What a disgusting thing to say.
Jo Cox had views unpalatable to some people.
Charlie Kirk had views unpalatable to some people.
Unless you’re willing to support their right to equally speak their unpalatable views, then you’re the problem
Because let’s be absolutely clear. The problem isn’t people expressing their views.
The problem is people being unwilling to accept everyone’s right to express their opinions freely
You can be sure they won’t report his beliefs if he’s a neo Nazi who was pissed off at Kirk for ‘selling out’.I don't think they should report the beliefs or even the names of people who do acts like this.
Starve them of the infamy they desire.
OK let’s play a game. I’ll post some random things Charlie Kirk has said, then you post the Jo Cox equivalent.
View attachment 45970
You can’t get out of that mindset can you?
THIS IS THE PROBLEM
You’ve picked a bunch of things you personally disagree with, so have decided that he somehow had less right to speak his opinions than someone you agree with
Do you support the fundamental principle that people should have the right to say things that you disagree with?
Fucking hell.OK let’s play a game. I’ll post some random things Charlie Kirk has said, then you post the Jo Cox equivalent.
View attachment 45970
Course he does and the reason you can’t show things like that that Jo cox said is because she didn’tYou can’t get out of that mindset can you?
THIS IS THE PROBLEM
You’ve picked a bunch of things you personally disagree with, so have decided that he somehow had less right to speak his opinions than someone you agree with
Do you support the fundamental principle that people should have the right to say things that you disagree with?
Course he does and the reason you can’t show things like that that Jo cox said is because she didn’t
Bloody hell man. Can you not see what you're doing? Read back what you've written there and apply it to the conversations you're having right now.
Fucking hell.
It's not how I do things but can somewhat understand why people don't care what happened.
yet last night you were telling me “watch what you post…”WTF are you on about?
I support everyone’s right to speak freely
no you don't, you've been policing peoples views and words for the last 12 hoursWTF are you on about?
I support everyone’s right to speak freely
yet last night you were telling me “watch what you post…”
no you don't, you've been policing peoples views and words for the last 12 hours
liar
you've been attacking before for what they or more like you conceive they have saidApart from a single response, at no point have I tried to stop people posting.
You’re confusing disagreement with cancellation
you've been attacking before for what they or more like you conceive they have said
that's not "free speech" is it buddy
no, you are seeking to silence people and stop opinions you don't shareYes it is. You can say whatever, I can criticise you for it.
That is precisely what free speech is.
WTF are you on about?
I support everyone’s right to speak freely
His whole intention was to encourage debate.
But you don't, because you're telling people how to feel about this, not to mention Kirk's views etc etc. It's ridiculous hypocrisy.
The person committing the violence but and it’s quite a big one we have laws about inciting hatred and inciting violence so there’s clearly some aspects of what we do that does contribute to somethingIf someone is incited to violence because a man has expressed his opinions, who is to blame?
The person who has expressed their opinion? Or the person who has committed violence?
Didn't he say empathy is a sin?Victim blaming
It's sh*t what's happened and it's sad for a lot of reasons, but that doesn't mean anyone needs to pretend he encouraged debate (see his Professor Watchlist and School Board Watchlist projects).
That is good advice for yourself.Learn the difference between disagreement and cancellation
Yes as well as a lot of other thingsDidn't he say empathy is a sin?
Lots of his debates where just him answering completely different questions to the one asked.It's sh*t what's happened and it's sad for a lot of reasons, but that doesn't mean anyone needs to pretend he encouraged debate (see his Professor Watchlist and School Board Watchlist projects).
That was literally his entire stated aim
why does it? Everyone was getting on fine and agreeing until one person tried to police how people should feel.This thread proves that there just can't and won't ever be and kind of discourse between left and right leaning individuals.
Charlie Kirk came out with a lot of pretty batshit things, that's undeniable. He was the poster boy for American Conservatism and genuinely some of his views were like he was sucked out of 1957 - largely to whip up right wing hysteria while farming clicks/views to monetise his political influencer career. I very much doubt he believed half of the rhetoric he came out with.
But fundamentally what happened yesterday was abhorrent. Right or left you should be allowed to air your views without the concern of violence coming your way, least of all on the horrific scale of what happened to Charlie.
What's happening in the US is pretty concerning to say the least. The polarised gulf between both ends of the spectrum is getting wider and these incidents only serve to increase that gap and entrench partisan views further.
I do feel it's lost as a country and the increasing tension which is building is only going to end in more mindless violence being committed.
That pretty all encompassing if most of how we all feel mateThis thread proves that there just can't and won't ever be and kind of discourse between left and right leaning individuals.
Charlie Kirk came out with a lot of pretty batshit things, that's undeniable. He was the poster boy for American Conservatism and genuinely some of his views were like he was sucked out of 1957 - largely to whip up right wing hysteria while farming clicks/views to monetise his political influencer career. I very much doubt he believed half of the rhetoric he came out with.
But fundamentally what happened yesterday was abhorrent. Right or left you should be allowed to air your views without the concern of violence coming your way, least of all on the horrific scale of what happened to Charlie.
What's happening in the US is pretty concerning to say the least. The polarised gulf between both ends of the spectrum is getting wider and these incidents only serve to increase that gap and entrench partisan views further.
I do feel it's lost as a country and the increasing tension which is building is only going to end in more mindless violence being committed.
That is good advice for yourself.
then he either didn't know what the word meant or he was being misleading which for a bloke that supported the conspiracy theories he did, would not be a surprise.
Yes, strong remainer beliefs
Some people found her very polarising. She was very outspoken
The person committing the violence but and it’s quite a big one we have laws about inciting hatred and inciting violence so there’s clearly some aspects of what we do that does contribute to something
Nothing (but you have to be careful with this as there are caveats) excuses the taking of another persons life)
Apart from maybe war
Self defence
Defending someone else
If they’ve already taken someone’s life - death penalty
You can see how it’s not binary I mean dom and others want people guilty of sexual assault to be killed
Funny because I don't remember Jo Cox ever saying that a few deaths (presumably including school children and other innocents) were worth it to retain the rights of every man and his dog to hold lethal weapons.
I don't remember her supporting the attempted violent overthrow of a democratically elected government.
Equating Jo Cox to Charlie Kirk is, frankly, an absolute insult to her.
Similarly with Owen Jones or if you prefer Boris Johnson or other 'polarising' figures on the right or left. None of them have ever advocated for political violence or suggested that a few schoolchildren dying was a fair price for their chosen beliefs (I draw the line here at those suggesting that sinking boats in the middle of the Channel is somehow acceptable).
Just to avoid doubt, violence is never the answer to anything, and I would never advocate for it. But if Kirk was content to accept the deaths of others to protect second amendment rights, am I supposed to feel sorry that he's now one of them?
Perhaps he wasn't thinking of himself when he said it, but in essence it seems that he's just died for his cause.
If it troubles you, do what he did for all of those children that died in school shootings - pray for him.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?