Difference between revisions of "Talk:Pro-abortion"
(→Why are the Conservapedia Commandments not being followed?) |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
DanH, how do you rationalize that your reversal of my edit was not in violation of Conservapedia Commandment #5? It's disrespectful for a SysOp to arbitrarily undo edits like mine, that are in the spirit of the Commandments, without comment. | DanH, how do you rationalize that your reversal of my edit was not in violation of Conservapedia Commandment #5? It's disrespectful for a SysOp to arbitrarily undo edits like mine, that are in the spirit of the Commandments, without comment. | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Dan, I'm going to agree with Dinsdale to a certain extent. Using the "pro-death" line was a statement of opinion (even though true), and use of it to describe pro-choice and abortion is extremely rare. What needs to happen is to write the article in such a way (with citations) that the reader is left with the feeling and idea that "pro-choice" is exactly "pro-death". [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 16:01, 7 January 2008 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 21:01, January 7, 2008
I know it's a bit late to comment, but how is an explanation of the term "liberal bias"? Or, how would you put it ("the term comes from the idea that...") in a non-liberally-biassed way? --G7mzh 10:21, 27 July 2007 (EDT)
Why are the Conservapedia Commandments not being followed?
I see that when I had edited out an opinion, leaving a factual statement, the opinion was restored without comment. How is that adhering to the commandments to rely on verifiable facts in these articles, and how can you expect people to find Conservapedia credible when the commandments are applied subjectively? I'd appreciate a response.
DanH, how do you rationalize that your reversal of my edit was not in violation of Conservapedia Commandment #5? It's disrespectful for a SysOp to arbitrarily undo edits like mine, that are in the spirit of the Commandments, without comment.
- Dan, I'm going to agree with Dinsdale to a certain extent. Using the "pro-death" line was a statement of opinion (even though true), and use of it to describe pro-choice and abortion is extremely rare. What needs to happen is to write the article in such a way (with citations) that the reader is left with the feeling and idea that "pro-choice" is exactly "pro-death". Karajou 16:01, 7 January 2008 (EST)
