Uncyclopedia is bad for your kids

50px	This page is considered an unignorable policy.
Failure to comply will result in being burned at the stake. Thank you.
Many people assume that, like sugary cereal and unleaded paste, Uncyclopedia is completely fine for children to consume in moderation. Such assumptions are completely reasonable; it advertises itself as a comedic website, and comedy is a predominantly family friendly genre. A quick analysis of the site shows, however, that it's anything but family friendly and, in fact, it may be one of the most evil things to ever exist on the internet. Ever. Because of this, we at the Board of Unified Raging Parents Club feel that it's necessary to issue this very important warning to our many devoted readers: Uncyclopedia is bad for your kids. Hence the title of this article.
For those of you who aren't yet fully convinced of Uncyclopedia's evilness, please allow us to use the rest of this document to elaborate:
== The content is evil ==
thumb|350px|Even the people that host them agree with us!
The bulk of Uncyclopedia's pages contain dirty language and often promote sinful behavior including but not limited to sex, sexual thoughts, and thoughts about having sexual thoughts. The outright obscenity of their unimpressive catalog demonstrates a complete disregard for basic American values, and that's a very, very bad thing. If put in the hands of an innocent youth, this trash will, without a doubt, cripple their souls and send them on a certain path to damnation. And that's even worse.
Not only is Uncyclopedia's content inappropriate; it's also extremely immature. Potty humor and utter nonsense abound on this site, and we at the BURP Club could never stand for such juvenile antics. The farcical nature of Uncyclopedia is so egregious that just reading it could drop a person's IQ by several points, making it dangerous for any developing mind and dangerous for America.
To summarize: If you don't want your children to grow up foul-mouthed and stupid, don't let them read Uncyclopedia.
== The people are evil ==
Uncyclopedia is effectively the internet's Amsterdam. It's a community of morally depraved atheists that care only about posting smut, sleaze, filth, and moog to their black hearts' content. This disgusting state of affairs isn't completely their fault, however. The corrupt administration promotes such depravity by featuring the worst that the site has to offer on its front page, and like the Antichrist, they use their unlimited power to make sure that Uncyclopedia stays beyond redemption forever.Not to mention their Chief Justice is a homosexual cabbage-eater, and that's just weird. That may seem like a harsh accusation to make, but we have a shocking testimonial to back it up:
This unjust action proves that the administration has a policy of punishing good deeds as well as encouraging evil ones, a philosophy that has trickled down to the userbase, making them equally unprincipled and equally dangerous for your children to interact with.
To summarize: The guys on Uncyclopedia are bad... or something.
== Liberal bias ==
Not only is Uncyclopedia evil, but they're supportive of many liberal causes, which makes them an even bigger threat than before. If our fragile minors are exposed to this site, it will not only make them vulgar sexophiles, but it'll convince them that infanticide is a viable form of birth control, that polar bears are dying because we use the wrong light bulbs, and that all of humanity descended from screeching apes.Next they're gonna tell us that fluoridation wasn't a communist conspiracy to poison our drinking water. All of these ideas are silly, and most red-blooded citizens will agree that they're silly, but since children don't yet know the difference between right and silly, they can be influenced by Uncyclopedia's propaganda machine more easily than anyone.
=== Wikipedia ===
Though Uncyclopedia has undoubtedly given it a run for its money, Wikipedia remains the leading source of misinformation on the web. The majority of the articles on this so-called "encyclopedia" are full of liberal lies, and they defend this lack of editorial responsibility by pointing to their long lists of references, which are often full of unreliable, openly liberal sources like the New York Times. To go along with their radicalism, they often include content even more disgusting than what you'd find on Uncyclopedia. For example, looking up something as innocent as "sex positions" will bring you graphic images of people doing it doggy style on the floor, and we won't even mention what'll pop up when you look up "bestiality".We saw things that we can never unsee. In short, it's not the best environment for your college boy's research paper, and we at the board recommend Conservapedia for those who want information that's politically neutral, politically correct, and actually true. As you might expect, the trusworthy encyclopedia is made up of conservatives, proving once again that we're more intelligent and open-minded than our liberal counterparts.
To summarize: This section had to do with Uncyclopedia having a liberal bias. Go figure.
== "Satirical point of view" ==
thumb|300px|The "satire" is often crazy and destructive, like when they ruined a perfectly good content warning. The bastards.
Uncyclopedians try to justify their immorality by calling what they do satire, a classification that proves just how dense they really are. Satire is one of the highest forms of comedy imaginable, used by the likes of William Shakespeare, Mark Twain, and Cheech & Chong."I forgot to hide the grass, man." Brilliant! Associating themselves with such a sophisticated art is the most offensive thing Uncyclopedia has ever done, and the second we saw its mention on their How To Be Funny And Not Just Stupid page, we found ourselves projectile vomiting all over our computer screens. This may seem like a sensational reaction, but it was more than appropriate considering the fact that the users not only described themselves as satirists but gave credit to arrogant liberal Zionist Jon Stewart for his overrated prime time sitcom The Daily Show. We'd love to discuss this topic at length, but as our stomachs are already starting to get upset, we'll just say that Uncyclopedia will never never neverklever plever trever be satirical and leave it at that.
To summarize: I'm tired of summaries. Let's just move on.
=== Encyclopedia Dramatica ===
It's well-known that Uncyclopedia is a complete ripoff of original comedy wiki Encyclopedia Dramatica, and the main difference between them is that Encyclopedia Dramatica actually knows what satire is. It mocks people on both sides of the political spectrum (mostly liberals, since liberals are significantly more insane) in a witty and meaningful manner, and if it wasn't so horrifyingly offensive, we'd make it required reading for children everywhere. Nevertheless, we'll gladly suggest that you check the site out once the kids are tucked in, because it's very enjoyable reading, especially if you like the occasional chuckle at a minority's expense.
=== Illogicopedia ===
What the hell is Illogicopedia?Sounds like a ripoff of Wackypedia.
== Conclusion ==
Uncyclopedia is bad for your kids. It's evil and has no redeeming value. It's profane, foolhardy, gross, and unfunny, and that's the long and short of it. The BURP Club thanks all of its loyal readers for putting aside the four or five minutes necessary to understand this atrocious website's atrocities, and until next time, remember: Modern media is out to destroy America!
== See Also ==
*Uncyclopedia is the worst - Which it is
*Uncyclopedia is the best - Which it isn't
*F**k Uncyclopedia - And the horse it rode in on
*Why?:Boycott Uncyclopedia - Written by one of our most ardent raging parents
*HowTo:Be a Troll - It doesn't have to do with this article, and it's mostly shameless advertising
== Notes ==
Category:Satire
Category:Ignorable policies
Category:PLS Entry June 2012
Category:Uncyclopedia