Matt (00:00.55)
Hey everybody, welcome to the Latter day Lens. It's so good to have you with us again. I'm your host, Matt. With me as always is Sean, and we are so excited to have Levi back with us. Levi, welcome.

Levi (00:11.074)
Glad to be here. Thanks.

Matt (00:13.916)
Very good.

shawn (00:16.412)
Two goats. The two goats are right here. Levi and Matt. The two goats.

Matt (00:16.572)
All right.

Matt (00:20.214)
One one of us can grow a goatee and one of us cannot. And so I know. I'm serious. The the seven week break at BYU Idaho, all of my friends start growing facial hair because they don't have to teach. And then there's just me, clean shaven matte. They're like, I could grow like a really long patch of hair out of like one part of my chin.

Levi (00:23.842)
Yeah, I thought you were referring to my little half stash here. Those on video get treated to this little whatever it is.

shawn (00:30.01)
It is beautiful.

Levi (00:36.318)
Hey.

shawn (00:43.866)
It's true. I've seen it many times.

Levi (00:45.198)
But like that Matt, he's so diligent, he doesn't even grow a beard when he's allowed to.

Matt (00:47.548)
They think I'm so faithful. Hey, well, let's open the mailbag. One listener wrote in and said, Don't stop the podcast. I listen every week. And this listener wasn't alone. So I feel like so when my wife and I listened to the podcast last week, she's like, Matt, you are not being honest with your audience. So I feel like I have to be honest with the audience. like, so in my life, I just do things by prayer.

Real I I'm one of those people, I just get really direct answers to things. So when Sam left the podcast about two years ago, I thought maybe it's time to end the podcast. But I felt strongly like, no, no, no, this is an important thing. We should keep doing it. But in July, I think it was, I was in the temple and I just felt like it's time for me to stop doing the podcast, time to step away. And then I went back the next week and it's like, yeah. and I don't know why and I don't know the future, but so I

I think after the midterm elections, is when I'll be done. Or maybe the maybe I'll go to episode 200 or something like that. But I feel strongly like this isn't our podcast, Sean and my podcast. Like we have a strong, loyal audience. You guys have all been very good to us. And we've been so fortunate. Like from the very beginning, I always said, I don't want to like put ads in our podcast. I don't want to try to monetize the podcast. I don't want to try to like like inundate our audience with like.

Pitches to buy things from us. And we've been so fortunate that we've always been able to pay the bills of the podcast and keep it going without a lot of effort on our part and without any real like financial sacrifice on our part. So I think it's a great podcast. I love it, but for whatever reason, that it's time for me to step away. So let us know. Like Sean isn't ready to let it die, right, Sean?

shawn (02:33.465)
I don't know. I mean, you gave some t you gave good like notice. And so th there are some opportunities. my feeling is that people come from Matt. And so if Matt's gone, they're gonna go away. So, but you know, well let's listen to the to the what the audience says. There's a lot of interest in people joining, trying to mimic I even Levi, I even created a an AI Matt, who has now become an expert on Matt's.

His voice, his inflections, his his method of of creating the questions, like it's all kinda there. So you know, you know.

Levi (03:08.746)
Okay. He pokes the Sean Bear like Matt would, the AI does. What'd you say, Matt?

Matt (03:11.449)
I think you sell yourself short, Sean. Yeah. I think you're selling yourself short, Sean. I don't think it's all about me. And I do think that there are really talented listeners in our audience. And so if you want to like guest host, you want to give it a try, let us know. if you want to talk with Sean about what the future of the podcast should look like, that's fine. I'm committed to it's a very, very small fee to like keep the podcast archived forever. So I'm committed to making sure that the podcast doesn't go away.

shawn (03:15.057)
Yeah.

Matt (03:40.931)
If people want to listen to it over time. And I I've heard from so many listeners about how the podcast has been good for them and helpful for them. So I'm not anxious to shut it all down. It's just that it's time for me to step away, just like it was time for Sam to step away.

shawn (03:53.478)
No now Matt, if you don't become a mission president or a temple president within a month of quitting, then we know that you've come to the point in your life where you're just using the excuse of I have to do XYZ because the Lord told me to.

Matt (04:02.499)
Yeah.

Matt (04:09.787)
I've never used that as an excuse in my life. But

shawn (04:12.581)
Well we'll see. We'll see. You better become a mission president or something.

Levi (04:16.482)
Well, and probably the podcast is the only thing holding the Lord back from calling Matt as, you know, an area authority or something. There's the Lord's like, well, I shoot. He seems like the right guy, but that Latter day Lens podcast, I can't lend that thing. Boys out there doing the Lord's work.

Matt (04:16.559)
Yeah.

Matt (04:22.989)
Ha ha.

Matt (04:26.916)
there you go.

There were times after Sam left when I was like, I think maybe I'll stop doing this. And I would feel this impression, like, that's fine, but you might have a calling more than primary worker because you could do more with your life, and I'm not gonna let you just be a primary worker. So that did motivate me for a while, the idea of wanting to stay as a primary worker. But I don't think that the opposite is true. That God's like, now it's time for you to do something more important than primary worker. Because what's more important than primary worker?

shawn (04:44.315)
See?

shawn (04:58.691)
Levi, I do feel like the real reason is because Matt loves like what's beautiful about Matt is authenticity and honesty. Matt can't not say what he's thinking. And if this thing grew too big, Levi, Matt would be exposing his sometimes crazy thoughts in a more public way. And I don't think he wants that. I think he wants to not be a public figure, which Matt could easily continue to become.

And he's not wanting that.

Matt (05:30.637)
It is true th go ahead, Lee.

Levi (05:30.796)
Well or or you could adopt the the office space philosophy and you could just keep saying crazier things till you're canceled and you could just like and eventually everybody'll say, Get that guy out of there. The audience will clamor for your the execution, really. Yeah.

Matt (05:38.779)
And then go away that way.

shawn (05:40.101)
That's another way to do it, yeah.

Matt (05:47.132)
Firing. President Meredith and I have a good relationship and a good understanding. And it is possible that maybe a new president at BYU Idaho wouldn't see things the same way and wouldn't be like, Well, that's just Matt being Matt. They might be like, Maybe you should be different on your podcast. I don't know. Who knows? It's been a good run. It's almost four years it's been, and it's been a lot of fun. And I hope it doesn't die. I hope listeners are anxious and willing to keep it going strong, but

shawn (06:03.803)
Ha ha ha.

shawn (06:12.421)
Well, I'll get I've got some interest in some other people. I'll introduce them to Matt. We'll kinda toy around with it. I think the the world would love a Levi host. So, you know, we'll just see we'll just we'll keep playing. We'll keep talking.

Matt (06:21.337)
Yeah. Levi's great.

Yeah, of course.

Levi (06:25.486)
Matt's big shoes to fill though, right? I think I think Matt brings a level of calm to the whole thing, which is pr pretty essential, right? That's it's not a skill I have as to as to be the the mellow

shawn (06:33.231)
Yeah, it is. But Levi's true. What I love most about you is your passion. And you don't mean you probably don't have the ability to do what Matt does, which is I see I've triggered someone. It's okay, I don't care. Or hey, I see someone is saying something that isn't true, and Matt goes, That's okay, I don't care.

Matt (06:36.517)
But I hear there's an AI bot that's pretty calm.

Levi (06:49.25)
Right.

Matt (06:51.973)
We could get

Matt (06:59.939)
All right. Well let's get into the episode. So actually Levi came up with two of the topics this week, which was refreshing. It was really nice. Okay. So here's the first one. John Morales. What's that? I'm not gonna give it away. You'll just have to guess as we go along.

shawn (07:08.825)
Is this a Levi topic? Is this a Levi topic? dang it. Okay.

Matt (07:18.301)
okay, so John Morales is a veteran TV meteorologist in South Florida with over 30 years of experience. He warned viewers during a live broadcast that he can no longer guarantee the accuracy of his hurricane forecasts. He explained that major federal budget cuts, staff layoffs, and buyouts at key government science agencies like the National Weather Service and the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration have caused a severe shortage of experts. In addition,

The government has launched fewer weather balloons, which are essential instruments used to gather upper atmosphere data. Because of these missing tools and workers, the overall quality and reliability of daily weather data have dropped significantly. This issue extends beyond local weather as funding has also been cut for health and scientific research organizations like the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institutes of Health. Recent data from the National Hurricane Center confirmed that forecast accuracy declined.

During twenty twenty five hurricane season, showing the real world danger when human experts and scientific agencies lack the resources they need to keep communities safe. So here's the question Does the federal government have a moral obligation to fund these kinds of data collection efforts? I think everyone's gonna disagree with this and we'll just move on, right?

shawn (08:34.673)
Well

Levi (08:37.368)
Course not. I mean moral obligation, no. But it is a

Matt (08:40.591)
What? Of course they have a moral obligation. Okay, go ahead. Sorry, Lee I'm sorry, Levi. Go ahead.

shawn (08:40.923)
Okay.

shawn (08:44.613)
No no no let Levi talk. You shut up, Matt.

Levi (08:48.62)
Well, actually that when I heard the story, one thing that because this has always kind of fascinated me is this seems like a place where a private solution might be viable, right? Where we could have different companies that would send up weather weather balloons and provide data. Different companies could launch satellites and we could get all this data go happening. And I wonder why it doesn't happen. And I think there are several reasons why it doesn't happen. I mean, one one thing is I think there's a lot of efficiency in having it done by

shawn (09:00.707)
Nice. Leave I go.

Levi (09:18.792)
One entity, right? It's very expensive to send up weather balloons and launch satellites and things like that. And so to have two companies doing that, already there's a lot of redundancy, a lot of waste in that doesn't seem very efficient to me, like the market sometimes is. But but I have often thought, I wonder why, you know, there's not private, yeah, private weather services.

shawn (09:39.612)
Well the the tr the truth is, well no no no Matt. The truth is that I've done the research and the private weather industry is growing a a lot. It's growing a ton. And it is there are a ton of private companies now producing weather observations and forecasts that are sometimes using much, much, much better technology that are way more sophisticated. And it's it's

Matt (09:40.441)
I'll tell you why.

Matt (09:48.095)
jeez. jeez.

Matt (10:01.295)
Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.

Levi (10:04.684)
Doubt that.

Matt (10:06.37)
Ha ha ha.

shawn (10:06.799)
I mean that's what I'm reading. That this if that w private tech is going to be able to you're in private tech, Levi, you don't think that you would do a better job than a government agency in creating some tech?

Matt (10:13.421)
L let me address this question.

Levi (10:15.07)
yeah, yeah. But I don't have any illusions that private techies are smarter than than public techies. They're the same people.

shawn (10:23.151)
What

Matt (10:24.003)
Let me address this question before I get to the moral part of the question. Do you remember back in the day when the federal government funded something called NASA and there was federal research and government funding that went into NASA? And then they said, we're gonna pull back and we're gonna privatize that. And so then we have like SpaceX and Blue Origin and all of that stuff. It is more expensive for the federal government to pay the contracts they pay to Elon Musk to do the work of NASA than it was for the government to do it themselves.

So the government can do some things more efficiently than the private sector. And there's not an incentive, there's not a market out there for weather balloons and for accurate hurricane data. That's not something where there's this market demand that's gonna fund that kind of research. So you create an organization, you fund it with public funding, and then they produce a product that's superior to what the market could produce, because there's no demand for that in the marketplace.

shawn (11:16.389)
But in what I

Levi (11:16.61)
I don't think it's a lack of demand, but I do see what you're saying about there's an efficiency to it. If I if I scrapped the whole thing and said, well, private companies are going to step in, well, what would happen is I'd have three companies that would all launch weather balloons and they'd be collecting and reporting some redundant data, right? So I'm paying already more for that. And then they'd each have to have.

sales and marketing departments and that's gonna be a third of their fully third of their budget. And so like there's a lot of inefficiencies in a market solution to anything. So but you know

Matt (11:47.674)
Well, and and maybe maybe I'm stating demand the wrong way, right? So we have the corporation for public broadcasting that produces public television and they produce educational programming for children. And that educational programming for children is pretty good. And sometimes private companies like HBO say, We're gonna buy Sesame Street and we're gonna make money off of Sesame Street. And then they very quickly realize that it you can't make money off of Sesame Street.

To the same extent that you can make money off of something like Bluey or Dora the Explorer or some other more entertainment focused product. The educational focused product doesn't make the same kind of money or revenue that the other stuff makes. And so it's not that there's no demand, it's that once you have a product that's good providing a service, you could make more money if you just switched it into something less educational, less beneficial, or in the case of scientific research, more biased, less accurate.

Then so it's just much more efficient for the government to say, we can fund this, and it will be more efficient and less expensive for the consumers broadly than if the private sector tried to do it. But here's the moral argument. This is in John in Sean's favorite section of the Doctrine and Covenants. It begins verse one. We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man. There you go. Governments are there for the benefit of man.

shawn (13:13.553)
I think you're those

Matt (13:13.625)
And governments have a moral obligation to do things that benefit mankind.

shawn (13:19.697)
W I well, but that's pretty broad definition or or you're interpreting you're giving it that's a that's a that's a pretty pretty well why don't we include th then if the point of government is to benefit man, then the government should be a theocracy, an L D S theocracy 'cause tha that would

Matt (13:29.455)
I mean it's just can it's

Matt (13:33.658)
Yes.

Sean, I've been waiting for years for you to say that. Yes, I do agree with that. Sean, is it true that the mankind is better off if we can predict hurricanes? Yes. Is it true that mankind is better off if we have accurate information about how our economy is doing? Yes. Is it better for mankind if we have accurate data on all of these scientific? Like there are so many scientific projects that that produce important information because.

shawn (13:41.381)
But that's your preaching. I don't agree with that.

Matt (14:05.743)
The federal government funds data collection that nobody else has the incentive to collect. And they collect this data and everybody else has the access to use it. And it makes life better for everybody. They have a moral obligation to collect data that they can collect more cheaply and more efficiently than everyone else. So that we as a collective group can use that knowledge to develop better ideas, better technologies, better understand what's happening in the world around us.

shawn (14:31.173)
But Matt, you've driven a car in in Los Angeles, California, right? And you've seen when you're stuck in line, you've seen that lane next to the to the busy freeway that cars are just cruising by, maybe ten of them. The toll lanes. The toll lanes, those are kind of privately funded, privately organized toll lanes. Many of them are. Yes, they are. Many of them are.

Matt (14:42.201)
The The toll lane, the express lane?

They are not privately funded. Nobody's They just took the they just took the carpool lanes and changed them over to toll lanes.

shawn (14:57.339)
They sold them. The the priv many of them are privately operated. I'm ki I'm I'm kind of backing your s statement a little bit. They're not it's not like you've got it's not like it's solved congestion. It just benefited ten people, you know, one percent of the population. And the rich, but just whoever's willing to pay for it. So look, I understand there's probably in certain industries that it does make sense for government to to to to to manage.

Matt (15:00.015)
What a horrible idea. That's a horrible idea.

Matt (15:06.052)
Matt (15:12.122)
The rich.

shawn (15:26.885)
But there are many that that they should not. I don't think weather is one. I don't think mail has proven out to be one. The postal yeah, yeah. Like I look at the what pro

Matt (15:33.379)
Are you serious?

You save so much money. The Postal Service, again, Sean, the Postal Service will deliver a like a letter or like a a little like postcard or something. Do you know how much it would cost if you were going to send that via FedEx or via UPS or something like that? The post office provides a service to the nation in addition to the other things. So yeah, it's like your carpool lane or express lane is the perfect example. Taxpayers build an entire freeway system, right? They go through all of the work to build that infrastructure. And then some companies like,

shawn (15:59.186)
Yeah.

Levi (16:01.686)
Yeah.

Matt (16:06.159)
I'm gonna buy a little bit of that and I'm gonna show you how efficiently I can manage that little bit of that. When somebody else already put all the legwork in to create the infrastructure.

shawn (16:11.387)
True. Yeah, true, true. But i in places like LA where there's a high demand for these lanes, it's because their system didn't deliver. It's failing. Like you literally have to go you go two miles and it takes two hours.

Matt (16:23.183)
What I'm saying is

Levi (16:23.49)
Well, no. no, no. If they're not failing everyone, now they're failing most people, but they were failing the rich people, was the problem before, is they were failing rich people. And that to capitalism is a failure. Because capitalism never pays attention to poor people, right? They were failing the rich people, and so the rich people said, wait a minute, I have more money. Why shouldn't I have my own lane? Why I should be able to get to work faster because I have more money. And capitalism says, of course.

shawn (16:41.167)
That's ridiculous. That's ridiculous.

shawn (16:50.691)
You go ask a go ask app hey, go go ask go ask Apple if capitalism pays attention to poor people, Levi. Every human being on the earth has an iPhone and made it affordable for them.

Matt (16:51.055)
But

Levi (16:53.089)
Yes.

Levi (16:58.476)
Wait, no, no, no, no. But this is this is the definition of capitalism. This is the definition of a market. A market pays attention to you proportional to the number of dollars you have. That is what a dollar means, is it's a claim to resources in the market. So if you have a hundred times more dollars, the market will definitely spend a hundred times more resources on you. Absolutely. That's there's no getting around that.

shawn (17:24.719)
Yeah, I don't deny that.

Matt (17:25.563)
But to your example, Sean, about the post office, right? The only reason that UPS and FedEx and all those places can exist and be profitable is because of the infrastructure of the United States Postal Service, who does the legwork to make sure that they have an address for every single person in the United States. They're the ones that keep track of everybody's address. I know this because, as a survey researcher, you say, I need to get a list of every address in the United States, and only one place has it.

shawn (17:45.926)
Mm-hmm.

Matt (17:54.596)
It's not UPS and it's not FedEx. It's the post office. And I need to verify like, is this the good address? Is this a bad address? there's a new construction that's happened here. You know, FedEx can't deliver to new developments because they don't have really good data yet. Do you know who collects that data? The post office. They're using the post office to make money.

shawn (17:58.022)
Yeah, but but as

shawn (18:10.225)
Okay, but you're sick yeah, I know, but but the same way you're assuming that private industry couldn't do and solve collecting addresses for everyone. That's ridiculous. They can of course. Really? They made they made GPS maps that now a hundred percent of society uses in order to like

Matt (18:20.581)
They're not doing it. They're not doing it.

Matt (18:27.439)
Where do they get the addresses for those GPS maps?

shawn (18:30.321)
Not it's not Elon Musk. What I'm saying is okay, if you you're saying that there's this like relationship between government and private that innovates and grows. I'm I just am saying that it's possible that that private industry could develop a system that collects all addresses in the United States. Of course they could. Could they do it cheaper, more efficiently? And weather. And could they do it more efficiently and

Levi (18:30.348)
And the satellite data.

Matt (18:35.323)
They're using ghost.

Levi (18:35.498)
No, it wasn't before, yeah.

Matt (18:42.597)
Yes, yes.

Matt (18:52.846)
As you said

Levi (18:53.034)
And and weather.

And and weather potentially, but I think that it's important to recognize that that might be less efficient. The private markets might be less efficient at that. And I think one thing that the government does pretty well is data, is collect neutral, unbiased data. Weather data, great. Economic data, great. Addresses, great. The government's actually really good at that kind of thing.

shawn (19:03.419)
That's that's okay. I'm okay with that. Yeah, yeah.

shawn (19:18.243)
I see and you and you're saying that pr that c capitalism would would would taint an un they would make bias, they would collect biased data, which they do now, but in the absence, yeah. I mean maybe the the free market would see that there's a demand for unbiased data, for neutral data, and could solve it. I think they could. There'd be a self interest somewhere.

Levi (19:33.996)
Well, and and I think depending upon depending upon how much people with money care about it, the data would get more accurate. And so I think there's lots of money in shipping, there's lots of money in agriculture, and those industries rely on accurate weather data. And so this is a place where I I suspect private industry wouldn't do too badly. Is yeah.

shawn (19:56.15)
And and we're we're answering Matt's question, is it a moral topic? No, it's not immoral for private companies to provide all of our all of our weather data.

Matt (20:04.173)
It is a moral obligation for the government to do everything that benefits mankind. They are morally obligated. They exist to benefit mankind. Thank you. Yes. Yes. I love it all.

Levi (20:11.064)
To do everything. Provide food, iPhones, education, everything.

shawn (20:17.071)
Religion, religion, Matt's religion, 'cause Matt's religion is the right one, apparent according to Matt. What? But the benefit of man, you said. That's everything that benefits man, and you have the true religion. So that should be the one that the government pushes.

Matt (20:20.473)
They they should provide freedom of religion so that people can choose the religion yeah.

Ha ha ha

Matt (20:32.239)
To rephrase what Levi said, they should provide freedom of choice of food, freedom of choice of which phone you want to use, freedom of choice of whichever these things are gonna provide for you.

shawn (20:36.849)
is that what Levi said?

Levi (20:38.56)
Ha ha

Well, but this actually, as I was thinking about this, I thought about the the Matt Miles perspective, the Matt Miles lens on this. And I thought Matt Miles would want government to compete in this market, maybe against private industries, right? Matt would say, let's have a let's have a government provided weather service, maybe government provided weather balloons, and private companies, if you want to compete against that, sure, whatever. Do your worst, right? FedEx, you can deliver.

shawn (20:57.635)
Social Democrat.

Levi (21:11.234)
things too. Elon, you can launch satellites and provide satellite data. And if that data is better and people like it more then they can use that too. Yeah. So maybe there's a Matt Miles perspective.

Matt (21:20.911)
Postal Service is a great ex Yeah, the Postal Service is a great example. And it

shawn (21:25.635)
So Matt on air is admitting that you are a social democrat 'cause isn't that basically what a social social democracy is? Is is free f free market

Matt (21:31.651)
I would say I'm a Republican.

I I don't know what it means to be a Republican anymore, but that's what I would say I am. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool, GOP loving Republican. I I love the Republican Party. I'm more of a Teddy Roosevelt Republican. All right.

Levi (21:46.604)
An Eisenhower Republican.

shawn (21:49.113)
Yeah.

Levi (21:52.495)
Tidney Roosevelt Republican. There you go. Yeah. Well, I the other thing that's that's useful about this is to understand the cost of cutting things. And I like that you brought in the CDC and the NIH. And I think it it is important to note that we are gonna start to see issues with government programs that have been cut. And we may not see them this year, we may not see them next year, but eventually, if you underfund NOAA, NASA, CDC, NIH, you're gonna start to see.

More disease, more death, more destruction. Elon ruins everything he touches. Right. Every time we go with in with the hatchet, we are sorry. We're like, man, we really needed that. So we should be careful.

Matt (22:36.463)
But I actually think Leva I think that's a perspective most Americans agree with. I think that the approach of the current administration to just slashing everything in the federal government isn't popular with Americans. And I do believe that most Trump voters didn't believe he was actually going to do the things that he's done. They thought yes.

Levi (22:44.342)
Mm. Yeah.

Levi (22:53.41)
Well, right. And this is this was the whole lie of Doge is Doge came along and said, those guys over there are going to tell you that you can either have low taxes or all these programs that we love, but we're telling you that's not true. There's so much fraud that we're going to eliminate the fraud, and then you can have low taxes without cutting any programs, and everything's going to be glorious. So vote for us. And so the lesson to learn, America, is

If it sounds too good to be true, it is. Doge told you you could have your cake and eat it too, and it's an abject failure. The lesson to learn is don't believe the con men when they tell you the yeah. When they tell you stuff that's too good to be true.

Matt (23:35.877)
Who's the con man that's selling that stuff now, Sean? Who's the con man they need to beware of? Who's telling of stuff's too good to be true?

shawn (23:40.433)
isn't the same administration in power during Doge than it was today? good point. Great point. That's a great point.

Matt (23:45.114)
No, Sean's answer is Mom Donnie. That's Sean's answer. Yeah. Sean Sean was up late partying last night, so he's a little bit slow today. Listeners, forgive him, but I'll I know the the things that Sean wants to say and I can remind him because cause I know that that's where Sean would go with that. Mom Donnie's a con man. Is mom Donnie a con man, Sean?

Levi (23:48.894)
Mom Donnie.

shawn (23:56.306)
A little slow. A little slow. Yeah.

Yeah, mom Donnie.

Ha ha.

Let's ask Levi, Mom Dani a con man or is he is he the righteous version of the politician you were just describing?

Levi (24:15.656)
well he really seems sincere to me. I I I mean I I don't think he's intending to con anyone. I mean I mean we'll remains to be seen whether he's economically na naive, but but so far I think he's legit, right?

shawn (24:18.432)
Ha ha ha.

shawn (24:26.565)
How you know it's

You know, it's funny. I just read an article of someone talking about Elon Musk and they said those exact words. He seems like an honest entrepreneur. Like he's trying to better. He wants to get us to Mars, Levi. What do you think? He's not a racist, dude. What do you think his motive is to get to Mars? He wants to get to Mars. Yeah. You think that's you think that's self-interest? Where do you where did you get Tang from, Levi?

Matt (24:39.983)
He's deaf.

Levi (24:41.07)
Like he's a he's a sincere white supremacist. He's

absolutely.

Matt (24:50.307)
Yeah. He's got a lot of children and there's not enough space on Earth. He's gotta get his kids.

shawn (24:58.777)
It's guys like Elon Musk who get us to Mars.

Matt (24:58.831)
Yeah, Levi. Or the government NASA program. All right, I'm giving points to both Levi and Sean on that one. You guys did great. That was awesome. All right, next up

Levi (25:00.344)
Base. Yeah.

shawn (25:09.401)
Levi gets my points. 'Cause that was I thought you'd take one stance, but then you taught me and you're right. I I I I learned from you. Yeah.

Matt (25:12.879)
Go ahead.

Matt (25:18.235)
All right, here's the next one. The US military dismantled a major program designed to prevent civilian deaths during combat operations, leading to rising civilian casualties. Following past tragedies in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan, the Department of Defense created the Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response Framework in 2022. This initiative embedded specialist advisors within military command units.

To analyze risks to noncombatants before airstrikes and investigate mistakes afterward. Under the current administration, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegzeth, roughly 90% of this harm reduction effort was eliminated in favor of maximizing military lethality. Experts and former military personnel note that the removal of these oversight teams coincided with a sharp increase in civilian deaths across multiple conflict zones.

including a devastating missile strike that destroyed an elementary school in Iran and killed over a hundred young girls. So here's the question Do governments have a moral obligation to prioritize reducing civilian casualties in conflict or at war?

shawn (26:31.737)
Just a quick question for for clarity. last week we talked a lot about ca you know, cause versus like correlation and causation, right? Are we suggesting that this program correlated or or is the cause of, for example, that devast I mean, that's a great example to look at, right? The that school in Iran and all those innocent kids and how sad that that is. Are we suggesting correlation or causation?

Matt (26:38.459)
Correlation versus causation. Yeah.

Matt (26:58.597)
I don't think we can know for sure, but I think that if you have people whose job is to look at an airstrike and say, let's make sure we're gonna reduce civilian casualties. I think that if you had a specialist looking at that particular airstrike, they could have identified a nearby elementary school and said, Hitting this place at this time maximizes the possibility that you're gonna have civilian casualties. Maybe if you need to do it

Do it a different time of day when school's not in session, maybe do it at a different time. So I think the I think the argument would be causation that removing someone like that from the team made it so that the military didn't have that kind of information to reduce harm.

shawn (27:40.178)
I mean, isn't the problem with the question do governments have a moral obligation to prioritize reducing civilian casualties and conflict? Everyone is gonna say yes to that. But the problem well well, before we k before we get to that, hang on, yeah, like before me and Levi, yeah. But it it's it's isn't it kind of a I don't know, the question is a tough to answer because no matter what you find, you're gonna have anyone, any government s explaining and showing trying to show evidence that of course what we're doing is

Matt (27:47.577)
I'm not I'm not gonna say but go go.

Levi (27:51.596)
Wait, what? Claw twist, okay.

shawn (28:10.289)
Prioritizing the reduction of casualties and conflict of the of civilian casualties. They're going to try and show data and like like the Israel effort, right? They they go out of their way to say, look, we're not targeting civilians the way that Hamas targets civilians. They go and there's a huge branded message about like, look.

Matt (28:20.281)
Yeah. Hamas, the stuff they're doing in Gaza.

shawn (28:37.487)
We are trying to reduce civilian casualties, but our enemy is huh? What I'm saying is No, no, Levi. Levi, what I'm s what I'm saying is but but Hamas says the same thing. They all all everyone's gonna say the same thing. That look, we are making an effort. We're not targeting civilian like, for example, is Russia targeting civilian civilians? Is Ukraine? So Ukraine hit some civilians and they try and put the story out that

Levi (28:40.334)
No, but they are lying, Sean. They are lying. They are lying about that when they say that. yeah.

Matt (28:58.979)
Yes, yes, yes.

shawn (29:05.805)
No, we're these civilians were working in a factory that is providing military equipment to Russia. So by law it's fair game. But they did target some civilians, right? Is it right or wrong in that case? Is it a moral obligation? Yeah, so that's what your point, Matt.

Matt (29:21.541)
My I I do not think it's okay to target civilians, but I I don't think that governments have this moral obligation to to do the kind of talk that you're talking about that says we're going to do our best to reduce civilian casualties. I think that that's morally a wrong thing to do. So so first of all, I'm not a fan of war at all. I'm not a fan of like the mass killing of people. I don't think that that's something that God intends. But if I look in scripture and I look at

What God says about war, there's nothing in there ever that says war should only be between soldier versus soldier, army versus army. That's a that's an invention in the post-World War II era, maybe post-World War I era, where we invented the system of war crimes and where we try to police war. And I don't think that there's a moral foundation for that idea. And I think that it ends up causing more problems. It hurts does more harm than good when people say,

Let's try to not target civilians. Because like you were pointing out, nobody follows those rules, anyways. And so it just makes hypocrites of the governments. And I think that if again, if I'm in charge of a war and I'm let's say I'm in Ukraine or I'm in Russia, and I my go my job is to end this war as soon as possible. I my moral obligation is to make the military tactical decision that results in the fewest loss of lives in general.

and ends the conflict as soon as possible. That's the moral obligation, not reducing conflict, not not reducing civilian casualties.

shawn (30:51.281)
So you would so you would change the

You would change the the statement to say governments have a moral obligation to prioritize the least amount of casualties in a war.

Matt (31:06.019)
Not even just casualties, injuries, like so loss of life, injury. Yeah, like military technologies, yeah.

shawn (31:09.337)
Right, right, right. And so if it means so if it means we drop a bomb i in Hiroshima and target civilians so that it ends the war and saves what assuming would be many more millions of lives, then it's that's the moral oblig that's the priority over reducing civilian casualties. That's your point? Hmm.

Matt (31:16.761)
Right.

Matt (31:29.391)
That's that's my argument. My argument is that it's always better to re the priority is reduce the number of reduce the length of the war and reduce the number of overall casualties, not just civilian casualties.

shawn (31:42.105)
Le Levi, that's pretty persuasive. What do you think?

Levi (31:46.729)
I think that civilian casualties are worse. I think that yeah, I think that I think that somebody who signed up to to be a soldier and and fight, I I understand that their lives do have a great deal of value, but it is a thing that they have decided to do and and I feel like like bombing schoolgirls is is worse. Now, but maybe there's a

Matt (32:14.669)
Okay, but Levi

Levi (32:16.632)
There's a weight there, right? That like do I have to kill, you know, a hundred thousand soldiers to save one schoolgirl? Do I do that? I don't know. It's a good it's a good question.

Matt (32:29.335)
In Israel, Levi, nobody signs up to be in the military. In Russia, nobody's signing up to be in the military. It's all conscripted forced service. So we're taking a US perspective where we have a private military that people voluntarily join, and we're forcing that perspective on the rest of the world. And I have friends who served in the Israeli Defense Forces and they're proud of their country, but they didn't choose Israeli Defense Forces. That's a mandatory thing that they have to do. And so

Levi (32:42.818)
Mm, point.

Matt (32:56.503)
I don't think it's great to kill little girls. Obviously, nobody thinks that that's great. But I need to preserve the lives of everybody involved in the conflict. And so civilian versus military, I just don't draw that line because most people don't choose to be there in the first place.

shawn (33:14.001)
Pretty persuasive. I don't know. It's it it I guess I see your point, Levi, and especially because you have always been a champion, Levi, of the underdog and of the defenseless. And I love that about you. You've always had this just heart for, you know, minorities or or the poor. And you look at he does not like you very much, actually. I don't know that you've known this. I don't see how you don't. No.

Matt (33:34.363)
And me, Sean, and me.

Matt (33:41.314)
No, I'm saying I'm similar to Levi in that I have a heart for the defense. I don't like watching people get slaughtered in Gaza. I don't like what happened in Iran. I don't like any of this stuff. But I but I say look at the length of war. Like the the Ukraine-Russia conflict so far. We're just going like since Russia invaded Ukraine, not all the way back to 2014. It's already longer than World War One.

shawn (33:45.1)
Levi (33:47.852)
Yes.

shawn (33:52.079)
I know you don't.

shawn (33:56.174)
No I agree I

Matt (34:04.953)
Like these new rules we've put into place are making it so that wars last so much longer than they need to last. And I wanna s I'm saying just get it over with. Like fight the war and get it over.

shawn (34:11.235)
Yeah, I was just I was just I I hear what you're saying. I was just pulling a map miles and looking at both sides of this. And so I see where Levi comes from because the emotional response is, no. again, yeah, if you find yourself in military, you have an objective. But civilians don't. Civilians are just trying to get by and survive and they have no power. And the powerful who have the weapons and the powerful governments who control the battle and where they go, they're more

Matt (34:17.207)
I see.

shawn (34:37.893)
They're in a power position above civilians. So I can see Le Levi's perspective. But I I think I'd I don't know, I I might give you the points, Matt, because if I can prioritize the fewest amount of lives lost, then I probably s would agree that that trumps everything. I don't know. What do you think, Levi?

Levi (34:58.018)
Yeah, well, so a couple of things occurring to me. So one is that it it's hard to it's hard to justify killing school children because they are not a threat to you. Right. But I but I guess Matt here is saying there that in such a case that accidentally killing children can shorten the war, maybe that's you know, dropping the bomb on Hiroshima, maybe that's an okay thing. I don't know. I also brought a scripture.

Matt (35:28.207)
Yeah.

shawn (35:28.225)
nice.

Levi (35:28.43)
so this is Deuteronomy 20 19. When thou shalt besiege a city a long time and making war against it, thou shalt not destroy the trees thereof by forcing an axe against them. So, schools, okay, trees, not okay. for thou mayest eat of them, and thou shalt not cut them down, for the tree of the field is man's life to employ them in the siege. So, I I

And I think this goes to say, like, I I think that there's something to be said for we are at war with a nation's armies, but not with the nation's homeland or infrastructure, right? That we'd like at the end of this war, whatever the result, for people to be able to live, right? And I think when you start targeting or when you're not careful with civilian infrastructure, you end up with

Everybody losing, right? At the end of the war, winners and losers have nothing nothing to go home to, right?

shawn (36:30.929)
I mean, there's there there is l another scripture, Matt, would be in Alma fourteen where it says, Let's see. the blood of the innocent shall stand as a witness against those, yea, cry middle

Matt (36:31.46)
It's a it's a good point.

Matt (36:40.773)
That's not a war situation, Sean. That's people killing innocent people because they believe in God.

shawn (36:47.471)
you don't think this would apply to anyone who out of either neglect or out of Yeah, of course. Like w you can't you're gonna tell me that the Nephites, when they were wicked and go against the Lamanites, the the blood of the innocent shall stand not stand as a witness against them just because it just because it was categorized as war? Of course that applies.

Matt (36:49.336)
A war?

Matt (36:56.783)
That's like

Matt (37:01.701)
This is this is a this is the Zoromites.

This is the people in Amaniaha killing their own people. This is like taking David Kuresh and Waco, Texas, or whatever, and being like, well, they were at war with the government or something like that. No, it's like just that's like that's not a war situation. That's all I'm saying about Alma 14. They're not at war. They're killing their own people. I'm opposed. There are no s circumstances under which I think God justifies a government killing its own people for their belief. I'm opposed to that. Yeah.

shawn (37:11.631)
This specific one is, yeah.

shawn (37:23.023)
Okay.

shawn (37:35.739)
Okay, good, we're all on the same page at least with with with that. Okay.

Matt (37:37.848)
And I I think what I would just say to to what Levi was saying about Iran, the the problem, many, many, many problems, right? But we're not at war with Iran because Congress hasn't declared war. We have a a weird situation in the United States where we are allowing people to act unlawfully. And when people are acting outside the bounds of law and outside the bounds of the constitution, they often do things that are immoral and egregious and terrible. And I don't think that this war with Iran, I wouldn't even call it a war.

or what what happened in Venezuela. There's a number of military actions the Trump administration has taken that I don't think of them as war because they don't we haven't declared war. And it's just individuals acting outside the realm of their constitutional authority. And so of course we should expect terrible things will happen when we act when people exercise power that's not lawfully given to them. So I I'm not trying to justify what happened to the girls in Iran. I we still don't even know the objective in Iran.

But when I think just generally about in a war situation, Russia, Ukraine, Jerusalem and Hamas, right? Israel and Hamas, should the priority be protect innocent lives and civilian lives? I just don't think that governments need to prioritize that.

But I'll still give Levi the points because that's a pretty good argument here. And I'll give Sean the points. Like Sean Sean brought in scripture. I shot him down a little shouted him down, which was inappropriate on my part, but it was a good scripture. And Levi Levi brought in a good scripture. No, I know, I know. But it was probably inappropriate

shawn (39:06.065)
It's okay. You can shout it down. Matt, I love you. I love you to shout me down. Nope. That's latter day lens. We

Levi (39:06.826)
Ha ha.

Levi (39:12.334)
I thought was a good response. Points to Matt. That was a good it was a good argument. Yeah, it was a good argument.

shawn (39:16.977)
Ha ha

Matt (39:18.927)
So I don't know how many of our listeners know about Jason Arde. And because Levi's wife is a sociologist, he might have a little more background on this than I do. But this is a story that broke my heart. And I'm gonna try and do it justice. But I do want to make I want to talk about this because when when all of this stuff happened, I just wish I felt powerless to do anything about it. But okay. So Jason Arday was a British sociologist who made history in 2023 when he became the youngest black.

Professor appointed at the University of Cambridge. For those who don't know, University of Cambridge is one of the top universities in the entire world. Celebrated for overcoming major personal obstacles, including autism and learning to read in his late teens, his academic career unraveled following widespread allegations of plagiarism, leading to his resignation and his death shortly thereafter in August of this year. Writing in the New York Times, one author contends that Cambridge and academic journals.

Delayed investigating serious misconduct claims for years because R. Day had become a high-profile symbol of institutional progress and social justice. The author warns that prioritizing ideological symbolism and public image over basic academic standards compromises university integrity and fuels attacks against higher education. In the Wall Street Journal, Harvard economist Roland Freyer agrees that institutions failed R-Day, but frames the flaw in

DEI differently. He argues that the problem is not taking chances, that the problem is not taking chances on non-traditional candidates, but refusing to provide honest critique and rigorous development afterward. When evaluators withhold critical feet feedback out of fear of appearing biased or wanting a diverse hire to succeed, they rob scholars of real growth and enable eventual scandal. Fryer concludes that the true include that true inclusion.

requires taking risks on untapped talent while maintaining high standards and telling candidates the truth about their work. So here's the question. Do either of these perspectives about diversity, equity, and inclusion really get to the heart of the problem? Why are people so imp opposed to DEI?

shawn (41:34.865)
Please go, you guys. I'm dying to hear your perspectives on this.

Matt (41:37.147)
Well, we'll let Levi go first 'cause he might know more about the story.

Levi (41:41.291)
Yeah, I I those were two crazy articles. Like like that's when I hear this story, I there's no part of me that thinks there's too much DEI going on. Like all of me thinks this is a fine example of why we need more DEI. Let me tell you what happened. So Jason Arde was a you know sort of well known scholar.

And a disgruntled racist who calls himself a racist, he calls himself a scientific racist, who had been fired from Cambridge for his racist views, went and started running Jason Arde's papers through something to find plagiarism, through programs that can find plagiarism, and found some passages in his dissertation. His dissertation, now Matt.

How carefully are dissertations written and reviewed? What are you what is your feeling on that? I I mean my dissertation, boy, I tell you, there were some passages in there. I like I I don't want to stand by that.

Matt (42:47.589)
I remember writing my

Levi (42:53.646)
What are your thoughts? Is it dissertation?

Matt (42:54.127)
I remember, I remember writing my dissertation. I was, I said to my wife, I know more about this topic than my advisors do. And this particular part right here, I know that I could slide that past my committee. and I wouldn't and they would never catch me. And she said to me, But is it true? And I'm like, it's not really, there's not a lot of empirical support for this. And and I'm not sure it's right, but it sure sounds better if I put it in the dissertation. And she's like, look.

You like in the end it's your dissertation. Even if you can get it through without anybody catching you, like you you shouldn't do it. But but to answer your question, Levi, y you know more about the subject than your committee does at that point. And they're gonna review it a little bit, but they really don't know it as well as you know it.

Levi (43:35.694)
Yeah.

Levi (43:40.045)
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Not well reviewed in general. So, I mean, my my whole take on this thing was this is exactly why we need more DEI, because black scholars are subject to so much more scrutiny than white scholars. That this man, because he was black, was targeted by a racist and and called out for it. That man didn't didn't go through all the Cambridge professors.

and run all their dissertations through this program. He targeted a black scholar to try to take him down. Same thing with Claudine Gay. Do you have feelings on that, Matt? What did what was the Claudine Gay situation?

Matt (44:19.855)
Yeah, so Claudine Gay, I actually know her personally, and I don't like her personally. but she was she was a bit rude. But it was the same thing. President of Harvard University, she testifies before Congress. Some people don't like it. So they go back through all of her work trying to find misquotes or misstatements or all that sort of stuff, and then they find some things and then they demand that she be fired, and eventually she either resigned or was fired from her position at Harvard. Like her entire life's career was destroyed.

Levi (44:24.814)
no.

Matt (44:49.785)
Because of some misstatements, some misquotes in her dissertation, her early work. Which again, I'm not gonna try to justify plagiarism, but like Lee, like most academics know, I hope nobody goes through my work with that kind of scrutiny because who knows, right? As you're writing something of that length, are you quoting when you do you put quotes in the right place? Are you paraphrasing too much? Does your paraphrasing sound too much like them?

shawn (44:55.174)
Well they

Levi (45:11.362)
Yeah. Yeah.

Matt (45:15.653)
Did you not cite the right thing? Like there's so much that could go into an accusation of plagiarism. Everybody, everybody hopes that nobody goes through their work with that kind of scrutiny.

shawn (45:25.797)
Levi, at the time of the Claudine Gay debacle, I was really upset that the the reason that they were firing her is because of the or demoting her, really, was the the plagiarism, right? I I actually spent the time to read through it and I'm like, really? Really, these are the claims of plagiarism. Like it's absolute nonsense. Now listen, I was a I was happy that she was held accountable for her actions regarding the Jewish students that are and the statements that she made.

were extremely immoral and and and irresponsible. So I was happy for her to have, you know, be accountable for those things. But I hated that the reasoning that they were giving was or the just or the the the the tools that they were trying to use were this whole plagiarism thing. It was so pathetic and so weak. Like like if you're trying to get her out because of what she didn't said, maybe there's merit to that. Don't go and fish out some and so it's in it's enlightening to hear what you guys are saying. You're saying that

Levi (46:10.424)
Yeah.

shawn (46:22.083)
Of course, there's going to be similar phrases or or borrowed things in all these dissertations. It doesn't mean that any of like what I found with Claudine Gaze was there was nothing of substance. Everything that she copied, none of it was there was no substance to it that would be of any problem at all. And yet that's what she's known for, right? She was a plagiarist. So you're saying that that applies here as well. And it seems like what I've read is true. Like there's nothing of substance that he borrowed or used. Is that correct?

Levi (46:31.82)
Yeah. Yeah.

Matt (46:36.196)
Right.

Levi (46:41.507)
Yeah, yeah.

Levi (46:51.606)
Yeah, I the the I I didn't actually read line by line all these things. But the yeah, the comment was that the that it was similar to some other work by by another scholar and they even said, Yeah, write down to copy editing errors, which are not punctuation errors. They're like, you know, so what, like subject verb disagreement kind of errors. I don't even know what what what what they were about. So

Matt (47:09.659)
Yes. Right.

Matt (47:16.772)
Right.

Levi (47:21.154)
They claimed that there was some reason that that meant he had lifted it verbatim. I don't know.

Matt (47:21.295)
Yeah, so b

shawn (47:26.693)
Levi, I I don't I don't tend to you tend to default to racism for most things. I don't tend to do that as much, but if racism and what you've claimed, I believe you, then it is so immoral and so sad for this this this this man. Like it breaks my heart. And if 'cause I'm I would never deny that there is no racism, but and I don't put it as often or common or as the foundation of all problems in in society, but

Levi (47:48.929)
Yeah.

shawn (47:54.372)
In this case, it seems like it was accurate based on what you're teaching me and what I've read, and that's just a tragedy and heartbreaking. Now, how does that apply to DEI? you make a good point. That's maybe the reason why there should be more DEI. But on the other hand, Matt, your point in bringing up the alternate alter articles are saying, well, DEI is what causes this because it puts undue spotlights onto people and requires a a higher stance

Right? It requires you're saying it requires a higher standard for them to be judged by, and therefore it pulls out all this like scrutiny, unwanted scrutiny?

Matt (48:30.745)
Yeah, I think it's not just the unwanted scrutiny. I feel like somebody who perceives themselves as being a DEI hire feels like they have to prove themselves to the world for the rest of their lives. And they feel like their entire academic career is at stake. So no matter what they accomplish, no matter what good things they do, there's a fear that someone's gonna always come back and try to destroy them. So my my friends that are white, if they were

The youngest tenured whatever at University of Cambridge would say, I made it. I'm done. Nobody can touch me. I'm safe forevermore. And people who are perceived to be DEI hires have that behind underneath their entire lives. Personally, I feel like Barack Obama, as the first black president, held back from a lot of things he would like to say or a lot of things he would like to do because he felt this pressure that I'm the first black president. I have this obligation to make sure that.

Whatever. And so I think that in a lot of ways, this like anti-DEI feeling that exists among Americans does more harm than good. And I don't know where it comes from. And these articles, I just disagree with these articles. I don't think institutions failed these people. I it's for the reasons that they say. The institutions failed these people because they didn't stand up to the masses and say, he is a tenured professor at the University of Cambridge, leave him alone. We have our own rigorous process.

shawn (49:39.589)
Levi

Levi (49:51.83)
Yeah.

Matt (49:57.126)
Dig up whatever dirt you want to dig up. This person is safe forever. Because they would have done that for their white professors. That's where I see the racism.

Levi (50:04.418)
Yeah. Mm-hmm. Yeah. I there's racism all through this, right? So a racist comes and tells you this man plagiarized his dissertation and then Cambridge investigates it, right? I I think that's already a mistake by Cambridge. Cambridge should have said, I'm not really interested in your opinion. And and then to have the media follow it so closely. I know the American media didn't, but the British media put a lot of attention on this.

shawn (50:09.531)
Yeah.

Matt (50:17.647)
Yeah, of course.

Matt (50:21.935)
Right, we hired this person.

Levi (50:30.348)
And I think that's because of racism in in their consumers, yeah.

shawn (50:32.793)
Okay, so but your question, Matt, is what's the right perspective about DEI? Levi, how like I'm willing to learn on this. Like, help me. So, for example, all growing up here, so we just had my son's wedding last night, and it was so exciting to have all of these kids that we've known for 20, 23 years who Evan grew up with, my son grew up with, come and visit all these basketball players. And there's a couple of kids in particular who would fall into the categories, Levi, that you would say.

DEI applies to them. They are poor, they are minorities, they are single-parent families, they are like all kinds of categories. And like this gets me emotional because, you know, our our our community at least, we rallied around these kids and we we took them as our own and we did everything we could, man. We like bent like we loved them and we we saved them and supported them. And

We didn't do it because they were minorities. We didn't do it because they were poor. We do it because we love them. And in the end, no DEI has ever benefited them. At least, just they haven't had the opportunity to access DEI. And yet, today, despite all odds, they're doing great. They're doing great because their society, their community rallied with them. And because they individually overcame, right? Maybe we don't even give credit to us as rallying against them. Or maybe we just give the credit to

This is a beloved son of God who rose above all challenges. And it doesn't matter that he was poor and it doesn't matter the color of his skin. He was an individual son of God who rose above all of his challenges. I don't look, I don't, I I just think DEI would harm his confidence. It would harm his perception of his ability to overcome all things because talking to him last night, that's his attitude. Sean, I've overcome this. I overcame this. I did this. I worked hard.

I now have a degree. I'm going up for a higher degree. Like against all odds. To me, how how do I not look at that and go, DEI has no place in there? I don't think it would have been good for him.

Matt (52:35.451)
Well so to me.

Well, so to me, DEI is nothing more than this, Sean, that if a white person from a an an upper middle class neighborhood is competing with this friend of yours for a job and they're equally qualified in all ways, DEI just says, we're gonna recognize that this kid that Sean's talking about had to pay a higher price to get to this position than the white kid in an upper middle class neighborhood. We're not gonna hire somebody less qualified.

We're gonna say if you're equally qualified, we're gonna put a higher premium on what you overcame to get to that point, and we're gonna choose you instead of the other person.

shawn (53:17.361)
So so I'd be okay with that, except then you have to agree that all levels of racism are not equal, that it's okay to be racist to some people and it's not okay to be racist to other people, which at its core is the reason racism exists. I can't justify what you just said, because that is the exact reasoning that causes societies to be racist. Is I'm allowing racism here and I'm not allowing it over there.

Matt (53:38.157)
It's not racism.

I'm it's not about di diversity, equity, and inclusion isn't about racism. It's about

Levi (53:43.448)
Mm-hmm.

shawn (53:47.194)
You just said, hang on, let me make sure. You just said if a person of this skin color and a person of this skin color side by side have equal qualifications, I should use their skin color as the reason to fire them or hire them or not hire them.

Matt (53:58.958)
No, I didn't I didn't say skin color. You didn't even tell me the race of your your friend. I don't know their race. I know their story and what they overcame. And I know that all DEI isn't about race. DEI is about saying that if two people are equally qualified, we're gonna prioritize the person who had a harder path to get there. That's all it is.

Levi (54:03.917)
shawn (54:07.107)
You're s saying that race has nothing to do with DEI? Skin color?

shawn (54:20.123)
So that c so in in a in a Levi, would you agree with that? So in the case where a white kid had a harder path, are they gonna be deemed hireable over, you know, a non white kid? Is that what you're saying? Really?

Matt (54:34.103)
It happens. Happens to Princeton every year. A rural kid from Idaho gets in over a rich kid in the upper middle classes because they say, We're gonna prioritize the story of the rural farmer kid who overcame a bad education system to get to that same point. It's not about race.

Levi (54:40.397)
No.

Levi (54:47.711)
Mm.

shawn (54:49.679)
I'd have to r I'd have to research that, but I just that doesn't seem right. I don't think that's happening.

Levi (54:53.634)
Well, and one way that that my brilliant wife, I think this was somebody else's idea, but related to me, is is she she talked about if you were a track coach and you found two athletes and they had the same time, right? They're running the 400 in the same exact time. And one of them had had the benefit of the best coaches, went to a high-powered high school track school. They've had

lots of advantages. They've had train personal trainers. And the other one didn't have any of that and went to a school that hardly has a track team and and the only person ever taught him how to run was YouTube. Which one which of those would you choose for your college program? Right? You'd obviously choose the one who'd had no training because you'd think, aha, this is a person that given a little bit of advantage, given the benefit of some serious coaching is gonna is going to suddenly become a lot faster.

So that's a really good, I think, argument for what Matt's talking about, for taking into account everybody's background. I also think that race is legitimately important, but it doesn't always have to be something like a like a quota or like a you know, like a company that that I'm that that I know a little bit about, they when there was a big push for DEI, what they did is they

Hired recruiters specifically to seek out candidates who were people of color and women. And they said, okay, like your job as a recruiter is to get these people to apply for these jobs. And beyond that, they said, You're not involved. You got them to apply. Congratulations, you're done. And so they this was sort of recognizing hiring as a pipeline, is they said, well,

You know, if we can get more people of color and women to apply for jobs, then we'll get more of them to get an interview. And if more of them get an interview, then we'll get more of them hired and we'll have a more diverse workforce. And this was, I thought, a great way to say we're not lowering our standards. There's not a different standard depending upon what you look like. We're just saying we recognize we need more diversity for a lot of reasons. And so let's, you know, focus on recruitment. So that can be a DEI.

Levi (57:14.506)
Or research that focuses on disparate health outcomes for for people of different races. These are all things that are, you know, that are DEI that aren't somebody saying, well, you're white, so you don't get to get into, you know, so you don't get a job. So I think sometimes we have a very narrow definition of DEI when we, yeah. And that can be a mistake.

Matt (57:36.539)
It's a good thing. DEI is a good thing. It's really, really good for society. But I'm giving points to Sean because I love the story, Sean, that you shared about your family helping people. I already knew that you guys did that.

shawn (57:38.694)
Mm-hmm.

shawn (57:47.09)
It wasn't about me, us helping people. It was about the fact that he overcame on his own. Yeah, maybe it's his come are his community gave a little support, but that's not the point of the story. The point is he overcame. He chose to look at these like really desperate, traumatic situations. And he made all these decisions to go to school. He made the decision to hang out with families who would support him. He made the decision to keep in sports or to do the right. Like he overcame it on his own.

Matt (57:57.155)
I know.

Matt (58:16.759)
I gave the story a bad title, but it's still a good story, and that's why I'm giving you the points. But you gave it a better title than I did. All right, here's the big question. In the last 25 years, membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints expanded nationwide, growing 33% from 5.21 million members to 6.93 million members. Membership increased in 49 of the 50 states. Only California shrunk.

Sean. North Dakota saw the largest percentage surge at 131%, followed by high growth states like Tennessee, Arkansas, Texas, while Washington, D.C. jumped 187% in terms of total numbers added. Utah led the nation with over 576,000 new members, followed by major gains in Texas, Idaho, Arizona, and Florida. So in 1984,

Levi (58:48.728)
Yeah.

Matt (59:14.725)
a non-LDS sociologist named Rodney Stark project projected that by 2080 there would be more than 265 million Mormons in the world if the church grew at a 50% growth rate. The US rate right now of 33% is lower than what he projected. So here's the big question How should church members feel about this growth rate in the US over the last 25 years? By the way, if you're excited, shame on you. That's not awesome.

shawn (59:42.768)
Ha ha ha.

Matt (59:44.397)
And Sean has a podcast, the Mission Stories Podcast, where he's helping train young people to improve this in the future. Sean, I hope you're not content with thirty three percent of the United States and losing people in California. This is horrible.

shawn (59:57.714)
Thanks for the shout out. Mission Stories Podcast is there to grow the church and to help missionaries be more prepared and have more exciting experiences. Thank you very much. Mormon or mission stories, not Mormon stories. That's no, I did though. So Mission Stories, Sean Record.

Matt (01:00:09.125)
Did I call it Mormon Stories? okay. Yeah. Yours is way better than Mormon Stories. Mission Stories podcast with Sean Record. When I search for it on Apple, I have to put in Sean Record to find it. No, no, it's good, but just so listeners know, put in Sean Record, you'll find it. It's way better than Mormon Stories.

shawn (01:00:19.961)
Yeah, I know. Sorry. Sorry about that. You're d

shawn (01:00:27.665)
Do you remember the the being on our mission in Ukraine and there's a rumor going around that Leo Tolstoy, the the the the great Leo Tolstoy said something about our church. You remember that? What did he say? Do you remember what said? Supposedly?

Matt (01:00:38.992)
Yeah.

N no, I just remember that he died with a copy of the Book of Mormon in his room or something like that. That was the story I heard.

shawn (01:00:45.937)
And he called our church the American religion and wanted to learn about the American religion and said that if it keep grow keeps growing at the pace it's growing, then it'll be the most powerful force in the world. Well, it turns out there's not a primary source for that quote, so who knows? But I I I'm using that to go, yeah, yeah, yeah. We're on a projection to like we're gonna grow and grow and grow. So I'm with you, Matt. Thirty-three percent is not good enough. I agree. And by the way, to defend California, which is below Oregon.

Matt (01:00:57.946)
Wow.

Matt (01:01:02.469)
Yeah.

Matt (01:01:10.725)
Thank you, Sean.

shawn (01:01:15.545)
Levi, as you've reminded me of the shirts you sent me. California still has the second largest gro population of LDS members in the country. And the only reason we went down is because all the Californians are going to your states, which is why you grew.

Levi (01:01:17.196)
Mm-hmm. Yeah.

Matt (01:01:18.303)
Ha ha ha.

Matt (01:01:24.186)
Yeah.

Matt (01:01:29.413)
Don't blame Gavanusome. Don't blame Gavanu. It's it's you don't have welcoming enough congregations that makes people want to stay. Whereas they come to Rexburg, they're like, I've got to come here. These people are so cool.

shawn (01:01:37.848)
That's not true.

I'm just saying the only r the o the only reason your states are growing is because we in California are going to them. That's the only reason.

Matt (01:01:47.001)
You don't think North Dakota has like really awesome missionary work or Washington, DC, that they're just pounding the pavement in DC? You think it's people moving to those states?

shawn (01:01:51.611)
I'm sure they do. I'm s no, they're I'm just defending California.

Levi (01:01:58.046)
Okay.

Matt (01:01:58.212)
Yeah. Well, Oregon's not a ton better. Oregon's maybe like nine percent or something like that. Dude, it's not great.

shawn (01:02:02.803)
Levi (01:02:04.502)
Nine percent. no. well, so what do we do to so I'm I'm always been kind of surprised that we haven't heard a prophet say that the Lord hasn't said everybody get out of Utah, like not everybody, right? But I'm I'm surprised we haven't heard the the prophets say, Hey, if you get an opportunity to to move out of Utah and Arizona and Idaho, you guys should do it.

because I I I do think that that might help growth of the church is if we had people from Utah moving to Arkansas and Connecticut, and you know, then then you'd have congregations grow there, more people, more exposure to the church. We know the best you know, the best conversions happen friend to friend and not missionary to stranger. So I'm kind of surprised that hasn't been a fr a thrust in the church, and I wonder if it will be.

shawn (01:02:58.961)
That's interesting.

Levi (01:02:59.382)
some point. God probably just hasn't thought of it yet, but now he knows.

shawn (01:03:02.501)
Can Matt, can we also point out though that this last year, if you believe the apostles, they say that there have been more growth growth in the last 24 or 12 months than in any time in the church's history? And if we're talking correlation and or causation, at a time where more sisters are going out as missionaries, would we suggest maybe that the the the trajectory could keep going and growing and growing because we have more women going out and being more effective than us knucklehead men?

Matt (01:03:13.039)
Yes.

Matt (01:03:32.763)
Mm-hmm.

shawn (01:03:32.816)
And maybe that is that is a sign that things are gonna grow and grow and grow that we have more sister missionaries. I find on my podcast called Mission Stories by Sean Record that the girls' stories, it's called Mission Stories by Sean Record. No, you're giving me another shout-out. But I find that these sister stories are so miraculous and faithful. I don't know, to me, I have optimism, even though I agree with you, Matt, 33%, no good. But I'm pretty optimistic because of the fact that so many sisters

Levi (01:03:43.532)
Wait, what's it called? Just kidding.

shawn (01:04:03.065)
Are engaging in the work the way they are so faithfully, I think it's just growth, growth, growth from here. We'll be beyond the 33 mark.

Matt (01:04:10.351)
I think it's an intro level math class called calculus that I never got to that teaches you how to measure things in non a nonlinear fashion. I think that thirty-three per and so I don't know the math on this, right? But I think that the thirty-three percent over the last twenty-five years, I think a lot of the weight in that growth is actually being carried by the last five years. Since the pandemic, the church has had amazing growth just in the United States and globally. But as I travel around and visit congregations, every single one of them

Reports record growth.

shawn (01:04:41.775)
Hang on, Matt. So I credit our growth to the women of the church. You credit it to a a pandemic called COVID. You're saying the

Matt (01:04:48.963)
I mean, I don't know that it's I don't know if it's COVID, but I I think that I think that there was actually probably flat growth there for a long time and and we're in a surge again. So when I say when it's 33%, I actually think that we're doing better than 30% right now. That's what I'm trying to say. Like, and I and and to Levi's point, when I visit congregations outside of Utah and Idaho, the church is alive, it's exciting, it's new.

shawn (01:05:05.444)
I see.

Matt (01:05:14.479)
There are people who don't speak English. There's people of all races, all backgrounds. Like the church is so exciting outside of Utah and Idaho. It's just a different church altogether that I think it's a very exciting time to be in the church. And I think we are at a point of like tremendous growth. and so actually, even though I said we should be ashamed, I actually think we should be pretty proud. The church is doing pretty great right now. And it's a fun time to be a member of the church, in my experience. Like

I love, I was at Myrtle Beach last Sunday. No, two Sundays ago. I went to church. Anyhow, I go to church. I'll be in Boston in a couple weeks. Like everywhere I go, it's just so exciting to just see the church. The members are alive, they're excited. Conversion stories, baptisms, like new people at church. My son in his ward in New Jersey, he's in a really tough area.

They're having record growth in that area. Like everywhere I see in the church in the United States and abroad, it just seems like it's exciting to be a member of the church and it's growing. And I think that that's a cool thing. I don't know why the church released this thing state by state that they did. I don't think that that's all that cool, but I think the church growth is cool. And maybe it is.

Levi (01:06:25.912)
Just to shame California, probably.

shawn (01:06:27.959)
Ha ha ha.

Matt (01:06:30.331)
Do you do you think Levi there's something to sister missionaries being better than elders? I don't think that Sean's right about this.

shawn (01:06:36.561)
I didn't quite say it in those words, Matt, but I didn't say that they were better.

Levi (01:06:40.224)
What as Sean was talking about it, as Sean was talking about the thing I thought of was we talked statistically the other day that younger women are leaving the church more often. And I thought, well, I wonder if that's gonna help to like cause when you talked about that, I thought, this is this might be a problem in LDS marriages, right? If this s sort of trend continues, now suddenly you have all these Mormon men looking for

Matt (01:07:01.243)
Mm-hmm.

Levi (01:07:07.916)
somebody in the church to marry and where'd they all go, they all left the church. And so I wondered if these sister missionaries would help to bring along but maybe that maybe the opposite'll t be true, right? Maybe these handsome sister missionaries will draw in more younger men and exacerbate the problem. I don't know.

Matt (01:07:13.509)
Yeah.

Well.

Matt (01:07:26.755)
My son told me that zone conferences in his mission sometimes feel like a YSA dance as all of the elders and sisters flirt with each other because there's just so many young people. And he's like, and I try to get them not to flirt, but President Oaks said something recently about people meeting their spouses on their mission or something like that. So you've got this like lock your hearts tension versus the living prophet saying maybe it's okay to meet your spouse on the mission. And and at BYU Idaho.

shawn (01:07:51.663)
I support that.

Matt (01:07:53.205)
So many young people met each other on their missions. They got married.

shawn (01:07:56.108)
I can't think of much better. What a great, amazing thing, right? These missionaries going out, meeting each other, having common experiences on their mission. Like like you two, I'll love you for I wish I could marry the both of you together. And that would no, because it's just joy to have Why would you be offended by that, Matt? You're pro all that. Yeah, that's true. I want to.

Matt (01:08:07.397)
stop, Sean.

Matt (01:08:12.899)
It's No no, I just your wife likes you a lot and so I don't know that she's gonna appreciate that y that you would like to mar and you have strong views on polygamy, so you really can't marry both of us and so I don't I just didn't know how true that was, that's all.

shawn (01:08:23.163)
Ha ha.

shawn (01:08:27.323)
Saying I would if I could. And I love that these missionaries are out there meeting each other and having common, life-changing, foundational establishing, Christ-centered experiences. And then they get married. I just think that's so cool.

Matt (01:08:41.489)
but what Levi said reminded me of something. I was doing a little bit of church history research yesterday, and I came across Elder Jack Gosland of the 70 in 1992, I think it was at a BYU devotional. He said that for the first time in church history, more young women are leaving the church than young men are. So this trend that we started talking about recently actually dates back to.

When we were at BYU in Provo, like that's when that shift started happening, where more young women were leaving than young men leaving the church.

shawn (01:09:08.165)
nineties.

shawn (01:09:15.365)
What is it called? The wheat wheat and the tares? Separation of the wheat and the w is that what's called?

Matt (01:09:18.233)
What? okay. I thought you were talking about like his talk. I was like, man, you don't want me to remember the title of his talk, do you?

Levi (01:09:24.494)
Yeah.

shawn (01:09:25.135)
No. Maybe it's the wheat and the tares. Like those the women in the church today are running everything, in my opinion. Not everything, but it it's amazing the good like they they're our leaders. That's what I love the most. I think they are. I'll reclaim the statement. I think they're doing everything in the church. Like I love seeing in my ward and stake level them lead out and do like all the good work. And we men go, Yeah, we need to step up, like we need to do better.

And so maybe it's just a separation of the wheat and the tares and we see these powerful, powerful disciples of Christ doing the work. And then the ones who aren't interested, yeah, they leave wheat and the tares. Is that what

Levi (01:10:05.342)
Well, but the the parable of the wheat and the tares was the was the opp of the lesson was the opposite, right? The parable of the wheat and the tares was you gotta let you gotta stop picking the tares out because you can't tell the difference, right? You have to let the wheat and the tares grow together, right?

shawn (01:10:08.291)
is it? Did I get it wrong? Yeah. Yeah.

yeah, I was not confident. I was I was not conf I was not confident about that analogy. Sorry, or that reference.

Levi (01:10:23.894)
We need those we need the you know, yeah. We need to let those wheat and tares grow up together.

shawn (01:10:27.525)
Wheat and the chaff? Wheat in the chaff. What's the one about I f never mind. I'm too tired. The wedding went till like one AM.

Matt (01:10:33.87)
I love it. That's exactly that's exactly how we're gonna end the podcast. That was awesome. Thanks, Sean. Hey you guys, thanks so much for joining me this week. And listeners, talk to you again next week.

shawn (01:10:38.488)
great.