User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.7315 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
WTF tenet of the Church does a girl playing baseball go against?
That's the beauty of organized religion based on arcane scripture - you can pretty much find a way to justify anything you want. It's great!
Its not the Catholic Church, this time at least:
Except, if you're really a traditional Catholic, you're not supposed to be interpreting scripture on your own.
Good for you!
Nutjobs! Get your nutjobs here!
She shoulda taken the field and offered the opposing pitcher and apple.
Our Lady of Sorrows is run by the U.S. branch of the Society of Saint Pius X, a group of conservative, traditionalist priests who disagree with the reforms of the Vatican II Council in the 1960s and broke with the Catholic Church in the 1980s.
I know very well who the SSPX are. They've not actually formally broken with the Church, though their in an irregular situation. Their founder ordained 4 bishops without permission, and all 5 were excommunicated. Pope Benedict lifted the excommunication a couple of years ago, and there's actually a negotiation going on right now to bring them back into full alignment.
Aren't they the nutters from Mexico with the founder with the little boy problem?
Nope. That's the Legion of Christ/Regnum Christi.
Macial was really an F-up. Also had several long-term girlfriends and multiple children.
The SSPX are also known as Lefebvrists (after their founder Bishop Lefebvre).
Okay. My bad. Should have known better than to name his group "legion."
In that movie with Ben Stiller?
Randy Baum gets the "Blaming the Wrong Party" award for this ridiculous state of affairs.
So they're Lefebvre Believers?
I think I see the connection now - the '89-'91 Mariners never played a game against a team with a girl, either. Luckily Bob Shirley retired in '87.
<slow sarcastic golf clap>
He can cry all he wants, but Spanky knows he didn't get the tag down on Sid Bream.
Oh...
Ha Ha
/nelson
If it were tackle Football, or wrestling, or boxing, I would sympathize. It's a perfectly valid viewpoint that boys/men should never be physically aggressive towards girls/women.
But baseball and flag football?
The messy problem of rampant Lefebvrist anti-Semitism needs to be dealt with.
Dude, you know this has nothing to do with violence and everything to do with sex. They might touch a breast or something.
You may be right in this case; although I have no idea why they would worry about that in baseball.
I'm just saying, there are legitimate reasons not to want to have boys playing girls in real contact sports.
There are wackos in every group, and the wackos are the one most likely to head into schism if the main Society reaches an agreement with the Pope (as is expected this month).
The anti-semites are certainly more likely to be dealt and marginalized with within the broader Church, rather than within a break away faction.
Second base. Can't have a boy sliding in to break up the DP and having a girl land on top of him. He might jizz his pants or something.
Really, this is about archaic gender roles and the belief that women aren't worthy of being equal to men.
Again, you could be right in this. I have no idea what these people think, but that's not generally true about Traditional Catholics.
Believing that women and men are different doesn't mean you believe they are unequal.
One time when I was about 14 my baseball team played an All-Star girls team. My brother caught and I played SS, and this one girl was taking a super aggressive secondary lead off 2B. So my brother and I had one of those sibling-psychic moments and after the next pitch he gunned it down to pick her off. These girls were quite good (and from what I gathered quite competitive), she was well out but came in spikes high and ripped a gash in my pants from crotch to knee. It was certainly a lively experience, but I can tell you I wasn't in any danger of being aroused.
Shoulda backhanded her and told her to make you some dinner.
You really are a piece of work. What you are implying is that it's OK for boys/men to be physically aggressive towards other boys/men outside the arena of contact sports, which is a pretty screwed up viewpoint.
My daughter plays full contact football, and gives as good as she gets. It's taught her, among other things, enormous self confidence notibly lacking in most of her girl friends, that she is not some sort of fragile flower that the world has to treat with kid gloves. She stands up for herself in many instances in which her peers do not. Between football and her Tae Kwan Do red belt (yes, she spars with the boys), no one better mess with her.
The over/under is that you put three people on ignore and leave before post 200.
You really are a piece of work. What you are implying is that it's OK for boys/men to be physically aggressive towards other boys/men outside the arena of contact sports, which is a pretty screwed up viewpoint.
I implied no such thing.
But there's a big difference between boys rough-housing, or even men getting into fisticuffs, and hitting a girl or woman. If you don't see that, I'm sorry for you.
If you got a call from school that said your son was in trouble for punching a kid that was teasing him, your reaction wouldn't be different based on whether it was a boy or a girl?
Snapper, you can't believe that this thread will end well for you :-)
The over/under is that you put three people on ignore and leave before post 200.
I'll take the under on both. Way under on the posts. I'm leaving for dinner, and then I'm going to watch CC-Price.
Oh, no doubt. She's only 10, and I don't see her playing more than a year or 2 more. These south Florida 10-12 year old boys hit hard enough. Plus, I don't want to take a chance she impacts her swimming, because that's where the (scholarship) money is at : )
of course you did. How else to interpret this?:
The implication is clear, that if boys/men are aggressive in the context of sport, then they will be outside of that context. Otherwise, why care? It's just a competition. But you seem to care only about the potential aggressiveness of males toward females but not males toward other males, because obviously it's OK for boys to play football against other boys.
You missed the joke.
It doesn't matter one way or the other.
I would not be comfortable being physically aggressive towards a woman, even in the context of the sport. I would not tackle a woman in football. When I've played basketball against women, I was far less physically aggressive; e.g. make sure to keep the elbows down, don't risk hard fouls, etc.
I don't favor physical aggression by males vs. males (I've never started a fight in my life) but it's far less concerning, and not out of bounds in every situation.
His daughter is also named Briene of Tarth.
Yes. I played CA class I youth soccer and each year from around 10 to 14 years old my team would scrimmage against the girls' team 2-3 years older than us. Those girls were really rough.
I was going to make that joke! But then I recalled that my Baelor the Blessed reference already started up a nerd thread a couple days ago.
I will limit my role as pedantic Westeros-lover to correcting the spelling on Brienne.
That's you own personal choice, and that's fine, but it's not a position that should be institutionalized in any way. That faux Catholic school should be suspended from all inter school sports for a year, and permanently banned if they pull a stunt like that again.
Obviously. They're into water sports.
<slow sarcastic Roger Cedeno clap>
"Arizona is starting to give Ohio and Florida a run for their money in "state producing the most news stories featuring ridiculous people.""
California says hi (although all bow to Florida, admittedly).
Is that a slow, sarcastic clap that has no idea where the ball is going off the bat and routinely takes routes that might best be described as "based on a sort of non-Euclidean geometry usually reserved for Lovecraftian horror?"
Did Texas secede and I missed it?
Wow, this is as strange a piece of pseudo logic that I've read in some time.
Snapper: guys shouldn't be aggressive towards girls ever.
Lunatic: How dare you advocate so vociferously for widespread male on male violence!
I do agree with lunatic that the school should be suspended from competition. You can't join a league formed under commonly agreed rules for the purpose of allowing kids to compete, then refuse to show up for a game because you only want to play under your own rules. Another team should have gotten the opportunity to play, and that poor harlot should never have been forced to miss a game.
The girl voluntarily sat out during the season when they played against this school. Honestly, the girl and her mom are far more tolerant of these nutjobs than most people would be.
That's my sister your talking about there - junior Olympian years ago. But yeah they play rough and for keeps. I'll never fight her (not that I would anyway).
What would be funny is if the other teams all made sure they had one girl on the team so that the nutbar school would have to forfeit every game.
Coke to DL from MN
Ultra-Orthodox Shun Their Own for Reporting Child Sexual Abuse
Ultra-Orthodox Shun Their Own for Reporting Child Sexual Abuse
Thanks for the link, Andy.
This story is getting remarkably little press. It seems to be a widespread conspiracy to protect sexual predators.
Your paranoia notwithstanding, this story has been covered as far a south as Atlanta, so it's not exactly being buried.
Well, the Times has given it prominent and extensive coverage both yesterday and today, with further details on its website, and I doubt if the story will remain "local" for too much longer, since it also involves a prominent Brooklyn prosecutor. Here's the followup story that appeared in today's editions:
For Ultra-Orthodox in Abuse Cases, Prosecutor Has Different Rules
EDIT: I see that from what Sam says, the story has already broken out of the Brooklyn bandbox, and deservedly so. It's a good reminder that it's not just Catholics who are capable of circling their wagons under an outsider's spotlight.
No, not buried, but certainly not the level of press I would have expected based on the very similar Catholic Church scandals.
Probably has to do with the lack of people in the community willing to speak, but the political power of the community (they all vote, and mostly vote the way their Rabbis tell them) certainly plays a role.
The Ultra-Orthodox Jewish community in Brooklyn simply isn't as big or hierarchical as the Catholic Church, nor is the abuse there as systemic as with the church. You keep playing that victimization card all you want. It's still crap.
The fascinating thing about this scandal, is it's not just the hierarchy covering up to protect itself. The average manp-on-the-street in the community is going along, and actively participating in the coverup (through shunning and harassment of the accusers). Similar behavior apparently happens in Amish communities around sex abuse. Turning in a guilty community member to the outside authorities is viewed as worse than sexually abusing children.
If you're going to take the tack the these matters need to be handled by the community, at least have the moral deceny to engage in vigilante justice against the abusers.
Did you read the article? It's every bit as systematic as the Church scandals (which were horrific). And it is far more hierarchical. Virtually the entire community is joining in shunning and harassing the accusers. These people listen to their religious leaders in a way Catholics don't. Little children are spitting on the victims and accusers.
Why do you need to insist that the Catholic Church is unique in the wickedness of some of its members and officials? If protecting the victims and potential victims is our primary goal, we should react with equal horror wherever this stuff happens.
Sam's right that at least so far, the scandal is mostly confined to one part of Brooklyn. It's nowhere near as (geographically) widespread as the Catholic Church scandal.
OTOH snapper's right in that the resistance to the truth seems to permeate much deeper into the Orthodox community than it does among Catholic laymen. That's a rather damning point about the mores of the both the Ultra-Orthodox and their kept politicians.
As for the extent of the press coverage: Give it time before making any conclusive judgment about that.
And Rockland County. This is hard thing to gauge in that Ultra-Orthodox Jews are concentrated in a tiny handful of places in the world. The communities just don't exist across the US.
You should care less about its uniqueness or lack thereof and more about it being a huge problem in your own ####### house. Your reaction has pretty much solely been: "IT'S THE GAYS FAULT"
The Orthodox community's relationship with City Hall is...interesting and not very well reported, that's for sure.
There's no conspiracy. It's just that a piddling little sex-abuse scandal simply can't compete for attention with such blockbuster stories as whether George Clooney is gay or whether Mitt Romney was a bully in High School.
As the father of two daughters whom we're trying to raise Catholic, this is the problem I worry over. I can accept a belief in difference. I can't accept giving authority over my daughters to people who think my daughters are unequal. What is the line? The priesthood is the part I can't swallow and what will probably lead to us taking them out and breaking my wife's family's presumably millennium-and-a-half association with the church. If priests and nuns are truly separate but equal, how come priests get all the leadership positions? It's hard not to shake the sense that the "difference" the church hierarchy points to--not individual practitioners--is at heart a difference rooted in a belief in inferiority. There are lots of things I respect about the church, and lots of things about it that seem silly to me but that I can live with, but I cannot really see how it's right to subject my daughters voluntarily to training in a belief that they aren't qualified to be leaders.
My reaction has been that many priests, bishops and Cardinals belong in jail (including Cardinals Mahoney and Law). I've stated that repeatedly, and have never said anything but that. I will also state again that homosexual priests preying on teenage boys is part (but only part) of the problem. Acknowledging that part of the scandal doesn't diminish the wickedness of the other parts of the scandal.
As far as I can tell, the Church has done a good job of reforming itself on this issue and rooting out predators. Abuse accusation rates have fallen dramatically. I don't know what else I'm supposed to "care more" about?
Am I supposed to ignore all other sex abuse in the world until the Catholic Church is perfect? Because, no institution composed of mortals will ever be perfect.
I meant the conspiracy within the Ultra-Orthodox community, not a conspiracy among the press.
I think the issue is the view of the priesthood you're taking. It is not primarily a leadership position. It is a position of service, and a sacramental role, in the imitation of Christ. Think about Holy Thursday, and Christ washing his disciples feet as the model of priestly service.
Women are certainly not denied leadership roles in the Church. They've long run Catholic hospital systems, school districts, religious orders, charitable foundations, etc., that can be as big as any diocese run by a bishop. They've also been great theologians, and even Doctors of the Church.
The role they can't play is the role of acting "In personae Christi" (in the place of Christ) in certain sacraments of the Church. This is based on the masculinity of Christ, and the fact that he chose only men (despite having many female disciples) as apostles/bishops.
OK. The juxtaposition of the "conspiracy" comment with the "little press" comment led me to infer a connection.
The people who are firmest in telling me that the church does not really accept women into leadership are longtime, and continuing, nuns. The ones my wife's family is close to--perhaps unrepresentative as a sample--all thought the language of different but equal was true in the 1970s but has been explicitly rebuked over the last decades. What could Benedict's going out of his way to belittle US nuns be, other than a reminder that their opinions don't really matter?
My god yes. My junior high JV team scrimmaged against the girls team in 1984 -- I'd never experience so much hand checking and elbow throwing. Maybe 10 minutes in I went up for a jump shot from around the free throw line and got hit by three different opponents before I came down, two of whom fell on me. I broke the lower end of my fibia, tore just about every ligament in my left ankle, and tore the posterior cruciate ligament in my left knee. My leg's been completely ###### ever since. Do *not* play ball against girls. They will murder you.
Dude, I'm horrified by pretty much all of you people. Every damned last one of you. The best argument for your God's loving grace is that I have no reasonable path to acquiring nuclear weapons. My point here is to make sure we don't slide into the 'but the Jews are doing it to' talking point as a *defense* of the Catholics.
Pretty much all deeply religious people have seriously, soul-crushing hangups about sex which far, far to often leads to repression and the curdling of desire into something that snakes its way up from the bowels of hell and whispers "Hey, why not #### a child instead?" I'm against all of that. I think the lot of you people need to find some truly engaged adult sluts and whores - men or women, whatever tastes suits you - and get yourself some seriously bang-up laid action going on. That's true for everyone here, whackadoodle Ultra-Orthodox Jews, you and the Pope.
Also, dude, stop with the conflation of pedophilia with homosexuality. NOT THE SAME THING!
This, however, is nuts. Over the years, these traditionalist (or "anti-reform", as you prefer) have gotten so frustrated by everything that they've adopted very reactionary elements of the culture wars. I mean, I'm all for traditional expressions of Christian worship, but how the hell does anyone get "you can't play baseball against a girl" out of that. Maybe, maybe, if this was something like beach volleyball, and they said "co-ed sports in skimpy swimwear is too immodest for the values we're trying to teach our students." Of course, they'd never say it like that...
Side Note: The recent flap between Rome and US nuns has been a long time coming. Rome has been warning them for years that Vat. II only allowed for changes in practice and expression, and that any deviations from dogma were unacceptable -- full stop. This hasn't really been reported, largely because everyone likes "nuns" and reporters are typically sympathetic towards more liberal expressions of Catholicism. I was always amazed that the Vatican hadn't stepped in sooner. There have been nuns openly flouting very basic dogmas for decades -- elemental stuff like the divine nature of Jesus, not more "cultural" stuff like gay marriage.
Actually, none of this matters in the long run because all the liberal nuns will be dead in twenty years. Almost no novices are entering the liberal orders. To the extent that female Catholics are seeking a religious life, they're almost exclusively heading towards the traditional, full-habit, orders.
I grew up in a home with an Episcopal mother and a Catholic father, and was confirmed as a Catholic in 8th grade, though it was mostly just going through the motions. My mother is still pretty active in the local Episcopal diocese. I have no particular interest in organized religion at this point, but if I were to go back, I certainly know which one I would choose based purely on their respective level of tolerance. All I can do these days is laugh at a Catholic hierarchy (I don't necessarily blame the laity or even probably the bulk of the priesthood) that pretends to hold the moral high ground on issues like contraception when it's pretty much just a criminal organization these days.
Hand waving. How many women Popes have there been? Cardinals, Bishops, Nuncios? I'm going to go out on a limb and say 0.
Suppose in the US, women were barred from the Presidency and Congress. Would it be a proper retort to say "Hey, we once had a woman Secretary of Commerce."?
Also, dude, stop with the conflation of pedophilia with homosexuality. NOT THE SAME THING!
I'm not conflating them, and will state definitively that they are not the same thing, and (to the best of my knowledge) homosexuality plays no role in pedophilia.
I'm saying that the scandals in the Church involved both pedophilia (sexual abuse of pre-pubescent children) and priests having sexual relationships with teenagers (both male and female, but predominantly male - 81% according to John Jay study).
Homosexuality is not an issue in the pedophilia aspect, but it is in sex-with-teenagers aspect. 53% of the abused were age 13-17 according to the John Jay report. If a straight man has sex with a 15-year-old girl, he's not a pedophile. If a gay man has sex with a 15-year-old boy, he's not a pedophile either. The Church's scandal involved a lot of gay priests having sex with 13-17 year old males, and a lesser number of straight priests having sex with 13-17 year old girls
Even if one grants your point about a 15-year-old boy or girl, the five-year span with which you're using that age to hand-wave away abuse of ages 13 through 17 is not small.
Regarding my comment on your blaming of the gays, I may have yours and tfbg's homophobia conflated. If so, I apologize for the mix-up.
Right back at you big guy.
I should also note that just because a person believes there are limitations on the proper expression of sexuality does not mean they don't have a great sex life. I've lived the secular value too, and it was worse, not better.
According to this book, one.
The cut-off for pedophilia is generally viewed as puberty, in everything I've read. By 13, the vast majority have gone through puberty. That's why I'm using it.
Move it higher if you want, and you'll get 30% or 40% of the scandal being non-pedophilia related, rather than 50%. The exact numbers don't matter, the point is that their are multiple aspects to the scandal. We should probably also include priest having sex with adults (women and men) as another part of the scandal.
- DINGDINGDING
well, except the boys who are being raised to believe that females are icky
- people really only care about sex when it is 9 year old boys being sodomized by someone famous or some sort of official or if it is a beautiful little blond grrrl that nacy grace can go nuts over
who cares about some amish/orthodox jewish/other weird religion that is kind of underground - kids?
That doesn't pass the giggle test. Another instance where unthinking ideological preconceptions drives opinions. Most all pedophiles have a favored sex. Why is that if it doesn't show sexual preference? Next thing you will be doing is promoting the ancient canard that rape has nothing to do with sex.
My point was that homosexuals are not pre-disposed to pedophilia; they are no more likely to be pedophiles than straight men. At least I've never seen anything to the contrary. Do you have contrary information? Whether an individual pedophile has a preference doesn't bear on the broader point.
Arguing about which intolerant, hierarchical, misogynistic, repressed, fanatical religion - Christian, Jewish, or Muslim-- is worse is like arguing whether or not Hitler or Stalin or Pol Pol was worse.
- people really only care about sex when it is 9 year old boys being sodomized by someone famous or some sort of official or if it is a beautiful little blond grrrl that nacy grace can go nuts over
who cares about some amish/orthodox jewish/other weird religion that is kind of underground - kids?
Sad, but true.
And even when it is someone famous (e.g. Roman Polanski) they can't keep the sleazebags in jail.
I'm not talking about BBTF, I'm talking about the local and national media.
Arguing about which intolerant, hierarchical, misogynistic, repressed, fanatical religion - Christian, Jewish, or Muslim-- is worse is like arguing whether or not Hitler or Stalin or Pol Pol was worse.
There are lots and lots and lots of observent Christians, Jews and Muslims who are very good people. The religious have no monopoly on intolerant nutjobs; secularists and atheists have plenty too.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main