The fact that Wikipedia lets anybody edit just isn't enough for some people. Some demand their own Wiki, damn it!
What kind of people feel the need to set up an entirely separate reference? Why, that would be the ones who live on the fringes of society, who need a place where their people can go to be shielded from the whole "outside world" thing.
Reading these inbred cousins of Wikipedia is like stepping into a terrifying parallel universe.
Even if you're the most conservative damned person you know, I'm betting you'll still be plenty creeped out by Conservapedia, which bills itself as a "much-needed alternative to Wikipedia, which is increasingly anti-Christian and anti-American."
It's tough to argue against that last part, as there are rumors that some of the authors at Wikipedia are not very good Christians, and that others are not even from America at all. It's no wonder Wikipedia's entry for "United States" is nothing but a Photoshopped image of a cow shitting America.
Luckily, Conservapedia blows the lid off its rival, in its entry on ...
"Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia founded by entrepreneur and atheist Jimmy Wales and philosophy professor Larry Sanger...Despite its official "neutrality policy", Wikipedia has a strong liberal bias. In his article entitled 'Wikipedia lies, slander continue' journalist Joseph Farah stated Wikipedia 'is not only a provider of inaccuracy and bias. It is wholesale purveyor of lies and slander unlike any other the world has ever known.'"
Yes, not even Hitler's own propaganda machine can stand against the pure torrent of evil lies that ushers forth from Wikipedia. Fortunately, these guys are here to restore some balance to this thing. Let's check out Conservapedia's even-handed treatment of, say, liberals:Liberal:
"A liberal is someone who rejects logical and biblical standards, often for self-centered reasons. There are no coherent liberal standards; often a liberal is merely someone who craves attention, and who uses many words to say nothing."
Everything you need to understand about life inside the hardcore conservative bubble is right there in that paragraph. "People with other points of view aren't actually disagreeing with conservatives. They're just pretending to, probably because they're gay little babies!"
Actually, "bubble" probably isn't the right word. The folks at Conservapedia are trying to build something more like a bunker, surrounded by six feet of concrete that no opposing ideas can pierce. If you're wondering how the conservative movement got to DEFCON crazy, I've prepared a helpful timeline:
If it sounds like I'm being critical, some of the entries make valid points. For instance, I defy you to construct an argument against this:
"Vic Eliason of Crosstalk America rightly points out that if all Americans turned homosexual it would only take a few generations for the United States to lose most of the population of the country through lack of procreation. This would make the US more vulnerable to attack by our enemies."
That is in fact what would happen to an entirely gay country. Checkmate, Harvey Milk. Let's look up Hitler:
"...consciously sought to make the practices of Germany conform to the theory of evolution."
At this point you may be calling bullshit, figuring it's some snarky Stephen Colbert-esque mockery of the right. Not so. Conservapedia is the work of Andrew Schlafly, a lawyer and school teacher (let that second one sink in for a moment) and son of famous conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly (these days you can find her complaining about how George Bush wasn't conservative enough).
Where it Really Gets Weird...
Upset that the Bible doesn't warn us about the dangers of Socialism, welfare and Hollywood? Rewrite that shit!
For further research, see...