What can we, as individual US citizens do to improve the division (non-political)

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, SKL said:

When people ask me "what do you think of xyz" I am very likely to say "I don't know enough about it" and decline to opine.  I say this much more than "my opinion is ___." 

There is no requirement that every human have an opinion about every issue.  It would be better not to have an opinion where factual knowledge is low.

Sure, I try not to have opinions when I don’t have facts. But I can look facts up. 

[SKL]

26 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Right. There is no truth. I give up.

We must be talking in different languages.

Being humble enough to admit not knowing enough does not equal negating facts.

If you know some humans who are capable of being sufficiently knowledgeable about all the facts that matter to humanity, I want to meet those humans.  Because that kind of knowledge would take me a lot of time and effort to learn.  First of all I would need to investigate for a long time just to decide whom to believe, or be present to see the reality with my own naked eyes.

[TravelingChris]

1 hour ago, Sneezyone said:

 Cori Bush (

Oh you mean the rep who just got elected who is aligning with the far left Alexandria Ocasio Cortez group that are, in fact, socialists. Got it, BLM isn;'t a socialist group, I guess.

[SKL]

28 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Ok, I believe people say that, but I’d guess that would offend a lot of people.

I'm sure it does, but I'm not sure why that matters in this context.

[Pam in CT]

re capitalized letters = "organization" with defined "principles:

22 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

It is an organization with that capitalization.  Otherwise how can Starbucks, etc be funding a movement.

 

21 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Starbucks is a corporation with bylaws and regulations for all of its affiliates and franchises. Not the same, at all.

the Black Lives Matter movement started out as a twitter hashtag. Capitalized letters helped distinguish the words.

 

Capitalized, visible, but not legally defined as formal organizations with centralized leadership stucture, mission statement, by-laws etc:

Make America Great Again

Christian

Breast Cancer Awareness

 

Not capitalized, not legally defined as formal organizations with centralized leadership structure etc... but visible "movement":

pro-life movement

environmental movement

feminism

book group phenomenon

 

 

The one does not, particularly, correlate with the other.

 

 

[Not_a_Number]

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

We must be talking in different languages.

Being humble enough to admit not knowing enough does not equal negating facts.

But I think the next step there is learning more facts from a variety of sources.

 

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

If you know some humans who are capable of being sufficiently knowledgeable about all the facts that matter to humanity, I want to meet those humans.  Because that kind of knowledge would take me a lot of time and effort to learn.  First of all I would need to investigate for a long time just to decide whom to believe, or be present to see the reality with my own naked eyes.

I try to keep track of who has been reliable in the past... helps separate things out.

[Not_a_Number]

4 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

Oh you mean the rep who just got elected who is aligning with the far left Alexandria Ocasio Cortez group that are, in fact, socialists. Got it, BLM isn;'t a socialist group, I guess.

What is this rep advocating for?

[SKL]

30 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

But the point is that there is no centralized structure. No one runs it.

I think what you mean is that nobody is in charge of what the local chapters do, at least at the moment.  Clearly someone is deciding how the donation cash is getting spent.  Someone is providing some level of guidance on unified messaging.

[Not_a_Number]

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

I think what you mean is that nobody is in charge of what the local chapters do, at least at the moment.  Clearly someone is deciding how the donation cash is getting spent.  Someone is providing some level of guidance on unified messaging.

Yeah, I’d be curious how that works. @Sneezyone, do you know how they distribute the money?

[ktgrok]

2 hours ago, Cnew02 said:

I don’t disagree with you.  I just think that at some point you need a national spokesperson and some sort of control of messaging.  

Christianity does not have one central spokesperson. Neither does vegetarianism. Or homschooling for that matter. Just some examples of movements that do not have a centralized voic. 

1 hour ago, TravelingChris said:

It is an actually organization and before they took it down a few months ago, one of their many objectives having nothing do with improving lives of black people, was stop encouraging marriage and then children.  Other items I object to are also aims of that particular organization.  It is a legal IRS listed organization and one that I do not approve of. Organizations I would have no objection to anyone telling me they support are ones like NAACP, etc.  Black Lives Matter is a very far left, socialist organization and so no, if my Pastor was all in to that, I would have an issues.  

There are homeschool organizations that I'm sure don't represent what you believe, but would you therefore say you don't support homeschooling as a movement? Or Christian organizations/groups that don't represent what you believe, at all. But you wouldn't be upset if your pastor wore a shirt with "Christian" on it. 

You don't have to agree with everyone who uses the term Christian, or Homeschool or Black Lives Matter to support the general topic of Christianity, Homeschooling, or Black Lives Matter. 

33 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

It is an organization.  That is why companies can donate money to it.  https://blacklivesmatter.com/

They are taking donations.  They make money off of merchandise.  And I do not support them but do support changing the CJ system to help blacks, mentally ill, anyone,.

There are homeschool groups that take donations, and sell merchandise. There are vegetarian groups that make products, sell stuff, take donations. That doesn't mean that the term vegetarian is owned by them. 

[TravelingChris]

46 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

THIS. Silent kneeling, fists raised, t-shirts—none of it is ok because the fundamental message that Black Lives Matter is, and always has been, a radical idea in America.

Here is the deal- with silent kneeling or fists raised- they are being done during entertainment times- i.e. NFL, etc.  And what has happened-- NFL, NBA, etc watching has completely plummeted.  I, like many, do not want politics or protests to spoil my enjoyment time, any protests at all-even ones that maybe I would be super supportive of in a different setting- in sports, I want sports.  Save it for protests.  Not sports, concerts, movies, etc/  

[Sneezyone]

1 minute ago, Not_a_Number said:

Yeah, I’d be curious how that works. @Sneezyone, do you know how they distribute the money?

They mostly keep it, as Pam’s links documented...for those who wish to learn.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Sneezyone

[SKL]

11 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

To be explicit here, not supporting BLM can be used as evidence of racism. It might not be intentional racism, it might not be conscious racism, but it's racism nonetheless.

By your logic then, not supporting Planned Parenthood is evidence of being against parents planning families.

[Sneezyone]

1 minute ago, TravelingChris said:

Here is the deal- with silent kneeling or fists raised- they are being done during entertainment times- i.e. NFL, etc.  And what has happened-- NFL, NBA, etc watching has completely plummeted.  I, like many, do not want politics or protests to spoil my enjoyment time, any protests at all-even ones that maybe I would be super supportive of in a different setting- in sports, I want sports.  Save it for protests.  Not sports, concerts, movies, etc/  

You can stop tagging me now. Your positions are clear.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Sneezyone

[TravelingChris]

42 minutes ago, *Jessica* said:

No matter what you think, if you are white you do benefit from white privilege.  

That is what you say.  I do not agree and one big reason I do not agree is because I am disabled and getting more so rapidly and it is very hard to think of one as privileged in any way when that is happening.

Edited November 10, 2020 by TravelingChris

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, TravelingChris said:

Here is the deal- with silent kneeling or fists raised- they are being done during entertainment times- i.e. NFL, etc.  And what has happened-- NFL, NBA, etc watching has completely plummeted.  I, like many, do not want politics or protests to spoil my enjoyment time, any protests at all-even ones that maybe I would be super supportive of in a different setting- in sports, I want sports.  Save it for protests.  Not sports, concerts, movies, etc/  

“You do not want politics to spoil your enjoyment time.”

But it’s not just politics for the people protesting. It’s about having a safe-feeling country. It’s about how people are treated. It’s not academic. 

If you support the cause, why does it interfere with your watching? 

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, TravelingChris said:

That is what you say.  I do not agree

Can you explain why you don’t think you do? What does “white privilege” mean to you?

[Not_a_Number]

5 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

They mostly keep it, as Pam’s links documented...for those who wish to learn.

As in, keep in centralized? Or distribute it to chapters? Sorry, I’ll read the links if that’s easier.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Not_a_Number

[TravelingChris]

2 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

ACO is a Catholic. Are Catholics socialists? She's aligning herself with the Pope. Does that mean the pope is a socialist? 

Take a step back here and think through what you are writing here. 

The *other* is put in a box. They believe this and this and you know it for a fact. But what you know, the familiar, isn't put a box because you know it's not true. You need to see the *other* with as much of an open mind as you see the familiar. 

Actually, I think this particular Pope is socialist leaning.  BUt AOC and Biden and Pelosi and many other Dem Catholics aren;t actually good Catholics since they are for abortion and not only early ones but all the way up to birth.  

And I have no idea if Maduro in Venezuela is a practicing Catholic or not, but he certainly is a socialist that has continued bringing extreme hardship to that country.

[Sneezyone]

Just now, Not_a_Number said:

As in, keep in centralized? Or distribute it to chapters? Sorry, I’ll read the links if that’s easier.

No, as in line their pockets.

[Not_a_Number]

3 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

That is what you say.  I do not agree and one big reason I do not agree is because I am disabled and getting more so rapidly and it is very hard to think of one as privileged in any way when that is happening.

What does white privilege mean to you?

[Pam in CT]

re surely someone's in charge of unified messaging

11 minutes ago, SKL said:

I think what you mean is that nobody is in charge of what the local chapters do, at least at the moment.  Clearly someone is deciding how the donation cash is getting spent.  Someone is providing some level of guidance on unified messaging.

Would you say that of the "pro-life"  movement? or the "family values" movement, or "environmentalism" or "feminism"?

 

As posted and linked above, the Black Lives Matter Foundation is literally under cease and desist orders from at least two state Attorney Generals for *inappropriate* use of donation cash, and has been shut down from further collection.

As is also true of the "pro-life" movement, there are local decentralized groups passing hats around to print up posters.  And folks (some of good will, some of purely commercial aims, some just opportunistic) printing up and selling merch.

There really isn't some hidden Soros-like figure, offscreen, pulling strings on messaging and doling out funds.

 

Why would there have to be? 

Is it so implausible that ordinary folks simply want justice?

Edited November 10, 2020 by Pam in CT
typo

[SKL]

15 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Sure, I try not to have opinions when I don’t have facts. But I can look facts up. 

You can look up what some people are stating as facts.  But if you really want to know "facts," you need to know whom to trust to tell you those facts - whose fact reporting isn't tainted by bias and prejudice.  Looked-up "facts" are not worth much if the source is tainted ... and most easy look-ups are very tainted.

[TravelingChris]

3 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

“You do not want politics to spoil your enjoyment time.”

But it’s not just politics for the people protesting. It’s about having a safe-feeling country. It’s about how people are treated. It’s not academic. 

If you support the cause, why does it interfere with your watching? 

It does and more importantly to NFL, NBA, ESPN, etc,  it appears to really matter to a huge number of people which is why sports watching has tanked as protests have invaded.  And lots of people are losing jobs due to these protests, including probably lots of minorities.

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, TravelingChris said:

Actually, I think this particular Pope is socialist leaning.  BUt AOC and Biden and Pelosi and many other Dem Catholics aren;t actually good Catholics since they are for abortion and not only early ones but all the way up to birth.  

And that’s the main requirement for being a good Catholic?

[fairfarmhand]

44 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Ok, I believe people say that, but I’d guess that would offend a lot of people.

Actually as a Christian, I get it. 

I am a pastor's kid. I've seen the inside of more churches than I care to admit. Sadly, (at least in the South) many churches have become more of a social club than what Jesus intended for it to be--a way to learn how to relate to our Heavenly Father. 

(There are a lot of Christians I don't like either, and I'm embarrassed that they are the face of Christianity)

[Not_a_Number]

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

You can look up what some people are stating as facts.  But if you really want to know "facts," you need to know whom to trust to tell you those facts - whose fact reporting isn't tainted by bias and prejudice.  Looked-up "facts" are not worth much if the source is tainted ... and most easy look-ups are very tainted.

Not really. If I need numbers, most sources tend to agree. If I need to hear what someone said, there tends to be video. There are usually a good number of eyewitnesses to any event nowadays, and cell phone footage often enough at that.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Not_a_Number

[Not_a_Number]

2 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

It does and more importantly to NFL, NBA, ESPN, etc,  it appears to really matter to a huge number of people which is why sports watching has tanked as protests have invaded.  And lots of people are losing jobs due to these protests, including probably lots of minorities.

I don’t think you answered how something short at the beginning of the game interferes with your watching.

[SKL]

12 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Sometimes we must rely on other sources to determine truth. We've all seen the stories in the last few months of people who believe COVID was a hoax and then they got COVID. Most of us only personally experience a small part of the world.

Also, there is no way any of us can investigate everything for ourselves. No one is an expert on everything. 

If you want to see the truth your own naked eyes about racial injustice in this country, you will never see it because you are white. 

And here we are back where we were at the beginning. 

Just FTR, the quote I was being attacked for was that sometimes, both sides could admit that neither has all the facts.  This was in response to comments on how to convince another person that they are wrong and you are right.

A lot of unsuccessful discussions begin with one or both sides having an opinion they can't actually support.  I personally prefer to admit up front that I don't have an opinion I can support when I am in that situation.  Discussing it with someone who thinks they know will only give me their side of the story / their bias.

I wasn't saying I don't think I should have an opinion or that I'm free to not give a damn about important things.

[TravelingChris]

3 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

We could go round and round about this. 

I don't think you like protests much either. 

I encourage you to read several books about the history of the Civil Rights movement. Then come back here and talk about people should or should not do to protest for civil rights. 

I know that sounds condescending but you aren't going to get it until you step outside of your world. 

 

You are very rude.  Of course I know a lot about protests,.  And protests in certain circumstances were very effective- i.e. Ghandi, Civil Rights Protests in the south, etc.  But there was a very good bill introduced by the AA senator from South Carolina with regards to Police Reforms and the Republicans kept saying they were absolutely willing to compromise and talk with the Dems of the House and Pelosi refused to consider it at all. 

And my objection currently to protests is that it is much more effective to do other actions like advocate for cj reform locally and statewide by engaging legislators, figuring out how to learn about local policing (most cities have ride a longs you can do) and maybe join a police citizen board, etc, etc,.

 

[SKL]

12 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

No, as in line their pockets.

So this is why "support BLM" concerns people.  Because for many people and organizations, the main "support" they can or do give is monetary support.  Sounds like these very large monetary totals may not be spent in ways that actually improve black lives, justice for all blacks, etc.  So this goes back to my first comment on this topic.

Black lives matter and I would do anything I could to promote better police justice.  But donating money to "BLM" or buying a BLM t-shirt is not happening, at least given what I've learned so far.

[Sneezyone]

4 minutes ago, SKL said:

So this is why "support BLM" concerns people.  Because for many people and organizations, the main "support" they can or do give is monetary support.  Sounds like these very large monetary totals may not be spent in ways that actually improve black lives, justice for all blacks, etc.  So this goes back to my first comment on this topic.

Black lives matter and I would do anything I could to promote better police justice.  But donating money to "BLM" or buying a BLM t-shirt is not happening, at least given what I've learned so far.

Most donations, as people here have indicated, go to local organizations. Most t-shirts and swag are purchased from small neighborhood and online entrepreneurs. Make of that economic choice what you will. The most significant support costs zero $$.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Sneezyone

[TravelingChris]

7 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

I'm very sorry that you are going through this. Do you think there is a privilege from being non-disabled? Do you see that? It's not like white privilege is the only privilege. 

If you're disabled, you can understand what it means for some people to have more benefits in society than you do. 

The only white privilege I get is not one I want at all.  It is one I detest.  That is that some people probably treat me better because I am white. But what exactly am I supposed to do- It is something I suspect occasionally - and not because I see a black person being disrespected but just kind of the way some people seem to talk makes me suspect (there are no blacks around at those times).  It makes me very uncomfortable==for one thing, as I said, I see race as an artificial and bad human construct.  It is useless in most ways.  For example, there is more genetic diversity in so-called black people than so-called Caucasians.  Things like sickle cell anemia only affect certain populations of blacks as well as some Mediterranean and Arabian peninsula area peoples too.  And on and on and on why race is totally bogus.

[SKL]

17 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

re surely someone's in charge of unified messaging

Would you say that of the "pro-life"  movement? or the "family values" movement, or "environmentalism" or "feminism"?

 

As posted and linked above, the Black Lives Matter Foundation is literally under cease and desist orders from at least two state Attorney Generals for *inappropriate* use of donation cash, and has been shut down from further collection.

As is also true of the "pro-life" movement, there are local decentralized groups passing hats around to print up posters.  And folks (some of good will, some of purely commercial aims, some just opportunistic) printing up and selling merch.

There really isn't some hidden Soros-like figure, offscreen, pulling strings on messaging and doling out funds.

 

Why would there have to be? 

Is it so implausible that ordinary folks simply want justice?

Well first of all, I am the person who said I am skeptical about ANY slogan-name because it can be misleading as to what is actually happening.

Secondly, your own posts explain why monetary support for "BLM" is in question.  Questioning support for an organization (which is naturally going to be associated with local movements that use the exact same name and slogans) does not mean questioning a moral or ideal.  The moral/ideal does not depend on the name or who gets rich off of it.

 

[Not_a_Number]

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

Well first of all, I am the person who said I am skeptical about ANY slogan-name because it can be misleading as to what is actually happening.

Secondly, your own posts explain why monetary support for "BLM" is in question.  Questioning support for an organization (which is naturally going to be associated with local movements that use the exact same name and slogans) does not mean questioning a moral or ideal.  The moral/ideal does not depend on the name or who gets rich off of it.

 

But if you go to a protest, you aren’t supporting any specific person.

[Carol in Cal.]

15 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Shrug. I'm actually being very polite to you. You don't like what I, or other people here, are writing. 

You don't know much about the history of the Civil Rights movement in this country. You may think that you do but you don't. Sorry if you think that is rude for me to write that to you. 

If you understood more about the history of Civil Rights in the USA, you would not write what you're writing here. 

ETA more on this - why were the protests of Ghandi effective? MLK? Do you have how many times MLK was dismissed as an "outside agitator" (referencing a post upthread about outside agitators)? 

I'm sorry that you find this discussion "rude." I know it's uncomfortable. It should be uncomfortable for all of us. 

I could be much ruder to you than I've been besides recommending that you read some books. 

No, it IS rude to be condescending and sarcastic.  It seems like you’re just trying to shut her up, and that’s hardly civil.  

[Sneezyone]

3 minutes ago, SKL said:

Well first of all, I am the person who said I am skeptical about ANY slogan-name because it can be misleading as to what is actually happening.

Secondly, your own posts explain why monetary support for "BLM" is in question.  Questioning support for an organization (which is naturally going to be associated with local movements that use the exact same name and slogans) does not mean questioning a moral or ideal.  The moral/ideal does not depend on the name or who gets rich off of it.

 

Support comes in many forms—word, deed, time, money.

[TravelingChris]

9 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

ou don't know much about the history of the Civil Rights movement in this country. You may think that you do but you don't. Sorry if you think that is rude for me to write that to you. 

I know an awful lot about it.  Of course I have read about, watched documentaries, visited places, etc.  

 

12 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

If you understood more about the history of Civil Rights in the USA, you would not write what you're writing here. 

OP,  this is why we will not have any unity in this country.  Because people cannot discuss things civilly but have to call others racists.  

13 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

I'm sorry that you find this discussion "rude." I know it's uncomfortable. It should be uncomfortable for all of us. 

I could be much ruder to you than I've been besides recommending that you read some books. 

It is not uncomfortable.  I don't need to read any more books about the civil rights.   I have read plenty in my 57 years.  I don't care how many books I read from a leftist viewpoint, I am not changing to be a leftist.  It isn't happening.  Nor it is happening that I will still believe that there at this time, there are much better actions than wearing shirts or protesting if you are concerned about black lives.  How about actually working to reform police locally or how about advocating for school choice for kids stuck in horrible schools or shopping in the minority area of your town or .......   

[Sneezyone]

2 minutes ago, Carol in Cal. said:

No, it IS rude to be condescending and sarcastic.  It seems like you’re just trying to shut her up, and that’s hardly civil.  

I, for one, encourage her to keep talking—just not to me.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Sneezyone

[TravelingChris]

17 minutes ago, Dreamergal said:

I am sorry, but what gives you the right to say who is a good catholic ? Or by extension who is a good Christian ? It really bugs me because I was judged for the same on this very board for daring to question about the role of the Church in slavery and colonization and said I was not because Pentecost made it ok.  It cheapens Christianity and in turn Christ.

Christianity is more than abortion, the Bible is more than abortion.

If it is politics you disagree, but all means do so but do not pass judgement on someone whether or if they are a Christian or "true" Christian or "sincere" Christian and that includes both parties.

Political disagreements, voting a certain way does not translate to Christianity and it is a scourge upon American Christianity. It is and one of the reasons churches are splintering and people are walking away.

Let us look at the speck in our own eyes before looking at the log in others like the Bible says.

The Catholic Church is a rather rigid religious organization where there are rules of what one can support and what one cannot support.  It isn;t my rules- it is theirs.

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, TravelingChris said:

It is not uncomfortable.  I don't need to read any more books about the civil rights.   I have read plenty in my 57 years.  I don't care how many books I read from a leftist viewpoint, I am not changing to be a leftist.  It isn't happening.  Nor it is happening that I will still believe that there at this time, there are much better actions than wearing shirts or protesting if you are concerned about black lives.  How about actually working to reform police locally or how about advocating for school choice for kids stuck in horrible schools or shopping in the minority area of your town or .......   

No one is asking you to be a leftist. There's maybe one or two people on this thread I'd describe as seriously progressive, to be honest. It's a lot of center-left people. 

I think all of the actions you're describing are very much worthwhile. But I think raising awareness is also worthwhile, and I say that as someone who had no idea how bad police behavior can get with respect to minority communities until I've seen videos. I wouldn't have believed it. I really wouldn't have. 

[Not_a_Number]

2 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

The Catholic Church is a rather rigid religious organization where there are rules of what one can support and what one cannot support.  It isn;t my rules- it is theirs.

OK, I Googled this, and found the following: 

"In the early Roman Catholic church, abortion was permitted for male fetuses in the first 40 days of pregnancy and for female fetuses in the first 80-90 days. Not until 1588 did Pope Sixtus V declare all abortion murder, with excommunication as the punishment." 

I didn't fact-check this: do you know if this is true? 

Edited November 10, 2020 by Not_a_Number

[Carol in Cal.]

7 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

The only white privilege I get is not one I want at all.  It is one I detest.  That is that some people probably treat me better because I am white. But what exactly am I supposed to do- It is something I suspect occasionally - and not because I see a black person being disrespected but just kind of the way some people seem to talk makes me suspect (there are no blacks around at those times).  

I think that this is a fair question.  One of the ways that I address it is by absolutely not letting assumed complicity stay assumed.

But, I would invite you to consider—maybe those same people would preferentially rent to you or sell their home to you or help you get a mortgage because you are white.  Maybe you don’t have to worry about your husband or son being dragged out of the car and manhandled or worse during a traffic stop every single time they drive anywhere.  These are more hidden privileges that you and I both have.  

My husband is a from a decidedly working class white family of origin, and I think that his dad would have absolutely been infuriated by the idea that he had privilege, but he did—those ones I mentioned above.  That doesn’t make him at fault or complicit, but it does effect outcomes in the long run.

[Not_a_Number]

13 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

The only white privilege I get is not one I want at all.  It is one I detest.  That is that some people probably treat me better because I am white. But what exactly am I supposed to do- It is something I suspect occasionally - and not because I see a black person being disrespected but just kind of the way some people seem to talk makes me suspect (there are no blacks around at those times).  It makes me very uncomfortable==for one thing, as I said, I see race as an artificial and bad human construct.  It is useless in most ways.  For example, there is more genetic diversity in so-called black people than so-called Caucasians.  Things like sickle cell anemia only affect certain populations of blacks as well as some Mediterranean and Arabian peninsula area peoples too.  And on and on and on why race is totally bogus.

Yeah, that's all most people really mean by white privilege -- that you get accorded rights that a black person would not. 

[TravelingChris]

27 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I don’t think you answered how something short at the beginning of the game interferes with your watching.

I wasn't a huge watcher of NFL and didn't watch NBA at all.  I am a tiny example of who isn't watching anymore.  There is a very large contingent of people who decided that NFL had become political and they weren't supportive and stopped watching. NBA followed, etc.  We have turned to watching other sports where no one seems to be protesting anything except the other team.  

And of course, it interferes.  I don't need something distasteful happening right before I watch a game.  The whole thing was started by Colin Kaepernick who was a failing quarterback, about to be fired because of poor performance, who decided to become a celebrity protestor and try to keep his job.  Forgive me for my skepticism about his motives. Cause I don't think it had anything to do with actual civil rights.

And yes, I have a true problem with not respecting our flag.  We  were stationed overseas and we stood regardless of whether it was our anthem or the country we were at.

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, TravelingChris said:

And of course, it interferes.  I don't need something distasteful happening right before I watch a game.

But why is it distasteful? I know people have stopped watching, but I'm trying to understand why, given that it seems like an unambiguously good cause, requires no money, and honestly requires no time from you. 

[TravelingChris]

9 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

No one is asking you to be a leftist. There's maybe one or two people on this thread I'd describe as seriously progressive, to be honest. It's a lot of center-left people. 

I think all of the actions you're describing are very much worthwhile. But I think raising awareness is also worthwhile, and I say that as someone who had no idea how bad police behavior can get with respect to minority communities until I've seen videos. I wouldn't have believed it. I really wouldn't have. 

Well I did know

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, TravelingChris said:

Well I did know

Then you were way ahead of me 🙂 . I was clueless. 

[Carol in Cal.]

Just now, Dreamergal said:

Yeah, well today this came out.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/10/europe/cardinal-theodore-mccarrick-vatican-report-intl/index.html

Short version Pope John Paul II knew about allegations about someone and still chose to promote him. Still processing it, grieves me, I will absolute condemn it but still not my place to judge if he is a true Christian. 

God sees the heart and though actions and choices maybe reprehensible to you and me, condemn those, not if they are true Christians or not. 

The question of whether someone is a true Christian is different from the question of whether someone is a true Roman Catholic.  I think the previous convo has conflated the two in a way that is confusing.

[SKL]

9 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

OK, I Googled this, and found the following: 

"In the early Roman Catholic church, abortion was permitted for male fetuses in the first 40 days of pregnancy and for female fetuses in the first 80-90 days. Not until 1588 did Pope Sixtus V declare all abortion murder, with excommunication as the punishment." 

I didn't fact-check this: do you know if this is true? 

Aside from how the heck did they know within 40 days whether it was a male or female fetus ....