They truly are unhinged mentally deranged people.
Consider the following.
Charles H.F. Davis, a professor at the University of Michigan, immediately posted this about Mr. Kirk’s murder: “Violence … is a solution, especially to … violent rhetoric.”
MSNBC’s Matthew Dowd added that he believed Charlie Kirk was one of our country’s “most divisive” figures. Charlie, he said, “was constantly sort of pushing this sort of hate speech. Hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which then lead to hateful actions.”
CBS’s Nate Burleson jumped in and condemned what he called Kirk’s “rhetoric,” claiming it was “offensive.”
Then there’s the story of the Democrats in the House of Representatives who stunningly villainized the victim by refusing to even participate in a brief prayer for his wife and children.
The list goes on and on, with tens of thousands of the “tolerant” and woke crowd on Bluesky, X, Facebook and Instagram chiming in, not just to blame Charlie for his own assassination but also to celebrate his death.
Now, the obvious question should be: What was it Charlie Kirk said that warranted all this “contextualization,” animosity and vitriol?
Well, here’s a list of some of the topics Charlie addressed repeatedly on college campuses across the country.
First, he opposed killing babies. Charlie believed in the dignity of every human being, and he worked tirelessly to stop the powerful from compromising the lives of the weak.
Second, Charlie condemned the genital mutilation of children and the chemical sterilization of minors, and he challenged all comers to tell him how it could possibly be a good thing to sacrifice the innocence of little boys and girls on the altar of adult sexual nihilism.
Third, Charlie defended the traditional family. He told young men their first duty was to be responsible fathers and faithful husbands. He also spoke against the misogyny of males intruding in female sports and the science-denying nonsense of telling little boys that they can become girls and vice versa.
Fourth, Charlie championed legal immigration and the rule of law. He believed that all criminals should be punished and argued that we should judge people by the content of their character and not the color of their skin.
Fifth, Charlie was a proponent of free speech and religious liberty. He believed in the ideas of our Founding Fathers, and he challenged college students across the country to read them before they disparaged them. Sixth, Charlie cherished honest dialogue and a robust debate. He practiced what he preached by including everybody, even those who disagreed with him the most. He believed respectful conversations were better than intransigence. He thought debate was better than trigger warnings, deplatforming, censorship and “safe spaces.”
Finally, and most important, Charlie spoke openly about being a sinful man in need of God’s grace and that the only thing that matters in the end is repentance and confession. He didn’t think he was better than anyone else, and he, in fact, modeled the words of John Newton: “I remember two things. … I am a great sinner, and Christ is a great savior.”
In other words, Charlie Kirk was a Christian. He grounded nearly everything he said in this worldview and invited everyone to the conversation. He gave them a microphone. He gave them his time. He gave them an audience. And then he politely told them whether he agreed or disagreed.
For this and this alone, Charlie Kirk was executed.
The left’s evil response to Charlie Kirk’s murder
Have you ever questioned the Judeo-Christian teaching that mankind is evil? Have you ever recoiled at the Old Testament’s claim that “the heart is deceitful above all things” or felt uncomfortable with St. Paul’s accusation that, apart from Christ, all of us suffer the curse of a “reprobate mind”? Well, if you have, then the response to Charlie Kirk’s assassination last week should remove all doubt. We are indeed a wicked and broken race.Consider the following.
Charles H.F. Davis, a professor at the University of Michigan, immediately posted this about Mr. Kirk’s murder: “Violence … is a solution, especially to … violent rhetoric.”
MSNBC’s Matthew Dowd added that he believed Charlie Kirk was one of our country’s “most divisive” figures. Charlie, he said, “was constantly sort of pushing this sort of hate speech. Hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which then lead to hateful actions.”
CBS’s Nate Burleson jumped in and condemned what he called Kirk’s “rhetoric,” claiming it was “offensive.”
Then there’s the story of the Democrats in the House of Representatives who stunningly villainized the victim by refusing to even participate in a brief prayer for his wife and children.
The list goes on and on, with tens of thousands of the “tolerant” and woke crowd on Bluesky, X, Facebook and Instagram chiming in, not just to blame Charlie for his own assassination but also to celebrate his death.
Now, the obvious question should be: What was it Charlie Kirk said that warranted all this “contextualization,” animosity and vitriol?
Well, here’s a list of some of the topics Charlie addressed repeatedly on college campuses across the country.
First, he opposed killing babies. Charlie believed in the dignity of every human being, and he worked tirelessly to stop the powerful from compromising the lives of the weak.
Second, Charlie condemned the genital mutilation of children and the chemical sterilization of minors, and he challenged all comers to tell him how it could possibly be a good thing to sacrifice the innocence of little boys and girls on the altar of adult sexual nihilism.
Third, Charlie defended the traditional family. He told young men their first duty was to be responsible fathers and faithful husbands. He also spoke against the misogyny of males intruding in female sports and the science-denying nonsense of telling little boys that they can become girls and vice versa.
Fourth, Charlie championed legal immigration and the rule of law. He believed that all criminals should be punished and argued that we should judge people by the content of their character and not the color of their skin.
Fifth, Charlie was a proponent of free speech and religious liberty. He believed in the ideas of our Founding Fathers, and he challenged college students across the country to read them before they disparaged them. Sixth, Charlie cherished honest dialogue and a robust debate. He practiced what he preached by including everybody, even those who disagreed with him the most. He believed respectful conversations were better than intransigence. He thought debate was better than trigger warnings, deplatforming, censorship and “safe spaces.”
Finally, and most important, Charlie spoke openly about being a sinful man in need of God’s grace and that the only thing that matters in the end is repentance and confession. He didn’t think he was better than anyone else, and he, in fact, modeled the words of John Newton: “I remember two things. … I am a great sinner, and Christ is a great savior.”
In other words, Charlie Kirk was a Christian. He grounded nearly everything he said in this worldview and invited everyone to the conversation. He gave them a microphone. He gave them his time. He gave them an audience. And then he politely told them whether he agreed or disagreed.
For this and this alone, Charlie Kirk was executed.
