Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Tobacco

2013-03-16T12:33:41Z

JGrant: /* Health Effects */

'''Tobacco''' is a plant that contains the [[drug]] nicotine, and products produced from the leaves of that plant for consumption by smoking or chewing. Its recreational qualities were discovered by [[native American]]s and passed on to Europeans after the establishment of [[Jamestown, Virginia|the first permanent English settlement]] in 1607. Tobacco is smoked for a euphoric high that relaxes the individual and provides a calming, social atmosphere. However, studies in the mid to late 20th century showed that tobacco causes [[lung cancer]] and many other types of respiratory diseases such as [[emphysema]]. Nicotine is also an addictive substance that is the subject of controversy.

== History ==
The Native Americans were the first to use tobacco because the plant was native to the Americas. Tobacco when consumed in large quantities is a hallucinogen; therefore the Native Americans did not use it recreationally but instead used it as a hallucinogen during religious ceremonies. Tobacco was exported by [[John Rolfe]], (husband of [[Pocahontas]]). It became known as a [[cash crop]]. The negative effects of tobacco such as [[lung cancer]], [[bronchitis]] and foul odor are widely accepted today.<ref>One of the first papers to recognize that smoking causes lung cancer was published in 1957.[http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/reprint/17/10/981.pdf]</ref> Tobacco companies have genetically modified tobacco plants and added toxic [[chemical]]s to their products to make them more addictive, thus making the modern cigarette much more toxic than the original cultivated plant.

== Nicotine ==
Nicotine is an alkaloid in tobacco that is responsible for the addictive nature of cigarette smoking and other tobacco use. Regular nicotine consumption leads to [[tolerance]]<ref>Porchet, H. C., Benowitz, N. L., & Sheiner, L. B. (1988). Pharmacodynamic model of tolerance: Application to nicotine. ''Journal of Pharmacology & Experimental Therapeutics, 244'', 231-236</ref> (i.e., higher doses are required to achieve the same effect), and [[withdrawal]]<ref>Hughes, J.R., Higgins, S.T., & Bickel, W.K. (1994). Nicotine withdrawal versus other drug withdrawal syndromes: Similarities and dissimilarities. ''Addiction, 89'', 1461-1470</ref> symptoms (e.g., irritability, restlessness, nicotine cravings) occur when use is discontinued. Intake elicits acute increases in [[heart rate]] and blood pressure<ref>Benowitz, N.L., Jacob, P., Jones, R.T., & Rosenberg, J. (1982). Interindividual variability in the metabolism and cardiovascular effects of nicotine in man. ''Journal of Pharmacology & Experimental Therapeutics, 221'', 368-372.''</ref>, as well as respiratory rate, but also decreases the volume of blood flow by causing the constriction of blood vessels. Nicotine in cigarette smoke is very easily absorbed through the lungs and buccal tissue in the oral cavity<ref>Miller, M.S., & Cocores, J.A. (1993). Nicotine dependence: Diagnosis, chemistry and pharmacologic treatments. ''Pediatrics in Review, 14'', 275-279.</ref>, and reaches the brain about seven seconds after it is inhaled in cigarette smoke<ref>Benowitz, N.L. (1991). Pharmacodynamics of nicotine: Implications for rational treatment of nicotine addiction. ''British Journal of Addiction, 86'', 495-499.</ref>. After reaching the brain, it stimulates the release of a number of [[neurotransmitters]], including [[dopamine]]<ref>Stolerman, I.P., & Shoaib, M. (1991). The neurobiology of tobacco addiction. ''Trends in Pharmacological Science, 12'', 467-473.</ref>, [[norepinephrine]]<ref>Summers, K.L., & Giacobini, E. (1995). Effects of local and repeated systemic administration of (-)nicotine on extracellular levels of acetylcholine, norepinephrine, dopamine and serotonin in rat cortex. ''Neurochemical Research, 20'', 753-759.</ref>, [[serotonin]]<ref>Ribeiro, E.B., Bettiker, R.L., Bogdanov, M., & Wurtman, R.J. (1993). Effects of systemic nicotine on serotonin release in rat brain. ''Brain Research, 621'', 311-318.</ref>, and [[acetylcholine]]<ref>Summers & Giacobini, 1995.</ref>. The increased availability of these chemicals in the brain leads to feelings of pleasure and mild euphoria, as well as increased alertness and concentration. The half-life of nicotine is approximately two hours.

Medications containing nicotine are also used to help smokers who are trying to quit. These are referred to as nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). The idea behind NRT is that it allows smokers to break the behavioral component of their smoking habit (e.g., becoming used to not smoking while driving) while gradually reducing the amount of nicotine in their bloodstream, thus minimizing the effects of physiological nicotine withdrawal. Several different forms of NRT are available, including a transdermal patch, chewing gum, and nasal spray. Nicotine has also been found to be a useful treatment for certain physical conditions, though the mechanisms are not well understood. Smoking has been associated with a lower risk of Kaposi's sarcoma<ref>http://dceg.cancer.gov/pdfs/goedert942002.pdf</ref>. Nicotine also appears to have therapeutic benefit for individuals with ulcerative colitis and one form of epilepsy.

Nicotine has been shown in some medical studies to be more addictive than cocaine and even heroin. Tobacco is often used along with cocaine because the nicotine in tobacco greatly enhances the euphoria one receives from cocaine.

[[Image:Nicotine.gif]]

== Tobacco Products ==

'''Cigarettes.''' Cigarettes are the most commonly used tobacco product. Approximately one of every five [[American]] adults is a current smoker<ref>Centers for Disease Control (2005). Cigarette smoking among adults - United States, 2004. ''Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, 54''', 1121-1124</ref>, and about 438,000 Americans die annually due to the effects of smoking; about 38,000 of these deaths are attributed to secondhand smoke<ref>Centers for Disease Control (2005). Annual smoking-attributable mortality, years of potential life lost, and productivity losses - United States, 1997-2001. ''Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, 54'', 300-303.</ref>. While the prevalence of smoking has dropped dramatically in the past 50 years, the rate at which the prevalence is decreasing has slowed substantially<ref>Hughes, J. R., & Brandon, T. H. (2003). A softer view of hardening. ''Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 5'', 961-962.</ref> Additionally, the rate of smoking in adolescents and young adults has been increasing since the mid-1990s<ref>Wechsler, H., Rigotti, N., Gledhill-Hoyt, J., & Lee, H. (1998). Increased levels of cigarette use among college students: A cause for national concern. ''Journal of the American Medical Association, 280'', 1673-1678.</ref>. There are nearly 5,000 different chemicals in cigarette smoke, including over 60 [[carcinogens]]<ref>Hecht, S. (2006). Cigarette smoking: Cancer risks, carcinogens, and mechanisms. ''Archives of Surgery, 391'', 603-613</ref>.

'''Cigars.''' Cigars are larger versions of cigarettes. The tobacco leaves are less finely cut and do not undergo as much post-harvest processing or curing. They are rarely (if ever) filtered, and most users do not inhale as deeply as they do cigarettes. Cigars are somewhat more socially acceptable to many people, often being reserved for special occasions. They are certainly not without health hazards - and share many in common with other tobacco products - but as a consequence of the different method of use, cigar users are relatively more prone to oral cancers than are cigarette users.

'''Smokeless tobacco (chewing or dipping tobacco)''' Smokeless tobacco (a form of snuff) is a less commonly used tobacco product, however, this market segment has not suffered as much as that for cigarettes. It is a safer (though not safe) alternative to cigarettes, and tobacco-cessation groups are divided on whether it should be promoted as such (though largely against). It is typically sold in small metal or plastic cans referred to colloquially as "tins", generally containing 1.1oz (34 grams) of chewing tobacco. It usually consists of moistened fermented tobacco with additional synthetic flavorings. The smokeless tobacco market has been involved in a several consolidations recently, with large (primarily cigarette) companies buying smaller manufacturers of smokeless tobacco. It is more like the cigarette market in that there are numerous brands with high visibility, common ones include Skoal (controlling about 30% of the U.S. domestic market), Copenhagen (both owned by the U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Company), as well as Grizzly and Kodiak (products of the Conwood Sales Company, a subsidiary of RJ Reynolds).
Smokeless tobacco users are especially at risk for oral cancers.

== Health Effects ==
Smoking has a significant negative health impact, and causes many dangerous and fatal conditions, including cancers, heart disease, and respiratory disease.

It has been estimated that cigarette smoking is responsible for 28% of all deaths in developed countries in the 35-69 age group, as well as 35% of all cancer deaths and 28% of all deaths due to vascular diseases<ref>Hecht, 2006.</ref>. Smoking increases the risk of oral, pharyngeal, esophageal, laryngeal, lung, uterine, cervical, urinary, and kidney cancers<ref>http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/health_effects/cancer.htm</ref>.

Coronary heart disease is one of the biggest causes of death in the United States, and is 2-4 more likely in smokers than nonsmokers. Smokers are also 10 times more likely to develop peripheral vascular disease, which is a narrowing of the arteries. Additionally, smokers are twice as vulnerable to a stroke compared with nonsmokers<ref>http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/health_effects/heart.htm</ref>. Smoking also negatively impacts the respiratory system. Approximately 90% of all deaths from chronic lung diseases are the result of smoking<ref>http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/health_effects/respiratory.htm</ref>.

In addition, smoking has been shown to double the risk of Alzheimer's Disease<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/115829.stm</ref>.

Smoking, quite obviously, can deal serious damage to your voice over time, and vocalists and professional speakers ought avoid it. Inhaling smoke coats your vocal cords as much as it does your lungs in tar deposits, and anyone who doesn't wish to drop an octave off both ends of their range and ruin what's left should keep away from even second-hand smoke.

== Secondhand Smoke ==
''Secondhand smoke'' refers to smoke that is inhaled by nonsmokers from the environment. It is a combination of smoke given off by cigarettes and other smoking implements that is not inhaled by smokers, as well as the smoke exhaled by smokers. The U.S. [[Environmental Protection Agency]] has classified secondhand smoke as a [[Group A carcinogen]], meaning that it is known to cause cancer in humans. It has been reported that secondhand smoke causes 3,600 annual lung cancer deaths and between 22,700 and 69,600 heart disease deaths annually in the U.S.<ref>California Environmental Protection Agency (2005, June). Health Effects of Exposure to Tobacco Smoke.</ref>. According the the [[Surgeon General]], even short-term exposure to secondhand smoke can have harmful effects on cardiovascular functioning<ref>The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: 6 Major Conclusions of the Surgeon General Report. A Report of the Surgeon General, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2006. Retrieved from [http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke/factsheets/factsheet6.html]</ref>. Some tobacco companies have disputed the findings regarding harm caused by secondhand smoke. For example, Imperial Tobacco's website states "...it is our view that the scientific evidence, taken as a whole, is insufficient to establish that other people's tobacco smoke is a cause of any disease"<ref>http://www.imperial-tobacco.com/index.asp?pageid=64&subsection=env_tobacco_smoke. Accessed April 26, 2007.</ref>. Other tobacco companies have acknowledged that secondhand smoke can be harmful, including [[Phillip Morris]]: "Public health officials have concluded that secondhand smoke from cigarettes causes disease...Phillip Morris USA believes that the public should be guided by the conclusions of public health officials...[and] that the conclusions of public health officials concerning environmental tobacco smoke are sufficient to warrant measures that regulate smoking in public places"<ref>http://www.phillipmorrisusa.com/en/health_issues/secondhand_smoke.asp. Accessed April 26, 2007.</ref>.

== Regulation ==

In 2000, the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] ruled by a narrow margin of 5-4 that the [[FDA]] lacked authority to regulate tobacco products.<ref>''[[FDA v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corp.]]'', 529 U.S. 120 (2000).</ref>

==Tobacco use in the United States==

Tobacco use varies regionally within the United States. In 2006, the most recent year for which data are available, adult tobacco use was highest in [[Kentucky]], where 50% of adults used tobacco, followed by [[West Virginia]] (49%), [[Oklahoma]] (47%), [[Tennessee]] (47%), and [[Ohio]] (46%). States with the lowest rates of adult tobacco use in 2006 were [[Utah]] (1%), [[California]] (2%), [[Idaho]] (3%), [[Connecticut]], (4%), and [[Massachusetts]], (5%). <ref>http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/state_data/data_highlights/2006/index.htm</ref>

== References ==
<references/>

[[category:addiction]]
[[category:psychology]]
[[category:industry]]
[[category:botany]]

Biblical scientific foreknowledge

2013-03-16T12:30:30Z

JGrant: just removing all the obvious trolling.

[[File:Newton.png|thumb|alt=scientific foreknowledge in the bible|250px|[[Isaac Newton]], cornerstone of the [[scientific revolution]], based his research on the scientific authority of the Bible and sought enlightenment in scripture.]]‎
'''Biblical scientific foreknowledge''' is how the [[Bible]] shows a comprehension of [[science|scientific]] knowledge far ahead of its time. ''Biblical scientific foreknowledge illustrates what is possible.''

[[Bible denier]]s — such as [[atheist]]s and [[evolution]]ists — engage in [[liberal denial]] about the many truths in the Bible. '''''Their irrational [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness|closed-mindedness]] against the Bible obstructs the advancement of science'''''.

'''Biblical scientific foreknowledge''' has another benefit: it facilitates improvements in the translation of verses that describe scientific-related events, such as [[Jesus]]'s [[Essay:Calming the Storm|Calming the Storm]], the reference to the universe in [[Epistle to the Hebrews (Translated)#1:10-11|Hebrews 1:10]], and the changing of [[Essay:Water into Wine|water into wine]] at the wedding feast.

== Geology ==

===Flood===
Modern scientists long opposed a young earth [[creation|created]] by God whereby cataclysmic flooding, such as the [[Great Flood]] described in the Bible, shaped the landscape. However, ample [[counterexamples to an old earth]] exist and the discovery in the Northwest of "giant ripple marks, 50 feet high and 200-500 feet apart" proved that a cataclysmic flood did indeed occur. As a result, "[a]mong geologists, the concept of a catastrophic flood came to be accepted by the late 1950s."<ref>http://www.iafi.org/floods.html</ref>

===Continental drift===
[[Continental drift]] was proposed by the creationist [[Antonio Snider-Pellegrini]] in 1859 based on Genesis 1:9-10, which implies that all of dry land was once in one place.<ref>http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c001.html</ref> [[Atheists]] mocked this concept for about 100 years, until finally accepting its truth.

=== Underwater springs ===

Only in moderns times have scientists become aware of enormous underwater springs feeding into the oceans, and the very deep valleys at the bottom of the oceans.

But the Bible repeatedly describes this thousands of years earlier: "on that very day '''''the deep subcrustal springs were broken open''''', and the windows of the sky were thrown open." ([[Genesis_1-8_%28Translated%29#Chapter_7|Genesis 7:11 (CBP)]], emphasis added). And again, in 2 Samuel 22:16, the Bible says, "And the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the world were discovered ...." ([[KJV]])

=== Agriculture ===

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, intellectuals insisted that the world's population would grow larger than the food supply, resulting in mass starvation. Yet there are examples in both the Old and New Testaments of the food supply increasing to be more plentiful than expected. Indeed, by 2011 obesity was far more prevalent and harmful than hunger.

== History ==

The Bible describes a [[Great Flood]] occurring around 3300 B.C., or about 5300 years ago. It involved a cataclysmic rainstorm of a magnitude never seen before or since. For centuries atheists have denied its possibility.

In 1991, an "ice mummy" was discovered: a remarkably preserved ancient body, including even the contents of his last meal, due to an extraordinary ice storm in the [[Alps]]. By radiometric carbon dating<ref>http://www.nupecc.org/iai2001/report/B44.pdf</ref>, the scientists found that the occurrence of this massive ice storm in the mountains (and rainstorm below) was 5300 years ago.<ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/icemummies/iceman.html</ref>

=== False Theories ===

Jesus's recognition that the truth would remain hidden from arrogant intellectuals while simultaneously revealed to humbler, [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness|openminded]] people. This foreshadowed the promotion of theories to pull self-centered intellectual wannabees away from [[God]], based on the [[Theory of Evolution]], [[Theory of Relativity]], [[homosexual agenda]], [[abortion]], [[communism]], etc.

=== No End to Mankind as Expected ===

The Bible predicts that the end of mankind will not occur by chance, but rather at a time known only to [[God]]. Despite the extinction of many species each year throughout history, the expectation by scientists that Earth should be hit by chance by a massive meteor, and laws of probability that predict other immense catastrophes within thousands of years, mankind continues and Christianity grows just as Jesus predicted.

==Health, Biology and Medicine==

===Common DNA===

[[John_1-7_(Translated)#Chapter_1|John 1:3]] explains that "All things were made by Him; not one thing was made without Him." If something had been made without Him then creatures would exist that had completely different DNA from other creatures.

=== World obesity epidemic and obesity problem within the atheist population ===
[[File:11834504 3cc3c49559.jpg|187px|right|thumbnail|Two of the major risk factors for becoming [[obesity|obese]] according to the [[Mayo Clinic]] are poor dietary choices and inactivity.<ref>http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes</ref> According to the [[Gallup poll|Gallup Inc.]], "Very religious Americans are more likely to practice healthy behaviors than those who are moderately religious or nonreligious."<ref>http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx</ref>
 
 
(photo obtained from [http://www.flickr.com/photos/wader/11834504/ Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/deed.en license agreement]) ]]
See also: [[Atheism and obesity]] and [[New Atheism leadership's problem with excess weight]] and [[Evolutionists who have had problems with being overweight and/or obese]]

The [[Saint Paul|Apostle Paul]] wrote that in the [[end times]], men would be lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God (2 Timothy 3:1-4). In May of 2012, the [[World Health Organization]] reported that "Worldwide obesity has more than doubled since 1980."<ref>[http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/ World Health Organization - obesity fact sheet]</ref> In 2008, more than 1.4 billion adults, 20 and older, were overweight. Of these over 200 million men and nearly 300 million women were obese.<ref>[http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/ World Health Organization - obesity fact sheet]</ref>

Two of the major risk factors for becoming [[obesity|obese]] according to the [[Mayo Clinic]] are poor dietary choices and inactivity.<ref>http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/DS00314/DSECTION=causes</ref> In addition, [[Chuck Norris]] says the most common cause of obesity is a hedonistic lifestyle (see: [[Chuck Norris on the topic of obesity]]). According to [[Gallup poll|Gallup Inc.]], "Very religious Americans are more likely to practice healthy behaviors than those who are moderately religious or nonreligious."<ref>http://www.gallup.com/poll/145379/Religious-Americans-Lead-Healthier-Lives.aspx</ref>

Christians have good reasons to believe a [[Hedonism|hedonist lifestyle]] is a causal factor of [[atheism]] (see: [[Causes of atheism]]).<ref>[http://creation.com/atheist-god-hate Why do atheists hate God?]</ref>

See also:

*[[Atheism and obesity]]

*[[New Atheism leadership's problem with excess weight]]

* [[Evolutionists who have had problems with being overweight and/or obese]]

===Eighth Day Blood Clotting Factors===

In Genesis 17:12, God mandated that Abraham circumcise his sons on the 8th day after birth. In 1935, it was discovered that Vitamin K, together with prothrombin, causes blood coagulation, (important in any surgical procedure). On the 8th day, the amount of prothrombin present is elevated above 100% of normal and is therefore the only day in the male’s life in which this will be the case (normally). If surgery is to be performed, day 8 is the perfect day to do it as vitamin K and prothrombin levels are at their peak.

===Lifespan===

The Bible put the maximum lifespan for man at 120 years (Genesis 6:3), the typical lifespan at 70 years and the typical for a good-living person at 80 years (Psalm 90:10).

Thousands of years after that was written, despite immense advances in medicine and technology, these figures remain remarkably accurate. The longest recorded life of a man is precisely 120 years (Shigechiyo Izumi), the average lifespan for a man is roughly 70 years, and the average for a good-living man is about 80 years.

[[Jeanne Calment]] lived to age 122, only two years past 120. She was said to have never worked and used olive oil on her skin, outliving all of of her [[feminist]] counterparts.

===Oldest Human Ancestor===

The Bible suggests that the oldest maternal ancestor — [[Eve]] — first lived slightly more than 6000 years ago.<ref>http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/ussher.html</ref> The mutation rate of [[mitochondria]] indicates roughly the same date for the most recent common human ancestor.<ref>http://creationwiki.org/Mitochondrial_Eve_lived_only_6500_years_ago_%28Talk.Origins%29</ref>

===Anesthesia===

The first surgical operation described in the Bible was the removal of a rib from [[Adam]], which was performed by first putting Adam into an unconscious, "deep sleep-like trance."<ref>[[Genesis 1-8 (Translated)|Genesis 2:21]]</ref> This was the equivalent of anesthesia — thousands of years before anesthesia using inhaled ether was developed by William Morton in 1846. Had scientists and physicians been more [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness|openminded]] about Genesis 2:21 (perhaps they had considered it a miracle, and thus impossible for humans to achieve), they may have discovered anesthesia far sooner, and saved many more lives.

===Bloodletting hastens death===

At the time of Jesus and for centuries afterward, arteries and veins were thought to be filled with air, and blood was viewed as something to be used up rather than recirculate. Bloodletting -- the practice of intentionally draining blood from a patient -- was common medical practice through the time of [[George Washington]], hastening his death prematurely for reasons not understood until years later.<ref>http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/37212.php</ref>

Most victims of crucifixion in Roman times languished on the cross for days. But the Bible describes how Pilate, who crucified many, was surprised at how quickly Jesus passed away. 2000 years later, scientific knowledge has advanced to understand that this was caused by his prior loss of blood during his scourging (being brutally whipped), a punishment typically given ''instead of'' crucifixion.

===Homosexuality and disease===
The Bible's prohibition against [[homosexuality]] predated knowledge about the [[Homosexuality and Health|many diseases and disorders associated with homosexuality]], and thus showed scientific wisdom prescient for its time.

=== Eyesight ===

The description in the [[Mark 1-8 (Translated)|Gospel of Mark 8:24]] for the sensation when one's eyesight is restored includes his perception of "trees walking." This perception was first confirmed nearly 2000 years later as physicians developed medical techniques for restoring eyesight.<ref>This newspaper account is not specific but describes the overall sensation of restored sight: [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-138886/Robot-eye-restore-lost-sight-20-years.html]</ref>

=== Maximum Human Height ===

Atheists thought the size of [[Goliath]] in the Bible to be absurdly large (over nine feet tall), until [[Robert Wadlow]] grew to nearly 9 feet tall and was still growing when he died at a young age in 1940.

=== Quarantining Against Leprosy Epidemics ===

Although leprosy is not as contagious as other infectious diseases, and some forms of it (such as tuberculoid or paucibacillary form are not contagious), Leviticus 13 and 14 set forth rules to prevent epidemics of this disease among the people of Israel. Western science did not catch up until, in 1663, such laws were introduced in America in an attempt to curb an outbreak of smallpox.

Centuries ahead of medical science, Jesus subsequently explained that leprosy was not as contagious as people thought.

=== Hygiene ===

Millennia before germ theory was proposed in the late 19th century, Leviticus 15 mandated hygiene laws that included bathing, washing of clothing, destruction of contaminated pottery and washing of hands.

In Matthew 15:2, Jesus then curbed compulsive hand-washing by explaining why it was no longer typically necessary (in a non-farming, non-medical context) with respect to man's digestive system.

=== Digestive System ===

It was common thought throughout history that infections and illness resulted from the digestive system, based on unclean hands or food. Jesus rejected that view, and declared hand-washing before meals to be typically unnecessary. It took many centuries before science caught up to the Bible on this.

It is part of the Jewish kosher law to not eat milk with meat. In some Jewish homes they have separate refrigerators for meat and milk products. It comes from Deuteronomy 14:21 "...Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk." There is evidence that the body has difficulty digesting both meat and milk at the same time.

Also, as part of the Jewish kosher law a pork is on the list of prohibited foods. Under cooked pork can transmit Trichinosis, a parasitic disease that can infect muscle tissue, the brain, and the central nervous system, among other [[parasite]]s and zoonotic diseases. [[Creation denial|Creation deniers]] can counter this point only with such desperate non-arguments as asking why God had to create trichinae at all and then allow them onto the [[Ark]].

=== Feasibility of [[Abiogenesis]] ===
Although scientists dismissed ideas involving [[Abiogenesis|abiogenesis]], or the process from which life emerges from nothing, as nothing more than archaic beliefs in [[spontaneous generation]], the Bible very clearly depicts an occurrence of this phenomenon, for beginning in Genesis 1:20, [[God]] creates life from nothing. It was not until the early 20th century that science finally began to accept the viability of abiogenesis, a view that the Bible had held for almost 2000 years, except that [[atheists]] falsely claim that abiogenesis is somehow possible without a creator.

=== Awareness while Unborn ===
[[Abortion]] advocates argue that it is ok to terminate a baby while dismissing the pain inflicted by ending an innocent life. They argue that a fetus cannot feel pain because senses are incomplete. There is a heart-beating human in the womb that can feel even though still unborn and developing. In modern times, we now know the baby in the womb is alert, aware of their mother's emotions, recognizes voices, responds to stimuli and music. The Bible tells us the baby feels (1 Luke 44), ''"the babe leaps for joy in Elizabeth’s womb at the sound of Mary’s voice."'' The inwomb developing baby, John the Baptist, notices the presence of the unborn [[Lord]] in [[Mary]], and is excited. In addition (St. Paul to the Galatians 1:15), ''"God… from my mother’s womb had set me apart and called me through his grace."'' Paul's very first thought, feeling awareness, began while unborn.

=== Embalming ===

[[Mark_9-16_(Translated)#Chapter_14|Mark 14:3-8]] describes an embalming process to preserve a body after death, which was not discovered in the West until 1867.

=== The significance of blood ===

The Old Testament teaches that the [[life]] of all flesh is its [[blood]] ({{Bible ref|book=Leviticus|chap=17|verses=13-14|version=KJV}}). Secular science remained ignorant of the properties and circulation of blood until the 17th century A.D.<ref>[http://wap.bible.org/nbw/deu12_notes.htm Net Bible: Notes] to [http://wap.bible.org/nbw/deu12.htm#1234 Deuteronomy 12:23] </ref>

=== Menstruation ===

The Biblical laws concerning [[menstruation]], including the setting apart of the menstruating woman and the prohibition on intimacy during menstruation, address health concerns that were not known to secular science until the 20th century.<ref>Neuburger, Max. History of Medicine. Oxford University Press, 1910, Vol. I, p. 38.</ref> Also, modern science has only very recently discovered that following such rules dramatically reduces the rate of [[illegitimacy]].<ref>[http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120604182027.htm How Religion Promotes Confidence About Paternity]</ref>

=== Cloning ===

{{Bible ref|book=Genesis|chap=2|verses=21-22|version=KJV}} records that God made a [[woman]] out of one of [[Adam]]'s [[rib]]s. Secular scientists did not believe that [[cloning]] such a complex organism (apart from plants) was possible until 1997.<ref>[http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/cloning.shtml Cloning Fact Sheet]</ref>

===Inbreeding===

Leviticus 18:7-11 elaborates in detail the relationships it regards as incestuous unions, to forbid inbreeding. Secular science was able to scientifically explain the mechanisms and risks of inbreeding only in modern times.

==Cosmology==

===The Starlight Problem===

The [[Starlight Problem]] confounds all theories about the universe: light has reached us from stars that are too far away to transmit the light within the age of the universe. But Genesis explains this easily: "let there be light" means that God created light, not merely stars.

===Planet Formation at Dawn of Universe===

Theories of an old universe insisted that planet formation did not occur until long after the origin of the universe, contrary to the [[Book of Genesis]]. But in 2012 scientists announced the existence of planets that formed "at dawn of universe."<ref>http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2012/0330/Planets-found-at-dawn-of-universe-but-their-existence-is-a-mystery</ref>

===UFOs and Extraterrestrial Life===

For most of the 20th century, scientists typically believed in the existence of extraterrestrial life, despite the lack of any reference to it in the [[Bible]]. After spending many billions of dollars looking for such life, and investigating countless reports of UFOs, no such life has been found.

===Number of Stars===

The [[Bible]] repeatedly refers to the number of stars as being innumerable,<ref>''See'' Genesis 15:5, Jeremiah 33:22 and Hebrews 11:12.</ref> despite scientists insisting throughout most of history that there were only about 6000 stars. In the early 17th century [[Galileo]] turned a telescope to the heavens and discovered a great number of stars that had been previously invisible to the naked eye.<ref>http://galileo.rice.edu/lib/student_work/astronomy95/orionpleiades.html</ref>

Not until the 20th century did scientists discover the tremendous number of stars:<ref>http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/07/22/stars.survey/index.html</ref>

:There are "10 times as many stars as grains of sand on all the world's beaches and deserts," totaling "7 followed by 22 zeros or, more accurately, 70 sextillion.

But even that scientific estimate was much too low. On December 1, 2010, scientists admitted:<ref>http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2010/1201/Universe-might-hold-three-times-more-stars-than-previously-thought</ref>

:"a cosmic embarrassment of riches – ''the universe appears to hold three times the number of stars many [[astronomer]]s might have estimated only a year ago''."

===Each Star is Unique===
Although the use of telescopes to chart the outer-reaches of God's heavenly creation was developed around the 16th century in Europe, the Bible accurately hypothesized that every star is unique.

"There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differs from another star in glory"- 1 Corinthians 15:41 <ref>http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml</ref>

===Spherical Sun and Earth===
The Book of Isaiah establishes that the true shape of the earth is a sphere:
{{cquote|He sits above the sphere of the earth, and its inhabitants look to him like grasshoppers. He stretches out the galaxies like a curtain, spreading them out like a tent to live under: - [[Isaiah_34-42_(Translated)#Chapter_40|Isaiah 40:22 (CBP]])}}

Likewise, with respect to the [[sun]], the Book of Proverbs 8:27 ([[ESV]]) states:
{{cquote|When he established the heavens, ... he drew a circle on the face of the deep}}

The Book of Isaiah was written circa the 8th century BC, and the Book of Proverbs even earlier. This was centuries before Greek philosophers, beginning with [[Pythagoras]], theorized the earth was round, and it was not discovered until 2012 that the sun is perfectly spherical. Astronomers were not able to conclude until well into the second millennium of [[Christ]] that the Earth is also a sphere.

=== Earth free floating in space ===
The book of Job states that God "hangs the earth on nothing." It also contrasts with pagan mythologies such as [[Atlas]] holding up the earth or the earth being supported by a giant turtle, as in ancient Hindu and native American myths.

The Bible presaged the modern view that space is in fact empty, which wasn't known until the dawn of the 20th century when ether theories became disfavored.

=== Darkness, and Unexplained Ripples in Cosmic Background Radiation ===

[[Genesis 1-8 (Translated)|Genesis Chapter 1]] explains that [[God]] created light first, rather than merely stars. A "big bang" would result in light everywhere, without darkness, and without ripples in cosmic background radiation. Yet in the 21st century ripples were discovered in cosmic background radiation, which can only be plausibly explained by recognizing that light was created first.

=== Meteoroids ===
The Revelation of Saint John notes,
{{cquote|And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood; And the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, and had life, died; and the third part of the ships were destroyed. Revelation 8:8-9 (KJV)}}
This accurately describes meteoroids, essentially large chunks of rock lit on fire by the shock of entering the earth's atmosphere. They were not discovered until 1801, and their composition was not otherwise known until the 20th century.

=== Stellar proper movement ===
In [[Job]], there is a list of challenges that are constructed in the form of questions, with the idea that man can't do it, but God can.

Among those challenges, two are remarkable: one mentions the ''untying'' of Orion's belt, and the other is the ''binding'' of the Pleiades. One recently astronomers could measure the proper movement of those stars; Orion's belt is moving apart, with each star going in a different direction, while the Pleiades are moving together.

=== Space flight ===
Many theorize that the book of [[Ezekiel]] contains descriptions of spaceships and rockets, as they would have been described by someone thousands of years ago. [http://www.spaceshipsofezekiel.com/ Author Blumrich] has even published an entire book about this.

===Expanding universe===
The [[Bible]] explains, in 17 different verses, that [[God]] "stretched out" the heavens,<ref>http://www.creationists.org/God-streched-out-the-universe-bible-verses.html</ref> in other words, expanding the fabric of space-time from a smaller size to a much larger one. Scientists have discovered only in the last 100 years that, by studying the red shift of galaxies, the universe indeed appears to be expanding, or "stretching out."

== Meteorology ==
=== Existence of the [[Jet Stream]] ===
Ecclesiastes 1:6 notes, "The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits." This described the jet stream long before its 19th-20th century discovery.

=== Water cycle ===

The existence of the water cycle was not known until imperial Roman times, but the Bible described it over a thousand years before that!
See [[Ecclesiastes]] 11:3, [[Job]] 26:8 and [[Amos]] 9:6

== Physics ==

=== Impossibility of a Grand Unified Theory ===

Billions of dollars and millions of hours have been wasted by [[atheists]] in futile pursuit of a "grand unified theory" for physics. But [[Genesis_1-8_(Translated)#Chapter_1|Genesis]] explains that the creation of light was done in a separate, initial creation, free of darkness or entropy, and thus incapable of unification with matter.

=== Light and Color ===

Prior to the work of [[Isaac Newton]], white was considered to be the fundamental color of light, and other colors (such as red, green and blue) were formed by adding to white light. Under that traditional theory, the fullness of all light (a combination of all colors of light) would result in something other than pure white.

The transfiguration of Jesus is described with remarkable consistency in all three synoptic [[Gospel]]s: in the fullness of light Jesus and his clothing display an intense white, whiter than any bleach could produce. This illustrates what was not discovered and accepted until nearly 1700 years later: that white is the combination of other fundamental colors, and the purest white light is formed by a perfectly full combination (see [[Prism]]).

=== Action-at-a-distance ===

[[Jesus]] demonstrated [[action-at-a-distance]], as recounted in [[John 1-7 (Translated)|John 4:46-54]]. Scientists, particularly [[atheists]], denied the possibility of this phenomenon for thousands of years. When Newton proposed action-at-a-distance as the basis of gravity, scientists continued to reject it, but eventually accepted it as being true.

Later the [[Theory of Relativity]] again denied the possibility of action-at-a-distance, but [[quantum mechanics]] subsequently proved that it does occur.<ref>See also [[Counterexamples to Relativity]].</ref>

=== Quantum Mechanics ===

The fundamental principle of [[quantum mechanics]] is that the underlying reality is in random fluctuation, or chaos, until there is intelligent observation of it. This is precisely what [[Luke 1-8 (Translated)#Luke 4:6|Luke 4:6]] reveals when it quotes the [[devil]], which is derived from an ancient word for chaos, in saying that he has dominion over this world.

==== Observation of the Wave Function ====
The second chapter of the [[Gospel of John]] describes the conversion of water into wine by [[Jesus]] at a wedding reception. [[John_1-7_(Translated)#Chapter_2|John 2:9]] states: "When the host of the wedding feast tasted the water, it had been made into wine." This passage implies that the drink was not wine until it had been tasted, or observed. Possibly, the drink was a superposition of the state of wine and the state of water until it was observed as wine.

A storm developed over the water while Jesus slept (i.e., chaos develops when God is not observing), and it was Jesus's awaking to observe it that calmed the storm. This famous [[Essay:Calming the Storm|calming of the storm]] is typically translated as the result of a "rebuke" by [[Jesus]] of the bad weather. But a closer look at the Greek reveals that the key term means "judge" rather than "rebuke", and thus it was the act of Jesus observing the chaos that caused it to "collapse" into an orderly state, similar to the effect of observing a wave function.

In Matthew 16:19, Jesus draws a then-unusual distinction between what is fixed and what is uncertain by declaring, "Whatever you make binding on earth will be binding in heaven, and whatever you set loose on earth will be set loose in heaven."<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Matthew_10-19_%28Translated%29&oldid=870778#Chapter_16</ref> This may describe the fundamental uncertainty that continues unless and until there is human observation that then causes the wave function to collapse into a particular ("bound") state.

==== [[Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle]] ====

Both the Old and New Testaments refer to a fundamental uncertainty that requires observation to resolve, akin to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle discovered in the 1920s:

* "The earth came to exist in an utterly formless and empty state." [[Genesis 1-8 (Translated)|Genesis 1:2]].
* The master refusing to order the removal of the weeds sowed among the wheat because of the uncertainty in distinguishing between the two until later: [[Matthew 10-19 (Translated)|Matthew 13:24-30]].

==== Wave-Particle Duality ====

Particles are subject to gravity; waves are not. Wave-particle duality, first discovered in the 20th century, allows for a particle to sometimes be subject to gravity and sometimes not.

The wave-particle duality was described nearly 2000 years earlier in the Gospel account of Jesus walking on water: [[Mark 1-8 (Translated)|Mark 6:45-54]]. A close reading of the passage reveals the wave-like (or light-like) characteristic of the walking on water:
{{cquote|he walked on the surface of the lake and came to the boat, ''nearly passing it''. But when they saw him walking on water, they thought it must have been ''a ghost'', and cried out.}}
[[Mark 1-8 (Translated)|Mark 6:48-49]] (italics added).

In a more general sense, [[Jesus]] could be viewed as the "particle" and the [[Holy Spirit]] as the "wave" of [[God]]. A fuller understanding of the [[Trinity]] could have opened the eyes of scientists much earlier to the fundamental wave-particle duality of nature ... and still could.

==== Quantum tunneling ====

[[Quantum tunneling]] is the ability of particles to move through energy barriers even though ostensibly impossible based on classical laws of mechanical physics. This was not discovered by scientists until the 20th century.

[[Jesus]] proved this was possible in [[John_15-21_(Translated)#Chapter_20|John 20:26]], when he appeared before the [[Apostles]] in a closed room with completely shut doors.

=== Classical Relativity ===
Romans 10:6-7: But the righteousness that is by faith says: "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?'" (that is, to bring Christ down) 7"or 'Who will descend into the deep?'" (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).

Equating ascending into heaven to bringing Christ down is an example of the fact that there is no universal reference frame, and only relative speeds matter.

=== Modern Relativity ===
The [[Theory of Relativity]] denies the possibility of action-at-a-distance. But several passages in the Bible, such as [[John 1-7 (Translated)|John 4:46-54]] and [[Matthew 20-28 (Translated)|Matthew 27:51]], describe simultaneous actions from afar.

The list of [[Counterexamples to Relativity]] has grown recently, and modern experiments in [[quantum mechanics]] have confirmed action-at-a-distance.

=== [[Second Law of Thermodynamics]] ===

The [[Genesis 1-8 (Translated)|Book of Genesis]] states that the darkness or chaos in the universe can never overcome the light, or order. This same concept was not discovered in physics until the development of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which holds that heat (or order or light) always travels in the direction of cold (or disorder or darkness), and never in the opposite direction. On the other hand, the Second Law of Thermodynamics predicts a heat death for the universe; thus the universe will eventually be dark and chaotic. Thus, the validity of this statement is questionable.

[[Epistle to the Hebrews (Translated)#1:10-11|Hebrews 1:10-11]] explains that the universe shall "wear out" like a "garment", centuries before the discovery of the physical law that [[entropy]] is always increasing.

=== The nature of air ===

Until about 300 years ago, common knowledge believe that the air was "empty" and didn't weigh anything. But [[Job]] 28:25 says "To establish a '''weight''' for the wind, And apportion the waters by measure" indicating that the divinely inspired author knew the air had substance and weight.

=== Conservative forces ===

James 1:17 describes the electromagnetic forces (light) as having no "shadow of turning." Not understood for nearly 2000 years, this predicts that electromagnetic forces are [[conservative]] such that their [[line integrals]] over a closed loop are zero.

== Mathematics ==
=== Zero ===

Mathematicians in Western Europe did not discover [[zero]] until many centuries after the [[Bible]] was written. But there are hundreds of references to the concept of zero throughout the Bible.

=== [[Banach-Tarski Paradox]] ===
The only miracle described in all four [[Gospels]] is the multiplication of loaves and fish by [[Jesus]], thought for thousands of years to be a mathematical and physical impossibility. But the 20th century discovery of the so-called [[Banach-Tarski Paradox]] proved a mathematical basis for creating identical copies of an object out of no extra material.

=== Axiomatization of Arithmetic ===
The full set of axioms for integer arithmetic may be found in the Bible, as demonstrated by J.C. Keister.<ref>[http://www.biblicalblueprints.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/MathAndBible.pdf J. C. Keister: "''Math and the Bible''"], Biblical Blueprints Omaha, NE, 1999 (pdf)</ref> For example, [[Luke 9-16 (Translated)|Luke 12:52]] is a striking statement of the commutative law for addition: "For from this point forward there will be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three." This understanding presaged both later attempts at the axiomatization of arithmetic by Peano and the development of [[abstract algebra]] in the 19th and 20th centuries.

=== The Concept of [[Infinity]] ===

Most thinkers scoffed at the concept of infinity for thousands of years, despite it being referenced in the Bible in many ways. See, e.g., Psalm 147:4-6 (God's "understanding is infinte"); [[Matthew 20-28 (Translated)#20:1|Matthew 20:1-14]] ([[parable]] of the wages for the workers in the vineyard); Matthew 16:26 (one's soul has an infinite value to him, and nothing else can be worth more).

But [[Georg Cantor]], deeply inspired by [[Christianity]], established a logical foundation for infinity that revolutionized all of mathematics as a result, with his development of [[set theory]] to accomplish his goal.

=== [[Set theory]] ===

[[Georg Cantor]]'s development of [[set theory]] in the late 19th century was initially rejected by many great mathematicians, including [[Henri Poincare]], before it became the basis for nearly all of mathematics today. But the Bible contains many hints in support of set theory, as in the "last shall be first, and the first shall be last."

=== Calculus ===

The Bible emphasizes the importance of limits as a key distinction between this world and God; Calculus consists of relying on limits to derive useful results.<ref>[http://www.aiias.edu/ict/vol_27/27cc_225-239.htm Norie Grace Rivera-Poblete: "''God and Calculus''"], Institute for Christian Teaching Education Department of [[Seventh-day Adventist]], Prepared for the 27th International Faith and Learning Seminar held at Mission, Muak Lek Saraburi, Thailand December 3 – 15, 2000</ref>

James 1:17 states that the first and second derivatives of God's light (truth) is zero, more than 1600 years before calculus was discovered: "with [God] there is no variation or shadow of turning."<ref name="Shadow of Turning">[http://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress.com/2011/02/24/no-variation-or-shadow-of-turning-calculus-in-the-bible/ Nathan Albright: ''"No Variation Or Shadow Of Turning: Calculus In The Bible"''], Blog-Entry, Feb 24, 2011 </ref>

== Sociology ==

===Crime===

Mark 4:22 says how nothing can be hid, neither can anything be kept secret. Empirical statistics show that the vast majority of crimes worldwide are solved.

== Zoology ==

===Inability of Animals to Understand Morality===

[[Genesis 1-8 (Translated)|Genesis 3:1-10]] explains that only humans understand good and evil, and clothe themselves because of it. Repeatedly scientists have attempted to demonstrate that animals can understand morality also, but every attempt has failed. No animal (other than humans) has ever been found that clothes itself. However, as as limited case, animals do demonstrate altruistic behavior.

===Existence of dinosaurs===
[[Dinosaur]] fossils were not discovered until the 19th century, but the book of [[Job]] describes enormous creatures called behemoth and leviathan, the descriptions being similar to dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures. It may also have referred to another similarly giant now-extinct species. Other dinosaur like creatures mentioned are the cockatrice and satyr <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i2/behemoth.asp</ref>

===Lions' killing methods===

Until the 1970s naturalists believed that lions killed their prey by biting through the neck or by breaking the neck with a swat of a paw, while the Bible says that lions suffocated their prey. (Nahum 2:12) It was not until the 1970s that it was discovered that the [[Bible]] was correct.<ref>http://ed5015.tripod.com/BLions87.htm</ref> Lions fit their mouth over the mouth and nose of their prey and hold it while it suffocates, in addition to other killing methods.

=== Giant sea creatures and Jonah ===

The [[Jonah (Translated)|Book of Jonah]] describes his survival in the belly of a giant sea creature for 2.5 to 3 days. Scientists declared this to be impossible due to powerful stomach acids that quickly break down any material and the lack of breathable air inside marine animals.

In 2010, scientists found the following materials intact in the belly of a gray whale that had died after being stranded on a Northwest beach:<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/19/pair-sweat-pants-garbage-beached-whales-stomach/</ref>

*a pair of sweat pants
*a golf ball
*over 20 plastic bags
*small towels
*duct tape
*surgical gloves

Of course, many sea creatures have gone extinct in the thousands of years since Jonah lived.

===Worker ants===
Proverbs 6:6-8 correctly states the sex of worker [[ant]]s (female), using the correct one of the two [[Grammar#Gender|grammatical genders]] available in Biblical [[Hebrew]]. Secular entomologists would not discover that fact until the 19th century.<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=rzwSAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA6&dq=ant+undeveloped+female+worker+date:1700-1850&lr=&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES#v=onepage&q&f=false The study of medicine, Volume 5 By John Mason Good]</ref>

==Linguistics==

===Common Descent?===
The [[theory of evolution]] suggests that all languages are descended from a common ancestral language, and for a century (1860 to about 1960) scientists clung to that view. But now most linguists identify many different families of languages that have no common ancestor, just as described in Genesis 11 with the [[Tower of Babel]].

===Earliest Hebrew Writings===
Skeptics have claimed that [[Hebrew]] writing did not exist before the 6th century B.C. But a recent Israeli archaeological dig dated four centuries earlier, in the 10th century B.C., included an artifact found at Khirbet Qeiyafa in the Elah Valley. This artifact contained a written inscription in Hebrew relating to "slaves, widows and orphans." Haifa University Professor Gershon Galil noted that this disproves the theory that the Bible could not have been written before the 6th century.<ref>http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2010/01/08/Bible-may-be-centuries-older-than-thought/UPI-21171262997765/</ref>

== Economics ==

Jesus stated that there will always be poverty,<ref>See Mark 14:7, Matthew 26:11 and John 12.8.</ref> yet [[liberals]] repeatedly insist that poverty can be eliminated with more government spending. Every attempt to eliminate poverty has failed just as Jesus predicted. In 1991 [[Ronald Coase]] won a [[Nobel Prize]] in [[Economics]] for the [[Coase Theorem]], which implies that government attempts to reduced poverty will interfere with efficient operation of the economy, and thereby reduce wealth.

== Government and Politics ==

===Nation State===
Ancient Israel, as described in the [[Old Testament]], was a [[nation-state]] and that model was not utilized again until thousands of years later, well after the Renaissance in Western Europe. This model of a nation-state has become the modern standard worldwide.

===Separation of Powers===
The separation of powers adopted successfully by the [[U.S. Constitution]] in 1787, with the legislative, executive, and judicial branches having separate authority and jurisdiction, was first described in the Old Testament.<ref>See Jeremiah 17:19 and Isaiah 33:22.</ref>

===The Liberal Influence of the Media===
The Third [[Three Temptations of Christ|Temptation of Christ]] is to bow down and worship the [[Satan]] in exchange for becoming ruler of the world. The media plays that role and its influence is predictably [[liberal]] and anti-[[Christian]].

==Engineering examples==

Biblical scientific foreknowledge about these engineering developments has been proposed:<ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2191</ref>
{{cquote|automobiles (Joel 2:3-4); airplanes (Isaiah 31:5, also 40:31); submarines (Revelation 9:1-11); radio (Ecclesiastes 10:20); and television (Revelation 11:3-12)}}
Classical photography, using negative imaging, was predated by the [[Shroud of Turin]] with respect to the imaging on the Shroud likely due to the light of the [[Resurrection]]. The Shroud ([[Greek]]: σινδών - sindón) is mentioned in three Gospels: Matthew 27:59, Mark 15:46, Luke 23:53, while John 20:5-7 talks about a face cloth or napkin ([[Greek]]: σουδάριον - soudárion - perhaps the [[Sudarium of Oviedo]]), and a piece of fine linen ([[Greek]]: ὀθόνιον - othonion). The description by the eyewitness John implies that his sighting of the Shroud may have confirmed his [[faith]], though he doesn't mention its photograph-like image <ref>John Calvin, who opposed the Catholic Church, wrote a book in 1543 criticizing all material evidence of Jesus and the martyrs. In it he claimed that because the negative image on the Shroud is not described in the Gospels, it must not be authentic. [[John Calvin]]: ''Traité des Reliques'', Geneve 1543, translated by Valerian Krasinski: ''A treatise on Relics'', Edingburgh 1854</ref>.

== Alleged absurdities and contradictions ==

Biblical scientific foreknowledge is an underpinning of creation science, and is widely credited by Christian scientists and apologists, including the organizations [[Creation Ministries International]], [[Answers in Genesis]], and [[CreationWiki]].<ref>http://creationwiki.org/index.php/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge.</ref><ref>[http://creationwiki.org/index.php/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible Scientific Foreknowledge]</ref><ref>http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1718/</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v17/i1/medicine.asp</ref>

Atheists unsuccessfully attempt to discredit the Bible based on science. Here are some examples:

=== Bat as a bird ===
A favorite evolutionist canard is that Leviticus 11:13-19 labels the [[bat]], a [[mammal]], as a [[bird]]. But this is an obvious failure of translation, as the Hebrew term '' 'owph'' did not entail the "clade" of birds, but was a non-biological category referring to any winged creature, mammalian, avian, or insect. The KJV translation as "fowl" is simply incorrect. A popular Jewish translation, used to explain the laws of keeping kosher, translates the term as "winged flying things."

=== Incorrect value of Pi ===
Two sections of the bible (1 Kings 7, 23-26, 2 Chronicles, 4, 2-5) appear to indicate that the correct value of [[Pi]] is 3, whereas Pi is in fact an irrational number, equalling approximately 3.14159. Atheists, including [[Sam Harris]] and [[Richard Dawkins]], allege that this value indicates the fallacious nature of scripture.<ref>The Richard Dawkins Foundation, ''Reply to a Christian'', Sam Harris - [http://richarddawkins.net/articles/139]</ref> However, a simple explanation of the claimed "contradiction" is that the Bible records the ratio of the actual object which Hiram created, not that of a mathematical [[sphere]]. The claim that it was round all about does not equate to a claim that it was a perfect sphere, as atheists have claimed.<ref>''Theology'', Volume 59, Issues 427-438, Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge (Great Britain), London, 1956, p. 23 </ref> Additionally, pi to one significant digit is 3. Just because the measurement is only given to one significant digit does not mean it was precisely that amount. Of course, since pi is an irrational number, it would be impossible to give a truly precise measurement. Since decimal notation was not in use in Biblical times, there was no way to express pi to greater accuracy in the language of the day.

==See Also==
*[[Biblical political foreknowledge]]
*[[Christianity and Science]]
*[[Creation vs. Evolution Videos]]
*[[The Bible]]
*[[Evolution]]
*[[Atheism]]

==External Links==
*[http://www.creationwiki.org/Bible_scientific_foreknowledge Bible scientific foreknowledge] by [[CreationWiki]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}
[[Category:Bible]]
[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:Creationism]]

{{Template:Creation vs. evolution}}

Talk:BDSM

2013-03-16T12:29:04Z

JGrant: Created page with "Would anyone mind if I gave this article a family-friendly writeup explaining some basics about what BDSM actually is rather than potholing it all under the heading of "immoralit..."

Would anyone mind if I gave this article a family-friendly writeup explaining some basics about what BDSM actually is rather than potholing it all under the heading of "immorality?" I recognize, of course, that it is a sexually deviant practice by most standards, but I believe that being better informed will make someone better able to make both an informed decision and, if they choose, better able to avoid it altogether. Thanks :) [[User:JGrant|JGrant]] 08:29, 16 March 2013 (EDT)

Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game

2013-03-16T12:24:58Z

JGrant: Warning for parents - if your child easily fixates, keep them as far away from any popular MMO as you possibly can.

'''Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games''' (MMORPGs for short) are a genre of [[role-playing]] [[video games]] that involve many players logging into a [[server]] that is usually owned by the company that develops or publishes the game and playing in a virtual world. This game world is persistent, meaning it exists even when you aren't playing.

Most MMORPGs charge a monthly fee, though many new MMORPGs have systems where the game is both free to download and free to play, but the player pays real money for in-game items or services. The cost of developing and running a MMORPG can be high and include the price and maintenance of the servers used, customer and technical support, and developing fresh in-game content. However, with ongoing monthly charges for players or other persistent financial structure, the potential profit can be extraordinary as well.

Many MMORPGs are designed to be addictive in quality, with a 'grinding' system that requires a player to perform a repetitive task for, at high levels, sometimes days of playtime before gaining a substantive reward. The constantly-growing nature of some popular MMORPG storylines also means there is no real 'end' to the game other than hitting the maximum allowed character level and waiting for the next addition to the storyline to be put up. This addictive quality, deliberately planned into the games to keep players in (because most MMORPGs have very little actual 'fun' involved past the first few levels, if that), can and has caused players to give up essentials in their lives in order to keep playing. World of Warcraft is perhaps the worst offender, with stories having hit headlines about players leaving their spouses and selling their homes in lieu of leaving the game for good.

== History ==

MMORPGs are considered the next step from [[Multi-User Dungeons]] (MUDs), which are text-based multiplayer online games, since MMORPGs are graphics based.

== Violence ==
MMORPGs have a tendency to be violent and sometimes graphic. Some MMORPGs have objectionable content such as nudity or innuendo, while others do not.

== Commercial MMORPGs ==

(Due to the growth of this genre, this list will always be incomplete)

* [http://9dragons.acclaim.com/index.htm 9 Dragons] Korean company developed MMORPG
* [[Anarchy Online]]
* [http://ac.turbine.com/ Asheron's Call]
* [http://www.awplanet.com/rw/pages/index.en.do;jsessionid=768272CBD42D84920F9125D2F2B6E277 AWplanet]
* [[City of Heroes]]/[[City of Villains]] (abbreviated collectively as CoX)
* [http://www.clubpenguin.com/ Club Penguin] MMORPG for children.
* [http://global.cronous.com/# Cronous: The Shadow of Conspiracy]
* [http://www.darkageofcamelot.com/ Dark Age of Camelot]
* [http://www.darkages.com/ Dark Ages] MMORPG based on Celtic mythology and horror writings of [[H. P. Lovecraft]].
* [http://www.darkspace.net/ DarkSpace] sci-fi outer-space MMORPG.
* [http://www.ddo.com/ Dungeons & Dragons Online: Stormreach]
* [[EVE Online]]
* [[Everquest]]
* [http://www.fomportal.com/ Face of Mankind] sci-fi MMORPG
* [http://www.playonline.com/ff11us/index.shtml Final Fantasy XI]
* [http://www.fwo.com.my/ Fung Wan Online] MMORPG developed by Hong Kong company.
* [[Guild Wars]] pay once, no monthly fees.
* [http://www.istaria.com/ Horizons: Empire of Istaria]
* [http://www.industryplayer.com/index.php Industry Player] massive multi-player online business simulation game that focuses on the "carbon footprint" of businesses and the in-game effects of man-made [[global warming]].
* [http://www.lineage2.com/ Lineage II]
* [http://global.lunia.com/main.asp Lunia: Record of Lunia war]
* [http://home.mland.sdo.com/2006/ Magical Land] Chinese MMORPG
* [[Middle Earth Online]]
* [http://www.gametap.com/home/myst/index.html Myst Online: Uru Live]
* [http://www.navyfield.com/ Navy Field] naval combat MMORPG set during World War II.
* [http://ng.neocron.com/ Neocron] world's first cyber-punk theme MMORPG.
* [[Phantasy Star Online]]
* [[Phantasy Star Universe]]
* [http://iro.ragnarokonline.com/ Ragnarok Online] 2D anime theme MMORPG
* [http://rise.unistellar.com/ Rise: The Vieneo Province]
* [http://www.roma-victor.com/ Roma Victor] historically authentic MMORPG based on the Roman Empire; pay once, no monthly fee.
* [[Second Life]]
* [http://www.soulultimatenation.com/ Soul of the Ultimate Nation] fantasy theme MMORPG developed by Korean company.
* [[Star Wars Galaxies]]
* [http://www.lotro.com/ The Lord of the Rings Online: Shadows of Angmar]
* [http://thematrixonline.station.sony.com/ The Matrix Online]
* [http://play.toontown.com/webHome.php?r=358498&r=446861&r=506777&r=616690 ToonTown] Disney's cartoon theme MMORPG.
* [[Travian]]
* [[Ultima Online]]
* [[Urban Dead]]
* [[Warhammer online]]
* [[World of Warcraft]]

==Free MMORPGS==

(Due to the growth of this genre, this list will always be incomplete)

*[http://www.anarchy-online.com/content/downloads/tryout/ Anarchy Online Free Version] (has in-game advertisements)
*[http://corum.gpotato.com/index.php/?i=download Corum Online] 3D fantasy theme MMORPG
*[http://www.darkandlight.com/en/ Dark & Light]
*[http://darkswords.eu/?r=1910 DarkSwords]
*[http://www.dofus.com/ Dofus] 2D anime theme MMORPG.
*[http://www.endless-online.com/ Endless Online] 2D [[anime]] style MMORPG.
*[http://flyff.gpotato.com/ Fly for Fun]
*[http://www.furcadia.com/ Furcadia] animal world theme MMORPG
*[http://www.galaxseeds.com/ GalaXseeds] cartoon theme MMORPG for preteens
*[http://global.goonzu.com/center/default.asp Goonzu Online]
*[http://www.gunzonline.com/ Gunz: The Duel]
*[http://www.habbo.com/ Habbo Hotel]
*[http://www.kalonline.com/index.asp Kal Online] 3D oriental fantasy MMORPG
*[http://www.knightonlineworld.com/ Knight Online]
*[http://www.maplesea.com/ MapleStory]
*[http://www.globalmuonline.com/ Mu Online]
*[http://o2jam.e-games.com.my/ O2Jam] musical MMORPG
*[http://oilempires.itch.com/ Oil Empire]
*[http://www.wanmei.com/en/wmgj.htm Perfect World] Chinese MMORPG based on mythologies, cost 30 million dollars to develop.
*[http://www.quakelive.com/ Quake Live] First Person Shooter
*[http://ranonline.e-games.com.my/index_eng.asp RAN Online] School campus based MMORPG.
*[http://www.regnumonline.com.ar/ Regnum Online] MMORPG from Argentina, available in English and Spanish. Free to play, with certain "premium items" (mostly cosmetic- and convenience-related) sold for real money.
*[[RuneScape]]
*[http://fate.netgame.com/ Scions of Fate]
*[http://www.gamescampus.com/shotonline/ Shot Online] Massive multiplayer online golf game.
*[http://www.silkroadonline.net/ Silkroad] 3d fantasy theme MMORPG
*[http://sco.gpotato.com/ Space Cowboy Online]
*[http://www.martialheroes.com/main.php The Empire of Martial Heroes]
*[http://legendofares.netgame.com/ The Legend of Ares] 3D medieval fantasy MMORPG.
*[http://www.tibia.com/news/?subtopic=latestnews Tibia] 2D fantasy theme MMORPG
*[http://www.tricksteronline.com/ Trickster Online]
*[http://www.gamescampus.com/xiah/index.asp Xiah] Asian martial arts MMORPG.

[[Category:Video Games]]

Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game

2013-03-16T12:20:46Z

JGrant: /* Free MMORPGS */ Gaia Online is an online forum, not an MMO. They have planned an MMO based on the site's backstory for several years but to my knowledge it remains in open beta.

'''Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games''' (MMORPGs for short) are a genre of [[role-playing]] [[video games]] that involve many players logging into a [[server]] that is usually owned by the company that develops or publishes the game and playing in a virtual world. This game world is persistent, meaning it exists even when you aren't playing.

Most MMORPGs charge a monthly fee, though many new MMORPGs have systems where the game is both free to download and free to play, but the player pays real money for in-game items or services. The cost of developing and running a MMORPG can be high and include the price and maintenance of the servers used, customer and technical support, and developing fresh in-game content. However, with ongoing monthly charges for players or other persistent financial structure, the potential profit can be extraordinary as well.

== History ==

MMORPGs are considered the next step from [[Multi-User Dungeons]] (MUDs), which are text-based multiplayer online games, since MMORPGs are graphics based.

== Violence ==
MMORPGs have a tendency to be violent and sometimes graphic. Some MMORPGs have objectionable content such as nudity or innuendo, while others do not.

== Commercial MMORPGs ==

(Due to the growth of this genre, this list will always be incomplete)

* [http://9dragons.acclaim.com/index.htm 9 Dragons] Korean company developed MMORPG
* [[Anarchy Online]]
* [http://ac.turbine.com/ Asheron's Call]
* [http://www.awplanet.com/rw/pages/index.en.do;jsessionid=768272CBD42D84920F9125D2F2B6E277 AWplanet]
* [[City of Heroes]]/[[City of Villains]] (abbreviated collectively as CoX)
* [http://www.clubpenguin.com/ Club Penguin] MMORPG for children.
* [http://global.cronous.com/# Cronous: The Shadow of Conspiracy]
* [http://www.darkageofcamelot.com/ Dark Age of Camelot]
* [http://www.darkages.com/ Dark Ages] MMORPG based on Celtic mythology and horror writings of [[H. P. Lovecraft]].
* [http://www.darkspace.net/ DarkSpace] sci-fi outer-space MMORPG.
* [http://www.ddo.com/ Dungeons & Dragons Online: Stormreach]
* [[EVE Online]]
* [[Everquest]]
* [http://www.fomportal.com/ Face of Mankind] sci-fi MMORPG
* [http://www.playonline.com/ff11us/index.shtml Final Fantasy XI]
* [http://www.fwo.com.my/ Fung Wan Online] MMORPG developed by Hong Kong company.
* [[Guild Wars]] pay once, no monthly fees.
* [http://www.istaria.com/ Horizons: Empire of Istaria]
* [http://www.industryplayer.com/index.php Industry Player] massive multi-player online business simulation game that focuses on the "carbon footprint" of businesses and the in-game effects of man-made [[global warming]].
* [http://www.lineage2.com/ Lineage II]
* [http://global.lunia.com/main.asp Lunia: Record of Lunia war]
* [http://home.mland.sdo.com/2006/ Magical Land] Chinese MMORPG
* [[Middle Earth Online]]
* [http://www.gametap.com/home/myst/index.html Myst Online: Uru Live]
* [http://www.navyfield.com/ Navy Field] naval combat MMORPG set during World War II.
* [http://ng.neocron.com/ Neocron] world's first cyber-punk theme MMORPG.
* [[Phantasy Star Online]]
* [[Phantasy Star Universe]]
* [http://iro.ragnarokonline.com/ Ragnarok Online] 2D anime theme MMORPG
* [http://rise.unistellar.com/ Rise: The Vieneo Province]
* [http://www.roma-victor.com/ Roma Victor] historically authentic MMORPG based on the Roman Empire; pay once, no monthly fee.
* [[Second Life]]
* [http://www.soulultimatenation.com/ Soul of the Ultimate Nation] fantasy theme MMORPG developed by Korean company.
* [[Star Wars Galaxies]]
* [http://www.lotro.com/ The Lord of the Rings Online: Shadows of Angmar]
* [http://thematrixonline.station.sony.com/ The Matrix Online]
* [http://play.toontown.com/webHome.php?r=358498&r=446861&r=506777&r=616690 ToonTown] Disney's cartoon theme MMORPG.
* [[Travian]]
* [[Ultima Online]]
* [[Urban Dead]]
* [[Warhammer online]]
* [[World of Warcraft]]

==Free MMORPGS==

(Due to the growth of this genre, this list will always be incomplete)

*[http://www.anarchy-online.com/content/downloads/tryout/ Anarchy Online Free Version] (has in-game advertisements)
*[http://corum.gpotato.com/index.php/?i=download Corum Online] 3D fantasy theme MMORPG
*[http://www.darkandlight.com/en/ Dark & Light]
*[http://darkswords.eu/?r=1910 DarkSwords]
*[http://www.dofus.com/ Dofus] 2D anime theme MMORPG.
*[http://www.endless-online.com/ Endless Online] 2D [[anime]] style MMORPG.
*[http://flyff.gpotato.com/ Fly for Fun]
*[http://www.furcadia.com/ Furcadia] animal world theme MMORPG
*[http://www.galaxseeds.com/ GalaXseeds] cartoon theme MMORPG for preteens
*[http://global.goonzu.com/center/default.asp Goonzu Online]
*[http://www.gunzonline.com/ Gunz: The Duel]
*[http://www.habbo.com/ Habbo Hotel]
*[http://www.kalonline.com/index.asp Kal Online] 3D oriental fantasy MMORPG
*[http://www.knightonlineworld.com/ Knight Online]
*[http://www.maplesea.com/ MapleStory]
*[http://www.globalmuonline.com/ Mu Online]
*[http://o2jam.e-games.com.my/ O2Jam] musical MMORPG
*[http://oilempires.itch.com/ Oil Empire]
*[http://www.wanmei.com/en/wmgj.htm Perfect World] Chinese MMORPG based on mythologies, cost 30 million dollars to develop.
*[http://www.quakelive.com/ Quake Live] First Person Shooter
*[http://ranonline.e-games.com.my/index_eng.asp RAN Online] School campus based MMORPG.
*[http://www.regnumonline.com.ar/ Regnum Online] MMORPG from Argentina, available in English and Spanish. Free to play, with certain "premium items" (mostly cosmetic- and convenience-related) sold for real money.
*[[RuneScape]]
*[http://fate.netgame.com/ Scions of Fate]
*[http://www.gamescampus.com/shotonline/ Shot Online] Massive multiplayer online golf game.
*[http://www.silkroadonline.net/ Silkroad] 3d fantasy theme MMORPG
*[http://sco.gpotato.com/ Space Cowboy Online]
*[http://www.martialheroes.com/main.php The Empire of Martial Heroes]
*[http://legendofares.netgame.com/ The Legend of Ares] 3D medieval fantasy MMORPG.
*[http://www.tibia.com/news/?subtopic=latestnews Tibia] 2D fantasy theme MMORPG
*[http://www.tricksteronline.com/ Trickster Online]
*[http://www.gamescampus.com/xiah/index.asp Xiah] Asian martial arts MMORPG.

[[Category:Video Games]]

Talk:Barack Hussein Obama

2012-10-08T21:17:56Z

JGrant: /* Country of birth */

[[File:Brainreboot20110429.jpg|400px|thumb|]]

{{articletalkheader|prefix=archive}}
 

==Rense==
Jeff Rense may not be a such a good source. The Anti-Defamation League accuses him of promoting anti-Semitic views and 9/11 Conspiracy theories. OTOH, what is wrong with a Pravda article written in the post Soviet-censorship era when democratic Russia hungars to exercise a free press, open discussion and discernment of facts? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 22:39, 23 January 2010 (EST)

:See my talk page, Rob. I never noticed who added the Pravda cite, so if you say so, it is of course fine with me, and please add it back if you haven't already! I now suspect it was yet another vandal site troll stirring the pot, so feel free to deal with him as well. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 17:02, 24 January 2010 (EST)

== Terror Attacks ==
I have an issue with a claim made in the second paragraph. ''Since abandoning the "War on Terror" in Obama's first year, the United States has suffered more terrorist attacks with deadly intent on American soil than in the previous eight years combined.'' Since Obama replaced the 'Global War on Terror' with 'Overseas Contingency Operation', there have been only four domestic terrorist attacks, a far cry from the 19 that took place under Bush's tenure. This sentence should be reworded or removed in its entirety; it only makes the article look embarrassing. --[[User:MichaelJB|MichaelJB]] 15:46, 25 January 2010 (EST)

:More [[liberal]] poppycock, Michael? Even the New York Times counts more, excluding 9/11, under Obama. Perhaps you should consider sources other than the Kos? --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:29, 25 January 2010 (EST)

::A short time ago you gave me grief for making assumptions, yet here you are doing the same. I didn't get any information from Kos, it all came from legitimate news sources. Do you really believe that more terror attacks occurred on US soil from March 2009 to January 2010 than in the eight years of the Bush administration? I would really like to see all your references for making such a bold claim. And why would you want to exclude the WTC/Pentagon attacks?
::Some people have been making some really stupid claims lately about domestic terror. Dana Perino and Rudy Guiliani both claimed there was not a terror attack on the US when Bush was in office. The fact that these people could make such stupidly partisan claims is incredible. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kpfhGxJbLc] [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tYoMoJHNDs] The claim made in this article reeks of the same idiocy of Perino and Guiliani, why not delete the sentence or at least make it factual? --[[User:MichaelJB|MichaelJB]] 20:23, 25 January 2010 (EST)

:::The facts are undeniable that America was totally unprepared to protect itself from terrorist homeland attacks as Bush entered office, due to the total lack of focus of the Clinton Administration and Congress on the issue. Bush can in no way be blamed for the 9/11 attacks with any real credibility.

:::As I have stated many times before, as Mr. Schlafly has stated many times before, as several other Admins have as well, coming here to argue-without-end against our conservative point of view in all articles you come across, is silly. If you and others cannot bring yourselves to accept alternative points of view, so be it. If you want a place to argue against conservatism in general, make your own site or try the Kos or HuffPo; but CP isn't a debate forum, it is a conservative encyclopedia ''project''. Article talk pages are for suggesting ways to improve articles from a conservative point of view, not a liberal one. Is that a clear enough statement? --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 21:29, 25 January 2010 (EST)

::::TK: The change you made is completely unacceptable from a moral and ethical standpoint because instead of correcting an error, you are now highlighting a lie. Three terror attacks occurred during Pres. Bush's last year in office. I sent you links to all three events but you are willing to over look such trivial matters as the truth. It's funny that a liberal who has been blocked twice for pointing out errors and outright falsehoods is vilified as a trouble-maker while the conservatives that knowingly mislead and lie are in charge of an alleged 'trustworthy encyclopedia'.
::::I'm trying to make these changes because I don't want Americans to look stupid, even the conservative ones. It's an uphill battle.

::::Gunman killed two people in a church. [http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-07-29-church-shooting_N.htm]
::::Suicide bomber attacked a Georgia law firm. [http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/ga_law_firm_explodes_causing_multiple_injuries/]
::::Two police officers were killed by a bomb placed in a bank. [http://www.odmp.org/officer/19697-captain-thomas-paul-tennant]
::::--[[User:MichaelJB|MichaelJB]] 01:25, 29 January 2010 (EST)

MichaelJB you cannot tell the difference between Muslim terrorists and someone with an ax to grind? Godspeed! --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 06:36, 29 January 2010 (EST)v
:So Michael's point is that progressive liberal leftwing commie socialist (or whatever the flavor of the week) Prof. [[Amy Bishop]] conducted a domestic overseas contingency operation attack. It's beginning to make sense. How would we classify the guy who crashed the plane into the IRS building in Houston, a tax protester who railed against corporations. Dang, this is a tuff one.... [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 08:13, 12 March 2010 (EST)

== Middle name in article title? ==

----

::::<big>'''Unless you have some brilliant new argument to add to this section, further discussion is unneeded.</big>'''

----

It strikes to me odd that the title of the article is Barach Hussein Obama. While there is nothing wrong with that by itself, looking at the [[President_of_the_United_States_of_America#Presidents_list|list of all the U.S. presidents]], it seems that all the other presidents' articles are titled either without their middle name, or just a middle initial. Wouldn't it make sense to rename the article to either Barack Obama or Barack H. Obama to follow suit? [[User:Kayvan|Kayvan]] 18:19, 26 February 2010 (EST)
:There is a big difference between Walker or Jefferson and Hussein. My two cents. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 18:22, 26 February 2010 (EST)
::What about [[Ronald Wilson Reagan]]? [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] 18:26, 26 February 2010 (EST)
:::This topic had been discussed before. He decided to be inaugurated with his middle name after not using it during the campaign. He is not ashamed of it and we are not ashamed to include it.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 18:29, 26 February 2010 (EST)
::::Ah, I see. Looking at some lists though ([http://www.ipl.org/div/potus/] and [http://www.apples4theteacher.com/holidays/presidents-day/past-presidents-of-usa.html]), it seems that many presidents were also inaugurated in a similar fashion. [[User:Kayvan|Kayvan]] 18:33, 26 February 2010 (EST)

::: I think that, as all encyclopedias and scholarly works try to do, we should try to decide on a particular set of rules and always follow it. In this case, these are the options:
:::1) Always cite the full name in the title, so "Barack Hussein Obama", "George Herbert Walker Bush" and "Ronald Wilson Reagan";
:::2) Always use initials for middle names, so "Barack H. Obama", "George H.W. Bush" and "Ronald W. Reagan";
:::3) Use the names in the way they most commonly used, using middle name initials only where they are necessary to distinguish one particular individual from another, therefore "Barack Obama", "George H.W. Bush" and "Ronald Reagan".

::: We are talking about titles of articles; the full name should always be cited in the body of the article. Personally, I would vote for solution n.3. --[[User:Maquissar|Maquissar]] 18:34, 26 February 2010 (EST)
::::I like the idea. Either 2 or 3 seem best in my opinion; full names seem a bit to long for article titles. The name that the president was inaugurated with isn't bad either, but it would seem less formal, as some have middle names and others don't. [[User:Kayvan|Kayvan]] 18:38, 26 February 2010 (EST)

:::: I thought about that solution, but then I thought that we should better set very general rules; by this I mean that we should decide how to title page names referring to INDIVIDUALS, not to US PRESIDENTS. Deciding that "the name that the president was inaugurated with" is a rule that, naturally, can only be applied to presidents. --[[User:Maquissar|Maquissar]] 18:41, 26 February 2010 (EST)

:::: Another good rule would be to use the name that is mostly used to refer to that individual; this has the disadvantage of not being objective, but it is also the most effective. So "Barack Obama", "George H.W. Bush" (to distinguish him from his son), "Ronald Reagan", "Eminem" instead of "Marshall Mathers", "O.J. Simpson" instead of "Orenthal J. Simpson"... --[[User:Maquissar|Maquissar]] 18:56, 26 February 2010 (EST)

There isn't any vote here, nor was one asked for. Since Obama tries to soft-pedal his Muslim roots and associations, our editorial policy is to call attention to that ''fact''. In addition you should note the [[Ronald Wilson Reagan|Reagan]] article, where well before anyone had an inkling Obama would run for President, Conservapedia used his full name, ''Ronald Wilson Reagan'' which Reagan himself preferred for formal use. So I submit President Obama isn't being singled out, contrary to the insistence of silly-minded liberals. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:06, 26 February 2010 (EST)

:But why call attention to that ''fact'' in the title of the article? The ''fact'' is never going to be denied. The introduction sentence would still say "Barack Hussein Obama". Italicize his middle name in the introduction or change the font color to bring out the ''fact'' if you wish. What I am trying to point at is, why should his middle name be used in the article title? Reagan may have preferred it for formal use, but does Mr. Obama say that same? He is commonly known as Barack Obama; I haven't seen it used in any other way (except Obama, of course). If he is commonly known as that, it would make sense to title the article like that, as should every article on people. [[User:Kayvan|Kayvan]] 21:05, 26 February 2010 (EST)
::Richard Milhous Nixon was commonly refered to as [[Milhous]] by his detracters. Indeed, googling milhouse brings up hundreds of thousands of hits on Nixon that dwarf most all other uses of the name. Now, googling [[Hussein]] presents a host of other problems. The [[Heshamite Dynasty]] of [[Hussein bin Ali]] had been the Islamic Keeper of the Holy places for 700 years until Western British Imperialist interests unseated them and installed the Saudi ruling clan thier place (visualize Islamists dethroning the Pope and installing thier own choice as successor). How does it look when Hussein bin Ali's namesake bows to tne Saudi puppet? Why not focus on how Obama ''is'' bringing real change to the whole planet, rather than argue about how things have traditionally been done? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:14, 27 February 2010 (EST)
Drop it. Further discussion is last-wordism. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 21:14, 26 February 2010 (EST)

:On the question of "''all the other presidents' articles are titled either without their middle name, or just a middle initial. Wouldn't it make sense ...to follow suit? ''"
:You will recall Barack Hussein Obama is the transformational president of change. Wouldn't it make sense to begin change right here, with his name? (assuming that is his name). [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:54, 26 February 2010 (EST)

<nowiki>:</nowiki>D 
--<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 01:58, 27 February 2010 (EST)

Pretty slick conservative trap there TK. despite the fact that you neglected to answer some massive holes in the arguments above, you declare the debate "ended" (even though its not) then decry anything else as last wordism to stifle any further debate. well done--[[User:DerikJ|DerikJ]] 11:58, 27 February 2010 (EST)
:What holes? We're implementing change. Let's find common ground and compromise. We've done just that. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 12:35, 27 February 2010 (EST)
::I like your comment on change, Rob, it made me laugh :) Anyway, I don't see how an argument that Obama's slogan being "change" is any reason to title his article to what he is less commonly known as/less traditional. It's pushing it, in a sense. Besides, being a conservative, I would think that you wouldn't want to follow Obama's way of thinking ;) [[User:Kayvan|Kayvan]] 13:40, 27 February 2010 (EST)
:::Conservatives are for change, both economic and social. They want to change tax law and abortion rulings, for example. Above all, change public education. Being anti-change is just a vulgar stereotype held by closeminded and intolerant people. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 14:09, 27 February 2010 (EST)
::::I can agree with that. But ''why'' "change" how Obama's article is titled when others are titled either without their middle name or with their middle name if they are commonly known and identified by the name, in some cases. Simply changing something doesn't necessarily mean it's a good thing, there has to be reason, and the reason has to be, well, reasonable. [[User:Kayvan|Kayvan]] 14:44, 27 February 2010 (EST)
:::::Call it the price of progress. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 15:17, 27 February 2010 (EST)
::::::In that case, would changing the titles of all the other peoples' articles to include their middle names sound all right to you? It would be progress, after all. [[User:Kayvan|Kayvan]] 17:29, 27 February 2010 (EST)
I have always wondered why the Obamabots get so upset with the name Obama's parents chose. Pretty silly. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 16:40, 27 February 2010 (EST)

:I actually like the name, it has a nice ring to it. It's more of just keeping a solid style of titling pages, a format if you want to call it that. [[User:Kayvan|Kayvan]] 17:29, 27 February 2010 (EST)
::Which brings us to the question of Barry Soetero. If Obama went by this name, then he may have lied to the Illinois Supreme Court when asked to provide former names, according to this Attorney’s Registration Record. [http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2061988/posts] I'm not the sure what the resolution of this issue ever was, and we don't have a word about it in this article. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 17:49, 27 February 2010 (EST)

I know I am new here but there really needs to be a consensus amongst all Presidential and Vice President articles, actually this should probably extend to all US politicians. I know there is a specified conservative bias, however the lack organization and consensus has nothing to do with liberal or conservative bias, it has to do with disorganization and lazyiness by the admins.

If you want to leave the middle, that is fine, however, there would need to be a quick modification of all or the majority of the US Politian article so as not to look so disorganized.[[User:Solarguy17|Solarguy17]] 01:01, 10 March 2010 (EST)

:You hit the nail on the head. You are new here. Don't come in criticizing and such off the bat. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 01:12, 10 March 2010 (EST)

My criticization is to help the article(s) to be better as a whole. None of the above discussion explains the reasoning for leaving it as is. Just people saying he used it in his inauguration so we use it here, however, almost every pres does this so why not have it that way for everyone????[[User:Solarguy17|Solarguy17]] 01:15, 10 March 2010 (EST)

Not really discussion just more of a question. I just recently found this site and was looking through the religious articles and for the most part they seemed pretty good. However, when I come to the political articles, some of them seem a little crazy. I know it is to call more attention to the things that are being overlooked by the media. But I have ask about the middle name thing.

I read all of the information above and I still am not sure why it was decided to leave it as is. Can someone clarify this?
Please don't ban me, I noticed that basically everyone with discussion in this thread that isn't an admin now has banned accounts. I personally don't care, I am just confused. [[User:StevenS|StevenS]] 01:12, 12 March 2010 (EST)

: As it says up at the top of this section, "Unless you have some brilliant new argument to add to this section, further discussion is unneeded." If you do have one, let's have it. But it sure seems like everyone who signs up to this site and immediately starts complaining has nothing new to say at all. Why don't you spend some time reading here with an open mind first, and complain later? [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 01:20, 12 March 2010 (EST)

Now, why would a single individual come here under several different user names all in an effort to get the word "Hussein" removed from the title of this article? It makes no sense at all unless that individual has a personal agenda to perform. The article title stays as it is. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 01:42, 12 March 2010 (EST)

:My only concern is that the title seems to exist in its current state for no purpose other than to further a bias. The arguments that "well he asked for it" seem to suggest that accuracy and fairness are non-valuable in this wiki. I sincerely hope this is not the case and that I may not be banned and able to start a fun future in helping this wiki grow in the impressive way it has so far. [[User:Vidihawk|Vidihawk]] 07:47, 6 April 2010 (EDT)

::'''"Unless you have some brilliant new argument to add to this section, further discussion is unneeded."'''
I guess you missed the bold title at the top of this section? Also, see [[Ronald Wilson Reagan]] to see how silly your argument is. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 08:16, 6 April 2010 (EDT)
:I guess it wasn't as bright an idea as I had hoped. Heh... It still comes off as somewhat purposeful, though. Okie, I'll back away! - [[User:Vidihawk|Vidihawk]] 08:24, 6 April 2010 (EDT)
::Purposeful, as in done with the same horribly malevolent intent as ''my'' adding Reagan's middle name several years ago? You are giving away your intent in advance, good sir, by refusing to admit your already formed assumptions about us are wrong. I hope you prove me wrong, and turn out to be that rare U.K. denizen that turns out to be open-minded and as fair to us as you wish us to be to you. There have been precious few. And please do check out our editors guide and all of that. We differ quite a bit from Wikipedia. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 08:33, 6 April 2010 (EDT)
:::::I think we should keep the current title of the article. Furthermore, I think we should replace the top picture, which is currently a picture of Obama, with a picture of an oil drenched pelican (and a new caption) as a tribute to Obama's indifference, sloth and incompetence. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 20:36, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

== I moved the material dealing with the present to the top ==

I moved the material dealing with the present to the top as I thought readers would be more interested in how Obama is screwing up the present. For example, I think Americans right now are very concerned about how Obama is screwing up the economy. Of course, he is also doing a poor job in other areas presently as well such as holding terrorists court cases in civilian courts, etc. etc. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:30, 15 March 2010 (EDT)

:That makes sense to me. I do appreciate letting me try the other timeline structure. However, I didn't really take into consideration the fact that because he is a high profile individual it may benefit readers to see more recent info before his earlier biography facts. At least while he's fulfilling his one failed term as president, your structure makes sense to me. [[User:DerekE|DerekE]] 12:42, 15 March 2010 (EDT)

::As the ==Maoism== section is being being built, we may eventually be able to free up space from the sections on the Ayers/Dohrn relationship by moving some of that material to Ayers own page, and/or creating a new separate page documenting Obama's rise with communist and terrorist assistance. An acceptable title for that page would be needed. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:23, 15 March 2010 (EDT)

==Citation==

"Any orders he gives to the American military are subject to being refused. Orders that Obama gives to America’s Joint Chiefs of Staff of the military can be refused." --http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/19-01-2009/106972-Barry_Soetoro-0

Do we really want to cite an article that makes this claim? Do any of us really support this opinion, or if we do, do we support the use of opinion articles as sources in addition to factual ones? --[[User:BenjaminS|Ben]] [[User Talk:BenjaminS|Talk]] 08:42, 6 April 2010 (EDT)

:Is the opinion piece backed by valid and factual citations from the United States Code, Ben, as opposed to a unsupported rant? --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 08:47, 6 April 2010 (EDT)

== pronunciation of "Pakistan" ==

This is really considered evidence of anything? I've heard [[Mark Levin]] use the Spanish-inflected pronunciation of Sonia Sotomayor's name (''so tow my OR'' rather than ''so tow MY er''), but nobody would claim that proves he's Catholic or Hispanic. [[User:Golgaronok|Golgaronok]] 23:55, 9 April 2010 (EDT)
:Pronunciation shows an enormous amount about someone's views and history. Obama doesn't use the American pronunciation, and this is telling, since ''no one else in the public sphere'' pronounces it in the muslim way ''but'' Obama. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 00:15, 10 April 2010 (EDT)
[[David Petraeus]] does [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtCLp7siY7I]. [[User:Golgaronok|Golgaronok]] 00:50, 10 April 2010 (EDT)
And [http://www.forvo.com/word/pakistan/ numerous other languages] use a pronunciation closer to the native form. [[User:Golgaronok|Golgaronok]] 00:57, 10 April 2010 (EDT)

::"Golgaronok" (if that is your name), your quibbles with the entry have already been argued ad nauseum, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Barack_Hussein_Obama/archive4#.22Pokiston.22.3F.3F.3F.3F.3F here], for instance. If you've only come to argue on talk pages, you're wasting your own time. Try making substantive contributions to the project; excessive talk is disfavored here. [[User:DanielPulido|DanielPulido]] 01:04, 10 April 2010 (EDT)
I don't see any responses to the points I raised. But it's y'all's funeral. [[User:Golgaronok|Golgaronok]] 01:13, 10 April 2010 (EDT)
:::Kind of interesting that Davis Petraeus was mentioned here. When that general was ordered to command US forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, the liberal elites decided that his name should be pronounced "BETRAY US". [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 01:29, 10 April 2010 (EDT)

==Barry Soetoro = birth name?==
This may have already been discussed, so forgive me if this has been settled. I noticed that the article says ''"Barack Hussein Obama II (birth name Barry Soetoro..."'', however the articles cited do not support the idea that "Barry Soetoro" is Obama's birth name, in fact quite the opposite. My understanding, from reading the Newsweek article, is that "Barack" is his birth name, although he went by "Barry" when he was younger. His father's name, as I understand it, is Barack Hussein Obama, and he was named after his father. "Seotoro", if I remember right, was his stepfather's last name, so it is unlikely that it would have been part of Obama's birth name. To be clear, I do realize that he spent his younger years being known as "Barry Soetoro", and I think that should be included in the article, I just don't think it was actually his birth name. 
Please understand that I am not as knowledgeable in this kind of thing as many other contributors here, so I may have gotten it all wrong - that's why I didn't attempt to edit the article. Please correct me if I have gotten it wrong - I won't be offended and I am curious as to the truth of the matter. [[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 18:11, 1 May 2010 (EDT)

According to the citation that shows the birth certificate, the birth name is, in fact, Barack Hussein Obama II, NOT Barry Soetoro. Also, because there is an actual document, i.e. physical, demonstrable proof, the word "allegedly" should be removed.

== Remove name repetition? ==

Would anyone mind if I removed some of the repetition of Obama's name in certain portions of the article? For example, in this paragraph:
{{cquote|
[[Barack Obama and uncharitableness|Barack Obama's recent pattern of charitable giving]] and [[Barack Obama and liberal elitism|Barack Obama's liberal elitism]] is consistent with Obama being a [[Narcissism|narcissist]] which is a charge that has often been made against Barack Obama. However, it is also true that Barack Obama is an [[evolution|evolutionist]]. Barack Obama told the ''York Daily Record'' that "I believe in [[evolution]]...". Barack Obama's recent pattern of charitable giving and liberal elitism is also in accordance with someone who has a certain degree of [[Social Darwinism|social darwinistic]] thinking. In addition to [[Liberals and uncharitableness|American liberals giving less to charity]], it is also true that [[Theory of evolution and liberalism|American liberals are also more likely to believe in evolution]].
}}

I think I could alter it to make it more readable with "Obama's recent pattern of charitable giving and liberal elitism is consistent with that of a narcissist, a charge that has often been made against him."

And so forth. In my linguistics class, we talked about semantic satiation, and I believe that paragraphs like these, along with the fact that it never seems to use pronouns, somewhat diminish the readability of the article. If I were to make this change, I would preserve every wikilink, reference, etc, but I believe it would become more readable. In Christ, [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 09:09, 6 May 2010 (EDT)

== Insults? ==

Does the entire beginning of the article have to be so laden with insults? Couldnt it simply say what the article will be about, and THEN express views? As it is it appears very unprofessional. 19:11, 6 May 2010 (EDT)
:We believe in the truth here, and the fact that [[liberals]] like yourself feign offense at the display of it speaks volumes about you. If you insist on closing your mind, at least take ownership of your [[deceit]]! Sign your comments with <nowiki> ~~~~ </nowiki> next time. Godspeed! [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 19:58, 6 May 2010 (EDT)

== "The first president who is biracial" ==

There have been other presidents of more than one race. Bush Jr. is has some German and English ancestry. [[User:NP|NP]]

:George W is German and English, is that two races according to our census? I think the readers will understand what biracial refers to.

::English and German are '''''not''''' races, and neither is Hispanic. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 22:16, 17 May 2010 (EDT)

== Reorganizing ==

I'm glad to see the edit feature is enabled here once more. I think this page needs a revamp to structure information better. I've reorganized everything into a better structure, let me know what you think. I am trying to put a summary of the presidency at the top, information about his life/career next, and then a political summary. This should really improve the page's appearance, as it appears too disorganized right now. --[[User:Jzyehoshua|Jzyehoshua]] 15:56, 20 May 2010 (EDT)
:What you're doing is burying important information so fewer users will find it. That's unacceptable. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 15:57, 20 May 2010 (EDT)

== Obama is a Muslim theory and the alleged claim of Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit ==

Here is what the American Thinker reported: "The American President told me in confidence that he is a Muslim." That was the claim of Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit, as reported in the May 2010 issue of Israel Today. According to journalist Avi Lipkin, Gheit appeared on Nile TV's "Round Table Show" in January, on which he said that "he had had a one-on-one meeting with Obama who swore to him that he was a Moslem, the son of a Moslem father and step-son of Moslem step-father, that his half-brothers in Kenya were Moslems, and that he was loyal to the Moslem agenda."[http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/06/report_obama_said_i_am_a_musli.html] Here is what Hot Air says: http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2010/06/14/obama-is-a-muslim-take-two/

Personally, I am beginning to think Obama is: not a Muslim, not a Christian, and not an atheist. I think Obama is a narcissist who worships himself. I can also see him telling one person he is a Christian and then later telling someone else he is a Muslim. There are many examples of Obama being insincere such as all the substantive healthcare discussions were going to be on C-Span, etc. etc. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 15:53, 16 June 2010 (EDT)

== 2009 Nobel Peace Prize ==

I find it strange that there is not a single mention of the president being awarded the Nobel peace prize in this article. Considering that other prominent award winners have it at least mentioned in their respective articles. The [[Mother Teresa]] article, for instance, prominently states her award in the introduction to the article, and even political figures like [[Al Gore]] and [[Henry Kissinger]] (both of whom won the peace prize) have their award at least mentioned in the article.
--[[User:DenisTR|DenisTR]] 16:04, 19 August 2010 (EDT)

:I agree with you, Denis. It was there, once-upon-a-time, but apparently it was removed in the constant editing turmoil. CP does mention this in the [[Nobel Prize]] article. I will add it here, as it should be. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 16:24, 19 August 2010 (EDT)

==Faulty Logic==
I have a suspicion that Andy Schlafly is secretly a Muslim. Will you deny that, Andy? If you do deny it, then I accuse you of being a Muslim under the concept of Taqiyya.
It's like a terrible flow chart that always ends with "You're a Muslim." I realize that you're kind of scraping the barrel with this whole "Obama is a Muslim" thing, but c'mon. [[User:Pete5383|Paul]] 18:57, 19 August 2010 (EDT)

: Paul, you seem to think all claims or facts are relative. They aren't. Truth is supported by logic and evidence.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:00, 19 August 2010 (EDT)

:: President Obama clearly has an Islamic background. As an adult, he joined a church and says he's a Christian. I'd say he's as much Muslim as I am Jewish; by Jewish law, my having a Jewish mother makes me Jewish by birth, but I became a Christian by choice as a teenager. Go figure. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:04, 3 September 2010 (EDT)

:::Whether President Obama is Muslim or not is one question; however it is undeniable Obama misspoke or was deceptive while ramping up his ambitions back in 2005 when he told the ''Chicago Sun-Times'', "I am rooted in the Christian tradition." Nowhere on his maternal side, grandma, gramps, or his natural father, or his stepfather, can any Christian rooting be found. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 14:37, 4 September 2010 (EDT)

==Days in office==
[[Barack Obama]] was inaugurated {{days since|2009|1|20}} days ago and will finish his term in {{#expr: -{{days since|2013|1|20}} }} days. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:00, 3 September 2010 (EDT)

==Apparent sourcing errors==

While looking over this article, I noticed a number of problems - mostly unsourced claims or claims for which the source is no longer available. Since my suggestions will almost certainly be controversial, I will not actually make any further changes to this page.

*The quote "Rather than being a unifier, Mr. Obama has divided America on the basis of race, class and partisanship" under the heading "Presidency" is unattributed.

*The claim that Obama represented ACORN in ''Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank'' is unsupported. While court documents do list Obama among the Plaintiff's Attorneys, they do not reference ACORN in any way. [http://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=10112] This claim seems to have been added by bloggers after the fact. Similarly, the cited reference contains no source for the claim that Obama had anything to do with the CRA, only a completely unsourced allegation that was reprinted almost verbatim here. As far as I can tell, Obama represented ACORN exactly once, on a case involving motor voter laws. [http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/oct/17/john-mccain/he-represented-them-in-one-case-/]

*The statement "Obama website Fight The Smears has confirmed that Obama was once a Kenyan citizen until 1982" under the subheading "Birth Certificate Controversy" is unsourced and ambiguous.

*Much of the content under the subheading "Engineers defeat of Centrist Democrats" is dubious. Two of the cites [http://articles.latimes.com/1992-03-18/news/mn-3844_1_gus-savage][http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Carol_Moseley_Braun#Political_career] are about Carol Moseley Braun and don't mention Obama at all. There is no indication in any of the sources that Obama was connected to the Braun campaign, so these cites are meaningless. Additionally, the section attributes an anti-Dixon intent to Obama (referring to Obama as "subverting" Dixon's reelection, defined by Conservapedia's own article as "lending of aid, comfort, and moral support to individuals, groups, or organizations that advocate the overthrow of incumbent governments by force and violence"). What he did was increase voter turnout among the black community, a far cry from what the text implies.

*<s>The statement "President Obama falsely claimed that the senior citizen group AARP endorsed his administration's health care plan when they never made such an endorsement" under the subheading "Obama Administration Health Care Plan and Its Advocacy Methods" is sourced to a YouTube video that no longer exists. Additionally, it appears that AARP has been supporting health care reform since at least August 2009. [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/08/17/eveningnews/main5247916.shtml][http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/19/aarp-ama-announce-support_n_506060.html]</s>

*Similarly, several cites link to YouTube videos that have been removed. Multiple cites under the subheading "Obama Administration Health Care Plan and Liberal Elitism" link to deleted videos, as does the cite for the statement "Barack Obama's "Disinformation Czar" (whose supposed job was to correct disinformation that others are spreading about the Obama administration's health care plan) was caught spreading misleading information." The cite for the statement "Senior citizens are key Democratic party constituents that could kill Obama's socialistic health care plan" links to a private video.

--[[User:DrewJ|DrewJ]] 15:50, 29 September 2010 (EDT)

:Sorry, Drew, but one glaring misrepresentation really sticks out, and explains why liberals are often accused of playing fast and loose with the truth: While AARP has long advocated health care reform, it specifically repudiated Obama's distortion of the truth, saying they were not endorsing any specific plan, at that time. See how easy it is to distort fact, by omission, and make obviously good-intentioned souls like you doubt the real truth?

:You are obviously an editor here, and I would urge you, before making posts such as this one, to try and find substitute sources that back up what is in the story. At the very least, as is the case with the AARP, at least check the facts before stating something is incorrect. It was a very big story at the time, Obama's misstatement, and not at all hard to find....so easy and well-known in fact that some people might be tempted to accuse you of inserting a deliberate [[Red Herring]]. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big>/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 17:29, 29 September 2010 (EDT)

Sources don't count if they are liberal sources. Those are worse than no source at all. Find a reliable source like Cato Institute or Fox News and we can add those. [[User:JoeSmithson117|JoeSmithson117]] 18:44, 4 December 2011 (EST)

== Typo ==
The first sentence here has a typo: it presumably is meant to read "...said to have '''been''' born in..." I'd fix it myself, but the page is so informative (and therefore long) that my poor old computer can't load it to edit. --[[User:LanceS|LanceS]] 21:49, 11 November 2010 (EST)
:Thanks, JPatt got it. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 22:29, 11 November 2010 (EST)

== Bryan Fischer: Obama wants to give America back to the Indians ==

Is [http://www.afa.net/Blogs/BlogPost.aspx?id=2147501360 this site] some kind of liberal parody? Otherwise, this is so serious that is should be included. American Family Association would seem to me as a pretty trustworthy organization, and this Bryan Fischer is writing for them. Any thoughts? – [[User:Dstone|dstone]] 16:42, 1 January 2011 (EST)

==Fact vs Opinion==
Okay...I thought maybe this article would be a good place to start. I was introduced to Conservapedia recently, and have been waffling about joining and bcoming an editor, but can no longer refrain. So, I'm extraordinarily new...and I fully expect the welcoming and flame-free arms of this community, as I support the overall efforts of what Conservapedia is trying to accomplish. The road to becoming a "Trustworthy Encyclopedia" is long, and this site is just starting to make baby steps in that direction. That being said, I will try to keep this short.

FACT: Opinions are not fact. Even expert opinions are not fact. They're just plain old opinions. Despite being in the Commandments, and otherwise stated over and over again, folks seem to have trouble making this distinction.
OPINION: If you are unable to make cited references, or present the conservative viewpoint in a reasoned and intelligent manner, I would heavily suggest that you leave the site to those who can. Your "help" is often unhelpful. Especially in an article as...contentious...as this - and I imagine many others, I'll be looking shortly - the talk page is the place to present your opinions. If you cannot site material, find sources that intelligently argue your viewpoint, or just want a second or third pair of eyes and ears, it would be addressed here. Also, if haven't actually read the article that you are citing...do that first, before posting anything at all...

There are several on this page, the most innocuous of which: President Obama authorized offshore oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico[28]. The moratorium lapsed in 2008. It says it right in the article, paragraph 4. This statement is spruious and vague and will be reworded to say something like: Then-Senator Obama voted to re-authorize oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. This is just a small and harmless example, but, either research the issue before posting, or don't post. If you wish to engage in historical revisionism, or just bottom-barrel opinion mongering, please roll on over to Wikipedia, and leave us be. [[User:RyanDav|RyanDav]] 2 January 2011
:I moved this from the top of the page to its current location, to maintain threading. [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] [[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]] 13:35, 2 January 2011 (EST)

== Oil Drilling Moratorium, redux ==

I did not realize that this would be as contentious as it was. The statement is simply poorly worded, I assume unintentionally, and appears to place the blame squarely on one person's shoulders. This is just factually innacurate, nothing more, nothing less. We accept credit where credit is due, and take blame where blame is appropriate - and the blame belongs to the vast majority of the 110th Congress, both the liberal reps and ours - and to deny that is some kind of revisionism, which will not be tolerated. I'm certainly more than willing to be corrected on this, but you can either site sources that support your viewpoint, or you cannot - it really is that easy. In that case, the article would read something like, "then-Senator Obama lobbied heavily for the moratorium to lapse, and led a congressional coalition consisting of Senators Blah, Blah and Blah and Congressmen Such-and-such and So-and-so to further that end, etc..." accompanied by supporting references. I am afraid, however, that a "nuh-uh," or, "because I said so," is simply Not Good Enough. We're counteracting liberal bias, here, not populating the internet with more unfounded claptrap. [[User:RyanDav|RyanDav]] 19:26, 3 January 2011 (EST)

:If you please, write here your proposal for how this should be written, including the source links. If Obama lobbied heavily for the moritorium to lapse, then the source evidence will say it; if he was a part of a coalition of people, then again the evidence will support that. Since this article is about Obama, it should lean on what he has done while in office. But as far as what the 110th Congress did or didn't do, oh yes, I am in total agreement with you...and so were the vast majority of voters back in November. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 20:00, 3 January 2011 (EST)

::He didn't, as far as I know, or have ever read. I don't think any articles arguing that he soley was responsible, or even more responsible than any other rep, exist. The text is already up there. Pretty vanilla. Mentions him by name, but also says, "hey, don't forget about all the other chair-jockeys, too!" But the article is about him, so he gets a name drop for focus. The article is about him as whole, so his Presidential and Senatorial terms would be seperate sections of the same article, so as not to confuse. The 110th was the last Bush-era Congress. In November, we voted out the 111th. We are now in the 112th Congress.

::Oh, I also replaced someone's citation from an OpEd piece in the NYTimes with an actual news reference that supported the same point (about the Obama administration's poor response to the Oil Spill). If I didn't know better (and I probably don't), I would suspect that some of the citations here are purposefully planted just to make us look like simpletons. [[User:RyanDav|RyanDav]] 21:39, 3 January 2011 (EST)

== Birth Controversy ==
Could someone please explain to me something I've never quite followed: why does it matter where Obama was born? As far as I can tell, no one is claiming his mother was not a US Citizen, which makes him a "natural born" US citizen even if he was born in Kenya, Moscow, or Riyadh. If the issue is "without a birth certificate we can't be certain his mother is really his mother" then I get it, but this side of things seems to be ignored in favor of controversy over the actual location of the birth. If we interpret "natural born citizen" as "born within the US", then that would exclude the children of Armed Forces personnel stationed overseas with their families at the time their children were born from the presidency, which seems like something liberals would love to do. [[User:Ptorquemada|Ptorquemada]] 12:09, 5 April 2011 (EDT)
:Well, John McCain whose father was an Admiral was born to two American parents in Panama Canal Zone. The media questioned his "natural born" citizen status and it seemingly was determined that since both his parents were American citizens who were living out of State because of the Admiral's duties that John McCain's birth status would be considered "natural born. The question concerning Barack Obama is that his father was not a US citizen but was in fact a British subject as Kenya was under British rule at the time. Some suggest that the original conception of "natural born" was that both parents are US citizens at the time of the birth of a child. So there is a question as to his "natural born" status even if he was, in fact, born in Hawaii. The fact that Obama has spent a couple of million dollars fighting any requests for proof of an original long form birth certificate and school records makes some people more convinced that a. he wasn't actually born in Hawaii and that his birth was only registered there or b. because his father was a British subject he had duel citizenship status which would make it doubtful that he would be considered a natural born citizen. There are many questions concerning Obama's "natural born" status because he also appears to have been a citizenship of Indonesia and is supposed to have traveled on an Indonesian passport as an adult. Of course, a lot of questions would be removed if the president just released the original birth certificate. The fact that he hasn't just adds fuel to the fire. [[User:Dwain|Dwain]] 12:09, 8 April 2011 (EDT)

== Birth Certificate Removal? ==

Now that Obama has finally released his birth certificate, all this about Kenya and Barry Soetoro seems a bit silly. Should we remove it? [[User:JimAB|JimAB]] 11:24, 27 April 2011 (EDT)
:Has the question of Mr. Obama traveling to Pakistan on an Indonesian passport under the name Barry Soetero in 1981 been resolved yet? As well as the statements regarding his application to join the Illinois State Bar Association wherein he answered no to the question of ever using any aliases? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:12, 28 April 2011 (EDT)

== Shortening the article length ==

I think we need to work on splitting this article; I recently revert a vandal's (mostly) blanking of the page, and my browser would freeze up when I tried to save the page (actually I'm currently trying to save it - and over and over again I'm having no luck). Currently this appears at the top of the edit screen:
:'''WARNING: This page is 144 kilobytes long; some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please consider breaking the page into smaller sections or removing irrelevant information.'''
Thoughts?--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 00:34, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

== First Socialist??? ==

Obama is clearly a socialist, but is he the first to be president as the lead of the article states? The New deal democrats who created social security come to mind.[[User:BenDylan|BenD]] 09:03, 1 May 2011 (EDT)
:That certainly may be true. But we are talking about one man who occupies the office of president, not underlings and appopintees. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 09:23, 1 May 2011 (EDT)
::But couldn't the Presidents who hired them be considered socialists? I still don't know about saying he's the FIRST. [[User:KingHanksley|KingHanksley]] 12:31, 4 May 2011 (EDT)
:::You Americans have no idea what socialism is anymore do you?[[User:Cmurphynz|Cmurphynz]] 21:36, 25 June 2012 (EDT)
::::I guess you're on to us. Alex, I'll take What is redistribution of wealth, State control of industry for $200. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:43, 25 June 2012 (EDT)

== Obama the Socialist ==
I am counting all the capitalists that have hired self-proclaimed communists. I come up with zero. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 12:43, 2 May 2011 (EDT)

== Update of the article ==

See [[Talk:Barack Hussein Obama/update]] if you'd like to contribute to an update of this article - we'll be keeping a lot of the information that's good, throwing out some information that's a little old, and adding new information - all while hopefully downsizing! All help is appreciated!--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 19:55, 2 May 2011 (EDT)

== Bin Laden ==

Should we at least mention the Bin Laden capture? I feel that in fairness we should give him his one or two accomplishments. We should definitely mention that George W. Bush's policies played a big hand but still Obama could have gone entirely bleeding heart on us and we wouldn't have gotten OBL [[User:KingHanksley|KingHanksley]] 11:24, 4 May 2011 (EDT)

But being fair and giving credit to a liberal muslim socialist for making the world even a little safer would undermine the integrity of a conservative encyclopedia. Now had he screwed up the capture then that would be worthy of mentioning because it would show how he endangered the country. We should only be fair and give credit where credit is due if Obama was a Christian conservative who shared our beliefs. ([[User:Bluebank|Bluebank]] 12:58, 7 July 2011 (EDT))

I agree, it would only be worth mentioning if he had screwed up the capture because then we could hold his feet to the fire. ([[User:Jvclark2|Jvclark2]] 13:00, 7 July 2011 (EDT))

:::''"giving credit to a liberal muslim socialist for making the world even a little safer would undermine the integrity of a conservative encyclopedia."'' Well that's not a biased statement or anything. It should fall under the article Obama presidency but because of its significance, put it on the BHO page. Rarely, but we have given Obama credit in the past. The rescue of a Captain from Somali pirates is a good example of the proper choice the Progressive fake Christian Marxist had made. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:58, 7 July 2011 (EDT)
:::::I just don't see where ordering bin Laden's killing is a big accomplishment. What purpose did it serve other than a failed effort to turn around Obama's falling poll ratings while destroying the most important relationship the United States had in the war on terror. After Obama declared the war on terror over two years ago, dismantling the delicate relationship with the Pakistani ISS seems like phase two. Undermining Pakistan's secular regime, the way Obama did, only works to the advantage of Islamic extremists.

:::::Did killing bin Laden bring back the lives lost in the 9/11 attacks? No. Does making the war's in Iraq & Afghanistan about retribution rather than prevention, further American foreign policy interests or make the United States more secure? Hardly.

:::::Does creating the false sense among the American electorate that the objectives of the war in Afghanistan have now been accomplished, and we can abandon the fight? The height of folly -- and a repeat of what happened when the U.S. abandoned Afghanistan to the terrorists after 1991.

:::::Did killing bin Laden make America safe from reprisals? Or rather doies killing bin Laden expose innocent men, women, and children to the never ending threat of sudden, sensesless, and violent death?
:::::The cynical manipulation of American security and foreign policy interests for short term popularity and selfish career interests is appalling. I just don't agree this a "success" to boast of. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:15, 7 July 2011 (EDT)
::::::While I think it's laughable to say that taking down the number one most wanted man in the world isn't an accomplishment, I think it's a decision that ''anyone'' would have made, therefore, it isn't special or particular that Obama happened to be the one to make it. [[User:BradB|BradB]] 23:57, 7 July 2011 (EDT)
:::::::No. We've learned from our mistakes. In 1967 the the number one most wanted man in the world - Che Guevara - was similiarly hunted and executed, only to be resurrected by liberals, hate-mongers, and other assorted sociopaths and pro-mass murder advocates, made the mascot of the hate-America crowd, and sold to American college students as somethiong larger than life and a cult hero to be worshiped. It is not laughable at all. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:55, 8 July 2011 (EDT)
::::::::The angst from the left goes back to Bush hatred. We shouldn't have interfered in Iraq and should have focused on OBL. Leftist sheep knew better than Bush. We knew all along that it is not one man but a movement, confront them there instead of here. At least we are no longer creating and recruiting terrorists, thanks to a Muslim-named president and his policies of peace in the Middle East.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:08, 8 July 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::You will recall Senator [[Patty Murray]], who now heads the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee charged with candidate recruitment and doling out funds, praised bin Laden for his work with children buidling day care centers. He probably supported the Family-Leave Act and opposed No Child Left Behind, too. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 15:26, 8 July 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::''" I just don't agree this a "success" to boast of. "'' Two points, 1) stating a fact is not boasting, it is just stating a fact. We list domestic policy, popular bills, economic plan, gulf oil spill, DADT... It's just another thing to list. 2) Had Bush done it I'm pretty sure it would be on his page.([[User:Jvclark2|Jvclark2]] 21:09, 8 July 2011 (EDT))
:::::::::::That is the point. Stating the fact that Obama's unnecessarily destroyed the most vital relationship the United States has in the War on Terror to score short term approval ratings. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 12:38, 9 July 2011 (EDT)
Jvclark - bin Laden's death is mentioned on this page. In the lead. What more do you want?--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 11:46, 9 July 2011 (EDT)

==From the update - discussion==
===Structuring===
This is what I feel should be the general sectioning of the article - I think with an article that we have this much information on, what we mostly need to do is use "See also:" pages rather than go into major details.
{| style="width:100%"
|valign="top"|
*Early life
*U.S. Senate career (with a note on opposition to the Iraq War - which should be followed up on in the presidential primary race)
*U.S. Senate career
**Radical endorsements, support, and get out the vote efforts (better language?)
**'''Use of filibuster and obstructionism'''
**'''Voted agaist debt ceiling increase'''

*Presidential election (things to cover: experience question, jeremiah wright, PUMA)
**Primary race
**National election
|valign="top"|
*Presidency
**Domestic policy
***Popular Bills (Zadroga, lilly ledbetter fair pay act)
***Economic plan
****Stimulus plan
***Health care
***The Gulf oil spill
**Foreign policy
***Commander-in-Chief
****Iraq
****Afghanistan
****Libya/The Obama Doctine
****Don't Ask Don't Tell
|valign="top"|

*Ideology (mentioning pro-abortion stance, other things not mentioned above)
*References
*See also
*External links
|}

Rob I've bolded two section that I wonder if they should be sections alone; I do 100% agree that they should be mentioned in the text; are you set on them being sections? If so I'll yield--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 00:58, 3 May 2011 (EDT)
:Leave bold for now & let's see what develops; '''Recovery''' is ambiguous; while total output (GDP growth) has recovered, we've seen several polls just over the past week where 60-70% of respondents ''still'' think the US is in recession (despite the fact GDP growth has recovered over the past year and half). Likewise, it certainly has not been a "jobs recovery". I'd suggest this needs a better name. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 01:15, 3 May 2011 (EDT)

::I very much agree - that's a misleading section title - I think what I meant was "Proposed Recovery" - or "Recovery Plan". The latter sounds a little better to my ears. I made a few edits below - I'm gonna hold off on doing anything else till you get a chance to take a look and add things.--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]]01:22, 3 May 2011 (EDT)
:::I've replaced Recovery with Stimulus, perhaps "Stimulus and budget". Also, Don't Ask Don't Tell seems a little wierd under "Wartime"; is it there solely cause it's a military subject? It could just as easily fit under Idealogy as well (I' not just trying to be argumentative....) [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 01:40, 3 May 2011 (EDT)
::::Hmm. Very true. No I think it's definitely a legitimate question. I HAD been thinking that Ideology would just cover what wasn't addressed in the prior sections (since certainly we'd discuss his economic ideology in the "Economic plan" section) - so, yes, I had just placed it under wartime solely because its a military subject. But it is probably more apropos to homosexual rights. I am worried that Ideology will become a bucket of worms, so to speak, only in that it'd be weird to just have a section for DADT under it, so then we'd have to have a super-section for "Homosexual policy", and then super-sections for everything else, making the article very long. I leave it up to you.--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 01:45, 3 May 2011 (EDT)
:::::Alternatively, we can just leave it as is for now. I'm updating the [[Obama administration]] article right now, too. That one is structured , "Economic policy", "Foreign policy", etc. Wartime leader is something new. Perhaps, Commander-in-Chief? that would encompass DADT as well as ongoing military operations. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 02:08, 3 May 2011 (EDT)
::::::I like that. It's broader and works well. Nice.--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 02:29, 3 May 2011 (EDT)
I took a look at the Wikipedia page on Obama - and I actually like how they organize his presidency - into Domestic policy and foreign policy. I'm going to make some changes to reflect that. I think in the long run it'll actually limit the number of sections we need--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 18:15, 4 May 2011 (EDT)

== Congratulations! ==
To the people who worked updating this article. It looks much better now.--[[User:AlejandroH|AlejandroH]] 00:43, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

== Speculation ==

In the spirit of accuracy, I think that all articles should refrain from speculative language (I thought this would be good article to start with). I understand that this is a conservative encyclopedia, but one should not overrule the other. We can still present the conservative view point that other encyclopedias overlook without veering off the path of facts. I think that President Obama has done enough to harm himself without adding inflammatory and opinion statements. This language degrades the reliability of the site. [[User:McTone|McTone]] 10:59, 23 May 2011 (EDT)McTone
:You're actually not making encyclopedic edits - for example how you're adding titles ("''President'' Obama"), which is traditionally not done. As you've now been reverted twice I think you should refrain from editing this article.--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 11:35, 23 May 2011 (EDT)
:: That is encyclopaedic, as it is proper to use a person's title in reference material. However, that's not ththe only edits I've made. Most of them being removing speculative speech. Basically we should follow the rule of "if you can't cite it, don't say it."[[User:McTone|McTone]] 13:01, 23 May 2011 (EDT)McTone
:::No it's generally not. See his Wikipedia page if you don't believe. We also don't say "Mr." or "Ms."--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 12:02, 23 May 2011 (EDT)
::::Are we not better than Wikipedia? In any case, this is deferring the point I was making with this heading.[[User:McTone|McTone]] 13:01, 23 May 2011 (EDT)McTone

== Perhaps ==

I have read two cases of the word perhaps in the opening section of this article. Shouldn't assumptions like these not belong in an encyclopedia like article, especially in the opening section?- AlexMason
:The first one is arguably a wording error ... I'll consider that - the second one is more appropriate; since the event just happened we're not sure what the consequences will be, but if a potential consequence is notable enough it's probably worth stating--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 16:30, 23 May 2011 (EDT)
::I'm an underwriter at Fox News and I see stuff like this all the time. I think AlexMason is correct here (as well as the poster in the previous topic). Is this a web encyclopedia or is this an opinion site? Speculating on the outcome of events is tantamount to gossip (highly frowned upon and in fact forbidden by the standards of Conservapedia as I have read the rules and commandments). I really think this should be fixed. I noticed some edits in the history of this page and I've got to stick with Andy's last revision (reverting some of the edits of the previous editor) which kept to the less speculative nature of the article.[[User:PapaBear|PapaBear]] 21:32, 28 May 2011 (EDT)

== Obama Muslim Evidence? ==

I was going to make a post on this talk page suggesting we move the long list of evidence that Obama may be a Muslim to its own article (or an article dealing with the Obama/Islam controversy) but when I got here I saw that section had been removed, as had any mention of the words "Islam" or "Muslim". (I did a search on my browser). I could not find a reason for this on the talk page. Could someone explain why this was made? [[User:Gregkochuconn|Gregkochuconn]] 22:13, 3 June 2011 (EDT)
:I rescued the content from an old revision and put it here: [[Barack Obama's Muslim Heritage]] [[User:AndyJ|AndyJ]] 22:18, 21 June 2011 (EDT)

== Obama as President ==
With the long-standing controversy about Hussein's birth certificate and the recent evidence that the one that was released is forged, I feel that there is ample evidence to conclude that Obama was born in Kenya. Because of that, I propose that we list the current holder of the office of [[President]] as [[Joe Biden]], as he would take the office if Obama were found to be unable or ineligible to serve. --[[User:AndyJ|AndyJ]] 22:29, 21 June 2011 (EDT)
:You may be misreading the story; the "Obama was born in Kenya" conspiracy theory was promoted by the White House to hide the fact that, Barack Hussein Obama's father was a [[natural born citizen]] of Kenya, and not the United States. That is the constitutional question, being that a case can be made that the Constitutional framers defined "natural born citizen" as being a citizen of the country of ''your fathers'' birth. The birth certificate, or the location of Obama Jr. birth, that is to say, the birther conspircacy the White House promoted, never had anything to do with the constitutional issue in question. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 16:27, 22 June 2011 (EDT)
::And two things, firstly, there is not ample evidence. Just conspiracy theories. Even assuming that the certificate/s released are forgeries, that alone isn't enough to prove he wasn't born in the US, it would just raise concerning questions. Secondly, Obama would remain the President. The Constitution doesn't mention what would happen if someone who was ineligible to be President became President. Hence, until impeachment or the 25th Amendment is invoked, Obama would remain President. (Presumably the 25th would be invoked, as impeachment would take a lot longer, and would require proving that Obama knew, which could be a little difficult.) - [[User:JamesCA|JamesCA]] 07:57, 18 October 2011 (EDT)

== Why is the birth certificate things still going? ==

I read a while ago (and posted in the article) an article from the National Review where even they concede that Obama was probably born in the US. [[User:CaptainSwing|CaptainSwing]] 23:43, 7 November 2011 (EST)

:Well as soon as it's verified than we can move past. Until then, we'll just pretend everything is a ok. For me, I'd still like to see every executive order, every law signed, every supreme court nominee from Obama overturned. It took three years the release of the long form certificate. I can wait another three years if need be for the proof.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 00:11, 8 November 2011 (EST)
::I don't understand, the National Review, a magazine that I admit is quite conservative, viewed the birth certificate and said it was most likely valid. I'm not sure what you're waiting for, as I don't think anyone is going to prove that Obama wasn't born in the country. [[User:CaptainSwing|CaptainSwing]] 09:59, 8 November 2011 (EST)
:::Because what they viewed was a Photoshoped work. Until the American public sees for itself exactly what is - or is not - on file in Hawaii, there will always be this unanswered question. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 11:22, 8 November 2011 (EST)
::::But it wasn't photo-shopped, that was the whole point the National Review was making: [http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/265767/pdf-layers-obamas-birth-certificate-nathan-goulding]. And honestly it makes sense, why on Earth would they go to the trouble of planting so much evidence that even the Mccain campaign declined to pursue it further, only to bungle the job on an elementary error in photoshop that any reasonable graphics designer would never make. [[User:CaptainSwing|CaptainSwing]] 12:03, 8 November 2011 (EST)
:::::It was Photoshopped, and downloading the original White House copy of it reveals all of the layers when it's run under Photoshop. Try reading all of these [http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=98546] by different reporters rather than a single National Review piece that's harping the beliefs of the "Yes We Can" crowd. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:21, 8 November 2011 (EST)
::::::So wait, you're saying that because they agree with Obama we can dismiss them? Isn't that circular reasoning? The author of the national review article posted a guide of how the mistakes could have easily come up and has no reason to lie about it. And again, let's think about this logically, they have authentic birth announcements from the relevant papers, good enough to fool the Mccain campaign, why would they botch a photoshop job? [[User:CaptainSwing|CaptainSwing]] 12:27, 8 November 2011 (EST)
:::::::And one of those mistakes that appeared on the Obama "certificate" was a sequence number that interfered with the numbers issued to a pair of twins; one of those mistakes was the "signature" of an individual which happens to be close enough to the name of a very small Hawaiian guitar; one of those mistakes is a smiley face attached to another signature; the list goes on. And until we see the real, bona-fide birth certificate, this issue is not going to go away, and we will continue to publish the current evidence as the fraud that it is. So don't worry too much about it, okay? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:44, 8 November 2011 (EST)
::::::::Does that mean to say that it should be considered a fraud until such a time as every US citizen has held and viewed the physical document? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 16:49, 8 November 2011 (EST)
:::::::::Though this discussion is old. I will agree with this CaptainSwing person and this MaxFletcher that Obama's birth certificate issue has been dealt with, and the National Review magazine that one user mentioned is a conservative magazine. Plus you don't go to court with flimsy argument saying "hey he was born in Kenya" and demand that the defense prove all its points without the prosecution being able to present solid evidence. I see no solid evidence that proves he was born outside the United States, in our party the centre-right Austrian-born Arnold Schwarzenegger was elected Governor of California. And besides the real serious problems that people have with Obama are what he is doing as President, such as his high tax agenda for instance.--[[User:TheQuestioner|TheQuestioner]] 17:08, 3 August 2012 (EDT)

==Promises kept==
I can count how many promises Obama kept on one hand.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 13:47, 19 December 2011 (EST)

== Poverty comment in paragraph 2 of intro ==

The poverty comment isn't supported by the link at all. The link looks at from the 1950s to 2009. Obama began office in 2009, so the 14.3 percent marked at the end of the graph is a measure of the poverty at some point during 2009, and may have been taken in Bush's last month in office. It is unreasonable to conclude from the graph that poverty increased under Obama's presidency. I'll also note that the increase in poverty began, according to the graph, whilst Bush was in office. - [[User:JamesCA|JamesCA]] 00:08, 20 March 2012 (EDT)

== Better, More Objective Article at CreationWiki.org ==

There's now a better-sourced, more objective article at CreationWiki.org:

http://creationwiki.org/Barack_Obama

This article mentions virtually no biographic detail about Obama, or major controversies, including the Born Alive issue or his Chicago Politics. And the sourcing looks haphazard here. --[[User:Jzy|Jzy]] 09:52, 29 May 2012 (EDT)

Still, you guys have a 1-sentence mention of the Born Alive controversy even though it was brought up by Obama's last 4 political opponents, John McCain, Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, and Alan Keyes. And Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum both brought it up a few months ago as well. There's a whole article on this subject alone over at CreationWiki:

http://creationwiki.org/Obama_born_alive_controversy

You're missing the boat on the biggest controversy surrounding Obama, one that hasn't been debunked and is going to cause him a WHOLE lot of trouble. I told you guys this 2 years ago.
--[[User:Jzy|Jzy]] 10:14, 29 May 2012 (EDT)

:Thanks for the comments Jyz, the current article has been in the top 10 for nearly four years now. Most Americans are quite aware that Obama is the most pro-abortion president ever. Feel free to add to our wiki with the born-alive controversy page. In addition, you were not registered here two years ago so no wonder we didn't heed your warning.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 12:52, 29 May 2012 (EDT)

::Well, if this were just another abortion issue Obama wouldn't have a thing to worry about. This is an entirely different subject because it involves aborting children who aren't inside the mother's body but are outside the body and capable of surviving if given medical attention. We passed the federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act in 2002 making it illegal to let premature, newborn babies who survive late-term abortions get left to die without medical attention. We also passed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act outlawing the late-term Dilation & Extraction (D&E) abortions that resulted in these live births. Nurses Jill Stanek and Allison Baker (of Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, IL) testified before Congress in 2001 that newborn babies were being born prematurely after botched abortions in their home state of Illinois and being thrown in wastebaskets or soiled utility rooms. Stanek's moving testimony about how she held a little baby in her arms after one of these abortions and the physician refused to help keep it alive so that it died in her arms, proved especially influential.

::The entire U.S. Senate passed the Born Alive Infant Protection Act unanimously, because as Obama would put it, it was "the bill everybody supported". The Partial-Birth Abortion Act twice refers to the practice in federal law as "infanticide". It's a legal, technical term referring to what U.S. law now considers murder of newborn children. Stanek also testified before the Illinois Senate at the time, where Obama was leading a Planned Parenthood movement to vote down numerous Born Alive bills and cover up this fact from Illinois citizens using "present votes". Normally pro-choice Democrats like Barbara Boxer, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and Ted Kennedy all voted for the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. Hillary Clinton herself brought up Obama's voting record on this in 2008 to criticize him over. So like I said, if this were just a Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice issue it wouldn't be controversial. I'm not talking about abortion here. I'm talking about infanticide, and opposition to medical care for newborn infants. I'm talking about Obama's opposition to a bill that had over 90% public support, unlike typical Pro-Life bills. --[[User:Jzy|Jzy]] 02:18, 4 June 2012 (EDT)

:::I'm going to incorporate some of my writing and sourcing from that article to this one, and edit boldly. If anyone has any objections to any material please state them. However, I believe I've sourced everything so solidly it should be unobjectionable. --[[User:Jzyehoshua|Jzyehoshua]] 22:03, 20 July 2012 (EDT)

== Last Change ==

The protests weren't peaceful, but they were really violent, to date there's no proof that Muammar Gaddafi had took any violent action against civilians, but there are proof and reports from Amnesty International, Human rights watch, Russian intelligence which denies any of the rumors and falsely alleged crime.

Here's one source where US defense secretary Robert Gates and Navy Admiral Michael Mullen tells about whole thing, :-

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1110/S00144/un-silent-despite-no-basis-for-natos-illegal-war-on-libya.htm

Thanks. [[User:Regular|Regular]] 11:10, 14 June 2012 (EDT)

== Changes, Detailed ==

I made the following changes, merging an article I wrote on Obama for CreationWiki with this one:

http://creationwiki.org/Barack_Obama

The diff for the changes can be seen here:

http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Barack_Hussein_Obama&action=historysubmit&diff=994904&oldid=994689

I left the Lede intact.

* Birth: I removed an opening sentence about Obama eating dog meat. It looks really silly there, starting off the section. Maybe the article could be linked somewhere else but it looks really bad starting off the page like that.
* Early Life: I included a whole new section on his early life and family and removed some unsourced claims that he was the antichrist and will be instating police rule (which either way doesn't fit the section). If it's going to be put anywhere in the article an appropriate subsection should be created for it, and some sourcing provided - neither of which was the case before.
* Personal Life: I added a whole new section on his marriage to Michelle Obama, children, and church.
* Education: I added a new section on education. Some of it was alluded to earlier but didn't have sources, my material does.
* Non-Political Employment: Whole new section, a LOT of detail about his employment history here.
* Personal Awards: The Nobel controversy mentioned in this new section.
* 1991-1992, Project Vote: His time as a community organizer, new section.
* 1996 Election: I added an entirely new section on how Obama knocked candidates off the ballot.
* 2003 Emil Jones Deal: Whole new section on how Obama struck a deal with Emil Jones to get appointed legislation for other Illinois Senators to advance his political career.
* 2004 Primary Election: Completely new section on how the Illinois media knocked off Obama's first opponent.
* 2004 General Election, Jack Ryan: Completely new section on how the Illinois media knocked off Jack Ryan afterwards through the same tricks.
* 2004 General Election, Alan Keyes: Completely new section highlighting the Born Alive controversy surrounding Obama.
* 2008 Presidential Election: I preserved what little detail there was and merged it in but otherwise everything here is new.
* 2009-2012, U.S. Presidency: I added new sections on the Stimulus and Iraq troop withdrawal. What little info there was about the withdrawal I preserved and merged in.

--[[User:Jzyehoshua|Jzyehoshua]] 23:15, 20 July 2012 (EDT)

=== Deletions ===

I figure it's best to mention any deletions made.

- I deleted the following from the end of the Lede:
{{cquote|Later Obama apologized. When Obama visited [[England]] in 2011, he signed his name and added the date of "2008" -- the last time he won an election. He never explaned that one. When Obama read a speech from a teleprompter, as he almost always does, he repeatedly mispronounced the familiar military term of "corpsman" by sounding out the "p".}}
I removed it because (A) it had no sourcing provided, (B) it showed signs of poor grammar (misspelled "explained"), (C) used weasel words/phrases (almost always does), and perhaps most importantly, (D) it's not even especially relevant. I mean, who cares if he mispronounced the word "corpsman"? How many Americans even would pronounce it right? Maybe that could merit a footnote somewhere on the page, but in the Lede? Really??? I try to preserve as much of the page as possible, but I really think those sentences made the rest of the page look bad. --[[User:Jzyehoshua|Jzyehoshua]] 15:45, 21 July 2012 (EDT)
:Having those sentences there in the Lede gives the impression the whole page is going to be about nitpicking over Obama's grammar, and I really don't think that's the impression Conservapedia wants to give. I'd like to think the Lede would show evidence Obama will be fairly and accurately criticized, not with poorly written and unsourced claims that he mispronounced a word most Americans wouldn't pronounce right anyway. --[[User:Jzyehoshua|Jzyehoshua]] 15:49, 21 July 2012 (EDT)

-I deleted the "Retrieved from 对当代托洛茨基主义的批判：英文论集百花齐放 - 中国文革研究网, March 15, 2010." part of this footnote:
{{cquote|[[File:O-2002-antiwar-rally-davidson.jpg|right|thumb|250px| Obama speaking at the October 2002 rally in Chicago organized by [[Carl Davidson]].<ref>Davidson is a longtime [[Mao]]ist and champion of the ''Thought of Mao Tse Tung.'' Davidson's anti-Trotskyite polemic, [http://www.wengewang.org/read.php?tid=10925 ''Left in Form, Right in Essence''] defends Maoist doctrine. Retrieved from 对当代托洛茨基主义的批判：英文论集百花齐放 - 中国文革研究网, March 15, 2010.</ref> ''"[H]e is a brutal man who butchers his own people,"'' nevertheless Obama opposed ''"dumb wars".'']]}}
I think this should all be in English. It might belong on a Chinese page for Conservapedia, the alternate language translations, but I don't think so here. Hopefully someone can find an alternate reference for this, but it looks bad at the bottom of the page in footnotes like that, and since it can't be understood doesn't serve any real purpose. --[[User:Jzyehoshua|Jzyehoshua]] 21:39, 21 July 2012 (EDT)

== New Section On ACORN/New Party Ties ==

Alright, I just removed the following sentence from the 1996 section:
{{cquote|In 1995 Obama openly sought and obtained the endorsement of the [[Marxist]] [[New Party]] in his quest to be elected to the Illinois State Senate.<ref>[http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7434 NEW PARTY (NP)], discoverthenetwork.org.</ref><ref>Rick Moran. [http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/06/obamas_alliance_with_marxists.html Obama's Alliance with Marxists], ''American Thinker'', June 03, 2008.</ref>}}

I made a new section on this at the end of the article. Frankly, I just wanted to remove the section from the 1996 section because it makes the whole thing look bad. I don't really care about his New Party or ACORN affiliations but I know many conservatives care about them, so I didn't want to delete the sentence and wanted to see if I could move it somewhere else, and maybe provide some more detail to give it a small subsection somewhere. I didn't think much of the sources it had so I figured I'd see if I could find any decent sourcing and information for it. In the process, I found out it had articles relating to it at National Review, Politico, and by Billy Hallowell (a FOX News contributor), plus had been addressed by Obama's "Fight the Smears" campaign and David Axelrod. Plus it's still relevant in 2012.

So I wrote it a new section, because I just follow sources and newsworthiness, and it is does appear to have some prominence. I tried to provide sources and perspective from both sides, and provide all the facts, so it won't just be a one-sided claim. Anyway, that's why I detailed it out more. Like I said, I don't really care about the claim myself, but it is newsworthy and a cause for concern among some conservatives, so I figured I might as well write it a section - and get it out of the 1996 one :) --[[User:Jzyehoshua|Jzyehoshua]] 23:21, 21 July 2012 (EDT)

:For me, the big issue surrounding Obama has always been his voting record against the Born Alive bills, and repeated lying attempts to cover this up. That he's gone to such lengths to prevent newborn babies from being given medical attention and then lie about having done so, has always struck me as reprehensible. His political corruption and constant lies are also disgusting. I just want people to know about these things. But his Marxism and ACORN stuff? Not really an issue for me. I just wrote this because I know it's a cause for concern to other conservatives, so I made sure the facts are presented on it. --[[User:Jzyehoshua|Jzyehoshua]] 23:37, 21 July 2012 (EDT)

:And mainly I didn't want that sentence in the 1996 section, by the way, because it's still highly controversial. I don't like starting off an otherwise credible section with undeniable sources with a claim that is still under investigation. Maybe this stuff on the New Party will hold up - those minutes will be strong evidence if Kurtz is right about them. But right now the sourcing for it isn't as strong as I'd like, even if it is newsworthy. And I'd prefer the 1996 section stick to strongly proven facts. That he knocked off all his opponents using a team of lawyers is well sourced by the Chicago Tribune, CBS News, CNN, New York Times, etc. The stuff about the New Party had two lesser-known sources and while it has better sourcing now, it's still an ongoing issue, which is why I think it's more relevant in a 2012 section than 1996. --[[User:Jzyehoshua|Jzyehoshua]] 23:51, 21 July 2012 (EDT)

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

== Conspiracy theory that Obama is not born in the US is by crazy lunatic fringe right-wing people who don't represent the mainstream right, it is just like crazy lunatic fringe left-wing conspiracy theories on JFK being killed by the CIA and not J. Harvey Oswald or 9-11 truthers ==

Regardless of criticisms and condemnations by mainstream conservatives of Obama's policies, these claims that he is a foreign-born citizen have been disproven and mainstream conservatives accept that he is an American citizen. Theories that he was born outside the USA are lunatic fringe conspiracy theories - and I don't care whether they are right-wing - their ideas have been disproven just like the crazy 9-11 truther conspiracy theories and JFK conspiracy theories by lunatic fringe left-wing people. Why is there such focus on conspiracy theories on where Obama is born in the intro, rather than focus in the intro on Obama's policies and conservative criticisms of Obama's policies?--[[User:TheQuestioner|TheQuestioner]] 12:31, 3 August 2012 (EDT)

:Thank God you registered here to set the record straight. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 12:34, 3 August 2012 (EDT)

::What do you mean?--[[User:TheQuestioner|TheQuestioner]] 12:36, 3 August 2012 (EDT)

== Title of article ==

The middle name should be removed as the name of the article. The middle name of other figures is not in the title in other articles. [[User:AcomaMagic|AcomaMagic]] 15:17, 18 August 2012 (EDT)
:[[Ronald Wilson Reagan]]?? --[[User:JamesWilson|James Wilson]] 05:16, 4 September 2012 (EDT)
::That looks like a rarity. All the other biography pages that I've seen use the most common name. The middle name of Reagan should be removed as the title too. [[User:AcomaMagic|AcomaMagic]] 08:08, 9 September 2012 (EDT)

== Teleprompter at school ==

It is a false rumor, based on photoshopped photos, that Obama had teleprompters set up for a speech to a middle school class. He spoke to the class without teleprompters, then went to another classroom, where he spoke to the ''media'' using a teleprompter. Surely there are enough things to criticize without distorting the truth? [http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/photos/6thgrade.asp] [[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 10:39, 2 September 2012 (EDT)
:This is a little shaky as a criticism I suppose. With his voting record on the Born Alive bills and political corruption, there's an awful lot that can be criticized about him. That he uses teleprompters so often is a valid criticism of him, but the teleprompters in classrooms one needs to be carefully presented in context, as pointed out by Sharon. --[[User:JZambrano|Joshua Zambrano]] 08:56, 4 September 2012 (EDT)

== "may have had a prior marriage" ==

This appears in the information box - I assume its about Obama rather than his wife - but is not explained in the main article, let alone supported with any references. As a Brit, this is completely new to me. Can anyone develop this further? [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] 17:54, 10 September 2012 (EDT)

== Accusations about birth certificate and cultural and name identity ==

I would like to move this section back to the section about Obama's birth, and weave it back into the relevant section instead of having it tagged on to the end of the article. None of the edits will change the argument at all. [[User:MattyD|MattyD]] 12:40, 16 September 2012 (EDT)
:JPatt, the edits I made REMOVED fluff and apologies. Can you please point to specific passages where you think the argument was softened? [[User:MattyD|MattyD]] 12:57, 16 September 2012 (EDT)
::No--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 13:01, 16 September 2012 (EDT)
:::Why not? My edits REMOVE a lot of the fluff. Where is the problem? [[User:MattyD|MattyD]] 13:03, 16 September 2012 (EDT)

==Page has too many kbs==
This age is ''WAY'' too heavy for updating the Intro and I can't wait 2 hours to make these minor changes. Can someone who actually cares please add,
* the U.S. Government's credit rating, for the first time in its history, was downgraded, and [[poverty]]<ref>[http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/incpovhlth/2009/pov09fig04.pdf Figure 4: Number in Poverty and Poverty Rate: 1959-2009]. ''U.S. Census Bureau''. Current Population Survey, 1960 to 2010 Annual Social and Economic Supplements.</ref> increased markedly every year.<ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-20105376.html Poverty continues to rise in U.S., now 15.1%], CBS News.</ref>
I realize I am penalized 9 mainspace edits for asking for this help, but some, if not much of the Intro citations are two years out of date. [[User:OscarO|OscarO]] 11:38, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

== Country of birth ==

He released his long-form birth certificate, so what evidence is there that he was born in Kenya? [[User:Nightsky|Nightsky]] 15:43, 8 October 2012 (EDT)

== Country of birth ==

He released his long-form birth certificate, so what evidence is there that he was born in Kenya? [[User:Nightsky|Nightsky]] 15:43, 8 October 2012 (EDT)

== Country of birth ==

He released his long-form birth certificate, so what evidence is there that he was born in Kenya? [[User:Nightsky|Nightsky]] 15:43, 8 October 2012 (EDT)

*I think at this point the question might better be, "Why do we care at this point?" Obama's almost certainly going to be defeated by Romney, since Romney is better-suited to handle the currently-relevant economic issues (and boy howdy do we ever need someone like that in the Oval Office right now!) Seriously, he's got a little bit more than a month before the election in November, and at this point if his country of birth was conclusively proven to be Kenya it really wouldn't make all that much difference. It's an interesting academic question, but at this point it's irrelevant to the practical situation. [[User:JGrant|JGrant]] 17:17, 8 October 2012 (EDT)

Oxymoron

2012-10-08T12:19:54Z

JGrant: the idea that Christians can't be liberal is patently ridiculous. It's certainly true that such Christians are rare, but they do exist. Ask my Mum, she grew up in a church full of them.

An '''oxymoron''' is a figure of speech in which two terms that are polar opposites are used together for [[rhetorical]] effect, or criticized because they are self-contradictory as in "[[pro-life]] [[Democrat]]." Political oxymorons include:

* ''[[liberal logic]]''
* ''government service''
* ''Harvard Divinity School''
* ''gay charity'' (the homosexual ideology is entirely selfish)
* ''evolutionary science''<ref>The theory of evolution is [[pseudoscience]] [http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwinism/there-is-no-theory-of-evolution/][http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe05scnc.html][http://www.parentcompany.com/science_kit/sk3b.htm]</ref>
* ''government intelligence - often used by liberals to smear the Armed Forces
* ''illegal law'' - a law that violates the [[Constitution]], for example.
* ''chicken hawk'' - a politician who advocates war but personally avoided being drafted into military service.
* ''[[salutary neglect]]'' - one of the [[Essay:Best New Conservative Words|Best New Conservative Terms]]
* ''graffiti artist''
* ''liberal
__NOTOC__
=== Debatable oxymorons ===

* ''liberal [[Christian]]'' - [[Liberal values]] are in direct contradiction to the teachings of [[Christianity]] ([[Abortion]], [[Homosexuality]] etc), but some Christian denominations are able to reconcile these differences (the Moravians, for instance)
* ''[[conservative]] professor'' - the process of obtaining a PhD and professorship is so politicized that [[liberals]] simply exclude conservatives
*''good law''
*''mathematical physics'' -- the ''Encyclopedia Britannica'' defines it as the "[b]ranch of mathematical analysis that emphasizes tools and techniques of particular use to physicists and engineers."<ref>http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/660160/mathematical-physics</ref><ref>For example, the Ising model can be used to explain the existence of the [[Curie point]], the temperature above which ferromagnetic materials lose magnetic properties.</ref>

=== History ===

In the past, rhetoric and elocution were standard school subjects and students were taught long lists of technical names of figures of speech and their meaning. ''Oxymoron'' was one of these, along with ''[[simile]]'', ''[[metaphor]]'', ''[[metonymy]]'', etc. True oxymoron is relatively rare; one well-known example occurs in [[Tennyson]]'s ''Idylls of the King:''
:And faith unfaithful kept him falsely true.<ref>[http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/T/TennysonAlfred/verse/idyllsking/lancelotelaine.html Lancelot and Elaine], Tennyson, ''Idylls of the King''</ref>
Another occurs in [[Shakespeare]]'s ''[[Romeo and Juliet]]'', when Juliet tells Romeo
:Good night, good night! parting is such sweet sorrow.<ref>Shakespeare, ''Romeo and Juliet,'' [http://shakespeare.mit.edu/romeo_juliet/romeo_juliet.2.2.html Act II, Scene 2]</ref>
Arthur Koestler's book title, ''Darkness at Noon,'' is another example.

Among classical [[ancient Greece|Greek]] authors, [[Sophocles]] was known for his fondness for the device.

Since the word ''oxymoron'' is derived from the Greek roots ''oxy,'' sharp, and ''moron,'' dull, it literally means "sharp-dull" and is thus itself an example of an oxymoron.

There is also a [[pun]]like form of humor which consists of observing or claiming that certain phrases are oxymorons. While not new, It was popularized by Warren Blumenfeld's 1986 book, ''Jumbo Shrimp & Other Almost Perfect Oxymorons: Contradictory Expressions That Make Absolute Sense.'' In literal fact, what is being pointed out is an amusing contradiction.

Originally it played on the fact that many listeners remembered they been taught what an oxymoron was in school, but could not remember what it was. The context would have been something like this:

Humorist: "Jumbo shrimp?" That's an ''oxymoron.'' 
Mark: [Realizes he should know the word... his ten-grade English teacher drilled him on it... but can't quite, and is forced to ask]: A what? 
Humorist: An oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. 
Mark: (Thinks about it, realizes that although "Jumbo shrimp" is a real expression, "shrimp" means small and "Jumbo" means large, and rolls on the ground laughing helplessly). 

The device has now become so common that the word ''oxymoron'' has come to ''mean'' this form of humor, which is entirely unrelated to the original meaning of the word. It is often employed to make a political point. It rarely reveals any actual meaning; "Military intelligence is an oxymoron" does not actually point out anything intrinsic in military structure or thinking; it merely puns on the meaning of the phrase "military intelligence" and is just a tricky way of delivering an insult.

Examples of the modern, joking usage:

* ''Heroic villain'' - Since villains are bad, calling one heroic is an oxymoron.
* ''Friendly vandal'' - A flaw similar to the one above.

Examples of modern, serious usage:

* ''Jumbo shrimp''
* ''Real nightmare''
* ''same difference''
* ''expect the unexpected''
* ''classic rock''
* ''important game''

==External Links==
* [http://www.fun-with-words.com/oxym_oxymoronology.html Oxymorons (or Oxymora)]

==Notes==
<references/>

[[Category:Rhetorical Devices]]
[[Category:Figures of Speech]]
[[Category:Words and Phrases]]

Oxymoron

2012-10-08T01:44:51Z

JGrant: Mostly true, but with demonstrable exceptions. The entire music and business departments at my college, for instance. All with their doctorates, all staunch and open conservatives.

An '''oxymoron''' is a figure of speech in which two terms that are polar opposites are used together for [[rhetorical]] effect, or criticized because they are self-contradictory as in "[[pro-life]] [[Democrat]]." Political oxymorons include:

* ''[[liberal logic]]''
* ''government service''
* ''Harvard Divinity School''
* ''gay charity'' (the homosexual ideology is entirely selfish)
* ''evolutionary science''<ref>The theory of evolution is [[pseudoscience]] [http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwinism/there-is-no-theory-of-evolution/][http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe05scnc.html][http://www.parentcompany.com/science_kit/sk3b.htm]</ref>
* ''liberal [[Christian]]''<ref>[[Liberal values]] are in direct contradiction to the teachings of [[Christianity]] ([[Abortion]], [[Homosexuality]] etc).</ref>
* ''government intelligence - often used by liberals to smear the Armed Forces

* ''illegal law'' - a law that violates the [[Constitution]], for example.
* ''chicken hawk'' - a politician who advocates war but personally avoided being drafted into military service.
* ''[[salutary neglect]]'' - one of the [[Essay:Best New Conservative Words|Best New Conservative Terms]]
* ''graffiti artist''
__NOTOC__
=== Debatable oxymorons ===

* ''[[conservative]] professor'' - the process of obtaining a PhD and professorship is so politicized that [[liberals]] simply exclude conservatives
*''good law''
*''mathematical physics'' -- the ''Encyclopedia Britannica'' defines it as the "[b]ranch of mathematical analysis that emphasizes tools and techniques of particular use to physicists and engineers."<ref>http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/660160/mathematical-physics</ref><ref>For example, the Ising model can be used to explain the existence of the [[Curie point]], the temperature above which ferromagnetic materials lose magnetic properties.</ref>

=== History ===

In the past, rhetoric and elocution were standard school subjects and students were taught long lists of technical names of figures of speech and their meaning. ''Oxymoron'' was one of these, along with ''[[simile]]'', ''[[metaphor]]'', ''[[metonymy]]'', etc. True oxymoron is relatively rare; one well-known example occurs in [[Tennyson]]'s ''Idylls of the King:''
:And faith unfaithful kept him falsely true.<ref>[http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/T/TennysonAlfred/verse/idyllsking/lancelotelaine.html Lancelot and Elaine], Tennyson, ''Idylls of the King''</ref>
Another occurs in [[Shakespeare]]'s ''[[Romeo and Juliet]]'', when Juliet tells Romeo
:Good night, good night! parting is such sweet sorrow.<ref>Shakespeare, ''Romeo and Juliet,'' [http://shakespeare.mit.edu/romeo_juliet/romeo_juliet.2.2.html Act II, Scene 2]</ref>
Arthur Koestler's book title, ''Darkness at Noon,'' is another example.

Among classical [[ancient Greece|Greek]] authors, [[Sophocles]] was known for his fondness for the device.

Since the word ''oxymoron'' is derived from the Greek roots ''oxy,'' sharp, and ''moron,'' dull, it literally means "sharp-dull" and is thus itself an example of an oxymoron.

There is also a [[pun]]like form of humor which consists of observing or claiming that certain phrases are oxymorons. While not new, It was popularized by Warren Blumenfeld's 1986 book, ''Jumbo Shrimp & Other Almost Perfect Oxymorons: Contradictory Expressions That Make Absolute Sense.'' In literal fact, what is being pointed out is an amusing contradiction.

Originally it played on the fact that many listeners remembered they been taught what an oxymoron was in school, but could not remember what it was. The context would have been something like this:

Humorist: "Jumbo shrimp?" That's an ''oxymoron.'' 
Mark: [Realizes he should know the word... his ten-grade English teacher drilled him on it... but can't quite, and is forced to ask]: A what? 
Humorist: An oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. 
Mark: (Thinks about it, realizes that although "Jumbo shrimp" is a real expression, "shrimp" means small and "Jumbo" means large, and rolls on the ground laughing helplessly). 

The device has now become so common that the word ''oxymoron'' has come to ''mean'' this form of humor, which is entirely unrelated to the original meaning of the word. It is often employed to make a political point. It rarely reveals any actual meaning; "Military intelligence is an oxymoron" does not actually point out anything intrinsic in military structure or thinking; it merely puns on the meaning of the phrase "military intelligence" and is just a tricky way of delivering an insult.

Examples of the modern, joking usage:

* ''Heroic villain'' - Since villains are bad, calling one heroic is an oxymoron.
* ''Friendly vandal'' - A flaw similar to the one above.

Examples of modern, serious usage:

* ''Jumbo shrimp''
* ''Real nightmare''
* ''same difference''
* ''expect the unexpected''
* ''classic rock''
* ''important game''

==External Links==
* [http://www.fun-with-words.com/oxym_oxymoronology.html Oxymorons (or Oxymora)]

==Notes==
<references/>

[[Category:Rhetorical Devices]]
[[Category:Figures of Speech]]
[[Category:Words and Phrases]]

Madalyn Murray O'Hair

2012-10-07T12:18:17Z

JGrant: Why in the world were these in all-caps?

[[File:Madalyn Murray O'Hair-Wikimedia.jpg|400px|right]]
'''Madalyn Murray O'Hair''' (1919 - 1995) was an activist, founder of [[American Atheists]], and famous for her stern opposition to religion, who in 1960 filed and won a [[lawsuit]] (''Murray v. Curlett'') against the [[Baltimore]] City [[Public School]] System, claiming that it was unconstitutional for her son to study the [[Bible]] at school; this lawsuit, combined with another, would reach the [[Supreme Court]] and result in the banning of [[prayer]] and recitations of Bible verses in American public schools in June, 1963.<ref> [http://www.who2.com/madalynmurrayohair.html Madalyn Murray O'Hair Biography]</ref>

She, her son and granddaughter suddenly disappeared; ''The evidence that has been disclosed does not point to a single conclusion. One would think that the disappearance of a well-known family such as the Murray-O'Hairs would be front page news but the papers have been strangely silent. Where is the Murray-O'Hair family? Are they dead or alive? Why has there apparently been no investigation?'' <ref> [http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/ohairs2.htm What Happened to Madalyn, Jon, and Robin?] </ref>

<blockquote>
"There is no God. There's no heaven. There's no hell. There are no angels. When you die, you go in the ground, the worms eat you." Madalyn Murray O'Hair. <ref> [http://www.crimemagazine.com/ohair.htm The Murder of Madalyn Murray O'Hair:America's Most Hated Woman.] by Lona Manning </ref>
</blockquote>

In 2001, her son, her granddaughter and Madalyn's dismembered bodies had been located on a ranch in Austin, Texas. David R Waters, a fellow atheist associate had been charged with the crime. <ref>[http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/o/madalyn_murray_ohair/index.html Madalyn Murray O'Hair, NYTimes]</ref>

==Life==
O'Hair was born in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania on April 13, 1919, the daughter of John Irwin and Lena Scholle Mays. She grew up there and in Ohio, graduating high school in Rossford in 1937. Her parents were Presbyterians and attended church regularly, but it was apparently during her teen years that she became an atheist<ref>http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Secular-Philosophies/Who-Was-Madalyn-Murray-Ohair.aspx</ref>. In 1941 she had her first marriage to John Henry Roths; this marriage was separated due to World War II and the enlistments they made to the Marine Corps and Women's Army Corps. In 1945 she engaged in an affair with a married man while stationed in Italy; the result of which was a son, whom she named William J. Murray after the father; she had since divorced her husband and had taken up the name "Murray". By 1952 she had earned two degrees: a bachelors from Ashland University in Ohio, and a degree from the South Texas College of Law; she never, however, capitalized on her law degree by going before the Texas bar and becoming a lawyer. A relationship with boyfriend Michael Fiorillo resulted in another son, Jon Garth Murray, being born in 1954.

Her life was filled with pornography. Her house had figures of mating animals, and she would often describe her trips to X-rated theaters, stating with some delight that she was the only female in the building. As son William stated later:
<blockquote>
When I was a young boy of ten or eleven years old she would come home and brag about spending the day in X-rated movie theaters in downtown Baltimore. She was proud of the fact she was the only woman in the movie house watching this filth. My mother’s whole life circulated around such things. She even wrote articles for Larry Flynt’s pornographic magazine, ''Hustler''. My mother lived in spiritual death as Paul writes: ''"But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth." I Timothy 5:6''<ref>http://www.rfcnet.org/news/default.asp?action=detail&article=144</ref>
</blockquote>
She was also a communist, going so far as to attempt an unsuccessful defection to the [[Soviet Union]] in 1960, taking both sons with her.<ref>http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/vol18/issue12/pols.ohair.side3.html</ref>

== Debate with Dr. Walter Martin ==
Madalyn Murray O'Hair did particularly badly in her debate with Dr. [[Walter Martin]].<ref>
http://defendingcontending.com/2009/01/01/debate-walter-martin-vs-madalyn-murray-ohair/</ref> For example, when she claimed [[Atheism and the Bible|there were supposedly were contradictions in the Bible]], Dr. Martin asked her to provide an example of one and Ms. O'Hair did not and could not offer even an alleged example of one.<ref>
http://defendingcontending.com/2009/01/01/debate-walter-martin-vs-madalyn-murray-ohair/</ref> In addition, Ms. O'Hair did a poor job defending against the issue of [[Atheism and mass murder|atheism and mass murder]].<ref>
http://defendingcontending.com/2009/01/01/debate-walter-martin-vs-madalyn-murray-ohair/</ref>
== American Atheists organization's leadership and excess weight challenges ==

See also: [[Atheism and obesity]] and [[New Atheism leadership's problem with excess weight]]

Madalyn Murray O'Hair, the founder of the American Atheists organization, was overweight.<ref>http://www.flickr.com/photos/alan-light/229583104/</ref> One of the last pictures taken of Madalyn Murray O'Hair features O'Hair standing before a cake as can be seen [http://www.dallasobserver.com/content/printVersion/276262/ here]. As of December 28, 2010 the pictures of some of the members of their board of directors showed members who were facing challenges in terms of their body weight. <ref>http://www.atheists.org/about/Board_of_Directors</ref> The pictures of the American Atheists board of directors can be found [http://www.atheists.org/about/Board_of_Directors here].

== See also ==

*[[History of Atheism]]
*[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]
*[[Atheism and beliefs]]
*[[Atheism is a religion]]

== External links ==

*[http://crimemagazine.com/ohair.htm The Murder of Madalyn Murray O'Hair:America's Most Hated Woman.] by Lona Manning.
*[http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/madalyn_ohair/ Madalyn Murray O'Hair.]
*[http://www.atheists.org/ American Atheists] Official site.

==References==
<references/>
[[category:Atheists]]
[[category:Religion and Politics]]

Bible Belt

2012-10-07T12:16:46Z

JGrant: just some trivia I picked up from a friend. Looked it up online to confirm, it all checks out.

The '''Bible Belt''' is a geographical region including part of the South and midsection of the [[United States]]. It is so called because of the rough shape of the region: it resembles a belt around much of the lower middle of the nation and the majority of the inhabitants are practicing [[Christian]]s (hence the 'Bible' belt). [[Paleoconservative|Social conservatism]] is a dominant paradigm within the Bible Belt.

The [[Bible]] Belt includes all of the southern states as well as the Lower Midwestern States. Perhaps the spiritual center of the Bible Belt is Oklahoma, where some streets are lined with church after church. Various places, including Georgia, North Carolina, Alabama, and Tennessee have all claimed to contain the "buckle" of the Bible Belt, a term usually used to refer to the most conservative or most fundamentalist Christian town or county in the Belt. The term "buckle of the Bible Belt" was, in fact, originally used in a derogatory fashion to refer to a town in Tennessee.

==Bible Belt States==
* [[Alabama]]
* [[Arkansas]]
* [[Florida]] (Northern part)
* [[Georgia]]
* [[Illinois]] (Southern part)
* [[Indiana]]
* [[Kansas]]
* [[Kentucky]]
* [[Nebraska]] (Southern part)
* [[Louisiana]]
* [[Mississippi]]
* [[Missouri]]
* [[New Mexico]] (South Western corner)
* [[North Carolina]]
* [[Ohio]] (Southern part)
* [[Oklahoma]]
* [[South Carolina]]
* [[Tennessee]]
* [[Texas]]
* [[Virginia]]
* [[West Virginia]]

[[category:United States]]

F.A.T.A.L.

2012-10-07T01:44:23Z

JGrant: Finished with this one, gonna work on RaHoWa tomorrow. If anyone wants to add or change some stuff around, feel free :) Also yes, this is a really horrible game, both game-wise and morally.

'''''Fantasy Adventure to Adult Lechery,''''' the original full name of the legendarily-bad tabletop roleplaying game F.A.T.A.L., is indicative of the content. That the authors later attempted to change this obviously-perverted title to "From Another Time, Another Land" only serves to cement the initial title in the minds of those roleplaying enthusiasts who have heard of it.

==Gameplay==

There are no confirmed reports of F.A.T.A.L. having ever been used for an actual roleplaying session, as the character creation process is uniformly the point of surrender for anyone actually attempting to play the game. The authors of the game claimed during the creation process to be making the most "historically-accurate" tabletop RPG ever, but this claim is roundly refuted by the use of such words as "whore" and "slut" to describe women not only in scenes where they are depicted as immoral but in situations where the women are clearly helpless victims (famously, one situation within the book describes a bound and helpless sacrifice as a "trollop.")

While it may be taken in good faith that the gameplay was developed with historical accuracy in mind, the gameplay itself is needlessly overcomplicated and contains a glut of useless statistics. Most famous of these are over half a dozen stats related to urination, none of which are at all dependent on the others, which may easily lead to a character that can't hold his water for more than an hour after drinking, but must wait at least seventy minutes before he can go. Another is the infamous "hymen resistance" stat, which is inadequately explained in the text; one may infer, though, that it indicates how difficult it is to take the virginity of the woman in question. These are, perhaps unsurprisingly, not the most overtly sexual statistics, but the most extreme examples are perhaps best left to an internet search.

==Reception and ideological slant==

F.A.T.A.L., with its overcomplicated gameplay, overambitious pretensions at accuracy, and utterly horrific pagination (the first drafts included pictures of the author in cardboard "armor" run through a crosshatch filter in PhotoShop 1.0), was and is today one of the "Unholy Trinity" of tabletop RPGs, consistently taking the top spot for sheer overpowering badness and beating out both ''[[RaHoWa]]'' and ''HYBRID'' for the "top" spot. Reviewers on online gaming forums have compared it unfavorably to a catheter insertion. That is, perhaps, all that need be said for F.A.T.A.L.

F.A.T.A.L. is, along with being incompatible with general standards of human decency, also terribly unsuited for any Christian gamer's library. If you feel the need to peruse the book, a *.pdf download is all but certainly available online somewhere. A review of F.A.T.A.L., which is not at all work-safe or decent as the authors clearly took personal affront to the content, is available at this link: [http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/14/14567.phtml]; a "refutation" by the authors is available at [http://wiki.rpg.net/index.php/FATALReviewRebuttal]. Please be advised that, while the review gives an accurate picture of what exactly is wrong with F.A.T.A.L., it is certainly not suitable for a workplace environment. It contains foul language and ad hominem attacks against the author and contributors (though, to be fair, the rebuttal contains similar attacks.)

Jack Chick

2012-10-06T14:52:18Z

JGrant: /* Criticism */ I admire Chick's evangelical fervor, but you can't deny that he has put out some truly disturbing tracts.

'''Jack Thomas Chick''' (b. 1924) is a controversial American [[Evangelical]] Christian cartoonist who produces religious tracts. According to the Jack Chick publications website, hundreds of millions of copies of Chick tracts have been read worldwide.<ref>http://www.chick.com/information/authors/chick.asp</ref>

==Chick Tracts==
His works are featured in "Chick Tracts," inexpensive [[comic book]]s designed to be left in public places and to reach out to people who might be passing by. A major theme in his tracts are emotionally wrought portrayals of God's perfect love for his children alongside somewhat more violent images, like homosexuals writhing in agony while being burned alive in the streets of [[Sodom]] and [[Gomorrah]]<ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/1052/1052_01.asp</ref>. Chick tracts take a Fundamentalist approach to the Bible, with an emphasis on the act of becoming saved. Also, Chick tracts emphasize that becoming saved is something that can be done at any time during one's life, whether that person is a small child or a death row inmate minutes from execution. He is also a member of the King James Only movement. This movement rejects all other versions of the Bible.

Some recurring themes include non-Christian characters being converted at the end of the tract, Chick's belief that the Roman Catholic Church is a tool of Satan, battles over human salvation between angels and demons, arguments for evolution being presented by old, aggressive and quick to anger teachers, the use of an 'accept Christ' form at the end of tracts and suggestions of demonic influence in even comparatively minor events such as the creation of TV series [[Bewitched (TV Show)|Bewitched]].

[[Jews]]<ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0014/0014_01.asp</ref>, [[Islam| Muslims]]<ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0042/0042_01.asp</ref>, Roman [[Catholic| Catholics]]<ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0071/0071_01.asp</ref>, [[Freemasons]]<ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0093/0093_01.asp</ref>, [[Jehovah's Witnesses]]<ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0026/0026_01.asp</ref>, [[Mormonism| Mormons]]<ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0061/0061_01.asp</ref>, [[Buddhism| Buddhists]]<ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0016/0016_01.asp</ref>, [[Hinduism| Hindus]]<ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0070/0070_01.asp</ref>, people that practice witchcraft <ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/5012/5012_01.asp</ref>, [[homosexual]]s<ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0084/0084_01.asp</ref>, [[evolution]]ists<ref>http://www.chick.com/catalog/comics/0106.asp</ref>, [[Dungeons and Dragons]] players<ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0046/0046_01.asp</ref>, and Rock n' Roll fans<ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0034/0034_01.asp</ref> have all been negatively portrayed in Chick's tracts, often being presented as subjects or tools of Satan. Chick has responded that he does not hate these individuals, but hates the system they belong to that is feverishly working to win millions of souls for Satan<ref>http://www.chick.com/bc/1999/hate.asp</ref>.

==Criticism==
Critics have argued that Chick's tracts rely on stereotypes, faulty logic, and conspiracy theories,<ref>http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0007/0007_01.asp</ref> including suggesting that the [[Pope]] is the [[Antichrist]].

Many Chick tracts depict unrealistic plots to help make their points. Often, Chick tracts depict children in elementary school who have never heard of Jesus, or purport that it is illegal to even discuss religion at all in school.

Several Chick tracts - including most famously "Lisa" (currently out of print), in which a father is heavily implied to have had sex with his preteen daughter and even given her an STD - depict morally-heinous actions as being instantly forgiven through the power of prayer or some similar action. While God does forgive even the most heinous sinners, it cannot be denied that tracts such as "Lisa" and similar present such earthly sins as being of little import to others. Other tracts imply that is is somehow "normal" for Christian parents to not mourn the death of their child if the child was not themselves a Christian.

==External Links==
*[http://www.chick.com Chick Publications]

==References==

<references/>

{{DEFAULTSORT:Chick, Jack}}

[[Category:Christian Media]]
[[Category:Cartoonists]]
[[Category:Fundamentalism]]
[[Category:Religion and Politics]]

Christianity and science

2012-10-06T14:07:11Z

JGrant: Reverting to last unvandalized version

[[Image:Bacon5.jpg|thumb|right|175px|In his essay ''Of [[Atheism]]'' Sir [[Francis Bacon]] wrote: "I had rather believe all the fables in the Legend, and the [[Talmud]], and the [[Koran|Alcoran (Koran)]], than that this universal frame is without a mind."<ref>Bacon, Francis, [http://www.authorama.com/essays-of-francis-bacon-17.html Of Atheism]</ref> ]]
A notable fact in relation to '''Christianity and science''' is that the [[Scientific revolution|birth of modern science]] occurred in the geographic area of [[Christianity|Christianized]] [[Europe]].<ref>http://www.ldolphin.org/bumbulis/#anchor5343749</ref> Christians awed by the grandeur of [[God]]'s creative work have long striven to understand His creativity through [[Science|scientific]] study.

[[Sociology|Sociologist]] [[Rodney Stark]] investigated the individuals who made the most significant scientific contributions between 1543 and 1680 A.D., the time of the Scientific Revolution.
In Stark's list of 52 top scientific contributors,<ref name="Origins">Williams, Alex,[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1581/ The biblical origins of science], ''Journal of Creation'' 18(2):49–52, August 2004.</ref> only one ([[Edmund Halley]]) was a skeptic and another ([[Paracelsus]]) was a [[pantheism|pantheist]].
The other 50 were Christians, 30 of whom could be characterized as being devout Christians.<ref name="Origins" />
Stark believes that the [[Enlightenment]] was a ploy by "militant atheists" to claim credit for the rise of science<ref>http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3274629/False-conflict-Christianity-is-not.html</ref>.

In ''False conflict: Christianity is not only compatible with Science--it created it'' Stark writes:
{{cquote|Recent historical research has debunked the idea of a "Dark Ages" after the "fall" of [[Roman Empire|Rome]]. In fact, this was an era of profound and rapid technological progress, by the end of which Europe had surpassed the rest of the world. Moreover, the so-called "Scientific Revolution" of the sixteenth century was a result of developments begun by religious scholars starting in the eleventh century. In my own academic research I have asked why these religious scholastics were interested in science at all. Why did science develop in Europe at this time? Why did it not develop anywhere else? I find answers to those questions in unique features of Christian [[theology]].
Even in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the leading scientific figures were overwhelmingly devout Christians who believed it their duty to comprehend God's handiwork. My studies show that the "Enlightenment" was conceived initially as a propaganda ploy by militant atheists attempting to claim credit for the rise of science. The falsehood that science required the defeat of religion was proclaimed by self-appointed cheerleaders like [[Voltaire]], [[Denis Diderot|Diderot]], and [[Edward Gibbon|Gibbon]], who themselves played no part in the scientific enterprise......<ref>http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-3274629/False-conflict-Christianity-is-not.html</ref>}}

Indeed, some of the most notable and revolutionary scientists were Christians. [[Nicolaus Copernicus]], who first proposed the heliocentric model of the universe, was an officer of the church. [[Rene Descartes]], who played an integral role in the development of physics, also set about to prove the existence of God in his "Discourse on Methods." [[Gregor Mendel]], who laid the foundations for genetics, was a monk. Although Descartes, Galileo later ran afoul of the Church, the Christian genesis of his and other scientists' work cannot be ignored.

Dr. Charles Thaxton similarly states that modern science developed in the Middle Ages in Christian Europe because of the Christian beliefs of scientists.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth17.html</ref>

Today, the prevalence of belief in God among American scientists is much lower than it is among the American public. <ref>[http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html]</ref><ref>[http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=3341576]</ref> Nevertheless, an article published by ''[[The University of Chicago|The University of Chicago Chronicle]]'' that discussed this study, stated that 76 percent of physicians believe in [[God]] while being highly educated.<ref name="Physicians">{{cite web|url = http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/050714/doctorsfaith.shtml|title =Survey on physicians’ religious beliefs shows majority faithful|publisher = [[The University of Chicago]]|quote=The first study of physician religious beliefs has found that 76 percent of doctors believe in God and 59 percent believe in some sort of afterlife. The survey, performed by researchers at the University and published in the July issue of the Journal of General Internal Medicine, found that 90 percent of doctors in the United States attend religious services at least occasionally, compared to 81 percent of all adults.|accessdate = 2007–10–18}}</ref> Moreover, another study by the ''Journal of General Internal Medicine'', found that 90 percent of doctors in the United States attend religious services at least occasionally as compared with 81% of the general U.S. population.<ref name="Physicians"/>

Christians, though, upon being confirmed into their church study catechisms, or documents written to answer questions about their faith. According to the 1998 Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) ''Study Catechism,'' Christians are not conflicted when it comes to choosing modern science or Creationism. Question 27 asks " Does your confession of God as Creator contradict the findings of modern science?" The answer then states, "No. My confession of God as Creator answers three questions: Who?, How? and Why? It affirms that (a) the triune God, who is self-sufficient, (b) called the world into being out of nothing by the creative power of God's Word (c) for the sake of sharing love and freedom. Natural science has much to teach us about the particular mechanisms and processes of nature, but it is not in a position to answer these questions about ultimate reality, which point to mysteries that science as such is not equipped to explore. Nothing basic to the Christian faith contradicts the findings of modern science, nor does anything essential to modern science contradict the Christian faith."
" <ref>http://www.pcusa.org/catech/studycat.htm</ref>

Atheists sometimes claim that "science" is somehow the opposite of Christianity. In fact, science is the study of the universe, and is therefore completely compatable with Christianity.

==See Also==
*[[Bible scientific foreknowledge]]
*[[Creation vs. Evolution Videos]]
*[[Atheism and the suppression of science]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://media.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/ToF/downloads/pdf/TedDavis_A_Short_History_of_Christianity_and_Science.pdf Christianity and Science in Historical Perspective (from the University of Cambridge)]
*[http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html Evidence for God from Science: Famous Scientists Who Believed in God]
*God: new evidence – a series of six videos exploring how evidence from cosmic fine tuning points to the reality of a creator God ([http://www.focus.org.uk/ Website] • [http://www.facebook.com/godnewevidence Facebook])
{{Creation vs. evolution}}
[[Category:Christianity]]
[[Category:Science]]
[[Category:History of Science]]

Old York Times

2012-10-06T03:38:39Z

JGrant: Fixing a few double-redirects

#REDIRECT[[The New York Times]]

Affordable Care Act

2012-10-06T03:38:36Z

JGrant: Fixing a few double-redirects

#REDIRECT [[ObamaCare]]

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

2012-10-06T03:38:34Z

JGrant: Fixing a few double-redirects

#REDIRECT [[ObamaCare]]

Fifty Shades of Grey

2012-10-06T03:14:02Z

JGrant:

'''''Fifty Shades of Grey''''' is the first book in the ''Fifty Shades'' trilogy, all three books written by British author E.L. James. The book is not based off of original characters, and most of the first book is copied verbatim from a [[The Twilight Saga | Twilight]] fanfiction titled ''Masters of the Universe'' that previously existed on FanFiction.net and was removed several months before the publication of ''Fifty Shades of Grey.'' More than 70% of ''Fifty Shades of Grey'' is identical to ''Masters of the Universe,'' with the only differences in the identical portions being "Edward Cullen" and "Bella Swann" being changed to "Christian Grey" and "Anastasia Steele." Smaller, but still significant, portions of the latter two books in the trilogy (''Fifty Shades Darker'' and ''Fifty Shades Freed'') are taken from later parts of ''Masters of the Universe.''

==Relationship Themes==

The ''Fifty Shades'' trilogy shows, on the surface, a relationship that is represented by the characters involved as being healthy and consensual. [[BDSM]] mechanics are involved, though it must be stressed that the trilogy was written by someone with no firsthand knowledge of techniques to do with the fetish and consequently is a distorted misrepresentation of both the power dynamics and activities that commonly take place within a BDSM relationship. What E.L. James outlines is not the "safe, sane, and consensual" power dynamic that exists within a relatively-normal BDSM relationship, but a psychologically and physically abusive relationship with multiple red flags being raised for any attentive reader within the first book. Any doubts as to the unhealthy nature of Christian Grey's obsession ought be dispelled when he threatens to rape Anastasia in the elevator on the way to his penthouse.

==Relationship to Conservative Values==

Though the ''Fifty Shades'' series presents a disturbing look into an unhealthy relationship, the book was written by a conservative British female author and is aimed primarily at the middle-aged housewife demographic. It appears to sell well within the demographic, and has beaten the [[Harry Potter]] series for the record of fastest-selling paperback of all time.

For those unmarried persons who choose to pursue the series, it cannot be stressed enough that any man or woman exhibiting the obsessive and controlling personality traits of Christian Grey is absolutely ''not'' a person to associate with on a romantic basis.

The Twilight Saga

2012-10-06T03:07:14Z

JGrant:

The '''Twilight Saga''' is a series of books and films about a young lady who falls in love with a [[vampire]] from the 19th century. The series has seen mixed reactions from critics and the public, and over 100 million copies have been sold worldwide of both the books and the films. The author of the series, [[Stephenie Meyer]], attended [[Brigham Young University]] and is a member of [[The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]]. The series has been criticised by some [[liberals]], possibly because it contains pro-marriage and pro-life elements. It has also been criticised by some conservatives due to its positive depictions of vampires.<ref>http://spesunica.wordpress.com/is-twilight-anti-christian-yes/</ref> The films have also received valid criticism on the basis of their quality.

==Politics==
The series features [[vampire]]s and [[werewolve]]s, which are part of non-Christian mythology, and it does not depict any of the characters as Christians. In popular culture vampires are generally depicted as individuals who have either willingly or by duress turned against God (such as [[Bram Stoker]]'s original [[Dracula]]) and thus any promotion of vampirism stands in direct conflict to Christianity. Vampires are shown as being hurt by crosses or crucifixes, although in the novel Dracula the weapons that Van Helsing used to control Dracula were Catholic in origin, and he mentions the Vatican directly. However, most treatment of vampires in fiction does not distinguish between Catholic symbols and Protestant ones, and both seem effective.

The series does however seems to make certain elements of conservatism "cool" to young school girls whereas other series targeting the demographic encourage immorality (the pro-Satanic elements notwithstanding). Despite not referencing Christianity, the series seems to support traditional marriage and Chrisitian morals; for example, Edward, being from the 19th century when immorality seen as normal in modern times was considered taboo, refused to engage in sexual intercourse with Bella prior to marriage, and Bella was pro-life even when having the baby put herself at great risk (this in particular upsets [[liberal]]s).

==Relationship Dynamics==

The relationship between Edward and Bella, while exhibiting many conservative characteristics on the surface, has many subtle and not-so-subtle hints of psychological abuse. One major example is Edward physically removing the engine from Bella's truck, and a popularly-cited example on anti-''Twilight'' forums is Edward watching Bella while she sleeps.

It goes without saying that any person exhibiting such behavior is to be ''kept away from,'' rather than being pursued romantically, regardless of how honourable their surface intent.

==References==

<references/>
[[Category:Movies]]
[[Category:Juvenile Fiction]]

Fifty Shades of Grey

2012-10-06T02:56:59Z

JGrant: This is not a high-quality trilogy, but it does present a textbook case of abusive relationships, including the main characters. A good psychological study, but not a good literary read at all.

Fifty Shades of Grey is the first book in the ''Fifty Shades'' trilogy, all three books written by British author E.L. James. The book is not based off of original characters, and most of the first book is copied verbatim from a [[Twilight]] fanfiction titled ''Masters of the Universe'' that previously existed on FanFiction.net and was removed several months before the publication of ''Fifty Shades of Grey.'' More than 70% of ''Fifty Shades of Grey'' is identical to ''Masters of the Universe,'' with the only differences in the identical portions being "Edward Cullen" and "Bella Swann" being changed to "Christian Grey" and "Anastasia Steele." Smaller, but still significant, portions of the latter two books in the trilogy (''Fifty Shades Darker'' and ''Fifty Shades Freed'') are taken from later parts of ''Masters of the Universe.''

==Relationship Themes==

The ''Fifty Shades'' trilogy shows, on the surface, a relationship that is represented by the characters involved as being healthy and consensual. [[BDSM]] mechanics are involved, though it must be stressed that the trilogy was written by someone with no firsthand knowledge of techniques to do with the fetish and consequently is a distorted misrepresentation of both the power dynamics and activities that commonly take place within a BDSM relationship. What E.L. James outlines is not the "safe, sane, and consensual" power dynamic that exists within a relatively-normal BDSM relationship, but a psychologically and physically abusive relationship with multiple red flags being raised for any attentive reader within the first book. Any doubts as to the unhealthy nature of Christian Grey's obsession ought be dispelled when he threatens to rape Anastasia in the elevator on the way to his penthouse.

==Relationship to Conservative Values==

Though the ''Fifty Shades'' series presents a disturbing look into an unhealthy relationship, the book was written by a conservative British female author and is aimed primarily at the middle-aged housewife demographic. It appears to sell well within the demographic, and has beaten the [[Harry Potter]] series for the record of fastest-selling paperback of all time.

For those unmarried persons who choose to pursue the series, it cannot be stressed enough that any man or woman exhibiting the obsessive and controlling personality traits of Christian Grey is absolutely ''not'' a person to associate with on a romantic basis.

Sex education

2012-10-05T19:16:19Z

JGrant: /* Abstinence Only */ I'm all for abstinence-only, but a comprehensive sex-ed talk by my parents wouldn't have gone unused by most of the children I went to school with, even in Christian schools.

'''Sex Education''' is classroom instruction on [[human reproduction]] and [[sexuality]]. It is typically taught by both [[Public schools|public]] and private schools, with parents usually given the option of withdrawing their children if they feel the content to be inappropriate or have personal or religious objections.

The appropriate content for sex education is a subject of political dispute within the United States, and within other countries. The greatest division is between the comprehensive and [[abstinence]]-only schools of thought. Proponents of comprehensive sex education believe that instruction should include education on methods of [[contraception]], as a means to prevent the twin threats of pregnancy and the transmission of sexually-transmitted infections. Proponents of abstinence education maintain that instructing unmarried teenagers on contraception is implicitly endorsing sexual activity outside of marriage, and so sex education should omit contraception and instead concentrate on helping teenagers to avoid pressure towards pre-marital sexual activity, and to wait until they are in a monogamous, married relationship to begin sexual activity.

In general, comprehensive education is favored by [[liberal|liberals]] while abstinence-only education is favored by [[conservative|conservatives]].

As well as subjects directly related to physical sexual acts, sex education may also include instruction or guidance on relationship management, self-control, pregnancy, the physiological changes of puberty, sexual orientation, and sometimes the morality of sex. This variety adds to the political controversy, with varying groups advocating the inclusion or exclusion of specific components.

Sex education is typically taught at varying points throughout education, either as a separate short course (often with a visiting specialist teacher) or as a module in the science curriculum. Thus an individual student will go through several sex education courses, each one imparting information considered appropriate for their age at the time.

==Abstinence Only==
[[Federal funding]] for abstinence only education across the country has increased during the decade, but still does not equal the amount of money the government gives to [[Planned Parenthood]], a single organization, each year.<ref>http://www.latimes.com/news/education/la-na-abstinence24apr24,1,5905418.story</ref><ref>http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/mmalkin/2008/mm_06041.shtml</ref>

It should be noted that, while teens can benefit from abstinence-only sex ed in school, prudent parents may still want to take the precaution of informing their children of basic contraception. No matter how strong the will to resist one's physical urges, it cannot be denied that some children will inevitably give in to their desires and that they ought to know how to prevent unplanned pregnancy in this eventuality.

== Sex Education in England ==
In England the National Curriculum <ref>[http://www.dfes.gov.uk National Curriculum]</ref> requires all schools to offer comprehensive sex education as part of Personal, Social and Health Education, from junior school on. These classes are opt-out: All children take the lessons unless their parents have previously requested otherwise.

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Sociology]]
[[Category:Sexuality]]

Glenn Beck

2012-10-04T22:11:58Z

JGrant: reverting to last unvandalized version

[[File:Glenn Beck 2010.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Glenn Beck at [[CPAC]]. Photograph by Gage Skidmore.]]
'''Glenn Edward Lee Beck''' is a [[conservative]] [[libertarian]] talk-radio host and former television anchor who was employed by [[Fox News]].<ref> [http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/tv_fox_beck_cnn/2008/10/16/141295.html Glenn Beck Leaving CNN for Fox News] AP, October 16, 2008</ref> <ref>[http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/06/entertainment/et-foxnews6 Fox News' Glenn Beck strikes ratings gold by challenging Barack Obama] p.3 </ref>
His radio show, The Glenn Beck Program, is syndicated by over 230 radio stations across the [[United States]]. His television show, Glenn Beck, appeared daily on [[CNN]] Headline News, before he switched to FOX.

Beck is the author of ten books, and four of them were #1 New York Times Bestsellers. Books include: ''The Real America: Messages from the Heart and Heartland'' ''An Inconvenient Book: Real Solutions to the World's Biggest Problems,'' ''The Christmas Sweater,'' ''Common Sense: The Case Against an Out-of-Control Government,'' ''Arguing With Idiots,'' ''Broke: The Plan to Restore Our Trust, Truth, and Treasure'', and ''Being George Washington''.

Beck is a [[Mormon]], having converted after recovering from [[alcoholism]].<ref>Glenn Beck. (2008). An Unlikely Mormon: The Conversion Story of Glenn Beck [DVD]. Deserest Book.</ref>

Beck is currently the host of a paid-subscription online network, GBTV, which has several programs including a two-hour version of his Fox News show.
== Earnings and Book Deal ==
[http://www.businessinsider.com BusinessInsider.com] estimated Beck will make $18 million in 2009<ref>[http://www.businessinsider.com/the-empire-of-glenn-beck-slideshow-2009-4 Glenn Beck's Cash Machine]</ref> Now with the signing of his new book deal with [[Simon & Schuster]], he will be given a larger share in the profits of each book, as well as increased creative control.<ref>[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124138941245781353.html Wall St. Journal; New Deal Gives Beck Share in Book Profits]</ref>

In addition to several volumes of political commentary, Beck has also written a novel, [[The Overton Window]], published in 2010.

==Controversies==
Liberal activism groups attempted to silence Beck by pushing his advertisers to abandon his program, after he alleged that [[Barack Obama]] is [[racism|racist]] against white people, and that he [[hate|hates]] white culture. This prompted "RedState" to defend Beck and call for a boycott of the advertisers on his show who were hoodwinked into boycotting it by the liberal elite.

The publicity over the attempts on Beck's popularity achieved a result that the liberals cannot have intended: Beck was featured on the cover of [[Time]] magazine, and in a final insult to liberal pride; he is depicted sticking his tongue out at the reader. Beck, however, was less than pleased with the Time cover: He stated that ''Time'' ought to have featured the large crowds attending the [[September 12 March on Washington]] and not him on its cover.

On August 28th, 2010, Glenn Beck hosted his Restoring Honor to America rally at the [[Lincoln Memorial]]. [[Google]] attempted to mislead attendees by changing its location in ''Google Maps'' to the Roosevelt Memorial days before the rally.

On June 27th, 2011, Glen Beck and his wife were attacked by liberal hooligans in New York City's Bryant Park. [http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/06/new_yorkers_turned_on_glenn_be.html]

== Known favorite associations ==
Beck frequently had Judge [[Andrew Napolitano]] as a guest on his Fox program. Judge Napolitano even hosted the show himself when Beck was on assignment.

== 9/12 Project ==
In 2009, Beck launched the 9/12 project, a project aimed at recovering America's Christian founding values, closely allied with the [[Tea Party Movement]]. On September 12, 2009 (9/12), a massive Taxpayer March on Washington was accomplished, with hundreds of thousands of attendees, and was roundly censored by the [[liberal media]].

===The Project's 9 Principles, 12 Values===

The 9 Principles:
# America Is Good.
# I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.
# I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.
# The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
# If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.
# I have a right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results.
# I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable.
# It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion.
# The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me.

The 12 Values:
Honesty, Reverence, Hope, Thrift, Humility, Charity, Sincerity, Moderation, Hard Work, Courage, Personal Responsibility, Gratitude

==June 2011==
June 30th was Glenn Beck's last show on Fox News, breaking all records for his timeslot. He is investing his future in an internet program with a different format. Beck's show on Fox was replaced by "The Five".

Between the time he left Fox and The Five started, Beck reruns were played. To add to liberal's disgust, Beck reruns handily won the ratings time slot over CNN and MSNBC. <ref>[http://www.theblaze.com/stories/beck-reruns-beat-cnn-msnbc/ ONE WEEK AFTER LEAVING FOX NEWS, BECK RE-RUNS STILL WINNING TIME SLOT, The Blaze, July 9, 2011]</ref>

==Restoring Love==
In July 2012, Beck held a 3 day event in Texas culminating at the Cowboys stadium in Dallas. It was a non-political conference attended by 65,000 fans. Many high profile conservatives were there including [[Michele Bachmann]] and [[Rick Santorum]]. The event focused on American exceptionalism, love, faith, and community. <ref>[http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/07/65000-gather-for-glenn-becks-restoring-love-conference-video/ 65,000 Gather for Glenn Beck’s Restoring Love Conference, Gateway Pundit, July 29, 2012]</ref>

==See Also==
* [[Restoring Honor Rally]]
* [[Fox News]]
* [[Broke: The Plan to Restore Our Trust, Truth, and Treasure]]
* [[The Overton Window]]

==External References==
* [http://www.gbtv.com GBTV]
* [http://www.the912project.com/ 9/12 Project website]
* [http://www.glennbeck.com/home/index.shtml Glenn Beck's personal site]
* [http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Nov09/0,4670,APonTVPostElection,00.html Glenn Beck jumps from CNN to Fox News]

==References==
<references/>
{{DEFAULTSORT: Beck, Glenn}}
[[Category: Broadcasters]]
[[Category: Television]]
[[Category: Conservative Commentators]]
[[Category: Media personalities ]]
[[Category: Conservatives]]
[[Category:The 100 Americans The Left Hates Most]]

{{Conservatism}}

Mitt Romney

2012-10-04T22:06:56Z

JGrant: Reverting to last unvandalized version

{{Officeholder
|name=Willard Mitt Romney
|image=MittPortrait.jpg‎
|party=[[Republican]]
|spouse=[[Ann Romney]]
|religion=[[The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]]
|offices=

{{Officeholder/governor
|state=Massachusetts
|terms=January 2, 2003 – January 4, 2007
|preceded=[[Jane Swift]]
|former=n
|succeeded=[[Deval Patrick]]
}}
}}

'''Willard Mitt Romney''', most popularly known as '''Mitt Romney''', (born March 12, 1947) is the former governor of [[Massachusetts]], and a successful U.S. businessman, and the [[2012 Republican Primary|Republican nominee]] for the [[Presidential Election 2012]]. Romney is favored by most voters on economic issues.

According to [[CNN]], Romney won by a margin of 67-25% the first presidential debate against [[liberal]] [[Barack Obama]].

He was first runner-up for the nomination in 2008. In 1994, Mitt Romney proved to be the most difficult challenger that incumbent Senator [[Ted Kennedy]] of Massachusetts ever faced for reelection, causing Kennedy to pour far more money into the race than he expected.<ref>[http://archive.newsmax.com/romney/ Romney to the Rescue: Mitt Romney's Got the Right Stuff for 2008] Kessler, Ronald, newsmax.com archives, retrieved April 27, 2012</ref>

Romney leads Obama among many key segments of the electorate: "Romney leads [[Barack Obama|Obama]] 58%-34% among [[veteran]]s, who make up about 13% of the [[electorate]]" and influence many other voters.<ref>http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2012/05/gallup-romney-tops-obama-with-veterans/1</ref> One national poll showed Romney with a 7-point lead over [[Obama]], 50-43%, in early May.<ref>http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/polls/226943-poll-romney-opens-up-big-lead-nationally</ref> Other polls show different results,<ref>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html</ref> in swing states like Ohio,<ref> http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/oh/ohio_romney_vs_obama-1860.html </ref> Virginia<ref> http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/va/virginia_romney_vs_obama-1774.html </ref> and Wisconsin.<ref> http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/wi/wisconsin_romney_vs_obama-1871.html </ref>

Before entering politics Romney was a businessman in Boston, having served as CEO of Bain Capital, a management consulting firm known for saving American companies. <ref>Staples, Toys R Us, Babies R Us, Clear Channel Radio, Dunkin Donuts, Domino's Pizza, The Weather Channel, Burger King, Sealy Mattress, Baskin Robbins, Outback Steakhouse, Guitar Center, Gymboree, Bonefish Grill, Burlington Coat Factory, Carrabba's Italian Grill, Michael's, to name a few</ref> His political start began during the financially unsteady 2002 Winter Olympics. He gained popularity in Massachusetts, a state known for being extremely liberal, and was elected governor in 2002. As governor he raised taxes several times. He unashamedly admits creating [[RomneyCare]], which is a complete disaster and forces everyone to buy health insurance and has resulted in long delays for obtaining medical services, such as an ordinary physical, in that state. [[Ted Kennedy]] and other [[liberals]] supported the bill and probably wrote key parts of it. Romney declined to run for reelection and announced his candidacy for President.

During his campaign for the Republican nomination in 2008, Romney was widely but incorrectly supported as a staunch conservative and ran on his business experience in the private sector. Romney fought a rough battle against Senator [[John McCain]] in Florida, Michigan, and other key states, but large losses on the Super Tuesday primaries ended his campaign. Romney dropped out of the race and endorsed Senator [[John McCain]] on February 14, 2008. His name was circulated as a potential running mate for McCain as their relationship improved, though [[Sarah Palin]] eventually became the vice-president nominee.

Romney had supported many far left positions: Romney had a pro-abortion record but is firmly pro-life today; Romney also continues to believe in liberal propaganda claiming global warming; Romney has been criticized for standing behind his 2005 [[RomneyCare|health care plan in Massachusetts]], which featured an 'individual mandate' requiring everyone to purchase health insurance. This plan is very similar to the 2010 ObamaCare bill that was adopted on a national level, and Obama claims Romney's people helped craft it.

==Flip Flopping==
Romney's inconsistent track record on issues such as abortion and gay marriage has gotten 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 September 2007 indicates that Mitt was still polling at approximately 10% within the GOP primary forecasts.

*Mitt Romney also changed his positions on gun control. He was originally for it, but recently joined the National Rifle Association, an organization opposed to it.

*Following the split of the first three major elections in the 2008 primaries, Ron Kaufman, a top adviser to Romney, stated that the battle between the top three candidates "is going to be like the Bataan Death March."

*Romney changed his position on immigration shortly before the [[2012 Presidential Election]]. He originally supported amnesty for certain illegals and moratoriums on criminal prosecution for drug dealing by illegal immigrants. It is possible that Romney is trying to erode President Obama's support in the Latin community in places like [[Nevada]], where immigration is a hot-button issue and Obama's victory in 2008 was by only a few percentage points.

The Bataan Death March resulted in the death of approximately 9,000 prisoners of war during World War II, and has been labeled as a war crime.

== Personal Life ==
[[Image:MittRomneyYouth05.jpg|thumb|Ann Lois Davies and Willard Mitt Romney]]
Romney is the scion of an old Mormon family. His grandparents were polygamists who fled the United States in the early 20th century when the Mormon Church repudiated polygamy; his father was born in Mexico. The Romneys returned to the U.S. in 1911 when a violent civil war broke out in Mexico.

Mitt Romney is a devout member of [[The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints]], and spent time as a missionary during his youth converting Catholics and agnostics to Mormonism in France. In fact, his time as a student and missionary helped him defer from military service during the Vietnam draft,<ref>Michael Kranish, "The Making of Mitt Romney: Mormon church obtained Vietnam draft deferrals for Romney, other missionaries" June 24, 2007. The Boston Globe. http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/specials/romney/articles/part1_side_2/?page=1 </ref> but he stated during interviews that "he had longed to join the soldiers in Vietnam and support the war effort." His father had stated in 1967 that he felt "brainwashed" by U.S. officials over the justification of the prolonged Vietnam war. This statement had been very costly in George Romney's 1968 campaign for president against Richard Nixon.

Romney claims to maintains a stable marriage with his wife Ann, with whom he has five children.

Romney is the son of former [[Michigan]] governor and presidential candidate [[George Romney]], a "Rockefeller Republican,"<ref>Lisa McGirr, ''Suburban Warriors''(2001) pp. 141, 222.</ref> who amassed a large fortune as an automobile industry magnate during World War II.  George Romney was popular among moderates during his presidential run and was well-equipped for victory; many of his political advisors had come from [[Nelson Rockefeller]]'s 1964 campaign.

==Business Career==
From 1978 to 1984, Romney was a vice president of Bain & Company, Inc. a worldwide management consulting firm, and in 1984, Romney co-founded a spin-off called Bain Capital. He invested in or bought many well-known companies such as Staples, Brookstone, Domino's, Sealy Corporation and Sports Authority. Critics say he advised corporations to cut their U.S. taxes by reincorporating in Caribbean tax havens such as the Caymen Islands, while maintaining their operations in the U.S.

==Record as Governor==
Romney served as governor of Massachusetts (2003-2007), with a generally [[conservative]] record that included economic expansion. He balanced the budget every year of his administration with out increasing taxes or increasing state dept. Romney turned a $3 billion budget deficit into a $500 million surplus by reducing government spending and added 80,000 new jobs by the end of his term. In 2004, 2005, and 2006 Governor Romney proposed cutting the state income tax from 5.3% to 5.0% <ref>http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/08/mitt_romneys_record_on_economi.php</ref>. Although the Democratic super majority in the state legislator refused to budge. Romney vetoed 844 pieces of legislation, with over 700 overridden. <ref>http://www.ontheissues.org/Governor/Mitt_Romney_Government_Reform.htm</ref> He vetoed an increase in the minimum wage, saying "there's no question raising the minimum wage excessively causes a loss of jobs." <ref>Telegram & Gazette, 08/01/06</ref> Under Governor Romney the state abolished a retroactive capital gains tax that would have forced nearly 50,000 taxpayers to pay additional taxes and fees. <ref>http://www.americansformitt.com/</ref> Massachusetts Citizens For Limited Taxation Executive Director Barbara Anderson praised Romney, saying "There was no one else out on the horizon and with the legislature almost entirely Democratic, we felt it was necessary to have a grown-up in the corner office. … And we were right to back him. He's been a really good friend to the taxpayers."

However, some of the actions Governor Romney took received criticisms from conservatives, such as supporting moderate fee increases and creating and the nation's first universal [[health care]] program. During his 2002 gubernatorial campaign Romney supported [[abortion]], his views evolved and would later take [[pro-life]] positions such as vetoing emergency contraception and vetoing [[stem-cell research]] that would allow cloning of human embryos. In 2006, Governor Romney testified before the [[United States]] [[Senate]] to support the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would limit marriage to one man and one woman. Additionally, Romney filed legislation to reinstate [[capital punishment]], but was defeated in the Massachusetts House of Representatives on a 99-53 vote.

Mitt Romney made no pardons as governor, "My conclusion was, if somebody has been convicted by a jury of their peers, and they’ve been prosecuted and the police were able to get the evidence necessary to put them behind bars, why in the world would I step in and reverse that sentence?" <ref>http://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/04/romney-on-huckabee-unlike-some-people-i-never-pardoned-anyone/</ref>

On [[Education]] Romney called for the privatization of the University of Massachusetts medical school<ref>Telegram & Gazette, 02/27/03</ref>. In 2004, he established the John and Abigail Adams Scholarship Program, which rewarded the top 25 percent of Massachusetts high school students with tuition-free scholarship to any Massachusetts public [[university]] or [[college]]. In August 2006, Governor Romney refused to allow former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami, an outspoken opponent of the [[United States]] and [[Israel]], state police escorts during his speech at [[Harvard University]]. <ref>http://www.nysun.com/editorials/khatemi-at-harvard/38903/</ref>

In December 2006, Romney signed a memorandum of agreement with the federal government that would allow state troopers to enforce federal immigration laws <ref>http://www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=96543</ref>, however was revoked when Democrat Deval Patrict took office as Governor in January 2007.

== Political Views ==

===Abortion===
Currently, Romney claims to be pro-life, but his record is very spotty. At times he has claimed to be pro-infantacide.
"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> 

Despite having a largely pro-life record as governor, 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."<ref>http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/07/03/clarity_sought_on_romneys_abortion_stance/?page=2</ref>

In his campaign literature for the 2002 Massachusetts gubernatorial election, Romney expressed a willingness to defend that State's pro-choice status quo.<ref>http://web.archive.org/web/20021218005104/www.romneyhealey.com/issues/4</ref> He stated in a live, televised debate:<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4</ref>

{{cquote|"I've been very clear on that, I will preserve and protect a woman's right to choose, and am devoted and dedicated to honoring my word in that regard."}}

===Civil Unions===
Romney claims to be opposed to the idea of [[gay marriage]], however he has voiced explicit support for the [[homosexual agenda]]. He has advocated for domestic partnership benefits and equal rights for [[homosexuals]], which is gay marriage in everything but name and an easy stepping stone on the vile gay agenda path towards homosexual recruitment.<ref>http://web.archive.org/web/20021218005104/www.romneyhealey.com/issues/3</ref>. He also supports adoption for gay couples<ref>http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57432292-503544/romney-says-hes-fine-with-gay-couples-adopting-children/</ref>.

===Economic Agenda===
As President, Romney promised to pursue a conservative, pro-growth economic agenda. His number one economic priority would be to grow the economy — helping to create good jobs, raise incomes and preserve American strength. He says he would work to rein in excessive government spending and reform entitlements. To ensure America's continued economic growth, he promises to cut taxes — such as the Death Tax, savings taxes, corporate taxes and marginal tax rates. Despite these claims, he has supported the [[socialist|socialism]] agenda. He claimed credit for the government bailout of the union controlled car companies<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/05/07/romney-taking-credit-for-auto-industry-success/</ref>. Also his [[RomneyCare]] law started the process of [[socialism|socializing]] medical care in [[Massachusetts]]. He continues to defend this law up to this day, undermining his commitment to repel the similar and equally atrocious [[ObamaCare]]<ref>http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/romney-defends-romneycare_560953.html</ref>.

Romney says he would 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.

===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.<ref>http://www.mittromney.com/Issue-Watch/Immigration</ref></blockquote>

Romney supports a strong stance on illegal immigration.<ref>[http://www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=91722 IowaPolitics.com: Romney Touts Strong Stance On Illegal Immigration]</ref> 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."<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007May24/0,4670,RomneyGays,00.html</ref></blockquote>

===Stem Cell Research===
Mitt Romney supports the right of scientists to research on embryos created during fertility treatments. Critics consider this to be essentially infantacide.<ref>http://www.boston.com/yourlife/health/diseases/articles/2007/02/11/romneys_stem_cell_view_may_upset_the_right/</ref>

==2008 Presidential Campaign==
''Main Article: [[Mitt Romney 2008 Presidential Campaign]]''

[[Image:Dude and mitt romney.jpg|right|180px]] As chairman of the [[Republican Governors Association]], Romney campaigned nationwide for GOP gubernatorial candidates in 2006, building up a network of allies and supporters. While he did not run for reelection as governor, in 2004 Romney set up a federal political action committee (PAC) called the Commonwealth PAC, which raised $2.71 million during the 2006 election cycle. On January 3, 2007, his next-to-last day in office as governor of Massachusetts, Romney filed to form a presidential exploratory committee with the Federal Election Commission. He officially announced his candidacy for President a month later. Romney was the first candidate in either party to start running television and radio ads. The ads focused mainly on his record as governor, running the 2002 Salt Lake Olympics, and his work as a very successful businessman. Romney's five sons had been actively campaigning for their father, traveling around in a campaign bus called the "Mitt Mobile, A Five Brothers Bus."

As a presidential candidate Romney sought the support of the business community and social conservatives. He reversed moderate positions on abortion and gay rights to take a hardline conservative position on them, and on opposition to illegal immigrants. Opponents charged he changed too often. Romney was a leader in fund-raising, augmented by over $35 million from his own fortune. However he was little known outside of Massachusetts, so his strategy was to play for early wins in Iowa and New Hampshire, then "sling-shot" the momentum into national visibility. Romney won the Michigan primary on January 16th, 2008, with 39% of the vote, edging out McCain with 30% and Huckabee with 16%. Romney was favored to win in the state of his birth, where his father, [[George Romney]] was governor from 1963-1969. After losing both the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary (to Huckabee and McCain, respectively), Romney won a low-publicized Wyoming caucus. On January 19, Romney easily won the [[Nevada]] caucuses by 37 percentage points when there were seven candidates on the ballot, however, on that same day he placed a distant fourth in the [[South Carolina]] primary. After a disappointing performance on Super Tuesday, Romney announced the suspension of his campaign on Thursday 7th February. He expressed his wishes not to divide the Republican party and later endorsed Senator [[John McCain]] of [[Arizona]]. Commentators correctly speculated on his chances for a return effort in 2012.

===Fundraising===
Mitt Romney had done well in fund raising. During his first fund raiser as a presidential candidate, he raised $6.5 million dollars compared to an original goal of only $1 million. During the first quarter Romney raised more money then any other Republican presidential candidate with $23 million. However, a substantial portion of his funds ($17 million) came from his own personal wealth. [http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/10/16/top_spender_romney_could_soon_run_short/]

==2012 Presidential campaign==
In April 2011, Romney announced his candidacy for President of the United States for the 2012 election, running as a Republican <ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/11/mitt-romney-president-candidate</ref>. Romney was criticized throughout the primary season for being a Republican In Name Only due to his liberal views on social issues as governor and his flip-flops, as well as a controversial business record. His main competitors during the primaries were former conservative Speaker of the House [[Newt Gingrich]], Pro-Life Senator [[Rick Santorum]], and libertarian Congressman [[Ron Paul]]. Romney ended up winning the vast majority of contests, though the race remained close in delegate count throughout. Romney together with Vice Presidential candidate [[Paul Ryan]] are running against President Barack Obama and Vice President [[Joe Biden]] in an election to be held on November 6, 2012. During the campaign, Romney was criticized for saying that the [[Romney's 47 percent comment|47% of Americans who do not pay income taxes consider themselves to be 'victims']].

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.mittromney.com Mitt Romney for President 2008]
*[http://www.ldslivingonline.com/article.php?articleId=17633 Mitt Romney: proudly, quietly Mormon]
*[http://www.evangelicalsformitt.org/ Evangelicals for Mitt]
*[http://sparklepony.blogspot.com/2007/03/fresh-mitt-romney-juvenalia-hot-off.html Fresh Mitt Romney Juvenalia] Pics - Comments.
*[http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjE4MmMyMzVkZjlhZGQzNzlhZjdmMDEzNjI3MzM4ZTA= Mitt Romney: “I Changed My View. Is that So Difficult to Understand?”] The candidate talks about his efforts to convince voters that his pro-life conversion is real. Byron York, National Review Online, November 20, 2007
*[http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Y2ZkMWNkZDkzOTk1YTM0NTNkNmJlZThmYjJmM2ZmOGE= Did Mitt Romney Push Poll Himself?] Mark Hemingway, National Review Online, November 19, 2007
*[http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2EzODZjY2UxZTRhMWE2ZDk1ZWE5MGI0ZmRjMDViZTI= Team Romney on Push-Poll Connections] After reading the Hemingway piece, Kevin Madden, Romney for President campaign spokesman replies. Kathryn Jean Lopez, National Review Online, November 19, 2007
*[http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MzliMDgzOWVlOGEwYThlMzc5ZDVlNzM2YjA4M2ZkYTg= Romney Stands for Faith] The candidate pushes back against push-poll attacks. Larry Kudlow, National Review Online, November 16, 2007
*[http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MGQ4YmM4Y2U3Yjc3MzYzNDQwYzk3YTVjMTI5YTkwNzg= Romney’s Religion], The Editors, National Review Online, November 16, 2007

==Blogs==
*[http://www.mymanmitt.com/mitt-romney/ My Man Mitt]
*[http://libertariansformitt.wordpress.com/ Libertarians for Romney]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Romney, Mitt}}
[[Category:Massachusetts Governors]]
[[Category:Republican Governors]]
[[Category:2008 Presidential Candidates]]
[[Category:Business People]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]
[[Category:The 100 Americans The Left Hates Most]]
[[Category:Mormons]]
[[Category:2012 Presidential Candidates]]
[[Category:Rino backers]]
[[Category: Candidates for United States President]]

Troll

2012-10-04T22:02:33Z

JGrant: Undo revision 1010555 by D34D (talk) I don't think an hour ban was completely sufficient.

A '''troll''' is a mythical creature, like a giant but mostly portrayed as a dwarf.

== Internet troll ==

A troll, in [[Internet]] parlance, is an entity or character that purposely disrupts a conversation via discussion [[forum]] or [[email]], a comment thread on a [[blog]], or another sort of website. For example, on [[Wiki | Wikis]], users who purposely make disruptive edits are considered trolls. Many people consider this type of activity to be merely childish, while others consider it symptomatic of deviant minds of opposition whereby infiltration by deceit is normal practice. Trolls pretend to be of common thinking, at the same time plotting anti-social crimes. The troll can otherwise be known as a [[frenemy]] or as a [[hoax plant]] lurking for an opportunity to create trouble.

The term originated in the early 1990s, an abbreviation of the term "trolling for suckers" (trolling being an angling technique to seek fish). An [[Internet]] troll will lock their target, bait the line and spread the net to catch their goal (unwitting victim). Sites such as [[YouTube]], [[Yahoo!]] and the Internet Movie Database are known for their lax (laid back) and sometimes negative enforcement of community guidelines on their forums and comment sections. The effects of trolling on children who use the internet have been linked to a number of well documented suicides among youth in years past. The reason most trolls act the way they do online is because they either have nothing better to do, suffer from low self esteem as a result of a number of factors, or are anonymous children who have been, or are being [[bullying|bullied]] in real life and turn to the Internet to vent their anger. Many users have been banned from web forums or social networking sites as a result of using foul language or abusive replies to defend themselves against trolls, mostly due to corrupt and one-sided web masters. This is the basis that most trolls operate on. Luring their victims in, getting them stirred up, and then using their reactions against them and pretending that the victim is the bad guy. Anybody who expresses their viewpoints freely and/or touches on divisive and/or sensitive issues is a potential target for trolls. Trolling is a common weapon used against conservative speech in feeble attempts at silencing them. Most trolls are kids between the ages of 10 and 16 who have no other agenda than amusing themselves with other people's frustration.

===Do not feed the troll===
'''Do Not Feed the Troll''', or '''DNFT''' is a common internet term for ignoring trolls, and allowing them to become bored. Generally, it is seen as the best way to deal with trolls. The key motive behind trolling is to cause a reaction. Trolls do not care how well reasoned your argument is, they simply want you to react. By failing to give them a response, they will get bored, and leave.

== External Links ==
*[http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=troll Troll] -- Dictionary definition
*[http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/troll.htm Beware The Troll]
*[http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/troll-tactics.html Recognising and Dealing with Trolls]
*[http://www.alternet.org/media/why-online-comments-are-so-toxic?ak_proof=1&akid=9147.47561.Ez0FIj&rd=1&src=newsletter683851&t=3&paging=off Why Online Comments Are So Toxic]

[[Category:Mythical Beasts]]
[[Category:Internet slang]]
[[Category:Deceit]]
[[Category:Liberals]]
{{liberalism}}

User:JGrant

2012-10-04T17:26:03Z

JGrant:

I am a relatively-new user to Conservapedia, nice to meet you all :)

==About Me==
I'm a fine arts major at a small Methodist college, loving the opportunity to use my voice and music to praise the Lord.

I am a fundamentally rational person, and lack the conviction and emotional strength to sustain passionate and full Belief in God the Almighty, but He laid out in the Bible that "[T]he sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works." (Rev20:13 KJV)

I am, I admit, too weak a man to set aside my misgivings and accept the Christ as my saviour, but I pray that through my efforts, however small they may be, I might stand before God on the day of judgement and hear from Him "Well done, thou good and faithful servant. Enter unto the joy of the Lord."

I am an old-earth creationist and believe that evolution is the best theory currently available to explain the diversity of life on this planet, but that the Lord was the ultimate origin of the world and universe.

==My goals on this wikispace==

I hope to give ideologically-neutral contributions to the religious articles on this wiki. I disagree with many of the political viewpoints espoused here, but am not a fan of conflict and will thus respectfully decline to edit them. I will likewise not be editing the pages on [[Homosexuality]] and related topics, despite their religious bent, because I do not wish to drag my views on homosexuality into a mainspace article.

I have found the Conservative Bible Project as an external link on the web, and having looked through the stated goals I am not going to touch it with a thirty-foot pole. I think it an admirable endeavor to attempt to correct ideological alterations in the Holy Word, but the inherently-ideological bent of the project repels me. Were the project dedicated to removing all introduced bias and giving a truly-accurate translation, I would be your most ardent supporter. Still, despite my personal objections your goals are to be striven towards with all haste and I wish you the best of luck. :)

I am also a video gamer, a tabletop gamer, an internet denizen, and pretty much every other kind of geek there is. In addition to the religious articles on this site, I will spend a portion of my time editing the pop culture- and music-focused articles. :)

==Clarification==

I am not homosexual, but I sympathize with their struggles for equality and fair treatment. I do my level best at all times to treat all people equally until they clearly telegraph by their words or actions that they wish to act in a manner less than human.

I recognize that this will offend some people who take a more hardline and intolerant approach to those different from themselves. I will keep an open and tolerant mind towards your prejudices, and hope you will return the favour. :)

User talk:EJamesW

2012-10-04T17:14:02Z

JGrant: /* Bravo, good sir :) */ new section

{{welcome|sig=[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 16:14, 13 February 2012 (EST)}}

Hi James ta!! [[User:Alexis|Alexis]] 22:14, 25 February 2012 (EST)

Oi hey nobody answered my question how can i help and is there nething I can do?? [[User:Alexis|Alexis]] 22:20, 25 February 2012 (EST)
== My sincere apologies ==

I meant to block KoyogaBekijo but hit your name by mistake. Please accept my apology. [[User:Davidspencer|Davidspencer]] 16:19, 16 March 2012 (EDT)

== Blocking authority ==

Your account has been promoted to blocking authority. Congratulations!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:44, 16 May 2012 (EDT)

== Got your message in my talk page message area ==

I got your message in my talk page message area. Thanks. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 10:14, 26 June 2012 (EDT)

== Blocking ==

Great blocking. Please note, however, that a new user cannot create a second new account if the two boxes are not unchecked when blocking that user. Please observe the difference in messages between the block I just did (when I unchecked the boxes) and the blocks you did.

No big deal today - some of the users you blocked may not have created a legitimate second account anyway.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:18, 21 August 2012 (EDT)

== examine this ==

Examine this: http://conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page#Prove_creationism_is_true [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:32, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

=== Proof Creationism! is true ===

Here is evidence that Christianity/creationism is true: [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/09/evidence-for-christianity-websites-and.html Christianity and creationism is true].

Second, have you noticed [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-thrill-of-creationists-victories.html this] and [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/06/developing-plan-for-accelerating.html this] yet? Are the seedlings of a Creationism Proven! campaign already planted? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:12, 30 September 2012 (EDT)

== Bravo, good sir :) ==

Congratulations on your having somehow not only survived here for several months as a professed atheist and liberal, but on also gaining and judiciously applying your block rights. :) I wish some of the Wikias I've contributed to in the past had sysops with similarly-reasonable personalities. I may not agree with you religiously, but you seem to be a good person so more power to you. [[User:JGrant|JGrant]] 13:14, 4 October 2012 (EDT)

Jack Thompson

2012-10-04T15:35:38Z

JGrant: Relevant information

'''John Bruce "Jack" Thompson''' is a former lawyer and an outspoken critic of video game violence. His stance against violent video games has made him notorious among the gaming community. He has frequently sought legal action against videogame companies, such as Take Two Interactive and [[Rockstar]], who have published many violent games. He was disbarred in July 2008.<ref>[http://kotaku.com/5054772/jack-thompson-disbarred Kotaku.com; Thompson disbarred]</ref> He has tried, with no success, to ban several games in franchises such as ''[[Mortal Kombat]]'' and ''[[Grand Theft Auto]]''. Critics of Thompson argue that he unfairly singles out video games over other media, such as literature and film, as a cause of violence, however it should be noted that he has campaigned against rap music.

In 2005, Thompson challenged the video game industry with a satirical offer to donate money to any specified charity if a developer created a game he described. The game would involve a father, whose son has been murdered by a violent video game addict, getting his own back on the makers of violent video games. He called this his "Modest Proposal". A small group of independent video game programmers created a game fitting the criteria to within Thompson's specifications, at which point he refused to donate the promised ten thousand dollars and claimed he was not serious in his initial offer. The two bloggers behind the video game-focused webcomic Penny Arcade donated the promised sum to a children's charity in lieu of Thompson. The video game created for Thompson's "Modest Proposal," created with faux-retro graphics and titled ''I'm OK,'' is available for free download online.

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[category:law]]

Jack Thompson

2012-10-04T15:34:26Z

JGrant:

Roleplaying game

2012-10-04T13:33:06Z

JGrant: /* Tabletop RPGs */ broken link, sorry.

A '''roleplaying game''', or RPG, is a game where a number of participants typically assume the roles of fictional characters.

One of the most popular and long running RPGs is [[Dungeons and Dragons]] which was created in the [[USA]]. It became so popular that it spawned a children's cartoon of the same name.

Traditionally, an RPG was played by a group of friends with one of the group assuming the role of "game master" and effectively running the game. These are often called "tabletop" RPGs because they employ rulebooks, pen/pencil, paper and dice of assorted shapes. Nowadays there are a great number of RPGs available in videogame format - everything from online games designed for any number of players (for example [[World of Warcraft]], [[Phantasy Star Online]], and [[Everquest]]) to single player story led games (for example, the Final Fantasy series). Proponents of tabletop RPGs criticize computer and console-based RPGs for their relative inflexibility, since even the best computer-model can't be as ingenious as an actual game-master can.

Since the 1980s, RPGs have come under a great deal of criticism from groups who feel that playing these games is inherently dangerous, especially to children, and could potentially lead to [[insanity]], [[murder]], [[suicide]], and [[occultism]].<ref>[http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/2003/occult-rpg.htm Kjos Ministries]</ref><ref>[http://theescapist.com/ The Escapist]</ref>

Others have argued that RPGs can be used to teach mathematics, problem solving, social skills, and critical thinking to kids, especially those who might have trouble learning these skills in a traditional environment [http://www.theescapist.com/rwrpg/interview-rebeccathomas.htm]

== Tabletop RPGs ==
* [[Dungeons and Dragons]]
* [[Vampire: the Masquerade]]
* [[Traveller]]
* [[Top Secret]]
* [[Exalted]]
* [[Empire of the Petal Throne]]
* [[Nobilis]]
* [[Boot Hill]]
* [[In Nomine]]
* [[Dragonraid]]
* [[GURPS]]
* [[Bunnies and Burrows]]
* [[Paranoia (game) | Paranoia]]

===''Bad'' Tabletop RPGs===
Please note that the tabletop roleplaying games listed below may cause feelings of disgust or shame if for some reason you attempt to look them up online. Essentially all of these are poorly-designed and many of them feature subtly (or not-so-subtly) racist, sexist, or otherwise bigoted ideologies inherent in their ruleset or backstories.

''The "Unholy Trinity" of tabletop RPGs''
* ''[[F.A.T.A.L.]]''
* ''[[RaHoWa]]''
* ''HYBRID'' - A confusing mass of unnecessarily-complex rules with no structured backstory, HYBRID was an attempt to write rules for reality using comic books. An utter failure, both unplayable and offensive. Given the nature of the Internet, HYBRID will likely be replaced by another yet-worse RPG in time.

''Other notably-bad tabletop RPGs''
* ''Spawn of Fashan'' - one of the first "bad" RPGs, generally thought to be a deliberate parody. The game is well-optimized for people who roleplay to ruin other people's fun.
* ''The World of Synnibarr'' - Considered a terrible RPG by many online and a "B-list" RPG worth playing for the hilarity by others, the badness comes not from poor design (like virtually every other title contained herein), but from the ridiculous-by-any-standard setting. An infamous example of a typical ''Synnibarr'' monster is a flying bear with laser-beam eyes.
* ''SenZar'' - Perhaps better-designed than most of the games on this list, the balance between classes is still terribly off (even more so than the first edition of D&D). It also not only allows but openly encourages abandoning roleplaying in favor of optimizing one's character, a tack that offends many roleplayers.
* ''deadEarth'' - Ridiculed for claiming "realism" while simultaneously having comic-book-level powers gained from radiation exposure, including a table of 1000 random powers included in the core mechanics. Given backhanded praise by some critics for a rule that is often interpreted as only allowing a single player to create three characters (ever, and characters dying during the creation process is not uncommon.)
* ''Phoenix Command'' - Not so much "poorly" designed as ''over''designed, ''Phoenix Command'' and other games from the now-defunct publisher Leading Edge Games were the products of a rocket scientist attempting tabletop RPG design.
* ''Wraeththu: From Enchantment to Fulfilment'' [sic] - Almost as oversexualized as the Unholy Trinity above, ''Wraeththu'' is one of the most recent additions to the ranks of legendarily-bad RPGs, and boasts what is almost certainly the only extant depiction of an alien penis on the cover of a tabletop RPG rulebook.

== See also ==
*[[CRPG|Console RPGs]]
*[[MMORPG]]

== References ==
<references/>

[[category:Video Games]]

Roleplaying game

2012-10-04T13:32:16Z

JGrant: /* Tabletop RPGs */ adding from my own experience. I'll be working on articles for F.A.T.A.L. and RaHoWa when I get a moment. Additions or clarifications of unclear points would be appreciated :)

A '''roleplaying game''', or RPG, is a game where a number of participants typically assume the roles of fictional characters.

One of the most popular and long running RPGs is [[Dungeons and Dragons]] which was created in the [[USA]]. It became so popular that it spawned a children's cartoon of the same name.

Traditionally, an RPG was played by a group of friends with one of the group assuming the role of "game master" and effectively running the game. These are often called "tabletop" RPGs because they employ rulebooks, pen/pencil, paper and dice of assorted shapes. Nowadays there are a great number of RPGs available in videogame format - everything from online games designed for any number of players (for example [[World of Warcraft]], [[Phantasy Star Online]], and [[Everquest]]) to single player story led games (for example, the Final Fantasy series). Proponents of tabletop RPGs criticize computer and console-based RPGs for their relative inflexibility, since even the best computer-model can't be as ingenious as an actual game-master can.

Since the 1980s, RPGs have come under a great deal of criticism from groups who feel that playing these games is inherently dangerous, especially to children, and could potentially lead to [[insanity]], [[murder]], [[suicide]], and [[occultism]].<ref>[http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/2003/occult-rpg.htm Kjos Ministries]</ref><ref>[http://theescapist.com/ The Escapist]</ref>

Others have argued that RPGs can be used to teach mathematics, problem solving, social skills, and critical thinking to kids, especially those who might have trouble learning these skills in a traditional environment [http://www.theescapist.com/rwrpg/interview-rebeccathomas.htm]

== Tabletop RPGs ==
* [[Dungeons and Dragons]]
* [[Vampire: the Masquerade]]
* [[Traveller]]
* [[Top Secret]]
* [[Exalted]]
* [[Empire of the Petal Throne]]
* [[Nobilis]]
* [[Boot Hill]]
* [[In Nomine]]
* [[Dragonraid]]
* [[GURPS]]
* [[Bunnies and Burrows]]
* [[Paranoia]]

===''Bad'' Tabletop RPGs===
Please note that the tabletop roleplaying games listed below may cause feelings of disgust or shame if for some reason you attempt to look them up online. Essentially all of these are poorly-designed and many of them feature subtly (or not-so-subtly) racist, sexist, or otherwise bigoted ideologies inherent in their ruleset or backstories.

''The "Unholy Trinity" of tabletop RPGs''
* ''[[F.A.T.A.L.]]''
* ''[[RaHoWa]]''
* ''HYBRID'' - A confusing mass of unnecessarily-complex rules with no structured backstory, HYBRID was an attempt to write rules for reality using comic books. An utter failure, both unplayable and offensive. Given the nature of the Internet, HYBRID will likely be replaced by another yet-worse RPG in time.

''Other notably-bad tabletop RPGs''
* ''Spawn of Fashan'' - one of the first "bad" RPGs, generally thought to be a deliberate parody. The game is well-optimized for people who roleplay to ruin other people's fun.
* ''The World of Synnibarr'' - Considered a terrible RPG by many online and a "B-list" RPG worth playing for the hilarity by others, the badness comes not from poor design (like virtually every other title contained herein), but from the ridiculous-by-any-standard setting. An infamous example of a typical ''Synnibarr'' monster is a flying bear with laser-beam eyes.
* ''SenZar'' - Perhaps better-designed than most of the games on this list, the balance between classes is still terribly off (even more so than the first edition of D&D). It also not only allows but openly encourages abandoning roleplaying in favor of optimizing one's character, a tack that offends many roleplayers.
* ''deadEarth'' - Ridiculed for claiming "realism" while simultaneously having comic-book-level powers gained from radiation exposure, including a table of 1000 random powers included in the core mechanics. Given backhanded praise by some critics for a rule that is often interpreted as only allowing a single player to create three characters (ever, and characters dying during the creation process is not uncommon.)
* ''Phoenix Command'' - Not so much "poorly" designed as ''over''designed, ''Phoenix Command'' and other games from the now-defunct publisher Leading Edge Games were the products of a rocket scientist attempting tabletop RPG design.
* ''Wraeththu: From Enchantment to Fulfilment'' [sic] - Almost as oversexualized as the Unholy Trinity above, ''Wraeththu'' is one of the most recent additions to the ranks of legendarily-bad RPGs, and boasts what is almost certainly the only extant depiction of an alien penis on the cover of a tabletop RPG rulebook.

== See also ==
*[[CRPG|Console RPGs]]
*[[MMORPG]]

== References ==
<references/>

[[category:Video Games]]

User:JGrant

2012-10-03T21:51:50Z

JGrant:

I am a relatively-new user to Conservapedia, nice to meet you all :)

==About Me==
I'm a fine arts major at a small Methodist college, loving the opportunity to use my voice and music to praise the Lord.

I am a fundamentally rational person, and lack the conviction and emotional strength to sustain passionate and full Belief in God the Almighty, but He laid out in the Bible that "[T]he sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works." (Rev20:13 KJV)

I am, I admit, too weak a man to set aside my misgivings and accept the Christ as my saviour, but I pray that through my efforts, however small they may be, I might stand before God on the day of judgement and hear from Him "Well done, thou good and faithful servant. Enter unto the joy of the Lord."

==My goals on this wikispace==

I hope to give ideologically-neutral contributions to the religious articles on this wiki. I disagree with many of the political viewpoints espoused here, but am not a fan of conflict and will thus respectfully decline to edit them. I will likewise not be editing the pages on [[Homosexuality]] and related topics, despite their religious bent, because I do not wish to drag my views on homosexuality into a mainspace article.

I have found the Conservative Bible Project as an external link on the web, and having looked through the stated goals I am not going to touch it with a thirty-foot pole. I think it an admirable endeavor to attempt to correct ideological alterations in the Holy Word, but the inherently-ideological bent of the project repels me. Were the project dedicated to removing all introduced bias and giving a truly-accurate translation, I would be your most ardent supporter. Still, despite my personal objections your goals are to be striven towards with all haste and I wish you the best of luck. :)

==Clarification==

I am not homosexual, but I sympathize with their struggles for equality and fair treatment. I do my level best at all times to treat all people equally until they clearly telegraph by their words or actions that they wish to act in a manner less than human.

I recognize that this will offend some people who take a more hardline and intolerant approach to those different from themselves. I will keep an open and tolerant mind towards your prejudices, and hope you will return the favour. :)

User talk:Brenden

2012-10-03T20:25:31Z

JGrant: /* Regarding the Anonymous page */ new section

{{Useful links}}
[[User talk:Brenden/Archive]]

== Regarding the Anonymous page ==

I've looked into the Anon/WBC incident before for an essay on freedom of speech as it relates to Internet culture, and while both WBC and Anon showed their typical lack of civility and good manners towards each other they didn't violate the 1st Amendment in any way. I might have made a mistake in the report, though, so if you could show me where one side or the other violated 1st Amendment rights I'd be happy to concede the point. [[User:JGrant|Blessings of the Almighty on you :)]] 16:25, 3 October 2012 (EDT)

Anonymous

2012-10-03T20:19:10Z

JGrant: Undo revision 1010391 by Brenden (talk) Both ungrammatical and inaccurate, I'm afraid. Nothing done by WBC or Anon violated 1st Amendment rights

'''Anonymous''' is the name given to a online group (described by supporters as "hacktivists", opponents as terrorists) who carry out attacks on various websites, usually employing various forms of [[network abuse]], amongst other general Internet activities.

The group gained notoriety in recent years with its participation in Operation Payback, which included a series of actions in defence of whistle-blowing organization Wikileaks and its figurehead [[Julian Assange]], Operation Sony and from [[Westboro Baptist Church]]'s declaration of war on Anonymous, which they mostly ignored.

== History ==

The use of the "Anonymous" collective name to describe the source of activities dates to 2003, on various image boards on the Internet, the most famously attributed of which is 4chan.

In its early days its focus was focused on "[[Internet trolling|trolling]]" various websites<ref>http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=459214</ref>, usually by including offensive or inappropriate material on the websites of groups with whom they disagree.

In 2008, in response to a [[Tom Cruise]] video <ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCHkHZIyrdo</ref>, Anonymous became more homogeneous in its opposition to the Church of [[Scientology]] <ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCbKv9yiLiQ</ref>. Known as Operation Chanology, it included Denial-of-Service attacks, real life protests and mass publication and spread of information usually withheld by members of the church.

In 2010, it rose to notoriety due to Anonymous' actions against those who opposed copyright violation. Operation Payback was initially about using network abuse in a vain attempt to intimidate large corporations, and later became involved with the support of Wikileaks and Julian Assange.

== Beliefs ==

As Anonymous is a collective, rather than a group, it has no official beliefs and ideals. This has begun to change in last year due to a cell within Anonymous, called AnonOps, carrying out a lot of the operations, but as a collective they are still loosely defined. Many members of Anonymous will reject any such group attempting to be more identifiable in the general body.

However, Anonymous, at least certain segments, is known for its support of freedom of information, freedom of speech, personal freedom, transparency within the government and universal access to human rights.[http://anonyops.com/Whoarewe.htm]

== Operation Chanology ==

In 2008, after a video of Tom Cruise talking about Scientology was leaked onto [[YouTube]], Anonymous declared Project Chanology (also known as Operation: Chanology), a crusade by Anonymous to "destroy" the Church of Scientology (CoS) as it exists today. This prolonged campaign was initiated due to the CoS's belief in suppressing information, suppressing it's members, spreading misinformation and abusing taxation laws to remain tax free.

There was also considerable opposition to the core practice in Scientology of having to hand over a significant fortune[http://altreligion.about.com/od/controversymisconception/a/scientology_cos.htm] to be shown what the Scientology believes, which is strongly opposed by the ideal that "Knowledge is Free".

It should be noted that, while Project Chanology/Operation: Chanology has been a more organized form of protest than most Anonymous attacks, and physical protests against Scientology have been organized, there are still Anonymous who believe that spreading generally inappropriate havoc "for the lulz" is still the best way to carry out Operation: Chanology. At least one Anonymous has covered himself in vaseline and toenail clippings and walked out in public with this mixture coating his skin as a form of Operation: Chanology-linked protest.

== Operation Payback ==

Operation Payback began in 2010 as a counter to those who opposed Internet Piracy. It began in response to Distributed Denial of Service attacks against Torrent websites, with return DDoS attacks against pro-copyright and anti-piracy companies.

The attacks received from criticism from the Pirate Party UK and the United States Pirate Party due to their support for a democratic opposition.[http://news.softpedia.com/news/Pirate-Parties-Ask-Anonymous-to-End-DDoS-Campaign-168050.shtml][http://news.softpedia.com/news/Anonymous-to-Pirate-Parties-We-Won-t-Stop-168306.shtml]

After Wikileaks released the secret cables many of those who opposed Wikileaks, or retracted their affiliation[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8190541/WikiLeaks-cyberwar-on-Visa-and-MasterCard-disrupts-Christmas-shopping-in-Operation-Payback.html] due to government pressure, became the next targets. The concept of Freedom of Information was supported by Wikileaks so those who opposed the group became targets, but also those who were pressured into retracting by government forces (the US government was blamed significantly for this) opened up a knowledge of a corruption within these governments, due to their intervention in private business.

These Operation also spun Operation Avenge Assange[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/06/anonymous_launches_pro_wikileaks_campaign/], an operation against those who targeted and victimised Julian Assange after the cable leaks.

== Westboro Baptist Church ==

On February 16, 2011, the Westboro Baptist Church issued a declaration of war against the group Anonymous. WBC claimed that Anonymous had threatened to start a war with their website and church. Despite this going against both Rule 14 of the Internet (Do not feed the trolls) and the principle belief of Freedom of Speech, a member of Anonymous called Topiary agreed to speak on the David Pakman Show on February 24[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZJwSjor4hM].

On the show Anonymous explained that it initially had no interest in WBC because it considered them unimportant and trolls but after being harassed on the show the group replaced their sites with a message explaining their lack of interest.

== Anonymous and the Arab Spring ==
Because of their belief in values as freedom and democracy, Anonymous members are generally on the side of the people opposing dictators.
During the [[Arab Spring]], they initiated 2 operations: Operation [[Egypt]] and Operation [[Tunisia]] which consisted in series of attacks on governmental websites. They also lead some actions against [[Libya]] and recently against the [[Syria | Syrian]] Defense Ministry.

== Symbols ==
In 2009, Anonymous adopted the motto "We are Anonymous. We are Legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us". Contrary to what the [[Bible]] teaches, Anonymous rejects the concept of [[forgiveness]].

In public, members of Anonymous usually wear Guy Fawkes masks, made famous by the comic and movie ''[[V for Vendetta]]''.

== References ==

<references/>

{{terrorism}}

[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Crime]]
[[Category:Activism]]
[[Category:Terrorism]]

Talk:Obama's Religion

2012-10-03T18:27:30Z

JGrant: /* Better to seek permission */ new section

Is it not necessary to delete this talkpage? '''R7''' ~ [[User talk:R7|''Talk'']] 16:06, 4 August 2011 (EDT)
:Why do you say that? [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 16:13, 4 August 2011 (EDT)
::Sorry for the late reaction, but this is an empty talkpage. Normally these things, without content, so far as I saw, are being deleted, or am I wrong? [[User:R7|R7]] 15:44, 8 August 2011 (EDT)

== Question ==

Hey guys! I'm sure this has been discussed before but I can't seem to find the discussion... maybe someone here could point me in the right direction? This article shows pretty conclusively that Obama is a Muslim, I'm not arguing that but... why does it matter? Isn't he entitled to his freedom of religion just like the rest of us? I mean, I disagree totally with his policies bordering on socialistic but this is something I've never understood. (Unless of course he claims to be christian, that would be different). Thanks! [[User:GregorySKroeger|Gregory]] [[Special:Contributions/GregorySKroeger|S.]] [[User talk:GregorySKroeger|Kroeger]] 13:43, 11 August 2011 (EDT)Greg

Hello all! Now I am not trying to disagree with this article but I just found a great Q&A from a trustworthy conservitive Christian website that seems to actually paint Obama as a Christian. What are your thoughts on the article? (The link is below)

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/januaryweb-only/104-32.0.html?start=2

== Fewer than 1% muslims leave the faith applies globally, not in the usa ==

Fewer than 1% muslims leave the Muslims faith applies globally, not in the usa. In the USA people switch religions more frequently than in many places. Plus, what matters is the evidence for Obama in particular and the historical context of the evidence. For example, not many people rise from the dead in history, but the evidence for the resurrection of [[Jesus Christ]] is very good. I do not know enough about Obama's history to know if he was ever a Muslim. If he was a Muslim, I would like to know at what age. It does seem odd that he attended Wright's church and had his daughter baptised if he was a Muslim. Plus, Obama eats pork and drinks alcohol. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:29, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
:::Also, this sentence is too broad: "Obama's background, education, and outlook are Muslim." It clearly ignores his black liberation theology church attendance, his atheist mother, Columbia and Harvard education and his secular progressive like stances on social issues (homosexuality, etc.). Obama fits a heretical liberal Christianity outlook far more than a Muslim outlook. Historical evidence [http://books.google.com/books?id=7_G2UumJCEQC&pg=PR19&lpg=PR19&dq=Historians%27+fallacies:+toward+a+logic+of+historical+thought+rules&source=bl&ots=uG5YbjPDO9&sig=o166eo168lp9fXU20YnBW_T-s1I&hl=en&ei=XzFETtiDN4ng0QGkpIjzCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CFoQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q&f=false is weighed in context] and not through cherry picking. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:42, 11 August 2011 (EDT)

==This article is more harmful than good for this project==

The text clearly says that Barak may be the first Islamic president, there follows a list of mostly straw grasping and "synthesis" of assetions based on certain evidence. I am no fan of Obama, but the ecmaples is SO flawed I'm beginning to think it was started by a troll as '''a parody to debase the authority of this encyclopedia'''. I have only taken the comments below but the whole article, being based on the premise that Obam is Islamic, is on very unstable ground, in fact much of it seems an errand in silliness, but let's disucss it:
*Obama declared in prepared remarks, "The United States has been enriched by '''Muslim Americans'''. Many other Americans have Muslims in their families or have lived in a Muslim-majority country - I know, because '''I am one of them'''
:Synthesis: shows that he has a positive opinion of the input of muslims, and proves that he has either or both lived in muslim countries and had muslims in his family. Does not provide evidence of being Islamic
*Obama's wife Michelle does not accompany him to Muslim nations because [[Sharia law]] would apply to her there; on a presidential trip she was with him until France, but then returned home.
:Synthesis again – many men visiting muslim countries would be less than likely to want their wives there to be subject to their customs. If anything it maybe evidence counter to the point
*Obama's background, education, and outlook are [[Muslim]], and fewer than 1% of Muslims convert to Christianity
:So? 1% do (if we assume the statistic is correct to start with in a western country which I doubt)
*During the third and fourth grades, Obama learned about Islam for two hours each week in religion class, according to the LATimes.
:I learned about it for three years as part of general Social and Religious Studies in High School. I am a Christian and not a muslim. If I had muslims in my family, I would perhaps be even more curious from an accademic point of view.
*Obama's middle name (Hussein) references '''Husayn''',
:Hussein is an Arabic name. Changing a name on conversion is common in Islam but less common in christisanity so nothing can be inferred , especially as his father had that name so he is likely to retain it for family reasons
::This one always amuses me. My father's family was from Germany, and my great-grandfather shared first names with Hitler. My father was named after his grandfather, and is about as far from a Nazi as can be. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 09:25, 12 September 2011 (EDT)
:: Indeed - my aunt was born a Christian, then married my Jewish uncle and converted. But she didn't change her name from Christina. And that's hardly a Jewish name. Of course, now she's divorced from my uncle and I don't know if she went back to Christianity or not, but she's still named Christina. And there's also a convert in my synagogue named "Christian". That's about as un-Jewish a name as you can get right there. For that matter, my grandmother made a big deal about how I had the same name as a former Pope, although given that she named one of her sons Mark, I'm guessing that's just because she was mad my parents didn't name me after her late husband. [[User:Gregkochuconn|Gregkochuconn]] 08:27, 21 February 2012 (EST)
*Obama mentioned his religion as "[[my Muslim faith]]."
:Out of context – past tense
*He has said that "Islam can be compatible with the modern world."
:Empathy and a positive opinion do not make you part of the club.
*Obama said the Muslim call to prayer is "one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset," and recited "with a first-class [[Arabic]] accent" the opening lines: Allah is Supreme! ... I witness that there is no god but Allah ...."
:See above
*Obama stated that the autobiography of Malcolm X, a Nation of Islam leader who became a Muslim, inspired him in his youth
:I was inspired and still am by Gandhi – he was not a Christian, I am.
*Obama uses the Muslim Pakistani pronunciation for "Pakistan" rather than the common American one. Obama repeatedly pronounced "Pakistan" as "Pokiston" in the first presidential debate.
:Dimplomatic lingusitc trait from someone with experience of a culture?
*Obama was thoroughly exposed to Christianity as an adult in Chicago prior to attending law school, yet no one at law school saw him display any interest in converting.
:Like lots of young people, it is often hard to get them interested.
*Obama has chosen the [[Secret Service]] code name "Renegade". "Renegade" conventionally describes someone who goes against normal conventions of behavior, but its first usage was to describe someone who has turned from their religion. It is a word derived from the [[Spanish]] ''renegado'', which originally meant "Christian turned Muslim."<
:Golly it gets even more tenuous. Do we really always think of the derivations of words when we use them?
[[User:DavidMilton|DavidMilton]] 14:08, 8 September 2011 (EDT)

:Ok, then I will edit the article without deviating from its title. [[User:DavidMilton|DavidMilton]] 09:13, 12 September 2011 (EDT)

== "Prepared remarks" ==

Obama referenced Jesus as "a" Son of God in a speech given at a formal event. He reads his remarks from [[teleprompter]]s at such events. This should be distinguished from an interview, where words are chosen less carefully.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:06, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

== Blatant Slander ==

Conservapedia is going downhill. Virtually every piece of evidence on this page is either taken out of context or entirely irrelevant. Obama read a book written from a Muslim point of view. How does that prove he's a Muslim. Does reading the book of Exodus make me Jewish because it's from Moses's point of view?

Obama's been doing a poor job, but you can point that out pretty easily without having to resort to a smear campaign. Don't sink to the liberal level. You guys are better than that--[[User:Bdor24|Bdor24]] 20:34, 19 April 2012 (EDT)

== Trimmed examples ==

I removed the following examples from the article because, even if they are true, they serve as little to no evidence that Obama is Muslim:
*In prepared remarks in April 2012, Obama referred to Jesus as "a" Son of God rather than as "the" Son of God: "And for me, and I’m sure for some of you, it’s also a chance to remember the tremendous sacrifice that led up to that day, and all that Christ endured—not just as '''''a'' Son of God''', but as a human being."[http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-jesus-son-god]
*Obama's wife Michelle does not accompany him to Muslim nations because [[Sharia law]] would apply to her there; on a presidential trip she was with him until France, but then returned home.

Later on, I will be going through the lengthy list of arguments to trim and refine the page to the best arguments that can be made about this. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 23:53, 25 April 2012 (EDT)

:Both are persuasive examples. Deletions of factual information are disfavored. Readers can decide whether something is persuasive.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:58, 25 April 2012 (EDT)
::I respectfully disagree. I will discuss each example in turn.
::*The first example has many more plausible explanations than that Obama is Muslim. My interpretation of the quote is that Obama is contrasting the '''role''' of Jesus as Son of God and as a fully human being. He appears to be expounding the truth that Christ suffered great pain and ultimately death as a human being so that our sins may be forgiven (Isaiah 53:5, 1 Peter 2:21-25). Even if Obama meant to say "the" or nothing at all instead of "a", and even if the speech came in prepared remarks (which, incidentally, even if prepared, we don't know whether they are verbatim or merely an outline), anyone can have a slip of the tongue (ask Neil Armstrong!). But even if Obama meant to say '''a''' Son of God to expressly imply that God has more than one Son, this still would not demonstrate that he is a Muslim, because (as I understand it) Muslims believe that God has '''no''' incarnate son. Thus, this example cannot possibly demonstrate that Obama is Muslim. If it does provide any evidence at all contradicting his assertions that he is Christian, it still does nothing to support the alternative hypothesis that he is Muslim.
::*The second example can be attributed to cultural norms in Muslim countries. Where sharia law is practiced, women are marginalized. Thus, any man, Muslim, Christian, Jew, whoever, would take special considerations before bringing his wife to a country hostile to women. Under the same logic of this argument, my refusal to take friends into sketchy parts of the city where gangs reign would indicate that I am a gangster. Again, this argument is of little probative value.
::The issue I have is that when you have several weak examples, they make the rest of the examples look less strong in comparison. I know that, as a lawyer, you want to not only cover all the potential arguments of a case but also focus on your strongest arguments. I would respectfully suggest the same approach here, and I am willing to help with this. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 00:18, 26 April 2012 (EDT)

== Same-sex marriage ==

Do many Muslims support same-sex marriage? [[User:AcomaMagic|AcomaMagic]] 15:31, 18 August 2012 (EDT)

== Better to seek permission ==

I'd like to go through this page and either rephrase or entirely remove a few of the more "sensationalist" accusations, to make this a more balanced look at the likely religion of the current-and-soon-to-be-former President. I think that many of the examples are valid, but at the same time multiple others are not. I have read the Quran, the Torah, and the Book of Mormon but I am not a Muslim, Jew, or Mormon myself; in the same vein, President Obama isn't necessarily a Muslim for taking inspiration from a Muslim-slanted work or an Islamic activist.

I'd appreciate it if someone could get back to me on this as soon as possible. :)

Regards,
[[User:JGrant|JGrant]] 14:27, 3 October 2012 (EDT)

User:JGrant

2012-10-03T16:23:23Z

JGrant:

Religion

2012-10-03T14:31:39Z

JGrant: /* Parody and joke religions */ Adding descriptions to match the rest of the page, clarifying that there are people who take these things seriously (sad as that is)

"'''Religion'''" refers to a set of core beliefs upon which people base their lives. For [[Christians]], religion includes all of [[logic]] plus the addition of [[faith]]. Morality is often based on religion. Beyond this general definition, the word "religion" is used in several ways:

* '''Formal definition''': "The service and worship of [[God]] or the [[supernatural]];"<ref>[http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=religion "Religion"] in Merriam Webster dictionary.</ref> Under this definition, [[atheism]], [[agnosticism]], and [[secular humanism]] are not "religions." <ref>Religious Groups Participating in Religious Congregations & Membership Study 2000. [http://www.thearda.com/mapsReports/reports/alldenoms.asp]</ref>.
* '''Functional definition''': "A cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith"<ref>[http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=religion "Religion"] in Merriam Webster dictionary.</ref> By this definition, non-theistic belief systems such as [[atheism]], [[humanism]], and [[agnosticism]] could be considered religions. Indeed, the Supreme Court of the [[United States of America]] has acknowledged that "religion" does not need to include a belief in a god or gods, and included Secular Humanism as an example of a non-theistic religion.<ref>"Among religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God, are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism, and others.". [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=367&invol=488#t11 Torcaso v. Watkins, (1961)]</ref><ref>"A federal court of appeals ruled ... Wisconsin prison officials violated an inmate's rights because they did not treat [[atheism]] as a religion." [http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45874 Court rules [[atheism]] a religion] WorldNet Daily</ref>
* '''Organisational definition''': Under the definition, the term refers to a particular religious organisation or movement, such a [[Roman Catholic|Catholicism]], [[Methodist|Methodism]], or [[Lutheran]]ism. These groups generally consist of a central creed or body of beliefs, an ethical component (i.e. a code of morals), a body of literature or holy texts or stories, and a set of individual and communal practices. Under this definition, a person might say, "I'm not religious, because I don't go to church—but I believe in God."
* '''Practical definition''': Under this definition, the term refers to a set of practices, rites, or rituals observed by followers. Under this definition, a person might say, "I'm not religious, because I'm not into rituals. My relationship with God is enough."

== List of religions ==
Religions can be classified according to how many gods the religion recognises.
=== Monotheistic religions ===

Monotheistic ("one god") religions are followed by the vast majority of the world's population.

* [[Bahá'í]]
* [[Christianity]]
* [[Messianic Judaism]]
* [[Islam]]
* [[Jehovah's Witnesses]]
* [[Judaism]]
* [[Rastafari movement]]
* [[Sikhism]]
* [[Zoroastrianism]]

=== Polytheistic religions ===
Polytheistic ("many gods") religions believe in and worship multiple gods or spirits or other supernatural beings. Polytheism has declined since the rise of Christianity, but has seen a recent resurgence among pagan cults in developed nations.

* [[Cao Dai]]
* [[Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints|Mormonism]]
* [[Paganism]]

* [[Shamanism]]
* [[Shinto]]
* [[Wicca]]

=== Pantheistic religions ===
Pantheistic ("all is god") religions believe that all of creation or nature is divine.

* [[Hinduism]]
* [[Jainism]]
* [[New Age]] beliefs

It is also worth noting the existence of 'Panentheism' and the importance of distinguishing it from Pantheism. Panentheism is the belief that God is ''in'' all things and is chiefly manifest in [[Animism]]. Nonetheless, Pantheism and Panentheism have also been shown to feature in some outlooks generally defined as 'Monotheistic' (cf. [[Baruch Spinoza]]).

=== Non-theistic religions and philosophies===
Non-theistic religions do not have a belief in God or gods. Some consider the existence of God to be unknown or irrelevant, while (strong) [[Atheism]] is the belief that asserts it is false.
* [[Agnostic]]ism
* [[Atheism]]
** [[Strong atheism]]
** [[Weak atheism]]
* [[Buddhism]] (though with elements of [[Polytheism]]. The ''devas'' that are found in a supporting role in the Tipitika are not strictly comparable to gods, as they are ultimately mortal.)
* [[Secular Humanism]]
* [[Scientology]] Has stories containing extraterrestrials though none are claimed to be divine.
* The [[Raelism|Raëlian Church]], base on the [[Ancient astronaut theory]].

=== Parody and joke religions ===
Several "religions" have been invented in an effort to denigrate or parody traditional religions. While most adherents of these "religions" are not serious believers, there are inevitably a few people who take the tenets seriously.

* [[Flying Spaghetti Monster|The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster]] - A joke religion created to parody Christianity
* [[Discordianism]] - More likely than the rest of these to be taken seriously, due to parallels with actual religions and a more unified philosophical view than the rest on this list.
* [[Jedi]] - Based on the Star Wars universe, best known for the Australian census prank where large groups of pranksters claimed to be Jedi adherents
* [[Last Thursdayism]] - Another joke religion aimed at parodying Christianity, specifically aimed at Young Earth Creationism
* [[Church of the SubGenius|SubGeniism]] - Parodies both aspects of Christianity and Scientology

== Faith in organised religion ==

The percentage of respondents answering they had a "great deal" or "quite a lot" of confidence in organised religion has decreased in the [[United States]] according to a [[Gallup]] poll taken in 2007. Only 46% of respondents selected either of the choices above. The numbers peaked at 68% in May 1975.<ref>Christian Examiner, Sept. 2007, Vol 25, No 9, Pg. 24</ref>

== Development of religion ==

Secular scholars and liberals, in order to justify their own postmodernist ideal that religious faith is a subjective issue, all religions are equally valid, there are no absolutes and consequently morality is relative, tend to take an evolutionary approach to the development of religion in human societies.

They usually suscribe to the idea that religion first started off as a primitive form of Animism or Spirit Worship, then evolved into polytheistic tribal/national religions, and then from one of these religions emerged Zoroastrianism which saw a gradual decrease in its number of gods until it eventually was transformed into a monotheistic religion, which in turn evolved into the well organized, theologically complex and philosophically deep monotheistic faiths of today such as Christianity, Judaism and Islam.

This idea regarding the development of religion continues to appear in liberal publications, despite the fact that it has little real substantiation and is merely an assumption by liberal scholars, who often hold a certain kind of prejudice towards organized religion.

In reality, the exact opposite viewpoint has more substantiating anthropological evidence. Namely, the viewpoint that Monotheism (faith in one sole creator deity) was the original form of religion, but gradually corrupted until it fragmented into various polytheistic religions, which in turn decayed further giving rise to pantheistic and atheistic religions.

For example, expert egyptologist Flinders Petrie suggests there is sufficient archaological evidence to conclude that the religion of the ancient Egyptians, which is normally categorized as a typical polytheistic religion, was not originally polytheistic, but in fact a monotheistic faith, which only in the later years of the Egyptian empire shifted from monotheism to polytheism.

similarly, doctor Steven Rangdon of Oxford University based on his research of ancient Babylonian inscriptions concludes that the ancient Babylonian religion like the ancient Egyptian religion was also originally monotheistic, and only in the later stages of the Babylonian civilization did it start to transform into a polytheistic and idolatrous religion. Interestingly, this was also the case with the ancient Sumerian religion. The Sumerians believed in over 5000 gods at the time of the end of their civilization. At the start of their history, however, they only worshiped one god, the god of the sky. It is more than likely that the Sumerian god of the sky is the same God of the heavens of the Hebrew Bible.

Interestlingly, this trend can also be seen in far Eastern religions. Shinto (神道), a native polytheistic religion of Japan which now believes in the existence of thousands of deities, was in fact originally a religion with only three gods. As time passed, however, the religion started to fall into a state of decay as believers started to arbitrarily created more and more new gods of their own. The further one goes back in Japanese history the number of gods in Shinto lessens significantly. In addition, some Japanese scholars, for example evangelical theologian Kubo Arimasa, postulate that it is possible that Shinto was in fact originally monotheistic, and the three originals gods decribed in the opening of the oldest known Shinto text ''Kojiki'' were, in fact, originally one creator God, identical to the creator of the Old Testament.

This monotheism → polytheism → pantheism religion curruption hypothesis is also in concordance with the scriptures of the Old Testament which tells explicitly that the origin of polytheistic, idolatrous and pagan religions was the rebellion of sinners who sought to free themselves from the laws of the true creator, the Lord Yahaweh.

==References==
<references/>

==See also==
* [[World Religions by Number of Followers]]
*[[Christianity in Conservapedia]]

==External Links==
*[http://www.aim.org/wls/category/religion/ What Liberals Say - Category: Religion], [[Accuracy In Media]]
*[http://www.opposingviews.com/questions/is-there-a-god Opposing Views: Is There a God?]

{{Virtues}}

[[Category:Religion]]

Anonymous

2012-10-03T14:19:09Z

JGrant: /* Operation Chanology */ Clarifying a few things, adding some others.

'''Anonymous''' is the name given to a online group (described by supporters as "hacktivists", opponents as terrorists) who carry out attacks on various websites, usually employing various forms of [[network abuse]], amongst other general Internet activities.

The group gained notoriety in recent years with its participation in Operation Payback, which included a series of actions in defence of whistle-blowing organization Wikileaks and its figurehead [[Julian Assange]], Operation Sony and from [[Westboro Baptist Church]]'s declaration of war on Anonymous, which they mostly ignored.

== History ==

The use of the "Anonymous" collective name to describe the source of activities dates to 2003 (it has no official founders or membership, so dating its founding is difficult) on various image boards on the Internet, the most famously attributed of which is 4chan.

In its early days its focus was focused on "[[Internet trolling|trolling]]" various websites<ref>http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=459214</ref>, usually by including offensive or inappropriate material on the websites of groups with whom they disagree.

In 2008, in response to a [[Tom Cruise]] video <ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCHkHZIyrdo</ref>, Anonymous became more homogeneous in its opposition to the Church of [[Scientology]] <ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCbKv9yiLiQ</ref>. Known as Operation Chanology, it included Denial-of-Service attacks, real life protests and mass publication and spread of information usually withheld by members of the church.

In 2010, it rose to notoriety due to Anonymous' actions against those who opposed copyright violation. Operation Payback was initially about using network abuse in a vain attempt to intimidate large corporations, and later became involved with the support of Wikileaks and Julian Assange.

== Beliefs ==

As Anonymous is a collective, rather than a group, it has no official beliefs and ideals. This has begun to change in last year due to a cell within Anonymous, called AnonOps, carrying out a lot of the operations, but as a collective they are still loosely defined. Many members of Anonymous will reject any such group attempting to be more identifiable in the general body.

However, Anonymous, at least certain segments, is known for its support of freedom of information, freedom of speech, personal freedom, transparency within the government and universal access to human rights.[http://anonyops.com/Whoarewe.htm]

== Operation Chanology ==

In 2008, after a video of Tom Cruise talking about Scientology was leaked onto [[YouTube]], Anonymous declared Project Chanology (also known as Operation: Chanology), a crusade by Anonymous to "destroy" the Church of Scientology (CoS) as it exists today. This prolonged campaign was initiated due to the CoS's belief in suppressing information, suppressing it's members, spreading misinformation and abusing taxation laws to remain tax free.

There was also considerable opposition to the core practice in Scientology of having to hand over a significant fortune[http://altreligion.about.com/od/controversymisconception/a/scientology_cos.htm] to be shown what the Scientology believes, which is strongly opposed by the ideal that "Knowledge is Free".

It should be noted that, while Project Chanology/Operation: Chanology has been a more organized form of protest than most Anonymous attacks, and physical protests against Scientology have been organized, there are still Anonymous who believe that spreading generally inappropriate havoc "for the lulz" is still the best way to carry out Operation: Chanology. At least one Anonymous has covered himself in vaseline and toenail clippings and walked out in public with this mixture coating his skin as a form of Operation: Chanology-linked protest.

== Operation Payback ==

Operation Payback began in 2010 as a counter to those who opposed Internet Piracy. It began in response to Distributed Denial of Service attacks against Torrent websites, with return DDoS attacks against pro-copyright and anti-piracy companies.

The attacks received from criticism from the Pirate Party UK and the United States Pirate Party due to their support for a democratic opposition.[http://news.softpedia.com/news/Pirate-Parties-Ask-Anonymous-to-End-DDoS-Campaign-168050.shtml][http://news.softpedia.com/news/Anonymous-to-Pirate-Parties-We-Won-t-Stop-168306.shtml]

After Wikileaks released the secret cables many of those who opposed Wikileaks, or retracted their affiliation[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8190541/WikiLeaks-cyberwar-on-Visa-and-MasterCard-disrupts-Christmas-shopping-in-Operation-Payback.html] due to government pressure, became the next targets. The concept of Freedom of Information was supported by Wikileaks so those who opposed the group became targets, but also those who were pressured into retracting by government forces (the US government was blamed significantly for this) opened up a knowledge of a corruption within these governments, due to their intervention in private business.

These Operation also spun Operation Avenge Assange[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/06/anonymous_launches_pro_wikileaks_campaign/], an operation against those who targeted and victimised Julian Assange after the cable leaks.

== Westboro Baptist Church ==

On February 16, 2011, the Westboro Baptist Church issued a declaration of war against the group Anonymous. WBC claimed that Anonymous had threatened to start a war with their website and church. Despite this going against both Rule 14 of the Internet (Do not feed the trolls) and the principle belief of Freedom of Speech, a member of Anonymous called Topiary agreed to speak on the David Pakman Show on February 24[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZJwSjor4hM].

On the show Anonymous explained that it initially had no interest in WBC because it considered them unimportant and trolls but after being harassed on the show the group replaced their sites with a message explaining their lack of interest.

== Anonymous and the Arab Spring ==
Because of their belief in values as freedom and democracy, Anonymous members are generally on the side of the people opposing dictators.
During the [[Arab Spring]], they initiated 2 operations: Operation [[Egypt]] and Operation [[Tunisia]] which consisted in series of attacks on governmental websites. They also lead some actions against [[Libya]] and recently against the [[Syria | Syrian]] Defense Ministry.

== Symbols ==
In 2009, Anonymous adopted the motto "We are Anonymous. We are Legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us". Contrary to what the [[Bible]] teaches, Anonymous rejects the concept of [[forgiveness]].

In public, members of Anonymous usually wear Guy Fawkes masks, made famous by the comic and movie ''[[V for Vendetta]]''.

== References ==

<references/>

{{terrorism}}

[[Category:Internet]]
[[Category:Crime]]

User talk:Jpatt

2012-10-03T11:51:21Z

JGrant: /* Hey! New user, hoping to contribute usefully */

== Archive 2008 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/Subway_Troll Here]

== Archive 2009 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2009]

== Archive 2010 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2010]

== Archive 2011 ==
[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Jpatt/2011‎]

== Blank3r ==

Good job stopping him.[[User:JonM|JonM]] 14:40, 11 January 2012 (EST)

==Adambro==
Hi Jpatt, what did you mean by "AdamBro is clan but keep on eye on him. Sock puppets of BL4NK3R; NoohWicky, UtterMuppet, Maggie, B0LLL0X". Is he a sockpuppet ? --[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 17:04, 11 January 2012 (EST)
:AdamBro is clean, as far as socks are involved. He might be what Tony has said, so follow his future edits.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 17:10, 11 January 2012 (EST)
::I will, thanks for the info. --[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 17:15, 11 January 2012 (EST)

==RaymondW==

Hi Jpatt:

My former account on Conservapedia was named r136a1. The reason you provided for blocking this account is user name policy: please consider recreating your account with a real first name and last initial. Could you please tell me where this policy can be found on Conservapedia? And also, just to clarify, I realize it is not a real name, but it is not a random string of letters and numbers; it is the name of the most luminous star. By the way, your page says that you block liberal fascists; but, and correct me if I'm wrong, I believe that most agree that fascists are extremely right wing, but liberals are left wing.

:The username policy is at the discretion of administrators to help combat troll accounts. Please see the link above describing Jonah Goldberg's book for further clues to fascism.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:10, 25 June 2012 (EDT)

== Thank you ==

Thanks for the welcome and reverting vandalism on my user and talk page! I don't understand that vandal --- it was my first day and I don't think i wrote anything controversial, why would anyone do that to me? [[User:Lansing|Lansing]] 12:02, 12 January 2012 (EST)
:Get used to liberal intimidation. We can block their ideology but they counter with vandalism. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 12:15, 12 January 2012 (EST)
::What a shame, indeed. [[User:Lansing|Lansing]] 14:35, 13 January 2012 (EST)

I think KendallP/BostonBakedBeans23 realized he wasn't following the name rule, and so changed it so he wouldn't get blocked. [[User:DynaboyJ|DynaboyJ]] 14:17, 16 January 2012 (EST)
:You would like to see Kendall unblocked?--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:24, 16 January 2012 (EST)
::Yes, and thank you for unblocking him. [[User:DynaboyJ|DynaboyJ]] 14:28, 16 January 2012 (EST)

: Also, Thanks! --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 20:03, 12 February 2012 (EST)
:: Once again! --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 12:37, 4 September 2012 (EDT)

== Rubio ==

I'm curious as to why you reverted my edit? Everything I said was true and sourced. [[User:Ayzmo|Ayzmo :)]] 13:18, 20 January 2012 (EST)

Calling him a liberal is just tit for tat namecalling, but his support for PIPA is well documented. That should stay in the article.[[User:RachelW|RachelW]] 13:20, 20 January 2012 (EST)

:Add the PIPA stuff. Keep the liberal statement out. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 13:23, 20 January 2012 (EST)

::Thank you, I will. I don't apprive of name calling, either. [[User:RachelW|RachelW]] 13:25, 20 January 2012 (EST)

It wasn't done in namecalling. It has been stated by several members, including Andy, that any Republican supporting SOPA/PIPA is a liberal/rino no matter their record and stances. I questioned it but it was insisted. So I added what I did to Rubio since he was a sponsor. I don't consider Rubio liberal but I don't consider Lamar Smith liberal either. [[User:Ayzmo|Ayzmo :)]] 15:58, 20 January 2012 (EST)

Yes it is name calling. It was name calling when they did it to Lamar Smith and it was name calling when you did it right back to Rubio. Two wrongs don't make a right, and the proper response to an inappropriate edit is not another inappropriate edit. [[User:RachelW|RachelW]] 16:01, 20 January 2012 (EST)

:It's too early to label Rubio based on his supporting legislation. The Tea Party backs conservatives and Rubio. Also, I thought it was to early to label Scott Brown. I was wrong once. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:37, 20 January 2012 (EST)

== Vandalism ==

You do realise that you just reverted all my edits to the ones done by RickPeterson, who got blocked for inserting nonsense? Just saying... --[[User:GeorgeLi|GeorgeLi]] 16:24, 24 January 2012 (EST)
:Yea, Oops--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:26, 24 January 2012 (EST)
::Well, never mind. You fixed it now. I guess it gets confusing dealing with all those idiots. --[[User:GeorgeLi|GeorgeLi]] 16:27, 24 January 2012 (EST)

== MPR ==

Just letting you know that it was federal court that overturned Prop 8, not, as implied by your latest entry, a Californian court. Cheers. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 17:23, 7 February 2012 (EST)

==Two issues==
*(a) Archive 107 from [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page/Archive_index here] mistakenly brings up Archive 106;
*(b) [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Main_Page/Archive_index/108 Talk:Main Page/Archive index/108] need to be added. Thanks. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 11:51, 12 February 2012 (EST)

:Noted--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:02, 13 February 2012 (EST)

== Thanks ==

I wasn't aware I warranted vandalism :P Thanks for the reverts. [[User:Ayzmo|Ayzmo :)]] 19:37, 25 February 2012 (EST)

:You know what they say? Without evil we would never recognize good. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 20:44, 25 February 2012 (EST)

== Hi redneck ==

You don't have the skills to edit an encyclopedia. Please go, you monumental idiot. --[[User:Sextertainer|Sextertainer]] 13:47, 28 February 2012 (EST)
::Really, your brain is way too small. You can't write properly. Really. --[[User:Sextertainer|Sextertainer]] 13:48, 28 February 2012 (EST)

Your mom called, she said you are late for your LGBT counseling. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 15:23, 28 February 2012 (EST)

== Description ==

Hi Mr./Mrs. Jpatt,

(Please accept my apologies on the ambiguous greeting. Gender is difficult on the web without further research) Could you please give me a description of this web site? I'm writing about online media interfaces for a course at my university and would love to learn more.

Thank you,
Sarah

:Hi Sarah, try this [[Conservapedia:About]] and read about the wiki founder Andy Schlafly [[Andy_Schlafly]]. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 09:05, 2 March 2012 (EST)
::Thank you for the information. I will be in touch with Mr. Schlafly shortly. Sarah

==Judeo-Christian principles in the US Constitution==
Please show them to me. If there are none, please revert my editing of the United States of America page. - [[Rdsmith]] 10:42 (EST), 8 March 2012
: "all men are endowed by their Creator," In other words, the same era of people that wrote the Constitution, ratified the Declaration of Independence. I will not remove Judeo-Christian principles from the United States of America page. The Founders put us on the Gregorian calender. This means the Judeo-Christian.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 11:04, 8 March 2012 (EST)

::That is the Declaration of Independence, which is not law, it is a deist reference, and to cite Jefferson for Judeo-Christian values is moot (at least) as he created his own Bible where he cut the New Testament to present Jesus as good moral teacher who died. The Gregorian calender was the prevailing calender at the time, and creating a new calender would have been folly. Again, please show me exclusively Judeo-Christian principles in the US Constitution. [[Rdsmith]] 11:35 (EST), 8 March 2012

:::Why create a new calender when the Farsi and Chinese calenders already existed? Again, please stop trying to split hairs on the subject between secular and religion. We were not founded as a theocracy and we were not founded as a Godless nation either. The overblown "Jefferson was not religious" lovefest has been debunked already. Your "moot" point that nobody talks about is that Jefferson founded the American Bible Society and paid for the importation of 20000 Bibles. Look at the opening preambles of the 50 state constitutions and their references to God. [http://www.christianindex.org/617.article]. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 12:06, 8 March 2012 (EST)
::::I understand that this story has been circulating for many years in many forms but none of this is true. Jefferson did not found the American Bible Society. Neither he nor Congress paid for 20,000 Bibles to be imported. The 20,000 number comes from a proposed resolution in Congress to import Bibles because there were no printers in the US during the revolutionary war and we were obviously embargoed from importing Bibles during the war. After the war there was a real shortage. Jefferson really wasn't Christian in any sense: he may have believed in his own idea of God but he absolutely didn't accept the divinity of Jesus Christ, his resurrection, the triune person of Christ, etc. These beliefs are central to Christianity as far as I am aware. I may be wrong about whether evangelicals accept the various personages of Christ. Jefferson accepted none of them. I understand the desire of Christian men to associate important figures with their faiths but we wouldn't do this with a villain or a blasphemer and we oughtn't do it with a man who didn't adore Jesus Christ as his lord and savior but only as some random guy who lived in Palestine a long time ago. Nate [[User:NKeaton|Nate]] 13:06, 8 March 2012 (EST)

:::::I fixed my quote above. Jefferson did respect religion and is quoted praising the Bible. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 13:16, 8 March 2012 (EST)

::::The people living in the colonies were primarily accustomed to a European (therefore Christ-based) calender so using the Farsi or Chinese calenders would be of equal folly. I'm talking about the government of the United States and since the Articles of Confederation has been godless, as for America the nation, I'll agree it is has a strong Christian heritage (then again to question Christianity openly has been taboo until contemporary times).The "godliness" of the constitutions of the colonies range from freedom to religion to religious requirements for office (the latter being specifically opposed by the Constitution in Article VI). You can fixate on preambles all you want, all they state is ends, while I'm look at means, but I looked at the preambles of the constitutions of the states when America was founded, not very Judeo-Christian to me.

::::So, for a third time, in the context of " the United States Constitution was written; grounded on republican political principles and Judeo-Christian values," show me the specific Judeo-Christian values in the Articles of Confederation or the Constitution. If not, then I can show you the Enlightenment principles the government of this country was founded upon. The Declaration of Independence was based on Locke, but even Locke uses the term "God" as opposed to more deistic references of the Dec. -- [[Rdsmith]] 11:42 (EST) 9 March 2012

:::::I told you once but you didn't listen. You asked me three times but I will not respond. Is gay marriage in the Constitution?--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 11:59, 9 March 2012 (EST)

Would the "exclusively Judeo-Christian (or republican) principles in the US Constitution" include chattel slavery and the fact that people of African descent counted as 3/5 of a human being? [[User:HarveyG|HarveyG]] 12:51, 9 March 2012 (EST)

::::::White men may have purchased slaves but it was black men that sold them. It is liberal to belittle the Founders. With God in their hearts [http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html] the Founders set in motion the most powerful nation on the planet. Liberty, honor, and human rights central. They risked everything and got it right. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:31, 9 March 2012 (EST)

== Suggestions ==

Thank you so much for your great work and for the welcome message.
I am so encouraged to see this truly excellent encyclopedia representing what wikipedia could have been with some serious intellectual honesty.

A few suggestions:
1) Human Life International has a new president and is undergoing some great improvements in their ministry, including updating articles and resources. Perhaps they could be added to your top pro-life websites.
2) lovefacts.org is a veritable gold-mine of good medical references documenting the harms of induced abortion and contraception, which we need mine to improve many articles on the subject.
3) pop.org is the Population Research Institutes homepage; it is a pro-life alternative to PP's Guttmacher Institute, and they expose the myth of overpopulation and the numerous human rights abuses throughout the world in the name of "population control." Perhaps "overpopulation myth" or something similar would be a good page to refute these widespread errors driving the culture of death and its devotion to abortion and contraception.

I look forward to contributing in a forum where my input is appreciated and allowed to benefit the souls of all who may read the articles.
[[User:Frankgyn|Frankgyn]] 16:12, 29 March 2012 (EDT)

:Awesome, glad to see your interest and feel free to update articles or create new ones. Blessings. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 21:34, 29 March 2012 (EDT)

==Holy Week==
I'll be mostly absent this week. Blessed Easter! --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 19:38, 2 April 2012 (EDT)

== Reversion of vandalism ==

I blocked User:ShagMe but I am unable to revert the vandalism due to the spam filter inexplicably preventing me from doing so. It appears that a series of colons (that I obviously can't type here lest the spam filter get me again) is triggering the problem. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|Hello!]] 18:51, 30 April 2012 (EDT)

== Question Evolution! Campaign is achieving its goal - people are questioning evolution! ==
[[File:Increasing.JPG|150px|right]]
'''American [[young earth creationism]] increased in the last two years - Gallup survey.''' [http://creation.com/question-evolution Question evolution! campaign] and other efforts of creationists are working!.[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/06/american-young-earth-creationism.html]

It is so good to be a Bible believing creationist! It is so easy to crush the pseudoscience of [[evolution]]ism. It merely takes getting the anti-evolution message out there.[http://creation.com/creation-timely-tool-for-todays-evangelist][http://creation.com/taking-creation-evangelism-to-the-streets] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 07:34, 2 June 2012 (EDT)

== Thanks for removing the It Gets Worse link from the Anti-Semite website! ==

Thank you for removing the link to the It Gets Worse page, from a notoriously racist and anti-Semitic "Southern Conservative" website which blames the Jews for Communism, feminism, Facebook, and Psychoanalysis. I hate anti-Semitism, and I know Conservapedia doesn't endorse it either. I know it was a mistake that you posted the link first, but I looked at the website (Jett and Jahn media), and I was disgusted at the anti-Semitism and racism they espouse. They even have downloadable games which show the Ku Klux Klan as good guys! These guys give conservatism a bad name, and they are thankfully nobodies in the conservative movement.

You are indeed a great editor, who learns from his mistakes like any decent human being! Conservapedia forever! -[[User:RKLuffy88|RKLuffy88]] June 18, 2012

:I have notified [[Jewish Internet Defense Force]]. Thanks again for pointing that out. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:00, 18 June 2012 (EDT)
==Thanks==
Thank you. Changes made. You may lock the page again if you wish. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 21:32, 21 July 2012 (EDT)

== Malaysian woman shooter. ==

"but is there any discussion from NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, WaPo, LAtimes on the athlete in question?."
Yes, yes there is.:
*[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48371542#.UBSe4XilgUQ NBC/MSNBC]
*[http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/baby-boom-malaysian-olympian-months-pregnant-16868986#.UBSe-XilgUQ ABC]
*[http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-33747_162-57481389/baby-boom-malaysian-olympic-shooter-is-8-months-pregnant/?tag=mncol;lst;1 CBS]
*[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=157479015 NPR]
*[http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/pregnant-malaysian-shooter-relieved-not-to-go-into-labor-finishes-34th-in-10m-air-rifle/2012/07/28/gJQACQhtFX_story.html WAPO]
*[http://www.latimes.com/sports/olympics/la-sp-oly-pregnant-shooter-20120729,0,5371824.story LA Times].
[[User:RayM|RayM]] 22:30, 28 July 2012 (EDT)

:I stand corrected. Nice job.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:40, 28 July 2012 (EDT)

== What do you mean? ==
What do you mean when you said this: ''Thank God you registered here to set the record straight'' when I posted my opinion on the Obama birth certificate issue on the talk page. I am a cynical person and I usually interpret responses from people I do not know to be sarcastic, I may be wrong, but what was your intention?--[[User:TheQuestioner|TheQuestioner]] 13:04, 3 August 2012 (EDT)

:Your assertion about Obama's life and conspiracies are just opinions not based on facts. We know little to nothing about Obama and to claim "proven beyond a doubt" is just absurd. The man is a serial liar, his view of America and of capitalism is foreign to most. He may or may not be a natural-born. His secrecy prevents the rest of us from knowing for certain anything about him. Call it a conspiracy theory, I'm not offended but don't act like you have the facts because nobody does.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:22, 3 August 2012 (EDT)

{{cquote| The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them. - Patrick Henry}}
::"We know little to nothing about Obama" Are you counting the facts about his life mentioned in ''Dreams from My Father''? Or do you think that part or all of his autobiography is untrue? [[User:GregG|GregG]] 16:33, 3 August 2012 (EDT)

:::You believe 36 discrepancies? [http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/07/unreal-over-3-dozen-discrepancies-found-in-barack-obamas-dreams-of-my-father-video/] You can't trust a liar in small matters and surely you can't trust a liar in big matters.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 16:46, 3 August 2012 (EDT)
::::I'm sorry I can't give a full reply right now; I would like to take some time to check out the book and the video rather than jumping to conclusions as is standard for the [[hearsay society]]. [[User:GregG|GregG]] 17:06, 3 August 2012 (EDT)
:::::Well, I didn't read either book and I have no interest. I can comment without being accused of acting like the hearsay society. Jumping to conclusions is kind of odd given the facts - Obama is a known liar. You either give him a pass about his past statements, which is a guide to his character or you're not prepared to comment because you want to hear both sides first. I have made up my mind and he is guilty of whatever accusation is tossed at him. Am I right? I'll await your research. If I am wrong, I'll ask for forgiveness. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 18:46, 3 August 2012 (EDT)

:Our party recently had famous Austrian-born actor [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]] as California Governor. State governors can be foreign-born, and our party whether we like it or not has selected a foreign-born man to run for governor. The birth issue as you've said is un-confirmable and isn't it '''''more important''''' that Obama is ruining our country with his high tax goals and taking away individual rights on health care? Why not put the unconfirmed birth issue in the main body of the article - it's not like all conservatives agree with the birthers, conservative writer [[Ann Coulter]] doesn't agree with the birthers - see here from Fox News: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIRaWMwX68A] - the person who posted the video seems to be a birther because they are anti-Coulter, but she is a well-known conservative writer and she completely rejects the birther argument. Why not have the intro focus on Obama's tax-and-spend, and anti-individual-rights agenda in his health care policies?--[[User:TheQuestioner|TheQuestioner]] 18:02, 3 August 2012 (EDT)

::I don't see the problem. In my opinion is that Obama's position on a child born from a botched abortion is to be left to die is just plain evil. Maybe that should be the second sentence. Regardless, this is not my encyclopedia. You are certainly free to make changes but we do frown upon deleting material. So rearrange as you see fit. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 18:46, 3 August 2012 (EDT)

== Thank you! ==

Cheers for unlocking the LSD article for me, much appreciated. Little bit busy right now so might not get round to it till tomorrow [[User:Sambiam|Samb]]

== Go Question Evolution! USA! USA! USA! USA! ==

[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/09/our-north-america-initiatives-are.html Creationist benchmark is hit and exceeded in the United States]

[[Creation Ministries International]] breaks through key USA key benchmark! The first Question evolution! sound barrier has been breached. Watch the campaign grow faster and faster and faster. USA! USA! USA! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 05:19, 8 September 2012 (EDT)

[[File:Sound barrier.jpg|center|200px]]
== Liberal users ==
I having trouble with two liberal users who are insisting on hiding known facts. Could you please explain to them that this is not allowed here. [[User:CraigF2|CraigF2]] 20:15, 12 September 2012 (EDT)

:Craig, I know the feeling. They come here to poke holes in everything and are determined to show they are right and conservatives are wrong. There is not much you can do. Eventually, they will get bored with attacking you and move on. Fact tags stuff is nonsense here. They can spend all day fact tagging every page. Their lazy butts need to do a search for the answer or leave the statement alone. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 14:26, 13 September 2012 (EDT)
::I agree, but you are an administrator and while I can fight the good fight, some of these people threaten to block me and abuse me, calling me a liar and so forth. Take a look at what one of these guys wrote at [[On the Road]]. That this family friendly website would allow such glowing praise for an intensely liberal book which supports drug and alcohol abuse, deviant sexual pleasure and rejection of Jesus, makes me sick. I'd delete it, but MattyD would probably get his crony brendan to block me. [[User:CraigF2|CraigF2]] 11:02, 14 September 2012 (EDT)

== Ad Hominem attack ==

[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACraigF2&action=historysubmit&diff=1006355&oldid=1006354 here]. While I know you might not like Sharon too much, and that you do not get along together very well, I must ask you to please refrain from ad hominem attacks. These comments only serve to inflame discussion even more. Thank you for understanding,
[[User:Brenden|brenden]] 22:22, 14 September 2012 (EDT)

:Who said I don't like Sharon or that we don't get along? Craig has created more pages in his short time here than Sharon has. She is busy with U.S.A. wiki. When somebody attacks new users with a superiority comment--I take sides. She is not being helpful and your attention to Craig is not creating a welcoming environment. We all want perfection but there is no test here. Fix what is wrong and shut up. Telling someone to go read some more books, maybe you should tell Sharon to ease off instead of me. Thanks for understanding. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:34, 14 September 2012 (EDT)
:: I was polite the first time, but since you have not returned that courtesy, I must repeat it, ''sans'' good faith. You, are not merely creating a belligerent environment, but also defending your actions in creating that environment. Given that you literally warned another user of their [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:CraigF2&curid=123273&diff=1006345&oldid=1006332 snarky and inappropriate comments[, I cannot imagine you are responding in good faith. I therefore repeat: Use common courtesy, when communicating with editors, or about them.

Note: I am aware of your prolonged attacks against that "USA" wiki, and while your actions are quite indefensible, I have restrained from speaking about it. Clearly you couldn't afford Sharon that same respect though..[[User:Brenden|brenden]] 21:59, 15 September 2012 (EDT)

:Trolling redacted. Good luck with your bizarro world talk. I see Matty took your advice #fail --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 22:33, 15 September 2012 (EDT)
::I see you are still steamed. Get over it.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 17:38, 27 September 2012 (EDT)
:So you saw my comments on that place?[[User:Brenden|brenden]] 17:40, 27 September 2012 (EDT)
::Never heard of it.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 17:43, 27 September 2012 (EDT)
:::oh.[[User:Brenden|brenden]] 17:47, 27 September 2012 (EDT)

== "Fluff" ==

J-the edits I made removed fluff and apologies, and removed duplicate material to make a stronger argument. I would really like to see where you think I softened the criticism: what specific passages do you object to? [[User:MattyD|MattyD]] 12:59, 16 September 2012 (EDT)

:Find another page :) --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 13:00, 16 September 2012 (EDT)

== Hey! New user, hoping to contribute usefully ==

Hey, Jpatt, I just found Conservapedia and am eager to jump in and help contribute any way I can. Are there any articles that need cleaning/proofing/citing or anything else I could help out with?

Blessings of the Almighty on you :) [[User:JGrant|JGrant]] 23:06, 2 October 2012 (EDT)

:Thanks a million. My page has a list of items I haven't touched in some time if you feel so inclined. What brought you here if I may ask? --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 23:54, 2 October 2012 (EDT)

::I actually heard about both this site and another from a middle-ideology news site that promoted you as "conservative kooks" and the other website (can't remember the name, started with an R, I think) as "liberal morons." I checked them both out, found I agreed with you guys on many theological points and with the other guys on a lot of scientific ones. Got kicked off of their site for being too religious and noting how they treated Christianity unfairly, so I decided to see how tolerant you are over here. So far, looks promising. :) [[User:JGrant|JGrant]] 07:49, 3 October 2012 (EDT)

::Also (sorry for double-post), would it be alright for me to note Revelations 20:13 on the [[Salvation]] page? I note that it makes no mention of it, despite the verse pretty clearly referring to the possibility of salvation through works at the End of Days. [[User:JGrant|JGrant]] 07:51, 3 October 2012 (EDT)

User talk:Jpatt

2012-10-03T11:49:43Z

JGrant: /* Hey! New user, hoping to contribute usefully */

User:JGrant

2012-10-03T03:16:00Z

JGrant: Created page with "I am a relatively-new user to Conservapedia, nice to meet you all :) I'm a fine arts major at a small Methodist college, loving the opportunity to use my voice and music to prai..."

I am a relatively-new user to Conservapedia, nice to meet you all :)

I'm a fine arts major at a small Methodist college, loving the opportunity to use my voice and music to praise the Lord.

I am a fundamentally rational person, and lack the conviction and emotional strength to sustain passionate and full Belief in God the Almighty, but He laid out in the Bible that "[T]he sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works." (Rev20:13 KJV)

I am, I admit, too weak a man to set aside my misgivings and accept the Christ as my saviour, but I pray that through my efforts, however small they may be, I might stand before God on the day of judgement and hear from Him "Well done, thou good and faithful servant. Enter unto the joy of the Lord."

User talk:Jpatt

2012-10-03T03:06:20Z

JGrant: /* Hey! New user, hoping to contribute usefully */ new section