Episode Transcript
[00:00:14] Speaker A: Hello.
Welcome to the call it like I see it podcast.
I'm James Keys, and in this episode of call it like I see it, we're going to react to some of the commentary coming from inside various christian churches, both protestant and Catholic, that raise concerns about congregations turning away from Christ and the faith, moving more towards ideology or even idolatry.
And later on, we're going to take a look at the legacy of the march on Washington with the recent passing of its 60th anniversary.
Joining me today is a man who may not be what he was in the nineties, but he can still bring the action. Tunde Ogun, Lana Tunde, are you ready to show us why when things get bleak, you can still be the equalizer?
[00:01:03] Speaker B: Of course, man.
[00:01:04] Speaker A: All right.
Also joining me today is a special guest from the contemporary commentary YouTube show Warren Smith III. Warren yeah, Warren, let me welcome you to the show and ask are you ready to break down some things on an elemental level?
[00:01:22] Speaker C: I am so excited to be here with you all this morning, and I'm ready to get started.
[00:01:27] Speaker A: All right. All right. For sure. Now, recording this on September 1, 2023. And recently we've seen a former top official from the Southern Baptist convention, Russell Moore, talk about how the current political environment in America has left Christianity and the US in a crisis. And just a few days ago, we saw the pope take aim at conservatives in the US Catholic Church for allowing ideology to replace faith.
Now, one of the more shocking statements, turning back to the more piece, Russell Moore, one of the more shocking statements that he has talked about or things that he's talked about was his observation that some christians have actually been rejecting the teachings of Jesus Christ as being too weak or not something that still works, or even liberal talking points. So, Tunde, I'm going to throw it to you to get us started. What is your reaction to characterizations of Jesus's teachings as things like weak or liberal talking points and more generally to the crisis that people like Russell Moore say that the church is facing?
[00:02:29] Speaker B: Man it's very interesting to kind of be here at this point and see this type of rhetoric publicly from not only members but leaders of some parts of the evangelical church. And I think that's where I know the word inflection point gets used a lot. But I would say that that's the word I can think of here, that this must be some sort of inflection point for the organization. And I would say clearly here maybe not all branches of Christianity and focusing on the evangelical branch here, but when you have people that are prominent within a religious organization, saying that the teachings of the deity or the son of the deity in this case, however one wants to spin that one, are no longer valid because they are too weak and they don't work anymore. Yeah, they don't work anymore. You need to take extra, instead of extra judicial, maybe extra religious methods. I think you are at an inflection point within the culture of that part of the religion. That's why I don't want to blanket all christians with this. But if the evangelical christian side is becoming aggressive to the point where the teachings of Jesus are no longer enough, then it's just interesting. And what it reminds me of, and I'll pass it back, is kind of the direction that Islam went from kind of the mid late 20th century to now in many middle eastern countries, because a lot of people can look up that cities like Beirut in Lebanon or Tehran in Iran used to be very modern western cities. They used to call Beirut the Paris of the Middle east. And if you look at, you know, 40, 50 years after the aggressive strain of Islam took over those countries and kind of had their way and turned them into theocracies and things like that, you see the result is a more oppressive system. So my concern is that whenever people, human beings feel like they can start telling others how to dictate the word of the religion, you then lead to down an authoritarian road, which usually doesn't work out for the mass population.
[00:04:42] Speaker A: Yeah. Warren, Warren, what was your reaction to kind of this, what we're seeing more and others, you know, talk about?
[00:04:49] Speaker C: Well, I think first, when you talk about Christianity, I think you ought to look at what Jesus taught himself taught, and he himself said that he was sent by God to offer salvation to anyone who would receive him. And evangelizing is committed, is supposed to be committed to spreading that good news of the gospel and the message that Jesus Christ is the savior of humanity and humanity includes us all. And if the church was preaching Jesus, it would include everyone. But unfortunately, we have some conservative churches and pastors that are not preaching Jesus. And although I know that the left has been accused of leaving Christ out of Christmas because they choose to say happy holidays instead of merry Christmas, but now, more recently, the conservatives have been accused of leaving Christ out of Christianity preaching and whose teaching is a mirror reflection of our society. And as a result, it has caused a schism in the church. It has caused congregations to split. Even families and neighborhoods have been split by some of the teaching and preaching in church.
And the fact that the matter is a lot of times they only pull out certain verses that is used only to support the fact that they are right and the other person is wrong.
[00:06:41] Speaker A: No, selective reading of things is something like that. The Bible is famous for that, you know, like in terms of how it's been done, you know, for. I mean, the thing to me about.
[00:06:50] Speaker B: This, the way humans deal with the Bible is famous for that. Yes, the Bible is what it is.
[00:06:55] Speaker A: But the Bible is what it is. The way humans abuse it, any translations and so forth. But yes, yeah, the Bible is what it is, but humans are known for, you know, taking, taking what they want that makes their point and then leaving the rest.
[00:07:07] Speaker B: Russell Moore spoke exactly to that in his article, actually.
[00:07:10] Speaker A: Correct, correct. We'll have some things in the show notes on this. In my mind, the thing that really stood out to me about this was it's actually a religious concept, or a concept that comes from religion is that you can't serve two masters. And what we're seeing right now is a battle in the christian church, which, again, is described in different ways in different denominations. Again, you know, the pope just happened to be talking about this kind of thing, you know, just this week. And then Russell Moore was, it was more in like the month of August. But he's been saying these kinds of things. He's also part of Christianity today, you know, a publication, and he's been saying a lot of these things for a while. And there's, there is the, the quote unquote master of the word of Christ. But then there's this other quote unquote master, which is kind of the political mindset that's happening now, like this political agenda, these culture wars, things like that, that go beyond what Jesus is teaching. And so what we're seeing eventually, the whole thing of you can't serve two masters is that eventually what you're going to choose, one or the other, you can't go down that path indefinitely. So I think that's what we're watching right now is the fact that there has been a line that's been straddled. Whether you go back to the, quote unquote, you know, like the religious right or the, the full on adapt adoption of religion as a part of a political movement. You go back to that and no longer religion being something that, oh, well, there's people that are religious, quote unquote rightfully religious, legitimate religious on both sides. But actually, no, no, no. If you're going to be hardcore religion, you got to be on this side. So once the politics become like, oh, well, this is going to become part of politics, then you end up in this situation where you're serving two masters and there's going to be an inevitable split.
[00:08:58] Speaker C: I definitely agree with that. Now that our churches have become more politicized, our pastors messages coming through the pulpit have also become more politicized, necessarily.
[00:09:14] Speaker A: By the way, because if they're not politicized sufficiently, then the people who want the politicized message will go somewhere else.
[00:09:22] Speaker C: As a matter of fact, you know, you have one pastor down in Tennessee who have come out and said that if you are a Democrat, well, I don't even want you in my church.
[00:09:36] Speaker A: Oh, wow.
[00:09:37] Speaker B: Yeah. Well, let me jump in here too. Cause I wanted to share this piece from the article, actually, Mister Moore, because I thought it was exactly what we spoke to. He says, you know, we must refocus our attention on conversion rather than culture wars, and actually read the Bible rather than mine it for passages to win arguments. And I thought that was just a great way that he put it succinctly. And to your point, Warren, I thought it was great when you said evangelism. Sorry, evangelism is about spreading a positive message. Because what you just described, like that, the example of that pastor from Tennessee, and there's many other examples like that. I know we've all seen different YouTube clips. You know, stuff like that is really today's a lot of, again, I don't want to say today's church and blanket the whole church with that, because I know there's a lot of positive leaders in various denominations, but it seems that at least the evangelical side right now is dominated by leaders who are really trying to lead with messages of fear. And that's what you're saying, Warren. Like, it's like, don't look over there, those other people are bad. And you know, you gotta, you gotta come to me for salvation, by the way.
[00:10:47] Speaker A: Categorically.
[00:10:48] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah, that's what I mean. And it's almost like, it's almost like it's really, in a sense, it's how humans can hijack a religion, in a sense. Meaning the pastor's message is really. Come, listen to me.
Listen to me. Only don't listen to, like you said, whether it's democrats, whether it's other religions, whether it's even other denominations of Christianity, it's all about. Well, if you look over that fence and see over there, it's more of a fear conversation. Be scared of what's beyond the gates of what we have, instead of like you're saying we should go out there in a positive way and actually tell this beautiful message of Christianity and a message of Jesus Christ and James, that's where maybe a better way for me to come in and answer the initial question, which is, yeah, when people are saying the message of Jesus Christ is no longer enough, then it's an interesting point back to Warren. Like, how can you spread a positive message, the message of Jesus, with you starting to believe that that message isn't.
[00:11:42] Speaker A: Enough, that it's deficient? That was the thing, honestly.
[00:11:45] Speaker B: I mean, it's very interesting.
[00:11:46] Speaker A: Yeah, it's pretty reductive. But the whole thing to me was, is that, well, I thought I grew up, you know, in, in the christian church, and I consider myself a Christian. I thought the word of Christ was what we were doing. And so if. If the mindset of some, again, not all, but the mindset of some has evolved into, well, the word of Christ isn't enough, then that does beg the question of, well, then what are we doing then? Are we still doing Christianity? Or are we doing something else under the kind of banner of Christianity, but we're not really doing Christianity anymore? I mean, that statement reveals that question, so to speak. I want to get to the next section now. Warren, did you have anything else on this, though? And the next section kind of blends in with this, though.
[00:12:28] Speaker C: Okay.
[00:12:29] Speaker A: Okay. Well, so the next part I wanted to get to is actually ask. And you guys kind of led into this a little bit. But I want to ask, you know, more of a chicken and egg kind of a question, because Russell Moore talks about the right wing politics. He points to right wing politics as being a part of this and this either corruption or this kind of mindset that has taken evangelical and put the evangelical church in crisis.
But the pope, I thought it was really interesting that he cites conservatives in the US Catholic Church as well. So it's not really to point the fingers at the, in terms of, for the purpose of this conversation. But I do want to ask, is this something that right wing politics or conservative politics is doing to the church more so, or do you think that this is something that this is more of a symptom of an underlying issue of what was going on in the church already? You know, so what, was this something that, you know, political strategy, hey, let's get religious people, you know, that's coming out of the Republican Party, let's get religious people and then let's do this. Or is this something that is evolving because there's something going wrong in the church first that has made it susceptible to this.
And either one of you guys can jump on this.
[00:13:38] Speaker C: Okay. I think that at this political, at this particular time, I think that politics is influencing the church more so than churches influence in politics.
Church can be an effective influence on, as we know, elections. And it cannot and we cannot as a church completely avoid having political discussions and engaging in the political process because by not engaging, then you are actually casting your vote for the opposing issue.
And so the american churches, for example, in the 19th century, that didn't speak out against slavery because that was something that they would consider to be getting political.
But what that meant was that they were actually supporting slavery by not speaking out against it.
[00:14:42] Speaker A: So actually, because just let me throw something on that. Just because if it's wrong and then you, you condone it by not speaking out, then by, by, you know, you are in effect then condoning something that is wrong, which, you know, to your point, but go ahead.
[00:15:00] Speaker C: And so the church, if you think back to the Old Testament, you had Joseph and you had Daniel, who were government officials in foreign government. So christians should be involved politically, but we must also continue to love our neighbors and whether they believe what we believe or not, we still should love them and treat them with compassion and kindness. And we should also, as christians, vote to support God's agenda here on earth.
[00:15:39] Speaker A: Well, but that's the fight, though, you know, what is God's agenda on earth? You know, like, that ultimately is what this comes down to. And I think you made an interesting point in saying, you know, just that the politics is influencing. I think evidence of that would be how, how is the issues that are the important, quote unquote, issues are selected from a political level because you can find issues that Jesus would sign up for, so to speak, or get behind on either side of the political spectrum. You know, if you're looking at, you know, fighting racism or fighting poverty, then you might pick one side. If you're looking at, okay, why I want to make sure abortion is illegal, then you might pick another side. And for that reason, you know, historically, a lot of times it hasn't been that all christians are one religion, so to speak. You're all of this religion and all of that religion because you have to prioritize which issues, you know, so I think the fact that from, in many respects, not all the times, but in many respects, the issues have become more partisan in terms of, okay, we just won't worry about these other issues because they're on the other side. We're only going to worry about the issues that align with the side we've chosen that suggests that partisanship and the politics aspect is that the religion is becoming just another battleground in the overall political landscape. The religion is no longer separate and distinct from that, least from a large scale standpoint. What you got, Tunday?
[00:17:03] Speaker B: Yeah, and I think this is the forever battle between, I think, religions and governments that aren't theocracies. And I think, you know, like, England.
[00:17:11] Speaker A: Took care of those governments. The religion already won.
[00:17:14] Speaker B: Yeah, exactly. That's my point. But if you look at, like, the monarchy system, like in England, I mean, they figured it out by making the king of England the head of the anglican church once they broke away from the Catholic Church. So that kind of solved that. Like, all right, the king is also the head of the religion, and we got all that locked in. But when, like, a country like the United States is created, is created to keep government and religious ideology separate, specifically, and we've talked about this in various conversations on air, because America was an experiment where religious refugees at the time, from the 16 to the 18 hundreds, were coming because they were being persecuted in Europe by the Catholic Church and other, and other larger denominations. I mean, that's the whole idea of Protestants, right? They're protesting the, the rule of the Catholic Church. But then when you get to the United States, you got Unitarians, Methodists, Baptists, Quakers, Amish, and all these different groups that ended up, you know, kind of squabbling for who's, who's the one with the best message. And that's when the founding Father said, you know what? To stop everyone fighting and to stop this country turning into what Europe has been looking like. When they had, like, the hundred years war in England between and Ireland, between the Catholics and the Protestants, they said, okay, we're going to govern with a set of laws that are secular through this constitution and all that. And one of the things that that's going to allow is it's going to allow everybody to be free to practice their religion the way they want, whether Christianity or something else. So that was kind of the concept. And I think that in our country, specifically because of our culture, you can't get rid of religion because it's very important to human beings. And so there's some earliest examples, like, I'll give, like, the scopes monkey trial in the early twenties, which was very quickly just a trial about teaching evolution in public schools in the state of Tennessee. And the Supreme Court ruled on the side of evolution and not on the side of religious doctrine as being part of education. And so during that period, you know, a few decades after that, the evangelical crowd kind of was outside of the political world in the United States. And what happened was through the kind of mix in the 1950s with the Cold War and then with rulings like brown versus Board of Education, that's when we started seeing certain things like parental authority and people starting to bring religion back as a reason that, oh, we only want, you know, the parents should be in charge of the kids future and teaching them not to state. And that's when you started seeing this melding again in this fifties and sixties of the religious kind of right and the fear of the demographic changes in the country coming together. And then I'll pass it back. But through the southern strategy of 1968, I think, is when you saw it kind of manifest in going into the political realm, and it went into the realm of the Republican Party due to partly of this 1968 southern strategy, that joining between the southern Dixiecrat and their Baptist and evangelical kind of cultural bend with the fears of the changes of the sixties, the feminism, the civil rights, all that.
[00:20:28] Speaker A: Yeah. One thing I just mentioned real quick, I want to get your response to that as well, Warren, but the Russell Moore talked about and again, in one of the articles we'll have in the show notes, but talked about how, you know, Christianity being, is supposed to be a religion that is more open and welcoming. And this is something that this had a problem with, you know, throughout the United States. I mean, it's a, it's a human thing, you know, but, but how he points to evangelicals being more susceptible. You know, the numbers show to white nationalism and things like the great replacement theory, great replacement theory and so forth, and being more susceptible to being more critical of things like critical race theories, you know. And so there is something that is definitely involved in terms of this melding of what I would call different political coalitions that have been brought into the more right wing side of american politics and their beliefs kind of blending in together a little bit, or at least I would say melding in together, where if you go back to the 19, and I think you've cited this before on the show tunde, there's been issues where the religious people in this country were completely on the other end. I know, for abortion, for example, or in many parts of the country, segregation, things like that.
It was a lot of religious people that were on the side that would be considered the left side right now. But now what we're seeing is that that's not necessarily the case anymore. And I think that's part of the crisis in Russell Moore's word that he talks about. But, Warren, your thoughts on just the historical context or just kind of what we're seeing today? Because the next question I'm going to get into, just so you know, is looking forward. So just anything else on what we're seeing today in historical context or just in general?
[00:22:19] Speaker C: Yeah, historically, as a matter of fact, one evangelical leader said that the goal of religious rights should be back, should be to get back to the 1950s America.
I guess that was a time when you could attend a KKK meeting on Saturday nights and did get up and go to church on Sunday.
I wonder how many preachers were actually preaching against racism and preaching that racism was wrong back then.
[00:22:57] Speaker A: Well, it was definitely a split issue, though, because if you look at some of the people that would even support Whitln, our second time, we're gonna talk about the march on Washington, but just the civil rights. Like, there were religious leaders that were a part of helping on this in the civil rights movements as well. Like, it may not have been, it may have been more regional, you know, it may not have been in certain parts of the country, but that's kind of the, what we're seeing here is this effort to align everybody on one side. Like, I think historically, if you look back, you can always see people of religious, you know, of different faiths on both sides of issues. And so, but right now what we're seeing is like, hey, if you want to be part of this faith, almost everybody has to come in and align with us on all of these issues, you know, which is just, that's a little different. And you know, that the tunde, that was a great poll talking about the Middle east in terms of how this kind of thing happened in the last, you know, 80 years or so in the Middle east in several countries.
[00:23:50] Speaker C: Yeah, that was a great point. That now more so than ever, you're seeing that in order to be a part of a particular faith, then you have to be not only a member of that faith, but a member of that political party.
[00:24:07] Speaker A: Exactly.
[00:24:08] Speaker B: Well, I think that's a great point, Warren. And I've seen this brought up even in preparing for today. Some of the stuff I was reading and looking at where there was a kind of an open question. Question is kind of evangelicalism like a political ideology now? Like, are the evangelicals now a political arm of american culture more so than a religious arm? And I just found, I'm not going to answer that because I don't know, I'm just saying it's an interesting question as we have this conversation about the influence of the evangelical culture in the United States now on a major political party. And I think part of it, just to add a little bit of just even my reading where I saw some of this stuff going, because post, like I said, post 68 strategy, you get into then the merging of the religious right at the time, what they call the moral majority, people like Jerry Falwell, so on and so forth with politics in the early eighties through the Reagan administration.
[00:25:10] Speaker A: And that's, to me, that's where I point to it as really the, the point where we set on this current trajectory. But go ahead.
[00:25:16] Speaker B: But that's, and I, and I agree, because remember, by the eighties, right, I mean, figure out, you figure that the sixties were the sixties and then obviously, like any culture, right, it takes time for people to jockey for positions of power internally and to figure out what direction the culture is going. Kind of like we just saw where the Republican Party went through that in the last decade from, let's say, 2010, when the Tea party started. By 20, 2010 years later, the party was totally different. It took time for internally, the culture to shift. Leaders like John McCain and Mitt Romney to no longer be at the top and leaders like Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis to be at the top today. So the same thing was happening post 1968 when the stars realigned with who was a Democrat, who was a Republican, so on and so forth. So by 1980, just like in the last decade, it took about a decade, but the kind of the culture had begun to form and harden, that a lot of people who happen to be evangelical but also happen to be very uncomfortable with the changes that happened in the United States, let's say from the late fifties through the early seventies to that period, and this isn't just race, this is the anti war movement. Remember the hippies? Because part of the evangelical feminism as well. Yeah. So I was just going to get at part of the evangelical culture is very male dominated. It's very patriarchal. So like you're saying, James, the combination of feminism plus kind of this hippie, the liberal hippie revolt, which is men having long hair and people smoking grass and going to Woodstock, and they're worried about their kids turning into that. So what happened is by the early eighties, people like Falwell and Pat Robertson and all that were kind of astute enough as businessmen within the church to say, hold on. Well, if, if the Republican party, being the business guys, are looking for more votes and people to basically help them win elections in a sense. If, like you said, if 1972 73, I think it was, 79% of baptist pastors polled agreed with Roe versus Wade.
[00:27:27] Speaker A: By 1980 that it was fine.
[00:27:28] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah. And by 1980, that had switched a lot. And a lot of it was because of the influence of the leaders of certain parts of the evangelical community figuring out, okay, if we get into bed with the politicians, they're going to give us a little bit what we want.
[00:27:43] Speaker A: Things became a quid pro quo correct situation. Yeah.
[00:27:46] Speaker B: This is why pastors can have 60,000 square foot homes now and write them off as religious buildings and not pay.
[00:27:57] Speaker A: Any property taxes, not for profit and stuff.
[00:27:59] Speaker B: Exactly.
[00:28:00] Speaker A: I want to tie it up because you mentioned earlier the fear based kind of messaging. And I think that's where you get into. I do think what we've seen is that the politics has tried to get its tentacles into religion, but I think religion was, you know, religious. Certain religious sects were something that they were, they were susceptible to this as well. You know, the fear based messaging, all that. For all the reasons you just talked about, the ultra conservatives in society oftentimes provide the easiest or cleanest messaging on how to combat that as what happened with Islam and the ultra conservative Muslims taking over in those countries. And so you've seen that now. So it's that susceptibility when, when things become about fear, then a lot of times it is those ultra conservatives. And that this aligns, though, the question of whether the church is moving towards more of an ideology as opposed to a faith aligns with what the pope said. And because he specifically said that what he's seeing amongst conservatives in the US Catholic Church is a move towards a more ideology based approach than a faith based approach. And so what we're seeing this on multiple different levels. And I would say it's probably being driven by the same thing. Susceptibility is coming from the same place. But I want to get to just looking forward, Warren, and just your thoughts, do you think on the direction we're on, is the United States going to look like Iran, you know, in 30 years, or, you know, what do you think about the trajectory here for Christianity? Do you think it's something that can be changed?
Do you think that this is something that actually can lead to something that. To take us in a better direction ultimately, or, you know, let's just kind of. What do you see now and what do you see moving forward?
[00:29:42] Speaker C: Yeah, let me hit on that. But let me also hit on the fact that I think that really the straw that broke the camel's back with the way that the evangelicals pledged their die hard support to Trump. And then you started to hear from their messages words like liberals anarchy and words like lawlessness, which started to come more and more often from their pulpit. And it kind of resembled more of the gospel of Trump than the gospel of Christ during the 2020 time frames. And, you know, this was, and they were willing to throw themselves on the line to make a moral case that he was the great white hope or God's messenger or however they wanted to call him. But this was a man who exhibited none of the fruits of the spirits, but yet they were willing to look at him as a warrior for Christ. But my question was, is the church so weak that they need him to be their protector?
[00:31:02] Speaker A: Well, but that's, that, that leads into the, the issue of if once you've gone to rely on a fear based messaging, then what that leads you to is ends justify the means thinking just naturally as a human being, you know, if you're told how bad things are, told to be afraid, told that these other people are coming for you and they're going to do this and they're going to do that, ultimately, the, the natural response to that is that then the words of Christ aren't enough because the hordes are at the gate, so to speak. And so I think that's where, that's what I mean as far as the susceptibility. Many people agree with you that this breaking point was the Trump support, you know, and obviously immoral person, you know, someone who doesn't claim to be a moral person, you know, but the, hey, I'll make a deal with you, though. If you support me, I'll give you stuff you want, you know, almost in, like, in the Bible, like they have stories like that making a deal with the devil, you know? And a lot of people point to that, you know, as far as it being a key point detuned. Did you want to react?
[00:31:58] Speaker B: Definitely on this one. It's great because I was, you know, I, in preparing for today, I was listening to an interview with Ralph Reed, who is one of the longest standing leaders of the evangelical and hybrid and with the political side. He became a leader in the young college Republicans in the early 1980s. I mean, he was kind of front and center in the changes that happened. And now he's considered a leader in that side, both republican politics and the evangelical church. And the interview for me was fascinating because it speaks to exactly what you're saying. And I feel like you know, there was a few, he took a few psychological off ramps when they asked him questions exactly like you said. Like, how is it that he, cuz because the interviewer, I think, did a great job of positioning her questions very respectfully and politely, but in a way that we just said because I remember she asked him specifically, can you explain? Because a lot of people outside of the evangelical community see it as hypocritical that, you know, a guy who's a thrice married casino owner who's, who lies a lot, you know, and all that, that somehow the evangelical kind of movement backed him by like 80% to 90%. So he goes on to explain, and this is where it gets into exactly what we're talking about.
Obviously, he kind of sideswipes the need to address what she just said because he doesn't explain directly how he can go with someone who, you know, seems to have a history of things that go against the teachings of Christ. And he says, he basically gets into the idea. He starts going into my quote, my argument is, which vote represents the greatest good? Meaning when he talked about how he came to it in 2016 between Hillary and Trump, the fact that Donald Trump wasn't perfect, it's something I already knew when it came to the issues I believe in that are moral issues, such as, and he cites religious freedom, the right to life, the protection of the innocent human life in the womb, and the appointment of judges who would protect that life and the protection of the state of Israel. Those were his main points. And he says, these are not just policy issues for me. These are issues of right and wrong. And basically he goes on to say that I believe that Donald Trump would support those main issues and that Hillary Clinton would. And that's his right, obviously, to believe that from a political angle. But what I'm saying is it made me realize in the note I wrote here, I said, I realize nowhere in this, in there does he cite the protection of the american system and the Constitution. Like, that's what I realized.
[00:34:37] Speaker A: Nowhere in there is the idea that we need to do something about poverty, which would be, that would be at the top of Jesus's list.
[00:34:44] Speaker B: Yeah, you're right.
[00:34:46] Speaker A: That's what I mean. As far as you can, you know, it's political when you've decided which issues are important to you, correct for along political lines.
[00:34:55] Speaker B: And that's what I mean by he's given himself all these emotional off ramps to say, well, I can still support this guy and say that I believe in this style of Christianity because these are my important things. Just like to your point, James, and to the point of Mister Moore who wrote that article when he said people cherry picking out of the Bible, because you're right, he didn't cherry pick the part about helping the poor and the meek. And like you said, those who are racially discriminated against and all that. So it's, that's why to me I was like, wow, dude, you just, you're just picking and choosing. And that's what I said. It goes back to like you said about the, what Islam did in the Middle east. Nowhere is he saying, I want to protect the system which allows me to practice my faith freely in others, that the constitutional system of the United States. He seems to be okay with the idea that protecting life, protecting the state of Israel, all that kind of stuff is more important than actually protecting the system that allows us to do all those other things.
[00:35:51] Speaker A: So yeah, I mean, but I do want to, I got to keep us moving, Warren. You know, just trajectory moving forward, you know, like what do you see looking forward as far as, you know, just is all is lost. You know, we talk about crisis is all lost or what? What do you see?
[00:36:08] Speaker C: I have some good news for you and I have some bad news.
[00:36:11] Speaker A: All right, all right.
[00:36:13] Speaker C: The good news is that the best argument for Christianity is christians.
[00:36:20] Speaker A: All right, all right.
[00:36:21] Speaker C: The bad news is the strongest argument against Christianity is also Christianity.
So if we want people to stop leaving the church and if we want Christianity to thrive and be revelant again, then maybe it's time that we look at the movement that Jesus started 2000 years ago.
[00:36:47] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:36:48] Speaker C: Love is supposed to be the central theme of Christianity.
The fact that God loved us enough to send his son to die so that we can have a right to salvation and we are supposed to be able to exhibit that love.
Now when we look at even the Roe versus Wade and how christians were acting about that and how they were saying that, you know, if you support abortion, then you are going directly to hell.
The issue is that we cannot let our righteous outrage over abortion or any other political issue overwhelm our compassion and our love for our brothers and sisters.
And even at a time where they are in a position where they are struggling trying to make that decision and at the same time dealing with their own salvation.
[00:37:56] Speaker A: I don't know, Warren. Those sound like talking points to me, man.
[00:38:01] Speaker B: You know, it's funny because Warren makes such a beautiful and eloquent, like just case for Christianity. I mean, think about what you just said that, that, that God sent his son down to die for our sin. I mean, if you like. What I'm saying is, because when I said about how that interviewer asked Mister Reid about how is this not hypocritical? And I'm just going to speak from my own experience on this earth.
I was turned away early in my life by religion because I saw so much of those hypocrisies. And I really feel, had I been exposed to religion in the way that Warren just described from an early age. I may be religious myself today, but I'm not because I grew up with a cynical view of it, because I looked at people like Mister Reid himself. And those were my exposures early on in religion. Remember when we were young guy? I mean, I know we're all a little bit different ages, but I kind of started remembering stuff in the eighties, right? And it was when it was all those televangelists who were stealing and going to jail and, you know, was it the Jim and Tammy Faye Baker types? Right? And it's just like, and that's what I used to see. Like, hold on. None of these people really seem to be really about this stuff. And it took till I was an adult to meet people that are like you, Warren, that speak so eloquently about this, but by then I'm already a lost soul, so it's too late.
But it's just because you're so right. Like that's the real way to get people back, not through this fear stuff. And it's just like, because that's why I like the analogy of where Islam went most. It seems like in the last 50 years there's been a net migration out of the Middle east, then into the Middle east.
And, and that's what I mean. Like people, when you don't have a welcoming message, generally you're not going to welcome a lot of people. And then what you have to do is then put that hard authoritarian hand down to stop everyone else from leaving, you know, the people that remain. So, yeah, it's, it's very interesting.
[00:40:00] Speaker A: I'll say this. I think that it's important to have this discussion and consider this stuff because in a society, large society like ours, while someone like me or you, Tunde, talk about all the Constitution, and Warren, I know just something that is important to you as well.
The constitution and our loyalty to the constitution and stuff like that. The truth is that everyone in a society, well, I would say it like this, many people need more than that in terms of finding their connection and their fulfillment in their day to day life in their society and so forth. Like the Constitution is an abstract, philosophical like concept. You know, it's not something that gets people fired up necessarily 100% of the time. All types of people, there are certain people that really, that really does it for them. But other people need more. And religion a lot of times has spin that more to where these messages are tied in to make people feel more like a community together and so forth. And so getting this aligned is important. Now, I do believe that we're looking at two type of trajectories, and both of them, I think, will operate in parallel anyway. Like Christianity is split many a times, you know, so to speak, with different people saying, hey, we're just gonna go about it this way, you guys go about it that way. And so the point you raised earlier, Tunde, about the actual system that allows for that split and then everybody to still live and let live is kind of important because that's one of the foundational principles of this country. So I think that, and this is, you know, Russell Moore talked about this as well. Like, this isn't about one group needs to go to the other group and impose, hey, this is what Christianity is going to be about. You guys need to get on board with that now. But there is something that we have to kind of keep in mind here, and this will present somewhat of a, I don't know if you could say it would be a challenge, but just it's an inconvenience is that if you look at the teachings of Jesus and the type of stuff he talked about, what was important to him and so forth, he was a liberal guy, you know, and so it ultimately, yes, those are liberal talking points because, yeah, he was talking about social justice and all this stuff a long time ago. And so ultimately, if you're going to keep Christianity close to Christ, you're going to have that come up from time to time, and you're just gonna have to figure out a way to harmonize that. Ideally, I think that as long as we can keep a situation going where people can find meaning, people can find, you know, community through religious practices, ideally more people can find that, you know, like, again, and not about being exclusionary, but also keeping it as a message that brings people together and allows people to work things out is probably better from a societal standpoint than a message that is about, like you were talking about earlier today, exclusion and things like that.
[00:42:48] Speaker B: Yeah. When I hear you talk, you know, one of my things that I always feel is, you said that very well. Why should that be limited to a liberal mindset? You know what I mean? Like this idea of just inclusion and caring about other people. Like, and that's the part to me that is interesting because I know there's a lot of people that consider themselves conservative that are very, you know, welcoming and nice people and they want to help others. So that's where I feel almost bad for like the system and conservative because there's a certain strain of authoritarianism that has hijacked, you know, part of the conservative and part of the religious movement. And that's why I make this analogy to the Middle east. Like the reality is that the highest group of people or the biggest group of people that have been hurt I, by the wahhabi style Muslims have actually been muslim, moderate Muslims. They're the ones also got kicked out of a lot of their countries along with the Christians and the Jews over the last, you know, 60 years in some of these middle eastern countries. So I think it's, it's, it's, it's for people that aren't within this community and aren't that, that would like to see the church change just like Mister Moore. I think we also got to be very, and I'm not saying the three of us on the show, I'm just talking openly here, we got to be very also disciplined in how we look at this and not blanket all conservatives or everybody in the church that they all think that Jesus is too liberal.
[00:44:16] Speaker A: I think it's, let me throw something on that though, because that's a good point.
Because really what you're saying there, which is an excellent point, it's almost, society has put this on us and right now we accept it as is. But it's not an inherent truth. There's no reason why being against racism should be seen as liberal.
[00:44:34] Speaker B: Correct. That's what I mean.
[00:44:35] Speaker A: Like inherently liberal. It's just that the way things have evolved in our society, that tends to be that side of the aisle. And there's no reason why being against poverty, you know, wanting to address poverty, needs to be liberal, you know, but that's lined up.
[00:44:52] Speaker B: And so like the environment, God created the earth. How is it a liberal position to want to protect the earth?
[00:44:59] Speaker A: Exactly. So that should be the most religious world that we, that is the world we live in right now. That's unfortunate. And so that's part of ideally the trajectory that can change in terms of, again, if it, whether it's a split, whether it's kind of just a, you know, certain people haven't reframing their priorities or whatever. But that's really what you need some type of like harmonization on in terms of. Because these issues right now are being left, because other issues, like Ralph Reid said, other issues he has decided or just what, the ones that he's going to find important. And these issues aren't important to him anymore.
[00:45:32] Speaker B: And that actually helps articulate what I said earlier after Warren spoke. When I said, when I was younger, I was exposed and I kind of looked at it hypocritically. And I appreciate you saying this because that's exactly how I felt when I even, I read it. Like, you're right. Like he's cherry picking what's important to him based on political lines. Yeah, I appreciate the state of Israel, but since when did Israel, and I mean, I know Israel's in the Bible and all that, but this, this, it's a geopolitical conversations he's having now because they're our ally and all that, that's not necessarily religious. And then things like, um, like, like this whole focus on abortion and all that. Again, we've talked about this. That became a cultural issue within american religious circles just in the last 40 years. But that's not, and that's the, that's really what, why to me, protecting the secular institution that binds us all together is the most important thing. Because religions and how people view their religion changes based on cultural changes over time. Like, remember Mary Magdalene was a prostitute until, like, what? It's somewhere in the 20th century, the Catholic Church has said, well, she's not a prostitute anymore. And now that's a new way that we look at it. Yeah, right. You know, I mean, like, it's just over time, as cultures change, the religion also changes to reflect the culture and vice versa. But it's like the constitution, the law is the thing that's supposed to kind of be the guardrails of going too far in one direction or another.
[00:47:06] Speaker C: Well, you know, when you look at, for example, the LGBQ and how they are sometimes shunned in some of the congregations, people can see that and they can see how other congregants are leaning toward nationalism and at the same time they are claiming to follow Christ.
[00:47:38] Speaker A: There's certain people that talk like Christ was like, american or like the United states and stuff like that. That goes really far out.
But now, go ahead.
[00:47:48] Speaker C: But something is just not adding up. And deep down inside, we know. We know what's right and what's wrong. And even though we take sides and we talk in a certain way, and for certain political things to occur. We know deep down inside what's right and what's wrong. And the Bible says, can sweet and bitter flow from the same springs. And, like, I don't know if you saw notorious b I g, but when Puffy told him that he wanted to take over the world, the notorious b I g said, we can't change the world until we first change ourselves.
[00:48:36] Speaker A: Hey, that's always the best way to end the topic by quoting.
We can move to the second topic today. The second topic we want to discuss today, we just passed the 60th anniversary of the march on Washington. And which was, that's something that is iconic. That's something that at least until recently, in the whole war on and teaching history, every kid in America learned and saw, like, images from it and stuff like that. And for many people, something to be proud of as far as, you know, Americans coming together, really fighting to make America live up to what it says it was going to. You know, it says it was. But so, you know, like 60 years later, what do you guys see as the legacy? You know, tunde, I'll go to you first. What do you see as the legacy from this huge demonstration, and how much of it do you think you know, and also the energy of the civil rights movement still resonate today in society?
[00:49:32] Speaker B: No, I mean, look, clearly from that era, all that stuff was important in terms of the ability of people to use, to actually, and on a serious note, pursue their constitutional rights. Right? They had freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom to redress their grievances against the government. So that's real quick.
[00:49:55] Speaker A: I love how you. When you talk about civil rights and you're like, hey, these are rights as a citizen. This isn't a black people thing. Rights are. So that's. I always love it when you put it like that.
[00:50:05] Speaker B: Yeah. Because then it forces the question, okay, well, if you don't gonna give these rights to everybody, then we gotta have that conversation. Right? Like, it just makes it that. Let's just accept this, what it is. And so. And so the idea is that, yes, that was a big deal, and it showed that the country, I mean, for the first time in american history, that many people gathering to protest segregation and the lack of everyone having equal rights. And so I think that, you know how I feel without getting too into it, right. Integration worked in general.
We have in a very short period of time, meaning from, let's say, the late 1960s to now is just over 50 years. Blacks and other minorities have become fully integrated into american society in general.
And I know there's, there's individual pockets where we could have definitely different conversations. But in general, it's been a positive, I think, change and I think that we are seeing today. That's why it's interesting having the 60th anniversary, similar reactions to the progress that we had back in the sixties. And it goes back to even in part one, when Warren mentioned how the churches and some leaders in the faith movement are addressing today's issues using terms like anti woke and CRT and all this to use fear. They were doing the same stuff back then by saying that people that wanted integration were communists and all those kind of same language and even something similar, and I'll pass it back, is I was looking at an article and preparing for this conversation about Doctor King's favorable rating. And it's just interesting of how, yeah, when he was alive, like in 1966, which was the last poll taken by Gallup while he was alive, he had a favorability rating of just about 44%.
[00:52:00] Speaker A: Yep. He was underwater.
[00:52:02] Speaker B: He was under 50%. And it really didn't pick up until the 1980s, 1990s when people started having nostalgia again. Our culture had changed enough so that people could look back in a nostalgic way and say, wow, you know, he was a good guy. It was good that he led this change in our country. But at the time, you know, there as people were living through the dash of history there, you know, they all didn't feel that way.
Yeah.
[00:52:29] Speaker A: Warren, what do you think as far as the legacy and so forth?
[00:52:32] Speaker C: Well, you know, I think even though things have changed, they haven't. I think, you know, the issues have changed. Back then they gathered for civil rights and job and economic opportunities. Today is criminal justice reform and voting rights. It's almost like a give and take.
[00:52:56] Speaker A: Voting rights was during both times, voting rights has been a consistent one.
[00:53:02] Speaker C: Now it's almost just like everything that they've given us. Well, or not given us, but everything that we have gained, now they're trying to take it back.
[00:53:12] Speaker B: Yeah, well, that's what I'm saying about its mirroring.
[00:53:15] Speaker A: Right.
[00:53:15] Speaker B: Because, I mean, look, some people in the sixties, if they could take it back to slavery, they would have. There's always this, this knee jerk reaction whenever there's a certain level of progress, that energy that's still in our country that wants to go back to some sort of, you know, authoritarian caste system which would what Jim Crow or slavery was, they, they also rear their heads because they get intimidated by the progresses that are made by others. And so that's why, that's why I.
[00:53:44] Speaker A: Think, you know, there's a word for it. And actually the pope used the word, which was pretty interesting. It's called reactionary. People who want to take things back to a certain place, you know, because conservative, remember, conservative is things are as they are. Let's keep things as they are. Or if we're going to change it, let's change it very slow. People that want to go back to the fifties are not conservative. They're reactionary. They are radical. You know, they want to make big changes and want to make them fast. So, you know, it's always something to keep in mind, you know, when like, though with these terms, they get all mixed up. But I think that the legacy of this is strong. Yeah. And I'm glad you brought up the polling as far as how now we look back, you know, there's a national holiday for Martin Luther King and, you know, all this stuff and like, oh, you know, even, even people who are on, you know, like we would look at now and say, hey, this person is out here talking, stop woke and anti crt. That person, when it's Martin Luther King's birthday, I'll make a statement. Oh, he was a great american, yadda yadda.
[00:54:37] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:54:38] Speaker A: So we've seen that. But I think what it is basically is when the change is happening or being agitated for people, more people are uncomfortable. There's just a certain amount of people that are just always uncomfortable with change. And then to your point, 20 years later, like, oh, well, the change wasn't that big of a deal. And then they kind of move on and so forth. And so we're living through the time right now, honestly, where there's been some change, you know, Barack Obama, you know, like we're people, then people are going to look back most likely, you know, the way, if history is any, you know, retelling of this in 20 years and like, oh, it wasn't that big of a deal when Obama, it wasn't that bad. I mean, not that big of a deal from my perspective, but people who were against it, it wasn't that big of a deal. And so it's just like you said, when you're in the dash where it's in this time period, either during the time of being agitating for change or right after the change is happening, there's a lot of friction going on. But my concern is that the legacy, there's a fight over what the legacy is going to be right now. And I don't know that everybody realizes that because a sanitized version of this legacy could end up being what it is if we're not careful. Because once we get out of the living memory of things, like we're still in the living memory right now, there's still people alive that were around back then that were paying attention to things back then. They weren't five years old or whatever. But as that fades, then there's going to be a fight to retell it in the same way that after the civil, once the civil war got a little bit away, you had the daughters of Confederacy fighting to change the way it was remembered and so forth. And the way right now, this is what the moms for liberty are talking about. This is what Ron DeSantis is talking about when they're saying, we want to change how these things are taught because it's a battle over how these things are remembered.
I look at it right now as far as the legacy is something that we need to talk about more and what the legacy is because it's still in the balance. It's not. It's not. History is not, quote unquote in the books. And we can just look back on that as how everybody's going to remember it because I think that battle is literally happening right now.
[00:56:33] Speaker B: You're right. That's why they're banning books, man. It's obvious.
[00:56:39] Speaker A: Black history. Like what? You know, just recently, Florida takes an AP african american history class out of circulation. Like, no, we're just not. We're not doing this. You know, I think Arkansas is doing the same thing. So, you know, it's. What. Yeah, it's one of those things that. So I wanted to bring that part up. You know, like, I know that because the legacy is something, again, that people in our generations, you know, people that are 40 plus, look back and say, okay, yeah, we learned about it. We learned about it as being a pretty good thing and so forth, but that's not a given right now. And I think somehow we, people perceive racial issues now and in the future will be defined by what happens over the next ten years or so. As far as the legacy of this stuff.
[00:57:16] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:57:17] Speaker A: So anything else on this one, guys?
[00:57:20] Speaker C: Well, it is a very complicated issues, and I just think we just have to keep on pushing, like you say, to raise the level of consciousness that's, that's in the country to, to attack some of these issues. You know, we still have a high level of hate crimes, and, you know, they're still trying to attack our democracy, but we just have to continue to keep pushing and to keep striving and realize that at this point, we can't afford to turn back.
[00:57:56] Speaker A: Well, yeah, there's that. That's like the activist side, but there's also remember, and this is like the boring side. Like, there's. Yeah, you want to raise the consciousness, you know, and everything, but also just so that the actual stuff that happened gets remembered, you know, like, there we see efforts right now, like, oh, yeah, slavery. You know, slaves benefited from that. You know, like, that's like an actual effort to change how this thing will be remembered, to rewrite the history, you know? And so what we're gonna see efforts to happen is that, oh, okay, march on Washington was, you know, like, that was something that it was recasted in some way because the argument will be that, oh, it makes some people feel uncomfortable that there were people who were trying to deny people their rights as citizens and so forth. So we will take that out. Or so, again, I just want to make that connection to what we see now in big picture, though. You know, I think it's something that all Americans can and should be proud of, because most countries cannot make the kind of changes that we've made in this nation through relatively peaceful means, you know, usually requires wars and all this other stuff, you know? And so that's. That's. That's significant and something to be proud of your country for. Go ahead.
[00:59:03] Speaker B: No, I agree. And that's where. That's when I use this term, and some people look at me when I'm like I'm crazy that integration worked. And I think everybody, you know, is still shocked about that fact. You know, there's some on the white side who are intimidated by that, that, you know, we had a black president or that people like us have our own businesses and we live in, you know, their neighborhoods and all that kind of stuff. And there's also black Americans that are still, unfortunately, have the emotional and psychological trauma, let's put it that way, of the past, and still feel that they're renting this country and that they don't own it. And that's what I'm saying about I think we all. This 60th anniversary gives us a chance to all look at how we're approaching this in a different way. And I think we did that show, James, a few months ago about how the NAACP in Florida responded to the attacks. Bye, Governor DeSantis, on black education and other topics and by telling people not to come here. And I remember that, you know, we were kind of looking at it like a contrarian. Like, hold on. Why would you tell people, like, that's like a defeatist attitude. I would almost say if you're black and you were thinking about moving to Florida, we want you to move now so that you can be a registered voter here and again, use this system, your rights as a citizen to participate because that's the only way that we maintain these changes, and that's been proven. If we look at something like the Roe versus Wade issue, participating in elections then picks leaders who then pick judges who affect the law. And so if you don't want to see affirmative action, let's say, be tampered with, like it just was this year in 2023 by the Supreme Court as it relates at least to higher education, then you need to be out there participating in the system and voting for politicians that will protect those interests. And it's, and that's what a democracy is. That's why for a lot of people, when we go back to the, you know, the first topic of people that want to just have a theology because that feels easy or an autocracy or dictatorship, let's just give it to one guy and he'll fix it all.
[01:01:15] Speaker A: Yeah, you don't keep showing up every two years. You can just chill.
[01:01:18] Speaker B: But history shows that that doesn't work.
[01:01:20] Speaker A: It's a good point in the sense.
[01:01:21] Speaker B: That set of people.
[01:01:23] Speaker A: Well, no, it's a good point in the sense that now the requirements are different. Like, you do need to show up and vote for, if you guys are electing prosecutors in your county, you got to show up and do it because that's going to play a very big role on how you're treated or how people in your community are treated or communities that you care about are treated. You know, you need to show up and vote here like that. My thought on the NAACP thing that you're talking about with Florida is like, yeah, I thought that was a great opportunity to try to organize, get more people registered to vote and get people, more people voting. To me, that's what that seems. They're like, hey, we don't like what this politician is doing. This guy, when he first won, he barely. What? You know, like, let's, let's get him out of power. You know, like, let's not just throw a fit, you know, like, let's use agency to get him out of power. So. But, yeah, I mean, I think that's part of the transition that has been happening and still needs to happen in terms of, it's not just when you're upset about something that you can show up and like and demonstrate, and then you go back and then stop paying attention and stop caring like you gotta. Now that we've won more rights, now that we've gotten more rights as citizens, recognize you have to continually show up to preserve those because the people who didn't want you to have them in the first place, they're still working. They're not.
[01:02:34] Speaker B: You know, you're absolutely right. That's why to me, Roe versus Wade is a great example. They work. I mean, they deserve that win. Honestly, I'm pro choice, and I say that because they worked for 50 years and they got the right people in political office that picked the right judges and the right, you know, and it just, they worked it. And like you said, somebody spent decades trying to dismantle affirmative action at the higher education level and they got it. So you're right. If people don't show up, there's other people out there that want to do, want to take us back and they want to do, as a former candidate for Vice president yelled on a microphone, they want to take their country back as the way they see it because they don't see it as our country is their country.
[01:03:19] Speaker A: And that's the. I want to get your last comment, Warren, but, and that's you, you made the point earlier as far as when you don't take a position on issues, then you're really, you throwing your support behind the people you don't agree with. And that's really what it is. When you don't vote, then you're throwing your support behind people who you don't agree with because the person who is voting for the person you don't like, you would have counteracted their vote if you were there. Instead, their vote gets more strength because you didn't show up. But, you know, wrap us up, Lauren Warren, what you got exactly?
[01:03:44] Speaker C: I think that we need to have a lot of faith in the younger generation that's coming up. I think that's what's going to determine the faith of this country and the faith of this democracy. And I've seen the young people in action. I've seen a lot of the young people who have called their parents on the carpet because of the way that they have acted in supporting certain political events. And young people, I think they're galvanized. And I think even though there's some policies that will come out saying that we don't want you to teach certain things in our classroom, both black and white, say, no, we want to learn about this stuff.
I think that we have to look to our younger generations and have faith in them and to continue you to believe that we're going to eventually work things out the way that they're supposed to be worked out.
[01:04:48] Speaker A: All right.
[01:04:48] Speaker B: All right.
[01:04:48] Speaker A: Well, no, I mean, I take it from that comment that we need to get over to TikTok then.
But no, I mean, no, that's a great kind of thought. I mean, I think you're right, too. I mean, ultimately it is. That's how the whole generation thing works. You know, ultimately, the older folks are going to get out of the paint eventually. Like the older, the baby boomers don't seem to want to let go. But ultimately, you know, there's, the next generations always have to take over. So, yeah, hopefully we're creating an environment where they will be prepared to take power and be able to take the ideals forward and keep us moving to the country that, you know, is promised, so to speak. So. But no, we appreciate everybody for joining us. Warren, we appreciate you for joining us on this podcast.
[01:05:27] Speaker B: Thanks for joining us, brother.
[01:05:30] Speaker A: And just, you know, plug your podcast real quick before your, your YouTube show where people can find you and stuff like that.
[01:05:35] Speaker C: Look for me on contemporary commentary where I talk about the social, political and christian type topics just to keep you informed and to keep you up to date on current events.
[01:05:52] Speaker A: All right. All right. And yes, subscribe to us here also at Popcorn like I see it. Subscribe, share it with your friends. Rate us, review us, tell us what you think. Until next time. I'm James Keys.
[01:06:02] Speaker B: I'm Tunde Guanlana and Warren Smith.
[01:06:05] Speaker A: All right, and we'll talk to you next time.
