Changes

1,006 bytes added ,  03:45, December 11, 2009
no edit summary
Line 194: Line 194:     
: Try taking our [[Essay:Quantifying Open-Mindedness|open-mindedness test]].  You might break the record for the lowest score!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:30, 10 December 2009 (EST)
 
: Try taking our [[Essay:Quantifying Open-Mindedness|open-mindedness test]].  You might break the record for the lowest score!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:30, 10 December 2009 (EST)
 +
 +
It seems that this website is full of contradictions. An encyclopedia with an admitted bias, but says its trustworthy? If journalists are all biased in the main stream media then how do you get information? There are plenty of right wing commentators but you can't create facts out of commentary. People have to actually report the information. Why are there adults making fun of people who don't agree with them? I would also like to take issue with what truth is thought of as. Taking original intent in your view of the constitution and reducing government power does not make your political ideology any more truthful. Just as trying to make the government more powerful and interpreting the constitution more broadly does not make a political ideology any more truthful. I am mystified how believing these things adds to truth. Truth is what is actual reality. Neither changing government power or interpreting a piece of writing really leads to truth. --[[User:johnsm]]21:30, 10 December 2009 (est)
    
==Registration==
 
==Registration==
4

edits