Charlie Kirk Shot and killed



~ 16:20 is especially interesting if one wants to open their minds to a cultural shift that seems to be happening.


My church was packed with newcomers today and some of them even cited to the Charlie Kirk killing. There is a lot of talk that this killing was more about his religious beliefs than his political beliefs.
 
Well, that’s a fairly ambiguous qualification. What countries in your mind have a cultural founding in Christianity?

I can go ahead and answer the second part of your question now, because the stipulation that religion and morality are synonymous is false. A country doesn’t have to be tied to religion to have morals.
I guess let me ask this - have countries like the United States, England, Greece, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden generally been safer and offered greater levels of prosperity to their own people, if not the world around them, by being founded or deeply rooted in Christian principles? Do they have a better track record than countries founded, conquered, or overrun by violent theologies? Are they historically more stable than countries like Germany, Russia, Japan, and Italy that abandoned or never adhered to religious morality and had to be vanquished by war? Every country has a mixed bag history and none is perfect, this is just generally speaking.

The US was founded, albeit imperfectly, primarily on the objective morality we believe was given us by God. As we move farther and farther away from objective morality and apply our own subjective slant, mostly necessitated by the desire for convenience, do you think we are a better or worse country for it?
 
There is a reason that Huff posts still shots instead of the actual video. He knows that he is FOS.

I don't think that's true, hope not anyway. Huff is quite smart. He used to be strong Libertarian and link articles and stuff from them. I learned of the Mises Institute? IiRC from Huff and read a lot of Libertarian stuff from there and other sources because he linked them. He had some interesting positions I had never heard of regarding Anarcho Capitalism. He was extremely small government and i believe Centrist on most issues. Something changed in the last several years and Huff seems to have gone much further Left on the spectrum. Could be the people around him shaping his views, could be what media and reading he has done, I have no idea and its none of my business. From what he posts here though, Huffs views have gone from Libertarian to aligning with antifa, anti-Israel etc. Markedly different. Huff is really smart though and used to be very interesting to exchange ideas with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LadyVolette
I don't think that's true, hope not anyway. Huff is quite smart. He used to be strong Libertarian and link articles and stuff from them. I learned of the Mises Institute? IiRC from Huff and read a lot of Libertarian stuff from there and other sources because he linked them. He had some interesting positions I had never heard of regarding Anarcho Capitalism. He was extremely small government and i believe Centrist on most issues. Something changed in the last several years and Huff seems to have gone much further Left on the spectrum. Could be the people around him shaping his views, could be what media and reading he has done, I have no idea and its none of my business. From what he posts here though, Huffs views have gone from Libertarian to aligning with antifa, anti-Israel etc. Markedly different. Huff is really smart though and used to be very interesting to exchange ideas with.
By definition, when someone is radicalized, they do not know that they are full of ****.

Huff said that he uses screenshots instead of links because he refuses to give them traffic.
 
I think organized monotheistic religion has been the scourge of civilization for 100s of years, holding society back in many ways. So why wouldn’t I compare?

A scourge on civilization? Imagine where the world would be without any religion from any base.
 
I guess let me ask this - have countries like the United States, England, Greece, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden generally been safer and offered greater levels of prosperity to their own people, if not the world around them, by being founded or deeply rooted in Christian principles? Do they have a better track record than countries founded, conquered, or overrun by violent theologies? Are they historically more stable than countries like Germany, Russia, Japan, and Italy that abandoned or never adhered to religious morality and had to be vanquished by war? Every country has a mixed bag history and none is perfect, this is just generally speaking.

The US was founded, albeit imperfectly, primarily on the objective morality we believe was given us by God. As we move farther and farther away from objective morality and apply our own subjective slant, mostly necessitated by the desire for convenience, do you think we are a better or worse country for it?

Great post. You sound like me.

I ask people to point out a World Power in all of history that has been more benevolent than the USA. I am still waiting. Sure, you can find weak nations that don't have the pressures of rule and aren't powers that haven't done anything bad, but that is mostly because they haven't done anything period.
 
I'm just hoping for the outcome that calms the most tensions and some people in here are wanting things to boil over. They want to have more reason to hate. Far right groyper would be a terrible outcome for them. They need it to be somehow related to trans and the left so that trans kids going to school tomorrow can get harassed and bullied even more than normal. They need it to be the left so they can shame 40m voters, as if they had something to do with this.

Hours before you posted this, the governor had already confirmed left wing shooter with trans girlfriend. Probably 24-48 hours ago we already knew he told his parents Kirk was “spreading hate and full of hate”

 
Can someone tell me what a “groyper “ is? I’d never heard this term before yesterday and don’t really want that in my google search history.
I didn't know either. So I did the dirty work and sullied my search history.

Here you go:
The Groypers, sometimes called the Groyper Army, are a group of alt-right, white nationalist, and Christian nationalist activists led by Nick Fuentes.
 
I didn't know either. So I did the dirty work and sullied my search history.

Here you go:
The Groypers, sometimes called the Groyper Army, are a group of alt-right, white nationalist, and Christian nationalist activists led by Nick Fuentes.
Thank you. I figured it must be something like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
Can someone tell me what a “groyper “ is? I’d never heard this term before yesterday and don’t really want that in my google search history.

A movement no one knew about so the left decided to try popularizing it in an effort to misinform people of the shooters motivations
 
A movement no one knew about so the left decided to try popularizing it in an effort to misinform people of the shooters motivations
college kids know exactly who fuentes and the groypers are. I've had brief conversations about them at work with the seasonal help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smokey123
A few pages back someone made the claim that the left has gone further left and the right has gone further right.

I would assume it’s almost a unanimous opinion that the left as a whole has pushed much further to the left over the last 15 years, though obviously not everyone pushes as fast to the left. Anecdotally, living in a purple state, many of my liberal friends aren’t at all comfortable with many of the ideas espoused by the left.

Anyway, I would question the 2nd part about the right going further to the right. What issue(s) or idea(s) are going further to the right? I’m open to being wrong, but I just can’t think of anything.
 
college kids know exactly who fuentes and the groypers are. I've had brief conversations about them at work with the seasonal help.
Is that because most of the people in that movement are young? Or just young people are more aware of extremist groups in general?
 
Yes. I also read the quote where he said "remigration is the only way," which is political violence based on skin color.

Stop carrying water for violent racists.

Sending illegal immigrants back to where they came from is NOT VIOLENCE and NOT RACISM. Its the law. Period.

This is the silly crap I am talking about. Like you apparently, I have many Latino friends that I work with. Have them over to my house to eat with my family and care about them. That doesnt mean that we should let people illegally invade our country by the millions.
 
I'm just hoping for the outcome that calms the most tensions and some people in here are wanting things to boil over. They want to have more reason to hate. Far right groyper would be a terrible outcome for them. They need it to be somehow related to trans and the left so that trans kids going to school tomorrow can get harassed and bullied even more than normal. They need it to be the left so they can shame 40m voters, as if they had something to do with this.
You have no problem attempting to shame those you disagree with, or advocating for political violence if you approve of the target.
 
Advertisement

Back
Top