Poe's law states that it's impossible to tell if someone on the internet is being satirical, or genuinely thinks ridiculous things. For example there are conservatives who watch the Colbert report and think it's agreeing with their values. For example this site is satire, but if you look at it, can you truly say the actual homophobes don't say the same kind of stuff? If you're easily offended you might want to skip clicking that link. Similarly I've found a website Conservapedia, and for the life of me I can't tell if it's a very in depth joke, or if they are serious about that stuff. According to conservapedia item 16 on the gay agenda is "Undermining the resolve of latent homosexuals so that their will becomes too weak to resist the temptations of homosexuality[27]". That's right, not only is the gay agenda a thing, but we have a numbered list. I can not tell if this is supposed to be funny or not, but it is.
Undermining the resolve of latent homosexuals so that their will becomes too weak to resist the temptations of homosexuality :roflmao:
:eusa_doh: Goddamn who leaked our agenda? No but seriously, I hope it's satire. Although there probably are homophobes who believe that stuff.
"Even if Jesus agrees to go out with me"..........Pretty sure it's a joke. Atleast I hope... But I see what you mean, there's people out there that probably think this kinda stuff.
Looking at the website, I'm assuming it's a joke. Most serious websites are better put together than that :lol: Plus it all sounds rather sarcastic, but that may just be me.
More gems from conservapedia: "In an attempt to spread Bush hatred without mentioning his name, it is common for liberals to lie and say "we're in this economic mess because of the policies over the previous eight years." This is a myth, perpetuated by the corrupt in order to link bad economics with Conservatism and Bush policy. These liberals are the very same individuals that would not recognize George W. Bush's economic successes when the economy was creating jobs. Bush, McCain, Alan Greenspan are all on record as trying to fix the corrupt lending policies and government mismanagement for the past eight years. [35] All the while Democrats were lining their pockets with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac donations. Democrats are overwhelming responsible if they should point fingers. Democrats Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, John Kerry, Charles Schumer and even Barack Obama are as much, if not directly, indirectly responsible for the failed economics of this country over the past eight-years. The same people who got us into this mess are now responsible for getting us out of financial meltdown. Blame can go all around on this one, both Republicans and Democrats. This was the result of many bad decisions over a long period of time. Then out of nowhere, financial calamity that nobody saw coming, except congressmen and women who were privy to bank collapses. They made good money while the rest of America suffered. [36] “ The truth of the matter; Bush-era 4.5% unemployment, Obama-era will it go higher than 10%" "The liberal belief that an individual can claim to support our military, just not the mission and still be considered a 'Patriot'. In fact, the exact opposite is the truth. A liberals patriotism, party-specific position, cannot support the troops if they are an a impediment to their political left-wing strategy. The main reason for this has to due with passionate, partisan hatred for our current commander n chief, the President of the United States of America. Liberals claim to support the military, claim not to support the mission and refuse to support the Commander. The extremist left discounts the counter effect of troop morale. Understanding the true liberal mindset when it comes to supporting our U.S. troops, observe the often tried protest march. Though frustration boils over, actions lead from protest to outright sabotage or anarchism. [27] Liberal credibility fails and lack of concern for the support of America shows. The left-wing cares so much for our military they condone and actually prop up politicians that abuse troops with reckless accusations [28], negative media coverage and ego trips [29]. Liberal protesters look the other way as war memorials are vandalized. Liberals protest our severely injured soldiers at the Walter Reed Medical Center.[30] Liberal protesters harass, damage or block military recruitment centers from operating business as-usual. [31] This leftwing position, the myth is successful in feeding media driven discontent and mediocrity shame. If the news is bad, a liberal is spoon fed. If the news is good, the spoon fed liberal is oblivious. e.g. "a complete suspension of disbelief". Patriotism, to your brother, who volunteers and risks the ultimate sacrifice out of love, will never be diminished. True patriots will always be in our gratitude and held in the highest light." Oh my sides.
Oops, I clicked the wrong link when I made this post. :bang: Conservapedia.. eesh. That's all I have to say.
I believe Conservapedia is real, and I could be wrong, but I think it was founded by the son of Phylis Schlafly (she of the "stop the ERA" fame).
I always thought it was funny about homophobic conservatives, whose main motivation for their beliefs is love for another man.
