ColoradoIrish
Well-known member
- Messages
- 895
- Reaction score
- 1,285
No one is, I've been very clear on that. I've simply been pointing out why he was seen as such a divisive person.
Media Matters
- Thread starter Legacy
- Start date
TorontoGold
Mr. Dumb Moron
- Messages
- 7,353
- Reaction score
- 5,707
You are absolutely more correct than him. On a fundamental level saying empathy isn’t a real thing is wrong and is pretty antithetical to what Jesus stood for IMO. Who knows, I’m not a fly by night kind of Christian just picking which parts I like and ones I don’t.
- Messages
- 44,583
- Reaction score
- 20,035
I know you have and that's my point. What you feel is some abhorrent comment wasn't to him. Each of you have their own beliefs and neither you or him are some radical calling the the execution of others.
ColoradoIrish
Well-known member
- Messages
- 895
- Reaction score
- 1,285
He definitely has implied that he would be ok with certain people being killed. He used scripture to say it
BuaConstrictor
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,277
- Reaction score
- 1,920
You have repeatedly made this claim and it remains as untrue as the first time you said it.
You're lying.
BuaConstrictor
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,277
- Reaction score
- 1,920
ColoradoIrish
Well-known member
- Messages
- 895
- Reaction score
- 1,285
Shame they have you blocked and won't see this
RDU Irish
Catholics vs. Cousins
- Messages
- 8,622
- Reaction score
- 2,722
Click through and let the first comment explain it for you. If you were honestly interested in engaging in the debate instead of trolling for once.
sixstar
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,144
- Reaction score
- 2,064
provide the full context quotes.
provide the quotes.
provide the quotes.
RDU Irish
Catholics vs. Cousins
- Messages
- 8,622
- Reaction score
- 2,722
Clips? Links? I provided an hour of content debunking all the isms. Snake troll provided a 20 second clip with no context that I presume is the best y'all have got. Just call names and clutch pearls. Proclaiming shit doesn't make it true even if most people don't care enough to call you out on it.
ColoradoIrish
Well-known member
- Messages
- 895
- Reaction score
- 1,285
Professors say conservative website is fueling harassment and fear on campuses - The Boston Globe
Critics argue the list is more nefarious and can open professors to online harassment, public backlash, and even threats.
www.bostonglobe.com
Charlie Kirk says gun deaths "unfortunately" worth it to keep 2nd Amendment
The conservative founder of Turning Point USA made the comments following a mass shooting in Nashville last week that resulted in six deaths.
www.newsweek.com
How Charlie Kirk Plans to Discredit Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Act
Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk is preparing to launch a campaign against Martin Luther King Jr. and the landmark civil rights law he helped enact.
Just a few highlights
LifelongFan
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,599
- Reaction score
- 1,914
Look out, using precedent you can get fired for quoting Saint Charlie directly. It's the equivalent in Islam to portraying Muhammad or other prophets in art.
NDWarrior
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,004
- Reaction score
- 2,422
I'm anxiously awaiting the case documentation coming out tomorrow because all I see so far is everyone parroting what was said by different "family members," and a roommate but nothing substantiated.
It's all coming from what Patel said or the FBI.
They have said repeatedly that Robinson is absolutely not cooperating or talking one bit - Ok, but why? Is he working with a lawyer? Or, maybe is Patel and FBI saying that's the case even tho' truth may be otherwise?
I mean we have as evidence for how this admin handles things for which they want to tightly control the info and the narrative:
- The recent Venezuelan boat obliteration - Not a damn (substantiated) thing re: what that was about! (Venezuela says it was tuna boat)
- Trump's PA assassination - Nothing publicly released about Trump's injuries or the shooter, long forgotten
- Epstein being killed in Jail - We have to take their word for it, not substantiation
And taking the cake... I see this:
The update comes as the Utah County Sheriff’s Office confirmed to The Epoch Times on Sunday that Robinson was moved to a “special watch” area in the jail facility, adding that there is no evidence to suggest that he wants to kill himself.
I swear if we hear that the dude kills himself in jail just like Epstein also in a highly-monitored "special watch" jail facility, we will know this is a set up and false flag event
I'm waiting with bated breath...
It's all coming from what Patel said or the FBI.
They have said repeatedly that Robinson is absolutely not cooperating or talking one bit - Ok, but why? Is he working with a lawyer? Or, maybe is Patel and FBI saying that's the case even tho' truth may be otherwise?
I mean we have as evidence for how this admin handles things for which they want to tightly control the info and the narrative:
- The recent Venezuelan boat obliteration - Not a damn (substantiated) thing re: what that was about! (Venezuela says it was tuna boat)
- Trump's PA assassination - Nothing publicly released about Trump's injuries or the shooter, long forgotten
- Epstein being killed in Jail - We have to take their word for it, not substantiation
And taking the cake... I see this:
The update comes as the Utah County Sheriff’s Office confirmed to The Epoch Times on Sunday that Robinson was moved to a “special watch” area in the jail facility, adding that there is no evidence to suggest that he wants to kill himself.
I swear if we hear that the dude kills himself in jail just like Epstein also in a highly-monitored "special watch" jail facility, we will know this is a set up and false flag event
I'm waiting with bated breath...
sixstar
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,144
- Reaction score
- 2,064
Interesting.
I don't see where Kirk called the doctors Nazis. I also don't see where Kirk called black people mentally inept.
He did say that the doctors should be held on Nuremberg-style trials. But this was clearly in the context of minors. Explicit? No. But clearly the context.
Kirk did not call all queer people groomers. You are extrapolating what he actually said:
On the gun control quote:
Do you think that outlawing guns will eliminate all gun deaths?
That was his point.
I don't see where Kirk called the doctors Nazis. I also don't see where Kirk called black people mentally inept.
He did say that the doctors should be held on Nuremberg-style trials. But this was clearly in the context of minors. Explicit? No. But clearly the context.
Kirk did not call all queer people groomers. You are extrapolating what he actually said:
On the gun control quote:
Do you agree that we should outlaw driving to avoid all driving deaths?
Do you think that outlawing guns will eliminate all gun deaths?
That was his point.
Blazers46
Adjectives: wise/brilliant/handsome.
- Messages
- 8,106
- Reaction score
- 5,458
I am going to have to agree with Charlie Kirk on all of these issues. I’ll also add that these videos don’t necessarily prove your point, it just proves you are taking things out of context to create a villain for your cause.Professors say conservative website is fueling harassment and fear on campuses - The Boston Globe
Critics argue the list is more nefarious and can open professors to online harassment, public backlash, and even threats.
Charlie Kirk says gun deaths "unfortunately" worth it to keep 2nd Amendment
The conservative founder of Turning Point USA made the comments following a mass shooting in Nashville last week that resulted in six deaths.
How Charlie Kirk Plans to Discredit Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Act
Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk is preparing to launch a campaign against Martin Luther King Jr. and the landmark civil rights law he helped enact.www.wired.com
Just a few highlights
RDU Irish
Catholics vs. Cousins
- Messages
- 8,622
- Reaction score
- 2,722
Professors say conservative website is fueling harassment and fear on campuses - The Boston Globe
Critics argue the list is more nefarious and can open professors to online harassment, public backlash, and even threats.
Charlie Kirk says gun deaths "unfortunately" worth it to keep 2nd Amendment
The conservative founder of Turning Point USA made the comments following a mass shooting in Nashville last week that resulted in six deaths.
How Charlie Kirk Plans to Discredit Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Act
Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk is preparing to launch a campaign against Martin Luther King Jr. and the landmark civil rights law he helped enact.
Just a few highlights
Thanks for providing source material that you feel substantiates your claims.
LGBT are all about running for school boards - raising awareness of their push to cut ties to a Christian partnership is commendable. Run for school board before you run to the next political rally - politics is local and Rs get destroyed in the local ground game at the cost of traditional values in schools. Absolutely under attack and those motivated to manipulate the education of children for the cause of LGBT are 100% groomers. If you aren't a groomer it shouldn't bother you to call out those that are.
The professor thing looks barely linked to Kirk - pretty weaksauce and the first guy mentioned sounds like he should have never held a position in an institution of learning.
Doctors mutilating children are monsters IMO. I agree with him and do not think history will look back kindly at this - children and adults are very different conversations on this front and you repeatedly conflate protecting children with denying your rights which is intellectually dishonest, IMO. Hate it all you want but the idea that trans/gender "stuff" is based in delusion and mental illness long term while being very normal developmentally short term is not an assault on your humanity.
The Civil Rights Act conversation is worthy of it's own thread but reducing the it to RACISM!!!! is lazy and dishonest. A return to strong two parent households in the black community would do more than reparations and it isn't even close. The ones who are racist are the ones who think blacks are incapable of getting ahead without a head start, the bigotry of low expectations.
African-American family structure - Wikiwand
This merits a broader conversation than just blacks - all households have large increase in unwed births over that timeframe. It is negative for all of society that is largely ignored.
2A - JFC I'm not even going to try. Liberals see a murder weapon, conservatives see hunting, sporting, self defense and last line of defense from an oppressive government. That is how they see them, which is how they are used respectively. Especially after the draconian Covid mess, good luck disarming this populace. This is a mental health problem more than a gun problem. Lock up loonies - obvious problem of who gets to decide who is a loon b/c I know one side that isn't afraid to lock up the opposition but ironically calls the others fascists.
Also what SixStar said.
Also - Federal Bureau of Instigation F-ing up an investigation? No way! Whole thing smells funny, as bad as Butler and Las Vegas. I'll reserve judgement on motive and interested parties for a while. Murdering band of trans furries is too easy and Israel/Ukraine are up to no good agitating their "allies". Smells like a patsy to me, not a lone gunman.
TorontoGold
Mr. Dumb Moron
- Messages
- 7,353
- Reaction score
- 5,707
lol at a nuance discussion is needed to understand a college dropouts idiotic opinions.
Or he was a hateful grifter opportunist who saw his marks quite easily.
Or he was a hateful grifter opportunist who saw his marks quite easily.
drayer54
Well-known member
- Messages
- 8,380
- Reaction score
- 5,807
What site? I’m not spending money on the far left globeProfessors say conservative website is fueling harassment and fear on campuses - The Boston Globe
Critics argue the list is more nefarious and can open professors to online harassment, public backlash, and even threats.
sixstar
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,144
- Reaction score
- 2,064
Good to see that your loyalty to credentialism is still alive and well.
Funny that you call him hateful. He exhibited much more restraint and patience with opposing views than you have on this forum. So what does that make you?
BuaConstrictor
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,277
- Reaction score
- 1,920
I have. Three times.
BuaConstrictor
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,277
- Reaction score
- 1,920
Ah. So you again prove that you are a piece of shit.
ColoradoIrish
Well-known member
- Messages
- 895
- Reaction score
- 1,285
He dropped out of college and was groomed by his sugar daddy Republican
ColoradoIrish
Well-known member
- Messages
- 895
- Reaction score
- 1,285
Here's what our ai overlords think if you ask "Was Charlie Kirk hateful towards queer and other minority groups"
Here’s a breakdown of what I found regarding statements by Charlie Kirk and whether they are “hateful”—or how many people interpret them that way—especially toward queer people and other minority groups. Let me know if you want verifiable primary sources rather than media summaries, or a narrower time frame.
---
What Charlie Kirk Has Said That Has Been Criticized
There are many documented statements by Charlie Kirk that have been criticized as hateful, or discriminatory, especially toward LGBTQ+ and transgender people, and also some comments about racial minorities. Some of his remarks are more overt, some more indirect. Below are examples:
About LGBTQ+ / Transgender People
1. “God’s perfect law” and Leviticus
He has referred to a Bible verse (Leviticus 20:13) that in some interpretations calls for execution of homosexuals, saying it is “God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matters.”
2. Describing trans people in demeaning, dehumanizing terms
He has called trans people a “throbbing middle finger to God.”
He has said that the transgender movement is a “social contagion.”
He has called gender-affirming care “child mutilation.”
3. Comparisons, historical references, and perceived support for harsh treatment
He suggested that trans people should have been “taken care of” the way “we used to take care of things in the 1950s and 60s,” a period which some view as including institutionalization or more punitive approaches to those who didn’t conform.
Some have interpreted these statements as endorsing or glorifying harsh measures against trans people. Critics argue that using language invoking the past in which discriminatory measures were more severe carries implications.
4. Opposition to gay identity and LGBTQ rights
He has expressed opposition to same-sex marriage in various contexts.
He has said things like “Pride is a sin” and characterized the LGBTQ movement / agenda as something negative or harmful.
About Other Minorities / Racial and Ethnic Minorities
1. Skepticism / Negative Stereotypes
He once said, “If I see a Black pilot, I'm going to be like ‘boy, I hope he’s qualified.’”
He has blamed certain cultural or social issues (e.g. gun violence in Chicago) partly on single motherhood or “broken culture” in Black communities.
2. Statements about DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion)
He’s been critical of DEI policies; suggested they lead to less qualified people being chosen for roles, which critics argue is a coded or indirect form of bias.
He has criticized civil rights legislation. For example, he called the Civil Rights Act of 1964 a “huge mistake” and alleged it had created an overly bureaucratic DEI system.
---
Interpretations and Debate
Some people view Kirk’s statements as hate speech or incitement, especially when he uses strong religious language and historical analogies that imply punishment or purging (e.g., remarks referencing how things were “taken care of” historically).
Others argue that he is expressing religious conservative beliefs, invoking scripture, or defending what he sees as traditional social norms and morals. Supporters might say he is exercising freedom of speech and discussing what he considers moral or theological truths.
Some of his comments are ambiguous — whether he is advocating violence or simply using hyperbole or moral condemnation is often debated. Some of his remarks have been denounced by critics as encouraging hostility or intolerance.
---
Conclusion: Was He Hateful?
Given the evidence, many of Kirk’s statements can be considered hateful by commonly accepted definitions of hate speech or discrimination:
They often target protected groups (LGBTQ+ individuals, racial minorities).
Some statements dehumanize, mock, or delegitimize these groups’ identities or rights.
Some evoke ideas of punishment, ostracism, or exclusion.
Whether one considers him morally hateful or legally hateful depends on the standard you use. Legally, in the U.S., to cross into “hate speech” is a higher bar, often requiring direct threats, incitement to violence, etc. By many media, advocacy, and civil rights sources, his rhetoric is described as hateful and bigoted.
Here are several direct quotes from Charlie Kirk, with context where available, that have been criticized as hateful or discriminatory. I’ve organized them by group (LGBTQ+ / Trans folks, racial minorities) and included how people have interpreted them. These are based on media reports; for full video or audio transcripts, you may need to access original episodes/clips, but this should give a good starting point.
---
Quotes & Context
LGBTQ+ / Transgender Individuals
1. “We should have ‘just took care of’ trans people ‘the way we used to take care of things in the 1950s and 60s.’”
Context: This comment came up in reaction to a trans woman winning an NCAA swimming championship. Kirk expressed that rather than letting her compete, “someone should have took care of it the way we used to take care of things in the 1950s and 60s.”
Criticism: Many interpreted “the way we used to take care of things” as referencing a time when discrimination was institutionalized—i.e. with lack of rights, or even medical and legal coercion. Some trans advocates saw it as a call for violence or removal of rights. Kirk has denied that he meant lynching or explicit violence.
2. “Trans people are a ‘throbbing middle finger to God.’”
Context: This was said in a speech (September 2023) by Charlie Kirk.
Interpretation: This is clearly demeaning, using very strong, dehumanizing imagery. Many view it as an expression of contempt or disgust. It frames trans identity as something offensive/hostile.
3. About flag burning / hate-crime laws etc.:
One of his remarks: “It should be legal to burn a rainbow or [Black Lives Matter] flag in public.”
Also: “We should work to overturn every conviction for those arrested, fined, or otherwise harassed for the ‘hate crime’ of doing donuts over Pride flags painted on public streets.”
Interpretation: These statements express opposition to certain protections or legal recognitions connected to LGBTQ expression / LGBTQ assets. Some see them as undercutting the safety of marginalized groups.
---
Racial Minorities
1. “If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, ‘Boy, I hope he’s qualified.’”
Context: This was said on The Charlie Kirk Show during a discussion about DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) in aviation and airline pilot hiring.
He later added that “that’s not who I am, that’s not what I believe,” to try to clarify.
Interpretation: Many saw this as expressing a racial stereotype—that DEI policies lead to unqualified people being hired—and that his remark betrays implicit bias. It suggests distrust of Black individuals filling positions of responsibility.
2. “Black women … ‘do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person's slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.’”
This is reported in a set of quotes attributed to him.
Interpretation: This is explicitly insulting, suggesting Black women lack intellect or competence and that any success they have is due to affirmative action or quota systems rather than merit.
3. Comments about MLK, Civil Rights figures, and “mythologizing”
He said Martin Luther King Jr. was “just a man … a very flawed one at that” and that there was a “mythological anti-racist creation of the 1960s.”
Interpretation: Critics say this downplays the importance and moral authority of civil rights leaders, reframing them as overly glorified, which some see as dismissive of the struggle and suffering involved in civil rights. Some consider this a form of minimizing or even rewriting history in ways that undermine the experiences of racial minorities.
---
Clarifications / Denials
In the case of the “take care of” comment about trans people (1950s/60s), Kirk and his team have denied that he was advocating violence or lynching. They argue that people misinterpreted hyperbole or rhetorical framing.
In the Black pilot comment, he apparently said that while having such thoughts, it doesn’t reflect what he truly believes—he says DEI policies have conditioned people to have such doubts. But many find the admission itself problematic because it reveals underlying bias.
Here’s a breakdown of what I found regarding statements by Charlie Kirk and whether they are “hateful”—or how many people interpret them that way—especially toward queer people and other minority groups. Let me know if you want verifiable primary sources rather than media summaries, or a narrower time frame.
---
What Charlie Kirk Has Said That Has Been Criticized
There are many documented statements by Charlie Kirk that have been criticized as hateful, or discriminatory, especially toward LGBTQ+ and transgender people, and also some comments about racial minorities. Some of his remarks are more overt, some more indirect. Below are examples:
About LGBTQ+ / Transgender People
1. “God’s perfect law” and Leviticus
He has referred to a Bible verse (Leviticus 20:13) that in some interpretations calls for execution of homosexuals, saying it is “God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matters.”
2. Describing trans people in demeaning, dehumanizing terms
He has called trans people a “throbbing middle finger to God.”
He has said that the transgender movement is a “social contagion.”
He has called gender-affirming care “child mutilation.”
3. Comparisons, historical references, and perceived support for harsh treatment
He suggested that trans people should have been “taken care of” the way “we used to take care of things in the 1950s and 60s,” a period which some view as including institutionalization or more punitive approaches to those who didn’t conform.
Some have interpreted these statements as endorsing or glorifying harsh measures against trans people. Critics argue that using language invoking the past in which discriminatory measures were more severe carries implications.
4. Opposition to gay identity and LGBTQ rights
He has expressed opposition to same-sex marriage in various contexts.
He has said things like “Pride is a sin” and characterized the LGBTQ movement / agenda as something negative or harmful.
About Other Minorities / Racial and Ethnic Minorities
1. Skepticism / Negative Stereotypes
He once said, “If I see a Black pilot, I'm going to be like ‘boy, I hope he’s qualified.’”
He has blamed certain cultural or social issues (e.g. gun violence in Chicago) partly on single motherhood or “broken culture” in Black communities.
2. Statements about DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion)
He’s been critical of DEI policies; suggested they lead to less qualified people being chosen for roles, which critics argue is a coded or indirect form of bias.
He has criticized civil rights legislation. For example, he called the Civil Rights Act of 1964 a “huge mistake” and alleged it had created an overly bureaucratic DEI system.
---
Interpretations and Debate
Some people view Kirk’s statements as hate speech or incitement, especially when he uses strong religious language and historical analogies that imply punishment or purging (e.g., remarks referencing how things were “taken care of” historically).
Others argue that he is expressing religious conservative beliefs, invoking scripture, or defending what he sees as traditional social norms and morals. Supporters might say he is exercising freedom of speech and discussing what he considers moral or theological truths.
Some of his comments are ambiguous — whether he is advocating violence or simply using hyperbole or moral condemnation is often debated. Some of his remarks have been denounced by critics as encouraging hostility or intolerance.
---
Conclusion: Was He Hateful?
Given the evidence, many of Kirk’s statements can be considered hateful by commonly accepted definitions of hate speech or discrimination:
They often target protected groups (LGBTQ+ individuals, racial minorities).
Some statements dehumanize, mock, or delegitimize these groups’ identities or rights.
Some evoke ideas of punishment, ostracism, or exclusion.
Whether one considers him morally hateful or legally hateful depends on the standard you use. Legally, in the U.S., to cross into “hate speech” is a higher bar, often requiring direct threats, incitement to violence, etc. By many media, advocacy, and civil rights sources, his rhetoric is described as hateful and bigoted.
Here are several direct quotes from Charlie Kirk, with context where available, that have been criticized as hateful or discriminatory. I’ve organized them by group (LGBTQ+ / Trans folks, racial minorities) and included how people have interpreted them. These are based on media reports; for full video or audio transcripts, you may need to access original episodes/clips, but this should give a good starting point.
---
Quotes & Context
LGBTQ+ / Transgender Individuals
1. “We should have ‘just took care of’ trans people ‘the way we used to take care of things in the 1950s and 60s.’”
Context: This comment came up in reaction to a trans woman winning an NCAA swimming championship. Kirk expressed that rather than letting her compete, “someone should have took care of it the way we used to take care of things in the 1950s and 60s.”
Criticism: Many interpreted “the way we used to take care of things” as referencing a time when discrimination was institutionalized—i.e. with lack of rights, or even medical and legal coercion. Some trans advocates saw it as a call for violence or removal of rights. Kirk has denied that he meant lynching or explicit violence.
2. “Trans people are a ‘throbbing middle finger to God.’”
Context: This was said in a speech (September 2023) by Charlie Kirk.
Interpretation: This is clearly demeaning, using very strong, dehumanizing imagery. Many view it as an expression of contempt or disgust. It frames trans identity as something offensive/hostile.
3. About flag burning / hate-crime laws etc.:
One of his remarks: “It should be legal to burn a rainbow or [Black Lives Matter] flag in public.”
Also: “We should work to overturn every conviction for those arrested, fined, or otherwise harassed for the ‘hate crime’ of doing donuts over Pride flags painted on public streets.”
Interpretation: These statements express opposition to certain protections or legal recognitions connected to LGBTQ expression / LGBTQ assets. Some see them as undercutting the safety of marginalized groups.
---
Racial Minorities
1. “If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, ‘Boy, I hope he’s qualified.’”
Context: This was said on The Charlie Kirk Show during a discussion about DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) in aviation and airline pilot hiring.
He later added that “that’s not who I am, that’s not what I believe,” to try to clarify.
Interpretation: Many saw this as expressing a racial stereotype—that DEI policies lead to unqualified people being hired—and that his remark betrays implicit bias. It suggests distrust of Black individuals filling positions of responsibility.
2. “Black women … ‘do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person's slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.’”
This is reported in a set of quotes attributed to him.
Interpretation: This is explicitly insulting, suggesting Black women lack intellect or competence and that any success they have is due to affirmative action or quota systems rather than merit.
3. Comments about MLK, Civil Rights figures, and “mythologizing”
He said Martin Luther King Jr. was “just a man … a very flawed one at that” and that there was a “mythological anti-racist creation of the 1960s.”
Interpretation: Critics say this downplays the importance and moral authority of civil rights leaders, reframing them as overly glorified, which some see as dismissive of the struggle and suffering involved in civil rights. Some consider this a form of minimizing or even rewriting history in ways that undermine the experiences of racial minorities.
---
Clarifications / Denials
In the case of the “take care of” comment about trans people (1950s/60s), Kirk and his team have denied that he was advocating violence or lynching. They argue that people misinterpreted hyperbole or rhetorical framing.
In the Black pilot comment, he apparently said that while having such thoughts, it doesn’t reflect what he truly believes—he says DEI policies have conditioned people to have such doubts. But many find the admission itself problematic because it reveals underlying bias.
TorontoGold
Mr. Dumb Moron
- Messages
- 7,353
- Reaction score
- 5,707
Oh really? I have less restraint and patience? What does that make people who have Bua on ignore? They must be WAY more intolerant than me.
I can promise you I wouldn’t have a public meltdown like Kirk did with Cenk from TYT. I can set up a tent outside a Trump rally, and have neat little clips from emotional outbursts from Joe Dirt, would that make me the preeminent thought leader of the Left?
Blazers46
Adjectives: wise/brilliant/handsome.
- Messages
- 8,106
- Reaction score
- 5,458
Long story short, no.
sixstar
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,144
- Reaction score
- 2,064
Citing a Biblical passage of God's law is not hate.
The verse says:
"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."
But Kirk is a Christian, and the Bible explicitly states that God created man and woman, that He knit each of us in our mothers' wombs, and that marriage is between a man and a woman. People that identify as trans reject the premise that God created them how He wants, and therefore, are conveying a middle finger to God. This is logical, not hatred, from a Christian worldview.
Watch this 75 second interaction. Does this sound like a guy who hates trans people?
He is a Christian, and he is aligning with Biblical scripture.
That quote is out of context. He was talking about the perception that people can have because DEI promotes inclusion over merit.
Again, this is true. DEI - even by its name - promotes DEI over merit. I think we can all agree on that one, yes?
Yes, and I disagree with him, but this was not a hateful statement.
"The Civil Rights Act, yeah, let's be clear. Created a beast and that beast has now turned into an anti-white weapon...if you have unapologetic feracious anti-white racism then young whites are going to find some very radical positions and I don't want that actually...that's where a lot of young white men that we speak to on campus are at (end of their rope). I sometimes have to bring them back in to free society like let's calm down because they say everyone is against us and we need to create our own identity politics group. I actually don't think that's a good idea. I don't think more tribalism is the answer to tribalism."
Again, not a hateful comment. His opinion.
He did not say black women in general. He specifically pointed out the women he was referring to.
If we would have said three weeks ago […] that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama and Sheila Jackson Lee and Ketanji Brown Jackson were affirmative-action picks, we would have been called racist. But now they're coming out and they're saying it for us! They're coming out and they're saying, "I'm only here because of affirmative action."
Yeah, we know. You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person's slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.
The last sentence, while off-putting, still isn't objectively racist since it is historically accurate.