ChaoticMusings

Barksdale wrote:

---

Maddog wrote:

Saying someone is wrong isn't dehumanizing. It's an opinion. Attacking them personally is dehumanizing..

Again, Charlie was a hate the sin, not the sinner kind of guy. 

---

 I asked an AI assistant to research this for me and it states:

Yes, Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, has repeatedly made dehumanizing and bigoted comments targeting Black people, transgender individuals, LGBTQ+ people, and Muslims, among others. These statements often framed targeted groups as threats, incompetent, or deserving of violence, contributing to his reputation as a far-right provocateur. Below are some notable examples, drawn from documented instances:

• In a 2023 interview on Real America's Voice, Kirk suggested that transgender people should be "taken care of the way we used to take care of things in the 1950s and 60s," referencing an era of lobotomies, shock therapy, involuntary institutionalization, and violence against queer people.
• During a 2023 speech at a megachurch, he described transgender people as an "abomination" and a "throbbing middle finger to God," while citing scripture to label swimmer Lia Thomas similarly, equating transgender existence with divine offense.
• On his radio show in May 2023, Kirk claimed that "prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people," generalizing Black people as predatory criminals seeking entertainment through violence against whites.
• In a January 2024 episode of The Charlie Kirk Show, he stated that when dealing with a "moronic Black woman" in customer service, he wonders if she's there due to "affirmative action" rather than "excellence," stereotyping Black women as inherently incompetent.
• In a March 2024 broadcast, Kirk promoted the "great replacement" conspiracy theory, asserting it was a "strategy to replace white rural America with something different" via immigration, implying non-white populations as an existential threat to white identity.
• Responding to a Pride Month post in June (year unspecified but documented in resurfaced clips), Kirk invoked Leviticus to say, "Thou shall lay with another man, shall be stoned to death. Just saying... The chapter...affirms God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matter," framing homosexuality as warranting execution under "God's perfect law."

 

These quotes are part of a broader pattern documented by media watchdogs like Media Matters for America and resurfaced following Kirk's assassination on September 10, 2025. While Kirk defended such rhetoric as "free speech" or biblical truth, critics argued it normalized dehumanization and contributed to real-world harm.

I don't have direct knowledge of the above but it doesn't sound great.

---

 Let's take the last one. Stephen King did exactly what you just did. Relied on second hand quotes out of contex

Maddog wrote:

Google Roseanne Barr. What happened to her?

---

 Were the FCC involved in her termination as well? That is government over-reach surely. 

I've seen MAGA people openly talking about websites they set up to doxx people who posted themselves mocking the death of Charlie Kirk so they could contact their employers and get them sacked. Obviously it is very distasteful to mock the death of an individual but this is a coordinated attempt to get people fired for speech they don't like.

You have a de-facto hate speech law if that is allowed to continue. 

Maddog wrote:

---

Barksdale wrote:

---

Maddog wrote:

Saying someone is wrong isn't dehumanizing. It's an opinion. Attacking them personally is dehumanizing..

Again, Charlie was a hate the sin, not the sinner kind of guy. 

---

 I asked an AI assistant to research this for me and it states:

Yes, Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, has repeatedly made dehumanizing and bigoted comments targeting Black people, transgender individuals, LGBTQ+ people, and Muslims, among others. These statements often framed targeted groups as threats, incompetent, or deserving of violence, contributing to his reputation as a far-right provocateur. Below are some notable examples, drawn from documented instances:

• In a 2023 interview on Real America's Voice, Kirk suggested that transgender people should be "taken care of the way we used to take care of things in the 1950s and 60s," referencing an era of lobotomies, shock therapy, involuntary institutionalization, and violence against queer people.
• During a 2023 speech at a megachurch, he described transgender people as an "abomination" and a "throbbing middle finger to God," while citing scripture to label swimmer Lia Thomas similarly, equating transgender existence with divine offense.
• On his radio show in May 2023, Kirk claimed that "prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people," generalizing Black people as predatory criminals seeking entertainment through violence against whites.
• In a January 2024 episode of The Charlie Kirk Show, he stated that when dealing with a "moronic Black woman" in customer service, he wonders if she's there due to "affirmative action" rather than "excellence," stereotyping Black women as inherently incompetent.
• In a March 2024 broadcast, Kirk promoted the "great replacement" conspiracy theory, asserting it was a "strategy to replace white rural America with something different" via immigration, implying non-white populations as an existential threat to white identity.
• Responding to a Pride Month post in June (year unspecified but documented in resurfaced clips), Kirk invoked Leviticus to say, "Thou shall lay with another man, shall be stoned to death. Just saying... The chapter...affirms God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matter," framing homosexuality as warranting execution under "God's perfect law."

 

These quotes are part of a broader pattern documented by media watchdogs like Media Matters for America and resurfaced following Kirk's assassination on September 10, 2025. While Kirk defended such rhetoric as "free speech" or biblical truth, critics argued it normalized dehumanization and contributed to real-world harm.

I don't have direct knowledge of the above but it doesn't sound great.

---

 Let's take the last one. Stephen King did exactly what you just did. Relied on second hand quotes out of context..

 

 So what are the correct contexts then? If you do not dispute that the words attributed to Charlie Kirk are incorrect but the contexts are you presumably know what he meant by them as you have direct knowledge of what he was saying during those entire conversations.

Set them out. 

Barksdale wrote:

---

Maddog wrote:

---

Barksdale wrote:

---

Maddog wrote:

Saying someone is wrong isn't dehumanizing. It's an opinion. Attacking them personally is dehumanizing..

Again, Charlie was a hate the sin, not the sinner kind of guy. 

---

 I asked an AI assistant to research this for me and it states:

Yes, Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, has repeatedly made dehumanizing and bigoted comments targeting Black people, transgender individuals, LGBTQ+ people, and Muslims, among others. These statements often framed targeted groups as threats, incompetent, or deserving of violence, contributing to his reputation as a far-right provocateur. Below are some notable examples, drawn from documented instances:

• In a 2023 interview on Real America's Voice, Kirk suggested that transgender people should be "taken care of the way we used to take care of things in the 1950s and 60s," referencing an era of lobotomies, shock therapy, involuntary institutionalization, and violence against queer people.
• During a 2023 speech at a megachurch, he described transgender people as an "abomination" and a "throbbing middle finger to God," while citing scripture to label swimmer Lia Thomas similarly, equating transgender existence with divine offense.
• On his radio show in May 2023, Kirk claimed that "prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people," generalizing Black people as predatory criminals seeking entertainment through violence against whites.
• In a January 2024 episode of The Charlie Kirk Show, he stated that when dealing with a "moronic Black woman" in customer service, he wonders if she's there due to "affirmative action" rather than "excellence," stereotyping Black women as inherently incompetent.
• In a March 2024 broadcast, Kirk promoted the "great replacement" conspiracy theory, asserting it was a "strategy to replace white rural America with something different" via immigration, implying non-white populations as an existential threat to white identity.
• Responding to a Pride Month post in June (year unspecified but documented in resurfaced clips), Kirk invoked Leviticus to say, "Thou shall lay with another man, shall be stoned to death. Just saying... The chapter...affirms God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matter," framing homosexuality as warranting execution under "God's perfect law."

 

These quotes are part of a broader pattern documented by media watchdogs like Media Matters for America and resurfaced following Kirk's assassination on September 10, 2025. While Kirk defended such rhetoric as "free speech" or biblical truth, critics argued it normalized dehumanization and contributed to real-world harm.

I don't have direct knowledge of the above but it doesn't sound great.

---

 Let's take the last one. Stephen King did exactly what you just did. Relied on second hand quotes out of context..

 

 

 So what are the correct contexts then? If you do not dispute that the words attributed to Charlie Kirk are incorrect but the contexts are you presumably know what he meant by them as you have direct knowledge of what he was saying during those entire conversations.

Set them out. 

---

 Stephen King gave you the correct context for the last one..

If the last one was such a steaming pile of shit, the rest should be discounted too, because it's screams of an agenda..

I'm not going to spend an hour trying to refute a source so blatantly unreliable. 

You could randomly watch the man in action and form your own opinions about him I guess.  That's how I did it..

Maddog wrote:

Stephen King gave you the correct context for the last one..

If the last one was such a steaming pile of shit, the rest should be discounted too, because it's screams of an agenda..

I'm not going to spend an hour trying to refute a source so blatantly unreliable. 

You could randomly watch the man in action and form your own opinions about him I guess.  That's how I did it..

 

---

 I didn't make the same argument that Stephen King did. I did not say that Charlie Kirk had advocated stoning people to death and neither did the information which was pulled out using an AI assistant. What it showed was there is evidence, using Charlie Kirk's own words, of him dehumanising various groups and that it didn't look good. And it doesn't.

I don't know the full contexts, and neither it seems, do you. You and are both interpreting the evidence we have at our disposal to draw conclusions. You claim the sources are unreliable but do not say why except it seems because it doesn't converge with your interpretation of what Charlie Kirk meant by what you have seen. That's just another "trust me bro" approach.  

Barksdale wrote:

---

Maddog wrote:

Stephen King gave you the correct context for the last one..

If the last one was such a steaming pile of shit, the rest should be discounted too, because it's screams of an agenda..

I'm not going to spend an hour trying to refute a source so blatantly unreliable. 

You could randomly watch the man in action and form your own opinions about him I guess.  That's how I did it..

 

---

 I didn't make the same argument that Stephen King did. I did not say that Charlie Kirk had advocated stoning people to death and neither did the information which was pulled out using an AI assistant. What it showed was there is evidence, using Charlie Kirk's own words, of him dehumanising various groups and that it didn't look good. And it doesn't.

I don't know the full contexts, and neither it seems, do you. You and are both interpreting the evidence we have at our disposal to draw conclusions. You claim the sources are unreliable buYiur t do not say why except it seems because it doesn't converge with your interpretation of what Charlie Kirk meant by what you have seen. That's just another "trust me bro" approach.  

-- Edited by Barksdale on Thursday 18th of September 2025 05:55:21 PM

---

 Your source made the argument that Kirk advocated for stoning gays.

Did he?

Barksdale wrote:

---

Maddog wrote:

---

Barksdale wrote:

---

If those are the shooter's messages, and I have no reason to suspect they are not except for the lack of trustworthiness of the MAGA administration, then he will probably get the death penalty. It was a pre-meditated political execution.

I see two narratives forming. On one side this event will be used as evidence of far-left, trans ideological radicalisation leading to a government crackdown of free speech, free association, and left leaning organisations  being proscribed as terrorist organisations. That will lead to enormous pushback.

On the other side it will be used as example of how religious nationalism leads to a toxic culture where violence flourishes as people are marginalised. People will argue that the shooter - a wealthy, intelligent, white young male who had every opportunity before him were failed by his parents and his community as they failed to accept who he was as a person causing rage to grow in his heart, which exploded into violence as the rhetoric of right wing Conservatives like Charlie Kirk created an environment which put the person he loved, a trans woman, at danger and risk of attack. This will lead to enormous pushback as well.

You then have one of the most divisive and incompetent administrations in US history running the show and trying to manage the situation.

I doubt anyone believes America will unify. It has been split in two with little chance of reconciliation.

---

 Are you familiar with how religiously conservative Utah is? It's basically run by the Mormon Church. No doubt that causes a great deal of issues for kids who are gay, but they have been working this out for years. Many just move. 

And Charlie never said anyone should be attacked..He was very much a."love the sinner, hate the sin" kinda Christian..

---

 Yes, I discovered that Utah is very religiously conservative by reading about this case. I also heard that the state with the highest rate of searches from trans porn is Texas :popcorn:

Obviously I am just speculating here and trying to predict how things will play out. I have no idea about Tyler Robinson's upbringing. Maybe he was openly gay and experienced nothing but love and acceptance from his family and community. If he was repressed and closeted then it gives more credence to the theory it left him open to anger and then his actions.

As I said before I don't know much about Charlie Kirk as I watched very little content of him. What I did see I wasn't really bowled over by his ability so directed my attention elsewhere. My point was not about him directly saying anyone should be attacked but his rhetoric contributing to an environment where minority and women were dehumanised. It seems the MAGA right have suddenly discovered that dehumanisation may be a bad thing after not seeming to be that bothered about it or even revelling in it in the past. There are undoubtedly a lot of problems on the left that need to be fixed but the hypocrisy and lack of self awareness of some on the right on how they are acting is astonishing. 

---

 BIB, the hypocrisy is unreal. So these Texan gentleman who are in agreement with Kirk that the the only acceptable lifestyle is to marry a traditional Christian hopefully submissive wife are then searching for trans porn under cover of darkness ..! I feel sorry for their wives tbh.

I I totally agree with your observations about Fresh and Fit  and their ilk also but  that podcast in particular  finally went too far for YouTube and their channel is now demonetised.. Not for misogyny as you can say what you want about women , (he even wrote a book titled "Why Women deserve less" )but the main host made a terrible fool of themselves in a cringeworthy racist display against another YouTuber. It was quite shocking to witness, especially since the gentleman is a person of colour himself.  He is also a former FBI agent who gave up such a worthy position to verbally abuse  people online..It's farcical. I suppose he made a lot of money while he could humiliating young women.

Kirk.certainly dehumanized people and I'm  just glad his bigotry would not be permitted here. When it is, imo, we will finally be lost as a society.

Maddog wrote:

---

Fluffy wrote:

---

Syl wrote:

---

And yet Fluffy, after Kirk had visited the UK recently, he went on about how he couldn't wait to leave and get back on American soil, because free speech is clamped down on so much here.

Oh, the irony.

---

 I know Vam. Of course I would never of wished death on him, it was a horrible tragedy but I'm too lack lustre to debate with MD who refuses to see that Kirk has ever even said anything offensive..! I It's like going round round in circles.

Prior to Trump being elected he also said previous president Joe Biden should be jailed or face the death penalty. That's pretty offensive.. This is Kirk's exact quote from his show which has been fact checked and verified to him. (so Madders doesn't deny it)

Turning Point USA CEO and co-founder Charlie Kirk once said former U.S. President Joe Biden is a “corrupt tyrant who should honestly be put in prison and/or given the death penalty for his crimes against America.”

 I know what you're thinking, " Kirk stated "we've got to get Joe Biden out of the way so we can run up against Kammy. Oh my goodness, is she beatable. It's like Black Hillary on steroids. Is she Black? I guess she says she's Caribbean or whatever. Doesn't matter. She gives these speeches, and it just has this aura of totalitarianism. My team says she is Indian and Caribbean.  

I'll tell you what, she would be a lot easier to beat than Joe Biden. Joe Biden is a bumbling, dementia-filled Alzheimer's, corrupt, tyrant who should honestly be put in prison and/or given the death penalty for his crimes against America."

Source-

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/charlie-kirk-biden-death-penalty/

---

 Why did the video clip end suddenly? What did Kirk say after? Perhaps nothing, perhaps something that would change the meaning..

---

 Nah, not buying it. The clip is all over the net and it's  been fact checked and found to be true.  The clip is all over YouTube. 

MD, what happened to Kirk was an appalling tragedy and nobody disputed this. But he doesn't need to be made into.a martyr. Why can't he be mourned by those he loved for who he truly was instead of the media and his fans attempting to sanitize him. The American media weren't ashamed of his views when he was alive so why are they now?

In a June 8, 2024, episode of his podcast (at around the 1:00:00 mark), Kirk reacted to Accurso posting a video in which she cited Bible scripture to explain why she had wished a “Happy Pride” that month to people in the LGBTQ+ community.

“My faith is really important to me, and it’s also one reason why I love every neighbor,” she said in her video. “In Matthew 22, a religious teacher asked Jesus, what’s the most important commandment? And Jesus says, to love God and to ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’” “It doesn’t say love every neighbor except,” she went on to say.

In his reply, Kirk said Accurso left out something else the Bible says. “She’s not totally wrong,” Kirk said. “The first part is Deuteronomy 6:3–5. The second part is Leviticus 19. So you love God, so you must love his law. How do you love somebody? You love them by telling them the truth, not by confirming or affirming their sin.”

He continued: “And it says, by the way, Ms. Rachel, might want to crack open that Bible of yours, in a lesser referenced part of the same part of scripture is in Leviticus 18, is that thou shall lay with another man shall be stoned to death. Just saying. So, Ms. Rachel, you quote Leviticus 19, love your neighbor as yourself. The chapter before affirms God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matters.”

After backlash from Kirk supporters, the author Stephen King, who had posted on X on Sept. 11 that Kirk had “advocated stoning gays to death,” retracted his claim and apologized. King said, “What [Kirk] actually demonstrated was how some people cherry-pick Biblical passages.

https://www.factcheck.org/2025/09/viral-claims-about-charlie-kirks-words/ 

Looks like I am going to have to watch the video to make up my own mind...