Kicker Hates..."That Guy"

Well, I was harassed by little Juice so I decided to pump out a quick blog entry. I refuse to call it a column or else we'll go bankrupt like every newspaper in America. (Unless they are like the Minneapolis Star Tribune who ask Twins fans walking into the game to buy the newspaper...good luck with that by the way)

Anyway, I was reflecting the other day about how many people I dislike. Now, unlike your usual racist/sexist/communist I do not hate real groups of people but instead types of people (that sounds much better). In this case, I hate "that guy". I plan on making this a whole series of people and you will all relate perfectly to everyone one of them.

The first guy I hate is "guy who thinks he is awesome because he was a great athlete at a really small school". I was on my campus the other day and realized my entire school is full of these people, but none more than this one kid. He walks around with his pierced ears, Hollister athletic shorts and cocky ass grin on his face, and for what reason you ask?

Because he was awesome at 9-man football. Yes, apparently that means something, to someone, somewhere and he just happens to be someone I see everyday.

This is the guy who when you walk into his dorm room is watching his high school highlight video with the skanky girl from upstairs to try and impress her. This is the guy who wears his conference champs t-shirt with the opponents name and score of the game on his shirt to class like 3 times a week. The shirt reads something like this: (This is football by the way)
Opponent Score
Pineville-Meyertown-Hickson 63-5 (yes, 5)
Davidson-Alberton-Dayton 111-7

You get the point...anyway, I hate this guy. I hate all guys like him. But most of all, I hate the stupid shit they say.

"When I was in high school we only had 18 kids in my class and it was fun". No, it wasn't fun. It was only fun because you had no other experiences and had to associate with the other douchey guys and ugly girls who make up your pathetic village.

Oh yea, another thing about this guy is he probably ends up dating a girl who is way to hot for him but only after she slept with 1/2 the guys on his dorm floor and they all know it but he doesn't. If anyone doesn't know the kind of guy I am talking about, I hope you can better relate to tomorrow's guy of "weight room guy". Let me tell you, I hate weight room guy.

Back to guy who thinks he is awesome because he was a great athlete at a really small school. He goes out for the college team and makes it but never plays, but tells everyone who doesn't know better that he is hurt or coach hates him. He makes sure to wear his team issued sweatpants, sweatshirt, under armour, shoes, head band, hat and warm-up every day he isn't wearing his high school conference champions shirt or his "weight room warrior" shirt from high school.

This guy walks around like he owns the place, he has the same look as Kobe Bryant when Kobe goes off for 60, but he has it because he graced you with his presence in your 8am history class.

I could honestly go on forever about "this guy" but I have finals this week and I was tricked into writing this by little Juice. However, I like this and even though Jim Rome has similar rants, mine will be different and likely more profane as time goes on. This might be a weekly thing or just happens whenever I feel like bitchin' about shit.

-The Kicker

Random Thoughts...

...I always suspected that pigs would eventually kill us all. (Juice)

...So apparently the Yankees just figured out the economy is not doing great and people are in fact NOT willing to sell their souls. (The Kicker)

...Yes, but you must remember that Yankees fans never had souls to begin with. (Juice)

...It's annoying whe people talk about teams trading for or signing players, and say their team should only acquire a player if he is healthy. Why do people say this? Of course you should only acquire someone is healthy. It should go without saying. You aren't going to say, "well this guy has a torn ACL, and is out for the year, but I'll give up a players or millions of dollars for him anyway because he is awesome at being injured." (Juice)

...Have you ever thought about hand towels? You take all this time to wash your hands, hopefully with soap because if not you are a retarded jack ass, and then you whipe your hands on this towel that a bunch of other people have wiped their hands on. Doesn't this kind of defeat the purpose of washing your hands? Think of all the gross stuff people touch before they wipe their hands on a towel, too. People are disgusting. It's no wonder we are all going to die from swine flu. (Juice)

...Males and fat girls should be required to wear underwears at all times. I was sitting in class the other day when an apparently underwearless guy in front of me stood up. I got a whole lot of man ass. This is not ok. Someone needs to police this by checking to make sure every guy and fat girl is wearing underwear before they leave the house. I nominate The Kicker. (Juice)

...Reader Lisa Hawkinson pointed out the absurdity of using the phrase "go fuck yourself" as an insult. I completely agree that this is insane. It is in no way an insult. I mean, who doesn't want to fuck themself? I know I do. But then again, I am pretty, so maybe it is different for ugly people. You'd have to ask The Kicker that. (Juice)

...Umm....I don't even know how to respond to this video. I would, though, like to give a shoutout to the homeless guy who said "this ain't Easter." I believe the term you were looking for is Halloween, sir. (Juice)

...The new Transformers trailer is out, and if you think the first movie didn't have a plot, you ain't seen nothing yet. Unless Megan Fox gets naked, which she won't because the movie is PG-13, I can't think of a good reason to see this movie. The first one wasn't very good, Michael Bay is a tool, and as far as I can tell from the trailer, Revenge of the Fallen just looks like a combination of the first Transformers and Armageddon. And that isn't a good thing. (Juice)

...Speaking of movies about cartoons from the 80s, here is the trailer to G.I. Joe The Rise of Cobra. If you are a fan of the original G.I. Joe don't watch it, all it will do is make you depressed. I feel like they should have consulted the fans of the orginal Transformers and G.I. Joe before they made these crappy movies. (Juice)

Juice's Top Ten: Sports Rivalries

Since I didn't specify what I meant by "sports rivalries" in the poll, I'm going to use current rivalries. History matters, of course, but you won't find Ali vs Frazier on this list. I'm going with current sports rivalries because every shmuck in the world has made a list of all time rivalries and they are all basically the same; where, on the flip side, only every other shmuck has a list of current sports rivalries so they are a little less common. Although, also basically all the same as well.

Also, before I start, anyone who claims something is "too one-sided to be a rivalry," needs to buy a dictionary and look up the term "rival." It has nothing to do with who wins, it has to do with the competition between the two teams.

Oh, and the poll is up for next week's top ten, so vote away!

Now on to this week's list...

10b. Minnesota Vikings vs. Green Bay Packers
10a. Minnesota Twins vs. Chicago White Sox

My homer picks. Nobody outside of Minnesota, Green Bay, and Chicago actually cares about these rivalries, but I do and it is my list. Personally, the Twins vs. White Sox is the most important rivalry to me, but most of the country doesn’t even realize they are rivals. As for the Packers and Vikings, that rivalry matters more to Vikings fans than Packers fans. The Packers vs. Bears rivalry is far more important in Green Bay than the Packers vs. Bears. But like I said, this is my homer pick so my teams make 10b and 10a. I absolutely loathe the White Sox, might I add.

9. Whatever Dumbass College Football Rivalry You Follow

Let’s be completely honest here. Every single college football rivalry is the exact same thing. Nobody actually gives a crap outside of those respective schools. And yes, that includes you Ohio State and Michigan. Nobody cares. So just pick whatever college football team you follow, and stick their number one rival in this spot.

8. Chicago Cubs vs. St. Louis Cardinals

This rivalry is underrated. It’s not the Cardinals and Cubs fault Midwest fans aren’t as insane and douchey as east coast fans. However, if you ask Cubs and Cardinals fans what team they hate the most; their answer will always be the Cubs for Cardinals fans, and the Cardinals for Cubs fans. Plus, the Cardinals seem to always find a way to compete, so on those rare occasions when the Cubs are actually good, the Cardinals are usually their main competition. Seeing as how the Cubs are good this year, and the Cardinals are once again looking like contenders, I expect this rivalry to be even better than most seasons.

7. Chicago White Sox vs. Chicago Cubs/New York Yankees vs. New York Mets

These cross-town battles would probably be far more interesting if these teams played more often, but it seems the fans in these given cities seem to care quite a bit. Had the Mets actually been good in 2000, Subway Series fever probably would have swept the nation. Instead, they were swept. I think the people that live in these cities with two teams make too big a deal about their rivalry (they’re in different leagues after all) but Chicago and New York are so big, and the rest of the country finds the Cubs and Yankees so interest, that these battles become rivalries.

6. Tiger Woods vs. Phil Mickelson

Here is the first point on the list where stupid people will say, “This isn’t a rivalry, Tiger always beats Phil.” This is true, but that isn’t what it means to be “rivals.” Just ask Webster. The fact is, Tiger and Phil hate each other. Of course, pretty much everybody hates Phil and loves Tiger, so not only does Tiger dominate on the course, but in every other walk of life as well. Plus Tiger’s fist pump is way cooler than Phil’s awkward jump.

5. Philadelphia Phillies vs. New York Mets

There isn’t a ton of history to this particular rivalry, but in the last couple of years these two teams have gotten pretty intense. Both teams have talked smack in the media, and the division has come down to Philadelphia and New York the last two years. And probably will again. And hey, maybe this will finally be the year New York doesn’t pull a spectacular choke job.

4. New England Patriots vs. Indianapolis Colts

Again, not a lot of history to the Patriots vs. Colts rivalry, but it seems these two always go head to head for the AFC Championship, at least in the past decade or so. Couple that with the competition between the two best quarterbacks in Tom “Dreamy” Brady, and Peyton “Infinitely Less Dreamy” Manning, and you have yourself a full fledged rivalry.

3. Rafael Nadal vs. Roger Federer

I’m not big on tennis. But, then again, I don’t think anybody is all that big on tennis. The fact is, however, these two seem to meet in the finals of every major tournament. I put it at three, because they are by far the two best players in their sport, and are pretty much the only two that can even get people to watch tennis. Maybe Andy Roddick can get some viewers, but he is a failure. A massive failure. Then again, anyone who has a wife like Brooklyn Decker (see pic right), probably can’t be considered a failure.

2. Duke vs. North Carolina (Men’s Basketball)

Duke and North Carolina almost always play compelling games. The fans of these teams are arguably more passionate than any in sports (they aren’t actually, but one could make the argument). I’m not a huge college basketball fan, I enjoy it, but I’ not a huge fan, and I always find the Duke vs. North Carolina matchup compelling. I can only imagine what it would be like for people who actually live in North Carolina. But, then again, what else is there to do in North Carolina?

1. New York Yankees vs. Boston Red Sox

Anyone who tries to claim the Yankees vs. Red Sox isn’t the premiere rivalry in sports now, or ever, is an idiot. No way around it. People who don’t like these teams always try to claim nobody outside of New York and Boston cares about the Yankees vs. Red Sox rivalry. The fact is, however, there is a completely different energy to games between these two teams. Any true baseball fan finds this rivalry compelling. Between the history, and the fact that the two teams just plain don’t like each other, nothing can ever match Yankees vs. Red Sox. And if you think otherwise, you are retahded.

-Juice

The Death of the Pitching Staff

There has been a disturbing trend in Major League Baseball the last few years: The structure of teams pitching staffs.

We are long removed from the days of four man pitching rotations, and guys pitching up to 300 innings. This isn't necessarily a bad thing; however, the disturbing part is how many teams are shying away from an eleven pitching staff (the commonplace ever since teams introduced the five man rotation) and moving towards 12 or 13 man staffs.

I'm not trying to sound like baseball relic, listening to the old school pitchers complain about how "back in their day you had to pry the ball out of my hand if you wanted to get me off the mound," gets incredibly annoying, after all. (I'm looking at you Mr. Bert Blyleven.) With that said, there is at least a little merit in what they are advocating.

Pitches aren't becoming bigger pansys, they are just being brought up in a culture that breeds lower pitch counts, and plenty of bullpen help.

The problem is that there just aren't enough quality arms for every team to have seven or eight solid options out of the bullpen. Instead of having five starting pitchers, who are trained to pitch seven innings on a given night, there are five starting pitchers who are trained to pitch five to seven innings depending on how far they can get on a 100 pitch limit. That can leave up to four innings to get through with relief pitchers. Couple this with the fact that most relievers are trained to only go one inning, sometimes even less (see Reyes, Denys), and you have a yourself and overworked staff.

The problem with this system, is that it's a lot harder for a relief pitcher to warm up, throw 25 pitches, sit down, and try and do that again the next day. This is much more difficult that a starter warming himself up and chugging through seven innings.

This is where the change needs to take place. The pitching staff needs to be set up as follows:

Five starters: Trained not by pitch counts, but to make it through seven innings. This won't always work, but I'm not advocating demolishing the bullpen, just tweaking it.

Closer: Trained to pitch more innings. If you need this guy for a two inning, or even three inning, save he should be able to do that. Why leave the best reliever on the bench during the most important time in the game?

Setup: This could be a lefty or righty, but is essentially your "number two closer." He's the guy you are most confident in getting some outs in the seventh our eigth inning on days when you don't want to overwork your closer. Guys would still need some rest.

Middle relievers: One lefty, and one righty. These are the guys would come in on days when your starter struggles. Or, if they pitched a stressful five or six innings (a lot of baserunners, tough situations, etc.) you can go to one of these guys in the sixth or seventh. These guys would also be available for specific righty-righty, or lefty-lefty matchups.

Long reliever: The one "mop-up" guy. There will be days when your starting pitcher just doesn't have it. That happens. If your starter gets lit up like Chien Ming Wang, you need another option. Now, this doesn't mean you pull the plug after two innings if the starter gives up five runs, pitchers need to be a little more resilient than that.

That would equate to five starters and five relievers and, if a team chooses, you could add in an extra lefty just in case you want both a lefty and right setup guy. The key, of course, to all this working is rethinking how starting staffs operate.

It would not take that long to change the mentality of a starting pitcher. Once an arm is warmed up, there isn't a big difference between throwing 100 pitches and 125 pitches. Often times, that is the difference between going five or six innings, or going seven innings. If teams rethink how they train pitchers in the minor leagues, it would make the game as a whole much better.

The way it is now, teams complain about the lack of pitching. The fact is, however, that the problem isn't too little pitching, it is too much pitching. If you train your quality pitchers to pitch more innings, it will alleviate the concerns of an untrustworthy, and overworked, bullpen.

-Juice

Random Thoughts...

...Gotta live and die with the Cubs (The Kicker)

...How do you not throw in a diehard pun there? Or a pun about bleeding blue and red? (Which is technically true for everyone but you get my point.) Or at least a Bartman joke. I'm calling The Kicker out. (Juice)

...Chimpanzee riding on a segway. That video will either ruin your week or make it 1000 times better. It all depends on how you look at it. (Juice)

...I wonder if he is any good (The Kicker)

...I'm not impressed until a kid throws at least five straight no hitters. (Juice)

...Are you impressed by this? Because I am extremely annoyed by it (The Kicker)

...The perfect game girl bothers me, because she got national attention after throwing one Little League perfect game. The high school kid had to throw four no hitters before anybody even noticed. Why is it such a big deal that a girl threw a perfect game in Little League? If a boy did it nobody would notice. It's sexist. I'm not even female and that bothers me. (Juice)

...By the way, who decided four was the magic number of no hitters to gain some sort of national attention? Three isn't enough? I would say even two is at least worth mentioning. Have you ever watched a high school pitcher? Most of them can't even last three innings, let alone throw a complete game no hitter. (Juice)

...They mentioned it after three and ESPN ran a small tidbit on ESPN.com after two, but who's counting...well, ESPN apparently (The Kicker)

...Obscure references on espn.com doesn't count as National attention, champ. (Juice)

...How is this allowed or encouraged by the parents? Only in America... and Europe because that's the key to the story. (The Kicker)

...I found myself saying "it is windy as fuck out" the other day. After doing so, I started pondering the idea of saying something is "(insert phrase) as fuck." Rarely does this actually make sense. "Windy as fuck" certainly does not make sense. Is their a progression of swearing to show how intense something is? (Damn, shit, etc.) If that is the case, I obviously exaggerated because windy as fuck would be a tornado or hurricane. I guess my point is indiscriminately swearing to describe something is completely ridiculous. Regardless, I just set a new record for number of times "fuck" was used in a fifty word sequence on this site. So that's something I suppose. (Juice)

...Also, another thing I, and many other people, say is "very true." This doesn't make sense either. If something is true then it is just true. Something that is very true isn't truer than something that is true. Truth is truth. Think about it.(Juice)

...Have you seen those commercials for charities that supply laptops to impoverished children in Africa? I don't have a link but they show them on Hulu (one of the greatest inventions ever) quite a bit. My question is, though, shouldn't they be advocating sending kids food, clothing and other necessities? Computers can be helpful, but I think food and clothing is a little more important. Or have we just gotten to the point where we say "here's a computer try and find some cheap food and clothing on Ebay?" (Juice)

...Note: If you actually buy food on Ebay, you probably have some issues. (Juice)

...So its been sunny back to back days. Very rare. I decide to turn on the weather channel to see the full day forecast and all I see is "T-storms" for the whole weekend, gotta love false hope from weather (The Kicker)

...Have you seen the story about the high school cheerleading coach who got fired for posing in Playboy? That drives me nuts. So she posed for a few pictures to make a little extra money, who cares? And anybody who plays the "she's a role model for younger girls and shouldn't do that kind of thing" card can go fuck themselves. Why does it matter that she posed for a few pictures? It's not like she murdered someone. People need to get over their obsession with nudity being a big deal. There are way worse things kids are exposed to than a pair of boobs. I just don't get it. If you were offered a fairly substantial amount of money to pose naked for a reputable publication why wouldn't you do it? It's just nudity. I'd do it for like $20. I mean, come on. Unbelievable. By the way here are her pictures if you are curious. Don't click that if you are morally opposed to attractive naked girls though. (Juice)

...Not only is this completely absurd, but Eric Byrnes is prominently involved; and nobody wants to be like Eric Byrnes. Also, the quote Mark Reynolds gives is fantastic. (Juice)

...Would you rather attend a Nickelback concert or stick a fork in an electrical outlet? I think the answer is pretty obvious. (Juice)

...There needs to be more emphasis placed on how mentally competent a person must before they are allowed to drive. Yesterday I saw someone driving an SUV who I was 90% was drunk. (Note that it was one in the afternoon.) This person was neglicting to use their turn signal, cutting multiple off, and swerving all over the place. Eventually I caught up to them when I was turning, and I looked over and it was an Asian woman driving. Now I realize this is perpetuating a stereotype, but if you don't want people to stereotype you, then don't do the things you are stereotyped for. Driving isn't that hard, why are so many people terrible at it?(Juice)

...And finally, happy birthday to Juice. (Juice) - Yep, I just wished myself happy birthday in the third person.

Juice's Weekly Top Ten: Minnesota Sports Icons

First of all, thanks to everyone who voted in the poll, there will be another one up shortly regarding next weeks top ten, so continue to check in. And feel free to vote as often as you would like. Stuffing the ballot box is not only allowed, but encouraged.

Given the poll results, today’s list will be sports related. With that in mind, I have decided to run down the top Minnesota sports figures of all time. Pretty self explanatory and I’m sure you all know who is number one already, but maybe there will be some surprises along the way.
And away we go.

10. Dave Winfield

This tenth spot was kind of difficult to decide on, but I put Winfield here because he played literally every sport at the U of M. Seriously. Everything. He was actually captain of the water polo team, in case you are wondering. The fact that he is from Minnesota was the final icing on his tenth position cake. Plus he is 900 feet tall.

9. Fran Tarkenton

Fran Tarkenton is obviously before my time so I don’t know a whole lot about him. I just kind of assume old people like him. I dunno. Maybe I’m wrong. His name is Fran, though, so I suppose that is fun.

8. Kevin Garnett

You know, honestly, I never really cared about Kevin Garnett. I guess it was cool to have one of the best players in the NBA in the late nineties and most of the 2000’s but he never really did it for me. He was by far the most popular and well known sports figure in Minnesota during that time period, though, so I’ll put him on the list.

7. Tony Oliva

Tony O. Everyone loves Tony O. At a Twins game last year he was sitting like ten rows behind me and The Kicker. I’m not really sure why Tony Oliva had worse seats than us, but I guess it is kind of fun that he sits amongst the common folk. I moved him down on the list just because his career was cut short due to injury. I do thoroughly enjoy how I can only understand about 30% of what he says though.

6. Herb Brooks

As everyone knows I am not a hockey guy. Herb Brooks, though, is kind of an important figure in sports history. You know, because of the whole Miracle on Ice thing. He is probably the face of team USA actually, since the whole point was there were no super stars; although, technically the Miracle on Ice had almost nothing to do with hockey. But that’s neither here nor there.

5. Bud Grant

Again, Bud Grant was before my time, but he coached the Vikings during those years when they tended to make the Super Bowl. They would lose, but at least they would make it. Plus when the current coach is Brad Childress, it just makes you long even more for someone who is competent to lead the team.

4. Rod Carew

If you need to find a reason to like Rod Carew, which by the way there are plenty, look no further than his batting stance. How anyone can not only hit like that, but be one of the greatest contact hitters in the history of baseball is beyond me.

3. Kent Hrbek

Hrbek isn’t the greatest player in Twins history or anything, and too be quite frank, I would say most fans overrate him, but he is very likeable. I’m not saying Hrbek wasn’t good, he definitely was, and he was very important to both of the Twins’ World Series championships. And, out of everyone on this list, he is probably the guy you would most want to have a beer with. I say have a beer, because if you were sharing a case with Hrbie that is all you would get. He would drink the other 23.

2. Harmon Killebrew

Regarded as one of the nicest athletes in Minnesota history, Killebrew was the man in Minnesota during his reign on the Twins. It is impressive how popular he is with a generation of people that never actually got a chance to see him play, but everyone young and old loves Harmon Killebrew. It is impossible not to.

1. Kirby Puckett

Kirbyyyyyyyyyy Puckett. That introduction from Bob Casey will always send shivers down Twins fans spines. Puckett is, without a doubt, not only the most beloved sports figure in Minnesota history, but the most beloved public figure period. There is no argument. No debate. No question. If you say otherwise you are dead wrong. Between his skills and smile on the field, and the way he interacted with fans off the field, it was impossible to not love Kirby Puckett. It’s just too bad we lost him way too soon.

Personally, I remember getting Puckett’s autograph when I was about nine. I was stuck in a group of people surrounding Kirby, and was being forced out of the group by the people rushing in. After getting the autograph, I forgot to grab my pen, and Kirby turned to me and said “hey kid you want your pen back?” Easily the most star struck I have ever been, and probably will ever be. I don’t think I mustered any words, but I grabbed my pen and sauntered away. I’ll always remember that. Nobody will ever be as beloved as #34, Kirby Puckett.

As a final note, I realize this list is baseball heavy, and there is a reason that beyond the fact that baseball is my sport. Baseball players are more revered than other athletes. They are immortalized, and made legendary more than athletes from any other sport. Yes, there are plenty of transcendent figures in every sport, but the biggest of them all usually come from baseball. That’s just how it how it has always been.

Honorable Mention:
Randy Moss
Paul Moiltor
Brad Radke
Torii Hunter
Ron Coomer (Just kidding)

God vs. Ghosts

Ok before I begin this post, I would like to note three things:

1. This is a completely random topic, I don't know what made it pop into my head, but I was pondering the idea recently and it started bugging me. So now you all get to enjoy the wonderful world of my warped mind.

2. This is completely unrelated to sports, but I like to shake things up every once in awhile.

3. I don't necessarily mean to offend anyone. Well, other than Catholics, of course.

I was pondering life yesterday, in the shower I believe (I think better in the nude). I started thinking about ghosts, not sure why, I’m just odd I supposed. More specifically, I started to think about how many people I know believe in ghosts, and comparing that number to the number of people who believe in God.

I came to the conclusion that almost everybody I know, or at least everyone I know well enough to understand their religious beliefs, either believes in God, or is at least open to the idea of the existence of God. So, working under that assumption, lets just say that number is 100% - essentially 100% of people I know fairly well believe in God.

Now, I must ask, how many of those people believe in ghosts? Or supernatural beings, or whatever you want to call them. I would guess that number is significantly smaller. In fact, I would venture to say more people do not believe in ghosts than people who do; or, at best, the numbers are 50/50 on the pro ghost anti ghost debate.

There is a discrepancy here, however. Believing in God, is equally absurd as believing in ghosts.

Anyone who claims an all knowing, all seeing, all powerful omniscient being is more logical than a disembodied spirit of a deceased human, is ignorant. Plain and simple. Technically, both ideas are absurd, so what makes one more absurd than the other? Because the existence of God is more widely accepted, that makes it more logical? That is the absolute epitome of ignorance. The majority opinion is not always the correct opinion.

Now, this brings up a greater issue with religious ideology in general.

All religions are founded on the concept that the ideas they set forth are correct, and everyone else is wrong. The fact is, however, whether you believe the teachings of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, a monkey alien warlord, or anything else, your ideas are illogical. They just are. This doesn’t make them wrong necessarily; it just makes them devoid of reason. (The divisiveness of organized religions, however, is wrong, and the reason that their existence is not only bad, but dangerous, for humanity. But that is a whole other issue.)

No religious belief system is based on logic, which is why they simply call it faith. Again, this doesn’t make your faith wrong, necessarily, it just makes a practice founded on passion as opposed reason.

People who believe ghosts are the exact same way.

Many ghost believers are equally fanatical on the “we’re right you’re wrong” front, but their ideas have a similar level of rationality. And, technically, one would likely have a much easier time arguing the existence of supernatural beings than the existence of God – who is in principle a supernatural being as well, by the way. Poor logic is just one (of many) problem(s) I have with staunchly religious people. Ghosts are just the example I have chosen to focus on here.

Most of the lunatic religious (I’m looking at you Captain Catholic) are completely caught up in the idea that the Bible and their religion’s teachings are absolute. So much so that they throw anything even resembling reason out the window. Ghosts can’t exist because when people die their spirit (which in and of itself is absurd) automatically goes to heaven or hell. Or, possibly, purgatory; you know, if you are into that sort of thing. This is more rational than the idea that people remain on earth as disembodied beings? Really?

Oh wait, no it isn’t.

Technically, neither one makes sense. Technically dead things are dead. And, fine, if you believe in some other mystical force, just don’t try to claim your mystical force is better than some other mystical force – My God could so beat up your God!

I know “religious” people who literally laugh at the idea of supernatural beings. They neglect one tiny detail, however: Their entire belief system is based on a supernatural being. Your supernatural being is not more rational than any other super natural being. If you are going to believe in God, you are essentially obligated to at least acknowledge that ghosts may exist. You are not obligated to believe in them, but you are a raging hypocrite if you do not at least acknowledge their existence. Quit simply, you are an ass.

I’m not here to decide who is right and who is wrong. That is an unanswerable question, people believe what they believe and that’s just the way it has always been and will always be.

All I’m asking is for people who have one set of illogical beliefs, to accept the fact that another set of illogical beliefs is possible. It doesn’t matter what you believe, it matters how you react to what others believe. If you are so blinded by the fact that “I’m right and you’re wrong,” you are not a morally righteous person, no matter what your belief system tells you.

I’m not saying everyone should believe in ghosts. I’m not saying everybody should believe in God. All I’m saying is, if you believe in one, you are obligated to acknowledge the possibility of the other’s existence. Otherwise, you have no argumentative footing to stand on, you have no ability to be taken seriously, and you look like an ignorant fool.

If you don’t believe me, maybe you should hop in the shower. The nudity might help you think.

-Juice