Thank you.
Some people take life far too seriously.

This message has been deleted.

Good post! Made me smile! :))))
I also admire your patience to respond to these idiots that don't get a joke.

Nope, ridge, not unnecessary at all. I see exactly where the OP's coming from. There was a touch of eroticism there, but I wouldn't call it perversion.
When you think of garbage, think of Hakeem!
Folks, calm down! This is not the last chopper outta Saigon!

Well, your post certainly made me smirk. I can see your point. And what's with all the sourfaces in this thread?
"If you ain't Dutch, you ain't much"

Erm. No I don't.
Please re-read, but this time, maybe I don't know, read it properly, without the superiority complex, you "Movie Fan".
I'll grow up when you get off your high horse. For it's a long, long way down.

One of the most unnecessary OP's this movie fan has ever read on this site. You equate a bladder infection to reviving a dead mouse and curing a woman with incurable brain cancer. Grow up man!

Exactly.

Ok, so not so much a continuity problem, but most definitely a consistency problem

No, there's no continuity problem at all. In every instance but one (leaving aside Percy's infection with the tumor, which is directly opposed to Paul's healing so should be obvious) Coffey had direct access to those he healed or sought to heal - the girls, Mr. Jingles, Melinda, and so on. The method employed varied according to the situation.

No, I never said that he was a Pervert.
So, why didn't he just lay his hands on Hal's wife, it would have been far less intrusive and a lot less alarming.
I still think it's a torrid continuity error.

Not necessarily. Think of what it says in scripture about the laying on of hands. So No, John was no pervert.

No, I was the next best thing though, confused
I mean, a little continuity wouldn't go amiss would it?
He does heal via the mouth though doesn't he?

Are you drunk?