American Politics 4.0 - Orangeyou Glad He’s Back?

[EldrickOnIce]

I think you are being deliberately obtuse, Fonz.
When confronted with Jesus said love one another, not sure the reasonable response, as a 'christian', is the bible also said gays should be killed according to God's perfect law.

Tell me you hate gays without telling me you hate gays?

[ResAlien]

Pretty telling that you guys are willing to use both the words and the context of those words to judge a good Christian man's stances.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

The fact is, the guy has used biblical references for a lot of what he says. So when he quotes the parts about killing gay people, it's not a stretch for people listening to him to think he's advocating for it.

...why should we give him the benefit of the doubt when he refers to a passage about killing gay people as "God's Perfect Law".
Was he being sarcastic and saying god's law isn't perfect?

I removed the trans parts cause, as you said, "technically not gay people" so I don't think it's relevant.

The "God's perfect law" quote is also from that same Kirk/Rachel discussion. No, I don't think he was being sarcastic and saying God's law isn't perfect - I think he was simply saying you cannot cherry pick vague bible verses to support homosexuality when there is a very direct, irrefutable bible verse which states that it is not supported under God.

I personally, support homosexuality. I'm also an atheist. So Kirk's position that homosexuality is wrong because the bible says so, does not resonate with me. Reason I'm asking on this claim of "he advocated for the killing of gays" is because it's being repeated everywhere as justifcation (1 of them) for why his murder is a good thing - but I've yet to find where he's advocated for ever killing a gay person - I have though come across footage and quotes from him where he is welcoming and kind to many gay people.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

I removed the trans parts cause, as you said, "technically not gay people" so I don't think it's relevant.

The "God's perfect law" quote is also from that same Kirk/Rachel discussion. No, I don't think he was being sarcastic and saying God's law isn't perfect - I think he was simply saying you cannot cherry pick vague bible verses to support homosexuality when there is a very direct, irrefutable bible verse which states that it is not supported under God.

I personally, support homosexuality. I'm also an atheist. So Kirk's position that homosexuality is wrong because the bible says so, does not resonate with me. Reason I'm asking on this claim of "he advocated for the killing of gays" is because it's being repeated everywhere as justifcation (1 of them) for why his murder is a good thing - but I've yet to find where he's advocated for ever killing a gay person - I have though come across footage and quotes from him where he is welcoming and kind to many gay people.

He spoke kindly to many people to their face, whether gay, trans, Black, etc.

Speaking kindly to ones face and using your platform when not face to face with them to suggest they’re unintelligent because of their race, an abomination needing to be lobotomized, or that God’s call to stone them was “perfect” is not kindness.

Is that your definition of kindness? If you hold the door for a person of colour and turn around call them a derogatory slur to your friends, are you a kind person?

[activeStick]

Originally Posted by devo22

reading up on the details of the shooter, it sounds exactly like the person they didn't want to paint.

Hunting, fishing, happy family. Both parents registered Republicans.

Not that it'll make a difference, they'll just pretend otherwise and run with the "radical left" playbook anyway.

Saw a news update on City on this and only thing shared was that his family said that the shooter had gotten more political recently and had said to them that, "Kirk promoted hate". Mentioned he acted alone.

More stuff now as I'm watching the report:

- no clear motive
- gotten more political in recent years according to his parents
- spoke to his family about how he disagreed with Kirk on Kirk's views
- knew Kirk was going on campus
- he spoke to his roomate on Discord about retrieving a rifle at some drop point

[Senator Clay Davis]

Have the happened to find the suspect who raped children? Around 6 feet, 300+ pounds, very orange, embarrassing combover, extremely poor vocabulary. Anyone know?

[#-3]

The right wing bros I work with came up to me today

"They caught the transvestite maniac that shot Kirk".

The way people get information is too broken.

[Wormius]

To the people who come here and say “I don’t even know who Charlie Kirk was”, just look him up before saying how people shouldn’t be unsad about him getting killed.

[Reggie Dunlop]

You can get bullets engraved?

Is this something you can order online and get customized by filling out the window?

Do you take them to the little kiosk guy who also cuts keys in the shabbier shopping malls?

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

or that God’s call to stone them was “perfect” is not kindness.

I addressed this above. My interpretation (maybe I'm wrong!) is he was saying God is perfectly clear on his stance of homosexuality ("stoning"), so don't attempt to leverage the bible into supporting homosexuality - it's a losing stance when there is a verse within in which God's words are perfectly clear on the subject.

He wasn't saying that he believes, personally, that gay people should be killed.

[puffnstuff]

There was an article I caught yeserday about how the RW online commentators are scrambling to fill Kirks spot, collect his followers and subscription payers.
'Charlie would want you to join my site to continue his important work'
Ghouls

[activeStick]

An article that talks through the things I saw earlier and noted in my other post:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/who...er-2025-09-12/

"They talked about why they didn't like him and the viewpoints he had," Cox said. Robinson had also become more political in recent years, the family member told investigators.

Robinson does not appear to have any criminal history, according to state records reviewed by Reuters. He was a registered voter but was not affiliated with a political party, according to state voter records.

Records show he was an “inactive” voter, which means he had not cast a ballot in recent elections and had not responded to a mailing from the county clerk’s office.

He has two younger brothers, according to his parents’ Facebook posts. His mother is a social worker at a non-profit healthcare company, while his father’s occupation was not immediately clear.

His mother’s Facebook posts over the years – most of which were deleted on Friday – mostly doted on her family: documenting trips to Alaska, the Caribbean and Disneyland; celebrating school plays, Halloween costumes and adopted pet rabbits; expressing pride as the three boys moved up in school. None of the posts appeared political in any way.

Other posts show Robinson and his brothers occasionally with guns, though that is not uncommon in a state with permissive firearms laws.

“Driving away without him was one of the most difficult things I’ve had to do in a long time,” his mother wrote in one post about helping him move to college in 2021. “He’s so excited to start his journey and it’s going to be so amazing for him!”

On Thursday evening, Cox said, a family member called a family friend who in turn called the Washington County’s Sheriff’s Office “with information that Robinson had confessed to them or implied that he had committed the incident.”

Robinson’s roommate also showed messages Robinson had sent via the Discord platform describing leaving a rifle in a bush wrapped in a towel – matching the weapon that authorities recovered in a wooded area near the scene of the shooting.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I don't even think that's true. I think most people can envision a scenario where they'd feel justified in murdering someone, even while saying as a general rule, they shouldn't. There aren't a lot of people who actually have hard and fast moral rules that they would never break no matter how extreme the circumstances.

It doesn't even go as far as assassinations; how many people were upset about Osama Bin Laden's killing? How many would be sad to hear that someone had knocked off Vladimir Putin?

By and large, we're okay with someone being intentionally and strategically killed because they're a bad person who has done bad things. It's just a question of where the line is.

Many governments have done this

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

I personally, support homosexuality. I'm also an atheist. So Kirk's position that homosexuality is wrong because the bible says so, does not resonate with me. Reason I'm asking on this claim of "he advocated for the killing of gays" is because it's being repeated everywhere as justifcation (1 of them) for why his murder is a good thing - but I've yet to find where he's advocated for ever killing a gay person - I have though come across footage and quotes from him where he is welcoming and kind to many gay people.

This is the issue I have with the Charlie Kirk’s of the world. They say so many hateful things it’s easy for people to assume what he meant bringing up that Bible quote, but then he claims he didn’t technically say it. He, and others, can claim he didn’t say that, but he implied it with his other hate speech. Plus, if he is a devout Christian as he claimed then without a doubt he believed LGBTQ should be killed. If not, then he is just picking and choosing how he follows the Bible and isn’t this prophet he’s being made out to be. However, even if you ignore this one issue and write it off as “he didn’t technically say that”, what about every other hateful comments he has directly and unequivocally made towards other groups? You can only ignore so many red flags before there is no doubt said person is a piece of ####.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

I addressed this above. My interpretation (maybe I'm wrong!) is he was saying God is perfectly clear on his stance of homosexuality ("stoning"), so don't attempt to leverage the bible into supporting homosexuality - it's a losing stance when there is a verse within in which God's words are perfectly clear on the subject.

He wasn't saying that he believes, personally, that gay people should be killed.

Not specifically, no. He just throwing it out there, God's prefect law, right, to all his rational followers. This is what the bible says. Charlie is not responsible for how they interpret that, right? And he (or you) then get to say no - he never said that.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Goriders

They wouldn’t be murdered though. I guess that’s the difference.

I don’t follow Kirk. TBH I had to google who he was. Whether you like what he said or not you can’t murder people for debating. If you do it will stifle debate. Which is the foundation of democracy.

Pretty sad statement of where North American society’s are headed. Divided, angry and closed minded. On both sides. Not a good recipe.

I have not seen anybody here say that it is ok to be murdered for debating. That is a straw man and literally nobody is taking that position

This both sides stuff is a false equivalency

Main stream messaging from the democratic and republican camps differ strikingly. Typically you see from the left commentary after any political violence condemning it. From the right, the instances of condemnation are fewer and selective.

The immediate attribution of this to the left as if it is representative of the left is wrong and more damaging than helpful

Again nobody is saying that murder for free speech is okay. And having said that, given the political climate, the love of guns, the deliberate polarization, the hateful rhetoric, and the systemic embrace of that hateful rhetoric, a lot of people are not surprised that something like this happens

It is not okay but it is not terribly surprising

There have been quotes about playing stupid games and winning stupid prizes. One may consider that as a risk when making a living monetizing hate in a tense society that is polarized and armed to the teeth

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

I addressed this above. My interpretation (maybe I'm wrong!) is he was saying God is perfectly clear on his stance of homosexuality ("stoning"), so don't attempt to leverage the bible into supporting homosexuality - it's a losing stance when there is a verse within in which God's words are perfectly clear on the subject.

He wasn't saying that he believes, personally, that gay people should be killed.

The phrase “perfect law” has a specific connotation in Christianity, it does not mean “perfectly clear.” It means that God’s law is quite literally perfect, and should be obeyed as such. The suggestion that it is God’s “perfect law on sexual matters” is very much a statement of belief that God’s word is perfect and should be obeyed as such.

Saying that he didn’t believe it is a bit absurd. There are many, many Christians who support the LGBTQ community, knowing full well what the Old Testament says and doing to regardless. Whether you are one of those people comes down to personal belief, nothing more. And Kirk’s belief was that the passage was representative of God’s “perfect law” on sexual matters. That was his BELIEF.

[KelVarnsen]

The Fonz reminds me of a former coworker who when down that rabbit hole and would spout that same "both sides" crap all the time.

There is a reason I no longer talk to that coworker.

[EldrickOnIce]

"Up Right Down Down Down" is the code for the Eagle 500kg Bomb airstrike, one of the most widely used stratagems for it's devastating effect on most enemies. Gained popularity from its appearance in reaction images, implying a reaction to something so heinous, vile, or disgusting you would airstrike the dog#### out of it.

https://share.google/kGsnaUZheFmYqRawr

[The Fonz]

I don’t want this to drag on, so I’ll just leave this here and hope anyone who believes he hated gay people and thought they should be killed, will take 4 mins to watch this as he speaks to someone at a public event who seemingly does hold those beliefs.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1197979402472046593