[whiteperil] Sean: Facts are lazy and facts are late

[Email subscription to blog articles]

Posted by Sean:
Facts are lazy and facts are late
http://whiteperil.com/posts/1182487890.shtml


   Steve Miller at IGF [1]posts about a conservative answer to Wikipedia
   called (natch) Conservapedia, started by one of Phyllis Schlafly's
   sons. The entries on topics such as evolution and homosexuality have
   some critics up in arms, and Schlafly's [2]own comments give reason
   for concern. The following paragraph almost gave me a heart attack:

     "We have certain principles that we adhere to, and we are up-front
     about them," Schlafly writes in his mission statement. "Beyond that
     we welcome the facts."

   I liked this gem, too:

     But consider the entry on Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton (b. 1947).
     She "may suffer from a psychological condition that would raise
     questions about her fitness for office" â namely, "clinical
     narcissism," Conservapedia asserts. Evidence of her instability
     includes her "ever-changing opinion of the Iraq war." Though
     Schlafly demands that entries be rigorously footnoted, these
     sentences are not.
     Schlafly calls the armchair psychology "borderline in
     acceptability" for his site, but he defends the Clinton article on
     balance as "an objective, bias-free piece from a conservative
     perspective."

   Beyond that we welcome the facts? Good grief. My understanding, both
   from my own super-conservative Christian upbringing and from
   commentators, was always that the faithful regarded some beliefs as
   not susceptible to empirical testing by science--not that certain
   principles were to be declared off limits to inquiry, with observable
   reality a secondary consideration. Yes, I'm talking about just one
   sentence, but Schlafly is a grown-up from a very media-savvy family. I
   have no doubt that he knows how to choose his words.
   As far as the entry on Clinton goes, it certainly sounds more fun to
   read than what you're likely to see on Wikipedia, but I thought
   conservatives were against the practice of repairing to "psychological
   conditions" as an explanation for venal behavior? Is it proposed that
   we start accusing all waffling politicians of being mentally unstable?
   Whatever. No website is obligated to champion the disinterested
   pursuit of truth, though a little more self-awareness might be seemly.
   Predictably, there are some gays who are up in arms over
   Conservapedia's entries about sexuality, and their solution is to
   infiltrate the place:

     In recent months, Conservapedia's articles have been hit frequently
     by interlopers from RationalWiki and elsewhere. The vandals have
     inserted errors, pornographic photos and satire... The vandalism
     aims "to cause people to say, 'That Conservapedia is just wacko,'"
     said Brian Macdonald, 45, a Navy veteran in Murfreesboro, Tenn.,
     who puts in several hours a day on the site fending off malicious
     editing.

   Miller's take is the right one:

     The cost of living in a free society is to suffer being
     offendedâwithout trying to silence those you find offensive
     (another example: campus "progressives" who steal conservative
     student newspapers from their distribution sites and destroy them).
     Conservatives have a right to their media; and the answer to
     arguments we find appalling is to criticize them. After all, it's
     not as if gay-supportive information isn't also easily available
     online.

   One thing he doesn't mention is how stupid the RationalWiki people are
   being in tactical terms. I happen to think the jabber about a "war on
   Christianity" is overheated and, in many cases, disingenuous.
   Nevertheless, a lot of well-meaning, ordinary Americans have a sense
   that anyone who agitates for "gay rights" is trying to impinge on
   their ability to practice their religion and rear their children as
   they see fit. Gay advocacy has a few decades of ACT-UP-style
   demonstrations and public shenanigans at pride parades to counteract,
   and new rounds of guerrila warfare are hardly helpful.

References

   1. http://www.indegayforum.org/blog/show/31280.html
   2. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-schlafly19jun19,1,5335211.story?coll=la-headlines-nation