Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 34 | The Paradox of Likability

Episode Date: September 4, 2018

If there's one thing conservatives generally lack, it's likability. Democrats and socialists have put forth their most affable candidates for the midterms, while Republicans are falling short, and we won't like the consequences. Likability isn't everything, though. It's a double-edged sword that must be wielded wisely. A Q&A section will end the episode.  Copyright CRTV. All rights reserved.

Hey guys, happy Tuesday. So just FYI, I am pre-recording these episodes this week because I'm going to be in North Carolina next week, aka this week for you guys as you're listening to it. So we are going to cover kind of an evergreen topic. And that is the topic of the paradox of likability, which I am going to explain in a second. Today we're going to talk about it as it pertains to politics and in particular to the Republican Party. And on Thursday, we're going to talk about it as it pertains to Christianity. And today and Thursday, I am going to answer many of the wonderful questions that you guys have sent me in the last few days. So what is this paradox of likability? Or why is likeability a paradox? The reason it's a paradox is because, on the one hand, being likable

draws people to you, to your cause and to your message, making it easier for you to accomplish whatever goal it is that you want to accomplish, whether that is just becoming someone's friend, gaming affirmation, convincing someone of your plan, persuading them with an idea. Whatever it is, likability typically helps you. And likability comes in many forms, in my opinion. Someone doesn't even have to be friendly to be likable. They don't have to be articulate necessarily to be likable. They don't always have to be funny or attractive, though I think all of these things can help. But people who are likable are sometimes dry, serious, reserves. And likewise, there are people who are very gregarious and funny who are not likable at all. There's just kind of

this intangible quality many times in likability. There are a lot of things that people can do to improve their level of likeability. But some people are just kind of born with this aura of of likability that draws people to them, that compels other people to listen to them. And the truly impactful people are the ones who are not only naturally likable, but they're also smooth. They leverage their natural likability into charm, a charm that persuades people. Likeability not only draws people to you, it also makes them trust you. Most people I know, maybe not everyone, but most people I know want to be likable.

I mean, that's the reason why most of us are on social media. We want likes. We want affirmation that people like us. We present ourselves as attractive, as fun, as funny, as the kind of people. Other people would want to hang out with. Most people want to be likable. Now, yes, some people would rather just command respect. People in the military, for example, they may not care about being liked.

They just want to be respected. They would rather be feared. but I think in the words of Michael Scott, if we had to choose between being feared or loved, we would probably say both, that we want people to fear how much they love us. And even though I would say that the likes we seek on social media are kind of, they're unhealthy and their fleeting forms of affirmation,

the desire to be liked and to be likable is natural. That's because likability is a good quality to have. Everyone wants to be charming. Everyone wants to be the kind of person people listen to and want to hang out with. Likeability in general is a good quality to which people aspire. At first, or at my first job, we called it something called Wu, which stands for winning others over. It's an incredibly valuable characteristic that for the most part, I think, is God-given. But on the other hand, there is a downside to likeability.

It is a double-edged sword. likeability can also be used as a tool of manipulation. The same characteristic that draws people and can also convince people of lies. It also has been used as a facade at some points. People are often so captured by the likeability of someone that they're unable to see what's behind the curtain. They're unable to examine the message that this likable person is conveying in an objective way. The first person that comes to mind for me is Bill Clinton.

by every account that I've ever read, he is charming. There's just something about him that people really love. I think he has a personality trait that he was really just bored with, but apparently he kind of has habits of a likable person. At least when he was a politician, he remembered everyone's name every time. He remembered the small things that you mentioned just once, things about your family, your own life.

When he was talking to you, and maybe it's still this way, he makes you feel like you were the only person in the room. And it worked for him. He was embroiled in scandal and accusations of being a womanizer while he was still governor of Arkansas. He still got elected president after that. And then in his first term, he was under investigation for all kinds of suspected corruption.

And he still got elected for a second term. Now, of course, he was impeached and then acquitted in the middle of his second term. but the point is that despite all of the public scandal that surrounded him during his presidency, he still won the hearts of the people. He was liked, at least by his own party. And if they're honest, a few Republicans probably liked him as a person too. But what we also know about Bill Clinton is that he was a master manipulator. We all know about Monica Lewinsky, but he had a long history of messing around with women when he was in positions of power. From everything Lewinsky, has said in her biography and elsewhere, she honestly felt that he loved her, that he cared about

her, wanted a relationship with her. It wasn't just a physical relationship either. It was an emotional relationship. And it was the emotional side of that relationship with Bill Clinton that tore Monica Lewinsky apart. She fell in love with him and Bill Clinton encouraged it, but obviously had no intention of actually being with her. And that's the way that Clinton was reportedly with everything. He had a way of dodging scandals and accusations of corruption through charm. And he still does it to this day. You remember that he's had interviews recently where he will dodge questions about the responsibility of the situation with Monica Lewinsky.

This is what master manipulators do. And it is impossible to be a master manipulator if you are not first likable. Bill Clinton is a perfect example of the paradox of likability and politics. but likeability doesn't always have to have that downside. It doesn't always have to be a paradox. It doesn't have to be used for manipulation. Ronald Reagan is an excellent example of someone who used his charm and his wit and his communication skills and acting ability to win people over.

But from every account ever rendered, he was a man of faith, of goodwill, of honor, and integrity. He was called the Great Communicator. and he used that gift not to cover up corruption underneath, but to actually shed light on the truth in a way that would embed his message into people's hearts and minds. I'm not saying he wasn't partisan, that he wasn't trying to convince people, other people of his particular political stances. He was.

But from everything that people have said about Reagan, his likability was genuine. It was used as a tool to advance his causes, which were primarily the restriction of nuclear weapons. and the alleviation of tax burdens on Americans. Now, I know that I just used a Democrat for my bad example and a Republican for my good example, but it's not really a partisan thing. There have been good and bad, likable people on both sides of the aisle.

FDR was a Democrat. And while I don't agree with most or all of his policies that he put in place during the Great Depression, I think that as far as we can tell, his motives were pure. His fireside chats changed the countenance of the entire nation. He was actually a really big inspiration for Reagan and the way that he communicated, really reaching into the hearts and minds of distressed Americans and assuring them that they're going to be okay.

He drew people to him. That was a gift. And to the best of his ability at the time, he did use it for good. People loved FDR on both sides of the aisle. People in both parties have been praising him for decades. And for the most part, besides Reagan and a handful of other Republican politicians, over the years, Democrats and progressives have dominated the field with both good, likable people and bad likable people. And this is the paradox. This is the problem. Likeability is useful for

drawing others in, but it can also be a cover for both bad people and bad ideas. And I'm seeing that, especially right now, you have people like Acosio-Cortez, like Beto O'Rourke here in Texas, like Andrew Gillum in Florida, you still have in the background people like Obama and Bernie Sanders. These are people with horrific ideas, truly damaging socialist ideas who are likable people. Bernie Sanders and Obama, other than Bernie Sanders than Obama, they are young, the people I just listed, they include in Obama are pretty good looking. They're attractive looking. They are charming. They are relatable. They make you feel like even though, even if you don't agree with them, you would hang out with them.

Now, a huge part of that is, of course, how they are actually portrayed by the media. They are on all the late night shows. They're hanging out with celebrities, which all lends to this idea that they are cool, hip people. Even Hillary Clinton was made to seem likable by the media. But even Ellen, one of the most likable people,

at least on TV in the world, couldn't make Hillary Clinton attractive to the right people. But for the most part, progressives put forth likable, relatable candidates at higher rates than conservatives do. And I can see conservatives becoming defensive about this because since most conservatives are pretty smart, we know about the superficiality of just being likable, that if it's not backed by integrity and substance, then it really doesn't matter how charming you are. But the mistake, the mistake that conservatives make is throwing the baby out with the bathwater

and pretending that likability is a bad thing that should be kind of shunned altogether. That is why, in my opinion, we don't typically put forth likable candidates, which is why, consequently, conservatives do not attract young people. We constantly harp on this idea, or this line, that the best idea wins. And while I really wish that we're true, it should be true. It's just not. The reality is, is that it is usually nine times out of 10 the best communicated idea that wins. Now, some people will say that even a wonderfully communicated, idea might fall on deaf ears if the people that you're speaking to are indeed deaf to logic and reality. We Christians know that firsthand. It doesn't matter how many different ways you present

the gospel to someone. They still might not believe it. The Bible tells us that that's going to be the case. So I'm not saying that unconditionally communication wins people over. Some people just refuse to hear. But typically, it is the winner of the battle over messaging who wins. the war over ideology. So it is a mistake. It is a mistake for conservatives to say, we don't want anything to do with Obama's charm or Beto or Rorch's Relatability

or Acosio-Cortez's social media marketing strategy. All we care about is someone's principles and agenda. I understand that. I do. And sometimes that works. But even unlikable candidates still have to be more likable than the person they're competing against. I wouldn't say Donald Trump is the most likable guy in the world,

but he was more likable to the right people than Hillary Clinton was. And in the end, that's really all that matters. That worked for that election. And it might work again. But increasingly, the people conservatives are going to have to convince are not going to be the baby boomers in middle America that like Trump. They're going to be the millennials who don't like Trump or anyone like him. And whether we like it or not,

millennials care about likeability more than, than they care about anything else. That is why in large part, socialists are winning over that generation with their ideas because their candidates seem cool. Let's just be real here. For those of you who live in Texas, who would you rather grab a beer with?

Politics aside. Beto O'Rourke or Ted Cruz. Politics aside, just what you've seen of them. Not that I would be going to a bar by myself with one of these random men, but if I were, I would probably honestly pick beta or work. I would hang out with Acosio Cortez. I would probably hang out with Andrew Gillum, probably more than I would, Ron DeSantis.

He seems like a really nice guy. The only reason I don't like any of those people, the socialist that I listed, is because I care about policy more than I care about personality. And the reason I do is because I actually pay attention. But the vast majority of millennials don't. They don't care. They don't feel like they have time. So what do they do?

They go on social media. They like what they see if a work. He made them laugh or something like that. They made him feel good. So they vote for him. And how conservatives tend to respond to that is, well, millennials are idiots. They're uninformed. They're stupid for only caring about how attractive someone is.

And yes, I agree. I agree with that. They are stupid for only caring about that. But harping on their ignorance isn't going to win us elections. putting forth likable candidates well. So even though likeability is or can be paradoxical, even though it has a dangerous side, it doesn't have to be. I think even conservatives now link charm to Democrat.

So we tend to avoid charming, compelling candidates because we think they lack substance or something. But remember, while likability can be used to cover up indecency, as was the case of Bill Clinton and even JFK, it can also be used to win people over to a good cause, like with Reagan. We are stupid for not realizing that and manifesting that. A large number of Republican candidates and politicians, not all, but a lot, in my opinion, are stuffy and nerdy. They just are. They are the kind of people that you just know have been reading about tax policy since they were 12.

And there's nothing wrong with reading about tax policy since you were 12. But I want to know that you can also carry an engaging conversation with me. So, I have been throwing around some ideas in my head about how I personally, as a conservative commentator, can help with this. What can I do to make our Republican leaders and conservatives come across as real people? Because that's what we lack. Realness. An exception to this rule, I would say, has been sass. He is a very likable person.

I don't know what you think about all of his politics, but he's very likable. But I want to help show other people are real, that they are likable, that are on our side. And I have reached out to three, I won't say who, three Republican leaders in Congress to do a funny satirical interview with me like the one I did with Ben Shapiro. And even though I have really good connections with all of them, I've met two of them. And from what I know, I think that we agree and I'm liked by these people. I was turned down by all three. There could be a plethora of reasons for this. They certainly have better things to do, better ways to spend their time than talking to a mid-level podcaster.

I totally get that. I don't think that I'm some star that they need to drop everything for. But one of these people, one of these people in particular, whom I am very well connected to, has a race to win. And it is a close race. And guess what? His Democratic opponent is dominating with millennials. His Democratic opponent is light ears more likable than he is.

Now, this person will probably end up winning. His state is very red. But if he were smart, he would have taken an interview with someone who is going to A, help him look fun, funny, and real. And B, has an audience of almost all millennials and is connected to a lot of young people in his state. And like I said, maybe he turned me down because he was genuinely busy. But this would have been an excellent opportunity for him to relate to the demographic that

he is struggling most with. Same with the two other congressmen, the most serious guys in the world. But they have great ideas and they could use some help relating to young people. they straight up said no. So my advice to any Congress people and to you who have Congress people would be to encourage them to take opportunities in which their real side is actually shown. So I say that because when I originally ranted about this on my Instagram story, I got a lot of questions. One, I got a lot of people telling me to run for office, which I hate to break it to you, probably never going to happen. But I also got a lot of questions about what we can do to change

that and help. And I'm just letting you know that I'm trying. This is a huge, reason why I do the non-serious funny, at least to most of you, funny videos. Because I have a lot of people reach out to me after them and say, okay, I don't like your politics or I don't agree with you, but your stuff makes me laugh. I just had someone the other day who I haven't talked to in years, who is a diehard liberal say, you know what? Your tweets really make me laugh, but I don't agree with anything you say politically. That's okay with me. I think it's an interesting way to reach across the aisle. I get messages or reviews every day that say, you know, I hate this podcast, but I really like you. That is why the podcast is called relatable, because we have a huge problem

among conservatives and Republicans with being likable. Now, there are plenty of people, I'm sure, who find me really annoying and not relatable at all. And that's fine. That's always going to be the case no matter what. But we need likability, relatability in our party and on our side. And we just don't have very much of it. So here are a few tangible tips for conservative politicians. First of all, stop acting and talking like a politician. That is part of why Trump beat Hillary. He didn't sound like a politician.

Like, this is one of my peeves when it comes to politicians. When they do that thing with their hand, where they put the thumb over their forefinger and they point without actually pointing, I want to know where, politicians learn that. Is that something that they teach you and the Polly side department? Who said that that was a good thing to do when you're speaking? Also, also, learn to give a speech. Learn to give a speech in a way that doesn't sound like you're reading from a book.

Every politician's cadence is the exact same. Their tone is the exact same. The best thing about Ronald Reagan was that he made you laugh and he actually just made you feel good, made you feel inspired. I know very, very few conservatives in politics who can do that. They are boring as heck. Some of the worst speeches I've ever heard have been given by conservative congresspeople. So lighten up, have a heart, have empathy. That's probably the biggest thing. Have empathy for your audience and let them know that you're thinking about what they're thinking. Don't just get up there and push your agenda down their throat. Let them know that you feel the same things they feel, read their minds, articulate their emotions, have some pathos rather than only

going for the logos every time. And conservative influencers can do a better job of being likable too, all of us, of being funny and kind and relatable. That doesn't mean that that looks the same for everyone. It doesn't. Ben Shapiro is an example. He's, he's intellectual and dry, but he also has a really good sense of humor. It is good at bringing that out in an effective way. that makes people really like him. He has a way that kind of draws people in that's different than my way or a lot of other people's way. But he allows himself to be a real person.

And I think that that's the ticket. Too many conservatives come across only as mean and cold and one dimensional or two dimensional and condescending. And I hate or I hate this. it's this kind of idea that because we hate political correctness, we have to purposely hurt people's feelings and say things that trigger everyone in sight. I just think that that's a really dumb strategy, especially in attracting young people. Now, there's nothing wrong with speaking truths and triggering someone. You can't really help it if the truth hurts. But this tactic of only saying things to get a rise out of people is a losing strategy for conservatives. Just be a real person. Okay, so for today, that's it for the likability paradox for conservatives. Now I want to answer some of your questions because I said that I would. I asked you all to give me some personal questions, political questions, whatever your

little hearts desired. So you did. So thank you for that. First question has something to do with politics. How did your husband propose? My husband, Timothy, proposed after we were done. dating for five months, as some of you guys know. And let's see. I know it was, it was the day after I had this big event for work. I was doing PR for this big leadership organization. And that night,

we went to a concert. I believe we saw Hozier in concert, which is kind of random. And I'm not sure if I remember that it was coming or not. But the next day, he was surprising me with something. Like we were going on a trip. And he took me to Furman, where I, I went to school and we like, I don't know, we walked around campus. And then we went to this place called Falls Park, which is in Greenville. And we were just kind of walking around. And at that point, I kind of knew because he was like walking three feet ahead of me the whole time.

And he just seemed really nervous and he was talking fast. And I felt like he was kind of shaky and stuff. And then we were walking around. I could tell he was looking for a spot for us to kind of sit down or something. But anyway, we just, I guess he found a spot. and he, yeah, got down on one knee. For some reason, I remember this distinctly. I remember dropping my sunglasses and that kind of ruining the moment.

And also, we didn't have anyone around to take a picture. So I do recommend, I don't know, someone being around, take a picture if you're into that. We don't have a picture of the actual proposal and we got along just fine, but we did get a picture after. So it was in Greenville. And then we drove back to Athens where we were both living at the time. and I was surprised to go into a sister's house and see my parents and my best friend.

And it was great. And we only had a four-month engagement. I highly recommend short engagements. So that's how my husband proposed. Second question, if you have friends in your personal life who are not Christians, how much obligation do you have to specifically proselytize them versus just letting the way you live your life be a witness? I think that's a good question.

And I'm not sure that there's a perfect formula for that. I do think that it's important to actually speak truth to someone. I think that we sometimes give ourselves a cop out when we say, oh, we're just going to be really nice to this person and hope that they come to the Lord. And really, that's just kind of a way to not want to feel uncomfortable. But I do think that you living your life at the end of the day is more important than your words, that you showing them that your that your life is different that how you give how you live how you talk the things you care about the way that you spend your money the way that you spend your time

how much you serve people the way that you don't talk badly about people even the music that you listen to those can all be an example of a life that is marked by christ and i also think things like not obsessing over uh social media the superficial affirmation that it brings um you know relieving your anxiety by praying. All of these things are so countercultural and different than how the world deals with things, that I think that that can be an amazing witness because you're showing them what the freedom of living in Christ looks like and people are attracted to that. But I do think it's important, especially when the opportunity arises organically,

to be unashamed in your preaching of the gospel and to not be shy about the truth and to take the opportunity when you can to bring it up yourself. I think it's important to do both, but of course that an example indeed is even better than using words. Next question. If you had to pick losing the ability to joke or never speaking in public again, which would you choose? And then in parentheses or losing a limb. Ooh. I would choose never, ever, ever joke limb.

I feel I feel like I would lose a limb. I feel like I would rather lose my arm, not a leg. I don't know, not a leg. I would rather lose my arm. Definitely. So ranking goes first,

first, the most important to me of these things is public speaking. I would never choose to not public speak again. And then the joking is secondary. So I would rather public speak than joke. but I would rather lose a limb than eliminate any of the things because like, okay, I have a new cool, defining feature of me. It's like, oh, she's not just the conservative millennial. She is the one-arm conservative millennial. That just adds like a whole different dynamic to

everything that I do. And really, how much do I need my left arm? Really. I definitely don't need limbs for podcasting. So I think I would lose a limb. Um, next question. This is interesting. I've always thought yoga was like the spiritualistic thing that had no business in the church. But I've been seeing more and more churches having yoga groups as part of their small groups. How can these two things coexist? So I don't know if I have the absolutely correct theological answer on all of this. I've done yoga in the past. I kind of feel like it's an individual thing.

I have never done yoga in order to, I don't know, do anything idolatrous or that doesn't glorify God. I think that yoga can be used as a good meditative force to even pray or to just get your mind centered or to kind of be at peace and to be quiet while also exercising your body. I don't think that there's anything inherently sinful about it. Now, of course, if you were expecting it to do some magic on your mind, it's going to give you peace outside of Christ, then no, I don't think that's going to work. And I guess there are some weird spiritualistic aspects of it. it, but I just don't buy into any of that. And so whenever I have done yoga in the past, I haven't thought about these things. Like, I'm not buying into the aspects of it that don't

align with my faith. So I think it's, I guess, I think it's fine for churches in small groups to kind of redeem yoga or reclaim yoga if you want to say that and use it in a way that's glorifying to God. It's just using your body and meditation to be centered and to maybe even focus on God more. Hi, Allie. I am a firm and alumna. Go Dins. Yes, go Dens. Before my question, I just want to say that I wish I could put into words my gratitude for you

for the example of a strong Christian and conservative woman that you have set for me, example that you have set for me and for other young adults. Thank you. I was just wondering if you have any recommendations of small things. Someone with a busy schedule can implement into their lives to stay well versed in politics. great. Thanks. I meant to say thanks. Not great because you said thanks at the end of your message. But then I wanted to say, great question. So yes, it is, it can be really difficult and I think overwhelming to stay in the know with every single detail of what's going on with, for example,

the Russia investigation. But I actually don't think that's necessary. I like the skim because it's a very simple breakdown of the most important things that are happening, not just in America, but also around the world. Now, since Trump has taken office, they have become a little bit more partisan. So I do recommend doing your own research. And what I do is I always try to research things from both sides of the aisle.

So I think it's interesting to go to Fox News.com and see the things that they're reporting is most important. And then go to the New York Times and see the things that they're reported is most important. A good kind of middle of the road, I think is the Wall Street Journal. They are pretty good about being not. So I tried to do just a little bit of digging on the most important stories from both sides of the spectrum. I also like to go on social media to see what everyone is talking about or what's kind of making people mad, things like that.

I follow a wide range of commentators on the left and the right just to see what kind of people are outraged by. That doesn't mean that's the most important story of the day. You don't have to follow the outrage of people to prioritize. your news stories, but it's interesting to see, I think, what people care about. So I think just a quick skim on social media and on two opposing news sites is a good way to just kind of get a sense of what people are talking about and what people are caring about. You don't have to be completely inundated in the details of the news and politics to be well-versed. Dredge Report also kind of gives a lot of headlines that are good for staying generally in the know.

and of course you can continue to listen to this podcast. I try to give you a good sense of important things and how you can think about them. So anyway, thanks for listening. It's a great question. What life experience impacted you the most? I would say probably I worked at a camp called Camp Barnabas, which is in Missouri, and it's a camp for kids and adults with special needs. My brother has special needs,

but I think I didn't really understand the special needs community until I worked at this camp for a summer. I had volunteered there in the past. And then I actually worked there on staff the summer, I think, before college. And I think it really kind of irreversibly like enlarged my heart for people that can't take care of themselves and just vulnerable communities in general. and I also just found something in myself that I didn't know that I had that much. I've always kind of been an empathetic person.

I just feel very strongly for people. And this, I think really just kind of dug deeply into that. And I think that it also changed me spiritually as well because I kind of saw in these kids and adults that really couldn't do anything for themselves that needed to be taking care of the way that God sees us as a little. well, that we are completely helpless to help ourselves and we really have nothing to add to him. And yet he chooses to spend time with us and to save us. So I think that that dynamic completely changed my relationship with the Lord and really my relationship with other people and

the idea of justice and charity and helping people. And of course, getting married changed my life too. You don't know how selfish you are until you have to lay down your conveniences for someone else. And I've also heard that having kids shows you, again, how selfish you are. So I'm looking forward to that one day. Where do you see yourself in 10 years? No freaking clue. No idea. I wish I knew. I don't. I'm doing some form of this. And hopefully I have all of my children by then. Well, who knows? Maybe I won't have all my kids by then. I'll be 36. I don't know, I don't know where I'll be in life in 10 years. Hopefully somewhere good. What motivates you as an individual? You guys motivate me a lot. I just love hearing from you and hearing for the things that mean a lot to you of what I do, the things that have an impact on you, the times that you tell me that I cause you to think differently about something. That really, really motivates me. And obviously, I feel like God put me on this earth for a specific purpose and that motivates me as well. The gospel motivates me. Last question for today. What is the end goal of the pro-life movement when all abortion

is abolished. Some would say that women would be charged with murder if they abort it and claim that the only abortionists, that claim that only abortionists would be charged. If only abortionists are charged with murder, wouldn't that be inconsistent? I have a heart for women, but they, if they hire a hitman to cut their child out of their womb, shouldn't they be charged for murder too? I decided to end this, I guess, with the kind of heavy question. I think it's so difficult because logically and legally, you would think that someone who decides to have someone murder someone else would be charged with, at the very least, being complicit in murder and should go to jail. But at the same time, I have a very difficult time justifying putting a

truly desperate woman who feels, she's wrong, but she feels like abortion is her only choice. I have a very difficult time saying that that person should be arrested. and should go to jail. I feel like that person needs help. Now, not all women who have abortions are desperate. Some women obviously just do it based on convenience. I don't know if you can take it on a case-by-case basis, but there are a lot of women who do it out of absolute desperation and who wrongly think that this is their only choice. I would hate to put them in a more desperate situation and put them in jail. That just, oh, that just breaks my heart. I can't say that I'm for that. But I understand the legal and logical question that why wouldn't they be punished for that? And I can't say that I know the answer to it.

I can't, I can't say that I know the right and moral answer to that. I do think abortionists should be punished. But that's a little bit of a different situation. They are removed from the emotions and the reality and the desperation of the circumstance that this woman is possibly in and they are choosing to kill someone for money. That's, that seems to, to me a little bit more depraved, a little bit more evil. So I know that that seems really subjective. I'm not a judge. I'm also not a lawyer. So I can't say for sure what the law would be. Obviously, I believe in eliminating not just abortion, but the felt need for abortion. So helping women who are poor, helping women who need education, helping women who need to become citizens,

helping women who need a safe haven from abusive men. So that is the hope that we give holistic care to these women who feel like they're desperate, not just tell them that they can't get an abortion, although, of course, I believe that's important too, since the child's life is valuable. So I hope that kind of gave, I mean, that's just my honest perspective. It's definitely not the Bible truth because I don't know. There's still more than I need to think about there. But I appreciate all of your questions and I appreciate you guys listening. Love you and I will see you here on Thursday.