Charlie Kirk Shot and killed

#8,978
#8,978
OHvol40 said:
Right, so I’ll ask you the same thing I asked another poster without an answer. Can you point to any instances where CK quotes are being taken out of context in here, so as to misrepresent what he is saying? As in incomplete thoughts? If so, I will listen.

Likely not, thought. What has been provided so far are elaborations that are meant to soften radical statements, which was a common strategy of CK. This was how he operated:
- Question posed
1. Outrageous and often bigoted answer
2. A qualification that distances him from outrageous statement and makes him seem normal again.
3. Sympathy complaining

So trying to redefine virtue until it suits your control does not impress me.
Click to expand...
Stoning gays ... took him 3 days to apologize and retract.

Author Stephen King is facing backlash after making a false claim on X, formerly Twitter, about conservative political activist Charlie Kirk, who was shot and killed on Wednesday.

In a now-deleted post, King wrote, “He advocated stoning gays to death. Just sayin’,” in response to a post by Fox News host Jesse Watters, who had called Kirk a “patriot.”

www.wmur.com

Stephen King apologizes for false claim about Charlie Kirk after his death

Author Stephen King is facing backlash after making a false claim on X about conservative political activist Charlie Kirk, who was shot and killed Wednesday.
www.wmur.com www.wmur.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#8,980
#8,980
SpaceCoastVol said:
I don't care who ya are, if the turbulence is bad enough, we are all just along for the ride.
Click to expand...
Oh for sure. It’s what Andrew said that provoked charlie to say the black pilot thing

“We’ve all been in the back of plane with turbulence but we saw the guy with the right stuff and a square jaw get in the cockpit and felt better”
 
#8,983
#8,983
OHvol40 said:
“It's worth it 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”

“I can't stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made up new age term that does a lot of damage.”


Do any of those quotes require more context to you? It seems to me the entire thought is conveyed, no?
Click to expand...
The first quote is an answer he's given many times. This is the absolute worst way he's phrased it, and if I'm not mistaken it was in the midst of a back and forth with some interruption..... But I could be wrong. What he's said on that subject repeatedly (I'm paraphrasing it) was that the 2nd amendment was given as a right and the cost of that liberty may be a few innocent people. He's often brought up Ben Franklin quotes those who give up liberty for security deserve neither. A lot of soldiers and innocent people died during the revolutionary war, would that mean it wasn't worth it?

The second quote is absolutely missing context, namely the following sentence that ties it all together.

Out of curiosity in your mind what was he trying to convey in that second example?
 
#8,985
#8,985
OHvol40 said:
I don’t remember ever having to provide context to quote MLK Jr, or Mother Theresa, or Nelson Mandel, etc… that’s because it wasn’t required, because their ideas and ideals were unimpeachable. So, I’ll say it again, if you’re constantly searching for context, maybe the content isn’t worth defending. Food for thought.

Also, I usually take literary recommendations from people that can distinguish then/than.
Click to expand...
That's because they were prepared speeches, written, rehearsed and rewritten for effectiveness. Most of the quotes many are using of CK's were of the cuff riffing and debating with people.
 
#8,987
#8,987
OHvol40 said:
“It's worth it 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”
Click to expand...

X number of people die every year in automobile deaths. If someone made his exact same statement regarding automobiles. Would you find it to be bad? If not, why is it bad if you make the same argument with guns?


OHvol40 said:
“I can't stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made up new age term that does a lot of damage.”
Click to expand...

I really don’t see the problem.

OHvol40 said:
Do any of those quotes require more context to you? It seems to me the entire thought is conveyed, no?
Click to expand...

No, but they apparently do require an IQ above room temperature to understand; as evidenced by this board.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, Behr and 82_VOL_83
#8,989
#8,989
OHvol40 said:
Right, so I’ll ask you the same thing I asked another poster without an answer. Can you point to any instances where CK quotes are being taken out of context in here, so as to misrepresent what he is saying? As in incomplete thoughts? If so, I will listen.

Likely not, thought. What has been provided so far are elaborations that are meant to soften radical statements, which was a common strategy of CK. This was how he operated:
- Question posed
1. Outrageous and often bigoted answer
2. A qualification that distances him from outrageous statement and makes him seem normal again.
3. Sympathy complaining

So trying to redefine virtue until it suits your control does not impress me.
Click to expand...

It’s like you’ve even read this thread
MontyPython said:
Well if you think gay people should NOT be stoned to death, then yes, Kirk held extremist views.

Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, made a controversial statement in June 2024 during a discussion on his podcast or live event, where he referenced a Bible verse (Leviticus 20:13) to argue against LGBTQ+ acceptance. While criticizing a YouTuber for promoting "love your neighbor" in the context of Pride Month, Kirk quoted the verse and described it as "God's perfect law when it comes to sexual matters," effectively endorsing the biblical prescription of stoning for homosexual acts.

The approximate quote, as captured in video clips and widely reported, is: **"The Bible says if a man lays with a man, they should be stoned to death... That's God's perfect law."**

### Context and Explanation
- This occurred amid Kirk's broader critique of LGBTQ+ visibility, where he likened being gay to an "error" comparable to addiction, urging people to "get free from that."
- The statement drew immediate backlash for promoting violence, though Kirk framed it as a defense of biblical literalism rather than a direct call to action in modern society.
- Video evidence of the exchange has circulated widely on platforms like X (formerly Twitter) and YouTube, showing Kirk reading the verse aloud and affirming its moral authority.
- Posthumously, following Kirk's assassination on September 10, 2025, at Utah Valley University, this quote has been frequently cited in discussions of his legacy and the hypocrisy in mourning him while ignoring his anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric.
Click to expand...
 
#8,994
#8,994
KB5252 said:
The first quote is an answer he's given many times. This is the absolute worst way he's phrased it, and if I'm not mistaken it was in the midst of a back and forth with some interruption..... But I could be wrong. What he's said on that subject repeatedly (I'm paraphrasing it) was that the 2nd amendment was given as a right and the cost of that liberty may be a few innocent people. He's often brought up Ben Franklin quotes those who give up liberty for security deserve neither. A lot of soldiers and innocent people died during the revolutionary war, would that mean it wasn't worth it?

The second quote is absolutely missing context, namely the following sentence that ties it all together.

Out of curiosity in your mind what was he trying to convey in that second example?
Click to expand...
I don’t think he understood what he was trying to convey. In the follow up he says he prefers sympathy to empathy, failing to acknowledge that they are 2 different ideas already.
 
#8,996
#8,996
OHvol40 said:
For starters, the “Professor Watchlist” run by turning point (still in use btw) was created to isolate and harass college professors that they think are too liberal. This has resulted in endless harassment of said professors, and even death threats, and again is still in use today. Pretty Christian huh?
Click to expand...

Where’s the non-Christian part?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Crush, Behr, whodeycin85 and 1 other person
#8,999
#8,999
OHvol40 said:
Except if you or a family member were on the list and were being harassed. But it’s not you, so you don’t care, amirite?
Click to expand...

Those are two separate issues. When SPL lists a group as a hate group, I imagine they get threats. Doesn’t mean SPL shouldn’t provide such lists. Nor is it “non-Christian”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77 and Orange_Crush
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top