Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
No bio...
User ID: 863
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
What is the alternative? If one is not a moral relativist this position is something of a necessity.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
Kirk recognized the political expediencies necessary to have the reach he does. No one doubted he was a savvy operator.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
Sure. People in the past often had pretty values, I think. I reserve judgement about whether any of their deaths was "sad" but I think lionizing them as moral paragons would be bad.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
Do you think anyone unwilling to say that God made a mistake in the Book of Leviticus is a bad person, undeserving of sympathy if they are murdered?
Yea. I think if you believe it is a moral imperative to stone gay people to death you are a bad person.
And as I asked above, do you think such Jews and Christians therefore and necessarily want to go out and stone homosexuals?
I am sure there are practical reasons (they will go to jail) they don't want to.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
I do not expect everyone to agree with me from the jump, as this thread illustrates. It is a progressive argument. Once we agree there are some cases where it's appropriate we can haggle over the line.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
What do you mean by "observant"? I suspect lots of people who conceive of themselves as observant pick and choose what part of their holy book they endorse. Does that make them not "observant"? In Kirk's case specifically, he is the one who brought up not believing in stoning gay people as an example of hypocrisy.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
Can you point me to where I justify him being shot? I think Kirk was a shitty person who doesn't deserve to be posthumously lionized and I have made no secret of that. That doesn't mean he deserved to be murdered!
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
Incredibly damning that quoting Kirk's words or showing clips of him speaking is "villainizing" him.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
Incredible mind reading powers you have. I chose the examples I did because they illustrate there are cases where ~everyone agrees there are dead that it is fine to speak ill of.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
I don't. If you think they were shitty and did shitty things you should feel free to say so.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
I think it a dumb norm generally. One that does a lot of harm and we should do away with. This is not specific to my political enemies. Do you think we should avoid speaking ill of, even flattering, Jeffrey Epstein? Joseph Stalin? Mao Zedong? They are all dead!
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
Ok, but I don't think Kirk was a hypocrite. Do you think he understood himself, in that clip, to be saying something like "Ms. Rachel agrees with Leviticus 19 but not Leviticus 18... and so do I!" That he was a hypocrite about the bible in the same way he was criticizing? I rather think he believed it was a criticism that would not apply to himself, which entails taking scripture more seriously, and in this specific case agreeing with the part of scripture he brought up as an example.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
Clip for the gay thing (I slightly misquoted) along with some additional context in this comment.
Ultimately, that claims boils down to Kirk said mean things about public figures based on a response from said public figures. You could say my summary is too charitable, I will respond that the other summary is too uncharitable, so one should look at the quote in context and make the decision for themselves how bad what Kirk said really is.
Yea I guess these public figures talking about how affirmative action helped them really forced Kirk into describing them as "not hav[ing] the brain power to be taken seriously." How could he have done anything else!
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
They are also often assholes about it.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
Why?
Because he was not a very nice person? He was very often a rude asshole. Please, watch this clip and tell me Kirk in it could be described as "kind" and "nice."
Wouldn't you want someone who believes in God's law in stoning people like you to death to make arguments to peacefully convince others through persuasion that this is correct?
No I would prefer they shut up and keep their opinions to themselves.
The most likely alternative to that seems to be using violence to actually enact God's law (something that we know God's followers have historically not been shy about doing). And that tends to be less pleasant - and often more effective, sadly - than argumentation pretty often.
I don't know. I get the sense that if Kirk personally tried to enact God's law the most likely outcome is he would be dead or in prison from the attempt. That could be better than convincing a large number of people that gay people should be stoned to death for being gay.
Like, maybe his opinions were evil or beyond the pale or whatever. But he did seem rather nice and kind in how he tried to persuade people of his evil opinions. I think if both people with evil and good opinions decided to emulate his way of being nice and kind while commentating, I think America would be a better, safer place, especially for the types of people that would unfairly suffer if all the people who thought like Kirk decided to eschew scruples around niceness and kindness.
I defy you to watch the clip above and tell me that Kirk is "nice" and "kind" in it.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
If you think it was wrong to kill Kirk for his speech (as I do) then that's fine. If you want to go on to talk about what a great commentator he was and how kind and gentle and worthy of emulation he is, maybe you should quote some of the things he actually said.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
Here is the clip where describes the section of Leviticus 18 about stoning men who have sex with men to death as part of "God's perfect law".
Here is the clip where he makes the comments about Ketanji Brown Jackson and others.
Edit for your edit:
The broader context in the clip above is that Kirk is criticizing Ms. Rachel for selectively quoting parts of Leviticus that she likes and ignoring the parts she doesn't. With the implication this makes her faith or invocation less sincere or authentic. That she is a hypocrite. For this to function as a contrast it would have to be the case that Kirk does not do the same thing, otherwise what is the point? Ms. Rachel selectively quotes scripture, just like me! So Kirk must either be consistent about believing the commands in Leviticus, presumably including the one he brings up, or his point in bringing it up is incoherent because it applies just as much to himself.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
Charlie Kirk believed it was part of God's perfect moral law that people who are my friends, my family, my coworkers should be stoned to death. He described Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown-Jackson (and other black women) as affirmative action hires who stole their spots from white people and who don't have the brain processing power to be taken seriously. This whole attempt to lionize Kirk after his death has been extremely black pulling, as a leftist. Basically none of the articles that try to do so can actually mention things Kirk said or believed because if they did their audience would not think he was worth lionizing! He didn't deserve to get killed for his views but this attempt to pretend Kirk was just the nicest kindest commentator we should all seek to emulate is insane.
I do not disagree with the idea people can be different degrees of bad.
More options
Context Copy link