]]>
Two signs on the doors leading from the visitors' clubhouse at U.S. Cellular Field to the first-base dugout read, "NO BOTTLED WATER ON THE BENCH."
What's this? Athletes can't drink water? Even in the humid Chicago summers?
Here's the explanation I got:
Gatorade is Major League Baseball's "official sports drink." So instructions were sent that no player could be seen drinking anything but Gatorade in the dugout. Not even Aquafina, which is the "official water" of MLB. Not even bottles of water with the labels removed.
White Sox clubhouse personnel said if players take bottled water onto the bench, all the bottled water will be removed from the clubhouse as punishment.
]]>]]>
'American Idol' Executive Producer's Secret Flop: 'The Apple'
]]>
]]>
TD unmasks himself as what Kingsley Amis called, in reference to himself, "an unwilling unbeliever." I'm kind of the same way myself, but it's not a happy thing to be. The atheists scoff at you for being wishy-washy: "For goodness sake just come right out and say it, man—Religion's all nonsense! Go on, say it—You'll feel much better!" On the other hand, religious types see you as a potential recruit, and nag you endlessly: "Since you're not a sticks-and-stones materialist atheist, since you admit that there's something else going on, surely you must agree that..."
It's just not a good position from which to say anything about religion. People like TD and myself understand that the universe is a deeply mysterious place, and the human personality likewise.
On the other hand, we "unwilling unbelievers" are not willing to confess belief in the kinds of historical events claimed as real by all the big religions. Those events seem to us just too highly improbable; and in any case, you have to pick which set to believe in. The Christian account of the Son of God, the Muslim account of the Messenger of God, and the Hindu account of the seven (I think it is) Incarnations of God are mutually exclusive for devotional purposes. The most parsimonious explanation, it seems to us, is that all of them were just made up. Further, the mysteries of faith just don't seem very interesting to us by comparison with real mysteries. They have a contrived quality, and are not very imaginative.
(C)onservatives like TD and myself are inclined to defer to human nature in its generality, and there is no doubt that human beings are innately, instinctively religious. The Dennett-Dawkins-Hitchens program to sweep away all those musty old cobwebs of faith and deliver humanity into the pure clear light of reason just bears far too close a resemblance to every other millenarian project, from Spartacus's City of the Sun to New Soviet Man. No thanks. Human nature has its unappealing side, but grand projects to overhaul it invariably end with a mountain of corpses. We'll take humanity as it is, religion and all. This attitude is, it seems to me, the essence of a conservative outlook.
Obviously, not everyone here would cop to having a conservative outlook, and I'll bet we all fall along different lines religiously, but I certainly agree with him that the Hitchens/Dawkins nexus is as annoyingly proselytizing as any fantatical religous crusader.
Discuss. Or don't. Or discuss this: Kummu joked that the police had decided not to arrest the goat which looked the most guilty.
]]>My favorite chapter headline is "Lineman gets involved." heh.
]]>
Anyway, let's see if this is allowed or disallowed:
(HT: The Volokh Conspiracy)
]]>
MTV