Deviled Abraham
The following is a set of corrections, made as shown on 2/23/07, by Conservapedia founder Andrew Schlafly (son of Phyllis Schlafly) to the Conservapedia article, ‘Islam’.
Above: Andrew Schlafly
Prior version:
Islam is a religion of Abraham (the other offshoots of which are Judaism and Christianity) that has grown to be the second largest religion with over 1.4 billion followers. The word “Islam” means submission to God. The followers of Islam are called Muslims.
Corrected version:
Islam is a religion of Abraham that has grown to be the second largest religion with over 1.4 billion followers. The word “Islam” means submission to God. The followers of Islam are called Muslims.
Well, that clears that up. Islam is a religion of Abraham, while on the other hand, Christianity and Judaism are religions of Abraham. The confusion comes when you start mixing them all together.
Prior version:
Others have pointed to the pagan roots of various Muslim prohibitions, such as the ban on pork originating in the 3rd-century AD Damascene cult of the pig-god Jamal. There is some evidence that traditional Muslim scholars have been suppressing this information as well as various recently-recovered scrolls that hint at early Muslim human sacrifice (e.g., at Uhud) which can also be found in one of the foundational myths of Christianity, the God-given mandate for Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac.
Corrected version:
Others have pointed to the pagan roots of various Muslim prohibitions, such as the ban on pork originating in the 3rd-century AD Damascene cult of the pig-god Jamal. There is some evidence that traditional Muslim scholars have been suppressing this information as well as various recently-recovered scrolls that hint at early Muslim human sacrifice (e.g., at Uhud).
The difference is that, okay, Abraham and Isaac. But Muslims stubbornly maintain that their so-called God commanded Abraham to human-sacrifice his son, with the… And this is especially appalling in contrast to the example of Christ, who… Because God said he had to… And then at the Last Supper, when he…
Because another thing is the unprecedented ban on pork, otherwise unknown to major world religious traditions.
Let’s hope Andrew keeps at it; there’s a lot of liberal bias in the Bible that needs uncovering.
He also mentioned something about Muslims being “overwhelmingly brown and swarthy-looking.”
I always thought that the Muslim version of the Abraham story had Abraham about to sacrifice his son Ishmael, not Isaac.
I always thought that the Muslim version of the Abraham story had Abraham about to sacrifice his son Ishmael, not Isaac.
He was also ordered to do the deed by Allah. So it was the same Abraham, but all different people otherwise.
Singling out Islam for its prohibition of pork doesn’t seem kosher to me.
Oh, and should the Christian “He died as propitiation for our sins” crowd really be trying to work the human sacrifice angle?
I don’t think the folk behind conservapedia thought things through very well.
Detailed logs of who made what edits and records of changed versions is going to be fun spelunking till they figure out how to effectively fake openness.
Which is to say never.
Far, far too dumb.
Yeah, and whatever happened to that whole catholic thing I remember about having to eat fish stix on fridays or something? I mean, when you have a religious food taboo with TWO variables, you’ve really got those other cults beat, guys. C’mon, flaunt it!!
mikey
Being a “Christo Conservative’ means never having to say, “Let’s think about this.”
Oh, and help me out here. Conservapedia? Think I missed something. Was I napping when the memo came out that conservative doesn’t mean conservative anymore, now it means fundamentalist christianist extremist, bible literalist nutjob? ‘Cause I do nap a lot more these days. But I think my question would be, y’know, that’s so far from the meaning of the word “conservative” wouldn’t they have been better served just picking out a shiny new word?
mikey
You know, this will be used as further ‘PROOF’ that they are being persecuted.
“All we wanted was a place where ‘conservatives’ could go and KNOW they wouldn’t see anything that might upset them and then those Lucifer Lovers came along and ruined it.”
mikey: Maybe christopedia would’ve been more apt?
Or maybe vendettapedia? I think there’s a clue in item three here:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia
about why Andy Schlafly (who’s the attorney for AAPS) is so darned mad at wikipedia.
Dolchstossapedia
Why does Islam need to be compared to anything guys? The article was edited to take out comparisons to other religions…why not compare it to Mormonism too?? Bahai’ism!!!
Are you checking to make sure the Christian entries have references to Islam??? Check the Jewish entries too!!!
Get BUSY!!!!
Be VIGILANT!
BINGO! We’ll call it Pie-o-pedia! Thanks annie…
mikey
Annie is objectively pro anti-cupcakes.
Just sayin’
Yeah! And what’s her position on brownies? People wanna know….
mikey
Mmmm…. baked goods…
I made a batch of seriously good maple scones this morning, doc marita. You oughta get in that. I can’t eat them – my MD would kick my ass, and trust me, she can. But I’ll take ’em to work on monday….
miikey
Oooh! Maple scones sound wonderful! Care to share a recipe?
This is going to be a source of amusement for years to come. I will be interested to see what the effect will be on Pammy’s viewing figures now that she has some real competition for completely loony wingnut sites. Perhaps you should drop the Glenn Reynolds Photoshop Contest and go straight to the Andrew Schlafly Photoshop Contest. Here is my entry.
Is there an entry in Conservapedia on pie or other pastries?
‘Cause there should be…
Again on this Wack-O-Pedia thing, now I find out that “Evolution violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics.”
That explains everything.
This is going to be a source of amusement for years to come.
Might be, blowback, but I expect to see a big invocation of the Take My Ball And Go Home rule soon, and its complete and pouty disappearance leaving behind nothing but an aggrieved notice, what with the ridicule and criticism of it. I guess it depends on whether the people running it get tired of being made fun of before the detractors get tired of making fun of it.
Sure. Piece o’cake…er, scone. Get your scone mix from Ivy Cottage. If you don’t, well, you’ll end up with crap. Just sayin. Anyway, get the original mix from Ivy Cottage. Hit it with a teaspoon of vanilla and a couple teaspoons of righteous maple syrup or maple extract, if that’s your deal. Now, you’ve added too much liquid to the mix, so after you knead it let it rest for a while. It’ll soak up whatcha got, just don’t ask it to hurry. Then, form it up and cut it now. I’d rather bake wedges than try and figure out if it’s done in the middle. It’s quickbread, remember. Treat it like, say, soda bread and it’ll be happy. When it comes out, it’s ready to go, so have the tea/coffee/butter out already – hot they’re sublime. Cold they’re pretty fuckin good…
mikeyh
Also, will they ever re-open registration?
Doesn’t keeping it closed prove they’ve lost the Battle of the Pedias?
Pansies.
Pedopedia (’cause it was written by middle-schoolers)?
Pedia-lite (’cause there isn’t any there there, and also ’cause it’s essentially a knock-the-kids-unconscious-so-they-won’t-bug-you remedy)?
The scones would’ve sounded great a few hours ago, mikey, but now it’s well into cocktail hour and maple? Not so much . . .
Ivy Cottage, you say? I must check this out.
DiffBrad, I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were you. I suspect they’ve figured out that they’re outnumbered.
Oh. And I should mention that AMC is doing “Deliverance” immediately followed by “Taxi Driver” starting right now. I cannot imagine what might be more important…
mikey
The scones WERE great a couple hours ago, my friend Mortician. And yes, the Laphroaig is much more aligned with teh now. We had snow on the highest peaks yesterday! That causes Northern California Insanity, dontcha know…
mikey
How about instead of a pedia name at all they just call it Rightopia – the magic place where facts are the way they ought to be*?
In a weird way allowing no new registrations is appropriate for them. It is vaguely anti-immigration. And it creates an entitled elite who have all the say.
* – if your mother didn’t have to change her last name when she got married, or you’re otherwise fucking stupid.
Mikey–
Your “they ain’t conservatives any more” is my new obsesh. Cf. Rush Limbaugh’s little cameo in Jane Meyer’s piece on Joel Surnow and 24 in the New Y’er. Rush, Joel, and kindred lads are at the White House and Rush, referring to all and sundry, stage-whispers “and they’re conservative!”
And for the first time I’m, like, “Huh? Because what? They back Chimpster? There’s nothing conservative about him in even the dumb-bell Reagan/Goldwater sense.” This bears investigating, in my view.
Don’t “they” know that by being monothestic “they” have to attribute all the weirdness of the World to “their” one true God?
And when faced with another monothestic culture, don’t “they” understand “they’re” worshipping the same God?
That’s why I believe in a variety of Deities. That way, I can always lay the blame at the Feet of Bast. Bad kitty!
I’m hoping they make the registration process so mockery-free that we can match the writers to the names on the school board ballot. But I think SamFromUtah is right.
They even screw up the easy stuff.
Forest
Forests are collections of trees as a whole, or large areas of trees. Forest is to trees as macroeconomics is to microeconomics.
Well that clears it up, because I know *all* about economics, but I have no idea what a tree is.
Forest is the opposite of trees.
There is nothing I could say to describe how stupid a statement that is. Nothing.
Cells are the opposite of animal.
Wait, what?
There is one sentence about “Jews” and about five thousand words about “The Da Vinci Code.”
Amusingly, the author of the article gives the back of his hand to Dan Brown’s “sources” (which the author calls “incredulous” when he means “not credible”), sneering that they “are dismissed by all serious historians, and described as being ‘schlock pseudo-history and conspiracy-theory.'”
Wonder how they treat Intelligent Design…
Hey! Get this:
“The theory of Intelligent Design has little or no support outside the United States, which is in the grip of a currently in the grip of an irrational religious-backed campaign to reject the teachings of the Theory of Evolution.”
Okay, two “grips.” Still, we’ll see how long this lasts. A lot of the entries read as though written by eighth graders.
Conservapedia is a school project for tweens who’ve been fundie-schooled and are therefore operating at a third-grade level of reading comprehension, writing ability, and all-round information background. I’m not sure it was ever supposed to be a ‘real’ -pedia of any kind, though it’s certainly been a real illuminating glimpse into fundie (home)school curricula.
If anyone here did manage to get a username before they closed registration, it would make me eternally happy if you could change the current entry for “Sea”:
(Which, I note, was added in December, making it an actually earnest entry)
to Baldrick’s definition from Black Adder:
For what it’s worth, I don’t think you’d be reducing the overall quality at all…
Ooh, go look at the entry for ‘Moon’…
SamFromUtah – it will stay up forever (well not really but certainly for quite some time) because they are True Believers and all this mockery will confirm to them that their views are correct.
BTW, James Wolcott is hyping a post by a true conservative that is vaguely amusing.
[…] Gavin M. and takes a couple looks at Conservapedia 8:20pm MST | View blog […]
Well, it’s a darned good thing that those jewy jews of jewery and the islamofascicles are forbidden to consume all that delicious, delicious pork… it leaves all the more for US!
Mmmmmmmmmmm….. pork!
I don’t know how many sons Phyllis Schlafly has, but one of the middle-aged ones is gay, a lawyer, and still lived with her as of a few years ago. I know this because they live in Alton, Illinois, and the gay son frequented a gay bar I was familiar with.
Talk about household tension…
From Cons-serving-pap.
2. The Moon presents the same side to Earth at all times, even though the Moon revolves around the Earth. That requires the rotation of the Moon to be timed precisely to offset the separate effects of the revolution around Earth. This has an awesome artistic or design effect without any plausible physical reason.
Skeptics sought to explain this remarkable phenomenon by saying that tidal forces on Earth caused a bulge on the Moon, thereby locking in the rotation of the Moon so that its same face always presents to the Earth. They asserted that the planet Mercury has a similar locked rotation due to gravitation forces from the sun, such that the same side of Mercury always faces the sun.
But this explanation was ultimately proven wrong.[1]Mercury does not always present the same face to the sun as claimed, and instead switches the side that it presents to the sun every full revolution. As to the Moon, the tidal forces on the Earth cannot account fully for its bulge or egg shape. The cause of the bulge on the Moon to lock in its rotation remains a mystery to those who reject design.
From Cons-serving-pap’s listed Source for its ‘Moon’ entry:
Mercury’s 3:2 spin—orbit resonance did not occur by chance. What mechanism establishes and maintains it? In the case of the Moon orbiting Earth, the 1:1 resonance is explained as the result of tidal forces. In essence, the lunar rotation period, which probably started off much shorter than its present value, has lengthened so that the tidal bulge created by Earth is fixed relative to the body of the Moon. Tidal forces (this time due to the Sun) are also responsible for Mercury’s 3:2 resonance, but in a much more subtle way.
http://physics.fortlewis.edu/Astronomy/astronomy%20today/CHAISSON/AT308/HTML/AT30803.HTM
Ooooooo! Bacon!
Forest is the opposite of trees.
Y’know, it would be easy to assume that it’s “opposite” they don’t know the meaning of, but it might be “forest” or “is” or “trees.” Or all of them. Or they might not know that words are supposed to have meanings. Or that there’s such a thing as written language, and that bumpy thing in front of the computer monitor encodes it. I’m just…no, I have to stop now.
“Forest is the opposite of trees” is a parody entry from someone at Pharyngula. They took the, umm, ‘logic’ from the economics entry (featuring, I think, a tree or forest analogy to explain the difference between micro- and macroeconomics) and applied it to the ‘forests’ entry.
That it’s still up is pretty funny.
If you’re fond of this interesting internet resource, you could describe yourself as a Conservapediaphile. However, I wouldn’t go around announcing the fact loudly or advertising it on a bumper sticker.
Have you never heard people complaining about not seeing the trees for the forest? Or maybe it was the other way around. Either way — the trees and the forest are in mutual opposition.
. Bill Clinton managed to serve two terms without botching the prosecution of two wars, manipulating intelligence, engaging in a systematic program of torture, or mishandling the federal response to flooding of a major American city. Obviously, he is the devil incarnate. Clinton also attempted to use the American military to kill Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, an action which was properly seen as a mere attempt to distract the nation from the Monica Lewisnky scandal.
Someone is having altogether too much fun with these yokels This is buried at the bottom of a relatively long entry, so home-schoolers will not get that far along to notice it.
Is he Phyllis’ homosexual son?
YAY! The site is back! More bagging on the Schlafly family!!!
Ah, welcome back. It’s been hell without SN — I’ve actually had to do some work.
Conservatives not only want to return the US to an early 20th century social milieu, they also are committed to working with early 1900’s technology, if the response of Conservapedia is any indication.
Slow as an unmotivated turtle.
I can visualize several crank engines, a steam driven bellows, some bubbling beakers and a rack of glowing vacuum tubes – kind of like that contraption Spock made in City On The Edge Of Forever- all being run by coffee-addled marmosets. With Yakety Sax playing in the background. And, of course, a monkey washing a cat.
When I checked out the Wikipedia bias section of conservipedia, there was a specific reference to all the gossip in the William Donald Schaefer Wiki article. Now I have lived in Maryland for the past 22 years and fairly familiar with the Willie Don legacy. I can only conclude that in conservipedia terms, gossip means easily verifiable facts.
coffee-addled marmosets
Good band name.
You went awaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyy! *sobbing*
Thank Goddess you are back, as I thought I would have to watch the Academy Awards broadcast.
Was it Poland again? I’ll bet they have Teh Preview Button, too.
In Iraq.
It’s kind of interesting to look at the articles contributed by aschlafly on that site. They start off kind of inocuous (if not inspired), but quickly start being peppered by entries on visa types, the Health Care Quality Improvement Act, medical staff bylaws, the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations… You know, the kind of stuff homeschooled kids are going to find really useful.
It’s like he can’t stay focused enough on the project to avoid grinding his own personal axes.
A shame that they’re cleaning up so many of the good entries. If nothing else, people have kept them busy all weekend. Future interlopers are going to need to learn to be really subtle in their subversion to fly under the radar, I think.
[waves to Gentlewoman]
Coffee-addled marmosets
Will run while grave men make their bets
On how the monkey soaps the cat
While vacuum tubes heat kitty’s vat
A bellows drives the gramophone
That squeaks out Randolph’s saxophone
And God will bless our creaking clanks
As we consider further wanks.
“He was also ordered to do the deed by Allah. So it was the same Abraham, but all different people otherwise.”
By the way, Allah is the Arabic word for “God”, similar to the Hebrew word “Ehllo” (these are both transcriptions). So the difference of Abraham being ordered by God or Abraham being ordered by Allah is absolutely none.
The mythos, I believe, is that there were two sons of Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael (this is in the book of Genesis, so is common to all semitic religions). In Islam it is agreed that Isaac’s descendants were the Hebrews, and to a lesser extent the Christians, while Ishmael’s descendants were the Muslims. (I think Muhammed is believed to be a direct descendant of Ishmael, but I’m not certain)
Third note “Islam” means “The way of peace”, and is based on the Arabic word “Salam” similar to the Hebrew “Shalom”. Muslim means “one who submits to peace”. The s,l, and m make the root word. So peace is the centerpoint of Islam.
Coffee-addled marmosets
Will run while grave men make their bets
That’s a King Crimson track, right?
I went to school in the den
My girlfriend was a dusty hen
I played with dolls and then I lied
The attic was my place to hide
I learned to cry and dress in black
Oxycontin filled in for the things I lacked
I started cutting my arms and thighs
Conservapedia says I must not like guys
Take it, Bubba
Welcome back, S,N! I had to go outside in the rain ’cause you were laggin…
mikey
Let none allow their cocks to rise
While thinking of a young man’s thighs
Instead think of our vengeful God
His potent wrath, His smiting rod.
You all do know that Abraham had two sons, right?
Well, he had more than two, but the two that are being spoken about here, Ishmael and Isaac are his first and second born sons.
“Third note “Islamâ€? means “The way of peaceâ€?, and is based on the Arabic word “Salamâ€? similar to the Hebrew “Shalomâ€?. Muslim means “one who submits to peaceâ€?. The s,l, and m make the root word. So peace is the centerpoint of Islam.”
Come on, Raznor, try a little harder. This is basic Islam 101:
But then again I guess you are smarter than Muslims about what Islam means, right?
Oh, swell! The pie lady is here to teach Sunday School!
Are you going to be teaching us about begettin’ today? There was a whole lot of begettin’ in the Bible, if I recall correctly.
Don’t bother Shoe, I’ve tried to explain the whole meaning of Islam thing to them before. It’s like nailing jello to a tree with your forehead to educate these people.
You best be gettin on your knees and REPENTING, Martika.
We steeped our tea in holy water
And closed our eyes to endless slaughter
We studied close the son of lord
While crying out “kill the brown horde”
mikey
Is repenting a euphemism for something?
The pie lady is trying to get me to do bad things.
I know it is a lost cause, Miss Annie, but it never hurts to try.
They’re like Jim and Tammy Faye
You all know Nicole had two dads, right?
Coffee-addled marmosets
Will run while grave men make their bets
That’s a King Crimson track, right?
heard abootleg of that once, belew my mind.
heard abootleg of that once, belew my mind.
Big props for gratuitous Adrian Belew reference; even bigger props if it was unintended.
annie is like a ted haggard suit that is set up on the corner next to the head shop and gay bar. inside, the operator is forming a froth of their own sexual juices, clenching their hands and grinding their teeth at the thought of what’s going on in these evil places. jesus annie, i’m gettin exited just thinkin bout you praying fervently for my dirty, dirty soul..
herr dok, it’s big props only for me…
did you ever see adrian in zappa’s “baby snakes”?
i got to go for a bi., annie, keep drinking. witnessing will really leave you parched
Did the Jeebus pie lady kill the thread, or all you all just watching the Oscars?
He was also ordered to do the deed by Allah. So it was the same Abraham, but all different people otherwise.
This story has about 100 versions depending on where in the religious history you are in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
At one time as a reaction to Christianity, Judaism adopted a version where Issac was slain, he went to heaven for three days and rose again, then God told Abraham not to do it anymore.
Ishmael was Abraham’s first born son who he cast out into the desert with his mother Hagar.
Isaac and Ishmael are two different people. The story with Isaac had been written down for a thousand years before Islam. The Jews started the whole Arabs come from Ishmael thing. Muhammed just went with it, and added to it.
The story with Isaac had been written down for a thousand years before Islam.
That’s almost certainly not true. The story is very much an adaption of pagan myths and appears first in Helenized Egyptian Judaism. It might pre-date Christianity be a few hundred years.
I don’t understand. To create an account you have to click on the create account button. But there’s no create account button. Does the ‘pedia know I don’t love Jesus?
Ed,
Add together the “few hundred” years that Genesis predates Christianity, and the 600 years between Christianity and Islam and you get……
It’s called math. It’s actually over a thousand years probably.
Dr Zen,
Jesus knows that you don’t love Him and it’s breaking His heart. He knows that you mock Him because you are in pain in your life, and He wants you to come to Him so He can carry your burdens for you. He wants to do this only because He LOVES you.
Isn’t that awesome?
I can overlook the fact that Muslims and Jews don’t beleive Jesus was God and redeemed their souls but no bacon. I cannont adhere to such a flawed religoin.
I think Conservapedia is a brilliant idea…for the wrong people. After all, rather than chasing guerrilla stupid all over the place, it’s got to be easier to mock stupid that’s concentrated, right?
Add together the “few hundred� years that Genesis predates Christianity, and the 600 years between Christianity and Islam and you get……
“Genesis” didn’t exist until the second century AD. It’s called anthropology.
Isn’t that awesome?
That’s pathetic.
Mankind was born to suffer. The result should be wisdom, not Jack Handy in the sky.
[…] Sadly No commentator Billy Pilgrim has the answer: I can visualize several crank engines, a steam driven bellows, some bubbling beakers and a rack […]
I think we shoul dall pitch in and get AA an editorship at Conservapedia.
I’m sure she would bring much merriment and edification to the proceedings. As well as pie.
Um, I refuse to believe that there was a 3rd-century pig-god named “Jamal.”
Steve said, February 26, 2007 at 18:21
Um, I refuse to believe that there was a 3rd-century pig-god named “Jamal.�
It’s true, he’s currently in jail for telling reporters about some damaged mosques.
Ah, yes. You shriveled old hag, annie. Why don’t you show up on every thread that mentions Christianity, and INSULT US ALL?
Your potty mouth and insults REALLY MAKE ME WANT TO CONVERT TO YOUR VERSION OF ‘CHRISTIANITY’.
You are a vile and disgusting woman, who in no way represents what any sane person would see as the ideas of Christ.
You aren’t very bright are you Ed? Now you have second century AD texts pre-dating Christianity??????
LOL, you’re so stoopid you’re funny.
I don’t know what you call anthropology, Mr. Marshall, but even the most liberal of scholars will date the finalalized composition of Genesis to the period of the Babylonian Exile/return from Exile, which would place it at that latest at the 5th century BC. And there are fragments of Genesis texts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, which at the latest are from the 1st century AD, as well as some fragments from the 1st century BC. So even if we were to say that it could not have been composed until the exact time that we find the first fragments (which is hardly anthropologically sound), it would still be at least the 1st century BC.
The Septuagint translation began in the 3rd century BC, and since the book of Genesis was a part of this translation, it must have existed in the 3rd century, and before it in fact because obviously there must have already been a book in existence in order for it to be translated, and for it to have been considered important enough to translate in the first place one would assume that they had a substantial existence prior to the Septuagint translation. So even if you want to discount linguistic, thematic, traditional and other evidence for dating the composition of the text, (which is hardly anthropologically sound) you must accept the book of Genesis to have been in existence at least in the 3rd century BC or before. I mean, really.
and you, annie angel, are so old and washed up, it’s also funny.
it’s funny that you consider yourself a christian, since you are clearly not.
I can just see Jesus now:
“LOL, James, surely the last among you will be first in heaven – you’re so stoopid, it’s funny.”
man, annie, you are the dumbest, stinking, washed-up old bitch I’ve come across on the interwebs in a long, long time.
Someone sounds like they have a crush on me!! Sorry prozaclover, I’m in a relationship. With a 24 year old. 😀
Life is good. 🙂
She’s really much better at endorsing pie. Yum.
[…] when everyone who is anyone has moved on to Conservapedia. This fine new online resource exposes liberal bias in the Bible, the secular-progressive myth that unicorns never existed, and details how “judicial […]
[…] Gavin M. takes a couple looks at Conservapedia. These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and […]