I'm Full Of Feelings about The Problem Of Ex-Evangelical Public Figures and I keep cycling around that response and others about Harris' exit from Evangelical Christianity and his public announcement of his divorce, and how much people yearn for them to be accountable for their actions and theologies of harm and how the structure of supremacist Christianity doesn't allow for people to say "I made a mistake and I'm sorry" but only to say "I've grown and changed so you can't be angry anymore about how I used to be" and how that continues to play out even when people disavow Christianity entirely.

That's... what I took away from the article, that it's staking a right to anger, in the face of this exact problem?