Conservapedia talk:Debate:Do we put enough emphasis on homosexuality
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
I'm going to try an experiment: Would any Conservapedians like to continue the debate on RW that Andy deleted from CP? --Marty 17:24, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
- Why is there now two copies of this? weaseLOId
~ 17:36, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
- If it's worth continuing, it's worth doing so on the talk: page and save the original as an archive. ArmondikoVpostate 17:39, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
What Armondikov said, sort of: I decided arbitrarily that the subpage of User:Marty would be the "archived" version (so I've pulled a Ken and locked it), while this version would be the "open for discussion" version. There ought to be a colored box on top of this page to let people know it's okay to edit it, but I don't know how to do boxes. --Marty 17:47, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
- I doubt the debate will extend much further. It's well attested that Kenservative won't show up here to debate (not that he was doing much in the way of debate anyway). At most we might prompt him to make another press release from CP in the form of "Gentlemen-I-rather-think-it-is-you-who-are-obsessed" or some such. Some of the other people in this debate might well be RationalWikians, but whether they will want to uncloak their CP identities is another matter. Probably most RW editors are fairly agreed on this issue (viz that CP & Ken in particular does have an unhealthy obsession with homosexuality and denouncing it). I think the most entertaining thing about this debate was Aschlafly's reaction to it. weaseLOId~ 17:56, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
- Andy's Tactical-Nuke-style "damage control" was indeed hilarious. But I loved Ken's nonsense replies the most. Their senselessness really stood out amidst the serious posts, especially his "I will now use exactly the things that were completely discredited in the post I reply to!" post. The poor guy dug his own grave to the degree that Andy had to throw the entire thing down the Memory Hole. That's saying something. --Sid 18:05, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
- Well Ken was like a little kid running around the room waving his Google & Cuil results & chanting "I know something you don't know". But I don't think that's what prompted Andy to kill it. I just don't think Andy will tolerate any discussions along the lines of 'is Conservapedia' going too far?' weaseLOId~ 18:15, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
- I don't think there's anyone who can go too far as far as CP is concerned. They kill off any user who even sniffs in a liberal direction and can't notice (or, in the case of their poe's law and parodist artircls, completely deny) that people who go uber-right wing are just mocking how far they're willing to go. ArmondikoVpostate 18:18, 29 October 2008 (EDT)
- Well Ken was like a little kid running around the room waving his Google & Cuil results & chanting "I know something you don't know". But I don't think that's what prompted Andy to kill it. I just don't think Andy will tolerate any discussions along the lines of 'is Conservapedia' going too far?' weaseLOId
- Andy's Tactical-Nuke-style "damage control" was indeed hilarious. But I loved Ken's nonsense replies the most. Their senselessness really stood out amidst the serious posts, especially his "I will now use exactly the things that were completely discredited in the post I reply to!" post. The poor guy dug his own grave to the degree that Andy had to throw the entire thing down the Memory Hole. That's saying something. --Sid 18:05, 29 October 2008 (EDT)