Fun talk:Andrew Schlafly

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Archives for this talk page: , (new)

Three separate articles...[edit]

I understand--and totally supported--the idea of two Andy articles, one satirical, and one a serious critique designed to show potential homeschoolers what they were dealing with. Now we have a silly one, a sillier one in the Fun space, and a serious one. Why? Is it clear what goes in which silly one? Why are there things that appear in both satirical articles? Can we go back to a two-article paradigm, or have some sort of clarity as to why we need two satirical articles and what goes where?PFoster 16:53, 31 October 2008 (EDT)

To avoid confusion, can we keep the discussion about this in one place? weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 17:51, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
Well, sure--to avoid confusion, can we keep all our silly stuff about Andy in one place? PFoster 17:54, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
I ain't gonna keep fucking repeating myself on this issue. I've spelt it out about three times on the talk page linked above. I'm not got waste time typing out again here. If you want to discuss further, follow the link above. weaseLOIdWeaselly.jpg~ 17:57, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
My point exactly. PFoster 17:59, 31 October 2008 (EDT)

This article is ridiculous and pointless. I vote for deletion. Salvage any yuks we need and jam them into the funspace article.DogP 17:42, 1 February 2009 (EST)

Fine by me. The "Andy is a Muslim" crap is already duplicated here, although I really think it belongs in fun, essay or the bin. ЩєазєюіδWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 17:49, 1 February 2009 (EST)

Why...[edit] the entire "sensible" article at the bottom of the page? Yours trulyDear Sir 17:47, 1 February 2009 (EST)

It's a transclusion error. This was built to display the same gallery as appears in the "satire" article, but everything's been moved umpteen times in the last two days so it's now transcluding the wrong article. ЩєазєюіδWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 17:49, 1 February 2009 (EST)

I don't believe it![edit]

All I did was attempt to make Conservapedia a bit less radically conservative and Andrew Schlafly banned my account for five years! I did not even do any vandalism! — Unsigned, by: Lefty / talk / contribs

Yeah, that'll happen alright. ЩєазєюіδWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 11:32, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
You did vandalise it. You tried to make it less radically conservative. Scarlet A.pngmoral 13:01, 28 March 2011 (UTC)


Under discussion here. ΨΣΔξΣΓΩΙÐWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 06:20, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Should there be a link to Self projection as god? (talk) 16:37, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

No, but thanks for stopping by. WéáśéĺóíďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 17:53, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

His evil British twin brother?[edit]

Just saw this story on the ITV News at 6:30: (but using BBC as online source):

Somerset sex abuse teacher Nigel Leat 'extremely devious':

"A mother of children at a primary school where a teacher sexually abused pupils has branded the man "extremely devious".

The woman has spoken of parents' devastation on learning Nigel Leat was being investigated for sexually abusing children in his classroom."

AP (talk) 17:45, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Birth Certificate?[edit]

Is there any evidence that Schlafly was born in the United States? I heard that he was actually born in Micronesia. I'd like to see his birth certificate to be sure.

Bella et Vita[edit]

Now amended to be civilised and decent Scherben (talk) 03:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Biased article mocking another human being[edit]

Please contribute to the 'Quick Poll' at the bottom of this section.

I am sorry that I added my opinion to your article. It just infuriates me that you can set a standard for the opinion of the page, and revert any edits that state an alternate opinion. Do you agree that people whom you disagree with should be treated this way?— Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

Not everyone I disagree with should be treated in any specific way. The logic does not follow. This article treats Andy this way. I disagree with Andy. Therefore, any article about someone I disagree with is this way. Perhaps there's something more unique about Andy? Hipocrite (talk) 15:17, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Andy is a sick, disturbed individual who is an embarrassment to Christians, and humans. This article is much kinder than it could have been to a figure who spreads the most perverted idea of Christianity this side of Westboro. This is a man who thought he could rewrite the freaking bible! We have a massive catalog of his outright lies. Read it and get back to us. VOXHUMANA

You my friend must rethink your theory of embarrassment. How can you say this?? If you believe that this article is "much kinder", I am very confident that you should rethink that too. Please exit the liberal box that you are reading about him. Have you even ever met him??— Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

No person is perfect!!! When Bill Clinton was made president of the US, what did he do (under oath)?? When Nixon was president, what did he do?? When President Obama was running for office, what promises were not fulfilled (we're 4 years into it, IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN).— Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

A biased article mocking another human being? Must be Rationalwiki!--Token Conservative (talk) 15:46, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so mush for helping me out Token Conservative!!-- (talk) 15:48, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome--Token Conservative (talk) 15:51, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Can someone (on the left) agree that this "Fun:Andrew Schlafly" page went overboard and should be deleted??-- (talk) 16:04, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Probably not. Hipocrite (talk) 16:07, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

That's what I thought... If you agree that you want this "Fun:Andrew Schlafly" to be deleted, please speak...-- (talk) 16:14, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm opposed to funspace generally, so...--Token Conservative (talk) 16:17, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

AGREED!!! I never would have believed that it existed if someone told me!-- (talk) 16:41, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Does ANYONE else want the page deleted???-- (talk) 16:45, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

You don't get me: this page as a part of funspace I'm fine with: Andy is an idiot who says idiotic and sometimes dangerous things, and people should be aware of them, if mocking him is the best way to do it, then so be it. But I don't much like funspace as a general idea because it reduces how much of a professional appearance RW has. And if anyone says they support deleting this article, it'll only be the few other people here that support deleting funspace altogether.
Also, making it seem like we agree makes me feel dirty.--Token Conservative (talk) 16:48, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

So why do you call yourself a conservative?? Everything you've stated thus far has been in favor of my efforts. And don't transitively call me names.-- (talk) 16:57, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Have you met him?? EVER??-- (talk) 16:57, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

You said bad things about Obama, Nixon and Clinton. I also say bad things about Osama bin Laden, but I've never met him. Since when was meeting someone a requirement to mock? Hipocrite (talk) 16:59, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
(Thank you to whoever just put the delete/retain poll on this subject. Thats really nice of you.) I did not say bad things about Obama, Nixon, or Clinton. I proved that they are fallible human beings just like every one of us. I would never MOCK someone, ESPECIALLY WITHOUT MEETING HIM!!!-- (talk) 17:04, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Really? You're an awesome dude, then. I'm not as awesome as you, I guess. Just so we can verify - you wouldn't mind linking to your contributions to other wikis and facebook/twitter/whatnot? Hipocrite (talk) 17:06, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Lets just say that I wouldn't go out, publicly demeaning him without meeting him. I have not posted to other wikis or anything else. You can take a look at my user talk page. I think I nailed some of the questions given there.-- (talk) 17:14, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

So you have never edited Wikipedia? Hipocrite (talk) 17:17, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Not really. (Just word and grammar corrections). Have you?-- (talk) 17:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
So you've never edited the article about Andrew Schlafly to defame a certain New Jersey senator? I edited Wikipedia under the username Hipocrite for years. Hipocrite (talk) 17:34, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I am an honest man, with a not-so-honest memory. I did edit that page in that way, but it completely slipped my mind. Sorry about that. If your not convinced, look for something else. That's the only article. Lately, i've been pretty disturbed at the ganging up on Andy. Again, that completely slipped my mind. I'm REALLY Sorry.-- (talk) 17:45, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Conservative Deceit in action. Who told you about this page? Hipocrite (talk) 17:47, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
So you forgot about an edit within 24 hours? I don't know that you have the mental capacity to continue editing...unless of course you're being dishonest, though I would hope that beneath someone whose only intent is to help preserve Mr. Schlafly's good name. (talk) 18:06, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

That's all I want to do. As far as my mental capacity... You are already judging me as if i'm your enemy. Please stop. I forgot completely. When you asked the question, were you testing me (aka. stalking)? (this reply is for 'Hipocrite')-- (talk) 18:12, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Of course I was testing you. I don't think testing and stalking are the same thing. Hipocrite (talk) 18:35, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Is there any person who agrees with me? Please speak!!-- (talk) 18:17, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Dosen't look like it. Hipocrite (talk) 18:35, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I take it that this organization will always be anti-Andy and anti-conservative and anti-all that conservatives believe.-- (talk) 18:25, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't think you or Andy represent "conservatives." You are a home schooled kid. Andy is a fringe catholic figure, mocked by even his own "side" of the political argument. Hipocrite (talk) 18:35, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Don't you dare try to mark me as something. Are you homeschooled?? What's your IQ?? Take a look at the comparison between public school graduation rate, and homeschooled grad rate. You can keep feeding the pubic school system. IT WILL NEVER GET BETTER.-- (talk) 18:48, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm not homeschooled. My IQ is OVER NINE THOUSAND! (In the real world, no one gets IQ tests). Graduation rates are not a meaningful statistic for multiple reasons. First, because homeschoolers have a graduation rate of zero (they do not graduate from school). Second, because homeschooling in self-selecting. Correcting for economics and other factors, the purported advantages of homeschooling shrink substantially. WP:It gets better. I know it's hard to be a homeschooled homosexual. Hipocrite (talk) 18:52, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
(EC)The site (as outlined in its mission) opposes pseudo-science and authoritarianism. Andrew Schlafly pushes both of these things. If you're trying to help out Andrew Schlafly, I can understand why you're distressed so many people deride him... but this is all over the Internet. RationalWiki is one of many sites that criticises or mocks him... Disgust, like respect, is earned. --TheLateGatsby (The end of the dock ) 18:38, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

(reply to 'Hipocrite') Why, because you are one? If you don't like grad rates, then how about college acception?! It's almost obvious that your IQ is over 9,000. Actually, I believe you're underestimating yourself. You're a funny guy.

College "acception" is not a meaningful statistic. The number of things that need to be corrected for make it impossible to evaluate. In addition to economics, demographics and geography, you'd need to correct for religious/non-traditional schools, schools applied to, and the like. If any real study has been done, I'd like to see it. I'm certain it does not exist in any quality. Hipocrite (talk) 19:02, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

THANK YOU Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg FOR BEING THE FIRST PERSON TO AGREE WITH ME ON THIS ISSUE. PLEASE, SPREAD THE WORD.-- (talk) 20:37, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

User: Powdersmokeandleather, why did you revert my changes if you want the page deleted anyway?-- (talk) 13:52, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Because as long as the article is here, it should suck less. Your editing made it suck more. If the thunder don't get you/Then the lightning will. 13:55, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
There isn't going to be consensus on deletion the way you've raised the issue as some anonymous griefer with an agenda. You will also fail at editing it. Someone who knows the site better is going to have more success. The article is going to get tuned up because someone who cares is going to make it better, not save someone's feelings or accomodate your druthers. In other words, at this point you're pissing in the wind and basically just wasting peoples' time. How about you move on and go fight someone else's battles somewhere else? Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 19:33, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry that you feel that way, but honestly, its your time to waste. Anyone can either defend their opinions on my poll, or waste their time actually pissing in the wind (haha). I don't think that anyone here will be making any page-saving changes because the entire idea of having a page devoted to such nonsense is ridiculous. Thank you for taking a little time out of your daily life to contribute. It benefits the both of us (you, for stating your opinion; me, for achieving my goal).-- (talk) 01:19, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Resemblance to Ha Ha Guy[edit]


Just putting that out there.


Why am I included in this article? I mean did Schlafly evered say that to me or is someone making this up for comedic purposes? User:Coolguy212

You aren't included. There is some wiki magic to make the current user's name pop up. For instance my sandbox says the current user's name, but I never typed your name in.ClickerClock (talk) 04:38, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
It's probably <span class="myName></span>, if I saw it I'd see "Christopher" and ClickerClock would see "ClickerClock". Christopher (talk) 07:18, 26 June 2017 (UTC)