Calm

Because you like her and want to feel you can trust her or you would prefer if there is violence, it is from the far right rather than the far left? Or something else?

It depends on what they are looking for. Some work is more group oriented and is better facilitated with a greater mix where other work is more individual dependent. PS: I believe some, but certainly not all nor a majority (opinion from the changes I have seen), Affirmative Action motivated behaviour was poorly thought out and screwed things up or at best maintained status quo on attitudes and longterm benefits, thus not justifying the resources invested. Those problems should be analyzed and improved in ways shown to work in related areas where possible, rather than getting rid of the effort completely.

That is just bizarre, lol. It’s back to the original form…just the two posts, but before when I hit the reply button it dumped the gun comment and instead put up a video that was the first time I had nothing to disagree with Kirk about and thought quite a few ideas were very, very useful.

Those are ugly no matter who it’s from (not claiming anyone here wouldn’t see it as ugly, just feel the need to express my revulsion right now). I am talking about the posts, haven’t watched the video and making no comment about that. Added: That is really weird, there is no indication of a edit, but I could have sworn there was a post about shooting anyone who was for gun control or something (I didn’t linger over it if it was there so retention is poor). The video I saw was Kirk’s advice on talking with a potential spouse before marriage, I thought his advice was excellent. I am wondering if that was the intended link.

Better qualified does not mean those hired aren’t fully qualified for the job. I find it highly unfortunate that so many assume that AA causes incompetent individuals to be hired, one of the important issues it’s supposed to help overcome (not saying you do, just felt the need to add this bit as some present it that way). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4554714/#:~:text=The studies identified gender bias,mitigate gender bias in hiring.

No, he hasn’t. His argument is solid. White women benefited the most from Affirmative Action as we were counted as a minority (and were back in college and higher paying jobs when I was going and still are among the top earners, I was one of four women in my year in Electrical Engineering in a class of well over 100, possibly over 200 iirc and hiring drives—it was the early 80s—for women were heavily slanted in my favour in the sense of if I was against a man of equal qualifications I would likely be picked in more companies than in the past, it’s not like bias against white women simply disappeared as it’s still there as demonstrated by the more negative judgments based on if someone is talking about a male or female in studies and women’s potentials are consistently judged as less than men’s). And the same complaints about women not being as good or smart as the men they “stole” the job from aren’t that rare unfortunately. And since you (Longview) don’t apparently don’t incorrectly assume benefitting from Affirmative Action as implying that white women are not as capable as the white men in their positions, maybe you could consider the same thing occurs for racial and ethnic women. It’s about expanding the pool of qualified candidates. https://educationdata.org/college-enrollment-statistics https://cla.umn.edu/news-events/story/affirmative-action-reversal-understanding-history-and-implications#:~:text=One of the untold stories,and People of Color counterparts.

Extrapolating from the several very public excommunications and resignations shortly before they got ‘purged’, that included calling a press conference to announce their fate that often amounted to condemning the Church for unrighteousness dominion or whatever, I really can’t imagine it would be all that good of a look for the Church. Would leaders break their tradition and start publicizing why people had their membership withdrawn? I can see a number of lawsuits happening if so and if not, if they kept it confidential, they can easily be set up as the big bad simply kicking someone out for dislike or leaders saw inactive as burdens, etc…unwelcome, not good enough.

It’s the in between parts…and the anticipation of awkwardness whether it happens or not. I am just too programmed to expect it. I will take graphic violence over awkwardness any day, lol. You know, it was good enough I might go read the plot on wiki….assuming it’s there. If there is enough details so I can avoid surprises, the anticipation factor could be dulled enough. Some of my family thinks I am insane wanting to know details of a show before it happens, but I love watching how ideas are developed and how actors and directors convey these ideas. I would prefer knowing the plot even for the most comfortable, predictable show ever. Just needs to be well made.

Daughter and I are watching the new Superman together (got halfway, got interrupted, will resume tomorrow). I might like it even better than the Christopher Reeve version because I generally like my camp lightly done, though the Reeve movie was a blast. This one is a great mix of fun with a touch of seriousness. Some really nice touches (Guy Gardner’s hair and Krypto for example). I think it’s the third time for my daughter.

I watched part of it. It was funny and very clever. Unfortunately also anxiety provoking, lol. So good chance I might not finish it. I have never been able to watch movies like Ocean’s 11 and other con/sting operations. Stuff always goes wrong before it goes right and waiting for that to happen is too nerve wracking (I can watch murder mysteries because the killing happens first and is then solved). I did watch The Sting when it first came out. Family went to see it. Never saw it again though. Great movie if looking for a Redford classic.

My next door neighbor (20+ years) has been my minister for the past three years…which I love. We are good friends. She just barely found out my daughter is queer. It was because we were talking politics due to Kirk’s murder, which I never do with church members or the vast majority of my friends because I want them to feel safe (my intensity when talking can come across as judgmental for some people I have learned). If the murder hadn’t happened, there is a good chance she would have never known though our kids grew up together and I consider her a good friend. And I talk about pretty much everything. If you think I overshare here, you should see me in person. There is no reason to assume ministers know everything important in someone’s life….especially the problematic stuff with church. We intentionally have not shared my daughter’s LGBT views because she likes her privacy, doesn’t want sympathy expressed, and did not want to be a project for family or friends or church members. My husband is extremely active, loads of friends in the Church, ministered by close friends, but he just doesn’t talk about personal troubles with most people. He has a hard enough time with me. If our ministers and bishops are missing massively significant information about our lives, given how we don’t feel any discomfort with our leaders and want to help them all we can, I find it hard to imagine that it’s that typical for leaders to know all the crucial things in a member’s life that might be problematic from the POV of the Church.

I understand, but it saddens me.

There are two that are used the most from what I have seen, the second is the brain power or lack thereof one.. I don’t know if the ellipsis leaves out anything. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/charlie-kirk-quotes-beliefs#:~:text=If we would have said,go be taken somewhat seriously.

ChatGPT states Catholics estimated numbers of members based off of sacraments, but it looks more like the estimates are for areas that can’t communicate easily with the Vatican. https://www.catholicsun.org/2018/06/07/big-book-of-numbers-vatican-volume-tracks-church-statistics/ ”The figures are the result of information requested annually from every diocese and church jurisdiction. Collecting and compiling the figures takes more than a year. The volume with statistics valid as of Dec. 31, 2016, was published this spring. Worldwide, there are more than 1.29 billion baptized Catholics, according to the volume, and that means the Catholic population is holding steady at about 17.7 percent of the global population. In addition, it estimated that another 4.9 million Catholics live in church jurisdictions with which the Vatican has no “regular exchange of information.” Most of those 146 dioceses, prelatures and prefectures are in mainland China. Thirty years earlier, the 1986 yearbook estimated there were as many as 15 million uncounted Catholics living in 214 jurisdictions that did not or could not report to the Vatican. The figure included Catholics in China and in most of what was then the Soviet Union.” https://www.usccb.org/news/2023/host-sacramental-statistics-vatican-tracks-practice-faith

I got the impression Tacenda is surprised because in the past it was often the conservatives being canceled and protesting “cancel culture” (quoted as a frequently used label, not scare quotes), but now she believes the conservatives are doing the same thing. If both the liberals and conservatives push for cancel culture when offended and corporations go along with both, that is how she sees democracy and free speech disappearing…no one is truly defending it. But she can correct me if I have misunderstood.

If this was actually from the shooter to the group, then it doesn’t sound like he thought the group would applaud him. https://abcnews.go.com/US/students-utah-valley-university-return-charlie-kirk/story?id=125663166 I can’t remember if someone has posted this already, the charging document… https://utahnewsdispatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/TJR-Information-1.pdf

Maybe you were speaking of criminal liability, I was focused on how such would impact the greater dialogue going on. I don’t see that ambiguous phrasing as increasing understanding, but contributing to confusion, which seems the me to also be leading to more conflict.

That is not the implication of what Duncan wrote (“worshipping Charlie and denigrating the "left"”). The shooter made that much, much worse, imo. (Not saying all responses from Kirk’s supporters fall into that category). Serious question… Is poking/lashing out at each other….is it making either of you (or anyone else doing it) feel any better overall and not just in the few moments after you write it and hit send… I will keep my mouth shut if it’s actually contributing to feelings of peace or at least a lessening of struggles, but not seeing improvement of people’s vibes who are striking out imo the last few days, though I get that it’s likely more to do with what’s happening elsewhere. It’s a pity imo this board won’t be seen as a refuge from the upheaval by some. I would like to see that for both Duncan and Ken and anyone else struggling right now.

At worst no response at all I would think…from either of them.

High probability on that one, imo. If he’s not, I hope the penalty for obstruction is on the maximum end to discourage such games in him in the future.

Except he didn’t know who the shooter was and why he did it. I agree he was supportive of the shooting itself, but agreeing he was defending the shooter would require me to know his current feelings. There is too much easily inferred that could be inaccurate in the ambiguous phrase “defending the shooter” and in this atmosphere I think we need to be very careful in describing or even just implying possible motivations. How about he was defending who he thought the shooter was?

Maybe because he is the President, someone who is supposed to represent the US and the others weren’t well known to the vast majority of people out there?

Is he an actual defender or just someone who craves attention given his past behavior?

I would say that is what is triggering the overall level of anger, but now they are angry simple disagreement can help maintain the anger. They are more likely to misinterpret civil comments as insults as well…but that’s human nature and is not restricted to this one group (those who are angry) in this broader discussion.

Since I posted in agreement with Tacenda…. I applaud him for that. People are complex, they can do bad and good things for bad and good reasons. I hope his words calling for civility even in disagreement and forgiveness are the ones that are remembered the longest and are the most influential rather than the ones that are concerning to me. I do hold him and others like him no matter what beliefs they hold to a higher standard since he is actively seeking publicity and has chosen to make a living by doing so, being an intentional influencer rather than just someone casually sharing ideas because they enjoy it.