Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On September 15 2025 23:08 Razyda wrote: So as you can see I dont agree with him on everything, and somehow dont think he deserved getting murdered.
Again, you are doing your favorite thing, putting words in people's mouths.
I don't, and have never said he deserved to be murdered.
I, unlike him, am very much against any kind of executions (yes, including Trump, Miller, Hitler, Pol Pot etc.) because it is my strong belief that killing someone makes the person and the system that commit this, no matter how just worse for it.
I don't even think CK should have been silenced or jailed, I think he was expressing his opinions which is his right, even tho I believe that those opinions and especially the way he espoused them and in support of what made him a huge piece of shit.
None of that means that him being assassinated makes pointing these things out wrong, in poor taste or whatever moniker you guys want to assign to it.
Fair point, my last sentence was more of saying what I think, rather than reference to your post. For what is worth I dont think of him as PoS either.
On September 16 2025 00:19 WombaT wrote: I will note that any time there’s talk about trying to regulate social media so it’s not a hate-filled, misinformational cesspit, be it from the left or from those of a more centrist persuasion, there’s gigantic pushback on the very idea itself. People should be free to be be arseholes if they want to be arseholes.
Then if folks from the left are complete arseholes that advocacy seems to just dissipate entirely. Here comes the pearl clutching!
Pick a lane like.
I’ll also add that there’s a world of difference between advocating for violence, and being ok with someone snuffing it. It’s completely possible to not wish x individual gets assassinated, but think their passing is for the greater benefit of society. Or, have sympathy with their nearest and dearest, while still thinking that person, being a net negative to society being gone is a net win. These aren’t conflicting things.
Rush Limbaugh who died after a lifetime of hate (albeit, mild by 2025 standards), of lung cancer, after taking money from tobacco companies and spreading bullshit on their behalf? I can’t laugh at that either?
Fucking snowflakes man…
Oh please Wombat it is not about it and you know it. People absolutely have the right to celebrate someone getting murdered, as it happens I also have the right to say what I think about it.
On September 15 2025 23:08 Razyda wrote: MLK jr - depends what you believe, dude did some good things and allegedly some bad too. If he indeed witnessed and encouraged rape, then yeah that would make him pretty awful. I dont know if thats the case, but if someone believed it, then statement like this would be fully justified.
This was based on a claim made by conservative David Garrow that basically every scholar across the political spectrum has spoken out against.
Also Islamic theocracies exist, what so much worse about christianity that wanting one makes you hateful or PoS?
Ah yes, because everyone across the political spectrum in the USA is very happy with and supportive of what Iran is like. I'm reminded of a tweet by some Trump supporter that said (paraphrased) "Wait a minute, the Taliban was against abortion and vaccines? Maybe we were on the wrong side the entire time..."
- that the "Great replacement theory" is true? I mean in the literal way CK did, a cabal of globalists (an anti-Semitic dog whistle) is trying to replace white people with Mexicans, Muslims, Blacks etc.?
Dont think it is some cabal, it seems to be happening organically if you look at birth rates.
This is, again, a literally Neo-Nazi conspiracy theory.
He believed in god, how am i supposed to know what else he believed? You have US in your profile, you could have gone and ask him that.
Not it wasnt nazi position like wtf you talking about. Even in wikipedia article you linked:
"Leading Nazis like Heinrich Himmler, Alfred Rosenberg, Martin Bormann, and Joseph Goebbels, backed by Hitler, were hostile to Christianity and ultimately planned to de-Christianise Germany"
Your Iran question have nothing to do with what I said and I dont know if what I said reflect conservatives position, it was my own musings on the topic.
Dude birth rates are not conspiracy theory, also I dare say that given unlimited time everyone will end up mixed race and there is nothing wrong with that.
- would you force your 10 year old female child that was raped carry the pregnancy to term? I honestly dont know
My good sir, there is one correct answer and one correct answer only. You should literally never force any rape victim to carry. Ever. And especially not your own daughter.
"I honestly don't know" tells me either one of two things: you refuse to think about it, in which case I advise you to start thinking now and come to the correct conclusion quickly. Or it tells me you are in fact willing to force your own daughter to carry. Just willingness alone, in my book, strictly disqualifies you from fatherhood. Unfortunately I don't have a say in that, but I hope you'll never be in a position to make such a decision because clearly you're willing to make a very evil choice.
And you have the gall to call anybody monsters? You can't be serious.
This is pure comedy, I will respond in kind. You should never force women to abortion, it is disgusting that you think you have the right to do so.
On September 12 2025 00:32 ThunderJunk wrote: Honestly... I don't feel even a little sad about Kirk's murder. He was a morally grandstanding rage baiter who accrued a net worth of 12 million dollars by "DESTROYING" dumb college kids publicly. He was also intellectually dishonest. His entire life's thesis supposedly revolved around his faith in scripture and the basic protestant brand of Christianity, but when confronted with the simple reality that, in fact, the King James bible is necessarily a linguistically ambiguous translation through the British lens of the original language the bible was written in - which would by his own definition be the most technically holy type of scripture, and therefore not as a reliable source of what is right and good as he maintained.. he just ignored the point, pressed forward with his views, and never took that fundamental problem with his conceptual framework seriously - nor would he ever.
I have a problem with people who claim to be fighters for truth who refuse to look at their own beliefs critically when confronted with evidence contrary to what makes them rich and powerful. That, to my mind, is fundamentally evil.
Also... And this is more of a petty point - but still completely fair: He was a staunch advocate from the right to bear arms. So, this way of getting killed was pretty poetically satisfying.
If freedom of speech is truly at issue here - I'll maintain the right to express that I think whoever killed Charlie did humanity a big favor.
This type of thinking is so dumb. To think murdering someone for voicing his opinions is doing humanity a favor is so backwards, I don't know where to even start.
You have lost the entire point of what humanity is. If this guy was truly a threat to you and your ideology so much, you should take a hard look as to why he was connecting with so many people and question your own ideology. Taking an intellectual debate to the level of violence is an intellectually cowardly way of debating and everyone loses in that scenario. You can have your opinions but imo you are despicable for having those beliefs. You've let group think and tribalism ruin a beautiful part of your humanity and I hope you get it back some day.
Charlie Kirk was a partisan political commentator, political fund raiser, and political influencer. He was a family man and most people described him as a very nice guy. He had strong opinions and even though I'm on the complete opposite side of him, I respected his courage to put himself and his beliefs out there.
No person deserves to be killed for speech. No one.
Say what you want about his beliefs and opinions but if you're cheering this murder, you're a disgusting human being who completely misses the point of humanity.
It's hard to argue with people who think that Charlie Kirk has lost his humanity and has brought many thousands if not millions of other people much closer to losing their humanity as well. You know, at some point you have to ask yourself whether free speech is really this holy relic that should be worshipped until everything breaks. Should it, really?
There's a reason why speech is not actually free. Not even in the free land of the free, the most freedom loving of all the free countries in the history of freedom. This idea that speech can't destroy a nation is, well... I'd call it naive at best.
I won't say Kirk's death was justified. But it's hard to argue that he didn't have some really bad shit coming his way. It shouldn't have been death, but something had to happen. The guy was on a quest to destroy America.
See free speech actually should be free. If you think otherwise you are just misguided. Why would you be against it? What happened to Kirk is very result of believing that he shouldn't be allowed to say what he was saying. Mind I dont think anyone should be banned for expressing their opinion on this murder. I am actually glad that given opportunity to show their true colours, people will do just that. You see I used to like you. I did considered your ideas idiotic, but overall it seemed like they were coming from the good place. Now I see there never was a good place.
As for everyone else cheering for this murder: line which shouldn't have been crossed was crossed, enjoy and bear the consequences. Might be worth to remember that right wing people actually went to capitol on January 6, didnt limit themselves to posting mean posts on internet.
Bruh, you never liked me. You may've liked my political views because they weren't so disaligned with yours at the time. Or at least you thought. I will still defend free speech. The way it's done in my country is that you can say literally anything that's not a call to violence or a death threat or something like that.You're even allowed to question the number of Jews killed in the Holocaust. What you're not allowed to do is question the Holocaust without evidence. In America you don't need a shred of evidence. Our way is better, and America's way is worse. This is simply a matter of fact. So I will not defend absolute free speech. I've outgrown that phase years ago.
I genuinely did. I found your arguments wanting, but they seemed to be coming from the things like compassion. Here however you picked a side of the people posting shit like this (purposedly put link instead of image, this shit is sickening):
I dont think you can be accused of having any sort of compassion any more.
On September 15 2025 17:21 Magic Powers wrote: I don't know about ya'll but my social media search results (just "Charlie Kirk", nothing else) are heavily pushing every content that's defending or honoring Charlie Kirk while heavily censoring anything revealing his racism and his hatred. I can't find literally anything about the latter with neutral search terms. The bias is overwhelmingly in his favor.
Something's up.
Like, he's practically being glorified on Youtube by the search algorithm. I'm not exaggerating.
Maybe, just maybe, all you knew about they guy came from places like this one, or reddit, but you never bothered to check?
I've never said Kirk deserved death, I've said the literal opposite. You're imagining things. Get back to reality.
I didnt state that you said he deserved death. It is more of a reference to how utterly devastated you were by his murder...
On September 11 2025 06:20 Magic Powers wrote: Guns may not save lives, but they did save my day.
Oh no, I didn't fall to the ground in tears. Cry me a river. Kirk didn't deserve death, but he did deserve to be shut up for good one way or another, other than through death. Unfortunately he chose not to shut up and someone else decided for him that his time on this planet was over.
You are not in a position to judge me.
So the only thing which prevents you from saving the US is 8th amendment. Why I am not surprised.
And of course I am in position to judge you, everyone you ever met is making judgements about you. And so do you.
He believed in god, how am i supposed to know what else he believed? You have US in your profile, you could have gone and ask him that.
I'll give you a hint. Donald Trump is really racist. MLK Jr. was opposed to racism and made terminating racial segregation his most important life mission. That's why the former can be a proven-in-court-rapist President, but even an unsubstantiated accusation of rape against the latter is all Kirk needed. You see, Kirk wasn't actually against rape at all, he was against racial equality.
Not it wasnt nazi position like wtf you talking about. Even in wikipedia article you linked:
"Leading Nazis like Heinrich Himmler, Alfred Rosenberg, Martin Bormann, and Joseph Goebbels, backed by Hitler, were hostile to Christianity and ultimately planned to de-Christianise Germany"
Perhaps you should attempt to read the entire article instead of cherrypicking a single line. For example, from the first paragraph:
"Positive Christianity (German: positives Christentum) was a religious movement within Nazi Germany which promoted the belief that the racial purity of the German people should be maintained by mixing racialistic Nazi ideology with either fundamental or significant elements of Nicene Christianity. Adolf Hitler used the term in point 24[a] of the 1920 Nazi Party Platform, stating: "the Party as such represents the viewpoint of Positive Christianity without binding itself to any particular denomination".[3]"
If you want to say "that's not real Christianity," then I agree, which is why I don't agree with calling Kirk a Christian either for advocating what is essentially the same thing in the USA.
Your Iran question have nothing to do with what I said and I dont know if what I said reflect conservatives position, it was my own musings on the topic.
Sick backtrack bro
Dude birth rates are not conspiracy theory, also I dare say that given unlimited time everyone will end up mixed race and there is nothing wrong with that.
Kirk thought there was, hence why he was almost verbatim repeating the arguments of Neo-Nazi David Lane.
On September 15 2025 23:08 Razyda wrote: So as you can see I dont agree with him on everything, and somehow dont think he deserved getting murdered.
Again, you are doing your favorite thing, putting words in people's mouths.
I don't, and have never said he deserved to be murdered.
I, unlike him, am very much against any kind of executions (yes, including Trump, Miller, Hitler, Pol Pot etc.) because it is my strong belief that killing someone makes the person and the system that commit this, no matter how just worse for it.
I don't even think CK should have been silenced or jailed, I think he was expressing his opinions which is his right, even tho I believe that those opinions and especially the way he espoused them and in support of what made him a huge piece of shit.
None of that means that him being assassinated makes pointing these things out wrong, in poor taste or whatever moniker you guys want to assign to it.
Fair point, my last sentence was more of saying what I think, rather than reference to your post. For what is worth I dont think of him as PoS either.
On September 16 2025 00:19 WombaT wrote: I will note that any time there’s talk about trying to regulate social media so it’s not a hate-filled, misinformational cesspit, be it from the left or from those of a more centrist persuasion, there’s gigantic pushback on the very idea itself. People should be free to be be arseholes if they want to be arseholes.
Then if folks from the left are complete arseholes that advocacy seems to just dissipate entirely. Here comes the pearl clutching!
Pick a lane like.
I’ll also add that there’s a world of difference between advocating for violence, and being ok with someone snuffing it. It’s completely possible to not wish x individual gets assassinated, but think their passing is for the greater benefit of society. Or, have sympathy with their nearest and dearest, while still thinking that person, being a net negative to society being gone is a net win. These aren’t conflicting things.
Rush Limbaugh who died after a lifetime of hate (albeit, mild by 2025 standards), of lung cancer, after taking money from tobacco companies and spreading bullshit on their behalf? I can’t laugh at that either?
Fucking snowflakes man…
Oh please Wombat it is not about it and you know it. People absolutely have the right to celebrate someone getting murdered, as it happens I also have the right to say what I think about it.
On September 15 2025 23:08 Razyda wrote: MLK jr - depends what you believe, dude did some good things and allegedly some bad too. If he indeed witnessed and encouraged rape, then yeah that would make him pretty awful. I dont know if thats the case, but if someone believed it, then statement like this would be fully justified.
This was based on a claim made by conservative David Garrow that basically every scholar across the political spectrum has spoken out against.
Also Islamic theocracies exist, what so much worse about christianity that wanting one makes you hateful or PoS?
Ah yes, because everyone across the political spectrum in the USA is very happy with and supportive of what Iran is like. I'm reminded of a tweet by some Trump supporter that said (paraphrased) "Wait a minute, the Taliban was against abortion and vaccines? Maybe we were on the wrong side the entire time..."
- that the "Great replacement theory" is true? I mean in the literal way CK did, a cabal of globalists (an anti-Semitic dog whistle) is trying to replace white people with Mexicans, Muslims, Blacks etc.?
Dont think it is some cabal, it seems to be happening organically if you look at birth rates.
This is, again, a literally Neo-Nazi conspiracy theory.
He believed in god, how am i supposed to know what else he believed? You have US in your profile, you could have gone and ask him that.
Not it wasnt nazi position like wtf you talking about. Even in wikipedia article you linked:
"Leading Nazis like Heinrich Himmler, Alfred Rosenberg, Martin Bormann, and Joseph Goebbels, backed by Hitler, were hostile to Christianity and ultimately planned to de-Christianise Germany"
Your Iran question have nothing to do with what I said and I dont know if what I said reflect conservatives position, it was my own musings on the topic.
Dude birth rates are not conspiracy theory, also I dare say that given unlimited time everyone will end up mixed race and there is nothing wrong with that.
- would you force your 10 year old female child that was raped carry the pregnancy to term? I honestly dont know
My good sir, there is one correct answer and one correct answer only. You should literally never force any rape victim to carry. Ever. And especially not your own daughter.
"I honestly don't know" tells me either one of two things: you refuse to think about it, in which case I advise you to start thinking now and come to the correct conclusion quickly. Or it tells me you are in fact willing to force your own daughter to carry. Just willingness alone, in my book, strictly disqualifies you from fatherhood. Unfortunately I don't have a say in that, but I hope you'll never be in a position to make such a decision because clearly you're willing to make a very evil choice.
And you have the gall to call anybody monsters? You can't be serious.
This is pure comedy, I will respond in kind. You should never force women to abortion, it is disgusting that you think you have the right to do so.
On September 12 2025 00:32 ThunderJunk wrote: Honestly... I don't feel even a little sad about Kirk's murder. He was a morally grandstanding rage baiter who accrued a net worth of 12 million dollars by "DESTROYING" dumb college kids publicly. He was also intellectually dishonest. His entire life's thesis supposedly revolved around his faith in scripture and the basic protestant brand of Christianity, but when confronted with the simple reality that, in fact, the King James bible is necessarily a linguistically ambiguous translation through the British lens of the original language the bible was written in - which would by his own definition be the most technically holy type of scripture, and therefore not as a reliable source of what is right and good as he maintained.. he just ignored the point, pressed forward with his views, and never took that fundamental problem with his conceptual framework seriously - nor would he ever.
I have a problem with people who claim to be fighters for truth who refuse to look at their own beliefs critically when confronted with evidence contrary to what makes them rich and powerful. That, to my mind, is fundamentally evil.
Also... And this is more of a petty point - but still completely fair: He was a staunch advocate from the right to bear arms. So, this way of getting killed was pretty poetically satisfying.
If freedom of speech is truly at issue here - I'll maintain the right to express that I think whoever killed Charlie did humanity a big favor.
This type of thinking is so dumb. To think murdering someone for voicing his opinions is doing humanity a favor is so backwards, I don't know where to even start.
You have lost the entire point of what humanity is. If this guy was truly a threat to you and your ideology so much, you should take a hard look as to why he was connecting with so many people and question your own ideology. Taking an intellectual debate to the level of violence is an intellectually cowardly way of debating and everyone loses in that scenario. You can have your opinions but imo you are despicable for having those beliefs. You've let group think and tribalism ruin a beautiful part of your humanity and I hope you get it back some day.
Charlie Kirk was a partisan political commentator, political fund raiser, and political influencer. He was a family man and most people described him as a very nice guy. He had strong opinions and even though I'm on the complete opposite side of him, I respected his courage to put himself and his beliefs out there.
No person deserves to be killed for speech. No one.
Say what you want about his beliefs and opinions but if you're cheering this murder, you're a disgusting human being who completely misses the point of humanity.
It's hard to argue with people who think that Charlie Kirk has lost his humanity and has brought many thousands if not millions of other people much closer to losing their humanity as well. You know, at some point you have to ask yourself whether free speech is really this holy relic that should be worshipped until everything breaks. Should it, really?
There's a reason why speech is not actually free. Not even in the free land of the free, the most freedom loving of all the free countries in the history of freedom. This idea that speech can't destroy a nation is, well... I'd call it naive at best.
I won't say Kirk's death was justified. But it's hard to argue that he didn't have some really bad shit coming his way. It shouldn't have been death, but something had to happen. The guy was on a quest to destroy America.
See free speech actually should be free. If you think otherwise you are just misguided. Why would you be against it? What happened to Kirk is very result of believing that he shouldn't be allowed to say what he was saying. Mind I dont think anyone should be banned for expressing their opinion on this murder. I am actually glad that given opportunity to show their true colours, people will do just that. You see I used to like you. I did considered your ideas idiotic, but overall it seemed like they were coming from the good place. Now I see there never was a good place.
As for everyone else cheering for this murder: line which shouldn't have been crossed was crossed, enjoy and bear the consequences. Might be worth to remember that right wing people actually went to capitol on January 6, didnt limit themselves to posting mean posts on internet.
Bruh, you never liked me. You may've liked my political views because they weren't so disaligned with yours at the time. Or at least you thought. I will still defend free speech. The way it's done in my country is that you can say literally anything that's not a call to violence or a death threat or something like that.You're even allowed to question the number of Jews killed in the Holocaust. What you're not allowed to do is question the Holocaust without evidence. In America you don't need a shred of evidence. Our way is better, and America's way is worse. This is simply a matter of fact. So I will not defend absolute free speech. I've outgrown that phase years ago.
I genuinely did. I found your arguments wanting, but they seemed to be coming from the things like compassion. Here however you picked a side of the people posting shit like this (purposedly put link instead of image, this shit is sickening):
I dont think you can be accused of having any sort of compassion any more.
On September 15 2025 17:21 Magic Powers wrote: I don't know about ya'll but my social media search results (just "Charlie Kirk", nothing else) are heavily pushing every content that's defending or honoring Charlie Kirk while heavily censoring anything revealing his racism and his hatred. I can't find literally anything about the latter with neutral search terms. The bias is overwhelmingly in his favor.
Something's up.
Like, he's practically being glorified on Youtube by the search algorithm. I'm not exaggerating.
Maybe, just maybe, all you knew about they guy came from places like this one, or reddit, but you never bothered to check?
I've never said Kirk deserved death, I've said the literal opposite. You're imagining things. Get back to reality.
I didnt state that you said he deserved death. It is more of a reference to how utterly devastated you were by his murder...
On September 11 2025 06:20 Magic Powers wrote: Guns may not save lives, but they did save my day.
Oh no, I didn't fall to the ground in tears. Cry me a river. Kirk didn't deserve death, but he did deserve to be shut up for good one way or another, other than through death. Unfortunately he chose not to shut up and someone else decided for him that his time on this planet was over.
You are not in a position to judge me.
So the only thing which prevents you from saving the US is 8th amendment. Why I am not surprised.
And of course I am in position to judge you, everyone you ever met is making judgements about you. And so do you.
It absolutely is about that. Plenty of handwaving, excuses and gaslighting attempts at all sorts of hateful shit being thrown about, in high volume, and all over the place, for fucking years but let’s all grab hands together and sing Kumbayah over Charlie Kirk?
It’s a complete nonsense, a joke, a complete fucking farce of a request, treated with the derision it deserves.
I personally find some of it steps into ghoulish territory, but I sure as fuck aren’t going to listen to the right’s demands for propriety when it suits them.
On September 15 2025 23:08 Razyda wrote: So as you can see I dont agree with him on everything, and somehow dont think he deserved getting murdered.
Again, you are doing your favorite thing, putting words in people's mouths.
I don't, and have never said he deserved to be murdered.
I, unlike him, am very much against any kind of executions (yes, including Trump, Miller, Hitler, Pol Pot etc.) because it is my strong belief that killing someone makes the person and the system that commit this, no matter how just worse for it.
I don't even think CK should have been silenced or jailed, I think he was expressing his opinions which is his right, even tho I believe that those opinions and especially the way he espoused them and in support of what made him a huge piece of shit.
None of that means that him being assassinated makes pointing these things out wrong, in poor taste or whatever moniker you guys want to assign to it.
Fair point, my last sentence was more of saying what I think, rather than reference to your post. For what is worth I dont think of him as PoS either.
On September 16 2025 00:19 WombaT wrote: I will note that any time there’s talk about trying to regulate social media so it’s not a hate-filled, misinformational cesspit, be it from the left or from those of a more centrist persuasion, there’s gigantic pushback on the very idea itself. People should be free to be be arseholes if they want to be arseholes.
Then if folks from the left are complete arseholes that advocacy seems to just dissipate entirely. Here comes the pearl clutching!
Pick a lane like.
I’ll also add that there’s a world of difference between advocating for violence, and being ok with someone snuffing it. It’s completely possible to not wish x individual gets assassinated, but think their passing is for the greater benefit of society. Or, have sympathy with their nearest and dearest, while still thinking that person, being a net negative to society being gone is a net win. These aren’t conflicting things.
Rush Limbaugh who died after a lifetime of hate (albeit, mild by 2025 standards), of lung cancer, after taking money from tobacco companies and spreading bullshit on their behalf? I can’t laugh at that either?
Fucking snowflakes man…
Oh please Wombat it is not about it and you know it. People absolutely have the right to celebrate someone getting murdered, as it happens I also have the right to say what I think about it.
On September 16 2025 00:10 LightSpectra wrote:
On September 15 2025 23:08 Razyda wrote: MLK jr - depends what you believe, dude did some good things and allegedly some bad too. If he indeed witnessed and encouraged rape, then yeah that would make him pretty awful. I dont know if thats the case, but if someone believed it, then statement like this would be fully justified.
This was based on a claim made by conservative David Garrow that basically every scholar across the political spectrum has spoken out against.
Also Islamic theocracies exist, what so much worse about christianity that wanting one makes you hateful or PoS?
Ah yes, because everyone across the political spectrum in the USA is very happy with and supportive of what Iran is like. I'm reminded of a tweet by some Trump supporter that said (paraphrased) "Wait a minute, the Taliban was against abortion and vaccines? Maybe we were on the wrong side the entire time..."
- that the "Great replacement theory" is true? I mean in the literal way CK did, a cabal of globalists (an anti-Semitic dog whistle) is trying to replace white people with Mexicans, Muslims, Blacks etc.?
Dont think it is some cabal, it seems to be happening organically if you look at birth rates.
This is, again, a literally Neo-Nazi conspiracy theory.
He believed in god, how am i supposed to know what else he believed? You have US in your profile, you could have gone and ask him that.
Not it wasnt nazi position like wtf you talking about. Even in wikipedia article you linked:
"Leading Nazis like Heinrich Himmler, Alfred Rosenberg, Martin Bormann, and Joseph Goebbels, backed by Hitler, were hostile to Christianity and ultimately planned to de-Christianise Germany"
Your Iran question have nothing to do with what I said and I dont know if what I said reflect conservatives position, it was my own musings on the topic.
Dude birth rates are not conspiracy theory, also I dare say that given unlimited time everyone will end up mixed race and there is nothing wrong with that.
On September 15 2025 23:24 Magic Powers wrote:
- would you force your 10 year old female child that was raped carry the pregnancy to term? I honestly dont know
My good sir, there is one correct answer and one correct answer only. You should literally never force any rape victim to carry. Ever. And especially not your own daughter.
"I honestly don't know" tells me either one of two things: you refuse to think about it, in which case I advise you to start thinking now and come to the correct conclusion quickly. Or it tells me you are in fact willing to force your own daughter to carry. Just willingness alone, in my book, strictly disqualifies you from fatherhood. Unfortunately I don't have a say in that, but I hope you'll never be in a position to make such a decision because clearly you're willing to make a very evil choice.
And you have the gall to call anybody monsters? You can't be serious.
This is pure comedy, I will respond in kind. You should never force women to abortion, it is disgusting that you think you have the right to do so.
On September 15 2025 23:26 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 15 2025 23:23 Razyda wrote:
On September 15 2025 20:50 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 15 2025 20:29 Razyda wrote:
On September 12 2025 16:32 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 12 2025 10:38 Razyda wrote:
On September 12 2025 07:44 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 12 2025 05:11 G5 wrote: [quote]
This type of thinking is so dumb. To think murdering someone for voicing his opinions is doing humanity a favor is so backwards, I don't know where to even start.
You have lost the entire point of what humanity is. If this guy was truly a threat to you and your ideology so much, you should take a hard look as to why he was connecting with so many people and question your own ideology. Taking an intellectual debate to the level of violence is an intellectually cowardly way of debating and everyone loses in that scenario. You can have your opinions but imo you are despicable for having those beliefs. You've let group think and tribalism ruin a beautiful part of your humanity and I hope you get it back some day.
Charlie Kirk was a partisan political commentator, political fund raiser, and political influencer. He was a family man and most people described him as a very nice guy. He had strong opinions and even though I'm on the complete opposite side of him, I respected his courage to put himself and his beliefs out there.
No person deserves to be killed for speech. No one.
Say what you want about his beliefs and opinions but if you're cheering this murder, you're a disgusting human being who completely misses the point of humanity.
It's hard to argue with people who think that Charlie Kirk has lost his humanity and has brought many thousands if not millions of other people much closer to losing their humanity as well. You know, at some point you have to ask yourself whether free speech is really this holy relic that should be worshipped until everything breaks. Should it, really?
There's a reason why speech is not actually free. Not even in the free land of the free, the most freedom loving of all the free countries in the history of freedom. This idea that speech can't destroy a nation is, well... I'd call it naive at best.
I won't say Kirk's death was justified. But it's hard to argue that he didn't have some really bad shit coming his way. It shouldn't have been death, but something had to happen. The guy was on a quest to destroy America.
See free speech actually should be free. If you think otherwise you are just misguided. Why would you be against it? What happened to Kirk is very result of believing that he shouldn't be allowed to say what he was saying. Mind I dont think anyone should be banned for expressing their opinion on this murder. I am actually glad that given opportunity to show their true colours, people will do just that. You see I used to like you. I did considered your ideas idiotic, but overall it seemed like they were coming from the good place. Now I see there never was a good place.
As for everyone else cheering for this murder: line which shouldn't have been crossed was crossed, enjoy and bear the consequences. Might be worth to remember that right wing people actually went to capitol on January 6, didnt limit themselves to posting mean posts on internet.
Bruh, you never liked me. You may've liked my political views because they weren't so disaligned with yours at the time. Or at least you thought. I will still defend free speech. The way it's done in my country is that you can say literally anything that's not a call to violence or a death threat or something like that.You're even allowed to question the number of Jews killed in the Holocaust. What you're not allowed to do is question the Holocaust without evidence. In America you don't need a shred of evidence. Our way is better, and America's way is worse. This is simply a matter of fact. So I will not defend absolute free speech. I've outgrown that phase years ago.
I genuinely did. I found your arguments wanting, but they seemed to be coming from the things like compassion. Here however you picked a side of the people posting shit like this (purposedly put link instead of image, this shit is sickening):
I dont think you can be accused of having any sort of compassion any more.
On September 15 2025 17:21 Magic Powers wrote: I don't know about ya'll but my social media search results (just "Charlie Kirk", nothing else) are heavily pushing every content that's defending or honoring Charlie Kirk while heavily censoring anything revealing his racism and his hatred. I can't find literally anything about the latter with neutral search terms. The bias is overwhelmingly in his favor.
Something's up.
Like, he's practically being glorified on Youtube by the search algorithm. I'm not exaggerating.
Maybe, just maybe, all you knew about they guy came from places like this one, or reddit, but you never bothered to check?
I've never said Kirk deserved death, I've said the literal opposite. You're imagining things. Get back to reality.
I didnt state that you said he deserved death. It is more of a reference to how utterly devastated you were by his murder...
On September 11 2025 06:20 Magic Powers wrote: Guns may not save lives, but they did save my day.
Oh no, I didn't fall to the ground in tears. Cry me a river. Kirk didn't deserve death, but he did deserve to be shut up for good one way or another, other than through death. Unfortunately he chose not to shut up and someone else decided for him that his time on this planet was over.
You are not in a position to judge me.
So the only thing which prevents you from saving the US is 8th amendment. Why I am not surprised.
And of course I am in position to judge you, everyone you ever met is making judgements about you. And so do you.
It absolutely is about that. Plenty of handwaving, excuses and gaslighting attempts at all sorts of hateful shit being thrown about, in high volume, and all over the place, for fucking years but let’s all grab hands together and sing Kumbayah over Charlie Kirk?
It’s a complete nonsense, a joke, a complete fucking farce of a request, treated with the derision it deserves.
I personally find some of it steps into ghoulish territory, but I sure as fuck aren’t going to listen to the right’s demands for propriety when it suits them.
Asking people not to shout for joy over murder is not just a demand for "propriety". This is part of what is rediculous about all this. Multiple recent assassination attempts over recent years and the left will never do the inward looking they are always asking the right for. It's anti-free speech to kill people for their political beliefs. This ghoulishness, to use your word, that we are seeing right now is unprecedented and does it fact cross a line. No one cheered when the MN legislators were shot (i use that example even though that guy seems to have had his own reasons). No one cheered when there was a plot found to kidnap the governor of MI. No one is asking you to feel bad for Kirk. You tried to straddle this line with the healthcare CEO too. Political assassination is bad, people should feel shame for celebrating, and as a society we should do this things that try to discourage it and keep it under control.
On September 16 2025 07:25 Introvert wrote: No one cheered when the MN legislators were shot (i use that example even though that guy seems to have had his own reasons). No one cheered when there was a plot found to kidnap the governor of MI.
On September 15 2025 23:08 Razyda wrote: So as you can see I dont agree with him on everything, and somehow dont think he deserved getting murdered.
Again, you are doing your favorite thing, putting words in people's mouths.
I don't, and have never said he deserved to be murdered.
I, unlike him, am very much against any kind of executions (yes, including Trump, Miller, Hitler, Pol Pot etc.) because it is my strong belief that killing someone makes the person and the system that commit this, no matter how just worse for it.
I don't even think CK should have been silenced or jailed, I think he was expressing his opinions which is his right, even tho I believe that those opinions and especially the way he espoused them and in support of what made him a huge piece of shit.
None of that means that him being assassinated makes pointing these things out wrong, in poor taste or whatever moniker you guys want to assign to it.
Fair point, my last sentence was more of saying what I think, rather than reference to your post. For what is worth I dont think of him as PoS either.
On September 16 2025 00:19 WombaT wrote: I will note that any time there’s talk about trying to regulate social media so it’s not a hate-filled, misinformational cesspit, be it from the left or from those of a more centrist persuasion, there’s gigantic pushback on the very idea itself. People should be free to be be arseholes if they want to be arseholes.
Then if folks from the left are complete arseholes that advocacy seems to just dissipate entirely. Here comes the pearl clutching!
Pick a lane like.
I’ll also add that there’s a world of difference between advocating for violence, and being ok with someone snuffing it. It’s completely possible to not wish x individual gets assassinated, but think their passing is for the greater benefit of society. Or, have sympathy with their nearest and dearest, while still thinking that person, being a net negative to society being gone is a net win. These aren’t conflicting things.
Rush Limbaugh who died after a lifetime of hate (albeit, mild by 2025 standards), of lung cancer, after taking money from tobacco companies and spreading bullshit on their behalf? I can’t laugh at that either?
Fucking snowflakes man…
Oh please Wombat it is not about it and you know it. People absolutely have the right to celebrate someone getting murdered, as it happens I also have the right to say what I think about it.
On September 16 2025 00:10 LightSpectra wrote:
On September 15 2025 23:08 Razyda wrote: MLK jr - depends what you believe, dude did some good things and allegedly some bad too. If he indeed witnessed and encouraged rape, then yeah that would make him pretty awful. I dont know if thats the case, but if someone believed it, then statement like this would be fully justified.
This was based on a claim made by conservative David Garrow that basically every scholar across the political spectrum has spoken out against.
Also Islamic theocracies exist, what so much worse about christianity that wanting one makes you hateful or PoS?
Ah yes, because everyone across the political spectrum in the USA is very happy with and supportive of what Iran is like. I'm reminded of a tweet by some Trump supporter that said (paraphrased) "Wait a minute, the Taliban was against abortion and vaccines? Maybe we were on the wrong side the entire time..."
- that the "Great replacement theory" is true? I mean in the literal way CK did, a cabal of globalists (an anti-Semitic dog whistle) is trying to replace white people with Mexicans, Muslims, Blacks etc.?
Dont think it is some cabal, it seems to be happening organically if you look at birth rates.
This is, again, a literally Neo-Nazi conspiracy theory.
He believed in god, how am i supposed to know what else he believed? You have US in your profile, you could have gone and ask him that.
Not it wasnt nazi position like wtf you talking about. Even in wikipedia article you linked:
"Leading Nazis like Heinrich Himmler, Alfred Rosenberg, Martin Bormann, and Joseph Goebbels, backed by Hitler, were hostile to Christianity and ultimately planned to de-Christianise Germany"
Your Iran question have nothing to do with what I said and I dont know if what I said reflect conservatives position, it was my own musings on the topic.
Dude birth rates are not conspiracy theory, also I dare say that given unlimited time everyone will end up mixed race and there is nothing wrong with that.
On September 15 2025 23:24 Magic Powers wrote:
- would you force your 10 year old female child that was raped carry the pregnancy to term? I honestly dont know
My good sir, there is one correct answer and one correct answer only. You should literally never force any rape victim to carry. Ever. And especially not your own daughter.
"I honestly don't know" tells me either one of two things: you refuse to think about it, in which case I advise you to start thinking now and come to the correct conclusion quickly. Or it tells me you are in fact willing to force your own daughter to carry. Just willingness alone, in my book, strictly disqualifies you from fatherhood. Unfortunately I don't have a say in that, but I hope you'll never be in a position to make such a decision because clearly you're willing to make a very evil choice.
And you have the gall to call anybody monsters? You can't be serious.
This is pure comedy, I will respond in kind. You should never force women to abortion, it is disgusting that you think you have the right to do so.
On September 15 2025 23:26 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 15 2025 23:23 Razyda wrote:
On September 15 2025 20:50 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 15 2025 20:29 Razyda wrote:
On September 12 2025 16:32 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 12 2025 10:38 Razyda wrote:
On September 12 2025 07:44 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 12 2025 05:11 G5 wrote: [quote]
This type of thinking is so dumb. To think murdering someone for voicing his opinions is doing humanity a favor is so backwards, I don't know where to even start.
You have lost the entire point of what humanity is. If this guy was truly a threat to you and your ideology so much, you should take a hard look as to why he was connecting with so many people and question your own ideology. Taking an intellectual debate to the level of violence is an intellectually cowardly way of debating and everyone loses in that scenario. You can have your opinions but imo you are despicable for having those beliefs. You've let group think and tribalism ruin a beautiful part of your humanity and I hope you get it back some day.
Charlie Kirk was a partisan political commentator, political fund raiser, and political influencer. He was a family man and most people described him as a very nice guy. He had strong opinions and even though I'm on the complete opposite side of him, I respected his courage to put himself and his beliefs out there.
No person deserves to be killed for speech. No one.
Say what you want about his beliefs and opinions but if you're cheering this murder, you're a disgusting human being who completely misses the point of humanity.
It's hard to argue with people who think that Charlie Kirk has lost his humanity and has brought many thousands if not millions of other people much closer to losing their humanity as well. You know, at some point you have to ask yourself whether free speech is really this holy relic that should be worshipped until everything breaks. Should it, really?
There's a reason why speech is not actually free. Not even in the free land of the free, the most freedom loving of all the free countries in the history of freedom. This idea that speech can't destroy a nation is, well... I'd call it naive at best.
I won't say Kirk's death was justified. But it's hard to argue that he didn't have some really bad shit coming his way. It shouldn't have been death, but something had to happen. The guy was on a quest to destroy America.
See free speech actually should be free. If you think otherwise you are just misguided. Why would you be against it? What happened to Kirk is very result of believing that he shouldn't be allowed to say what he was saying. Mind I dont think anyone should be banned for expressing their opinion on this murder. I am actually glad that given opportunity to show their true colours, people will do just that. You see I used to like you. I did considered your ideas idiotic, but overall it seemed like they were coming from the good place. Now I see there never was a good place.
As for everyone else cheering for this murder: line which shouldn't have been crossed was crossed, enjoy and bear the consequences. Might be worth to remember that right wing people actually went to capitol on January 6, didnt limit themselves to posting mean posts on internet.
Bruh, you never liked me. You may've liked my political views because they weren't so disaligned with yours at the time. Or at least you thought. I will still defend free speech. The way it's done in my country is that you can say literally anything that's not a call to violence or a death threat or something like that.You're even allowed to question the number of Jews killed in the Holocaust. What you're not allowed to do is question the Holocaust without evidence. In America you don't need a shred of evidence. Our way is better, and America's way is worse. This is simply a matter of fact. So I will not defend absolute free speech. I've outgrown that phase years ago.
I genuinely did. I found your arguments wanting, but they seemed to be coming from the things like compassion. Here however you picked a side of the people posting shit like this (purposedly put link instead of image, this shit is sickening):
I dont think you can be accused of having any sort of compassion any more.
On September 15 2025 17:21 Magic Powers wrote: I don't know about ya'll but my social media search results (just "Charlie Kirk", nothing else) are heavily pushing every content that's defending or honoring Charlie Kirk while heavily censoring anything revealing his racism and his hatred. I can't find literally anything about the latter with neutral search terms. The bias is overwhelmingly in his favor.
Something's up.
Like, he's practically being glorified on Youtube by the search algorithm. I'm not exaggerating.
Maybe, just maybe, all you knew about they guy came from places like this one, or reddit, but you never bothered to check?
I've never said Kirk deserved death, I've said the literal opposite. You're imagining things. Get back to reality.
I didnt state that you said he deserved death. It is more of a reference to how utterly devastated you were by his murder...
On September 11 2025 06:20 Magic Powers wrote: Guns may not save lives, but they did save my day.
Oh no, I didn't fall to the ground in tears. Cry me a river. Kirk didn't deserve death, but he did deserve to be shut up for good one way or another, other than through death. Unfortunately he chose not to shut up and someone else decided for him that his time on this planet was over.
You are not in a position to judge me.
So the only thing which prevents you from saving the US is 8th amendment. Why I am not surprised.
And of course I am in position to judge you, everyone you ever met is making judgements about you. And so do you.
It absolutely is about that. Plenty of handwaving, excuses and gaslighting attempts at all sorts of hateful shit being thrown about, in high volume, and all over the place, for fucking years but let’s all grab hands together and sing Kumbayah over Charlie Kirk?
It’s a complete nonsense, a joke, a complete fucking farce of a request, treated with the derision it deserves.
I personally find some of it steps into ghoulish territory, but I sure as fuck aren’t going to listen to the right’s demands for propriety when it suits them.
Where did I ever advocated that? Again, people absolutely have the right to celebrate someone getting murdered, as it happens I also have the right to say what I think about it.
It also seems we somewhat aligned in what we think about it:
On September 16 2025 00:19 WombaT wrote:
Then if folks from the left are complete arseholes
He believed in god, how am i supposed to know what else he believed? You have US in your profile, you could have gone and ask him that.
I'll give you a hint. Donald Trump is really racist. MLK Jr. was opposed to racism and made terminating racial segregation his most important life mission. That's why the former can be a proven-in-court-rapist President, but even an unsubstantiated accusation of rape against the latter is all Kirk needed. You see, Kirk wasn't actually against rape at all, he was against racial equality.
Not it wasnt nazi position like wtf you talking about. Even in wikipedia article you linked:
"Leading Nazis like Heinrich Himmler, Alfred Rosenberg, Martin Bormann, and Joseph Goebbels, backed by Hitler, were hostile to Christianity and ultimately planned to de-Christianise Germany"
Perhaps you should attempt to read the entire article instead of cherrypicking a single line. For example, from the first paragraph:
"Positive Christianity (German: positives Christentum) was a religious movement within Nazi Germany which promoted the belief that the racial purity of the German people should be maintained by mixing racialistic Nazi ideology with either fundamental or significant elements of Nicene Christianity. Adolf Hitler used the term in point 24[a] of the 1920 Nazi Party Platform, stating: "the Party as such represents the viewpoint of Positive Christianity without binding itself to any particular denomination".[3]"
If you want to say "that's not real Christianity," then I agree, which is why I don't agree with calling Kirk a Christian either for advocating what is essentially the same thing in the USA.
Your Iran question have nothing to do with what I said and I dont know if what I said reflect conservatives position, it was my own musings on the topic.
Dude birth rates are not conspiracy theory, also I dare say that given unlimited time everyone will end up mixed race and there is nothing wrong with that.
Kirk thought there was, hence why he was almost verbatim repeating the arguments of Neo-Nazi David Lane.
Regarding MLK: If that was the case then why as quoted earlier "As we note in the piece, Kirk has previously described [King] as a hero and a civil rights icon." I mean pretty much very first thing people know about MLK is his fight for racial equality. I am somewhat dubious that first thing Kirk knew about MLK was the rape thing and thought "this guy is a hero" and only later find out about MLK fight for racial equality and go "wtf, dude was a monster"
You do realise that people may leave great legacies, while not being the best people otherwise? Alexander the Great killed his friend while drunk, Rousseau abandon his children (later wrote Emil, lol)
As for nazi being christian theocracy, I read entire article even though I didnt have to. Hitler view on catholic church is rather common knowledge, he was not a fan. And I quoted only one line because it tells you all you need to know. It is so obvious that I am not even sure how to explain it. I will try though: You cant have christian theocracy if you remove christian out of it, thats just not how things work. You can have Hitler theocracy, or fknowswhat theocracy, but not christian because you de-christianazed. Like... why do I even have to explain that...
What did I backtrack? My thoughts remain the same" If Islamic theocracies exists, why christian theocracies shouldnt be allowed to?" What I said is that I dont know if it is conservatives argument.
This isn’t an especially new debate. When Falwell died Christopher Hitchens famously refused to join everyone in thoughts and prayers and the conservative thought police famously cried about it.
On September 15 2025 23:08 Razyda wrote: So as you can see I dont agree with him on everything, and somehow dont think he deserved getting murdered.
Again, you are doing your favorite thing, putting words in people's mouths.
I don't, and have never said he deserved to be murdered.
I, unlike him, am very much against any kind of executions (yes, including Trump, Miller, Hitler, Pol Pot etc.) because it is my strong belief that killing someone makes the person and the system that commit this, no matter how just worse for it.
I don't even think CK should have been silenced or jailed, I think he was expressing his opinions which is his right, even tho I believe that those opinions and especially the way he espoused them and in support of what made him a huge piece of shit.
None of that means that him being assassinated makes pointing these things out wrong, in poor taste or whatever moniker you guys want to assign to it.
Fair point, my last sentence was more of saying what I think, rather than reference to your post. For what is worth I dont think of him as PoS either.
On September 16 2025 00:19 WombaT wrote: I will note that any time there’s talk about trying to regulate social media so it’s not a hate-filled, misinformational cesspit, be it from the left or from those of a more centrist persuasion, there’s gigantic pushback on the very idea itself. People should be free to be be arseholes if they want to be arseholes.
Then if folks from the left are complete arseholes that advocacy seems to just dissipate entirely. Here comes the pearl clutching!
Pick a lane like.
I’ll also add that there’s a world of difference between advocating for violence, and being ok with someone snuffing it. It’s completely possible to not wish x individual gets assassinated, but think their passing is for the greater benefit of society. Or, have sympathy with their nearest and dearest, while still thinking that person, being a net negative to society being gone is a net win. These aren’t conflicting things.
Rush Limbaugh who died after a lifetime of hate (albeit, mild by 2025 standards), of lung cancer, after taking money from tobacco companies and spreading bullshit on their behalf? I can’t laugh at that either?
Fucking snowflakes man…
Oh please Wombat it is not about it and you know it. People absolutely have the right to celebrate someone getting murdered, as it happens I also have the right to say what I think about it.
On September 16 2025 00:10 LightSpectra wrote:
On September 15 2025 23:08 Razyda wrote: MLK jr - depends what you believe, dude did some good things and allegedly some bad too. If he indeed witnessed and encouraged rape, then yeah that would make him pretty awful. I dont know if thats the case, but if someone believed it, then statement like this would be fully justified.
This was based on a claim made by conservative David Garrow that basically every scholar across the political spectrum has spoken out against.
Also Islamic theocracies exist, what so much worse about christianity that wanting one makes you hateful or PoS?
Ah yes, because everyone across the political spectrum in the USA is very happy with and supportive of what Iran is like. I'm reminded of a tweet by some Trump supporter that said (paraphrased) "Wait a minute, the Taliban was against abortion and vaccines? Maybe we were on the wrong side the entire time..."
- that the "Great replacement theory" is true? I mean in the literal way CK did, a cabal of globalists (an anti-Semitic dog whistle) is trying to replace white people with Mexicans, Muslims, Blacks etc.?
Dont think it is some cabal, it seems to be happening organically if you look at birth rates.
This is, again, a literally Neo-Nazi conspiracy theory.
He believed in god, how am i supposed to know what else he believed? You have US in your profile, you could have gone and ask him that.
Not it wasnt nazi position like wtf you talking about. Even in wikipedia article you linked:
"Leading Nazis like Heinrich Himmler, Alfred Rosenberg, Martin Bormann, and Joseph Goebbels, backed by Hitler, were hostile to Christianity and ultimately planned to de-Christianise Germany"
Your Iran question have nothing to do with what I said and I dont know if what I said reflect conservatives position, it was my own musings on the topic.
Dude birth rates are not conspiracy theory, also I dare say that given unlimited time everyone will end up mixed race and there is nothing wrong with that.
On September 15 2025 23:24 Magic Powers wrote:
- would you force your 10 year old female child that was raped carry the pregnancy to term? I honestly dont know
My good sir, there is one correct answer and one correct answer only. You should literally never force any rape victim to carry. Ever. And especially not your own daughter.
"I honestly don't know" tells me either one of two things: you refuse to think about it, in which case I advise you to start thinking now and come to the correct conclusion quickly. Or it tells me you are in fact willing to force your own daughter to carry. Just willingness alone, in my book, strictly disqualifies you from fatherhood. Unfortunately I don't have a say in that, but I hope you'll never be in a position to make such a decision because clearly you're willing to make a very evil choice.
And you have the gall to call anybody monsters? You can't be serious.
This is pure comedy, I will respond in kind. You should never force women to abortion, it is disgusting that you think you have the right to do so.
On September 15 2025 23:26 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 15 2025 23:23 Razyda wrote:
On September 15 2025 20:50 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 15 2025 20:29 Razyda wrote:
On September 12 2025 16:32 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 12 2025 10:38 Razyda wrote:
On September 12 2025 07:44 Magic Powers wrote: [quote]
It's hard to argue with people who think that Charlie Kirk has lost his humanity and has brought many thousands if not millions of other people much closer to losing their humanity as well. You know, at some point you have to ask yourself whether free speech is really this holy relic that should be worshipped until everything breaks. Should it, really?
There's a reason why speech is not actually free. Not even in the free land of the free, the most freedom loving of all the free countries in the history of freedom. This idea that speech can't destroy a nation is, well... I'd call it naive at best.
I won't say Kirk's death was justified. But it's hard to argue that he didn't have some really bad shit coming his way. It shouldn't have been death, but something had to happen. The guy was on a quest to destroy America.
See free speech actually should be free. If you think otherwise you are just misguided. Why would you be against it? What happened to Kirk is very result of believing that he shouldn't be allowed to say what he was saying. Mind I dont think anyone should be banned for expressing their opinion on this murder. I am actually glad that given opportunity to show their true colours, people will do just that. You see I used to like you. I did considered your ideas idiotic, but overall it seemed like they were coming from the good place. Now I see there never was a good place.
As for everyone else cheering for this murder: line which shouldn't have been crossed was crossed, enjoy and bear the consequences. Might be worth to remember that right wing people actually went to capitol on January 6, didnt limit themselves to posting mean posts on internet.
Bruh, you never liked me. You may've liked my political views because they weren't so disaligned with yours at the time. Or at least you thought. I will still defend free speech. The way it's done in my country is that you can say literally anything that's not a call to violence or a death threat or something like that.You're even allowed to question the number of Jews killed in the Holocaust. What you're not allowed to do is question the Holocaust without evidence. In America you don't need a shred of evidence. Our way is better, and America's way is worse. This is simply a matter of fact. So I will not defend absolute free speech. I've outgrown that phase years ago.
I genuinely did. I found your arguments wanting, but they seemed to be coming from the things like compassion. Here however you picked a side of the people posting shit like this (purposedly put link instead of image, this shit is sickening):
I dont think you can be accused of having any sort of compassion any more.
On September 15 2025 17:21 Magic Powers wrote: I don't know about ya'll but my social media search results (just "Charlie Kirk", nothing else) are heavily pushing every content that's defending or honoring Charlie Kirk while heavily censoring anything revealing his racism and his hatred. I can't find literally anything about the latter with neutral search terms. The bias is overwhelmingly in his favor.
Something's up.
Like, he's practically being glorified on Youtube by the search algorithm. I'm not exaggerating.
Maybe, just maybe, all you knew about they guy came from places like this one, or reddit, but you never bothered to check?
I've never said Kirk deserved death, I've said the literal opposite. You're imagining things. Get back to reality.
I didnt state that you said he deserved death. It is more of a reference to how utterly devastated you were by his murder...
On September 11 2025 06:20 Magic Powers wrote: Guns may not save lives, but they did save my day.
Oh no, I didn't fall to the ground in tears. Cry me a river. Kirk didn't deserve death, but he did deserve to be shut up for good one way or another, other than through death. Unfortunately he chose not to shut up and someone else decided for him that his time on this planet was over.
You are not in a position to judge me.
So the only thing which prevents you from saving the US is 8th amendment. Why I am not surprised.
And of course I am in position to judge you, everyone you ever met is making judgements about you. And so do you.
It absolutely is about that. Plenty of handwaving, excuses and gaslighting attempts at all sorts of hateful shit being thrown about, in high volume, and all over the place, for fucking years but let’s all grab hands together and sing Kumbayah over Charlie Kirk?
It’s a complete nonsense, a joke, a complete fucking farce of a request, treated with the derision it deserves.
I personally find some of it steps into ghoulish territory, but I sure as fuck aren’t going to listen to the right’s demands for propriety when it suits them.
Asking people not to shout for joy over murder is not just a demand for "propriety". This is part of what is rediculous about all this. Multiple recent assassination attempts over recent years and the left will never do the inward looking they are always asking the right for. It's anti-free speech to kill people for their political beliefs. This ghoulishness, to use your word, that we are seeing right now is unprecedented and does it fact cross a line. No one cheered when the MN legislators were shot (i use that example even though that guy seems to have had his own reasons). No one cheered when there was a plot found to kidnap the governor of MI. No one is asking you to feel bad for Kirk. You tried to straddle this line with the healthcare CEO too. Political assassination is bad, people should feel shame for celebrating, and as a society we should do this things that try to discourage it and keep it under control.
It’s not remotely unprecedented, merely amplified amidst the push to canonise Mr Kirk. You may not have seen the rejoicing and the memes for other atrocious events, but there was plenty of it for all sorts.
As I alluded to in earlier posts I mean, did Kyle Rittenhouse need to get a wee podcast tour? Is that not somewhat insensitive and inflammatory?
If that isn’t, is it not ghoulish in the extreme that somebody paid 140,000 dollars for the weapon that George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin with?
Luigi is a bit of an outlier, that rejoicing was a relatively rare instance of quite a bipartisan outpouring, although it did skew a bit left it wasn’t exclusively from there.
I made the point earlier that the contrast with the UK is pretty fucking stark. When Jo Cox (Labour), and David Amess (Conservative) were assassinated, the political parties, the media across the spectrum behaved pretty bloody impeccably in condemning it, and also not further inflaming things. Of course, there will always be exceptions, but there wasn’t much mockery either.
Part of the reason for that is, our Conservative Party are merely rather shite if you’re of my political persuasion. But I could have a beer with a Tory and we’d argue about like, the role and scope of the state and agree to disagree.
Some of this GOP, in this current incarnation? Nope, they’re actively divisive hatemongers, I’ll pass.
What’s equally irritating is this phenomenon isn’t contained to the States, folks are actively working to export it. Hell Elon Musk just appeared via videolink at a far right rally here saying our Parliament should be dissolved. Because, reasons I guess.
To paraphrase Kwark, it’s not the world I wanted, but it’s the world I’ve got.
If you (not you personally) actively work to create a poisonous, divisive environment, you can’t pull a surprised Pikachu when that’s what you get. In a country full of fucking guns especially.
The left is indeed getting more violent, or tolerant of it too, but one has to question why that is happening in this epoch, and isn’t really mirrored in similar nations to the US.
On September 16 2025 07:47 KwarK wrote: This isn’t an especially new debate. When Falwell died Christopher Hitchens famously refused to join everyone in thoughts and prayers and the conservative thought police famously cried about it. https://youtu.be/doKkOSMaTk4?si=l-Tgi4v5OJFkD2fV
‘If you gave Falwell an enema he’d be buried in a matchbox’ is one of the all-time zingers.
I may be misremembering from some podcast I was listening to, so this could be total bollocks, but at least in Roman culture the convention of ‘don’t speak ill of the dead’ was somewhat constrained to the elites, who were always feuding and plotting. And it was never about decency, it was frowned upon because doing something post-mortis was showing a complete lack of balls if you couldn’t do it publicly while the deceased could challenge you back around your peers.
Very different from the modern application of it, in a very different society.
It’s a completely ridiculous convention. If you don’t want the pushback then you can’t venerate the dead either, especially any divisive figure. Don’t let us know, and let the family mourn in peace, otherwise I mean, fair game.
On September 15 2025 23:08 Razyda wrote: So as you can see I dont agree with him on everything, and somehow dont think he deserved getting murdered.
Again, you are doing your favorite thing, putting words in people's mouths.
I don't, and have never said he deserved to be murdered.
I, unlike him, am very much against any kind of executions (yes, including Trump, Miller, Hitler, Pol Pot etc.) because it is my strong belief that killing someone makes the person and the system that commit this, no matter how just worse for it.
I don't even think CK should have been silenced or jailed, I think he was expressing his opinions which is his right, even tho I believe that those opinions and especially the way he espoused them and in support of what made him a huge piece of shit.
None of that means that him being assassinated makes pointing these things out wrong, in poor taste or whatever moniker you guys want to assign to it.
Fair point, my last sentence was more of saying what I think, rather than reference to your post. For what is worth I dont think of him as PoS either.
On September 16 2025 00:19 WombaT wrote: I will note that any time there’s talk about trying to regulate social media so it’s not a hate-filled, misinformational cesspit, be it from the left or from those of a more centrist persuasion, there’s gigantic pushback on the very idea itself. People should be free to be be arseholes if they want to be arseholes.
Then if folks from the left are complete arseholes that advocacy seems to just dissipate entirely. Here comes the pearl clutching!
Pick a lane like.
I’ll also add that there’s a world of difference between advocating for violence, and being ok with someone snuffing it. It’s completely possible to not wish x individual gets assassinated, but think their passing is for the greater benefit of society. Or, have sympathy with their nearest and dearest, while still thinking that person, being a net negative to society being gone is a net win. These aren’t conflicting things.
Rush Limbaugh who died after a lifetime of hate (albeit, mild by 2025 standards), of lung cancer, after taking money from tobacco companies and spreading bullshit on their behalf? I can’t laugh at that either?
Fucking snowflakes man…
Oh please Wombat it is not about it and you know it. People absolutely have the right to celebrate someone getting murdered, as it happens I also have the right to say what I think about it.
On September 16 2025 00:10 LightSpectra wrote:
On September 15 2025 23:08 Razyda wrote: MLK jr - depends what you believe, dude did some good things and allegedly some bad too. If he indeed witnessed and encouraged rape, then yeah that would make him pretty awful. I dont know if thats the case, but if someone believed it, then statement like this would be fully justified.
This was based on a claim made by conservative David Garrow that basically every scholar across the political spectrum has spoken out against.
Also Islamic theocracies exist, what so much worse about christianity that wanting one makes you hateful or PoS?
Ah yes, because everyone across the political spectrum in the USA is very happy with and supportive of what Iran is like. I'm reminded of a tweet by some Trump supporter that said (paraphrased) "Wait a minute, the Taliban was against abortion and vaccines? Maybe we were on the wrong side the entire time..."
- that the "Great replacement theory" is true? I mean in the literal way CK did, a cabal of globalists (an anti-Semitic dog whistle) is trying to replace white people with Mexicans, Muslims, Blacks etc.?
Dont think it is some cabal, it seems to be happening organically if you look at birth rates.
This is, again, a literally Neo-Nazi conspiracy theory.
He believed in god, how am i supposed to know what else he believed? You have US in your profile, you could have gone and ask him that.
Not it wasnt nazi position like wtf you talking about. Even in wikipedia article you linked:
"Leading Nazis like Heinrich Himmler, Alfred Rosenberg, Martin Bormann, and Joseph Goebbels, backed by Hitler, were hostile to Christianity and ultimately planned to de-Christianise Germany"
Your Iran question have nothing to do with what I said and I dont know if what I said reflect conservatives position, it was my own musings on the topic.
Dude birth rates are not conspiracy theory, also I dare say that given unlimited time everyone will end up mixed race and there is nothing wrong with that.
On September 15 2025 23:24 Magic Powers wrote:
- would you force your 10 year old female child that was raped carry the pregnancy to term? I honestly dont know
My good sir, there is one correct answer and one correct answer only. You should literally never force any rape victim to carry. Ever. And especially not your own daughter.
"I honestly don't know" tells me either one of two things: you refuse to think about it, in which case I advise you to start thinking now and come to the correct conclusion quickly. Or it tells me you are in fact willing to force your own daughter to carry. Just willingness alone, in my book, strictly disqualifies you from fatherhood. Unfortunately I don't have a say in that, but I hope you'll never be in a position to make such a decision because clearly you're willing to make a very evil choice.
And you have the gall to call anybody monsters? You can't be serious.
This is pure comedy, I will respond in kind. You should never force women to abortion, it is disgusting that you think you have the right to do so.
On September 15 2025 23:26 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 15 2025 23:23 Razyda wrote:
On September 15 2025 20:50 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 15 2025 20:29 Razyda wrote:
On September 12 2025 16:32 Magic Powers wrote:
On September 12 2025 10:38 Razyda wrote: [quote]
See free speech actually should be free. If you think otherwise you are just misguided. Why would you be against it? What happened to Kirk is very result of believing that he shouldn't be allowed to say what he was saying. Mind I dont think anyone should be banned for expressing their opinion on this murder. I am actually glad that given opportunity to show their true colours, people will do just that. You see I used to like you. I did considered your ideas idiotic, but overall it seemed like they were coming from the good place. Now I see there never was a good place.
As for everyone else cheering for this murder: line which shouldn't have been crossed was crossed, enjoy and bear the consequences. Might be worth to remember that right wing people actually went to capitol on January 6, didnt limit themselves to posting mean posts on internet.
Bruh, you never liked me. You may've liked my political views because they weren't so disaligned with yours at the time. Or at least you thought. I will still defend free speech. The way it's done in my country is that you can say literally anything that's not a call to violence or a death threat or something like that.You're even allowed to question the number of Jews killed in the Holocaust. What you're not allowed to do is question the Holocaust without evidence. In America you don't need a shred of evidence. Our way is better, and America's way is worse. This is simply a matter of fact. So I will not defend absolute free speech. I've outgrown that phase years ago.
I genuinely did. I found your arguments wanting, but they seemed to be coming from the things like compassion. Here however you picked a side of the people posting shit like this (purposedly put link instead of image, this shit is sickening):
I dont think you can be accused of having any sort of compassion any more.
On September 15 2025 17:21 Magic Powers wrote: I don't know about ya'll but my social media search results (just "Charlie Kirk", nothing else) are heavily pushing every content that's defending or honoring Charlie Kirk while heavily censoring anything revealing his racism and his hatred. I can't find literally anything about the latter with neutral search terms. The bias is overwhelmingly in his favor.
Something's up.
Like, he's practically being glorified on Youtube by the search algorithm. I'm not exaggerating.
Maybe, just maybe, all you knew about they guy came from places like this one, or reddit, but you never bothered to check?
I've never said Kirk deserved death, I've said the literal opposite. You're imagining things. Get back to reality.
I didnt state that you said he deserved death. It is more of a reference to how utterly devastated you were by his murder...
On September 11 2025 06:20 Magic Powers wrote: Guns may not save lives, but they did save my day.
Oh no, I didn't fall to the ground in tears. Cry me a river. Kirk didn't deserve death, but he did deserve to be shut up for good one way or another, other than through death. Unfortunately he chose not to shut up and someone else decided for him that his time on this planet was over.
You are not in a position to judge me.
So the only thing which prevents you from saving the US is 8th amendment. Why I am not surprised.
And of course I am in position to judge you, everyone you ever met is making judgements about you. And so do you.
It absolutely is about that. Plenty of handwaving, excuses and gaslighting attempts at all sorts of hateful shit being thrown about, in high volume, and all over the place, for fucking years but let’s all grab hands together and sing Kumbayah over Charlie Kirk?
It’s a complete nonsense, a joke, a complete fucking farce of a request, treated with the derision it deserves.
I personally find some of it steps into ghoulish territory, but I sure as fuck aren’t going to listen to the right’s demands for propriety when it suits them.
Asking people not to shout for joy over murder is not just a demand for "propriety". This is part of what is rediculous about all this. Multiple recent assassination attempts over recent years and the left will never do the inward looking they are always asking the right for. It's anti-free speech to kill people for their political beliefs. This ghoulishness, to use your word, that we are seeing right now is unprecedented and does it fact cross a line. No one cheered when the MN legislators were shot (i use that example even though that guy seems to have had his own reasons). No one cheered when there was a plot found to kidnap the governor of MI. No one is asking you to feel bad for Kirk. You tried to straddle this line with the healthcare CEO too. Political assassination is bad, people should feel shame for celebrating, and as a society we should do this things that try to discourage it and keep it under control.
It’s not remotely unprecedented, merely amplified amidst the push to canonise Mr Kirk. You may not have seen the rejoicing and the memes for other atrocious events, but there was plenty of it for all sorts.
As I alluded to in earlier posts I mean, did Kyle Rittenhouse need to get a wee podcast tour? Is that not somewhat insensitive and inflammatory?
If that isn’t, is it not ghoulish in the extreme that somebody paid 140,000 dollars for the weapon that George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin with?
Luigi is a bit of an outlier, that rejoicing was a relatively rare instance of quite a bipartisan outpouring, although it did skew a bit left it wasn’t exclusively from there.
I made the point earlier that the contrast with the UK is pretty fucking stark. When Jo Cox (Labour), and David Amess (Conservative) were assassinated, the political parties, the media across the spectrum behaved pretty bloody impeccably in condemning it, and also not further inflaming things. Of course, there will always be exceptions, but there wasn’t much mockery either.
Part of the reason for that is, our Conservative Party are merely rather shite if you’re of my political persuasion. But I could have a beer with a Tory and we’d argue about like, the role and scope of the state and agree to disagree.
Some of this GOP, in this current incarnation? Nope, they’re actively divisive hatemongers, I’ll pass.
What’s equally irritating is this phenomenon isn’t contained to the States, folks are actively working to export it. Hell Elon Musk just appeared via videolink at a far right rally here saying our Parliament should be dissolved. Because, reasons I guess.
To paraphrase Kwark, it’s not the world I wanted, but it’s the world I’ve got.
If you (not you personally) actively work to create a poisonous, divisive environment, you can’t pull a surprised Pikachu when that’s what you get. In a country full of fucking guns especially.
The left is indeed getting more violent, or tolerant of it too, but one has to question why that is happening in this epoch, and isn’t really mirrored in similar nations to the US.
There are always crazy people but it didn't get amplified, no one needed to go around denouncing it because thr vast majority of people on the other side don't approve. Pretending like this is just a mirror reaction is obviously wrong and evasive. How many university professors, for example, were hoping that Whitmer was abducted and killed? Anyone? I remember in the old days the left always was chiding the right for their "rhetoric" and now that over the last 10 years more Republicans are being attacked somehow there's no concern about throwing the word "fascist" around.
I think even you can see that your references to Rittenhouse and Martin are big stretches. But at least there we can argue about actions. Was Rittenhouse defending himself? Was Zimmerman? And now we arent even talking about assassination of politicians anymore, but public figures.
The pass the left gets (or more accurately gives themselves, given their media dominance) is more and more grating it seems to me. On the one hand the left is caught between "it's good" and "you made us do it." And finally, any crackpot of social media cheering a state legislator getting shot, or bombing an abortion clinic i and almost everyone on my side can condemn. Too much of the left cannot and will not do the same in reverse. There is no equivalence in action, it's just that the left has convinced themselves there doesn't actually need to be.
This all feels like the emergence of a disruptive metagame in some competitive game that hasn't been patched yet. A single, high-leverage consideration becomes paramount, compressing strategy into the efficient execution of one decisive win condition.
"What kinds of things should the VP do during these first 4 years? Leverage the position of vice president to the fullest extent possible to generate and reinforce messaging and push narratives"
Its more efficient to mobilize voters rather than write a bill and sell it to voters after. Generate enough outrage to ‘justify’ the bill (like the Charlie Kirk one) and holdouts are steamrolled immediately when the base is loudly demanding action. Even without the fascism, IMO republicans are simply outplaying democrats as political groups
Democrats know what they want and they expect their representatives to accomplish it. They don't need to devote significant PR resources to lie about how tariffs aren't taxes or Medicaid cuts will only hurt bad people.
This all feels like the emergence of a disruptive metagame in some competitive game that hasn't been patched yet. A single, high-leverage consideration becomes paramount, compressing strategy into the efficient execution of one decisive win condition.
"What kinds of things should the VP do during these first 4 years? Leverage the position of vice president to the fullest extent possible to generate and reinforce messaging and push narratives"
Its more efficient to mobilize voters rather than write a bill and sell it to voters after. Generate enough outrage to ‘justify’ the bill (like the Charlie Kirk one) and holdouts are steamrolled immediately when the base is loudly demanding action. Even without the fascism,
IMO republicans are simply outplaying democrats as political groups
Outplaying them like a banker in monopoly that's been slipping themselves cash the whole game while Democrats whine that it isn't fair. Then when Republicans look them in the face and tell them to do something about it, Democrats say they'll get em the next time around the board.
On September 16 2025 09:15 KwarK wrote: The left dominate the media? Really? We’re trying that again?
There’s a reason why there has never been a good retort to the failing ratings garbage Trump used to spout because there’s a lot of truth in there. Did you know Gutfield is the highest rating late night show in America?
Like literally the only “big” left wing political commentator is Hasan Piker. Compared to how many right wing political commentators and podcasts?
On September 16 2025 09:18 LightSpectra wrote: You are 100% in an echo chamber if you didn't see or hear anyone cheering for violence against Democrats. It's not debatable.
Even if we assumed that was true for the sake of argument it doesn't stop you saying that gleeful celebration is bad no matter who does it. This really is the bare, basement level expectation. Instead we just get different versions of "they made me do it" or "they started it!" And we don't have to broaden, we can read it here.
On September 16 2025 09:18 LightSpectra wrote: You are 100% in an echo chamber if you didn't see or hear anyone cheering for violence against Democrats. It's not debatable.
Even if we assumed that was true for the sake of argument it doesn't stop you saying that gleeful celebration is bad no matter who does it. This really is the bare, basement level expectation. Instead we just get different versions of "they made me do it" or "they started it!" And we don't have to broaden, we can read it here.
You could post this exact paragraph in response to how Charlie Kirk talked about George Floyd.
EPT
.
