From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ed Poor (Talk | contribs) at 14:27, 25 April 2008. It may differ significantly from current revision.

Jump to: navigation, search

I would say the Libertarian community is one of the biggest opponents of censorship. ColinR 06:40, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

We are. And also one of the biggest proponents of undermining intellectual dishonesty by whatever means available. --Sam 08:41, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Both sides of the political spectrum can commit censorship very easily. If you step too far left or too far right you will censor many things, both communist dictators and fascist overlords have censored in modern history. Conservatives want to censor to hide military information or blunders such as a press blackout or to hide something that they deem to be "obscene", whereas liberals would want to censor things that are deemed offensive to other people's culture or removes rights. Either way, censorship is terrible and clearly not the Framer's Intent. --JamesLipton 22:16, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
What a perfect description of what conservapedia does.

Censorship of Michelangelo

I can only marvel at the irony. You don't dispute the facts, you only characterize them as anti-Catholic. Which is absurd. The Pope himself defended Michelagelo, and I stated that fact. The site cited is not a Wikipedia mirror site, but if you need a different citation, I can certainly find one. But, again, it is not the facts you dispute. The facts are inconvenient (for you., personally, for some reason), and so you censor them. How appropriate. You remind me of nothing so much as the Soviet revisionists of history. NitramNos 14:25, 8 June 2007 (EDT)

The subterfuge you employed to place this WP content gave it away. And of course the Counter-Reformation stab. If you wish to contribute constructively, please do so. However CP's content will not controlled and regulated by outside influences. RobS
I have not the slightest idea what you mean when you refer to subterfuge. Please be more specific, unless this is just an example of your paranoia affecting your better judgement. Your accusations are a rather wild. Have you actually looked at the reference I cited? It is not a WP mirror site. I added the Counter-Reformation fact (which you characterize so typically in your paranoid fashion as a "stab") after checking my notes and seeing I had left that out (as you would see if you did your homework and checked the reference in the first place). I summarized and cited one of the best-known instances of censorship in history, but you do not deem it worthy of the Censorship article. Controlled and regulated by outside "influences." Get a grip! NitramNos 14:39, 8 June 2007 (EDT)

Inserted for the record [1] reads at the bottom of the page,

  • All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (see Copyrights for details). Disclaimers. Wikipedia is powered by MediaWiki, an open source wiki engine.

Bunker Mentality

You people are a work of art! You do not consider the alteration of a work of art to be censorship? What planet do you live on? NitramNos 14:52, 8 June 2007 (EDT)

You people....who do you think you are talking to, Ross Perot? [2] RobS 17:19, 8 June 2007 (EDT)


This page would really benefit from some examples of censorship. American examples that come immediately to mind are various parent groups removing books like The Catcher in the Rye from schools, the military blacking out parts of letters sent by soldiers during wartime, and ratings systems like those for movies keeping some content away from audiences. I can see how the Michelangelo example can be written with an anti-Catholic sentiment, but reporting the true historical incident is not inherently anti-Catholic, just like talking about the Holocaust today isn't inherently anti-German. So, that may be a good non-American example to keep if it can be rewritten. China's policy of censoring most media content entering the country provides another international example that would be instructive. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AnilaWafer (talk)

I agree with you for the most part, though movie ratings aren't censorship, because you can still put whatever you want into movies (plus they are voluntary, despite their ubiquitousness). CP is an open encyclopedia, so as long as you follow the rules, feel free to add new material to the article! HelpJazz 23:39, 17 October 2007 (EDT)

What is not censorship?

I don't know about all of you, but when I open an article on any given subject, I like to be told what it is, maybe throw in some history of censorship, it's origin (does not belong at the end of the article) etc. etc.

Will somebody please be a dear and redo this article DLerner 06:34, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Rewritten intro

The intro as it stood was not very good. The examples given weren't very good (the prevention of official school prayer, for example, is not censorship) and one of them linked to a highly unencyclopedic article about "liberal friendship". I have replaced these with better examples of censorship, and a better introduction to what exactly it means. Also deleted the history section (which was only a single sentence and didn't warrant a whole section to itself) and incorporated it into the opening.Eoinc 07:49, 25 April 2008 (EDT)

User:EdPoor, you reverted some of my last edits and restored some of the examples that I had replaced, without giving any reason on the talk page.

There are three examples in question: the removal of school prayer, the destruction of conservative newspapers on college campuses, and the ostracization of students for their pro-life or conservative views. I removed these for the following reasons:

1. Regarding school prayer, I am of the opinion, as are many others, that it does not constitute censorship. What is prevented under the establishment clause is official school-led prayer, not prayer per se. If this is censorship, it is certainly not a particularly clear example of it, unlike the Google China situation, or the fictional examples from 1984. It is far better to give examples of things which are clearly, unambiguously, censorship, than it is to give as an example something which is hotly contested.

2. The destruction of conservative newspapers links to a news report of one such instance in Bucknell college, which is cited as being an act of vandalism by other students. Therefore it is not a particularly clear example of censorship. An article which seeks to give an overview of a topic should give the most "textbook" examples that it can.

3. Ostracization is not the same as censorship. A university which denies tenure to a conservative (for no other reason than their conservative views) is guilty of discrimination, not censorship. A liberal student who refuses to talk to a conservative student (again, for no other reason) is guilty of several things: foolishness, closed-mindedness, ignorance, etc, but not censorship.

What happened in South Africa when the government could ban its political opponents from being quoted in any media is censorship. The burning of books is censorship. The limits imposed upon journalists living in East Germany before the fall of the Berlin Wall amounted to censorship. The blocking of human rights websites and references to the 1989 Tianamen square protests on Google China is censorship. These examples you gave are not nearly as definitive. To mention them in the opening sentences, frankly, demeans the more serious examples.

If you disagree with me, I am happy to discuss our disagreement here. Until then, as per the reasons given here and in my previous post, I am reverting the page. Eoinc 10:12, 25 April 2008 (EDT)

I hope the irony of censoring opposing views is not escaping you. We welcome alternatives to conservative POV around here, provided they are properly labeled. When it comes to controversial issues, unmarked ideas are either common knowledge or distinctly conservative, but liberal ideas don't get the same respect. So tread carefully.
Even if you are an original thinker with much to share, I adjure you to work harmoniously here by adhering to our rules and customs. Be sure to avoid edit wars, particularly with sysops. --Ed Poor Talk 10:27, 25 April 2008 (EDT)