conservapedia.com é seguro?

LOL...ALL of the spooky guy George Soros zombies are posting false accusations about this site. You know a web site is posting articles that are based on facts when these zombies come out in droves to try and scare people away. Anyway, this site is clean as a whistle@@ Nothing to see here that is bad for your PC's health but dead spooky guy George Soros zombies.

Using WOT to censor viewpoint sucks. If I and other conservatives were to do this to liberal sites such as DailyKos.com, we'd be guilty of using WOT to enforce our viewpoint. There is nothing about this site that contains hate speech or "phishing" -- which is an attempt to drive traffic to a site presenting malware. Depending upon your political viewpoint, you might view the data presented as false, but I've seen far worse on some liberal sites. I remember when the libs tried to WOT out ***** and her subsidiary site ***** -- it didn't work.

WOT needs to crack down on political spammers. This site is 100% safe and informative if opinionated. While I don't claim to agree with everything on this site and identify as a Moderate,It is definitely not the WiKKKi that people claim it is. The whole "Gays are good people and can ditch destructive behavior and be happier" articles hardly qualify as hate speech and the articles about Theology are actually pretty insightful. It's a Conservative Wiki. Don't like it form a Liberal Wiki or a Moderate Wiki. The whole spam thing and "Awareness Campaign" by the Far-Far Left just smacks of thought crime to me. When did it become okay to let Neo-Nazis hold rallies in Skokie but bad for people to gather together to discuss their sincerely held beliefs in a peaceful forum? Maybe you should try engaging in dialog with them and try to come together in a noble exchange of ideas... Never mind just call them idiot rednecks and whine about how Political discourse is so uncivil.

I've only looked at a few articles, on unions and socialism, and found them to be generally accurate and helpful. I am not a conservative but feel that should not affect my judgment of the site. I am particularly concerned with the reviews that charge it with "phishing or other cams" -- I see no evidence of that at all. There may be more biased articles than the ones I saw, but this is not a simply ideological one-dimensional site.

My interest in this site stems from one simple question: would Natural Selection eliminate a 'gay gene'. This, so far, is the only site which gives a concise and clear answer to such a simple question. Sure, it's buried within a paradigm of Religious quotes and such, but this info is absent from Wikipedia and elsewhere, conspicuous by its absence in fact, and those sites are mired in propaganda of their own which also confuse the issue. I'll make my own judgements, but on balance, a different perspective and a useful resource, I couldn't care less about the politics, I don't vote. The fact that it had a red flag from WOT only intensified my interest, as did the 'elephant in the room' attitude of those involved in Wikipedia and the media. If you want to promote your enemies, you're doing it the right way.