Thursday, March 22, 2007

Dumb or Ignorant......You Decide

Recently a friend of mine named Tom started a discussion on his blog about nonsense in our society, you can check it out here. One of the cool things about his post is that it shows how if you look, with very little effort, you can find all kinds of dumb or ignorance. It is with this in mind that I have decided (at least until I no longer have the time) to spotlight something stupid, or ignorant, or just plain dumb, once a week.

My introductory week is being brought to everyone by the wonderful mind that is my wife! She mentioned this site to me and it got me to checking it out and in that process I discovered and even more idiotic site, so I'm going to double dip this week. It's equally enjoyable because the two sites share the same blind ignorance........or at least a great amount of it.

Meva was telling me about a site that is similar to Wikipedia, which for those who aren't aware, is a free Internet encyclopedia. The unique quality of this site is that much of it allows for readers to edit or add to the articles and entries that are found within. Taken lightly, it's a fun site to explore, but I personally wouldn't recommend anyone take the information found there as fact before verifying it through other sources. Apparently it gets knocked for it's highly liberal views. I wasn't aware they were liberally biased, but then again I don't rely on it solely for my information and my natural skepticism precludes me from accepting anything at face value, so I almost automatically filter out bias when I notice it in my search for facts or truth. That being said, I'm sure it's there.

In this country, once something is labeled "liberal" it is often attacked by our friends, The Conservatives. Obviously threatened by the potentially devastating power and influence that is the liberal spewing might of the all-invasive force of Wikipedia, we are now treated with Conservapedia!!

Conservapedia
promotes itself as one of the worlds largest and most reliable online educational sources without all the liberal and anti-Christian bias of Wikipedia and other online sources. Which in plan liberal speak means:
"We embrace religious fundamentalism in the face of scientific facts, while promoting a limited world view that only recognizes other cultures, religions, and peoples as subservient and viewable as a labor source to exploit for labor that we don't want to preform ourselves, but are more than willing to under pay for......and without benefits because if you were a true Christian your God would take care of you, or at least provide you with some kind of health insurance, which he has never said we need to do!"
Obviously that is a quote I am attributing to myself.

While checking out that site, I had the joy of doing a few searches about Conservapedia and I came across this page, a blog by someone named Jon Swift. He calls himself a "reasonable conservative," which to me is almost an oxymoron like Free Lunch, No Strings Attached, or Republican Compassion. I think his site is pretty up front, but I do believe he has a sense of humor.......or at least I'm pulling for it because if he doesn't, then this blog is even more scary! I say this because after reading his post on Conservapedia, he freely admits to its superiority over Wikipedia, yet doesn't even know what it's about (HINT---He attributes it to Wiccan). He also says that since the media is biased, he gets his news from Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and, the best part---Jay Leno Monologues!! There is so much wrong with that statement I don't even have the time to stop laughing and write about it!!

Maybe I'm wrong for including them here, but check them out and judge for yourself!

2 comments:

Brant W. Fowler said...

Well, being somewhat of a conservative myself (though I don't think of myself as Democrat or Republican) I disagree with a little of what you're saying about the oxymorons. There are, in fact, some of us who are conservative, but aren't uptight or close-minded. ;)

Having said that, Conservapedia seems to have done exactly what it accused Wikipedia of doing only on the opposite direction. So I don't support that. It's nice, I suppose, for those who merely want conservative information, or rather information with a conservative slant. But to me it's this kind of biased and piety that has made Christianity and Conservatism as a whole largely counter-productive and the target of dislike and so forth.

Sigh, such is life...

Brant W. Fowler said...

That should have been bias, not biased. my bad. :)