Quote:I see we're skipping over the evil comment. It's expected.


"I agreed with the original premise of the Black Lives Matter movement..." I'm asking where did you come upon the "original premise?" Where did you come across this info?


JFC did share and your response to him was flippant, the same with Solid. We're defensive because we don't trust YOUR motives, not because there's something to hide. I wouldn't even characterize it as being defensive. You said you open to dialogue, here it is. Like I said earlier, being patronizing only means you don't take us seriously. Doesn't matter the amount of degrees, doesn't matter the amount of community service. Otherwise, your responses would have been," Great, let's exchange contact info. I'd like to hear more and see if I can be apart of it." It certainly wouldn't be accusing someone of wanting to have a [BAD WORD REMOVED] contest for offering info you asked for to begin with.


Speak to teach...there you go again talking down

Why should I comment on the "evil" comment? It was another poster, not me. You need to go back and read as you are mixing and parsing comments. 

 

You can believe and trust what you want. I'm not here to convince one way or another. I'm flattered you want to make the topic of BLM about me, but just not the case. I'm interested in yours and others perspective as to why it should be considered a positive thing. Once again, we hear and see the bad consistently, why not the good?

 

So this is dialogue huh? I keep giving you the opportunity to express and teach, but you keep taking it as an insult. It was a paraphrased quote from Plato meaning to share some knowledge by conversation, but don't talk just to talk. Does this mean you can't or won't provide anything on the OP? This circle has gone around more than once and it's getting tiring.

---