Niven’s Law #16: There is no cause so right that one cannot find a fool following it.

Twitter is a rich mine of evidence for this.

I recognize the point Father and Mrs Timmy are making about there being random keyboard warriors for every conceivable thing. Mea culpa.

Is it possible that EWTN felt pressured because some donors were uncomfortable because she spoke of racial justice?

Absolutely. But be careful to make the distinction (which many critics do not) between being racist and not agreeing with some of the calls for change. One can, for example, oppose defunding the police with thereby being racist in the eyes of many.

Fair point. But some people who oppose defunding the police might have a certain insensitivity and ignorance (not deliberate malice), presuming whiteness as the norm, that perpetuates the status quo with certain difficulties being faced by BIPOC people.

What the heck have you been reading?

Let's say there was a writer at the National "Catholic" Reporter who wrote items critical of Biden, Fr. James Martin, and the vagaries of the German Bishops' Conference. How long do you think that writer would be employed there?

Again, this is why we have to be so careful with charges of racism. It lets the Distorter claim the moral high ground when in fact they tailor their reporting to their subscriber base every bit as much as EWTN does.

Several things, but the ones I can name are those that have influenced me the least.
Question for you: do you think BIPOC people in USA experience racism?


Touche. Fair point.

I think there is still racism in America.

Are you familiar with the story of the boy who cried, “Wolf!”?

Do you pray and preach about it?

You'd asked what the heck I was reading. I think you were shocked. What was it that shocked or surprised you? You acknowledge that racism exists, and I don't support defund the police.

Let us examine that sentence. EWTN may have indeed dropped an anti-white, BLM ideologue named Gloria Purvis ... but there is no indication why she was dropped. It is if the sentence read: "Support EWTN's decision to drop stamp-collecting, cricket loving Highlander. Much credit ...."

Then let us look to the author of the sentence. It does imply, I admit, that the reason that GP was dropped was her ideology and belief system. It that was indeed her ideology and belief system, then it was probably sufficient grounds to drop her. In today's US climate, it is a brave act as the hounds of wokedom and PC and totalitarian enforcement will come at you with foaming mouths. However, there is no support of the author's assertion that she was anti-white or a BLM ideologue or if those factors caused her firing. In my example above, I used to collect stamps and I don't even understand cricket. Merely writing it doesn't make it so.

Finally, if she is anti-white, then she is a racist. And a Christian network can not tolerate that. If she is a BLM ideologue then she is either ignorant of what the BLM organization is or she is a danger to civil rights and the rule of law. You might read up on what the BLM organization is, how it is financed and how it spends its money, and what illegal and damaging acts it has created and supported.

It is an old saw, but, yes, BLM. And if one expands it to ALM and that one is pilloried, then the racist agenda of BLM should be evident. One merely has to look what is left of the conservative media in the US and observe that it has been screaming for years about the number of black on black urban murders, with appeals for the rule of law, and the thousands of abortions of black babies, pointing out the racist genocide -- and that BLM has not urged those issues be addressed.

Finally, I personally have no issue with your exploration of Gloria Purvis's firing. I have no idea who she is, so I have no dog in this hunt. If there was an anti-Black motive, it ought to be exposed and EWTN should be held to account. I do agree with others that your sources of information to support that idea are suspect.

Yes.

Do I think that Asians in the USA experience racism. Definitely. And overtly. With no acknowledgement or, until Trump, action to address it. I specifically point out racist college admission practices. Oh, practiced by BIPOC.

Do I think that whites (which is an imprecise and inaccurate term as "blacks" -- West Indians and Eritreans have nothing in common other than some melanin genes) experience racism? See my earlier post upon being ignored when first in line. Yup, practiced by BIPOC. Where I live we have 10% of the land and 10% of the population are Indians divided into 19 pueblos, two reservations, and the Navajo Nation. You might be interested in how any non-Indian will be treated when setting foot in any of them. Or how any resident of any of them will be treated when setting foot in any other of them.

Racism has become an imprecise and ideologically loaded club to beat, sometimes to death, those who oppose your 'druthers. It is a nuanced, economic, historical, educational, social, legal, psychological, personal, and political topic that has been reduced to a single verbal bash in the face. It is used now in much the same way that the N-word was once used -- with pretty much the same intention.

I hold with the ideas that you cannot change a person's mind, but you can change their actions. So - you cannot make a racist a non-racist, but you expect him to act like one.

And that of course is the point. It is people's ACTIONS which you can see and which can affect others which count. We cannot see their beliefs and as mere mental constructs, they have no impact on others -- until the holders of those beliefs ACT.

I recall a debate when Mitt Romney was running for President. "He's a Mormon! Do you know what they believe?"

"Who cares what they believe? What has he DONE?"