RIP--Charlie Kirk

Gulfcoastguy · September 14

That happened at a highway ACCELERATION RAMP once in the 90’s. A couple parked their ghetto sled at the end of the ramp with low functioning tail lights on an overcast night. I did my best to get around them in the shoulder but just barely scratched their paint. I spent 6 months in Birmingham in the early 80’s . There you matched speed and merged. Traffic on the interstate made just enough space for you. They knew that you were coming in or were going to be shoved in by the vehicle behind you.

fishlessman · September 14

GrateEggspectations said:

alaskanassasin said:

I did see people stop at merges wtf is that! In Ohio there is always two more cars after a light turns red.

So dangerous. I see that pretty often here.

The other pet peeve of mine is being behind someone who merges on the highway at 30MPH.

There's people here who actually stop on the onramp to the highway here and wait for a half mile opening......

Canugghead · September 14

GrateEggspectations said:

alaskanassasin said:

I did see people stop at merges wtf is that! In Ohio there is always two more cars after a light turns red.

So dangerous. I see that pretty often here.

The other pet peeve of mine is being behind someone who merges on the highway at 30MPH.

You won't have that problem if you stop following so closely 😂

When I see someone like that ahead of me, I slow down proactively (keeping an eye on the guy behind me of course) to create even more space between us, so I can merge at a much higher speed. Problem solved.

Edit: apology to OP and Charlie for side-tracking

GrateEggspectations · September 14

I reckon I must have been following you, @Canugghead.

fishlessman · September 14

Canugghead said:

GrateEggspectations said:

alaskanassasin said:

I did see people stop at merges wtf is that! In Ohio there is always two more cars after a light turns red.

So dangerous. I see that pretty often here.

The other pet peeve of mine is being behind someone who merges on the highway at 30MPH.

You won't have that problem if you stop following so closely 😂

When I see someone like that ahead of me, I slow down proactively (keeping an eye on the guy behind me of course) to create even more space between us, so I can merge at a much higher speed. Problem solved.

Edit: apology to OP and Charlie for side-tracking

Pass on the left and punch it. Don't look back......

JohnInCarolina · September 14

I've been away for a bit but I guess I'm not surprised to see this thread. Much of what I would write in response has already been written by others, but on Kirk I do feel obligated to mention a few things that many of you probably aren't aware of.

I think there is still a lot we have to learn as to why he was shot in the first place, even though it seems that many want to ascribe it to a narrative that happens to fit their views of the world. But as far as I can see, everyone here agrees that Kirk shouldn't have been killed.

There seems to be much less agreement regarding Kirk's life and work. Some of you appear to believe he was a good person trying to influence young people at college campuses, maybe getting them to think differently about Christ's teachings, etc. While others have recounted some of the more hateful things he had to say. Maybe the truth is somewhere in between, since very few things are black and white. Then others, of course, hadn't heard of Kirk until last week.

I did know Charlie Kirk, but not for the reasons some of you might expect. I know Kirk because his organization maintains a "watch list" of professors across the US. It still exists, even now, after Kirk's death. I won't provide a link, but any one of you can find it easily using your favorite search engine.

Nominally the professors on Kirk's list are all supposed to be folks who have discriminated against conservative students or have advanced leftist agendas, or both. Sound familiar? It should, for any of you aware of McCarthyism. It seems that this has become a very American thing for our politics to do, even though it cuts against the very same free speech ideals Kirk claimed to be advocating.

I am aware of this list because I occupy a leadership role at my institution and, on some level, it is my job to know. But I also know because some of the Duke faculty on that list are people I've gotten to know over the years. There are in fact four Duke faculty currently on Kirk's list. Three of them are African Americans. The fourth is transgender. If it seems strange to you that out of a set of over a thousand faculty members the four Charlie Kirk's list has targeted are all under-represented minorities, well, I would suggest that maybe you don't actually know Charlie Kirk's life and work. I haven't looked at faculty at many other peer institutions but I have heard that the trend largely persists. I know Charlie Kirk as a hate merchant, and the worst version of that because he consistently targeted the most vulnerable among us. These are all folks who, to a person, have received death threats after being placed on Charlie's list. At other institutions, analogous faculty have lost their positions simply for appearing on the same.

And this particular instance of McCarthyism continues as I write this, with various faculty and teachers at schools around the US being targeted for firing for the thought crime of posting anything on social media that happens to suggest Kirk's life and work might not have been completely altruistic. As much as it seems we all agree that nobody should be shot and killed for their political beliefs, I'd hope the same concurrence extends to people losing their livelihoods for the same.

The hagiography of Charlie Kirk is a perverse thing, and indicative of a trend that, to me at least, leads nowhere good.

JIC out

lkapigian · September 14

Thanks @JohnInCarolina , always well written and thoughtful, while I dont follow much of this stuff, the “ hate” is what sticks out to me, guess I’m blind but I just don’t see an opinion as hate … but there is obviously a lot I don’t know

my house is like the Castro District most weekends, I am who I am and my daughter who I love with my heart and soul are what she and her friends are, we laugh and coexist

Canugghead · September 14

GrateEggspectations said:

I reckon I must have been following you, @Canugghead.

Aha, mystery of my asset kisser solved 😂

lousubcap · September 15

The above from @JohnInCarolina needs to be forwarded. We should seek all sides of the issues to then draw reasonable conclusions. And today this is especially true given the media bias across the spectrum which is generally focused on one side or the other. Reminds me of "Where you stand is where you sit."
We can only get out of this societal downward spiral if we choose to look outside our comfort and biased zones and then digest the information. The reality is somewhere in the middle, but that position won't reinforce either extremes.
Off mini-soap box.

Botch · September 15

This morning Fareed Zakaria did not have his usual hour show on CNN. I'd read that Gov Gavin Newsom had an hour-long interview with ck on his podcast, so I looked that up and watched it instead (like some others I was completely unfamiliar with him until the assassination).
The first third of the podcast was relatively cordial, but then it descended into both of them talking past each other, faster and faster, and I'll admit I couldn't keep up. They never even got into some of the issues I wanted to hear about, and frankly I wouldn't recommend you wasting an hour of anyone's day on it.
The only amusing thing I'll mention is that Newsom punctuates his speech with the occasional breaking of the third commandment (I actually got conflicting answers to this from Siri vs. Chat GPT!). ck called him out every single time, which I found amusing. fwiw

Legume · September 15

@Botch Third commandment "don't take the lord's name in vain" is commonly understood to mean don't use it an expletive or cuss.

I remember learning it's much broader than that and a quick search confirmed it.

From AI:

At its core, this commandment is about reverence—treating God's name with deep respect and not using it carelessly, falsely, or disrespectfully. But it goes far beyond just avoiding phrases like “Oh my God”:

Misuse in speech: Using God's name in curses, jokes, or casual expressions that strip it of its sacredness.
False oaths: Swearing by God's name to back up a lie or deceitful promise.
Hypocrisy: Claiming to represent God while acting in ways that contradict His character—this is seen as taking His name in vain through behavior.
Empty worship: Invoking God's name without genuine faith or intention, making it hollow or performative.

JohnInCarolina · September 15

lkapigian said:

Thanks @JohnInCarolina , always well written and thoughtful, while I dont follow much of this stuff, the “ hate” is what sticks out to me, guess I’m blind but I just don’t see an opinion as hate … but there is obviously a lot I don’t know

There are opinions and then there are statements like “trans people shouldn’t exist” and sentiments that effectively indicate the same, saying that stoning gay people was God’s best law, and calling for public executions of political opponents.

The man systematically and ruthlessly targeted members of marginalized groups, people least equipped to fight the powers of the state.

If that’s not hate then I don’t know what is, but regardless I refuse to sanitize it.

lkapigian · September 15

I know he spoke about stoning but in a broader context quoting Old Testament which is also done away with after the death of Christ , shame on him if he ever said that about the Trans community, as I said I don’t pay attention much to this stuff but I’ve never heard of him saying anything like that until now and if true is Not ok on Either Side

alaskanassasin · September 15

.

Gulfcoastguy · September 15

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/alastair-campbell-apologises-claiming-charlie-201734506.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

JohnInCarolina · September 15

Look if the quote about stoning gays being "God's perfect law when it comes to sexual matters" is taken out of context, then that's my bad.

Unfortunately when it comes to Kirk, there is no shortage of terrible things he said about gay, lesbian, and trans people.

Gulfcoastguy · September 15

Well let the dead speak.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FJmcqjP8mhk&pp=ygUwQ2hhcmxpZSBraXJrIHRhbGtpbmcgdG8gZ2F5IGNvbnNlcnZhdGl2ZSBzdHVkZW50

JohnInCarolina · September 15

Yeah, what a righteous dude.

Someone pass the smelling salts...

fishlessman · September 15

so whos heading to arizona this weekend

Ozzie_Isaac · September 15

Canugghead said:

Ozzie_Isaac said:

CupCakeEater said:

FlyOverCountry said:

Where are the lies? This is all just common cents. He was kilt for telling kids that college is no place for free thoughts a big ideas. Its to expansive for that. If you want to learn big ideas clean toilets at Walmart for ten years.

The lies come from the half posted remarks. That’s a typical tactic. You don’t show it in reference. Just like the empathy reference. He said he didn’t like the word because it’s was a reference to a person feeling what the person hurting feels. He stated you can’t feel what they feel so he preferred the word sympathy. This is no different than how people pull a snippet from the Bible and use it as proof without showing the entire message.

The statement about black women was also not truthful. He was only talking about a few individuals that used affirmative action to get a job. He never used the term “black women” as a collective group. Just showing that these individuals received their jobs because of their skin color and not their merit.

I voted for Trump - a massive regret. I have found that when I put his quotes in context or watch the entire video it is way worse than I could have imagined.

He is an objectively awful human being and a hate filled megalomaniac. I voted for my pocket book while ignoring everything else.

Hopefully our Democracy lasts long enough for me to try and make amends. Not sure we will even make it to the midterms, and that rests at the feet of Trump and his machine that ignores the constitution and ignores the rule of law - not to mention human decency at every single step.

Ignore everything else, how did that work out for you, or is it too early to tell? Just curious.

Oh it didn’t work out at all. Awful decision making process with terrible consequences.

Canugghead · September 15

^^^my Dislike. Sorry to hear that.

GrateEggspectations · September 15

@Ozzie_Isaac

Appreciate your candour on this point. Bet only a small proportion would admit to this sentiment.

Ozzie_Isaac · September 15

Canugghead said:

^^^my Dislike. Sorry to hear that.

You reap what you sow. Unfortunately the people who will pay the most for Trump’s policies are my daughter and every non-white male cisgender person. He is decimating everything to enrich himself.

Back to Kirk - here is a good clip that kind sums it up for me: (Will also admit I didn’t actually know who he was, my kids did. I’m also not 100% sure what the truth is about him. He seems purposely inflammatory which is a decent debate method to get people to listen, but makes it hard to know where he actual stood and most people - me included - don’t listen long enough to actually understand his point. We live in an age of sound bites)

https://x.com/etanthomas36/status/1967311612559413483?s=46

Botch · September 15

Legume said:

@Botch Third commandment "don't take the lord's name in vain" is commonly understood to mean don't use it an expletive or cuss.

I remember learning it's much broader than that and a quick search confirmed it.
From AI:
At its core, this commandment is about reverence—treating God's name with deep respect and not using it carelessly, falsely, or disrespectfully. But it goes far beyond just avoiding phrases like “Oh my God”:
Misuse in speech: Using God's name in curses, jokes, or casual expressions that strip it of its sacredness.
False oaths: Swearing by God's name to back up a lie or deceitful promise.
Hypocrisy: Claiming to represent God while acting in ways that contradict His character—this is seen as taking His name in vain through behavior.
Empty worship: Invoking God's name without genuine faith or intention, making it hollow or performative.

Thanks; here's the response I got from Siri, hence my confusion:

JohnInCarolina · September 15

Ozzie_Isaac · September 15

Botch said:

Legume said:

@Botch Third commandment "don't take the lord's name in vain" is commonly understood to mean don't use it an expletive or cuss.

I remember learning it's much broader than that and a quick search confirmed it.
From AI:
At its core, this commandment is about reverence—treating God's name with deep respect and not using it carelessly, falsely, or disrespectfully. But it goes far beyond just avoiding phrases like “Oh my God”:
Misuse in speech: Using God's name in curses, jokes, or casual expressions that strip it of its sacredness.
False oaths: Swearing by God's name to back up a lie or deceitful promise.
Hypocrisy: Claiming to represent God while acting in ways that contradict His character—this is seen as taking His name in vain through behavior.
Empty worship: Invoking God's name without genuine faith or intention, making it hollow or performative.

Thanks; here's the response I got from Siri, hence my confusion:

I never made it past the 1st Commandment, unfortunately. I did buy I did buy the ten pack of Indulgences.

Legume · September 15

That was the fourth @Botch, but I'm not sure if any have since been removed by executive order.

Botch · September 15

Well, according to this list (from a site called Hallow):

The Ten Commandments: Listed in Order

The Ten Commandments are as famous as they are powerful:

I am the LORD your God; you shall not have strange gods before me.
You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.
Remember to keep holy the LORD’s Day.
Honor your father and mother.
You shall not kill.
You shall not commit adultery.
You shall not steal.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.
You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods.

I remembered from Catechism the first three dealt with our relationship to god, and the last seven about our relationship to each other, just couldn’t remember the order of two and three, and got different answers.

JohnInCarolina · September 15

Why is that ironic, you might ask? Well…

Legume · September 15

Botch said:

Well, according to this list (from a site called Hallow):

The Ten Commandments: Listed in Order
The Ten Commandments are as famous as they are powerful:
I am the LORD your God; you shall not have strange gods before me.
You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.
Remember to keep holy the LORD’s Day.
Honor your father and mother.
You shall not kill.
You shall not commit adultery.
You shall not steal.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.
You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods.
I remembered from Catechism the first three dealt with our relationship to god, and the last seven about our relationship to each other, just couldn’t remember the order of two and three, and got different answers.

Well, I just dove into the interwebs and found

a) the original commandments were not numbered (Mel Brooks History of the World was wrong),

b) Catholics and Lutherans follow one numbering scheme, Protestants and Orthodox Christian churches follow another numbering scheme, both have origins in different parts of the old testament and they split/combine things so that there are 10, it’s not just a different order.

I wonder which version is being pushed into schools?

RIP--Charlie Kirk

Comments

The Ten Commandments: Listed in Order

The Ten Commandments: Listed in Order

Categories