ecclesia.org é seguro?

There is nothing underhanded on these web pages. Obviously there are enough people afraid of the information on this site for them to try and suppress it. That makes me want to read it to find out what it's about. I think it's wrong and dishonest to down vote something just because you don't agree with the content. This site is a victim of stating unpopular ideas and that is all. I see nothing wrong with how it's presented it's logical and organized.

Come on folks, WOT is for alerting people about dangerous sites that might be scams, virus related etc. It's not for voting down a site just because you disagree with the sites content. I haven't looked too deeply into this site but what I've seen I disagree with (citing Ruckman as a reputable source is a joke), but that doesn't mean the site should be marked as dangerous. You might lose a few IQ points but you wont get a virus.

Truth and honesty is a long way away from the content of this site - it excuses and offers explanations for violence, hate, and psychosis and pretends to be logical and honest. it is anything but. This site is not just useless, but it is potentially highly dangerous.

Whether one agrees with the content or not, there does not appear to be anything underhanded or subverted occurring here. The site's author is providing information to interested parties. This is exactly what a web site should do. If one feels the information is not useful, there are plenty of alternatives available. The "trustworthiness" rating must not be used to lambast content we do not agree with, but to point to those sites using nefarious means to subvert the free flow of information, i. e. phishing.

Good God, everyone is so over zealous about what is what. This site does not deserve having the "Trustworthiness" rating used. How adolescent do you young people get... To identify something as "useless" may be a much more appropriate way of documenting an observation about the site... and so, having discovered this heading, i will choose "entertaining" as it better fits the issue of this site being controversial.

can't really comment on the accuracy of this site, but I know there's nothing wrong with the vendor reliability - the site doesn't sell anything! I wish the people who give it bad ratings would say WHY they left them; probably they simply didn't agree with the content of the site.

This is a disingenuous story made up to prove an invalid point. From an empirical stance we all understand that if you are a human and you function normally then you have a brain. The bastardization of this logic is insulting to the reader if they know it or not. This is worse than bad sci-fi written by a 5th grader who has yet to take a science class or who is basing his writing on a sci-fi writer from the 1800's.