Hello @paramounttactcl , peace be with you. Something I think that is really important is, firstly, to note that @RealCandaceO has never directly accused Erika of murder. She has asked questions regarding actions or statements of Erika. If Candace has made a baseless claim, it’s important to point out the specific claim and explain why it is false. It is not sufficient to just say Candace is a liar or guilty of calumny, not that you are asserting that? What happened to Charlie was evil and affected the whole nation. And I pray for Erika, her family, and for their consolation. I do not condone derision, so on that score, any person, whether it be Candace or not, engaging in that behavior ought to repent and apologize. Derision is essentially mocking a person in order that others may view them contemptuously. I’ve already stated this clearly in previous conversations on X. That being said, several points need to be established. Firstly, no person is exempt from examination, especially a public figure. A person being a widow does not exempt one from being asked questions. Though I do not accuse Erika Kirk, it simply should be noted that we even read in Scripture that it’s possible for one who is a widow to be wicked. Sadly, people will read this and say, “Therefore, you are saying Erika is wicked!” No, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m pointing out that turning to passages of Scripture that speak of widows does not automatically sanctify a person or grant them a pass at being asked real questions. Nor does it automatically make a person incapable of sin. Consider Athaliah, who was the mother of Ahaziah, which we read about in 2 Chronicles. We read that when her husband Jehoram dies, she launched a massacre on the southern kingdom. We read: “When Athaliah, the mother of Ahaziah, saw that her son was dead, she began to kill off the whole royal family of the house of Judah.” 2 Chronicles 22:10 And: “For the sons of Athalia, the wicked woman, had broken up the temple of God.” 2 Chronicles 24:7 To be clear, my point here is not to accuse Erika Kirk. My point is to argue against blanket claims and gaslighting of those who ask questions by employing any Scripture passage that speaks of widows. One can accept that widows should be treated with care and compassion because of the loss of their husband, while also stating that the nature of being a widow does not make a person either immaculate or immune to being asked questions, nor from being wicked, as we read in Chronicles regarding Athaliah. Finally, you mentioned a passage from Romans. “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.” Firstly, when we speak of “causing offenses contrary to the doctrine,” this is quite the opposite. I speak in defense of the doctrine received, since it is the Catholic Church that possesses the fullness of truth and hands down the teachings via Sacred Tradition. Those to be avoided are actually promoters of error, such as heresy, etc. I am a defender of the faith, handed down to the saints through the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Another part of this passage I wish to touch upon is not serving Christ but “their own bellies.” Here we can make a connection with the passage regarding the Pharisees “devouring the houses of widows.” Our Lord’s accusation was that the Pharisees, under religious pretext, were exploiting the needy and most vulnerable to their own gain. In what way am I exploiting Erika Kirk, if you are accusing me of belonging to Our Lord’s Woe? Are you saying Candace is exploiting Erika? In what way?