He's flossin, right?
He's flossin, right?
so Dom's back and he's angrier than ever. Sad.
View attachment 46178
I totally agree. The answer to hate is not hate.
View attachment 46180
Just that there are some pretty hateful things said in there.
Yeah. Totally agree.Think I’ve said before, I’d always be careful taking one sentence quotes from a whole debate, especially when the bible was in the discussion. This has been a real issue post kirks death, in some weird way to justify the assassination. He did say some unsavoury, outdated stuff (mainly related to his strong Christian beliefs) and a lot which I personally dont agree with but I saw Alastair Campbell having to apologise for taking his views from a misquoted sentence. I’ve also seen enough stuff on socials over the last couple of weeks to know some of those quotes arent direct quotes or are out of context and are even the opposite of what he believed
I say this as someone who hadn’t really heard of him before his death but from what I’ve seen there’s been some intentional misrepresentation of what and how stuff was said (not from you Otis but whoever compiled that list)
All I’d say to anyone using social media, if you see a clip or a quote have a look for the full conversation before forming a judgment. That goes for all sides of a debate
Even in context of a debate, the things he said are abhorrent and wrong. Just because he's a Christian and taking about the Bible does not excuse what he saidThink I’ve said before, I’d always be careful taking one sentence quotes from a whole debate, especially when the bible was in the discussion. This has been a real issue post kirks death, in some weird way to justify the assassination. He did say some unsavoury, outdated stuff (mainly related to his strong Christian beliefs) and a lot which I personally dont agree with but I saw Alastair Campbell having to apologise for taking his views from a misquoted sentence. I’ve also seen enough stuff on socials over the last couple of weeks to know some of those quotes arent direct quotes or are out of context and are even the opposite of what he believed
I say this as someone who hadn’t really heard of him before his death but from what I’ve seen there’s been some intentional misrepresentation of what and how stuff was said (not from you Otis but whoever compiled that list)
All I’d say to anyone using social media, if you see a clip or a quote have a look for the full conversation before forming a judgment. That goes for all sides of a debate
He has indeed.Even in context of a debate, the things he said are abhorrent and wrong. Just because he's a Christian and taking about the Bible does not excuse what he said
Whilst nothing justifies his murder, we should also not be absolving the things he said and that he has helped sow hate and division.
Even in context of a debate, the things he said are abhorrent and wrong. Just because he's a Christian and taking about the Bible does not excuse what he said
Whilst nothing justifies his murder, we should also not be absolving the things he said and that he has helped sow hate and division.
Youre too kind much like Paul I’m a pretty terrible person and fall way short of who I desire to beHe has indeed.
It's hard isn't it. I get that things can be taken out of context and he may well not have said those direct words. But it is what he believes isn't it
Pete, on here, I think is a very decent Christian..
The fundamental, hard line Christians though, especially in the US, would clearly love us to move to a Gilead type world.
As far as I am concerned, the Bible was written by men, for men and that's why women are always subjugated and shouldn't hold any sort of power and should obey their husbands etc. in these people's minds
I do believe that anyone who says homosexuals should be stoned to death, is a hateful person.
Most Christians and moved on and seen that times have changed and the Bible is always open to interpretation.
Well, it clearly is, because God said though shalt not kill and these fundamentalist people are quite happy to kill people
We have moved so far in terms of women's rights and acceptance of gays. It seems that these people want to tear that all up
I actually was chatting to a trans person the other day. The son of a shop owner I know
He fully transitioned from a woman, having been born female and now lives as a man and has a girlfriend etc
Anyway, he was saying how hurtful all this stuff is and how he is staring to live in fear.
Always does Pride and says this was the first ever year he has encountered any trouble
Got a lot of verbal abuse and this was from religious protestors that had turned up
Anyway, I must read up more on Kirk, but he does come across as quite a hateful person. But Steve is right,t I should look at the whole segment and not just one line quotes
Slack is cut and ‘oh but the context’ is requested for some people but not others. It’s right that what Kirk says is heard in full, but that same courtesy isn’t extended to plenty on the other side.My point was that Kirk was misrepresented with some of those quotes above. If youre talking about the bible and quotes included the bible there’s going to be some stuff that’s abhorrent in this day and age. Have debates about his actual beliefs, some of which will be justifiably be pulled apart but why intentionally misrepresent/take stuff out of context ? This is the world we live in though
I’ve seen the actual conversation and Kirk is talking about what it says in the bible not what he believes.
Slack is cut and ‘oh but the context’ is requested for some people but not others. It’s right that what Kirk says is heard in full, but that same courtesy isn’t extended to plenty on the other side.
Why? Because he was on the right side of the political popularity contest.
Y
Youre too kind much like Paul I’m a pretty terrible person and fall way short of who I desire to be
That's just one example. There are plenty of others that context does not absolve. Here's just some examples of his racist bile.My point was that Kirk was misrepresented with some of those quotes above. If youre talking about the bible and quotes included the bible there’s going to be some stuff that’s abhorrent in this day and age. Have debates about his actual beliefs, some of which will be justifiably be pulled apart but why intentionally misrepresent/take stuff out of context ? This is the world we live in though
I’ve seen the actual conversation and Kirk is talking about what it says in the bible not what he believes.
You can talk about ‘both sides’ but from my perspective one gets cut a lot more slack than the other and the Kirk case is a good example.Both sides are letting themselves down and that’s why we’re living in such a polarised society. I always look someone’s profile on X before taking what is said as read these days as you just can’t believe anything you read. It’s almost impossible to get just facts, everything’s with a slant or opinion
Fine, but then that doesn't make sense.My point was that Kirk was misrepresented with some of those quotes above. If youre talking about the bible and quotes included the bible there’s going to be some stuff that’s abhorrent in this day and age. Have debates about his actual beliefs, some of which will be justifiably be pulled apart but why intentionally misrepresent/take stuff out of context ? This is the world we live in though
I’ve seen the actual conversation and Kirk is talking about what it says in the bible not what he believes.
That's just one example. There are plenty of others that context does not absolve.
Fine, but then that doesn't make sense.
If he believes that the Bible is the word of God,.then why doesn't he believe it.
Selective cherry picking
Yes, so they pick and choose which bits of the scripture they like.Haha, I dont really follow the bible but I’d imagine most that do don’t believe gay people should be stoned
That's just one example. There are plenty of others that context does not absolve. Here's just some examples of his racist bile.
Charlie Kirk in his own words: ‘prowling Blacks’ and ‘the great replacement strategy’
The far-right commentator didn’t pull his punches when discussing his bigoted views on current eventswww.theguardian.com
So they don't believe in the word of God?Haha, I dont really follow the bible but I’d imagine most that do don’t believe gay people should be stoned
"Prowling blacks? " That's pretty vile and disgusting.That's just one example. There are plenty of others that context does not absolve. Here's just some examples of his racist bile.
Charlie Kirk in his own words: ‘prowling Blacks’ and ‘the great replacement strategy’
The far-right commentator didn’t pull his punches when discussing his bigoted views on current eventswww.theguardian.com
So they don't believe in the word of God?
I have indeed. Not sure I said "devout" though. Can't remember saying that bit. If I did, I'm sure you will correct me.Have you not frequently made defence of devout Muslims declaring those you know are some of the nicest people you have met?
I have indeed. Not sure I said "devout" though. Can't remember saying that bit. If I did, I'm sure you will correct me.
I do know a lot about Christianity. I was a choir boy and former regular church goer and then I went out with an Evangelist for quite some time and we used to read the Bible together (she wanted to convert me and I agreed to read through as much as I possibly could.) We split because of the difference in belief, or lack of.
I don't know much about Islam at all. I can only tell you of the people I know.
I find all religion very selective. THIS is the word of God. It's ALL the word of God ...oh, except for this bit.
Yeah, sure. This is why I pretty much dislike all religion.I think you probably are aware of the Islamic views of homosexuality which permeates through its actual legislation in many of its countries
That’s right I don’t think the danger is Islam it’s religious fundamentalism in fact all sorts of fanatical extremism are an issueYeah, sure. This is why I pretty much dislike all religion.
I do know of Muslims though who though don't believe homosexuality is right, but accept it, as part of our way of life over here.
On all sides, it is the fundamental religious groups that carry out the biggest threat, because they want to take us all back to those thousands of years old scriptures.
I know there is a problem within Islam. It's plain to see. I also know though that there are an awful lot of Muslim people they have come over here and integrated into society.
One of the Muslim guy's I talked about before, joined the British Army.
Most religious people I know, just do their own thing and don't bother anyone.That’s right I don’t think the danger is Islam it’s religious fundamentalism in fact all sorts of fanatical extremism are an issue
I find it very strange the number of 'I'm not defending him but..." posts that are all over social media. If one or two things on a big long list of abhorrent things someone has said are slightly out of context it doesn't redeem the person so why the need to concentrate on that?You can talk about ‘both sides’ but from my perspective one gets cut a lot more slack than the other and the Kirk case is a good example.
South Park got it bang on. Trigger the libs, but edit out the ones who actually give you a rebuttal or a refutation. Stephen Crowder who is very similar made the mistake of leaving up such a case and he took a bit of a knock. The guy who made a 'change my mind' series but never looked once like he was actually open to having his mind changed because he thinks that makes him look weak, when it's the opposite.I find it very strange the number of 'I'm not defending him but..." posts that are all over social media. If one or two things on a big long list of abhorrent things someone has said are slightly out of context it doesn't redeem the person so why the need to concentrate on that?
It can only really be to try and force a narrative that actually he wasn't really a guy who held horrific views he was just misunderstood.
The same thing is being done with the rallies he held. If you watch them they are clearly set up so that the person who has agreed to debate him is harangued and ridiculed but this style of 'debate' is now being presented as a willingness to listen to both sides. He was in no way willing to listen to views that didn't match his. Listen to the people who were on one of the lists compiled as targets talk about how their personal and professional lives have been destroyed once he set his army of followers on them.
You really are a sad insufferable wanker aren’t youSouth Park got it bang on. Trigger the libs, but edit out the ones who actually give you a rebuttal or a refutation. Stephen Crowder who is very similar made the mistake of leaving up such a case and he took a bit of a knock. The guy who made a 'change my mind' series but never looked once like he was actually open to having his mind changed because he thinks that makes him look weak, when it's the opposite.
Debating, or at least the mass produced internet/TV ones, are more about who projects more confidence than who has won the battle of ideas. No denying that Kirk and other right wing grifters were skilled at it.
You stopped crying yet, saddoReplies in one minute! Keep telling people they're on here all the time, though. Maybe ask 'your mate' for a new joke, innit.
When the bait fails, just call people wankers and hope for the best. The WUM equivalent of knocking it long for an equaliser in stoppage timeYou really are a sad insufferable wanker aren’t you
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?