On December 11th 1995 it became the longest civil case (as opposed to criminal) in British history.

On November 1st 1996 (court day 292), McLibel became the longest trial of any kind in English history.

On 19th June 1997, Mr Justice Bell took two hours to read his summary. He ruled that Steel and Morris had not proved the allegations against McDonald's on rainforest destruction, heart disease and cancer, food poisoning, starvation in the Third World and bad working conditions. But they had proved that McDonald's "exploit children" with their advertising, falsely advertise their food as nutritious, risk the health of their most regular, long-term customers, are "culpabably responsible" for cruelty to animals, are "strongly antipathetic" to unions and pay their workers low wages.

('Not proved' does not mean that the allegations against McDonald's are not true, just that the Judge felt that the McLibel Two did not bring sufficient evidence to prove the meanings he had attributed to the leaflet.)

The Judge ruled that Steel and Morris had libelled McDonald's, but as they had proved many of the allegations, they would only owe half of the claimed damages: £60,000.

== External links ==
[http://www.mcspotlight.org/ McSpotlight.org]

== References ==
<references />
[[category:companies]]

Talk:World of Warcraft

2007-06-21T20:43:58Z

Be not dismayed:

I think we are too dignified to have such lengthy articles about video games. I propose that we do not have any articles on video games at all. What say you? ---[[User:Be not dismayed|Be not dismayed]] XXI June 2007

Talk:World of Warcraft

2007-06-21T20:43:03Z

Be not dismayed: New page: I think we are too dignified to have such lengthy articles about video games. I propose that we do not have any articles on video games at all. What say you?

I think we are too dignified to have such lengthy articles about video games. I propose that we do not have any articles on video games at all. What say you?

Roger Schlafly

2007-06-21T17:19:57Z

Be not dismayed:

[[Image:03011707c.jpg|right|thumb]]
'''Roger Schlafly''' is an independent computer programmer. In 1980, he received a PhD in mathematics from University of California at Berkeley, under Abel prize laureate Isadore Singer. He is the son of conservative activist [[Phyllis Schlafly | Phyllis Schlafly]] and the brother of Conservapedia founder [[Andrew Schlafly | Andrew Schlafly]]. He is also the brother of [[John Schlafly]].

His blog is called [http://www.spinstop.com/buzz/ Dark Buzz].

==Publications & Patents==
*[http://www.jstor.org/view/00029947/di970319/97p00577/0 Rigidity of Pseudoconformal Connections]
*[http://www.springerlink.com/content/h3837x61q777105x/ Universal connections]
*[http://www.ams.org/era/1995-01-03/S1079-6762-95-03001-0/S1079-6762-95-03001-0.pdf THE DOUBLE BUBBLE CONJECTURE]
*[http://www.emis.ams.org/journals/Annals/151_2/hass.pdf Double bubbles minimize]
*[http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN%2F5600584 Interactive formula compiler and range estimator]
*[http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN%2F5274707 Modular exponentiation and reduction device and method ]
*[http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN%2F5471612 Electronic spreadsheet system and methods for compiling a formula stored in a spreadsheet into native machine code for execution by a floating-point unit upon spreadsheet recalculation]
*[http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN%2F5299197 Communications packet server protocol]
*[http://www.springerlink.com/content/v75073523676j340/ On equivariant isometric embeddings]
*[http://projecteuclid.org/Dienst/UI/1.0/Summarize/euclid.pjm/1102734394 Universal connections: the local problem]
[[category:scientists]]

Episcopal Church in the United States of America

2007-06-21T17:10:02Z

Be not dismayed:

The Episcopal Church in the USA, abbreviated ECUSA, and also known as the The Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, is the American arm of the [[Worldwide Anglican Communion]]. The Church has about 2.5 million members.

The [[National Cathedral]] in Washington is an Episcopal church, and is the official seat of the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church in the USA. Twelve of the forty-three Presidents have been Episcopalian, including [[George Washington]], [[Thomas Jefferson]], [[George H. W. Bush]], and [[Gerald Ford]].

There is currently a controversy within the Episcopal church about the role of homosexuals within the church. The church was given until September 30, 2007 to determine whether or not it would continue to consecrate homosexuals. The Episcopal church's liberal stance is alienating it from other memebers of the communion, specifically the churches in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America.

[[Category:Christian Denominations]]

Just War Theory

2007-06-21T16:53:31Z

Be not dismayed:

Just War (''jus ad bellum'') is a doctrine of war which teaches that a war is not valid unless it is just, meaning it is defensive in nature either reclaiming things stolen or to castigate an offending person.

Under ''jus ad bellum'', only legitimate authorities can wage war for the right reasons (usually this means a defensive war) and only as a last resort if every other peaceful means to avert war have been used to no avail.

== War in Iraq ==

The 2003 Invasion of Iraq did not follow the historic traditions of ''jus ad bellum'' since it was a preemptive strike against the dictator Saddam Hussein from getting weapons of mass destruction. After the war had begun, inspectors did not find weapons of mass destruction, so the justification of the war has been questioned.

Just War Theory

2007-06-21T16:53:09Z

Be not dismayed:

Just War (''jus ad bellum'') is a doctrine of war which teaches that a war is not right unless it is just, meaning it is defensive in nature either reclaiming things stolen or to castigate an offending person.

Under ''jus ad bellum'', only legitimate authorities can wage war for the right reasons (usually this means a defensive war) and only as a last resort if every other peaceful means to avert war have been used to no avail.

== War in Iraq ==

The 2003 Invasion of Iraq did not follow the historic traditions of ''jus ad bellum'' since it was a preemptive strike against the dictator Saddam Hussein from getting weapons of mass destruction. After the war had begun, inspectors did not find weapons of mass destruction, so the justification of the war has been questioned.

Just War Theory

2007-06-21T16:52:21Z

Be not dismayed:

Just War (''jus ad bellum'') is a doctrine of war which teaches that a war is not just unless it is just, meaning it is defensive in nature either reclaiming things stolen or to castigate an offending person.

Under ''jus ad bellum'', only legitimate authorities can wage war for the right reasons (usually this means a defensive war) and only as a last resort if every other peaceful means to avert war have been used to no avail.

== War in Iraq ==

The 2003 Invasion of Iraq did not follow the historic traditions of ''jus ad bellum'' since it was a preemptive strike against the dictator Saddam Hussein from getting weapons of mass destruction. After the war had begun, inspectors did not find weapons of mass destruction, so the justification of the war has been questioned.

Just War Theory

2007-06-21T16:51:55Z

Be not dismayed: New page: '''Just war''' Just War (''jus ad bellum'') is a doctrine of war which teaches that a war is not just unless it is just, meaning it is defensive in nature either reclaiming things stolen ...

'''Just war'''

Just War (''jus ad bellum'') is a doctrine of war which teaches that a war is not just unless it is just, meaning it is defensive in nature either reclaiming things stolen or to castigate an offending person.

Under ''jus ad bellum'', only legitimate authorities can wage war for the right reasons (usually this means a defensive war) and only as a last resort if every other peaceful means to avert war have been used to no avail.

== War in Iraq ==

The 2003 Invasion of Iraq did not follow the historic traditions of ''jus ad bellum'' since it was a preemptive strike against the dictator Saddam Hussein from getting weapons of mass destruction. After the war had begun, inspectors did not find weapons of mass destruction, so the justification of the war has been questioned.

Michael Savage

2007-04-17T01:35:09Z

Be not dismayed:

[[Image:Michaelsavage.jpg|right|thumb]]
'''Michael Alan Weiner''', Ph.D. (born March 31, 1942) (aka '''Michael Savage''') is a conservative talk show host. <ref>http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Michael_Savage SourceWatch</ref>

His nationally-syndicated radio show is called "Savage Nation". He is affectionately known as "Dr. Savage" because he holds a Ph.D. in economics (compare [[Dr. Laura]]).

He is famous for making inflammatory statements. In 2003, Savage was fired from MSNBC, after telling a [[homosexual]] caller "I hope you get AIDS and die, you pig."<ref>USA Today http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-07-07-talk-host-fired_x.htm</ref>

=== References ===

<references />
[[category:biographies]]