Leaderboard

My two sons both went through the temple for their endowments on the same day. I'm so very proud of both of them. For the prayer circle, my wife stood with my eldest (Ffenix) and my mother-in-law stood with the younger (The Bear). Meanwhile, my FIL and I sat in the seats as the only attendees without partners. The two ladies later remarked how fulfilled they felt, standing with their son and grandson respectively. They felt so proud of them. I think I even saw a tear from each of their eyes. When it came time to go through, the two young men were scheduled to be last. That meant that parents and grandparents were waiting in the Celestial Room for them. As they came in one-at-a-time, I reached out to each and whispered in his ear, "Welcome to the Celestial Kingdom." The older son is known for being rather emotionless. But the embrace he gave me at that moment was like nothing I've ever received from him. And for just that short time, I really felt like I was in the Celestial Kingdom. Afterward, I took advantage of being in the Celestial Room to speak a bit more openly about some lessons I'd learned in the temple. I also said more things that I cannot write, but felt inspired by the Spirit to teach them at that time. It was rather disappointing when the temple matron informed us that we had to leave to allow the next session to have the Celestial Room to themselves. I really want the temples open NOW!

I don’t know that I’d call it a “public health” issue. If we have a population of 100 blacks and 900 whites, and 200 vaccines to go around—from a statistical/epidemiological standpoint, I don’t know that it matters *which* 200 people get the vaccine. Any way you slice it, you’re going to wind up with 20% immunity. Now, I’d agree that it’s certainly an equitable issue if a disproportionate share of vaccines is consumed by folks of any race. But I would worry about a CDC that is so obsessive about reserving at least 10% of vaccine doses for the right group that significant quantities of the vaccine wind up going unused; or about a CDC-imposed regimen that says “yes, you are at this clinic and you are ill and the clinic has the cure sitting on the shelf, but they cannot give it to you because of the color of your skin”; or about a CDC that destroys whatever’s left of the market-based health care system that we have in favor of a command-style system that is less effective for most Americans than what preceded it. I’d like to see the CDC (and everyone, really) focus on genuinely improving the parts of the system that need it without wrecking the parts that are working well; rather than papering over the issues by trying to redistribute the suffering more “equitably”. But the latter approach tends to be much easier than the former, and my suspicion is that the CDC, and government in general, will tend to move primarily in that direction.

Hey guys, it's MormonGator. Wanted to stop by for a minute. It's highly ironic that I'm wearing a mask, getting vaccinated....I'm the one following Prophetic counsel and guys like @mirkwood and @Vort aren't. Never thought you would see this day, huh? Just playing. Love y'all! Hope everything is great!

You're still conflating ideas that are in reality separate. COVID affected those communities. That is the communicable disease. That is what is within the CDC's mission. I'm all for racial equality. I'm all for the equal access to the distribution of the vaccine to all those who want it. But I don't see anything in the "documented inequity" that you refer to that says "This individual was not given a vaccine because some racist decided that because he's black, he shouldn't get the vaccine before these white people do." Never seen that. Remember, correlating numbers do not necessarily indicate a causal relationship. That is what a lot of these claims ignore. They see a numerical correlation that could be explained by a million different causes. But they immediately jump to racism as the culprit. Show me that it was indeed due to racism, and I'll be right beside you. I know just a few black people in poverty and many black people who are middle class or better. Guess what? All the middle class black people had the same access to the vaccine as middle class white people. And you know what else? All the lower class white people had the same difficulty getting the vaccine as did poor black people. Do you think that maybe it is because poor people tend not to have access to some things regardless of race? Do you think that maybe poor people in general tend not to have the mindset of getting the vaccine in the first place? Could one make an argument that racism may promote poverty? One could. Could one then say that poverty affects access to healthcare? One could. But the statement from the CDC says that racism "DIRECTLY" affects Black People's physical health. The reality is that virtually all links to racism are at least a few degrees removed from disease. But they want us to believe that "racism causes black disease" as a DIRECT relationship. We're not talking about water evaporating from the ocean eventually causes our lands to be irrigated (this distant relationship is something I could find as plausible). We're talking about "I shoot a gun at you and you die." Such a direct, immediate causal relationship is what I find implausible. And even if I'm completely wrong. Even if we found that racism causes this germ to travel to more black people than white people. And we further find that it was genetically engineered by white people (not Chinese people) to specifically target Blacks, how is the CDC going to cure "racism"? They can do what they can to treat the virus and the disease that goes with it. But how exactly does the CDC "cure" racism? If you remember how racism was in the 50s and 60s, you know true racism. If you remember how it was in the 70s and 80s, you MAY know true racism, and you certainly saw inequalities of opportunity. Yes, it was systemic. Today, racism still exists. And it always will exist. But it is certainly not "systemic". We are at a point that we've gotten it about as low as it really can be in any earthly, flawed society. Now the CDC will move away from its mission to work, spending time, means, and energy on getting it to stay about where it is, and possibly make it worse. Is that what you really want?

I think you're barking up the wrong tree here. I don't think anyone here says that racism has no impact on the Black Community, which has the potential to affect black people's health. The point here is that the CDC is about COMMUNICABLE DISEASES. Since its inception, the CDC has been about these definitions. But now it is going to be used as a tool for social engineering. If you want to defend someone from a racist or sexist who is doing them harm or engaging in criminal behavior against someone else, then I'm right there with you. I'll march right along side you. But take the "racist" out of it and ask if you'd do anything different. For me? No, nothing different. Wrong is wrong no matter who is doing it or to whom it is being done to. Wrong is wrong. The "hate crime" to me makes no sense. Anyone who does something criminal to another person either hates them (for whatever reason) or is so self-absorbed that they don't even think about the other person. So, why is it any different when the motive is "racism"? Why aren't we trying to protect crime-ridden areas no matter what race? If there is a crime-ridden white area (and believe me there are many around here) why aren't we doing more outreach to that area? Why doesn't that area get a "public health" flag on them? We have interesting ward boundaries. There are two wealthy areas sandwiching several separate slums. We minister to several families in that area. It isn't easy. They don't have it easy. But they're all white. So, the government doesn't care about them.

@JohnsonJones have you considered that many of us who made our decisions to not receive mRNA spike protein vaccines under emergency use authorizations made those decisions long before President Nelson spoke on the subject? And have you also considered that many of us regularly exercise and maintain good health habits, have worn our masks, have continued to take, or started to take vitamin D, have avoided large groups and visits with family, have used disinfectant religiously (no pun intended), etc., And don't these things count toward "Do[ing] all [we] can to bring COVID numbers down in your area so that your temple opportunities can increase."? While I respect your viewpoint, I do not understand your seemingly singular focus on interpreting President Nelson's recommendation for vaccination as a mandate that divides the faithful from the goats. I respectfully ask some questions to ponder - 1. Do we need to get the same exact vaccine as President Nelson in order to be exactly obedient? Surely to be fully obedient we would need to take no other COVID vaccine other than the one he took right? Or is there room for interpretation on which vaccine to receive and when to receive it? 2. Since President Nelson did not specify which COVID vaccine to receive, is it OK if those people who have already contracted COVID and enjoy a natural vaccinated state with active antibodies to not receive an additional vaccine? Or is there room for interpretation in this example as well? 3. Are people that have significant co-morbidities such as obesity, but who get a COVID shot, more obedient that the healthy person who chooses not to get a COVID shot at this time? Or is there room for interpretation in this example too? I love President Nelson, and I am so grateful for all he has done in his lifetime to serve Jesus Christ and His Church. I'm grateful he has spoken on this issue, even if I have chosen to patiently wait. I respect his medical career and knowledge and I feel from a public relations standpoint that he has absolutely done the right thing. But I also have no doubt that if we sat down and discussed the matter together he would completely and lovingly respect my choice. Will I be able to serve another foreign mission without the COVID shot? Not presently. But it's OK if I serve state-side. Is it possible that Church policy may change and I will no longer be able to serve in the Temple without having the COVID vaccine? Yes, it's possible. And if that happens I will serve in other places. And is it possible that this may all go away just like the original SARS virus did and we go back to normal and COVID vaccines are no longer required? Of course, so I'm not sure why we need to panic, criticize, or goad others into our viewpoints. In 2000 my younger brother died from leukemia. I watched him suffer through long, intense, and grueling pain for many months prior to his graduation from this life. He made a personal choice to receive those treatments despite a very small chance of success. I would have chosen differently, and yet both decisions would have been right. Imagine that?

While attending BYU I was really shocked with how many members were willing to indulge is boderline methodologies. One of which was sticking a kid in a sleeping bag, causing the kid pain (either by sticking an elbow in his chest (pressing as hard as you can), or something that would cause physical pain), and then when the kid is at the moment of despair and hurt they open the sleeping bag and then immediately give the kid to his parents. This was mainly for kids who were adopted. The concept -- the sleeping bag represented the uterus -- and thus birth, when the sleeping bag or bag was opened. It was the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard, and yet it was considered a logical and rational practice. So, yes, just because they are members does not mean they will be inline with gospel principles. I could go on, just from BYU, and it amazed me. Rather than strengthening testimony therapists would be depleting it. With that said, are their good, really good, therapists. Yes. One of my single ward bishopric members was a therapist and a successful one in Utah. I asked him about his practice and why he thought it was successful. He said, "The main principle/practice I have stems from the Book of Mormon, and that is why it helps people."

I could go on and on about the general public's understanding and expectations of science. Because I am a specialist in Orthopaedic surgery I will give an example from this field. We (as a nation) are doing way too many knee and shoulder arthroscopic procedures. We order way too many MRIs instead of relying upon simple inexpensive physical examinations. And many surgeons make huge bank by performing surgery when the patients would be better managed with conservative measures like NSAIDS, weight loss, and physical therapy. But the majority of our patient base is much happier getting cut than making lifestyle changes... Many well-documented studies show that arthroscopic knee cartilage debridement procedures (of which we do millions a year) are essentially expensive placebos. You take 100 patients, 50 have surgery, 50 have sham surgery where incisions are made and water is splashed in the OR but no joint procedures are performed. Guess what the difference was - NONE. The patients that had the sham surgery were just as happy as the patients that had the real surgery. AND would even recommend the fake procedure to their family. see https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa1305189 50% of shoulder rotator cuff repair surgeries display (via repeat MRI) that the repair was unsuccessful only a year later... And orthopaedics is very competitive (must be in the top 1/4 of your med school class just to get an interview), psychiatry on the other hand is one of the least competitive specialities https://www.prospectivedoctor.com/how-competitive-is-a-psychiatry-residency/#:~:text=Overall Competitiveness of Psychiatry Residency,%2C the probability is 92%. I am sure that there are some good psychiatrist and therapists out there. But there is no way that I would ever see one. The majority of people seeking assistance from either of these fields would probably get vastly better results by making simple lifestyle changes (following the recommendations of our Lord and Savior, daily exercise of both body and mind, eating a healthy diet, reading and studying scripture, etc). To assume that science understands the human brain is absurd. We are figuring out new stuff about bone all the time. And the human brain is vastly more complex than bone. Just saying.

I didn’t read the article in detail but in the past I have done a bit of study about therapists and their relationship with religious orthodoxy and how they approach it. From what I understand, the role of a therapist is to help those struggling emotionally, mentally and spiritually come to terms with their feelings, develop a healthy mindset toward and cope with issues in their life. When a person of an heavily orthodox / covenantal religion sees a therapist, I can see it being difficult to suggest things, particularly when you are a member of the same religion. For the majority of the time, a therapist is not a doctor (though they may have a doctorate degree). Most of what they are saying is just probing and trying to understand. They offer solutions to the feelings they feel. From what I have experienced, they will offer a solution or task to do, if I didn’t feel comfortable doing it, they never pushed it further, but moved in to other solutions and approaches. In the initial example, I would say it is well within the therapists means to suggest not reading scriptures. If someone came to me, a person who is not a therapist, and says reading scriptures gave them a large amount of anxiety, I may suggest taking a Hiatus from reading scriptures. Maybe I would suggest specific talks to read instead. Focus on reading talks from Eyring, Holland, and Suarez. And for the time being, avoid Oaks, Bednar, Renlund, packer, and McConkie. And perhaps focus on strengthening their prayer and try to understand how God true Lely sees them, the role sin plays in our life and how repentance, guilt and shame all play together. In more difficult situations, where homosexuality and transgender is played, I think it is healthy to at least admit such feelings aloud to one’s self. Then have a conversation about sharing them with family members and others. I remember my brother (now sister) experiencing intense amounts of social anxiety, depression, and feeling he was actually a she. He went to go see a therapist of the Latter-day Saint faith about the whole thing and the therapist helped him come to the conclusion that he does indeed see himself as a she. That step right there took a HUGE wait off her back. The therapist, from what I understand, never suggest to transition, leave the church, or any of the like. However, once my sister made the decision to no longer attend church and socially transition, the therapist was there as a tool for her to cope with the anxieties and stresses that came with it. When you go see a therapist, there must be a dialogue at some point about what religious steps you are uncomfortable taking. It’s not their job to make sure you continue living and orthodoxy life and obeying all the letter and spirit of the law commandments, particularly when you do t even want to be active. The role of a therapist is to help people cope with their feelings, and in some cases, keep you from killing yourself. Unless steps have been made the clarify how important your religious life is, it is not inappropriate for a therapist to say things like this.

Random thought/comment. I am glad I grew up kind of poor. I am very appreciative of what I have and what I have accomplished for myself and my family in my life. I went to the "rich" high school and saw most of classmates have everything. I have run into some of those classmates over the years. Some of them are still pompous ________. smh.

A funny thing happened in our Come Follow Me discussion last night. The subject of "being one" came up. My son asked,"How am I supposed to 'be one'?" I noticed the complete absence of "with others" or "with the Lord." Then I suddenly realized that I'd never heard the commandment to "be one" combined with the word "with". I did a search on the phrase "be one with". Only one time does it appear in all of scripture D&C 31:2. And this indeed talks about being united with family in the gospel. Nowhere does that phrase appear as "being one with the Lord." Nowhere does it say the Father and Son are "one with each other." They are merely "one." Why? I'd say it could be a linguistic quirk in Hebrew or Greek. I don't know. Maybe. But in English? Only tradition does the phrase "be one" necessarily mean "be united". So, what if it means something else? Could it? Would it be plausible? I went on to think about two alternatives. "One is the beginning" "someone has to start." Starting at the beginning means humility. Starting means one must lead. Starting from nothing and leading means strength and power. Entropy vs Order Entropy is about making everything the same. Entropy is decay. It is Chaos. Eternal life is about order. It is about identity. "Remember who you are." It is about being unique "God is one, for there is none like him." The Lord binds man to free man. Satan frees man to bind man. Maybe "Being One" is more about these things than "united". The Father found us and saw that we had the potential for "intelligence." What does that mean? What if it means that we could have identity. It meant that we could have power (The Glory of God is Intelligence). Maybe it does include the concept of being united. Maybe there are more than one applications of the phrase. Maybe I'm really far off with all this. But it hit me pretty powerfully last night. And I can't shake it. This is a nascent philosophizing in my head right now. But I feel like it could be much more. Thoughts?

In order to have a valid temple recommend, yes you are required to be up to date on child support. Which probably means the lady in question lied about it to her bishop & the Lord. Honestly, that puts her in way more of a bad spot than other any mortal could make her. If you're seeking to get this child support, I would reach out through legal channels.

Temple recommend questions - question #12: I usually don't recommend going to someone else's bishop to "tell on them". What's the point? If it's revenge, or trying to manipulate or force behavior out of the ex, y'all will have to ask yourselves if those are worthy reasons to act upon. It's just that for every 100 people who say something like "I'm worried about their soul, and want their bishop to be able to give them help appropriate to their struggles", I figure maybe 95 of them are lying to themselves, and it's really just a way to lash out at the person.

This is a suggestion for a new feature to be added to Third Hour. The suggestion is that a space be created where people can upload their lesson notes, or maybe even talks, and people can then view and download that material. The notes could be sorted by topic and when a forum member has a talk or lesson to prepare, the material that has been uploaded could be a resource that they could use to assist them in their preparation. How much interest is there in this idea, does something similar already exist, and if this did become a new feature on Third Hour, how likely is it that you would use it?

Well, hang on a sec. I think there’s a subtle difference between “I have a sinful nature, but I have faith that in Christ Jesus I can overcome it; and I look forward to a day when my nature is no longer sinful” versus “I have a sinful nature, and that’s basically OK, and while I will leave it ambiguous as to whether I plan to ever act out or not, I will under the guise of ‘testimony’, pooh-pooh the idea that the sinful elements of my nature need to or can change whether now or in the eternities”. Your hypothetical bad husband/alcoholic (or your real-life Brigham Young) are firmly in the first category. Where does the BYU speaker fall? “Queer” can have a lot of meanings, and as near as I can tell the speaker here doesn’t specify the term’s definition as it applies to herself. As I understand it, it can run the gamut from “sort of bisexual, sometimes” to “heterosexual and cisgender, but into cross-dressing” to “likes kink” to “basically normal, but too Woke to be ordinary and therefore desperately engaging in drama queenery in hopes that someone will Notice Me.”

It's sad that so many of the rising generation equate acceptance and tolerance for love. That when a parent tells their child they are doing something wrong, that they do not really love them. I have a family member who smokes...a lot. If I truly love him, should I allow him to smoke in my home as much as he wants, whenever he wants, around anyone that may also be in the home. Of course not...and he does not expect me or anyone else to. The same scenario applies to homosexuals. But they just can't seem to get over the idea that we can not tolerate their behavior, and yet still love them at the same time. The adversary is cunning and disguises many of his worst works as love.

It is rare that I forget much in the way of significant events in my life. In fact, many stupid, insignificant events which I wish to forget stick in my mind anyway. But recently I've been having a series of flashbacks. I've had memories of things I'd completely forgotten about start to make their way back to my consciousness. Two extremely shame-filled moments have come to the front of my mind recently. Since they tend to exemplify my greatest sin of commission and omission respectively, I tend to think that the Lord has seen fit to remind me of them because it is high time that I address them. I honestly don't know if I was prepared to address them until now. But I thought I'd at least share one of them because I'm going to guess that it is one that many have a problem with. ********************************************************* Around 4th grade or so a little girl moved into our school district. Her name was Kim (I'll withhold her surname for privacy). She was a cute little waif of a girl. By little, I mean she was the shortest person in the class. We all welcomed her. To my knowledge no one ever teased her. I even waved "hi" to her and gave her all the common greetings whenever I saw her. But I now realize that I never actually got to know her. I never carried on a conversation with her. And to my knowledge, no one ever did. Time went on. She was always there. I always greeted her as usual. By the time we went to high school, I never really saw her anymore. I was in advanced classes. She wasn't And such classes were on opposite ends of the school. But I knew she was in the same school because she lived just a couple blocks from me. And I never even visited her house. One day I found myself in a different place than normal and I had to take a different route to make it to my next class. I passed through the west side of the school where the druggies and gangsters hung out. As I was thus traversing, I saw Kim in the middle of the cloud of smoke that frequented the area. Our eyes locked. I had never really thought about what happened to her. I never really thought about who her friends were. I never really thought of her at all. But right there I realized I'd never realized what path she ended up taking because of a dearth of good friends. I gazed at her as if to ask, "What are you doing there?" And in a true Thoreau-Emerson moment, her expression seemed to respond, "What are you doing there?" To my shame, I shrugged it off and went on to my class. Somewhere in my mind I was justifying to myself: I'm too busy right now. I have to get to class. Besides, she made her choices. All of that was true. But the memory now haunts me. What if I had invited her to my home to even ONE birthday party? What if I invited her to play with me? What if I even carried on ONE conversation with her? What if she had just one good friend? Would she have turned out any different? Earlier this month, a new family moved into the ward. The attended for two weeks. Then they disappeared. No one has said a word. Then my son brought up their name. He mentioned that he had been trying to get a hold of them. Amazing parallels and contrasts. Lately, I have been doing what I can to get to know those who are attending, but aren't (if we were to make schoolyard equivalencies) the "popular kids". I don't really know if I can do anything to help them in their struggles or ease their burdens. But at the very least I can be there to say, "I'm your friend. I care about you." Some people who are down and out are afraid of becoming a "project" for ward leadership. And maybe sometimes that's the attitude with which it is executed. But I certainly hope that we do it with the attitude of "maybe I can't do much for you. But I can at least be there to say I'm your friend."

Sadly, this story did not necessarily age well. I'm still impressed by her description of her attitudes and actions.

Heh... I was studying and praying about the vaccine before our Prophet said anything. I had reservations. Our Prophet said what he said and showed his example. And that answered my study part and I signed up to get vaccinated. But my prayers did not end, having made my choice I took it to the Lord, saying if this be right, great then it will happen. If it is not, then stop me. The Lord answered that prayer by stopping me. I do not present this as an answer for any one else on this issue. Personal revelation is just that, personal. It could be simply a timing issue that caused him to stop me, I do not know, am still working on figuring that out. But I get really tired of self righteous blowhards, who think to judge my faithfulness or willingness to obey the Lord and his Prophet because I am not doing what they think I should be doing.

And likewise, those who feel vindicated in their own opinions simply because the Prophet seemed to say something that agreed with them have no justification to get on a high horse and judge others who disagree. To simply follow the Prophet without prayerful consideration is almost as bad as refusing to follow without prayerful consideration. And I do know many who disobey simply because they disagree, not because they HAVE prayed and not yet received confirmation. In the end, it is about sincerity of seeking the will of the Lord. Too often, people jump on the "well it was only good advice, not a commandment of the Lord" train when they took no thought to even pray about it at all, let alone, sincerely. But sincerity is not something we can really judge without knowing a person really well.

I'm not an anti-vaxxer, in fact I had a great conversation with my doctor as I was receiving the second of my shingles vaccines a few weeks ago. He asked if I wanted to sign up for the Johnson & Johnson vaccine (before the short ban)? I replied no thank you. He continued on trying over and over to convince me that it was safe. I kept politely saying no thank you. Finally, I told him that I have monetarily invested in specific vaccine development efforts in my life and in each case it took nearly a decade to even get to the point of possible approval and financial return. I said that I preferred to wait some additional time and had no fear of contracting COVID as I am not in any high risk group. He was polite, but you could see in his eyes that he thought I was a kook. On a different vein, the new COVID vaccine requirement for foreign missionaries appears to have caused quite a stir in the mormonworld last week. The Church even had to turn off their Facebook comments. One important piece of information that is not widely known is that a traditional "inactivated virus" vaccine called COVAXIN that does not use mRNA spike proteins will likely be available in the US in the next few months. It will also be under EUA, but it may be a preferable alternative for those who wish to go on a foreign Church mission and don't want to receive the current mRNA vaccines. https://indianexpress.com/article/india/bharat-biotech-covaxin-production-sale-up-700-million-doses-7281776/

Actual woman here I want to hear good messages, and I really don't care what the speaker looks like / gender / nationality /etc. Really don't care. That being said, I do know faithful LDS woman whom do desire to have both gender partners speaking. Somebody that they feel has traveled a road more similar to theirs and can relate to the hard / good times they are going through. And I understand and sympathize with that.

I may have over stated my opinion and should have said, They have skipped too many of the testing protocols for me to feel comfortable with getting the shot. I know the Prophet has received the shot, but please keep in mind that he is in the age group that is the most in danger from this virus. I believe I have the right to choose for myself whether to receive the so called vaccine and I choose to not do it. My wife has gotten and two of my adult children have too. I feel it is not what I need or have to do at this time. thank you very much. I am frankly very concerned about the potential long term risks compared to the short term, possible, benefits. Also, there is a lot of shaming going on right now in our society regarding the shot and masks, and I think people should learn to mind their own business.

I agree with your mother. I agree with you more, but I think your mother has the kernel of a true idea that she doesn't quite comprehend or know how to bring about. I wish I could tell her, or better yet, show her. What will a family look like in Zion, in the celestial kingdom? Parents will not "control" their adult children. Parents will instead glory in the adult nature of their children, in their maturity and ability to handle situations even (or especially) when the adult children's handling of a situation is different from how the parent would have approached it. But make no mistake, parents will interact intimately with their children, even as adults. They will be much closer than best friends, but with the added intimacy of being father and son or mother and daughter, or any permutation thereof. It will truly be heaven. Your mother senses this at some level. She may have an intellectual picture of what she thinks things will look like. Maybe she just feels sadness over the possibility of losing her precious daughter's presence, and wants to hold her children close and help them. That, too, is an outgrowth of the idea of a true family community. Your mother's problem is the problem all of us have in this state; namely, that we're mortal. This is not heaven, not yet. It is our duty to bring about heaven—but that is not something that is accomplished overnight, or in a week, or truth be told even in a single lifetime. It is a distant goal we work toward. To tell you what no one actually needs to say: You must do what is best for your husband and yourself, for your children, and for your parents and siblings, pretty much in that order. That risks hurting your mother's feelings, which is too bad. (Really, it is too bad. Truly regrettable.) But such are the hard choices that adults must make.

I also agree that the cancel culture is disgusting and attacks American's freedom of speech. Meanwhile the Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Khan-Cullors was sharply criticized recently after news broke that she had purchased a $1,400,000 million home in a mostly white Los Angeles area neighborhood. I do not like the Black Lives Matter organization. They care nothing about the many poor black Americans in this nation and are doing virtually nothing to help them. They are also helping and pushing the cancel culture in America presently.