ohmigawd
There is this anti-wikipedia encyclopedia made by conservatives for the world to roll with laughter. It's called consevapedia.com. Listen, wikipedia is incredibly biased. But the bias changes every day, that's why it's unreliable and why you can't reference it in anything scholarly. But this site is worse because it has no chance for improvement. It just sits there asserting and plagiarizing, never mind complete out right lying, it's way through the human knowledge database.
At first I was laughing at it's entry on "CE" and "Evolution" but I was just offended by the entry on feminism. It speaks with absolutely no reference or understanding of what feminism is.
AND I QUOTE "The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians." - 1992 Iowa fundraising letter opposing a state equal-rights amendment ("Equal Rights Initiative in Iowa Attacked", Washington Post, 23 August 1992); it is sometimes claimed that this statement appeared in Robertson's 1992 GOP convention speech,according to fundamentilists like pat robinson this is the case but it is not(see also [1]"
yeh. so uh, at least there passionate right?
At first I was laughing at it's entry on "CE" and "Evolution" but I was just offended by the entry on feminism. It speaks with absolutely no reference or understanding of what feminism is.
AND I QUOTE "The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians." - 1992 Iowa fundraising letter opposing a state equal-rights amendment ("Equal Rights Initiative in Iowa Attacked", Washington Post, 23 August 1992); it is sometimes claimed that this statement appeared in Robertson's 1992 GOP convention speech,according to fundamentilists like pat robinson this is the case but it is not(see also [1]"
yeh. so uh, at least there passionate right?