[WARNING! DO NOT TRY TO LINK TO CONSERVAPEDIA FROM DAILY KOS, HUFFINGTON POST OR THIS DIARY...A BLOCK MIGHT GO UP...maybe its a coincidence, maybe not, but I can't access the site from this computer anymore after linking. I will type out the address so you can cut and paste into the toolbar...]

Remember Phyllis Schlafly, the Queen of conservative religious “feminism” from the late 60s through the 80s? Well she’s got a son (Andy, BSE, JD, ABCDEFG), who is funnier than David Letterman. Except the poor guy is trying to be serious.

In 2006, Andy burst onto the scene with Conservapedia, a right wing version of wikipedia minus its “liberal, anti-Christian bias,” (not to mention all structural defects that encourage “liberal” biases such as fact-checking, offering proof, etc.).

About six months ago, Andy drew international attention to Conservapedia, when he challenged Dr. Richard Lenski’s groundbreaking study of the evolution of e coli bacteria.

Lenski found, after 20 years of painstaking research, that one descendent generation of his original e coli colony mutated, enabling it to feed off of a citrate solution, where as other descendant strains did not. Shlafly did not like the assumption that e coli evolves. He fired off a letter, artfully combining breathtaking arrogance with ignorance to Lenski demanding that the scientist produce his data.

Lenski responded to Schlafly by politely suggesting he actually read the article as it included the data. Undeterred, Schlafly actually posted a second equally idiotic letter and was decimated by a decidedly less polite, but extremely funny Lenski response. The entire dialogue can be found here.

And, while Schlafly does not believe that e coli can evolve, he seems to have no qualms at least about the geometric progression of “conservative terms.” (He avoids using the “e” word.) Schlafly writes:

Powerful, insightful new conservative terms have grown at a geometric rate, roughly doubling every century. For every insightful new conservative term originating in the 1600s, there are two new terms originating in the 1700s, four new terms in the 1800s, and eight new terms in the 1900s, for a pattern of “1-2-4-8″. [Never mind that his sequence does not seem to meet the criteria for either a geometric sequence or a geometric series according to Wikipedia. On the other hand, maybe it meets the more conservative standards of Conservapedia...] Implications of a geometric increase for new conservative terms include a more conservative future and a correlation between conservatism and truth. The year 1612 is our starting point: the King James Version of the Bible had just been published in 1611, and William Shakespeare had written virtually all of his plays. [Insert mine.]

Now Andy has embarked on a new mission. He is rewriting the Bible to eliminate its “liberal bias.” This delectable story was diaried last night on Daily Kos by MeMeMeMeMe. Since that time, the story has gone viral.

A strange thing happened to me this morning as I was writing this diary. I linked to the Conservative Bible Project so I could pull out some of the more delicious quotes for you. Suddenly, even though I had no difficulty linking to it last night, a SmartFilter block to the site went up. I went to my desktop and accessed the site directly without linking. Voila! There it was! I don’t yet know if the block is a quirk resulting from my own laptop filter (I don’t have one to the best of my knowledge) or something created by the folks at Conservapedia to deny us our daily dose of laughter.

A new blurb about liberal hypocrisy has appeared on the front page of Conservapedia, however, perhaps in response to our sudden attention to the site (http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page):

Liberal hypocrisy anyone? In their condemnation of the Conservative Bible Translation Project, the critics have forgotten their praise for last year’s “Green Bible”, an eco-friendly edition made from recycled paper, processed soy ink, and the words of nature – not Christ – in green.

At any rate, the gist of Andy’s mission (http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservative_Bible_Project) is to edit the Christian Bible to make it more consistent with the “Christian” agenda. This includes use of powerful new conservative terms, parables that support capitalism, elimination of the words “labor” and “laborers” and the substitution of “volunteer” for “comrade” or “friend.” Schlafly suggests removing the statement, “they know not what they do,” since the persecutors of Christ clearly did know what they were doing, and concentrating instead on the “logic of Hell.”

1. Framework against Liberal Bias: providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias.
2. Not Emasculated: avoiding unisex, “gender inclusive” language, and other modern emasculation of Christianity
3. Not Dumbed Down: not dumbing down the reading level, or diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity; the NIV is written at only the 7th grade level[3]
4. Utilize Powerful Conservative Terms: using powerful new conservative terms as they develop;[4] defective translations use the word “comrade” three times as often as “volunteer”; similarly, updating words which have a change in meaning, such as “word”, “peace”, and “miracle”.
5. Combat Harmful Addiction: combating addiction by using modern terms for it, such as “gamble” rather than “cast lots”;[5] using modern political terms, such as “register” rather than “enroll” for the census
6. Accept the Logic of Hell: applying logic with its full force and effect, as in not denying or downplaying the very real existence of Hell or the Devil.
7. Express Free Market Parables; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning
8. Exclude Later-Inserted Liberal Passages: excluding the later-inserted liberal passages that are not authentic, such as the adulteress story
9. Credit Open-Mindedness of Disciples: crediting open-mindedness, often found in youngsters like the eyewitnesses Mark and John, the authors of two of the Gospels
10. Prefer Conciseness over Liberal Wordiness: preferring conciseness to the liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio; avoid compound negatives and unnecessary ambiguities; prefer concise, consistent use of the word “Lord” rather than “Jehovah” or “Yahweh” or “Lord God.”

Apparently, by “open-mindedness,” of Jesus’ disciples, Schlafly means a willingness to not consider the possibility that “liberals” could be correct. Be sure to look up “open-mindedness” in Conservapedia for some truly hilarious reading.