You said: "Why, as a conservative, I love Camille Paglia...She only speaks when she has something worth saying, and she is as unpretentious as the others are pretentious."

Torchlight, you're full of shit! She speaks whenever someone is stupid enough to pay her for her obnoxious bloviations and she is the epitome of pretentiousness. The reason that you like her (you being a conservative and all) is that despite her claims to being a democrat and a liberal, Paglia is as conservative as they get.

You think you've found a kindred spirit on the left who backs up your insane bullshit-- but what you've have really found is a rank fraud who has liberal pretentions.

'Proposition 8 made me quit the Mormon Church'

Jodi, there are about forty other good reasons to quit and they've all been around long before Prop 8 was even an issue. But hey, better late than never. I just hope you don't do what some other ex Mormons do and find another equally dogmatic and moronic set of beliefs to fill what some perceive as a 'void'. Congratulations and enjoy your freedom from religion!

Polygamy in no longer preached or practiced in the Mormon church but you are no doubt well aware that according to Mormon doctrine it will be practiced in what the Mormons refer to as the 'hereafter'.

You accuse several people of not being ‘balanced’ in their accusations but I think this is just the refuge of the typical amateur apologist. Either the Church excluded black people from the priesthood or it didn’t. Either Church doctrine believes in polygamy or it doesn’t. Your attempts to demand balance only underscore your personal cognitive dissonance in the face of facts.

By the way, telling people to go to Wikipedia to read about Mormonism is a bit disingenuous since the majority of the entries on Mormonism were written by Mormons.

You said: "Actually, while it is widely believed that widowers that marry again in the temple will be polygamists in the hereafter, it is not official doctrine."

Yes, it is!

You said: "Most people who don't like Mormons do so because they're misinformed, or they want to find a reason to dislike Mormons."

I will grant the first one to you. I have been reading comments on Mormonism for years on this site and many people are very misinformed. However, with that said, not many people just "want to find a reason to dislike Mormons": the Church provides those reasons in spades!

Do you really expect people on a liberal site like this to give the Mormon church a pass on the whole prop 8 thing? Most readers here find what the Church did reprehensible--me included.

You said: "Also, your church is not CHRISTIAN."

I disagree with this statement completely! Mormons are Christians. The formal name of their church is 'The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints' and everything in their doctrine and theology is based around Jesus Christ being the literal son of God and the savior of mankind.

Tell me how that is not Christian!

I’m not remotely interested in psychoanalyzing you Jeremy. Everyone has a degree of cognitive dissonance—including me.

But I know a lot more about you than you think. I spent thirty years as a Mormon. Taught gospel doctrine, served a full time mission, and most of all I use to defend the church tooth and nail against detractors— all the time thinking that they were uninformed, unfare and that I had the truth.

I never once tried to divine your motivations. Me saying that you have cognitive dissonance had nothing to do with "divining your motivations."

You said:"I'm sick of the innuendo that people use to paint an unfair picture of the church."

Well, I think Mormons in general paint a pretty unfair and unrealistic picture of their own church and beliefs as well- so I'm afraid it works both ways!

And I don't believe that you have a "balanced" view of the church either. Before you excoriate everyone for biases--examine your own!

I’ve read both of Gladwell’s previous books and got a lot out of them. They’re rich in storytelling and anecdote and whether you agree with him or not on any given conclusion you still end up with a lot to chew on. I’m sure that this book will be the same and I look forward to reading it as soon as my copy arrives.

But with that said I also have to say that I’m pretty suspicious of anyone siding too heavily one way or another in the nature vs. nurture fight. We seem to be a very complex and convoluted amalgamation of both and I doubt that we will ever be able to draw a line in the sand saying we are this much nurture and that much nature.

From Bayard’s review he seems to be saying that Gladwell is pushing the nurture angle. No doubt, Gladwell will make his case persuasively and with great example to back him up. I just hope that people won’t buy it as gospel and suspend their critical faculties to the point where it blinds them to the other side of the argument.