Conservapedia:Schlafly's Laws

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Trus me
Conservapedia
Conservlogo late april.png
Introduction
Newcomer's Guide
What is going on?
Commentary
Best of Conservapedia
Blatant plagiarism
Differences with Wikipedia
Hijacked articles
"SDG"
"TZB"
"Fab Five"
Sysops
Timeline
CP in the media
In-depth analysis
Active users
Illustrated guide
Fun
Article Matrix
Greatest Insights
Parthian Shots

More about CP
Wigocp.svg This Conservapedia-related article is of largely historical interest and is no longer the focus of RationalWiki today.
Conservapedia (and religious fundamentalism to an extent) was a major focal point in the early history of RationalWiki, but long ago ceased coming up with new ways to appall and amuse.
Our energies are now spent debunking other, fresher examples of pseudoscientific claims and conservative deceit.
For RationalWiki's less ancient content, try the cover story articles or a random article.

Schlafly's Zeroth Law states:

Anyone who brings classroom prayer into an argument which is not about prayer or school requires no further serious consideration and is considered to have lost the argument.

Schlafly's First Law states:

Anyone who arbitrarily labels a dissenter a "liberal" or "atheist" based on no evidence other than said disagreement is not to be taken seriously, and is deemed to have automatically lost the argument.

Schlafly's Second Law states:

Anyone who brings largely defensive weapons of gun into an argument which is not about largely defensive weapons of gun requires no further serious consideration and is considered to have lost the argument.

Schlafly's Third Law states:

Anyone who assigns the qualities "liberal" and/or "conservative” to something that has little or nothing to do with politics is not tic be taken seriously, and has automatically lost on the point they were trying to make.

Schlafly's Fourth Law states:

Anyone who links something with another thing that is completely unrelated (e.g. abortion and breast cancer) requires no further serious consideration, and is considered to have lost the argument.

Schlafly’s Fifth Law states:

Anyone who tries to use the Laws of Thermodynamics to argue against a scientific theory that is not related to thermodynamics at all requires no further serious consideration, and is considered to have lost the argument.

These laws are named in honor of Assfly Andrew Schlafly, founder and Supreme Leader of the wiki blog Conservapedia, who uses classroom prayer as a hard-and-fast benchmark for conservatism, frequently assigns "liberal" and "conservative" to non-political matters, loves to link abortion with breast cancer, and often tries to use the Laws of Thermodynamics to discredit sciences that have little or nothing to do with thermodynamics . If you're all for classroom prayer you're okay by Schlafly. If you recognise that there is more than one religion and it's not a teacher's place to promote religion in a classroom - even if you love Ronald Reagan, own plenty of largely defensive weapons of gun, deny climate change and evolution - then you're obviously a smelly librul and not to be trusted. Hence why he brings them up against anyone who may be giving him a good spanking in a political discussion. This man can bring politics and/or classroom prayer into anything. And we really do mean anything, with about, say, 92.8% certainty.

We didn’t write the laws; [citation NOT needed] we merely enforce them.

See also[edit]

External links[edit]

Articles on RationalWiki about Eponymous laws
  Badger's Law  -  Borel's Law  -  Danth's Law  -  Feminist internet laws  -  Gore's Law  -  Haggard's Law  -  Haig's Law  -  Internet law  -  List of Poe's Law examples  -  Littlewood's law  -  Loi de Poe  -  Murphy's Law  -  Nazi analogies  -  PIDOOMA  -  Poe's Law  -  Rove's Law  -  Whale.to  -  波尔法则