Charlie Kirk Shot and killed

#5,653
#5,653
volfanhill said:
Gross. Must be a franchise location. Hope he sues their ass off. Thanks for being the only poster to show an example thus far
Click to expand...
It is a franchise location. It makes sense for Roadhouse tho, that area is very red and the calls for boycott were instant. Where is the line drawn for what is a fireable offense? Should businesses not be allowed to fire someone for anything they want?
 
#5,654
#5,654
Smokey123 said:
It is a franchise location. It makes sense for Roadhouse tho, that area is very red and the calls for boycott were instant. Where is the line drawn for what is a fireable offense? Should businesses not be allowed to fire someone for anything they want?
Click to expand...


They can, as long as its not illegal.

Doesn't mean they should.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandman 423
#5,655
#5,655
Smokey123 said:
It is a franchise location. It makes sense for Roadhouse tho, that area is very red and the calls for boycott were instant. Where is the line drawn for what is a fireable offense? Should businesses not be allowed to fire someone for anything they want?
Click to expand...
A wrongful termination lawsuit will likely answer that question. I think TXRH is getting ready to see a lawsuit with a lot of zeros after the comma and in front of the decimal point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#5,656
#5,656
lawgator1 said:
They can, as long as its not illegal.

Doesn't mean they should.
Click to expand...
I agree
Vol737 said:
A wrongful termination lawsuit will likely answer that question. I think TXRH is getting ready to see a lawsuit with a lot of zeros after the comma and in front of the decimal point.
Click to expand...
Florida is an at will state. Would this even be deemed illegal?
 
#5,666
#5,666
lawgator1 said:
I've watched some of his remarks now and disagree with your characterization. You take many of the pretty awful things he said and cloak it in some other context that mitigates it. But to do so you are in the end just interpreting what he said based on other occasions to ultimately sanitize it.

Not going to work. He said many awful things about blacks and religious minorities. You cant take those remarks and go find other, less obnoxious remarks, and say the latter make the former on the whole "okay."
Click to expand...
"Other context?"

Like the Bible that informed his comments?


Like I said to Huff, I'll be happy to debate this from a Biblical perspective, which is the perspective Charlie espoused. Is that something you're interested in?

Edited to add: Let's just start now.

Ephesians 5:
22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.

25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.[a] 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30 because we are members of his body. 31 “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
Click to expand...

So, how did Christ love the church? You can look to the garden, the night he was arrested, and the cross. He sweated blood, knowing the torture he was about to endure for the church, accepted it, and willingly died for her. That's how He loves us. That's how husbands are called to love our wives, as they willingly submit to our selfless decisions.

What is submission? Does it mean that the one submitting is seen as lesser? Do they submit because they are less capable? Dumber? Let's see. Again, we can go to the garden, where Jesus, coequal God with God the Father, said this to the Father:

Luke 22:
saying, “Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me. Nevertheless, not my will, but yours, be done.”
Click to expand...


Romans 12: 10 says: "Outdo one another in showing honor"



Let's just work from here. What "other" context did I use? I don't recall even quoting anything else Charlie said. I quoted the Bible and basic, traditional Christian doctrine that formed and informed Charlie's core beliefs.




What do we have here?

We have Jesus defining this concept of "submission" as a personal, free decision between equals, not mandated or enforced.

We have the context of submission within marriage given that the husband loves his wife and makes decisions for her benefit, even at his own loss, or even death. He's literally to die for her benefit. The context of the marriage is given that there is to be no rivalry or competition within the relationship. The only competition is that the other person gets the benefit.

If the household is to get a new car, we argue who gets to drive it.

"You take the new car. No. You take the new car."

Husband: "You drive the new car. That's final. I don't pull the 'submit' card often, but... You take the new car. I love you. I'll be overjoyed every time I see you in it."




That is literally how Biblical marriage is supposed to work. That's literally the context that Charlie espoused.

And let me tell you something. (And I'll gladly have you over for dinner so you can discuss with my wife, who will say this more powerfully than I do...)

After years and years of both kinds of marriage, God's plan has been the most peaceful, loving, uniting pattern we've ever experienced.

Compare:

A marriage that's a democracy of two and the tie breaking vote is who can manipulate, give silent treatment, or argue to get their way...

Or a marriage that gives each person, every day, the opportunity to serve the other in such loving ways that it builds trust, love, and commitment?


I'm not saying that Christianity is the only way to build a fulfilling marriage. I'm not saying that the Christian model hasn't been abused. I'm not even saying that the best intentions aren't failed in this model--everyone is human.

I AM saying that if you want to judge that model, judge that model and not some caricature strawman you or someone else creates just to tear it down.



















(Or were you talking about the only other comments I discussed in any detail, over several pages, dissecting the actual quote, and color coding it for everyone so that we can see the context of what was actually said before and after the one sentence that was stripped of context? Counselor?)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ritzwatch and InVOLuntary
#5,668
#5,668
volbeast33 said:
I don’t know why it is so hard to keep your mouth shut on social media. Nobody cares that much about your opinion
Click to expand...
Nobody seems to get that it’s the online version of those guys that stand on corners and lecture everybody as you’re walking to the stadium. Self awareness disappears behind a keyboard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 825VOL, marcusluvsvols, rekinhavoc and 2 others
#5,669
#5,669
BernardKingGOAT said:
I haven't called Charlie a racist, but I can see and understand why you think I did. The flow of these posts on such a hot topic with high emotions can lead to a muddled recollection of who said this and who said that. You're pretty quick to assume everyone who has pointed certain things out about Kirk's dialogue are calling him a racist, but that's not the case for everyone for which you disagree. That's ok too. The guy who killed him is at fault. No one else. Especially those who have never casted a vote for a Democrat who you feel has spat on his legacy
Click to expand...
BernardKingGOAT said:
You're right. He said they don't have the brain processing power to be taken seriously. My bad🤣
Click to expand...
BernardKingGOAT said:
So you think saying a group of black women only got their jobs because of DEI because they lack the brain processing power to do those jobs?

That's the exact same thing racist clowns were saying in the 1960s and 1970s about blacks playing the QB position. I actually heard that you into the early 1980s when I was playing collegiate sports
Click to expand...

Seems pretty blatant to me but I don't have that supreme edumacation or experience that you do. 😅
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85
#5,670
#5,670
DinkinFlicka said:
Is it just me or is it the same three posters who pay any attention to what Whoopi Goldberg has to say about anything?

I'm not one to judge how others spend their time, but for ****'s sake it must be a sad situation to tune into the View, and to do so out of spite.
Click to expand...
Jumping Jack Flash did it for me. No forgiveness for that one.
 
#5,672
#5,672
Smokey123 said:
It is a franchise location. It makes sense for Roadhouse tho, that area is very red and the calls for boycott were instant. Where is the line drawn for what is a fireable offense? Should businesses not be allowed to fire someone for anything they want?
Click to expand...
Depends on where he is. At-will employment?

People need to calm down. Seriously.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top