Discussion History Main / TheSmartGuy

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"... your sources are a (formerly) Fox News owned Mythology Blog post (the fact that the site has a forum does not change the fact that the linked article is a blog post).\\\"\\\'\\\'

The fact you are insisting on calling religion \\\"mythology\\\" tells me right off the bat [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement you are not trying to be polite]].

I\\\'ve tried looking into your claim that [=BeliefNet=] was formerly owned by Fox News. What I\\\'ve been able to find is that [=BeliefNet=] has partnerships with The Wall Street Journal, Chicken Soup for the Soul, and Fox Faith. The site was \\\'\\\'not created\\\'\\\' by Fox Entertainment Group. It\\\'s been around since 1999. It \\\'\\\'was\\\'\\\' briefly acquired by News Corp (the parent company of Fox News) for a few years; it\\\'s currently owned by BN Media, who bought it in 2010.

However, that\\\'s not even the main issue here. Justifying your labeling of [=BeliefNet=] as a \\\"Christian blog\\\" because you say that it was once owned by Fox News strikes me as a ChewbaccaDefense.

Furthermore, you are also incorrectly claiming that Seed Magazine, the \\\'\\\'other\\\'\\\' source provided, was formerly owned by Fox News. Seed Magazine is an online magazine published by the Seed Media Group that focuses on science. It has \\\'\\\'nothing to do\\\'\\\' with [=BeliefNet=].

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Some of the edits were square peg round trope — for example, calling Maher — a noted Athiest / Agnostic — a Fundamentalist? That... really doesn\\\'t fit, and is on the \\\"no real life examples, please\\\" list.\\\"\\\'\\\'

Bill Maher qualifies as a fundamentalist according to the trope definition, which you will note is not restricted to religious examples, and includes \\\'\\\'many\\\'\\\' ideologies that have little or nothing to do with religious belief. Claiming \\\"he doesn\\\'t fit\\\" just because he\\\'s an atheist or agnostic is incorrect.

You are right, though, on that trope it requests that no one add Real Life examples. In that case, the example should be removed entirely.

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Remember, a Documentary of this style\\\'s point isn\\\'t to provide answers, just to ask questions. It also has to be entertaining, and nowhere in the description is neutrality required.\\\"\\\'\\\'

This comes off to me as contradictory. On one hand you wag your finger and claim documentaries are subjective, not objective, and don\\\'t seek to provide answers--but then you tell me that neutrality is not required in documentaries.

\\\'\\\'Religulous\\\'\\\' is clearly a documentary that seeks to influence the audience, not inform it. It\\\'s one of many documentaries made in recent decades that tries to do so.

Further, that Bill Maher \\\"only asks questions\\\" is clearly not what happens in this film. Even reviewers who liked the film, [[http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081002/REVIEWS/810020306/1023 such as Roger Ebert]], point this out: \\\"Or maybe \\\'talks with\\\' is not quite the right phrase. It\\\'s more that he lines them up and shoots them down. He interrupts, talks over, slaps on subtitles, edits in movie and TV clips, and doesn\\\'t play fair.\\\"

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"... your sources are a (formerly) Fox News owned Mythology Blog post (the fact that the site has a forum does not change the fact that the linked article is a blog post).\\\"\\\'\\\'

The fact you are insisting on calling religion \\\"mythology\\\" tells me right off the bat [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement you are not trying to be polite]].

I\\\'ve tried looking into your claim that [=BeliefNet=] was formerly owned by Fox News. What I\\\'ve been able to find is that [=BeliefNet=] has partnerships with The Wall Street Journal, Chicken Soup for the Soul, and Fox Faith. The site was \\\'\\\'not created\\\'\\\' by Fox Entertainment Group. It\\\'s been around since 1999. It \\\'\\\'was\\\'\\\' briefly acquired by News Corp (the parent company of Fox News) for a few years; it\\\'s currently owned by BN Media, who bought it in 2010.

However, that\\\'s not even the main issue here. Justifying your labeling of [=BeliefNet=] as a \\\"Christian blog\\\" because you say that it was once owned by Fox News strikes me as a ChewbaccaDefense.

Furthermore, you are also incorrectly claiming that Seed Magazine, the \\\'\\\'other\\\'\\\' source provided, was formerly owned by Fox News. Seed Magazine is an online magazine published by the Seed Media Group that focuses on science. It has \\\'\\\'nothing to do\\\'\\\' with [=BeliefNet=].

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Some of the edits were square peg round trope — for example, calling Maher — a noted Athiest / Agnostic — a Fundamentalist? That... really doesn\\\'t fit, and is on the \\\"no real life examples, please\\\" list.\\\"\\\'\\\'

Bill Maher qualifies as a fundamentalist according to the trope definition, which you will note is not restricted to religious examples, and includes \\\'\\\'many\\\'\\\' ideologies that have little or nothing to do with religious belief. Claiming \\\"he doesn\\\'t fit\\\" just because he\\\'s an atheist or agnostic is incorrect.

You are right, though, on that trope it requests that no one add Real Life examples. In that case, the example should be removed entirely.

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Remember, a Documentary of this style\\\'s point isn\\\'t to provide answers, just to ask questions. It also has to be entertaining, and nowhere in the description is neutrality required.\\\"\\\'\\\'

This comes off to me as contradictory. On one hand you claim documentaries are subjective, not objective, and don\\\'t seek to provide answers--but then you tell me that neutrality is not required in documentaries.

\\\'\\\'Religulous\\\'\\\' is clearly a documentary that seeks to influence the audience, not inform it. It\\\'s one of many documentaries made in recent decades that tries to do so.

Further, that Bill Maher \\\"only asks questions\\\" is clearly not what happens in this film. Even reviewers who liked the film, [[http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081002/REVIEWS/810020306/1023 such as Roger Ebert]], point this out: \\\"Or maybe \\\'talks with\\\' is not quite the right phrase. It\\\'s more that he lines them up and shoots them down. He interrupts, talks over, slaps on subtitles, edits in movie and TV clips, and doesn\\\'t play fair.\\\"

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"... your sources are a (formerly) Fox News owned Mythology Blog post (the fact that the site has a forum does not change the fact that the linked article is a blog post).\\\"\\\'\\\'

The fact you are insisting on calling religion \\\"mythology\\\" tells me right off the bat [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement you are not trying to be polite]].

I\\\'ve tried looking into your claim that [=BeliefNet=] was formerly owned by Fox News. What I\\\'ve been able to find is that [=BeliefNet=] has partnerships with The Wall Street Journal, Chicken Soup for the Soul, and Fox Faith. The site was \\\'\\\'not created\\\'\\\' by Fox Entertainment Group. It\\\'s been around since 1999. It \\\'\\\'was\\\'\\\' briefly acquired by News Corp (the parent company of Fox News) for a few years, it\\\'s currently owned by BN Media, who bought it in 2010.

However, that\\\'s not even the main issue here. Justifying your labeling of [=BeliefNet=] as a \\\"Christian blog\\\" because you say that it was once owned by Fox News strikes me as a ChewbaccaDefense.

Furthermore, you are also incorrectly claiming that Seed Magazine, the \\\'\\\'other\\\'\\\' source provided, was formerly owned by Fox News. Seed Magazine is an online magazine published by the Seed Media Group that focuses on science. It has \\\'\\\'nothing to do\\\'\\\' with [=BeliefNet=].

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Some of the edits were square peg round trope — for example, calling Maher — a noted Athiest / Agnostic — a Fundamentalist? That... really doesn\\\'t fit, and is on the \\\"no real life examples, please\\\" list.\\\"\\\'\\\'

Bill Maher qualifies as a fundamentalist according to the trope definition, which you will note is not restricted to religious examples, and includes \\\'\\\'many\\\'\\\' ideologies that have little or nothing to do with religious belief. Claiming \\\"he doesn\\\'t fit\\\" just because he\\\'s an atheist or agnostic is incorrect.

You are right, though, on that trope it requests that no one add Real Life examples. In that case, the example should be removed entirely.

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Remember, a Documentary of this style\\\'s point isn\\\'t to provide answers, just to ask questions. It also has to be entertaining, and nowhere in the description is neutrality required.\\\"\\\'\\\'

This comes off to me as contradictory. On one hand you claim documentaries are subjective, not objective, and don\\\'t seek to provide answers--but then you tell me that neutrality is not required in documentaries.

\\\'\\\'Religulous\\\'\\\' is clearly a documentary that seeks to influence the audience, not inform it. It\\\'s one of many documentaries made in recent decades that tries to do so.

Further, that Bill Maher \\\"only asks questions\\\" is clearly not what happens in this film. Even reviewers who liked the film, [[http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081002/REVIEWS/810020306/1023 such as Roger Ebert]], point this out: \\\"Or maybe \\\'talks with\\\' is not quite the right phrase. It\\\'s more that he lines them up and shoots them down. He interrupts, talks over, slaps on subtitles, edits in movie and TV clips, and doesn\\\'t play fair.\\\"

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"... your sources are a (formerly) Fox News owned Mythology Blog post (the fact that the site has a forum does not change the fact that the linked article is a blog post).\\\"\\\'\\\'

The fact you are insisting on calling religion \\\"mythology\\\" tells me right off the bat [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement you are not trying to be polite]].

I\\\'ve tried looking into your claim that [=BeliefNet=] was formerly owned by Fox News. What I\\\'ve been able to find is that [=BeliefNet=] has partnerships with The Wall Street Journal, Chicken Soup for the Soul, and Fox Faith. The site was \\\'\\\'not created\\\'\\\' by Fox Entertainment Group. It\\\'s been around since 1999. It \\\'\\\'was\\\'\\\' briefly acquired by News Corp (the parent company of Fox News) for a few years, it\\\'s currently owned by BN Media, who bought it in 2010.

However, that\\\'s not even the main issue here. Justifying your labeling of [=BeliefNet=] as a \\\"Christian blog\\\" because you say that it was once owned by Fox News strikes me as a ChewbaccaDefense.

Furthermore, you are also incorrectly claiming that Seed Magazine, the \\\'\\\'other\\\'\\\' source provided, was formerly owned by Fox News. Seed Magazine is an online magazine published by the Seed Media Group that focuses on science. It has \\\'\\\'nothing to do\\\'\\\' with [=BeliefNet=].

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Some of the edits were square peg round trope — for example, calling Maher — a noted Athiest / Agnostic — a Fundamentalist? That... really doesn\\\'t fit, and is on the \\\"no real life examples, please\\\" list.\\\"\\\'\\\'

Bill Maher qualifies as a fundamentalist according to the trope definition, which you will note is not restricted to religious examples, and includes \\\'\\\'many\\\'\\\' ideologies that have little or nothing to do with religious belief. Claiming \\\"he doesn\\\'t fit\\\" just because he\\\'s an atheist or agnostic is incorrect.

You are right, though, on that trope it requests that no one add Real Life examples. In that case, the example should be removed entirely.

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Remember, a Documentary of this style\\\'s point isn\\\'t to provide answers, just to ask questions. It also has to be entertaining, and nowhere in the description is neutrality required.\\\"\\\'\\\'

This comes off to me as contradictory. On one hand you claim documentaries are subjective, not objective, and don\\\'t seek to provide answers--but then you tell me that neutrality is not required in documentaries.

\\\'\\\'Religulous\\\'\\\' is clearly a documentary that seeks to influence the audience, not inform it. It\\\'s one of many documentaries made in recent decades that tries to do so.

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"... your sources are a (formerly) Fox News owned Mythology Blog post (the fact that the site has a forum does not change the fact that the linked article is a blog post).\\\"\\\'\\\'

The fact you are insisting on calling religion \\\"mythology\\\" tells me right off the bat [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement you are not trying to be polite]].

I\\\'ve tried looking into your claim that [=BeliefNet=] was formerly owned by Fox News. What I\\\'ve been able to find is that [=BeliefNet=] has partnerships with The Wall Street Journal, Chicken Soup for the Soul, and Fox Faith. The site was \\\'\\\'not created\\\'\\\' by Fox Entertainment Group, but was briefly acquired by it for a few years; it\\\'s currently owned by BN Media.

However, that\\\'s not even the main issue here. Justifying your labeling of [=BeliefNet=] as a \\\"Christian blog\\\" because you say that it was once owned by Fox News strikes me as a ChewbaccaDefense.

Furthermore, you are also incorrectly claiming that Seed Magazine, the \\\'\\\'other\\\'\\\' source provided, was formerly owned by Fox News. Seed Magazine is an online magazine published by the Seed Media Group that focuses on science. It has \\\'\\\'nothing to do\\\'\\\' with [=BeliefNet=].

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Some of the edits were square peg round trope — for example, calling Maher — a noted Athiest / Agnostic — a Fundamentalist? That... really doesn\\\'t fit, and is on the \\\"no real life examples, please\\\" list.\\\"\\\'\\\'

Bill Maher qualifies as a fundamentalist according to the trope definition, which you will note is not restricted to religious examples, and includes \\\'\\\'many\\\'\\\' ideologies that have little or nothing to do with religious belief. Claiming \\\"he doesn\\\'t fit\\\" just because he\\\'s an atheist or agnostic is incorrect.

You are right, though, on that trope it requests that no one add Real Life examples. In that case, the example should be removed entirely.

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Remember, a Documentary of this style\\\'s point isn\\\'t to provide answers, just to ask questions. It also has to be entertaining, and nowhere in the description is neutrality required.\\\"\\\'\\\'

This comes off to me as contradictory. On one hand you claim documentaries are subjective, not objective, and don\\\'t seek to provide answers--but then you tell me that neutrality is not required in documentaries.

\\\'\\\'Religulous\\\'\\\' is clearly a documentary that seeks to influence the audience, not inform it. It\\\'s one of many documentaries made in recent decades that tries to do so.

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"... your sources are a (formerly) Fox News owned Mythology Blog post (the fact that the site has a forum does not change the fact that the linked article is a blog post).\\\"\\\'\\\'

The fact you are insisting on calling religion \\\"mythology\\\" tells me right off the bat [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement you are not trying to be polite]].

I\\\'ve tried looking into your claim that [=BeliefNet=] was formerly owned by Fox News, and I\\\'ve found nothing of the sort to confirm that. All I\\\'ve been able to confirm is that [=BeliefNet=] has partnerships with The Wall Street Journal, Chicken Soup for the Soul, and Fox Faith, which is not the same thing as once being owned by Fox News.

However, that\\\'s not even the main issue here. Justifying your labeling of [=BeliefNet=] as a \\\"Christian blog\\\" because you say that it was once owned by Fox News strikes me as a ChewbaccaDefense.

Furthermore, you are also incorrectly claiming that Seed Magazine, the \\\'\\\'other\\\'\\\' source provided, was formerly owned by Fox News. Seed Magazine is an online magazine published by the Seed Media Group that focuses on science. It has \\\'\\\'nothing to do\\\'\\\' with [=BeliefNet=].

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Some of the edits were square peg round trope — for example, calling Maher — a noted Athiest / Agnostic — a Fundamentalist? That... really doesn\\\'t fit, and is on the \\\"no real life examples, please\\\" list.\\\"\\\'\\\'

Bill Maher qualifies as a fundamentalist according to the trope definition, which you will note is not restricted to religious examples, and includes \\\'\\\'many\\\'\\\' ideologies that have little or nothing to do with religious belief. Claiming \\\"he doesn\\\'t fit\\\" just because he\\\'s an atheist or agnostic is incorrect.

You are right, though, on that trope it requests that no one add Real Life examples. In that case, the example should be removed entirely.

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Remember, a Documentary of this style\\\'s point isn\\\'t to provide answers, just to ask questions. It also has to be entertaining, and nowhere in the description is neutrality required.\\\"\\\'\\\'

This comes off to me as contradictory. On one hand you claim documentaries are subjective, not objective, and don\\\'t seek to provide answers--but then you tell me that neutrality is not required in documentaries.

\\\'\\\'Religulous\\\'\\\' is clearly a documentary that seeks to influence the audience, not inform it. It\\\'s one of many documentaries made in recent decades that tries to do so.

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"... your sources are a (formerly) Fox News owned Mythology Blog post (the fact that the site has a forum does not change the fact that the linked article is a blog post).\\\"\\\'\\\'

The fact you are insisting on calling religion \\\"mythology\\\" tells me right off the bat [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement you are not trying to be polite]].

I\\\'ve tried looking into your claim that [=BeliefNet=] was formerly owned by Fox News, and I\\\'ve found nothing of the sort to confirm that. All I\\\'ve been able to confirm is that [=BeliefNet=] has partnerships with The Wall Street Journal, Chicken Soup for the Soul, and Fox Faith, which is not the same thing as once being owned by Fox News.

However, that\\\'s not even the main issue here. Justifying your labeling of [=BeliefNet=] as a \\\"Christian blog\\\" because you say that it was once owned by Fox News strikes me as a ChewbaccaDefense.

Furthermore, you are also incorrectly claiming that Seed Magazine, the \\\'\\\'other\\\'\\\' source provided, was formerly owned by Fox News. Seed Magazine is an online magazine published by the Seed Media Group that focuses on science. It has \\\'\\\'nothing to do\\\'\\\' with [=BeliefNet=].

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"Some of the edits were square peg round trope — for example, calling Maher — a noted Athiest / Agnostic — a Fundamentalist? That... really doesn\\\'t fit, and is on the \\\"no real life examples, please\\\" list.\\\"\\\'\\\'

Bill Maher qualifies as a fundamentalist according to the trope definition, which you will note is not restricted to religious examples, and includes \\\'\\\'many\\\'\\\' completely secular schools of thought. Claiming \\\"he doesn\\\'t fit\\\" just because he\\\'s an atheist is incorrect.

You are right, though, on that trope it requests that no one add Real Life examples. In that case, the example should be removed entirely.

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"... your sources are a (formerly) Fox News owned Mythology Blog post (the fact that the site has a forum does not change the fact that the linked article is a blog post).\\\"\\\'\\\'

The fact you are insisting on calling religion \\\"mythology\\\" tells me right off the bat [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement you are not trying to be polite]].

I\\\'ve tried looking into your claim that [=BeliefNet=] was formerly owned by Fox News, and I\\\'ve found nothing of the sort to confirm that. All I\\\'ve been able to confirm is that [=BeliefNet=] has partnerships with The Wall Street Journal, Chicken Soup for the Soul, and Fox Faith, which is not the same thing as once being owned by Fox News.

However, that\\\'s not even the main issue here. Justifying your labeling of [=BeliefNet=] as a \\\"Christian blog\\\" because you say that it was once owned by Fox News strikes me as a ChewbaccaDefense.

Furthermore, you are also incorrectly claiming that Seed Magazine, the \\\'\\\'other\\\'\\\' source provided, was formerly owned by Fox News. Seed Magazine is an online magazine published by the Seed Media Group that focuses on science. It has \\\'\\\'nothing to do\\\'\\\' with [=BeliefNet=].

Bill Maher qualifies as a fundamentalist according to the trope definition, which you will note is not restricted to religious examples, and includes \\\'\\\'many\\\'\\\' completely secular schools of thought. Claiming \\\"he doesn\\\'t fit\\\" just because he\\\'s an atheist is incorrect.

You are right, though, on that trope it requests that no one add Real Life examples. In that case, the example should be removed entirely.

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"... your sources are a (formerly) Fox News owned Mythology Blog post (the fact that the site has a forum does not change the fact that the linked article is a blog post).\\\"\\\'\\\'

The fact you are insisting on calling religion \\\"mythology\\\" tells me right off the bat [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement you are not trying to be polite]].

I\\\'ve tried looking into your claim that [=BeliefNet=] was formerly owned by Fox News, and I\\\'ve found nothing of the sort to confirm that. All I\\\'ve been able to confirm is that [=BeliefNet=] has partnerships with The Wall Street Journal, Chicken Soup for the Soul, and Fox Faith, which is not the same thing as once being owned by Fox News.

However, that\\\'s not even the main issue here. Justifying your labeling of [=BeliefNet=] as a \\\"Christian blog\\\" because you say that it was once owned by Fox News strikes me as a ChewbaccaDefense.

Furthermore, you are also incorrectly claiming that Seed Magazine was formerly owned by Fox News. Seed Magazine is an online magazine published by the Seed Media Group that focuses on science. It has \\\'\\\'nothing to do\\\'\\\' with [=BeliefNet=].

Bill Maher qualifies as a fundamentalist according to the trope definition, which you will note is not restricted to religious examples, and includes \\\'\\\'many\\\'\\\' completely secular schools of thought. Claiming \\\"he doesn\\\'t fit\\\" just because he\\\'s an atheist is incorrect.

You are right, though, on that trope it requests that no one add Real Life examples. In that case, the example should be removed entirely.

-->\\\'\\\'\\\"... your sources are a (formerly) Fox News owned Mythology Blog post (the fact that the site has a forum does not change the fact that the linked article is a blog post).\\\"\\\'\\\'

The fact you are insisting on calling religion \\\"mythology\\\" tells me right off the bat [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement you are not trying to be polite]].

I\\\'ve tried looking into your claim that [=BeliefNet=] was formerly owned by Fox News, and I\\\'ve found nothing of the sort to confirm that. All I\\\'ve been able to confirm is that [=BeliefNet=] has partnerships with The Wall Street Journal, Chicken Soup for the Soul, and Fox Faith, which is not the same thing as once being owned by Fox News.

Justifying your labeling of [=BeliefNet=] as a \\\"Christian mythology blog\\\" because you say that it was once owned by Fox News strikes me as a ChewbaccaDefense.

Furthermore, you are also incorrectly claiming that Seed Magazine was formerly owned by Fox News. Seed Magazine is an online magazine published by the Seed Media Group that focuses on science. It has \\\'\\\'nothing to do\\\'\\\' with [=BeliefNet=].

Bill Maher qualifies as a fundamentalist according to the trope definition, which you will note is not restricted to religious examples, and includes \\\'\\\'many\\\'\\\' completely secular schools of thought. Claiming \\\"he doesn\\\'t fit\\\" just because he\\\'s an atheist is incorrect.

You are right, though, on that trope it requests that no one add Real Life examples. In that case, the example should be removed entirely.

The fact you are insisting on calling religion \\\"mythology\\\" tells me right off the bat [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement you are not trying to be polite]].

I\\\'ve tried looking into your claim that [=BeliefNet=] was formerly owned by Fox News, and I\\\'ve found nothing of the sort to confirm that. All I\\\'ve been able to confirm is that [=BeliefNet=] has partnerships with The Wall Street Journal, Chicken Soup for the Soul, and Fox Faith, which is not the same thing as once being owned by Fox News.

Justifying your labeling of [=BeliefNet=] as a \\\"Christian mythology blog\\\" because you say that it was once owned by Fox News strikes me as a ChewbaccaDefense.

Furthermore, you are also incorrectly claiming that Seed Magazine was formerly owned by Fox News. Seed Magazine is an online magazine published by the Seed Media Group that focuses on science. It has \\\'\\\'nothing to do\\\'\\\' with [=BeliefNet=].

Bill Maher qualifies as a fundamentalist according to the trope definition, which you will note is not restricted to religious examples, and includes \\\'\\\'many\\\'\\\' completely secular schools of thought. Claiming \\\"he doesn\\\'t fit\\\" just because he\\\'s an atheist is incorrect.

You are right, though, on that trope it requests that no one add Real Life examples. In that case, the example should be removed entirely.

The fact you are insisting on calling religion \\\"mythology\\\" tells me right off the bat [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement you are not trying to be polite]].

I\\\'ve tried looking into your claim that [=BeliefNet=] was formerly owned by Fox News, and I\\\'ve found nothing of the sort to confirm that. All I\\\'ve been able to confirm is that [=BeliefNet=] has partnerships with The Wall Street Journal, Chicken Soup for the Soul, and Fox Faith, which is not the same thing as being owned by Fox News.

Justifying your labeling of [=BeliefNet=] as a \\\"Christian mythology blog\\\" because you say that it was once owned by Fox News strikes me as a ChewbaccaDefense.

Furthermore, you are also incorrectly claiming that Seed Magazine was formerly owned by Fox News. Seed Magazine is an online magazine published by the Seed Media Group that focuses on science. It has \\\'\\\'nothing to do\\\'\\\' with [=BeliefNet=].

Bill Maher qualifies as a fundamentalist according to the trope definition, which you will note is not restricted to religious examples, and includes \\\'\\\'many\\\'\\\' completely secular schools of thought. Claiming \\\"he doesn\\\'t fit\\\" just because he\\\'s an atheist is incorrect.

You are right, though, on that trope it requests that no one add Real Life examples. In that case, the example should be removed entirely.

The fact you are insisting on calling religion \\\"mythology\\\" tells me right off the bat [[RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement you are not trying to be polite]].

I\\\'ve tried looking into your claim that [=BeliefNet=] was formerly owned by Fox News, and I\\\'ve found nothing of the sort to confirm that. All I\\\'ve been able to confirm is that [=BeliefNet=] has partnerships with The Wall Street Journal, Chicken Soup for the Soul, and Fox Faith, which is not the same thing as being owned by Fox News. Besides this, trying to justify your labeling [=BeliefNet=] as a \\\"Christian mythology blog\\\" because of your claim that it was once owned by Fox News strikes me as a ChewbaccaDefense claim.

Furthermore, you are also insinuating that Seed Magazine was owned by Fox News. Seed Magazine is published by the Seed Media Group that focuses on science.

Bill Maher qualifies as a fundamentalist according to the trope definition, which you will note is not restricted to religious examples, and includes \\\'\\\'many\\\'\\\' completely secular schools of thought. Claiming \\\"he doesn\\\'t fit\\\" just because he\\\'s an atheist is incorrect.

You are right, though, on that trope it requests that no one add Real Life examples. In that case, the example should be removed entirely.