Charlie Kirk Shot and killed

#5,802
#5,802
LouderVol said:
there largely wasn't a recognized term of "agnostic" for them to identify themselves as. if you go read their letters its pretty clear they weren't good ole southern baptists.

the Treaty of Tripoli was ratified by those same FFs, unanimously. there are multiple official government documents that back up that we aren't a Christian nation, and the best argument you have is that the Constitution doesn't say EITHER way.

if you want to change the Constitution to say that we are a Christian nation, there is a way to do that. until that change is made, we aren't, and never have been one.
Click to expand...
Could a state levy a fine to a citizen for church absenteeism in 1790? If so, was it Constitutional?
 
Last edited:
#5,803
#5,803
lawgator1 said:
And its not hate speech to say that Kirk was a bigot, at many levels.
Click to expand...

No...it isn't. Its a damn lie, but it isn't hate speech whatever that is. As far as the government is concerned, whatever this B is calling "hate speech" is actually just free speech unless it contains threats or incites riots/violence.

We are not the UK. We have the 1A....you're still a Leftist dishrag for calling an honorable murder victim a bigot when he is no longer here to completely destroy you in a debate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, rekinhavoc and Peradox1K
#5,804
#5,804
OrangeTsar said:
Can you sue for wrongful termination in a right to work state?
Click to expand...
You cannot sue for wrongfull termination in a right to work state if you are trying to claim you were wrongfully terminated for xyz reasons, because you can be terminated for any reason. As long as it can be shown by employer it wasn't for any reason protected by dicriminatory things. The verbage in a reason for a lawsuit is important. That's why employers never state the actual reason for termination on the pink slip. Everybody and their dog in the office may know you got fired for theft, but the pink slip will say only violation of company policy.

If you have documentation that there have been unfair and inconsistent managment practices and prove that without alluding to why you were fired, then go for it. journals as an employee are imoportant if you ever face this. Documentation is everything.

On 7/1/01 so and so manager said this to me or told me I could or couldn't do this.
etc 7/2/02 so and so manager allowed empoyee x to do this. Told me on previous entry I could not
etc
etc

Establishes trends of discrimination, unfair practices, harassment, hostile work environments, etc. But, you have to prove it affected you negatively or you didn't want to come to work.

That's why I also kept my own journal on everything I would speak to an employee about even if it was just a verbal conversation.

For any of these fired employees in a right to work state, winning a judgement will be difficult in an unbiased courtroom. One would have to show the company was unfair and inconsistent allwoing other employees to publically post vile trash similar to the Kirk postings but from other political or moral stances without repurcussion. Using a post from employee Y that only says I didn't agree with him but he had a right to it and shouldn't have died would not be supportive evidence and likewise should not be fireable because it did not celebrate nor support nor encourage violence against an individual.

The obstacles in such a law suit are companies are not the .gov and have a broader umbrella in these issues, and in right to work states only need to show that employees public proclamations were a detriment to their business. If the plaintiff clears that hurdle, they have to prove all these other items of unfairnaess, harassment, hostile environments, etc., and that road gets even tougher. Best course of action is to keep your vitriole verbal and within the confinces of your circle. Once you are dumb enough to post your stances eternally to the world and as an employee you damage your employer, you are holding the short stick. If you were spewing garbage that contained hate and calls of violence you yourself can very well be charged with hate speach that the left itself has created an opening for using thinking they would silence consevatives. Their own weapon is the dagger in their heart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#5,807
#5,807
LouderVol said:
no, just like I haven't seen anyone say you can't go to church on Sundays or Wednesdays.

I am not saying limit them, I just saying they can't limit others either. its an equal protection. the Christians rights stop when another person's start, and vice versa. its not a one way street some are pretending it is.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is stating that atheism should be outlawed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: midnight orange and InVOLuntary
#5,808
#5,808
LouderVol said:
I haven't spoken on my intentions. I have just spoken about what is in the Constitution, and I was asking what CK's stance was.

I have looked at his website, his shows website, and even Turning Point's website, and not found anything explicit on the separation of church and state. his videos are all over the place, and without any real explanation of what he means. what I do see all over the place is that he valued individual freedoms, and a small government. both of which would support more of a separation of church and state than less of one.
Click to expand...
I didn't really know who he was until about a year ago. Maybe earlier this year when his Prove Me Wrong clips just started hitting my FB reels. I was intrigued and watched tons of them. I agree with your last sentence. I think he understood you could be active in government as a christian, but you couldn't force it on others through government.

I also agree with your individuals freedoms take. I think alot of the debate questions he fielded came from kids whose freedoms of thought had been hijacked and program and he was trying to encourage or expose to them they had a voise of their own whether or not their voice agreed with his. Never saw him tell anyone they had to think like him. Only to dig deeper and find what they needed to think on their own. I did see him in overall themes question them on were they regurgitating on what the professor in that building told them to think, or did they come up with that themselves.

At the end of the day though, where I am in my 60 year journey, I found him to be closer to the truth than most people that do remotely close to what he did. And certainly more servant oriented to young people than those who are trying to destroy and discount him. His persona was far removed from your everyday TV evangelist. And God gave him an incredible mind. Never seen a person that can recall from memory all the details and facts about anything and everything he was asked. Photographic. Idytic. Whatever, his recall was incredible and mind boggling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, appvol and marcusluvsvols
#5,809
#5,809
whodeycin85 said:
Sorry you response got lost in the shuffle..my experience with there is thru my child....I have lived in 3 states in 5 years since getting sick
..Florida, Tennessee and Michigan...my son is 13 now in 8th grade. In Florida the school he was at held 3 different drag time hours..it wasn't story time it was just they were there interacting with kids. My son came home a told us that the 2nd time the trans people came that there was dancing a twerking and he told me that 1 make wore panties and nothing else like mother's..he was 8. He was pulled and homeschooled from there..till we moved to TN.

In Tennessee is wasn't the school this time but his best friend of 5 year who suddenly became trans and demanded to be called a female by my son...my son refused and that relation failed..later we learned that he has been accused of assaulting another "trans student," no idea what ever became of it but now that kid is back to being a boy...then we loved to Michigan to be closer to my dad because when getting to a transplant I was told that both members had to be present at the meeting which was a but he we are.
Here is been a school teacher who tried to get kid to attend drag shows after school for extra credit and even offered a whole grade change...and there have been 2 active shooter at his middle school who were trans but thankfully stopped after the old principal was fired for pushing lgtbq on students .the vice was promoted and he has done all he can't to keep that outta the schools.

My story is antedoal, take it or leave it..up to you...but my story is not unique as I can promise almost every parent which a kid has had to deal with some kinda trans issue at some point...that is in your face.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry you gotta live Michigan
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and Peradox1K
#5,811
#5,811
RDU VOL#14 said:
This will make everyone feel good…SIAP.
Straight to Arkham asylum
NSFW
They’re both sick. They both are like something out of movie.

Click to expand...



^^^ those people are either mentally ill, completely devoid of morals and ethics, or possessed by demons. Perhaps a combination of the above. I would be deeply ashamed to be related to or associated with them in any way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RDU VOL#14, InVOLuntary and Orangeburst
#5,812
#5,812
marcusluvsvols said:
No...it isn't. Its a damn lie, but it isn't hate speech whatever that is. As far as the government is concerned, whatever this B is calling "hate speech" is actually just free speech unless it contains threats or incites riots/violence.

We are not the UK. We have the 1A....you're still a Leftist dishrag for calling an honorable murder victim a bigot when he is no longer here to completely destroy you in a debate.
Click to expand...

IDK how to define it, but no way is that what it is.
 
#5,815
#5,815
n_huffhines said:
I get that you like that he's out there recruiting soldiers to your cause, but I see so many in here praising his method of debate, and he used cheap parlor tricks. We want better discourse in this country. He influenced a generation of kids who think this is how you engage.

His whole schtick was "prove me wrong." It's called the burden of proof fallacy. Everything he says starts with that premise, and this is out of bounds because it's generally hard to prove a negative. It's crazy that a whole country can look at this "prove me wrong" method and not immediately see the problem with it. It's right there in the name. He was telling us what he was doing before he did it. We are stupid.
Click to expand...
He took questions from whoever and whatever they wanted to ask. He didn't start with a statement that couldn't be argued against. He's not starting by asking those actual burden of proof fallacy questions like "prove that abortions haven't killed the person that would cure cancer." If someone walked up and wanted to talk about why abortion should be 100% legal he'd ask them about it and give a response. If someone called him a nazi, facist, ect, he'd give them the chance to prove their statement true.

If I start a thread in this forum called "prove me wrong" where you ask me a question or make a declarative statement and we debate, it's not a burden of proof fallacy just because you suck at debate or can't actually defend your position.

Folks would walk up there thinking they know everything and be surprised when they couldn't defend their position. That's not his fault. He's good at debate. That doesn't mean younger voters shouldn't be exposed to such things as free thought and conversation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peradox1K, -GiveHim6-, InVOLuntary and 3 others
#5,816
#5,816
TheDeeble said:
He took questions from whoever and whatever they wanted to ask. He didn't start with a statement that couldn't be argued against. He's not starting by asking those actual burden of proof fallacy questions like "prove that abortions haven't killed the person that would cure cancer." If someone walked up and wanted to talk about why abortion should be 100% legal he'd ask them about it and give a response. If someone called him a nazi, facist, ect, he'd give them the chance to prove their statement true.

If I start a thread in this forum called "prove me wrong" where you ask me a question or make a declarative statement and we debate, it's not a burden of proof fallacy just because you suck at debate or can't actually defend your position.

Folks would walk up there thinking they know everything and be surprised when they couldn't defend their position. That's not his fault. He's good at debate. That doesn't mean younger voters shouldn't be exposed to such things as free thought and conversation.
Click to expand...

He said "prove me wrong" all the time. It wasn't just a name of the show. He would make a statement and then say, "prove me wrong" as his catch-phrase. A logical fallacy was literally his brand.

You can justify this however you want, but I am delivering the message that this is a logical fallacy. If this bothers you, go write a novel to somebody who cares about why you think it's OK this time.
 
#5,818
#5,818
n_huffhines said:
He said "prove me wrong" all the time. It wasn't just a name of the show. He would make a statement and then say, "prove me wrong" as his catch-phrase. A logical fallacy was literally his brand.

You can justify this however you want, but I am delivering the message that this is a logical fallacy. If this bothers you, go write a novel to somebody who cares about why you think it's OK this time.
Click to expand...
That might be true if he didn’t provide any evidence. CK always backed up his opinions with facts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#5,822
#5,822
bamawriter said:
He's a local nut. He's constantly bothering the town. I'm sure he was a momentary distraction, but given that the cops knew he schtick, I highly doubt that his behavior allowed for Robinson to escape.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t matter. He can be charged as an accessory after the fact and I am sure there is plenty of video evidence. He will be tried in an Utah Court. He will live out the remainder of his life in a cell.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top