11
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 1:
Line 1: − {| align=right border=3 cellspacing=0 style="border-width: 5px; border-color: #c0c0c0; background: #e0e0e0; margin: 2em;"+ − + − − + − When a student handed in her paper using the date-markers “[[BCE]]” and "CE” from [[Wikipedia]], Schlafly realized that Wikipedia, despite its claim of neutrality, contained bias against the achievements of [[Christianity]] and conservatism. Other occasions of [[liberal bias]], including the reversion of factual edits about the 2005 Kansas Evolution Hearings, led to the creation and launch of Conservapedia. + − Though Conservapedia originally contained mostly [[history]] articles, it has grown over two years to be a general reference, with information about history, [[math]], [[science]], [[politics]], [[religion]] and other topics. It also contains [[Conservapedia:Debate Topics|debates]], [[essays]] and [[Conservapedia:Index|educational resources]].+ + + − In March 2007 it was picked up by the media, and faced a barrage of [[vandalism]] (See [[Essay:Examples of Moronic Vandalism by the "tolerant"|Examples of Moronic Vandalism by the "tolerant"]]). Ever since then, it has continued to grow, and now has [[Special:Statistics|tens of millions of page views]], and enjoys prominence on search engines.+ − == Rapid Expansion of Web Traffic Relative to Many Conservative Websites== − − Conservapedia was listed in May of 2009 as one of the 50 most popular conservative websites in terms of web traffic by the [[conservative]] blog Right Wing News.<ref name=popular50>[http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2009/03/the_50_most_popular_websites_o.php The 50 Most Popular Conservative Websites], ''Right Wing News'', March 16, 2009.</ref> Considering that Conservapedia was only about 3 years old in May of 2009 and was doing better in web traffic than some veteran conservative websites, the rise in web traffic for Conservapedia during its existence has been quite favorable. In May of 2009, the website Right Wing News determined with the help of [[Alexa]] data that Conservapedia was ranked 37 out of 50 in terms of its website traffic relative to other popular conservative websites.<ref name=popular50/> Conservapedia is looking forward to greatly spreading awareness of Conservapedia via the significant expansion of its [[YouTube]] channel subscriber base at [http://www.youtube.com/user/conservapediavideos Conservapediavideos]. [[Conservapediavideos]] will likely soon feature a multitude of excellent conservative videos. − ==Leadership==+ − Unlike Wikipedia, which bills itself as a [[democratic]] system and ends up functioning as a [[mobocracy]], Conservapedia employs a hierarchy based on a [[Meritocracy|merit system]].+ − + − ==Educational atmosphere==+ − Due to the existence of essays and debates on Conservapedia, and conventions such as the [[Conservapedia:Commandments|"90/10 rule"]] and the use of real names, Conservapedia successfully fosters an [[education]]al environment. Because liberal bias is not allowed, much information that would be elsewhere censored can be found on Conservapedia; often it is one of the only places to find such information in one place. − ==Promoting Original Scholarship ==+ − Many pages tagged as essays are really more like projects, or are otherwise thought-provoking, giving Conservapedia some characteristics of a [[think tank]]. See [[Essay:Best New Conservative Words|Best New Conservative Words]], [[Essay:The Coming Fifth Great Awakening in America|The Coming Fifth Great Awakening in America]], [[Essay:Top Causes of Rejecting Conservativism|Top Causes of Rejecting Conservativism]], [[Mystery:Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?|Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?]], [[Disputed Biblical Translations]], and [[Linguistic Analysis of Candidates]]. − + − On August 12, 2009, Conservapedia began an enormous scholarly enterprise, the [[Conservative Bible Project]], which endeavors to retranslate scripture into modern English while emphasizing Biblical insights and counteracting liberal bias. As of Oct. 29, 2009, this project has translated about 30% of it, or about 2400 verses. + + − The project has been the subject of extensive discussion and debate throughout television, radio, and print media, as well as on the internet, and has succeeded in encouraging even its most strident liberal critics to read the bible in their efforts to refute it!+ − ==Differences with Wikipedia==+ − − Wikipedia articles may contain [[trivia]], [[gossip]], profanity, and even [[Pornography|pornographic]]/sexually explicit images. The latter three are prohibited on Conservapedia and trivia is largely discouraged.+ − The administrative hierarchy prevents Conservapedia from being hijacked by a faction, and thus preserves it from mobocracy, as discussed above.+ − + − *[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] is the username of the aforementioned founder of Conservapedia, Andrew Schlafly. He has contributed massively to Conservapedia since the beginning, authored many articles including the [[World History Lectures|student lectures]], and is the final authority on article content and user conduct.+ + + + + + − *[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]], active at Conservapedia for over a year, and at Wikipedia for seven years, was the first elected bureaucrat at Wikipedia and has been extremely influential at both sites. At Conservapedia, he has primarily aimed at accuracy, rationality, and user cooperation.+ − *[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] has contributed the majority of content to the extremely popular [[evolution]], [[atheism]], and [[homosexuality]] articles. The first two articles were featured as articles of the year at Conservapedia.+ + − *[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] has contributed a large amount of content about the [[art]]s, such as pages on [[literature]], [[sculpture]], and [[painting]]. He created the [[Painting Masterpieces|galleries of artwork]] which are featured on Conservapedia's [[Main_Page|Main page]] as the "Masterpiece of the Week". His work has helped beautify the encyclopedia.+ + + + + − *[[User:Jpatt | Jpatt]] another hardcore conservative contributor despised by liberals.+ + − *[[User:TK|TK]] has made many substantive contributions since coming to Conservapedia over two years ago, and is known for his vigilance against vandals.+ + + + + + + − *[[User:DeanS|DeanS]] helped found the Conservapedia news project, and he is its main contributor. He has also worked on articles related to [[Mormonism]].+ + + + + + + + + + + − + + − *[[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] works on maintenance, and in addition to neutral contributions has created the popular article [[Essay:Examples of Moronic Vandalism by the "tolerant"|Examples of Moronic Vandalism by the "tolerant"]], as well as the Conservapedia article itself. − *[[User:RobSmith|RobSmith]] Created some of Conservapedia's most acclaimed articles, and was a tireless vandal fighter and researcher on the [[Socialist]] and [[Communist]] agendas.+ − + − *[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] has a PhD in American Studies and has been a professor of history and political science at numerous schools. Professor Jensen has made significant contibutions to Conservapedia's historical articles. − − − Conservapedia has been praised and ridiculed in the [[media]], on [[blog]]s, and on rival sites. Critics claim that it contains fringe viewpoints, and supporters note that it simply provides another viewpoint and an alternative to liberal bias. − − *Conservapedia provides information about the [[American]] people that liberal critics would rather hide: for example, nearly 50 percent of Americans reject evolution and embrace [[creationism]], and even more want creationism taught alongside evolution in school. <ref>Bootie Cosgrove-Mather. [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/22/opinion/polls/main657083.shtml Poll: Creationism Trumps Evolution], ''CBS News'', November 22, 2004.</ref> Another example is the fact that atheists- often claiming to be more equipped to help their fellow men than religious people- actually give less to charity than believers, even when church giving is excluded. − − *Search results for controversial subjects such as [[atheism]] and [[evolution]] contain Conservapedia links within a few searches and often on the first page.<ref>[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS293US293&q=atheism&btnG=Search atheism - Google Search]</ref><ref>[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS293US293&q=theory+of+evolution&btnG=Search theory of evolution - Google Search]</ref> − − *Many biographical articles contain religious references and information about the person’s religion, much more so than Wikipedia. Editor and college student Tasha Jones, ([[User:Taj|Taj]]) said of this aspect, “It gives me a better understanding of how people feel religion relates to our lives.” <ref>Stephanie Simon. [http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jun/19/nation/na-schlafly19 A conservative's answer to Wikipedia], ''Los Angeles Times'', June 19, 2007.</ref> − − *Conservapedia is active in political advocacy. For example, it [[charter]]ed a bus for the 2009 [[March for Life]]. − − *Conservapedia is currently developing a blog for the [[Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation]]. The blog in its prototype form can be found here: http://mindszentyfoundation.blogspot.com/ − − ==References== + − + − *[[Conservapedia:Commandments|Conservapedia Commandments]]+ − *[[Conservapedia:About|About Conservapedia]] − *[[Conservapedia:Articles mentioning Conservapedia]] − *[[Videos on Conservapedia]] − *[[Special:ListUsers/Siteadmin|List of Site Admins]] − *[[Conservative Links]] − {{Conservapedia}}+ + + + + + + + + + + − + + +
conservation
[[Image:Conservlogo.png|right|thumb|250px|Conservative? It can't be - it only has PART of our glorious flag on it!]]
| style="text-align: center; padding: 10px 40px 10px 40px;" | [[Previous_Breaking_News/Conservapedia| Previous Breaking News:<br>Conservapedia]]
{{Q|There is only one thing in life worse than being maligned on Conservapedia, and that is not being maligned on Conservapedia.|Oscar Wilde}}
|}
'''Conservapedia''', launched on November 21, 2006, is a [[conservative]], [[family-friendly]] [[Wiki]] [[encyclopedia]]. It was founded by [[teacher]] and [[attorney]] [[Andrew Schlafly]] with the help of several students from his fall 2006 World History class. In May 2008, Schlafly and some of his [[homeschooling|homeschooled]] students appeared on the [[CBC]] news program The Hour (see: [[Videos on Conservapedia]] ).
{{Q|I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, uhmmm, some people out there in our nation don't have maps and uh, I believe that our, I, education like such as uh, South Africa, and uh, the Iraq, everywhere like such as, and I believe that they should, uhhh, our education over here in the US should help the US, uh, should help South Africa, it should help the Iraq and the Asian countries so we will be able to build up our future, for our children.|Ms. South Carolina}}
'''Conservapedia'''<ref>Or '''Liberalpedia''', as it might as well be called</ref> is the wiki-based online encyclopedia project that purports itself to be "the trustworthy encyclopedia." Little do its poor, misguided editors realize, however, that Conservapedia is actually rife with '''stinking ''liberal'' bias and viewpoints.''' While its creator, Andrew Schlafly <ref>Using the internet name Arsefly</ref>, wears an elaborate façade of the archetypical conservative: overt piety, disapproval of so-called "science," and hatred for all things liberal, the ''liberal'' stance of his sad website is manifestly clear. He single-handedly shames the United States flag by printing "conservapedia" right onto it.
==History==
[[Image:Conservapedia.PNG|thumb|150px|Conservapedia in its true, ''liberal'' form.]]
Conservapedia was created as a seemingly trustworthy encyclopedia by Andrew Schlafly, extolling the values our great nation was built upon, the values of [[Real America]]; independence, personal responsibility, self-interest<ref>...and obedience to authority</ref> as well as [[Freedom of Expression|freedom of the press]]<ref>Go Fox News!</ref> and [[Creationism|freedom of religion]].<ref>You know which one</ref> It began in 2006, supposedly with the grand vision of expunging the rampant liberal bias from but one small site on the internet. Perhaps the vision was too grand, but it is far more likely that Schlafly himself is to blame. It is not that he is not conservative, just that he has never had the nerve to do [[genocide|what was necessary]] to keep the liberal scoundrels, who clearly penetrate all aspects of the internet, in line.
At first, only [[Southern Baptists|US citizens]] with [[fascism|conservative viewpoints]] were able to find the site and register for accounts. This is because conservatives are naturally smarter and more physically attractive than everyone else, although it is still not 100% clear which page in the [[Bible]] indicates how the latter normal feature of all conservatives factored into their ability to find the site. For this brief time things were pious, clean, and morally sound – there was even room for some of that good old-fashioned [[Slavery|southern hospitality]] and [[racism|charm]]. However, this utopia could not last.
[[File:TrafficGraph.png|right|300px]]
Soon, some conservatives who may have been slightly more socially liberal and who agreed with some American democrats on one or two issues began to discover the site. In other words, everything was ruined. They thought they could make Conservapedia more "fair," and soon the rivers of "fact"<ref>Ronald Reagan once said "Facts are stupid things." ''Ronald Reagan'' said it. It's true. It's not a fact, though. They're stupid.</ref> – nothing more than filth, and yes, even '''''[[truth|liberal deceit]]''''' – began to flow freely.
[[Image:Andrew Schlafly.jpg|right|thumb| Conservapedia's founder, Andrew Schlafly. Smiling on the outside, ''liberal'' on the inside.]]
Andrew Schlafly is the chief administrator and is the most prolific editor, followed by bureaucrats, administrators, and regular editors. Editors who contribute substantial content may be promoted to administrator and bureaucrat, or gain extra user rights such as blocking power and uploading images.
Andrew Schlafly tried to slow this inevitability. Banning anonymous editing was a step in the correct direction, as it is clear that all anonymous IPs have a strong liberal bias. However, when banning ''liberal'' vandals, many of which had made as much as '''one''' mistake, administrators often distributed bans only lasting for ''five measly years''. In Texas, mistakes warrant the death penalty! True conservatives are "tough on crime," and Mr. Schlafly was clearly not tough on crime.
Before long, Conservapedia contained articles about such falsities as "Evolution," which isn't real, "[[Homosexuality]]," which isn't real, either, and "Bacon," which, despite being real, is far more delicious than it is portrayed by the liberal dogs that wrote the article about it.
In recent times, Conservapedia has degenerated into little more than a melting pot of heathens and [[Sodomy|sodomites]]. If this corruption by liberals continues, it is assured that soon even the [[Bible]] will no longer be considered a pure source of factual information.
=== Conservative Bible Project ===
[[Image:Gunsandgod.jpg|left|thumb|The problem isn't that Conservapedia isn't pro-gun and pro-Jesus. The problem is that Conservapedia isn't pro-gun and pro-Jesus ''enough''.]]
==Wiki: the Communist Manifesto==
The format called the "wiki", being based on collaborative contributions by many contributors, is the opposite of good, clean, American Conservative values. It is, simply, collectivization in disguise.
Real Conservative internet sites, like Worldnetdaily, use laissez-faire competition, ''not'' collaboration, for their pages. Conservapedia is a wiki, and wikis depend on the input of the common worker for their content. Therefore, Conservapedia, and its Conservapedian proletariat supporters, is a Commie-pinko front for liberal values.
''Comrade'' Schlafly says that Wikipedia is six times more liberal than the American public, but statistics show that members of Conservapedia are, on average, more than ''eleven times more liberal'' than ''real'' Americans!<ref>No references needed here, it's painfully obvious!</ref>
Conservapedia strives to keep its articles concise, informative, family-friendly, and true to the [[fact]]s, which often back up conservative ideas more than [[liberal]] ones. Rather than claim a neutral point of view and then insert bias, Conservapedia is clear that it seeks to give due credit to conservatism and Christianity. Schlafly said in regard to the point of view issue, "It's impossible for an encyclopedia to be neutral. I mean let's take a point of view, let's disclose that point of view to the reader." <ref>Robert Siegel. [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8286084 Conservapedia: Data for Birds of a Political Feather?], npr.org, November 29, 2009.</ref>
Worse, Politburo Chief Schlafly wants to take the internet in a worldwide revolution of so-called "Conservative values". Luckily, real Conservatives see through his paper thin disguise, and point out that under his no-clothes this self styled Emperor is a dirty, naked liberal.
Some critics have pointed out that the dictionary definitions for communism and liberalism are two quite different things. Real conservative critics, in turn, reply that neither communism nor liberalism are conservatism. Therefore, they're both the same thing; enemies of conservatives. Besides, real Conservatives don't own dictionaries. They don't need them.<ref>Definitions are for University professors and blue states.</ref>
==Influential editors and users==
==Christian values???==
<span class=plainlinks>Another example of the rampant liberalism in Conservapedia is its unwillingness to ban people for the amount of time that God would have wanted. As it states in Holy Scripture,
[[Image:603px-Sputnikteck.jpg|right|thumb|Andrew Schlafly, shown connecting the Conservapedia server to the internet. Just out of frame, Phyllis Schlafly (his mother and a "conservative" activist) is burning an American flag.]]
{{cquote|And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast [it] from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having none.|4=Matt 18:9}}
Or, the more direct quote:
{{cquote|God beholdeth at all things and knoweth all sinnes. God sayeth in his wrath, "I hath seen thine liberal[istic] editing on Conservapedia and I will wish thee a fine time in hell, for thou knowst that is where thou belongst. Thine editings are a disgrace and blasphemise mine teachinges and thou knowest that thou art a sinner. "|4=Joseph 4:20}}
In other words, it's better to be saved than sorry. God's ban is a permaban. The Bible doesn't lie.<ref>It's inerrant. Obviously.</ref> Unfortunately, Conservapedia refuses to ban Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists for any length of time even close to what God would have wanted. One Jewish user was blocked for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Conservative&page=User%3AJewishguy 5 years]. Five puny years! That's not even ''close'' to the eternity of hellfire that all sinners (and Liberals''!'') in the wrong religions will endure! And that was after a warning. Does God give warnings? ''Hell no'', he smites. Not only that, but the Jewish user, was subsequently [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Jewishguy unblocked]! Obviously, ''Rabbi'' Schlafly was in on this, and is perpetuating a degradation of true Christian values.</span>
<span class=plainlinks>Similarly way-too-short blocks were issued to users like [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Hindu this Hindu], [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:LefthandedJew this Jew], [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3AIpblocklist&action=search&limit=&ip=Voodoonomics this Voodoo], [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Jewsdidwtc this Jew], and [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Jewsus this Jew]. Clearly, ''Imam-High Priest-Brahmin-Witch doctor-Guru-Rastafarian-Rabbi-Thing'' Schlafly lacks any sort of true Christian morality.</span>
==Homosexuality at Conservapedia==
Since the creation of the site by Andrew Schlafly, son of [[ball-buster|feminist]] Phyllis Schlafly and brother of homosexual John Schlafly, there's been a noticeable focus on homosexual desires in many of the articles. Overall, this disturbing trend leads to the conclusion that homosexuality is always on the [[Oral_sex|tip of the tongue]] of various Conservapedians. Indeed, this trend has seemingly intensified over the past year, with some users finding themselves [[Orgy|ganged up on]] in regards to homosexuality. Obviously, due to the nature of the site (the site is aimed towards homeschooled children), parents have expressed concern over numerous articles and discussions, including [[Bukkake|"Homosexual Overcoming"]] and [http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_and_smoking "Smoking Homosexuals"]. One of the clear proponents of the Homosexual focus of Conservapedia is user Ed Poor, who displays with pride that he is a [http://www.conservapedia.com/File:Ed_poor_grinning.jpg member of the Homosexual "Bear" community], woof!
==Promises of Conservapedia in Christian Scripture==
===In Revelation, the book wherein basically everything is promised if you try hard enough===
{{cquote|...I saw a woman seated on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names, with seven heads and ten horns|4=Rv 17:3}}
This states that God promises that one day, a great beast shall rise up from whence he was banished, and he would be great. This beast, clearly, is the beast of '''liberal pussy communist bastards'''. Further symbolizing them is the fact that a ''woman'' is seated on it. A '''''WOMAN!!!''''' Who is, by the way, not in the kitchen. What does this tell us? That avarice and inhumanity will rise. Later in this chapter, we get a promise of a savior:
{{cquote|...but the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and king of kings...|4=Rv 17:14}}
This is Conservapedia! It will crush the disgusting insurrection of the moralless beast, restore the gross misogyny and tyranny that God would want. It is killing beasts and harlots since before Angels and Airwaves were born. Alas, something has gone wrong...
[[Image:Bible2.jpg|thumb|left|Artist's conception of Conservapedia 1.0, which WILL beat Wikipedia 1.0 to the shelves! Liberal pussy communist bastards...]]
===In Genesis, which is kinda the opposite of Revelation, but hey!===
{{cquote|For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.|4=Gn 3:5-6}}
This seems, at first, to be Conservapedia. What else could the fruit that teaches all that is true be? But wait! God is pissed off now!
{{cquote|And he said, Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree, of which I commanded that you should not eat?|4=Gn 3:14}}
And now it's clear. These false truths are what God dislikes, these blasphemous lies perpetuated by liberal "scientists," who weren't even homeschooled and are therefore retarded, and then spread by evil websites '''just like Conservapedia.''' We all know who ''else'' presents these false truths; the serpent. The serpent...or those '''liberal, pussy, pink, socialist, feminist, lesbian, softy, anti-fascist communist bastards.''' And here God promises Conservapedia:
{{cquote|I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it shall strike at your head as you strike at his heel.|4=Gn 3:15}}
What better representation of Conservapedia than a concept such as enmity? We will STRIKE at the liberal pussy communist bastards as they attempt to bruise our heels, and we shall slaughter all of them, just as God undoubtedly intended.<ref>Messages of peace and love in the Bible are metaphorical or anecdotal, what God really wants is genocide of all liberals.</ref>
==Drawing the obligatory conclusions==
<div class="noprint" style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;">
<div style="float: left;"> [[Image:Conservlogo.png|60px]]</div>
<div style="margin-left: 60px;">For those who want their "facts" presented to them with rampant liberal bias, the pinko cowards at [[Conservapedia]] have an article about <span class="plainlinks">[http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia Themselves]</span></div>
</div>
{{wikipediapar|Conservapedia|{{PAGENAME}}}}
And so, all in all, it is painfully clear from the above-cited evidence that the website Conservapedia is an abhorrent, liberal scourge of the [[internet]]. The very fact that its misnomer of a name falsely claims conservative beliefs is itself evidence of the website's glaring liberal deceptions. Perhaps Mr. Schlafly had a better vision in mind when he spawned Conservapedia, but he should know that pride is one of the seven deadly sins, just as [[sloth]], [[anger|wrath]], [[evolution]], and [[premarital wanking|premarital masturrbation]] are.<ref>Little-known honorable mentions for the seven deadly sins included homosexuality, liberalism, questioning any established institutions, and the female orgasm.</ref> Mr. Schlafly's ''pride'' deceived him into thinking that the internet has any hope of supporting clean, family, ''Christian'' values, and because of that he is an ignorant stupid liberal pinko commie left-wing tax-raising media-supporting ignorant stupid liberal. And he is going to Hell. A website as conservative as this surely has the authority to make that judgment.
noodled revival from russia YOU AMERICAN BITHC!
==See also==
*[[Examples of Bias in Conservapedia]]
*[[Biblical Literalism]]
*[[User:SharonS|SharonS]] has been an editor since the very beginning of Conservapedia, and was interviewed and quoted in a newspaper article to explain and defend the project.
== External Links ==
*[http://www.conservapedia.com Conservapedia Main Page]
==Footnotes==
<div class="references-small">
==Testimonies and Impact==
<references/>
<references/>
</div>
==See Also==
{{FA|date=14 March 2008|revision=2861793}}
{{UnMedia}}
[[Category:Politics and Government]]
[[Category:Conservapedia]][[Category:God]]
[[Category:Ineffective Right Wing Propaganda]]
[[Category:War on Science]]
[[Category:Websites]]
[[Category:Wiki]]
[[Category:Followers God Would Rather Not Have]]
[[Category:People who could benefit from getting laid more often]]
[[Category:Things George Bush most certainly cares about]]
[[Category:Nasty Right Wing Bastards]]
[[Category:Conservapedia]]
[[Category:Conservapedia]][[Category:Wikis]][[Category:Encyclopedias]][[Category:Reference Material]][[Category:Conservative]][[Category:Websites]]
[[fi:Conservapedia]]
[[pt:Conservapedia]]
[[it:Conservapedia]]