Potomac Confidential

Washington's Hour of Talk Power

Potomac Confidential fills the midday lull with discussion by Metro columnist Marc Fisher of the latest news and a rigorous slicing and dicing of the issues that define who we are and where we live.

Fisher was online Thursday, June 28, at Noon ET to look at Virginia's new sky-high traffic "abuser fees," the Washington Nationals' plan to stage a Faith Night and what's next in the $54 million pants suit.

Today's Column: Peanuts, Cracker Jack and Jesus Make an Unsavory Mix at Ballparks ( Post, June 28)

Check out Marc's blog, Raw Fisher.

In his weekly show, Fisher veers wildly from serious probing to silly prattle, and is open to topics local, national, personal and more.

Archives: Discussion Transcripts

A transcript follows.

____________________

Marc Fisher: Welcome aboard, folks--lots of reaction to today's column, and of course to the verdict in the pants suit, and to Virginia's exorbitant new traffic "abuser fees," and a bunch of other topics on your minds, so we'll get right to it after calling the Yay and Nay of the Day:

Yay to Potomac developer Aris Mardirossian, for the world-class gall he's displaying in his effort to win the right to rip out a slew of trees along the Potomac River side of his property. The developer's stated reason for wanting to be rid of the trees: They bear nuts that his young children are allergic to. This is so wildly, patently ridiculous that you have to just give the guy a standing O for gall and for a fabulously huge reach. Stand by to see what happens at the county planning board tonight.

Nay to Maryland elections administrator Linda Lamone, who, as the Post's Lisa Rein reports today, has decided that it's perfectly ok for her to be a celebrity endorser of elections equipment made by the company that provides Maryland's voting machine, Diebold. This, you'll recall, is the same Diebold that managed to muck up voting last year with repeated crashes of the system, and the same Linda Lamone who acquired and defended the problematic system. The law is pretty clear: State officials "may not intentionally use the prestige of office or public position for that official's or employee's private gain or that of another." Lamone isn't being paid for her endorsement, but obviously Diebold is hoping to gain sales from her nice words.

Your turn starts right now....

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: Link for Fisher's column today Peanuts, Cracker Jack and Jesus Make an Unsavory Mix at Ballparks (Post, June 28)

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Marc,

If the Nats really don't get why "Faith" Night might be offensive to non-Christians, they desperately need a clue. And the spokesman is even more clueless, the idea doesn't become less offensive just because they are willing to also host nights for other religions. Imagine if they hosted a "White" Night, but then said that they are willing to host nights aimed at other races. That would not be tolerated, and I don't know why "Faith" Night would be either.

Marc Fisher: Lots of reaction to today's column, from all directions, and I'll start the hour with that before we move on to other topics....

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: Elections Chief Stars In Diebold Promotion (Post, June 28)

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: Tree-Cutting Proposal Near C& O Canal Spurs Debate (Post, June 28)

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: I read your column today, and I can't find the problem with "Faith Day" (aside from the name, which fails to convey that the activities are Christian-based, rather than involving multiple faiths). It doesn't sound like the game experience will be altered in any way -- it sounds like everything takes place after the game, and you have to pay extra to go to the activities.

It's not as if they're going to be playing sermons on the videoboard to a captive audience; they're going to be offering a for-pay service for those who choose to accept the offer of the service. If you choose not to accept the offer, then it's just like going to a regular Nats game. What's the issue here?

Marc Fisher: For starters, the name is exclusionary -- does Faith Night mean that those who don't share this particular brand of faith are not, as the trendy moniker has it, "people of faith?"

Then there's the question of how fans and kids will take to being at a game where a good chunk of the crowd is really there for an evangelical concert and rally. Does that change the nature of the fan experience? By their own account, many of the people who would choose to go to Faith Night aren't baseball fans and will really be there to hear their favorite Christian band. What does that do to the experience that the other fans paid for?

_______________________

Faith Night: Marc: Your column sparked dim memories of "Interfaith Nights" at Orioles game. I found a tidbit on the Maryland Knight of Columbus site:

"The Baltimore Chapter entered into an agreement with the Shrine of the Masonic Order and the B'nai B'rith to sponsor a huge night at the Baltimore Stadium on July 9, 1946, to witness a baseball game between the Baltimore Orioles and the Jersey City Little Giants. Thus started the famous 'Interfaith Night' which was proof that Catholics, Protestants and Jews cannot only work together and fight together, but can play together. The Chapter realized over $50,000.00 from these games and all was spent on charity. The last night was held in 1960."

What a concept, bringing together various religions for a good cause, as compared to a thinly disguised recruitment event.

Marc Fisher: Lovely -- that sounds like something almost everyone could embrace.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: I object to the event being called "Faith Night," since that implies it's a lot more inclusive than it really is. It would more accurately be termed "Evangelical Christian Night," but that would probably offend more people (and rightly so).

Marc Fisher: At least it would be straightforward.

_______________________

Re: Faith Night: I regard the title as misleading since it focuses exclusively on one faith. If the Nationals and other teams are going to host this type of event, they should welcome all faiths. I agree completely that targeting one faith only is inappropriate and potentially offensive.

What is the nature of Major League Baseball's relationship to Baseball Chapel and Third Coast Sports? Why is the league so eager to partner with evangelical Christian groups? Do some league officials have an agenda to push Christian beliefs?

Also, good job on including the "Bull Durham" line. I thought of the line as soon as I read your column's headline.

Marc Fisher: As best I can tell, Baseball Chapel is in major league clubhouses at the request of players and their union. That of course doesn't oblige baseball to permit the chaplains to use the clubhouse as a venue for prayer groups and study sessions, but from what baseball officials tell me, that's a fight they just don't see much purpose in having.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: With a long history of Jewish players, it's perplexing to me why "Faith Night" is just geared to Christians. I'm not Jewish myself, but am well acquainted with many, many rabid Jewish baseball fans. I can think of nothing that would make them more uncomfortable that "Faith Night." Actually, it makes me pretty uncomfortable as a Catholic, as this night has definitely a more, for lack of a better word, Evangelical bent to it.

Marc Fisher: There haven't been many Jewish players, but there are several teams that are owned by Jews, who you'd think would be sensitive to the pain that these events can cause. And judging by the reader response today, there are a good many Christians who are offended by the notion of Faith Night as well, especially since it is sponsored exclusively by an overtly evangelical group representing one strand of Christianity.

_______________________

Falls Church, Va.: I honestly don't get it, Marc. As a non-Hispanic, I'm not supposed to feel excluded by Hispanic Heritage night at the ballpark (and I don't). But change Hispanic to Christian and suddenly it IS exclusionary? Why? Why should the Rabbi you quoted, who I assume is not Hispanic, feel any more excluded on the one night than the other? Why is Mariachi music okay, but Christian rock has to be banned?

Marc Fisher: There's an essential difference between celebrating some culture and making a particular denomination the focus of a day of the ballpark. All sports franchises try to boost attendance by reaching out to sundry groups with Hispanic Heritage Nights, Firefighters Nights, Little League Nights and so on. Presumably, nobody feels excluded or demeaned when such groups are invited and there's a little ceremony and their music is played on the PA system. And there's no great opposition when that approach is used with religious groups -- Catholic service organizations are celebrated, there's even a Jewish fans recognition night at some places. The difference here is that Faith Night is an overtly evangelical event -- it seeks to win people over to one flavor of religion, it offers a separate and different experience at the park from what the rest of the crowd will have that day, and its clear message is that people of other faiths are not intended to get the full program of events occurring at the stadium that day.

_______________________

Anonymous: I am waiting for Islam Night at a Nats game. Imagine the protests! Imagine Fox News and Rush Limbaugh shouting indignities. Why the Nats would have a Faith Night I don't understand. They do not have a prayer when it comes to ending up with a winning season.

Marc Fisher: So maybe they need to turn every night into Faith Night, because really, why would those of no faith even show up at RFK?

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: I'm not sure what the fuss is about Faith Night, and I'm the last person to defend Christians.

One, it's a 50,000 seat stadium and the people there with the faith thing will probably all be together.

Second, baseball teams have all kinds of nights, including Gay Night, with these same Washington Nationals, on July 16, with the anthem sung by the gay men's chorus. You could make the SAME arguments about others being uncomfortable at that game as you could with the faith game.

Try doing some research.

Marc Fisher: Research? What does that have to do with whether one finds Faith Night a proper event or not?

Gay Night is an interesting contrast. It's obviously far more controversial than any of the other examples we've been playing with. But again, it, like Hispanic Heritage Night, Police Benevolent Association Night or Country Music Night, is intended entirely as a way to boost attendance and give a group a token celebration that ought not offend anyone else because it doesn't exclude anyone else. In the case of Faith Night, unlike Gay Night, there is an overt attempt to win people over by handing out Bibles and biblical bobblehead dolls, and there is a separate, outside group that comes in and sets up booths and stands for vendors pushing a particular religious message.

_______________________

Section 422: I'm a practicing, church-going Baptist, and a Nats ticketplan holder.

I find the concept of faith night ludicrous. What appallingly bad judgment! Really folks, it's baseball. You already over-push the whole "traditional values" thing with the ever expanding displays of sham patriotism. (What does the national anthem have to do with baseball anyhow? And while I know we'll never get rid of that, we need to nip this singing of "God Bless America" thing in the bud. And the bit about rising and taking off your hat for "God Bless America" is truly preposterous.)

I know, there is no separation of church and baseball in the constitution, but perhaps we need to amend it.

Marc Fisher: With baseball already granted special status in antitrust law, perhaps it is indeed time to enshrine the national pastime in the Constitution. But wouldn't that contradict the amendment barring establishment of a national religion?

_______________________

Fairfax, Va.:"But as teams across the nation have discovered, religion sells seats, and so the Nationals are diving back into the faith game."

That's the summary right there. It's all just about $.

Marc Fisher: Sure, but does that excuse it?

_______________________

G'burg, Md.: Marc,

Let me make sure I fully understand: The Nats have a Christian chaplain available to their players. A player asked this Christian chaplain a question about the eternal destiny of Jews. The Christian chaplain answered the player according to his knowledge of the Bible, which states Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life and no one "gets to the Father" (i.e. God) "except through Me." (i.e. Jesus) (John 14:6). Then the Nats suspended this chaplain for stating what he knows to be true according to his faith? Why have him on staff if he cannot counsel the players according to the Bible? If they had a Rabbi on staff and he/she told a player they needed to repent for eating pork or washing it down with a glass of milk, would the Rabbi have been suspended?

Marc Fisher: All the more reason for baseball to decide that those players who desire a religious service before games should do so back at their hotels, on their own time, on their own dime. The ballpark is a workplace, and I've never seen a workplace that decided to have denominational chaplains hanging around for employees to study with during their work day.

We'll come back to this later in the hour, but for now, some other topics....

_______________________

Dupont Circle, D.C.: Marc, maybe you're sick of the pants suit, but one thing still hasn't been made clear to me: did Pearson actually (realistically) expect the Chungs to be able to pay for him? Obviously his grasp of reason is low, but I'm sure all he needed to do was figure out that the average dry cleaners wouldn't bring in a $54 million in a lifetime, let alone however long the Chungs ran the business. Since he couldn't believe that they would have that kind of money, how could you NOT argue that this is some sort of "revenge" case, designed to squeeze every last dime out of the Chungs? If he had no intention of ever paying his previous court fees, why would he expect the Chungs to do the same for him? Makes no sense to me, no matter how you spin it (uh, never mind the whole case in general).

Marc Fisher: Pearson did say a few times during the trial that he was aware that the Chungs were not likely to be able to pay him the full $54 million that he wanted. He proposed a ludicrous plan in which he would get a few million for himself and would put the rest of his winnings in some kind of fund to support D.C. residents who wanted to sue and wipe out some of their friendly neighborhood merchants. So the whole thing was some overwrought fantasy that he'd built up during the 1,400 hours he said he'd put into preparing his case.

_______________________

Chantilly, Va.: Marc: Would you happen to know how long the Pants Man (I refuse to write the cretin's name) has to appeal his resounding defeat?

And why is the board that picks judges refusing to decide on this clown's future?

Marc Fisher: I believe Pearson has 30 days in which to file notice of his intent to appeal, which he, like the great majority of losers in civil suits, will do.

The board deciding on his reappointment to the bench has punted at the request of Mayor Fenty, who just this week nominated a new member for that board. Now the board will await Judge Bartnoff's ruling on the attorney's fees part of the pants suit, because that could give the board the foundation it needs to declare Pearson unsuited for work as a judge.

_______________________

Bloomingdale, D.C.: Pearson gets a big zero. Washington gets hauled in front of a grand jury. It's been a gratifying week for those of us entertained by D.C.'s formidable stash of legal absurdities. But you know, I have to admit to a growing (albeit voyeuristic) comfort with the Paris Hilton silliness that this is tending.... At least in that case, the news was sheer entertainment -- Hilton, despite being annoying, doesn't appear to have hurt anyone. DC's homegrown absurdities seem unusually spiteful. Is it just me, or is there something about this city that encourages people to, when they finally start to go wacko, try to do as much damage to others in the process as possible?

Marc Fisher: I don't think it's limited to Washington in any way. There are places in the country that seem to produce more than their share of wacky news about extreme behavior -- Miami, L.A. and all of Florida spring to mind -- but excesses in Washington tend to be more of the bureaucratic sort than the extreme exhibitionist kind.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Two comments on your most recent blogs:

On liberal media bias: while donating to political causes/campaigns may cause the appearance of impropriety, isn't that all it is? Reporters, especially political reporters, certainly have political beliefs and, like it or not, sometimes those beliefs seep into stories. Why should we care about political donations as a measure of reporters' bias (besides the fact that donations are easier to track and measure than what's actually in news stories)?

On abuser fees: several people suggested in the comments to your entry that fines for traffic violation should be assessed in proportion to the person's income because a $1000 fine hurts (and in effects punishes more) an unemployed person than a teacher than a doctor. Setting aside the logistics of such an approach, do you think that it would be a better system?

Marc Fisher: Sure, the problem with reporters giving to political causes and candidates is a matter of perception, but perception is vitally important in a business where the only coin is credibility. Yes, everybody has political views, including journalists. But the idea here is that journalists ought to make every effort to be fair and by aligning ourselves with a particular party or candidate, we undermine our ability to present ourselves as open to all views. Obviously, more journalists are liberals than are conservatives, though the skew is not nearly as strong as it is in the public mythology. And there are similar patterns in most professions -- different kinds of people gravitate toward different lines of work, and the attitudes that shape our political views also shape our decisions about our life's work. But that's very different from thumbing your nose at readers and aligning yourself with a candidate or cause.

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: Media Bias: When Reporters Don't Get Neutrality (Raw Fisher, June 28)

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: Personally, I think the idea that reporters shouldn't contribute to or support political campaigns is just stupid. Yes, I would like my news as unbiased as possible. No, I don't believe that prohibiting journalists from contributing to the candidates/causes of their choice in any way enhances this goal. They still hold the same beliefs, whether they publicly express them or not. They either are or aren't capable of separating these beliefs from their reporting, again whether they publicly express the beliefs or not.

I would actually argue that it's counterproductive to the stated goal of neutrality and avoidance of bias. Reporters and columnists include in stories disclosure of other things that could affect their impartiality (personal or financial relationship to a party in the story, for example). This is supposedly in the effort to maintain balance and prevent bias. How is disclosure of political beliefs any different?

Marc Fisher: I certainly agree that journalists who do contribute to candidates or causes ought to disclose that when writing on related topics. But I don't buy the idea that reporters should engage politically and then pretend to do their work in a fair and neutral manner. There are lines of work that require people to remove themselves from the fray so that they can take a step back and present a more neutral and probing perspective. Clergy must do this, physicians have to do it in some ways. Many government workers are required to refrain from partisan political activity.

And reporters should embrace this restriction as a minimum form of discipline necessary to then be able to go out and tell sources that we have the ability to present their viewpoints fairly.

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: Media Bias: When Reporters Don't Get Neutrality (Raw Fisher, June 28)

Marc Fisher: Here's that blog item.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: Last Tuesday, the Alexandria School Board again voted 5-4 in effect not to renew Superintendent Perry's contract and instead to proceed with the search for a new superintendent. The community, however, remains deeply divided over the issue, with much strident language and the threat of recall efforts being bandied about. Any thoughts on how the community can move forward instead of wallowing in the dispute?

Marc Fisher: Tough question. Alexandria parents and the wider community are obviously deeply split. Unfortunately, Rebecca Perry apparently chose to fight her loss of her job by supporting and encouraging efforts to fight the school board's decision. That only encouraged a deeper split in the community. I have received tons of mail from people who believe that they voted out the old school board members largely to get rid of Perry, but I've also heard from lots of folks who believe nothing of the sort. The only way forward is to come together around a strong new superintendent who is committed to staying in town for an extended period and who shares what the community does indeed have in common, which is a commitment to high standards and to narrowing the achievement gap between black and white students.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: While I hope Ms. Perry is, or will soon be, gone for good, Mr. Reinoso's alleged plagiarism bothers me as well. Is this really someone who should hold a high position in attempting to rescue DC schools?

Marc Fisher: Reinoso got a real going-over by the D.C. Council yesterday. It's hard to imagine that he'd actually be rejected -- the council very rarely turns down a mayoral nominee, but Reinoso certainly acquitted himself poorly by refusing to answer questions about whether he wrote the plagiarized report. I don't care what legal advice he got -- not coming clean on that ugly chapter is wrong, wrong, wrong.

_______________________

Librarians: I'm a librarian in the private sector, and found your blog posting interesting. At first I thought, hey, libraries and librarians and NOT obsolete. But then I realized that even I don't go to the public library. It's not even on my radar screen anymore.

Where I work we constantly have to market library services to our in-house patrons. We're more than just a warehouse for books --we have specialized databases, we hold training events, we do research -- and we continuously let everyone know what's available. Maybe if the public library could do better marketing and outreach, we'd go there more often. Of course, in the private sector we have the funds to do so.

washingtonpost.com: Random Friday Question: Do We Need Libraries Anymore? (Raw Fisher, June 22)

Marc Fisher: Very interesting -- there's no question that the public perception of what libraries are for has become murky at best. I see it in conversations with librarians at the elementary, high school and college levels -- they all have a tough time getting through to students about what libraries can offer in an age when we have the illusion -- and it is an utter mirage -- that everything is online. Tough sell, but a very important one.

_______________________

Traffic Fines: I believe Finland does have a sliding scale for fines that is tied to your income. A Nokia executive made headlines there a few years ago for getting a $200,000 (or thereabouts) speeding ticket.

Marc Fisher: Now that's a disincentive.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: Sure, I don't live in Virginia, but I drive there quite often. What's the big boohoo about the higher fees? Drive nicer/safer, avoid the fines. Can't complain about traffic/bad roads if you're not willing to pay somewhere. This gives everyone who drives in Virginia an equal opportunity to pay vs. taxing the residents only. Same thing with the fees of Dulles toll road. All these fees pale in comparison to what's charged in other states, esp. Calif.

Marc Fisher: I generally love the idea of massive fines as a weapon of social engineering, especially in life or death matters such as drunk driving. But that's only a backdoor outcome of this new law in Virginia -- the real purpose of these fees is to raise money for transportation improvements. And that's where the whole thing strikes me as dishonest.

If there's a consensus that the roads and rails need improvement, then levy a tax and let everyone share the cost. Don't try to pay for it on the backs of the jerks who drive like maniacs and endanger all of us. Those people deserve disincentives and punishments, but it's just not aboveboard to saddle them with the cost of building our roads simply because our pols aren't willing to take heat from taxpayers who want a free lunch.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: The problem with faith night has nothing to do with the Nats, and almost everything to do with the liberals who hate organized religion. The passion from the left against anything to do with religion is what is exclusionary. As mentioned the Nats are owned by a Jewish family. Anyone who is crazy enough to think that the owner are trying to push Christian beliefs on its fans is crazy.

Marc Fisher: I haven't heard anyone argue that the Lerner family seeks to push Christian views on their fans. Rather, the argument is that they are too willing to risk offending or excluding some fans in order to get the one-night fix of a much larger than average crowd.

_______________________

"Faith" Night: I wonder how the owners of RFK (City of D.C.) feels about the Nats holding a Christian rally at their stadium? I guess more people=more ticket tax revenue=more concessions revenue(not beer of course)=no problem. Is this the equivalent of putting a manger on the grounds of city hall?

Marc Fisher: No, because the city is not sponsoring the Christian event; it is merely renting its space -- the first-base line at RFK -- to an outside group. So it's an access to public facilities question, and there's no doubt that religious groups have that right of access.

_______________________

Marksburg, South Marcolina: Mark, I'm with you on the Nats-Faith thing in spirit. I'm a crazy anti-evangelical atheist, myself ... and gay. But upon reflection and reading your responses to the what about Hispanic night? gay night? questions, there doesn't seem to be much defense. I don't want them to have Faith night. But I do want them to have Hispanic night, gay night, whatever else. In my view, that means Faith Night has to be okay, too.

Marc Fisher: Okay, but I think there is a distinction based on the content and purpose of the program.

_______________________

Anonymous: "Then there's the question of how fans and kids will take to being at a game where a good chunk of the crowd is really there for an evangelical concert and rally."

Wow, Marc this is so over the top and absurd I don't really know what to say. I admire your columns but this is just absurd -- why are you so scared of people with religious faith? Do you really believe that they are going to be running around trying to save and convert people? I'm pretty sure there a lot of people of faith at every ball game and you don't freak out.

Marc Fisher: Right, and they're every bit as welcome as anyone else, obviously. The difference here is that the Faith Night event is designed to bring non-fans to the game (which of itself is also a good thing) for the purpose of enjoying a few hours of strictly separate evangelical entertainment and testimonials, and here's where it gets tricky. It's a question of purpose and content, as I spelled out earlier in the hour.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Marc said "...perhaps it is indeed time to enshrine the national pastime in the Constitution...."

Don't you mean FORMER national pastime. Football is the national pastime now. Yesterday's news. In the near future, probably won't be much news at all.

Marc Fisher: Football has replaced baseball as the nation's most popular sport, no question. But national pastime has a different connotation; it's more about a particular set of traditions and cultural connections, and baseball still plays a dominant role in communicating values and mores that are quintessentially American.

_______________________

Newport News: I can see your point about maintaining the appearance of neutrality of reporters who write about news and politics relating to the candidates they're donating to. But when a reporter's beat doesn't overlap with the candidate's, what's the problem? The Moscow bureau chief should be able to give money to a hometown mayoral candidate. The movie critic should be able to give to politicians, as should the science writer. Why should reporters have to maintain an appearance of neutrality when it comes to issues that don't touch on their professional career at all?

Marc Fisher: Good question, but the question overlooks the basic nature of news organizations. Reporters rarely stick with one beat for an entire career. Far more commonly, that Moscow bureau chief will cover the mayor's office again some time, and that film critic probably once covered City Hall and may become the Foreign Editor. The point is that a writer's beat of the moment is not what defines him as a reporter; rather, it's the craft writ large that's at stake when journalists fail to exercise care about their public leanings.

_______________________

Pearson's job: Marc, I'm torn. Part of me wants Pearson never to have control over another's legal fate, so I want him fired. But part of me wants him to stay on as an ALJ in order to have a steady income, so he can be forced to pay the Chungs' legal fees. Is there a third way out?

Marc Fisher: 'Fraid not. The lawyers for the Chungs took a deep breath and acknowledged the reality that their clients are unlikely to see a penny from Pearson even if they do win attorney's fees in the next phase of the case. Because in all likelihood, Pearson will lose his job as a judge, become unemployed again, and fail to pay whatever Judge Bartnoff might order him to pay to the Chungs.

_______________________

G'burg, Md.: I think it boils down to on Faith Night, the sponsor is hoping to convert people to Christianity, while Hispanic, gay, etc., nights are celebrating what people already are. As a Christian, I support Faith Night, but I understand the conflict people feel over it.

Marc Fisher: Nice way of putting it.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Marc, doesn't the Religion section of every Saturday's Post run the same risk of offending or excluding some people? The articles concern specific religions, and a reader typically can't avoid seeing it when handling the Metro section.

Marc Fisher: Isn't there an important difference between presenting news of various faiths and, say, devoting a page of the paper to proselytizing on behalf of a single faith?

_______________________

Why are you so scared of people with religious faith?: I am not, but I don't want them ruining my ball game I paid for. And yes, it would ruin my experience to have a holier-than-thou telling me how I should run my life when I'm trying to enjoy a game.

Marc Fisher: There are appropriate venues for different activities in life.

_______________________

Anonymous:"I don't want them to have Faith night. But I do want them to have Hispanic night, gay night, whatever else. In my view, that means Faith Night has to be OK, too."

At last, a voice of reason.

Marc Fisher: Different strokes....

_______________________

C&O Canal, Md.: If the Mardirossian children are truly allergic to nuts, then they need to be separated from their father as soon as possible.

Marc Fisher: Ha! Excellent.

_______________________

Anonymous: Unless he violated copyright laws, and most government documents are not copyrighted, what Reinoso did, if in fact he did it, was not illegal. There is zero likelihood that he will be prosecuted for having done this, if in fact he did. So his lawyer's telling him not to comment makes me wonder if there is more to this story than we have been told.

Marc Fisher: Interesting. I too was puzzled that a lawyer was even involved in that issue.

_______________________

Chungs' defense fund: Any word on how much they've raised?

Marc Fisher: About $35,000 at last report, though it's likely higher now.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Do the People of Faith on Faith Night know they will be sitting in the same seats and ballpark that gays and lesbians sat in on Gay Night?

Just Asking.

Marc Fisher: Maybe they could share season tickets.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Why do reputable journalists insist on legitimatizing the illegitimate by calling the illegitimate what it wants to be called instead of what it is? What you wrote about is a Christian Faith Night. Is there some rule preventing you from calling it that? Would you call me the President of the United States of America in a column if I identified myself to you as such?

Marc Fisher: Yes, I would, and of course I would add the fact that you are indeed not the president. I would be dishonest if I suppressed the fact that you go around pretending to be the president, but I'd want readers to know that fact so they might understand that you are a nut bar. Same with Faith Night: As several folks have pointed out over this hour, it ought to be called something else, and we hashed that out while also writing that the organizers call it Faith Night -- there's something revealing in their choice of words, so why not let readers know about it?

_______________________

Springfield, Va.: The problem I have with the traffic fees is that they are "civil" fees. Why not jack up the criminal fines instead? It's rather repugnant that these have been instituted in such a way that the justice system has no way to mitigate penalties short of letting someone off entirely.

Marc Fisher: That would make a lot more sense.

_______________________

Group rates: Sigh. Why can't we just go back to offering group rates and a note on the scoreboard. Your church wants to bus 80 people up and sit together, we give you a discount and do a "special warm welcome" between innings.

Marc Fisher: Now we're getting all reasonable in our final seconds together....

_______________________

The money: Sure it's all about the money for baseball, but it's clearly all about conversion for the evangelical groups. (One could argue that conversion is also all about money, but we'll leave that aside for the time being.) It's the seeking of converts that I think is the problem.

Marc Fisher: Yes, that's the issue....

_______________________

Silver Spring: As an atheist, this raises my hackles because religion is not like an occupation (Realtors night). Christianity (Faith Night) believes and teaches they are right and everyone else is wrong. The Nationals say they would hold nights for other faiths. Let's test this out. Ask them if they would really sponsor a Muslims Night or an Atheists Night. How about a Republicans Night or Democrats Night? These would substantially reduce attendance and I'm almost certain the Nationals would squirm their way out of hosting these Nights.

I go to baseball games as a respite from contentious issues of religion and politics. I am strongly opposed to mixing religion and politics with sporting events.

Marc Fisher: Then they could have Bloomberg Party Night too. Just think of the attendance.

_______________________

Faith night (what else?): The person who compared Faith Night to White Night is close, but actually I think the analogy would be if you held a night for white people but called it, like, "Chosen People Night" or "Night for the Superior." "Faith Night," to me, says, you're an evangelical Christian or you're a nobody.

Marc Fisher: Something like that.

_______________________

Nats Fan: Marc, I'd like to take this opportunity to tell all Nats fans how to run their lives: buy season tix for the new ballpark! Thank you, that is all.

Marc Fisher: Thanks, Mr. Lerner!

_______________________

Falls Church, Va.: So, if Christian rock should not be played at the ballpark, I assume you also object to Christian music being played on NPR?

By that I mean, of course, all of the Masses, Missas, cantatas, chants, etc. that one hears on the classical station, as well as other overtly religious works such as Handel's Messiah and Beethoven's Ninth Symphony.

Marc Fisher: I would go to Beethoven Night at the ballpark. Every time.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: I simply wonder what God would really say to these people who use his name to make profit. And no matter what anyone says it is, why then are there so many books, etc.

Now, if it were to raise money for the homeless or support orphan children etc, which in my opinion would make God happy.

But, this is nothing but a business deal.

Thank you.

Marc Fisher: It's a business deal for the Nats, but something much more for the Faith Night organizers.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: I think some of the folks who show up on Faith Night are going to be in for a bit of a shock. While it's not like hanging out at a fraternity party, there's a lot of drinking and cursing going on at games. Actually, if a large number of Evangelicals show up, won't beer sales go down?

Marc Fisher: Good point.

_______________________

Marc Fisher: Thanks for coming along, folks. Stay cool out there.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.