Too soon?
-
RIP Charlie Kirk.
You were a good Christian man with moral principles with a wife and 2 kids. You were killed by a lunatic while you were exercising your freedom of speech, you were persecuted by your opponents. Some may say that's a form of fascism, the same party that accused you of being.
The violent rhetoric of the left influenced some weak minded soul to take you from your children, and also taken your quotes out of context.
Charlie Kirk never robbed a pregnant woman at gun point, or robbed a bank, or killed a woman on a train, but instead encouraged open conversation between all parties so they could understand each other in a meaningful way.
May you rest in peace, and may your naysayers see the evil in their ways and repent. They may mock you because they're unable to refute your debates, but they will reap what they sow.
RIP Charlie Kirk
wrote on last edited by [email protected]violent rhetoric of the left?
as far as Ive seen the left mostly talks about taxing the wealthy and universal health care while the right focuses on removing women's, trans rights and jailing immigrants.
let's not forget that Kyle Rittenhouse was openly celebrated at a Republican convention essentially for killing a black protester.
do you have examples of this violent rhetoric?
-
I’m getting pretty fucking sick of seeing this ‘no one should be killed for their political beliefs’ take going around.
He wasn’t killed for his beliefs. He was killed because he dedicated his life to terrorizing everyone who isn’t a conservative white man, and was materially supporting state violence in the pursuit of white supremacy.
That is 100% something we have firmly established that people should be shot for, in multiple wars throughout the last few centuries.
See the issue with this mentality is that THIS is the mentality of authoritarians. You try to find ways to justify the murder of the people you politically disagree with while not applying the same standard to the people you politically agree with.
What you're doing is helping set a precedent that political violence is justified if you frame it in a certain way. If that's the case then other extremist whackos, including conservative ones, are going to start doing the same thing. What's there from stopping some conservative nutjob from shooting someone like Hasan Piker or AOC or Mamdani or anyone on the left really as a retaliation? After all, if what you're saying here is now passing as a valid justification, then they'll just use your very own justification to justify their own actions.
The things that authoritarians don't understand is that when principles aren't applied universally, the standard becomes subjective, and sooner or later, their abuse of power will come back to bite them in the ass by the very standard they helped establish. I am fully aware that Lemmy is usually off the deep end on politics, but this is too unhinged even for this platform.
-
This post did not contain any content.
His face seems larger in this pic than usual
-
RIP Charlie Kirk.
You were a good Christian man with moral principles with a wife and 2 kids. You were killed by a lunatic while you were exercising your freedom of speech, you were persecuted by your opponents. Some may say that's a form of fascism, the same party that accused you of being.
The violent rhetoric of the left influenced some weak minded soul to take you from your children, and also taken your quotes out of context.
Charlie Kirk never robbed a pregnant woman at gun point, or robbed a bank, or killed a woman on a train, but instead encouraged open conversation between all parties so they could understand each other in a meaningful way.
May you rest in peace, and may your naysayers see the evil in their ways and repent. They may mock you because they're unable to refute your debates, but they will reap what they sow.
RIP Charlie Kirk
Didn't he say gun violence is unfortunate cost just so people can own a gun to protect from the boogie man? I'd say live by the gun, die by the gun. He got his honorable death or something so you should be happy.
-
RIP Charlie Kirk.
You were a good Christian man with moral principles with a wife and 2 kids. You were killed by a lunatic while you were exercising your freedom of speech, you were persecuted by your opponents. Some may say that's a form of fascism, the same party that accused you of being.
The violent rhetoric of the left influenced some weak minded soul to take you from your children, and also taken your quotes out of context.
Charlie Kirk never robbed a pregnant woman at gun point, or robbed a bank, or killed a woman on a train, but instead encouraged open conversation between all parties so they could understand each other in a meaningful way.
May you rest in peace, and may your naysayers see the evil in their ways and repent. They may mock you because they're unable to refute your debates, but they will reap what they sow.
RIP Charlie Kirk
Ahh a "good christian man" he was anything but. Why do all of the "good christians" go against everything Jesus taught? Why do they only use his name to oppress others? A true christian would welcome and accept those that are different not try and belittle and shame them for their differences.
Begone CHUD.
-
This post did not contain any content.
The celebration around this is similar to how gazans danced on the streets on October 8.
-
have empathy for his children, who didn't ask to be born into this
and uh I guess that's about it
He did say kids should see public executions.
"Death penalties should be public, should be quick, it should be televised. I think at a certain age, its an initiation...What age should you start to see public executions?" -Kirk
https://www.newsweek.com/charlie-kirk-death-penalty-public-executions-1873073
-
Great foreshadowing too.
Earlier this year, Utah passed House Bill 128 allowing people to conceal carry firearms on university campuses. One of the campuses where conceal carry was now permitted is, of course, Utah Valley University, where Charlie Kirk was visiting today. He was sitting under a tent with the slogan "Prove Me Wrong".
Immediately before the shooting, he was taking questions from the audience:
“Do you know how many transgender Americans have been mass shooters over the last 10 years?” an audience member asked. Kirk responded, “Too many.”
The questioner followed up: “Do you know how many mass shooters there have been in America over the last 10 years?”
“Counting or not counting gang violence?” Kirk asked.
Then a single shot rang out.
It's unfortunate that he's ineligible for the Darwin Award because he leaves behind 2 very young children and a culture warrior wife, because otherwise he'd be a great nominee for the 2025 Darwin Awards. Normally to get a Darwin Award someone has to directly kill themselves. But, I think in this case we could have make an exception for someone who was a cheerleader for gun rights and was sitting directly under a banner saying "Prove Me Wrong" when he was killed with a gun.
If this is a movie plot, critic would say this is just too cliche.
-
This post did not contain any content.
i mean hes right. shoulda just been on the right side of history
-
They fought a war against an opposing army, not by assassinating people exercising their right to discuss opinions and ideas. In fact they fought FOR the right to have opinions and ideas and to express them. They thought it was so important to protect that right, that they put it into the bill of rights, which specifically states that the right to free speech transcends government. The government that they wanted could only exist if people could freely exchange ideas without fear of being murdered (or imprisoned) for them. That's why its a particularly bad example.
They fought a war against an opposing army, not by assassinating people exercising their right to discuss opinions and ideas
Of course it’s morally superior to kill a conscript (the British army was largely comprised of conscripts) than it is to kill a propagandist who advocates for political violence. /s
In fact they fought FOR the right to have opinions and ideas and to express them.
Utter rubbish. The war was instigated over matters of taxation and trade.
They thought it was so important to protect that right, that they put it into the bill of rights
It was so important that it was left out of the Constitution and had to be submitted as a bill to amend the Constitution.
Hardly sounds like the defining cause of the rebellion if they forgot to put it in their foundational document the first time around.
-
See the issue with this mentality is that THIS is the mentality of authoritarians. You try to find ways to justify the murder of the people you politically disagree with while not applying the same standard to the people you politically agree with.
What you're doing is helping set a precedent that political violence is justified if you frame it in a certain way. If that's the case then other extremist whackos, including conservative ones, are going to start doing the same thing. What's there from stopping some conservative nutjob from shooting someone like Hasan Piker or AOC or Mamdani or anyone on the left really as a retaliation? After all, if what you're saying here is now passing as a valid justification, then they'll just use your very own justification to justify their own actions.
The things that authoritarians don't understand is that when principles aren't applied universally, the standard becomes subjective, and sooner or later, their abuse of power will come back to bite them in the ass by the very standard they helped establish. I am fully aware that Lemmy is usually off the deep end on politics, but this is too unhinged even for this platform.
It's a conundrum. But remember, this guy said It's fine for some to die from guns. So I sure as hell ain't wasting a caring thought on him.
-
I’m getting pretty fucking sick of seeing this ‘no one should be killed for their political beliefs’ take going around.
He wasn’t killed for his beliefs. He was killed because he dedicated his life to terrorizing everyone who isn’t a conservative white man, and was materially supporting state violence in the pursuit of white supremacy.
That is 100% something we have firmly established that people should be shot for, in multiple wars throughout the last few centuries.
Well said. Claiming he simply died for his political beliefs is highly reductive and disingenuous.
-
This post did not contain any content.
It's my birthday today so hearing about it is one of the best birthday gifts
-
His face seems larger in this pic than usual
Well he had more blood flowing in this photo
-
::: spoiler I guess some people can change.
:::I dislike this for so many reasons, but I laughed out loud which means I am legally obligated to upvote
-
The celebration around this is similar to how gazans danced on the streets on October 8.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]I used to condone against 7th October, but what I've seen now I think it was glorious day of resistance against the illegal occupiers of the Palestinian territories. Israel has no right to exist! As far as I am concerned 7th October should be a worldwide holiday and I going to celebrate it !
-
This man wasn’t Hitler. This man was an annoying loudmouth who at the end of the day has a wife and kids he comes home to. He did not deserve this; this will only divide us more and contribute to the cycle of violence.
You make a reasonable argument, unfortunately these are unreasonable times. Think about it, were more or less already in a revolution right now, I'd deign to even say rebellion is over the next hill.
Be ready.
-
This post did not contain any content.
His death doesn't proof him wrong. Drones and robots will, when the rights are taken and the weapons are not enough to defend them.
-
Two in the thoughts, one in the prayers.
Instructions unclear, I now have two strangely smelly women and one weird methodist lady waving pregnancy tests at me.
-
honestly deserves a whole new award category a la Herman Cain Award
Do we have a Hermann Cain awards community here
