Talk:Andrew Schlafly

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Conservlogo late april.png

This Conservapedia related article has been awarded GOLD status for quality. Please keep this in mind when editing the article. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Goldenbrain.png
Information icon.svg Cover Story
This article is, among others, randomly included on the Main Page.
Please keep this in mind and be sure that your edits are of the quality that this implies.
Its front-page abstract can be found here and its editnotice here.
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.

This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>

His students' college admissions[edit]

I removed that sentence that mentioned that Yale and Harvard are missing. I don't see the relevance. In addition, Westminster Choir College is actually part of Rider University, a nonsectarian private university in New Jersey. Plus, at least one of his students got accepted to Princeton, Schlafly's alma mater. And I find it peculiar Schlafly was once an adjunct professor at Seton Hall Law School and also mentions in his user page "Seton Hall University (2 students on big scholarships)". AP (talk) 23:54, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

He was an adjunct. Bottom-of-the-barrel ranking. No chance of tenure. Less job security than the janitor, who at least has an effective union be hind him. The job of "adjunct professor" does not give one any "pull" with the folks over at admissions. PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?.Moderator 00:00, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Did he vote for Obama[edit]

From Barack Obama's Conservapedia Page:

"In the winter of 1988 Barack Obama decided to attend Harvard Law School, and left Chicago for Cambridge, Massachusetts. In his 2nd year a power struggle broke out among the dominant white liberals over control of the Harvard Law Review. Obama was elected its first black president as a compromise candidate largely with help of conservatives following a "marathon voting session" in which he finally won on the 19th ballot."

Who was a conservative editor of the Harvard Law Review that could have possibly voted in that election? Irrationalinhumanist (talk) 05:58, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

This article contains some statheist religious irrationality[edit]

How did someone with such a rich academic background (Princeton. Harvard) end up so anti-intellectual and irrational?[edit]

How?Levi Ackerman (talk) 15:21, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Try engineers and woo for a start and consider that the study of law is likely to encourage an approach that emphasises "winning" debates by whatever means, rather than critical, intellectual curiosity and scrutiny. See also, William Lane Craig. ScepticWombat (talk) 16:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
But...I studied law. While it does encourage an approach that emphasises "winning", it does not encourage winning at any cost. Also, for you to say that about the subject of law makes you sound rather ignorant on the subject. Law is indeed one of the subjects that demands critical thinking, intellectual curiousity and scrutiny. Don't make such sweeping and incorrect statements about a subject. You only need to look at the several landmark legal decisions, both recent and of old, of which there isn't a shortage, to know that what you just said about the subject of law is flat-out ignorant. Ted Cruz is akin to Schlafy in beliefs, and he too has a legal background. So, too was and did Antonin Scalia. They came to the subject with their religious prejudices. Law did not inform their religious nuttery. Levi Ackerman (talk) 18:10, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
It of course will depend on what your motivation for studying and working with law is and who you regard as your model lawyer (or judge). My point was that neither law nor engineering need challenge those who are, to use your designation, "anti-intellectual and irrational" as these subjects can be easily studied from a sort of "craftsmanship" perspective, something you also find in the medical field. I was not claiming that either subject actually produce or promote wingnuttery, just that their "filter" for challenging such ideas is less fine because you can easily avoid even discussing these notions - if you don't want to. ScepticWombat (talk) 09:22, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Urgh[edit]

Seriously, did you have to put that smile in the main page?. I cannot look straight at it --Panzerfaust (talk) 19:05, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

New Nickname[edit]

"Assfly"? Meh. "A Scat Fly"? Yeah. C'mon people, let's do it. — Unsigned, by: CTB33391 / talk / contribs

But he isn't into scat? — Dysk (contribs) 13:00, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
...Scat as in he's complete shit. It's forced but I guess it works. — Unsigned, by: CTB33391 / talk / contribs
It's not completely awful I guess. — Dysk (contribs) 09:50, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Why is this guy so dishonest? And why does he try to cut and change the meaning of the Bible?

He is a wingnut[edit]

It should be mentioned in the intro that he is a wingnut - citation not required. — Unsigned, by: 183.83.137.243 / talk

Roman Catholic?[edit]

Andrew Schafly's parents are Roman Catholic. Was he raised RC himself? Conservapedia isn't a Christian conservative wiki (which would not preclude RCC beliefs), it's an Evangelical Christian wiki (and an extremist one at that, it's not a mainstream Evangelical website). Several articles espouse Evangelical theology which is completely at odds with RC theology and the article on Pope Francis is... less than deferential to say the least. This begs the question, is Andy RC? If so, what is he up to? Is he merely engaging in a commercial enterprise to sell to Evangelicals? 78.18.98.28 (talk) 14:20, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Andy is nominally Catholic, but more importantly, he's also batshit insane, and worships his mother and his own personal Republican Jesus, and in that order, too. As long as you remember that he sees everything through a political lens, and that his political spectrum = God > "conservatives" (like him & mom) > everyone else, then you can stop worrying about trying to make sense of what he says and does, and just enjoy pointing & laughing at the craziness. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 18:06, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
You're right, I'm probably wasting my time speculating. I just find it interesting that the Schaflys are an élite, Eastern seaboard, well-educated, very wealthy sort of family and they're Roman Catholic. They're a far cry from your average lower middle-class Midwestern or Southern Evangelical Protestant. I think that Conservapedia is mostly written to appeal to Evangelicals for political reasons more than anything else. Roman Catholics in general tend to be socially conservative but quite left-wing in terms of economic policy and they are also less inclined to get involved in extremist politics like the Tea Party (at least in the USA). It's possible that he wrote Conservapedia as an Evangelical wiki just to get cozy with them so he can file plenty of lucrative frivolous lawsuits on their behalf. --78.18.98.28 (talk) 16:38, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
That unfortunately isn't true anymore -- this Wiki kind of touches on it in the traditionalist Catholicism article, but there's a large wing of the American Catholic church that behaves more like evangelicals in many ways (namely an embrace of libertarianism or pro-big-money policies, and an overemphasis on anti-abortion, anti-LGBTQ, and even flat out racist viewpoints). This wing is probably more visible than ever due to the loud grumbling regarding Pope Francis from that lot. To be honest, some of the figures from this side are worthy of articles. For instance, according to this article, for instance, one of the prominent figures in this category Carlo Maria ViganòWikipedia, who made nutty complaints about COVID-19 quarantines and even Black Lives Matter protests. Sounds like a piece of work. The far-right Catholic (not officially, but in that influence sphere) LifeSiteNewsWikipedia also has been converging with the general alt-right/fundie bullshit in promoting the atypical Trump era right wing conspiracies (one only has to browse their COVID-19 articles to see that). It wasn't always this way, but it is now. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 18:21, 13 April 2021 (UTC)