| |
| ▲ | croes 4 days ago | parent [-] | | >In one interview with Gaines on Real America’s Voice, Kirk railed against “the decline of American men” and blamed it for transgender equality. Then he added that people should have “just took care of” transgender people “the way we used to take care of things in the 1950s and 60s." Or take some from his last words >At about 12:20, he is asked by a member of the crowd: "Do you know how many transgender Americans have been mass shooters over the last 10 years?" >He replies: "Too many." Do you think he would have said the same when someone would have asked the same question about gun owners or would have said something like:
"I think it’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the second amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational." Or pick one of those quotes
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/charlie-kirk... He recommend the one about Responding to a question about whether he would support his 10-year-old daughter aborting a pregnancy conceived because of rape on the debate show Surrounded | | |
| ▲ | olalonde 4 days ago | parent [-] | | That's not what he said: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WhMtFZtmcg. He was just talking about not allowing a transgender compete in a women swimming competition. None of this has anything to do with threatening or inciting violence. | | |
| ▲ | croes 4 days ago | parent [-] | | So how did we handle that in the 50s and 60s opposed to the 70s, 80s and 90s, the times when being anything else than being straight slowly wasn't considered a crime anymore? | | |
| ▲ | olalonde 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Given he preceded that with "I blame the decline of American men" and followed it with "as testosterone rates go down and men start acting like women", it seems that in his worldview, the decline of masculinity started in the 70s. A high school swimming coach from the 1950s or 60s likely wouldn't have permitted a biological male in the women's locker room. | | |
| ▲ | croes 4 days ago | parent [-] | | But he would have beaten up a gay because he is homosexual, and called a black man a "boy" before going home, getting drunk, and beating his wife. This is, of course, a condensed depiction. | | |
| ▲ | olalonde 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Kirk didn't say "I miss everything about the 50s-60s". He did none of those things, nor did he encourage them. Suggesting otherwise is intellectually dishonest, and the spread of such misinformation may have partly contributed to creating the deranged individual who thought he deserved to be murdered. | | |
| ▲ | croes 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | He doesn't need to say it, but for many of his fans the so not so good parts (if you're non white or female) resonate. You do know what a dog whistle is? And talking about the spread of misinformation, Kirk spread the lie of the stolen election that led to the January 6 riots and caused multiple deaths. BTW maybe you can comment under some of the other commenters where I try to explain than words aren just words and can cause damage, you seem to have the same opinion, whereby my reach is far below Kirk's so I think I have a much lower risk of creating a deranged individual than people like Kirk have. | |
| ▲ | croes 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Have you read was Trump said? >For years, those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world's worst mass murderers and criminals," >This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we're seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now." That from the same guy who painted all immigrans as pet eating, drug trafficking rapists. But I'm the one accused of spreading misinformation. Even in his message on TS after Kirk's death Trump can't stay with the truth >He was loved and admired by ALL, especially me, and now, he is no longer with us. The first part is obviously nonsense | | |
| ▲ | olalonde 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Trump or Kirk spreading misinformation is not an excuse for yourself spreading misinformation. No matter his opinions, Kirk was a peaceful, non-violent person. | | |
| ▲ | croes 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Wait a minute, he spread misinformation about COVID and the „stolen“ election and reaches millions of people but I‘m the bad guy? He has definitely caused more violence than I. Kirk and others boost people like those here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2S-WJN3L5eo Show one who got influenced by me. That would be really interesting. That I spread misinformation has to be proven. He referenced the 50s and 60s on purpose, the good old times and he knows his peers and what the associate with that time period. So he either knew exactly what association he sent with that or he was naive. I don’t think he was naive. Given all what he said there is a clear subtext you try to ignore. | | |
| ▲ | zahlman a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > That I spread misinformation has to be proven. But you apparently expect "this is a dogwhistle" to be taken on faith. This is not a fair, consistent or reasonable standard. | |
| ▲ | olalonde 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Anyone who knowingly spreads misinformation is a bad guy in my book. If Kirk did, then that applies to him as well. > So he either knew exactly what association he sent with that or he was naive. I don’t think he was naive. I disagree - you're extrapolating from very little. If you take into consideration his whole life and the context of the conversation, it's very clear that he did not believe in violence and did not advocate it. Does that look like someone who wishes violence against gay or trans people? Be real. https://x.com/GayRepublicSwag/status/1966219378971889949 https://x.com/LuckyMcGee/status/1966207117767164362 | | |
| ▲ | croes 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | >You're both bad guys for spreading misinformation. >Anyone who knowingly spreads misinformation is a bad guy in my book. If Kirk did, then that applies to him as well. Interesting change. Don't forget my reach and his.
And I never spread the lie about the Great Replacement. The first clip sounds more like don't tell than real acceptance and it's quite ironic that accoring to this clip he says people aren't defined by their sexuality but every time a homosexual couple is show in a kids movie right wingers whine because now they have to talk about anal sex with their kids. What they don't have, like you don't have to explain hetero sex if a hetero couple is shown. The right is obsessed with the sexuality of gays. And calling it a lifestyle, that's one of the biggest misinformations often used to blame the victims of anti-gay violence for their bad "choice". Maybe watch this clip where he quotes Leviticus 18 https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1800678317030564306 But of course just saying. We all know you can say anything if you add "just saying" or "no offense". The second clip frames being trans as a mental disorder packed in clever words. | | |
| ▲ | olalonde 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Sure he had typical right wing and religious views, but did not advocate violence. Again that clip you linked was just him pointing out the irony of using Bible verses to support homosexuality while ignoring other very violent verses towards them. He was not literally advocating the stoning of homosexuals. FWIW, I disagree with Kirk on probably most topics (e.g. guns, religion, abortion, homosexuality being a bad "lifestyle") so there's no need to debate me. | | |
| ▲ | croes 4 days ago | parent [-] | | The bigger irony is that he completely ignores the contradiction between those tow bible parts, or will it be a loving stoning. I'm glad you wrote "was not literally advocating the stoning of homosexuals", because I never claimed that and it seems you realize that there could be an non literal advocation. His work definetly doesn't justify his murder, it would be ironic if I think so because I'm against the death penalty, but he helped create the battlefield he now died on. I guess the only reason why the current murderers are more likely from the left side of the political spectrum is because the right-wingers are in power. They can send the military or ICE to get rid of their opponents. If that changes we will see more right wing murderers. | | |
| ▲ | zahlman a day ago | parent [-] | | > The bigger irony is that he completely ignores the contradiction between those tow bible parts, or will it be a loving stoning. He does the exact opposite of "completely ignoring the contradiction". He explicitly uses it to make his point. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | croes 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | I find it interesting how he tries to dismiss the core message of Christianity with a reference to the old testament. Seems right wingers know the old testament pretty well but rarely quote the new one and even rarer live by it. It's often that authoritarian god, you know, the one who gave us the rainbow after multiple genocide and who said later on >Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Let's see those Christian values in action when they catch the shooter. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
