my friend is a Phillies fan, was watching the game w/me when that came on. his disdain for wright he says is now total, and he takes joy in knowing that whenever i root for him, i'm pulling for a guy who supports wacko xtian cults...

if wright said "i did it for the money, i'll gladly whore myself out to anyone with a couple of bucks to spend" all would be forgiven...

1. Testimony of Rev. Dr. Jaerock Lee

To live, I'd drink even the liquid of feces!
Modern medical science was not able to heal me, so I used all sorts of folk remedies. I ate whatever was said to be good for my health. I even changed my name and invited a sorceress to perform an exorcism. But to make things worse, I got the rheumatic arthritis and I had to hide myself. In this terrible situation, I heard that the liquid of feces was good for recovering my health. Although its stench was unbearable, I drank it earnestly. But it was all in vain and my condition got so worse that others had to help me urinate and defecate.


"What in God's name were you trying to prove?"
"I was trying to gain super powers."
"Well that's just silly."
"Silly yes ... Idiotic ... yes....."

And are Mets telecasts and Mets dressed in their Mets uniforms now available to help deliver religious come-ons of any and all kinds?

{{attempting to stay away from a gazillion post discussion of whether this was wise of David W and the Mets}}

What ARE the guidelines or restrictions for players in uniform doing ads? Do they pitch coffee, cars, and other stuff? If so, this is no different (well, it is different, but you know what I mean...). Do clubs have control over what commercials are broadcast during games (I suspect not)?

What ARE the guidelines or restrictions for players in uniform doing ads?

I thought the teams had control of what advertising their uniforms appeared in?

They've been pimping political factions for a long time. Why not religious ones?

I guess, "You Gotta Believe!"

This would... presumably mean that Wright believes in this crap? I doubt he'd do this ad in the same way he'd do an ad for a car he doesn't drive.

Well, that sucks.

I doubt he'd do this ad in the same way he'd do an ad for a car he doesn't drive.
You mean you don't think Derek Jeter really drives a Ford?

I'd drink even the liquid of feces!

So, along with Mr. Duaner Dirty Sanchez, the Mets have Mr. David Cleveland Steamer on board. I bet this is quite a shocker to Minaya.

The Mets will need a new third baseman when the spaceship leaves.

David healed the souls of many Met fans, it seems like a good fit to me.

Well, this is going to be a fun thread. I think there are two major rules regarding using the uniform, or any depiction of the team logo. You cannot use it in any way that reflects poorly on the organization, and you cannot use it to advertise a competetor of an official team sponsor. For example, if Tanner Boyle wanted to promote Groucho or Harpo's Bail Bonds wearing his Bears uniform, that would not fly.

Apparently the Mets did not feel this ad reflected poorly on the organization, and I doubt there is an "official liquid of feces drinking cult of the New York Mets", so no problem there either.

I doubt there is an "official liquid of feces drinking cult of the New York Mets", so no problem there either.

I agree. Cub fans probably don't advertise.

I agree. Cub fans probably don't advertise.

You're a cold, cold man.

How about we try and show a little respect for people beliefs?

I may not have them, you may not have them, but let those who do draw whatever comfort they can from them.

Thats one thing that has always bugged me about the Carl Everret/Dino bashing. Make fun of the guy because he is lousy not because his beliefs are different than yours.

How about we try and show a little respect for people beliefs?

What? It was a TV commercial. On the scale of things that deserve respect, it falls near the bottom. If he was getting paid for it, then he's shilling for something he may or may not believe. If he wasn't getting paid for it then he is proseletyzing to me. Either way, bewilderment and mockery seem perfectly reasonable responses.

How about we try and show a little respect for people beliefs?

I may not have them, you may not have them, but let those who do draw whatever comfort they can from them.

*lights fuse*

Not guys like this...this is straight con man bulls*t. These people prey on the disadvantaged. If we existed in a world where religious nutjobs had no impact on politics, I may not care as much...

*ducks*

Ain't it ironic that last week baseballthinkfactory began accepting a porn ad (at least, the need to check "I am at least 18 years old" to enter, and the warnings listed, strongly suggest so). This could be as big a target as Mr. Wright's faith healer enforsement. But apparently nobody has started a thread and/or made derisive comments.

He ate his own ####....

Geez, even I feel bad for this; the Mets' top young phenom 3Bman advertised for a group that <u>EATS THEIR OWN ####.</u>

At least we know St. Louis's franchise player is a Christian.

A different belief would be that Brett Myers was helping his wife with his fist. Not beliveing that there were Dinosaurs is just plain Krazy with a K. I mean do you really think that museum's spend a million dollars to pay for some 15ft femar bone made out of paper mache. Sorry, my gold standard is that I won't bash anyone's beliefs that don't sound like the utterings of a guy on Peachtree St. with a bullhorn yelling at me that I'm going to hell.

Sorry, my gold standard is that I won't bash anyone's beliefs that don't sound like the utterings of a guy on Peachtree St. with a bullhorn yelling at me that I'm going to hell.

Ditto; if I wanted to hear someone yelling that I'm going to hell for breathing wrong, I'll go to my college campus.

From what I read, the faith healer ate his own poop as one of many attempts to heal himself. It did not work. What he claims healed him was entering some temple and praying, hence he found his faith and became a faith healer (as the websites tell it). He isn't currently advocating eating poop to heal oneself.

Or am I reading something wrong/missing something?

So, I changed my nick. :P

Or am I reading something wrong/missing something?

Not really, no: we see "eats his own ####\" and run with it. :)

This would've never happened if Minaya had gotten a Jesus-loving Dominican to play 3b. Instead of digging in the toilets, he'd have been singing the gospel with Julio Franco and Carlos Beltran. But no. Minaya had to go for the reincarnation of Mike Piazza...

From what I read, the faith healer ate his own poop as one of many attempts to heal himself.

Right. If you're dumb enough to eat your own sh*t, you're pretty dumb. If you're dumb enough to follow someone dumb enough to eat their own sh*t...

The Miracle Mets!

Ed Charles never believed in something like this...unless a Glider meant something else back in the day.

faith healer ate his own poop as one of many attempts to heal himself.

Actually, this has been around a few years...

EAT #### AND TIE!

On a serious note:

Terminally ill people will do many things (anything, in fact) if they believe that it will cure them, or cure their loved ones. Including eating poop or drinking piss. What is unfortunate is that there are so many people praying on the desperation of these people for material gain. Those purported healers are the ones who need to be bashed mercilessly and exposed and mocked for their greed and hypocricy, not the people who listen to them.

I don't know what drives David Wright, but when you look at a young, healthy, good looking, extremely successful man, you assume that he'll have the mental ability to see through the ######## that may appear truth to truly desperate/sick people. Which leads to one of three possibilities: one, David Wright is a deserately sick person; two, David Wright is a desperately dumb person; three, David Wright is a desperately greedy person.

Whatever it is, my best wishes to David Wright.

Levski, I think the obvious answer is in the first paragraph of your post: David Wright is terminally ill. He'll be lucky to survive long enough to make a million dollars as a baseball player. His best hope is to quit the Mets and settle into a nice teaching job where the hand of death will stay its hand until his potential playing days are over.

Ok, now who's going to adopt "David Wright's Faith Healer" as their handle?

"Make fun of the guy because he is lousy not because his beliefs are different than yours."

In this case, though, the beliefs are sort of a side effect of the lousiness.

Ok, now who's going to adopt "David Wright's Faith Healer" as their handle?


First!

Hey does this mean if the Mets meet the Angels in the W.S. and the rally monkey takes a poop that David Wright will clean the field? Just asking!

Ok, now who's going to adopt "David Wright's Faith Healer" as their handle?

Hey, I had mine at 10 AM CST!

I'd just like to take a little time from mocking a faith healer who eats his own poop, and move on to something more important: giving Phil Mushnick a hard time. I know his column is more or less an opinion thing, but this item fairly SCREAMS to get a comment of some sort from the Mets, if not from Wright himself. Why did the Mets allow Wright to film this in his uniform? Are they worried that it looks like they're endorsing this? The answers might have been P.R. butt-covering, but the questions should have been asked.

Good point, Devin. A couple more like that and you can change your handle to England 2, Devin McCullen 1.

Which leads to one of three possibilities: one, David Wright is a deserately sick person; two, David Wright is a desperately dumb person; three, David Wright is a desperately greedy person.

Or maybe -- just maybe -- David Wright is a 23 year old kid (I get to call 23 year olds kids at my age) who did a dumb thing, without being either sick, dumb, or greedy. The first one of us who did NOT do something really, really stupid between the ages of, say, 18-24, please raise your hand?

Now, maybe Wright believes in this guy and what he preaches. I've got no idea. But maybe -- just maybe -- he didn't really know all the details when he agreed to this gig, and did a dumb thing in agreeing to do the spot. Lots of relatively bright people do dumb things. It happens. I'm not going to condemn David Wright for it until I know a lot more than a Phil Mushnick blurb that appears to have been researched not at all. And I'm certainly not comfortable with a standard that judges us all by the dumbest thing we did before the age of 25. Are you, Levski?

god is my coprolite!

<u>The first one of us who did NOT do something really, really stupid between the ages of, say, 18-24, please raise your hand?</u>

i'm pretty sure i never shilled for a shameless snake-oil salesman, though my mother did send money she could ill afford to spare to oral roberts ...

There is no greater admirer of Wright the hitter than I am. However after his stupid Fox promo where he's "Rocking the pastels" and this faith healer commercial, I reluctantly have to declare him an utter Tool. I mean he's still a kid, but what are the odds of a single man possessing boyish good looks, HOF calibre hitting abilities and a fierce intellect? Two outta three ain't bad.

Hmmm. Dumb things I did before the age of 25:
*declined a threesome
*refused a cushy job in industry to go to grad school
*traded half a kingdom for a horse

I tend to agree with you, Sam. I wouldn't be surprised if Wright somehow got signed to deliver a promo for this guy without having complete information; when you are young and famous, everybody is clamoring to put words in your mouth and get close to your Midas touch. If that's the case though, Wright should fire his PR company/agent.

However after his stupid Fox promo where he's "Rocking the pastels"

not sure what that manes, & the fact thgat i don't get tv anymore means that i've never been exposed to this spot anyway, but by god anyone who knows the songs "sit on it, mother" & "crawl babies," among others, can certainly understanding the concept of rocking the pastels. nice cover of "different drum" back around 1990, too. certainly one of the better scottish bands of that era.

I will say that his reaction to this is going to be very, very interesting -- and tell us a lot about him.

I'd hate to have Jay Horowitz's job today, that's for sure. (Of course, if he approved this and it creates a big firestorm, Jay Horowitz may not have Jay Horowitz's job by this time tomorrow . . . .).

If that's the case though, Wright should fire his PR company/agent.

One of the obvious differences between David Wright and your average 23-year-old is he has, or at least should have, a trusted advisor who tells him not to do really, really stupid TV ads. I suppose that requires some research as well.

If that's the case though, Wright should fire his PR company/agent.

Here's a WAG: a "friend" of Wright's is a follower of this person. I put friend in quotes because, as Wright will be learning, it is sometimes hard to know who you can really call your friends and who is just using you, when you are young and your star is ascending. But anyway, this friend asked Wright to do this -- it wouldn't really be endorsing it, after all, just telling people about it and inviting them to attend and find out what it's all about. No harm in that, right? And Wright didn't want to say no to this friend, so he did it.

Again -- one of a dozen possibilities, and something Mushnick SHOULD have followed up on if he'd been interested in actually reporting the story. Now, of course, he gets a three-day or more story out of it.

I tend to blame Mets officials rather than Wright on this one. Players are quite used to having a camera stuck in their faces and told to read things for the advertisers. Here in CT, I see Red Sox players doing this all the time, while Yankee players don't do it as much.

But someone in the Mets' FO approved this - they should have red-flagged it as suspicious and followed up. And told Muschnick, apparently. Because he wasn't going to call them.

I'd hate to have Jay Horowitz's job today, that's for sure. (Of course, if he approved this and it creates a big firestorm, Jay Horowitz may not have Jay Horowitz's job by this time tomorrow . . . .).

I don't think it's those kind of stakes. Celebrities who have shilled for Psychic Friends and the like haven't become pariahs for that reason (they may have been before they started...) Hell, wasn't Pedro, along with some other Latino players, involved in some kind of thing where they advertised for phone cards that turned out to be fraudulent? But probably virtually no one even knows that happened.

It's just that, I can't see how this could be a total mistake where Wright had no idea what he was getting into. The only way you wouldn't be skeptical of this thing the moment you heard about it, is if you already had a lot of belief in faith healers and other charlatans going in. If Wright believes in that crap (so to speak), that would make me less of a fan of him personally. Although, he would still by all accounts be a very nice guy, and of course he is still the Mets' best player. But, the same identification between me and him would not be there. I'm sure he can survive knowing that; he can't please everybody, and he needs to believe in whatever he believes in, not worry about how I feel about it.

I just hope we don't see him start jumping on the dugout and yelling "I LOVE THIS TEAM!". Or telling reporters that they're being glib and that they don't know the history of eating feces; he does.

I'd hate to have Jay Horowitz's job today, that's for sure. (Of course, if he approved this and it creates a big firestorm, Jay Horowitz may not have Jay Horowitz's job by this time tomorrow . . . .).

Supreme Court Justices don't have the same job security that Jay Horowitz has. Ever since I can remember he has been the PR guy for the Mets and ever since I can remember the Mets have been getting bad PR. Maybe it is about time he was canned.

As for the Wright issue I can honsetly care less if he believes it, if he just did it for the cash or he got suckered. Who besides Mushnick even watches commericals any more?

I mean he's still a kid, but what are the odds of a single man possessing boyish good looks, HOF calibre hitting abilities and a fierce intellect?

I remind you all of these pictures.

Thats one thing that has always bugged me about the Carl Everret/Dino bashing. Make fun of the guy because he is lousy not because his beliefs are different than yours.

Sheee-*t. Don't make fun of me if I believe the Cubs are in the AL and Gloria Steinem is a man. It's what I believe! And I have Tertullian ("credo quia absurdum", and you can't tell me he didn't say it!) to back me up.

I remind you all of these pictures.

Enough of this Cliff Floyd bashing, I say.

declined a threesome

having brad pitt and jon lovitz displayed in different browser windows hardly qualifies as a "threesome".

Re: #18

Ain't it ironic that last week baseballthinkfactory began accepting a porn ad (at least, the need to check "I am at least 18 years old" to enter, and the warnings listed, strongly suggest so). This could be as big a target as Mr. Wright's faith healer enforsement. But apparently nobody has started a thread and/or made derisive comments.

That lack might be attributable to the fact that most here believe ##### is not intrinsically objectionable either in fact or when represented while religious charlatans are always objectionable. Even the bible-thumpers I have known understood that Jimmy Swaggart would have been forgiven by God and should have been forgiven by His Church while Jim Bakker was a dirtbag through and through. Swaggart is by far the lesser of these two evils.

I think some people have misunderstood the phrase "respect others' beliefs." In a pluralistic society, we are asked to respect other people's rights to their beliefs, but we are never asked to respect the beliefs themselves. In the world of action, we give respect, meaning non-intervention. In the world of ideas, we are allowed to ask, critique, respond. Otherwise "respect" becomes a euphemism for "put brain in deep freeze." The word "respect" has taken a strange turn, recently, which is fine, but we have to understand the historical injunction of respect in the context in which it was made.

While this fool's beliefs don't seem especially harmful, as bilking people of money is less evil than sending them to commit suicide, they also don't seem worthy of anything but ridicule on a personal level. I have no respect at all for these beliefs; I do have respect for the principle that David Wright--or me or anybody else--has the right to hold beliefs that virtually all rational people find stupid beyond belief.

having brad pitt and jon lovitz displayed in different browser windows hardly qualifies as a "threesome".

there goes your permit to post in Sox Therapy threads, you little homophobic twerp.

Pardon the intrusion of a long-time lurker...

This may be bigger than just David Wright. I recently saw a similar commercial during a Mets broadcast, but it was Jerry Manuel pitching a revival-esque religious event (also in his Mets outfit). At the time, I said to my wife that it was really weird to see him doing that kind of commercial while wearing his uni, as that might imply a team endorsement. (I paid very little attention to the specifics of the cultish event being described, so I'm not sure if it was the same as this one.) Could the appearance of two members of the Mets organization (in uniform) in these spots suggest that the <u>organization </u>may have asked/invited/ordered them to film them?

You may now return to discussions of larger issues, like coprophagy....

I don't think "homophobia and "fear of Jon Lovitz' picture" are remotely equivalent.

From what I read, the faith healer ate his own poop as one of many attempts to heal himself. It did not work. What he claims healed him was entering some temple and praying, hence he found his faith and became a faith healer (as the websites tell it). He isn't currently advocating eating poop to heal oneself.

Seriously, I'm sure faith healing has a much better chance of healing most illnesses than does eating or drinking one's one feces.

If Wright believes in that crap (so to speak), that would make me less of a fan of him personally.

Something few ever seem to consider is that most of these guys have life and worldviews much different than you find here. Most/many are smart enough from a PR standpoint to keep their views to themselves but I have no doubt that the average political and religious view of professional baseball players is far different from BTF posters. Hopefully, you are only a fan of David Wright the baseball player even before you saw this blurb, as that is all you know about him. Why would any of us who don't know these guys think we have the slightest idea who they are or what they believe?

I recently saw a similar commercial during a Mets broadcast, but it was Jerry Manuel pitching a revival-esque religious event (also in his Mets outfit).

Was it for the same organization? Assuming so, it shocks me not at all to think they paid the Mets good money for the privilege. It surprises me that the Mets would take the money without delving into it a bit more.

If it's not the same organization, I eagerly await Carlos Delgado telling us to attend the synagogue of our choice.

(I recall from his stint in Chicago that Manuel is in fact quite religious. Not that it necessarily has anything to do with him pitching "religion" (if that's what it is) wearing the uni, but there it is.)

as that might imply a team endorsement

I know Jay Horowitz has had to eat a lot of #### through the years...but this is going too far!

Ok, now who's going to adopt "David Wright's Faith Healer" as their handle?

Wish I had been there first, nothing could be more apropos

Hmmm. Dumb things I did before the age of 25:
*declined a threesome

glad I'm not the only dumbass

No comment here except that I first thought I was hallucinating, then someone posted in the game chatter and Manuel's ad came on.

The thing that made me angry in the column was the Imus-McCarver story. I am no fan of Jeanne Zelasko and I don't find her especially attractive. But first, making fun of her looks is classless and unfunny, and second, WHO THE F IS DON IMUS TO MAKE FUN OF ANYONE'S LOOKS???? He may be the ugliest person I've ever seen.

For the good all days, when the Mets had people like Kris and Anna Benson who would never embarass the Mets organization.

I see Red Sox players doing this all the time, while Yankee players don't do it as much.

I'm Kevin Millar for Kentucky Fried Chicken.

I'm Kevin Millar for Kentucky Fried Chicken.

I'm Coco for Cocoa-Puffs.

"*declined a threesome"

Two girls, two dudes, or a three-of-a-kind?

Not being insulting, just honestly curious.

More like "Divine Health Management"

C'mon, House reference?

Two girls, two dudes, or a three-of-a-kind?

I feel I've gotten just about enough #### in this thread, ok?

Option L? LOL

I feel I've gotten just about enough #### in this thread, ok?

That is the BTF health plan.

#41:
god is my coprolite!

This genius pun should not be permitted to, er, pass unnoticed.

Two girls, two dudes, or a three-of-a-kind?

Siamese twins.

I actually distilled dog and pig feces for a summer in college, so I have firsthand knowledge of feces water. Word to the wise: don't drink it. The putrefactive compounds are bad for your body.

Everything our parents thought was good turned out to be bad for us: sun, red meat, feces water...

Word to the wise: don't drink it

You don't have to tell me twice

I had a buddy once do a shot of his own urine at a party for about $10 bucks in what was mostly change and the table, he then proceeded to puke out the back screen door, almost everyone but me took their money off the table while he was puking, least the guy deserved

I think some people have misunderstood the phrase "respect others' beliefs." In a pluralistic society, we are asked to respect other people's rights to their beliefs, but we are never asked to respect the beliefs themselves.

I think you misunderstand the word respect. No one is asking anyone to put anyone "brain in the deep freeze" I'm asking you to not ridicule what brings people comfort. Attack the underlying fallacies, voice skepticism. Reveal conartists. All fine things to do. However, a lot of things in this thread and on this site are none of them and instead attacks on beliefs.

Here is a rule of thumb about respect. If you wouldn't say something to a persons face, it isn't generally respectful to type it a semi private forum. I find it unlikely that many people would be calling many people a fool (or what have you) to their face.

just to futher my previous point:

One of these are respectful one of them isn't:

Cut it out with that hocus pocus, it's all a bunch of BS and any lemming who believes it is a born fool.

I've heard some peole echoing similar believes, I'm somewhat skeptical because of...

Well? Which one is?

In a world where Congressmen crown Sun Myung Moon king, it's hard to say any religious delusion is goofy any more.

Aren't you the guy who goes into every thread about mental health and questions the validity of people suffering from mental illness?

pretty rich to hear MHS complaining about respecting other's beliefs...

there goes your permit to post in Sox Therapy threads, you little homophobic twerp.

i'm not sure where making fun of your one-handed typing has much to do with being homophobic.

Here is a rule of thumb about respect. If you wouldn't say something to a persons face, it isn't generally respectful to type it a semi private forum. I find it unlikely that many people would be calling many people a fool (or what have you) to their face.

I think that's a bully's argument. Just because one is not as physically strong as David Wright (or any professional athlete), and thus might be intimidated when speaking to him face-to-face, does not make one's opinion any less valid, or any less of a contribution to this discussion. I've always thought the "You wouldn't say it to his face" argument just distracts from the topic. I'm all for politeness and respect regarding people's beliefs, but I respectfully disagree with your "rule of thumb."

I've heard some peole echoing similar believes, I'm somewhat skeptical because of...

...how stupid those beliefs are.

i'm not sure where making fun of your one-handed typing has much to do with being homophobic.

In Sox Therapy, I joked that Darren was Rudy Seanez's wife, and MCA called me a homophobe. So that term is apparently being used rather loosely here; hence, I can call you such even if you're making fun of my typing. And what do you have against one-handed typists, anyhow?

"I feel I've gotten just about enough #### in this thread, ok?"

Wasn't intended that way. I don't know anything about your sexual proclivities, and to be honest, I'm not even 100% sure you're a guy (although that's the assumption under which I've been operating).

vlad, it was a joke. trying to reference the general topic (sh!t) in my post...

and i'm not gay, not that it's any of your business

A friend of mine told me he saw a commercial with Edgardo Alfonzo in civies...doing the Salvation Miracles Revival Crusade squat.

Posted by: Mike Cooper at the Berea, OH Public Library July 17, 2006 at 6:29PM (#21022530):

Whats the matter with typing with one hand?

PS-Go Buckeyes!

MHS - I respect this preacher's religion, in the same way that I respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children are clever. Thanks, Mencken.

Everyone has the right to believe whatever the hell they like. No-one has the right to be taken seriously.

More like "Divine Health Management"

C'mon, House reference?

Given the way that episode ends, pass.

I think you misunderstand the word respect.

So, let ME get this straight. Calling people with mental health issues "weak" is okay. Loudly cursing at and threatening (and purportedly being willing to follow through with the threat) someone with assault for not standing during the National Anthem is okay.

Making fun of Carl Everett wrt dinosaurs, not okay.

Gotcha.

Making fun of Carl Everett wrt dinosaurs, not okay.

I guess this is just another piece of evidence that I'm a bad person.

Because that's a "religious" belief. For centuries, people have gotten away with doing and thinking all kinds of things under the banner of religion that they would have been considered jerks and fools for otherwise. But there are lots of different kinds of religions and religious people, some of which are worthy of respect, and others of which, whether truly "believed" or used as an excuse, are not. For example, a lot of people "believe" (a word I never use myself, because it doesn't have a legitimate meaning, though it's a useful shorthand at times) that Jesus Christ rose from the dead. Now, I think that's impossible, so I don't think it happened. But many, many of the people who believe that are worthy of respect, because the Christian religion is full of teachings that can only lead to a better world if they're actually followed, and many people actually follow them. I could fill a book with the names of sincere Christians who were and are truly wonderful people, and of course I don't have to believe everything they believe in order to respect them. The Christian religion also contains a lot of teachings that would lead to abhorent behavior if they were followed, though not as many, and the people who follow the good teachings don't follow the bad ones--in fact, the good ones generally contradict the bad ones. And then there are the pointless ones, which don't matter at all.

Now, those hundreds of thousands, and probably millions, of good people who are Christians are mainly people who are intellectually honest, which is to say (among many other things) that they accept the evidence of their own empirical observation. They recognize, in this relatively enlightened time, that the Earth orbits around the sun, that our current flora and fauna evolved from those of prevoious epochs, and that all that evolution certainly took longer than seven days. But they also recognize that the Bible was written by people who didn't know those things; the evidence hadn't yet been observed, and in any case, much of the Bible could well be interpreted as metaphor they tell themselves. Indeed, that is a reasonable thought to have. Even through all of this, they still believe, or at least believe they believe (whatever that means... we see the problem here) in the resurrection. The fundamental difference here is that, while there is empirical evidence of all that I've said before, there is none that Jesus Christ didn't rise from the dead, only extrapolation from the observed data that tells us no one else ever has (of course, we don't actually have any such data; why would we know that somebody somewhere had risen from the dead?). In that sense, I and my like are equally culpable of "believing" something for which there is no direct evidence. Belief in the resurrection, then, is in some sense intellectually honest, or at least as intellectually honest as "believing" that it didn't happen, which as I've outlined, is all I can do. So the point of all that is that making fun of someone for being that sort of Christian would be ludicrous.

The kind of Christian that Carl Everett (who also, though perhaps an irrelevant side-track to the current dicsussion, does not follow his religions best teachings, which is readilly evident in an examination of his dossier) is, on the other hand, is the kind that is not intellectually honest, but rather believes things not to be true of which there are empirical evidence. This kind "believes," now in the negative sense of the word, that dinosaurs did not exist, or perhaps that the Earth is not nearly as old as it actually is, or that humans did not evolve from lower primates. That is to be made fun of, or at least negatively criticized and eventually stamped out entirely, because it is detrimental to others. It is detrimental to those people's innocent children, who have the right not to have their tendency toward intellectual honesty poisoned by parents who they have every instinct to trust. Not only that, but off and on throughout history, these people have attempted to limit what the intellectually honest can teach our children, which truly must not be tolerated. There is a real and legitimate danger to the entire future well-being of the human race in "respecting" Carl Everett's beliefs.

Vaux- Were you joking with your last post? Not believing in dinosaurs is "dangerous" and "detrimental" to people's innocent children? It "poisons intellectual honesty"? Respecting Everetts beliefs is a "danger to the entire future well being of the human race?"

My hell, buddy, aren't you exaggerating a little (or a lot)? That's as ridiculous as saying that gay marriage is a threat to traditional families. Opposing opinions don't need to be "stamped out" just because your rational mind can't agree with them. The liberals who freak out when someone even suggests intelligent design is a possibility are just as childish as the conservatives who freak out about teaching evolution as fact.

I'm a political moderate myself, and from a non-biased POV I'd say that liberals have gotten just as bad (if not worse) than conservatives when it comes to thinking their opinions are fact, and that anyone who disagrees with them is not only wrong but also stupid and/or evil for believing what they do.

Not believing in dinosaurs is "dangerous" and "detrimental" to people's innocent children? It "poisons intellectual honesty"? Respecting Everetts beliefs is a "danger to the entire future well being of the human race?"

Might be hyperbole but I think there's truth to it. It's not liberals who "freak out" when someone suggests intelligent design as a possibility, it's scientists or people who believe that it's important to try to understand the world we live in.

Am I the only person who saw the headline and just assumed that this was going to be about Jaret Wright and his multitude of arm miseries? A faith healer for Jaret might almost be cosidered semi-rational.

Hey does this mean if the Mets meet the Angels in the W.S. and the rally monkey takes a poop that David Wright will clean the field? Just asking!

Not necessarily, but since Divine is dead he may be asked to star in the remake of Pink Flamingos.

Booey, do you realize you just said that the existence of dinosaurs is an opinion?

It's not, you know.


And absolutely disbelieving observable fact constitutes a corruption of intellectual honesty. How could it not? By the way, where are these "out of hand" liberals? In the government? On television? On radio? On school-boards? I look and look, but I just don't see any.

Vaux- I didn't say that dinosaurs are an opinion, or that I agree with Everett. I don't. Not even close. All I'm saying is that it's a harmless belief, similar to the Santa Claus myth our parents fed us as a child. It's not going to contribute to the downfall of society in any way. When people reach adulthood, pretty much everyone questions what they were taught as a child. Someone is not going to spend their whole life believing Santa is real or that dinosaurs don't exist or that evolution is or isn't a theory just because they were told that as a child. Saying that these are harmful beliefs that must be stamped out immediately for the benefit of humanity is simply a huge overreaction.


As for the self righteous liberals, I'm talking about people I know or converse with in message boards like this one and others. Luckily, they haven't made their way into the government as far as I can see...yet. Extremists come in all varieties, and they all scare me.