Charlie Kirk shot

imaround

So I am stupid AND homophobic? GN just keeps getting better and better doesn't it.

It's a very divisive site imaround, but then we live in a very divided world, sadly.

My take so far is that the left had nothing to do with this killing. The person being held was even further to the right and didn't approve of Kirk "debating". That was too soft.

So all those who tried to blame those left of themselves might just be trying to work out their apology.

ronib

No iamaround but I am beginning to think that Charlie Kirk may have presented his ideas in a perhaps too sophisticated manner for anyone not used to this style of discourse. He was a modern day philosopher? He was also attacking mainstream trends.

I can't believe that this post isn't some kind of joke.

Who’s blaming anyone on the left? It isn’t even fully understood yet why the killer shot Kirk.

growstuff I have noticed a predilection of those posters for the kind of low level passive aggression that has probably worked for them their whole lives but fails when it's challenged. Please carry on challenging it.

ronib

I think you need to be of a sufficient iq to understand the arguments put forward by Charlie Kirk….. seems a bit challenging for some?

This argument was certainly challenging for me.
In a September 2024 debate on Jubilee Media (Surrounded), he was asked: “If your 10‑year‑old daughter were raped and became pregnant, would you want her to carry the baby to term?” He answered, “The answer is yes, the baby would be delivered.”
He has also stated he opposes exceptions for rape, including cases involving children as young as 10.
In the same debate, he mentioned that there might be situations where abortion is medically necessary if the life of the mother is at risk, but his view is that this does not extend to rape or incest exceptions.

IOMGran

growstuff I have noticed a predilection of those posters for the kind of low level passive aggression that has probably worked for them their whole lives but fails when it's challenged. Please carry on challenging it.

Whereas you favour outright aggression?

Whatever we think of Charlie Kirk’s views, and I don’t agree with all the ones that I’ve heard of btw you have to admit that he didn’t use aggression or violence nor ask his many followers to do so.He used debate.
He was murdered by somebody who didn’t believe in debate or free speech.

Argumentative discourse does not a discussion make.

Oreo

Who’s blaming anyone on the left? It isn’t even fully understood yet why the killer shot Kirk.

Didn’t Trump say it was done by someone from the left initially? ( I must admit that I’m still avoiding the news as much as possible though).

Oreo

Who’s blaming anyone on the left? It isn’t even fully understood yet why the killer shot Kirk.

Trump.

Then Trump leapt to conclusions and should have waited for the real reason to come out.

He wasn't the only one.

Oreo

Whatever we think of Charlie Kirk’s views, and I don’t agree with all the ones that I’ve heard of btw you have to admit that he didn’t use aggression or violence nor ask his many followers to do so.He used debate.
He was murdered by somebody who didn’t believe in debate or free speech.

We don't know why he was murdered. He used "debate" to influence people and to gain followers. He used his beliefs as a business model just like influencers with big lips and slug eyebrows sell beauty, he sold his politics to young impressionable students. I just don't think his politics were designed to build a world in which I would want to live but I certainly don't think he should have been killed. His politics were IMO pretty vile but they attracted followers and followers attracted money. FGS let's not be naive about this, just like Trump, it's all about the money!

I admit to struggling to understand the online gaming references and what they mean, do they have any political undertones or symbolism? If anybody understands more can you please explain it in simple terms?

I don’t think it was all about the money with Kirk from what I have read today.

I am frankly shocked that so many have come on here to say dreadful things about an assassinated man within minutes of him dying.

If they didn’t like the man why don’t they just keep quiet. It is just horrible and ghoulish.

I think Kirk was sincere in his opinions and beliefs.

It is pretty gruesome Primrose53 😬

But that’s SM for you.

For accuracy, nobody posted anything within minutes of his death, the thread started the following day.

imaround

So I am stupid AND homophobic? GN just keeps getting better and better doesn't it.

No. I read what you have posted, it is neither stupid or homophobic.

We're Catholic, believing the Old Testament is mostly history, Jesus gave our salvation, told us not to judge others. Jesus doesn't ask us to stone gays. "

"Biblical passages that condemn same-sex intercourse are 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 and its repetition in 1 Timothy 1:10. Writing to the Corinthians, Paul says: “Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.”

"The Bible notes that Paul is not condemning the possession of same-sex attractions, or homosexuals as persons, but only those who engage in immoral sexual activities."

God's judgement is for all sinners. He alone decides who enters His Kingdom. Charlie Kirk apparently had limited Bible knowledge.

Casdon

For accuracy, nobody posted anything within minutes of his death, the thread started the following day.

Equally awful.

Primrose53

Casdon

For accuracy, nobody posted anything within minutes of his death, the thread started the following day.

Equally awful.

However saying the next day is less of an exaggeration of the facts of what happened on Gransnet.

I am sure he was. Fascists usually are.

Gransnet, let us remind ourselves, is a social media platform for grandparents. Do we really want our grandchildren to be required to watch executions, which was one of Kirk's tenets?

Oreo

IOMGran

growstuff I have noticed a predilection of those posters for the kind of low level passive aggression that has probably worked for them their whole lives but fails when it's challenged. Please carry on challenging it.

Whereas you favour outright aggression?

Yes, it's more honest.