First of all, let’s get something straight. Charlie Kirk, the right-wing political commentator, influencer, and figure who was shot and killed last weekend during one of his infamous public forums had stances which I agree with.
Most notably, his views on gun rights and the second amendment.
But he also had stances which I vehemently disagreed with, some so abhorrent, any positive emotions I had for the man are completely erased at the thought of how disgusting or morally unacceptable his comments were.
Let’s start with some examples.
At a Turning Point USA event in 2023, Kirk said that he believed gun deaths are “worth it” to have a Second Amendment.
“We must also be real. We must be honest with the population. Having an armed citizenry comes with a price, and that is part of liberty… We need to be very clear that you’re not going to get gun deaths to zero. It will not happen. But I think it’s worth it. I think it’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year, so that we can have the Second Amendment,” he said.
While I wholeheartedly agree with his statement, it’s important to understand that many who make these types of comments don’t make them in earnest, or ever conceive the notion that they themselves may just become part of the statistics.
On his self-titled radio talk show, Kirk expressed his dislike of the word “empathy.”
“I can’t stand the word empathy, actually,” he said. “I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that does a lot of damage.”
Interesting take considering the slew of his supporters complaining on social media about the lack of empathy from his political opponents.
Appearing on Jubilee’s internet show Surrounded, Kirk insisted Black people were “better” in the 1940s under Jim Crow laws.
While debating a college student, Kirk said, “They were actually better in the 1940s. It was bad. It was evil. But what happened? Something changed. They committed less crimes.”
The person he debated responded, “4,000 Black men, women, and children were killed in violent lynch mobs. Racial terror permeated American culture for hundreds of years. You don’t think that affected the generational psyche of an entire group of people?”
“Black America is worse than it has been in the last 80 years,” he interrupted.
A truly out of touch comment from a man who had never experienced the struggles of being a black American, even in this day and age.
During this same Jubilee episode, Kirk was asked what he would want his daughter to do if she were 10 years old and pregnant following rape.
After calling the scenario graphic, he responds, “The answer is yes. The baby would be delivered.”
Truly one of the most vile and apprehensible views any human being can take is that of forcing a child who has already been through the life changing suffering of being raped and impregnated to then be forced to carry out the birth. I see no problem with people who view the world this way being erased from its existence.
While I am not a proponent of abortion, there are limits, and this is most certainly one of them.
At a Turning Point USA event, Kirk suggested trans people are wearing the gender equivalent of “Black face.”
He said, “A man who calls himself trans is wearing ‘woman face,’ no different than I would wear Black face trying to be a Black person. It’s assuming an identity that isn’t yours.”
I believe every adult human being, regardless of mental state, deserves the right to live life how they choose as long as that choice does not directly harm the life of another. That same view applies to transgenders regardless if those decision alter their bodies permanently.
To compare it to wearing black face is not only laughable, but again, extremely out of touch from a privileged white guy who grew up in the suburbs.
On his radio show, Kirk not only said that Joy Reid, Michelle Obama, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Ketanji Brown Jackson are “affirmative action picks”..
He also said that those women “do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person’s slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.”
These statements, along with others he had made regarding blacks clearly demonstrated that he was a racist. It is no wonder he was hated by so many who actually paid attention to his content.
I won’t waste time disputing his claims as modern science beat me to it long ago.
After Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce announced their engagement, Kirk fantasized about Kelce making Swift “more conservative” and begged the pop star to “submit to her husband.”
“This is something that I hope will make Taylor Swift more conservative,” he said. “Engage in reality more… Reject feminism. Submit to your husband, Taylor. You’re not in charge.”
A very interesting comment, considering his now widowed wife is taking charge of continuing his “mission”.
Maybe she should listen to her ex-husband and submit like a good little housewife.
Following the tragic January collision between an American Airlines plane and a Black Hawk Army helicopter, Donald Trump suggested diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts were at fault. Kirk added to this, saying:
“If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, ‘Boy, I hope he’s qualified.'”
If Kirk’s previous controversial statements weren’t enough to qualify him as a racist in your eyes, let this one add fuel to the recently extinguished fire.
Following the release of an NBC poll illustrating the difference in priorities between Gen Z’ers — which showed that Gen Z women who voted for Kamala Harris see having a fulfilling career as a marker of success — Kirk said, “Democrat women want to die alone without children.”
Kirk must have been under the impression that it is just Democratic women who are childless. A very uninformed stance considering the likes of right-wing media personalities such as Tomi Lahren and Laura Ingram.
And let’s be totally honest here. Birth rates are falling across the globe in all demographics, for very good reasons.
Kirk repeatedly spread misinformation surrounding the death of George Floyd, who experts say died from an officer applying their knee to his neck. Instead, Kirk, who is not a medical examiner and did not examine Floyd’s body, said his death was caused by “overdose.”
I’m no fan of George Floyd and I certainly never supported him being propped up as some kind of hero for the black communities, but he clearly did not die from an overdose. He was murdered by a police officer who had a history of partaking in violence against minorities.
That same ex-officer is rightly serving twenty two and a half years sentence for his crimes. A light punishment if you ask me.
Kirk wanted to raise the age of retirement, and didn’t think people should retire at all.
“Now, I will say that for future retirees, people under the age of 45, we should absolutely raise the retirement age. I’m going to say something very provocative. I’m not a fan of retirement. I don’t think retirement is biblical,” he said. “You say, ‘Charlie, I’m just gonna retire and I’m just gonna go golf.’ I think, what a waste of the gifts that God has given you.”
To think that hundreds of millions of lazy people across the United States would actually want to enjoy their lives after spending most of it as a working class slave. How could they even fathom such an idea? What are they going to call it, the American Dream?
What would Jesus say?
And finally, but certainly not last:
During Pride Month, children’s show host Ms. Rachel, aka Rachel Griffin-Accurso, wished followers a happy Pride and responded to subsequent backlash by quoting the Bible and expressing the importance of “[loving] every neighbor.”
In response, Kirk attempted to cite the Bible to prove a point about his anti-gay views, but he ultimately misquoted a mixture of passages from Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13.
He said, “Thou shall lay with another man, shall be stoned to death. Just saying… The chapter…affirms God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matter.”
I’m pretty sure that’s not what it says in the Bible word for word, but hey, Charlie can ask the big man himself now.
Although, I doubt that’s where he’s headed..
Cancel Culture Is Back
Hundreds of thousands of people have poured their opinions on to social media sites such as X and TikTok regarding his death.
Some positive, and some negative.
Some call him a hero, similar to the likes of Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X, an ironic comparison given his racist ideology.
Others praising his death.
Some right-wing social media users are even taking things to the extreme, by attempting to report the identities of those online supporting his death (or simply criticizing him) to employers and writing negative reviews of businesses.
Vice President JD Vance has even called for the same actions.
I guess cancel culture is only wrong when the left does it.
The Trump administration has even promised to crack down on left leaning groups who “promote violence”. I’m sure they views this as quite the distraction from the recent debacle involving the Epstein files and are happy to shift the conversation.
Should Someone Be Killed for Their Political Views?
I have seen this question pop up all over right-wing feeds and have been asked by many Kirk supporters in posts myself over the past few days.
The question of rather someone’s life should be ended over their opinions isn’t a question, it is a reality. Throughout human history, people have been killed for their views. To ask such a thing is asinine.
Should Adolf Hitler have been killed for his views on genocide of entire ethnic groups? Should Muammar Gaddafi, Julius Ceasar, and other dictators such as Benito Mussolini be assassinated for their views that authoritarian rule and oppression over a population was not wrong? Should serial killers such as Ted Bundy be given the death penalty because they believe it is okay to strip others of their lives for mere sport? Should child rapists and murderers like Peter Scully or Jeffrey Epstein be given the death penalty for ripping the innocence and lives away from children?
The answer is yes. These people have proven to be a harm to the general population and fail to meet the ethical standards required to maintain a civil society. Although imprisonment is preferable, sometimes it’s just not practical.
This argument is not only a slippery slope which leads to a stance that supports a morally inept society, it is a useless argument as it is an undeniable fact that popular opinion generally leads to policies or laws being created. These laws have an impact on the lives of others, and in many cases, a negative one.
Those negative impacts often create disenfranchised groups. Amongst those groups will always be someone who sees violence as the only real solution.
And sometimes, they are right.
Given that, did Charlie Kirk deserve to be assassinated?
In my opinion, the world will be a better place without him.
- Why Charlie Kirk Got What He Deserved - September 16, 2025
- MAGA Went from Attacking Pedophiles to Protecting Them - September 15, 2025
- The New AI World Order Is Expected to Eliminate a Billion Jobs by 2030 - August 2, 2025
