I have never liked Charlie Kirk.
He was a well-spoken, educated, and talented orator. He was
active in conservative youth circles and developed a reputation early in his
career for galvanizing right-leaning people further into the cause. He used his
skills to deftly steer debates and conversations into treatises on what we call
the Project 2025 platform: the doctrine based around a successful reelection of
Donald Trump and the implementation of far-right policy into law. By this
doctrine, Charlie Kirk and others like him sought to make the United States unilaterally Christian
as opposed to a secular nation where no single religion rules. He would have
LGBTQ+ rights rolled back and rescinded when possible. He would have people
deported without due process of law. He would see abortion rights completely eliminated.
And he would do as much as possible to diminish black history, all under the pretense
of making everyone “equal”. I’m reminded of Animal Farm: All animals are equal,
but some are more equal than others.
I don’t understand how you can be female or have females in
your life that you care about and support Charlie Kirk. He believed that women
were not suitable for certain vocations, including law enforcement and the
armed forces. He felt women belonged at home having as many babies as
possible. The man of the house ought to have the final say on all things. This
is not my interpretation—look it up for yourself. Imagine Charlie Kirk looking down
at his young daughter and believing—teaching her that she would make a
great baby-maker someday. His daughter deserves far more than that. And if you’re wondering, he has agreed with guests on
his podcast who declared that women should never have gotten the vote.
Feminism, to Charlie Kirk, is a “construct” that has held women back. That
alone makes no sense whatsoever. By being freer, you’re more restricted?
(Note: All of these views can be easily searched and
confirmed on various sites, pages, in articles, and in video clips freely
available online. He has not been shy about sharing these views.)
I know this is the piece I’ll probably get crucified for. I
have not joined the chorus of sympathizers offering the same thoughts and
prayers that, as yet, haven’t stopped any other public shooting in the US. My
official line, if people ask—and they are, a lot of them—is that I do not in
any circumstance condone gun violence. Two young children watched their father
get killed in public, and for the whole world to see. There’s no recovering
from trauma like that. Charlie Kirk did not deserve to die like this. Life is a
fundamental human right. Notwithstanding, when some governments decide to take
life as punishment for certain crimes, but that’s a convenient loophole for
when the state of Utah seeks the death penalty for the killer whenever they are
caught. The governor implied as much. But I digress.
People who don’t take the time to read my words or hear my
reasoning will assume that I’m a heartless bastard who takes joy in Charlie
Kirk’s death. I assure you that is not the case. My heart sank when I heard he’d
been shot, and I wanted to throw up when I heard he’d died. My first thoughts
were for his kids. However, my thoughts then shifted to a much larger and
potentially more dangerous scenario. He will go down as a martyr for the cause
he’d championed for years. His followers will attribute his death to some sort
of agenda to restrict his freedom of expression or that it will be some sort of
attack on his faith.
You see, he hid behind his “faith” all the time. His “faith”
formed the basis of his views on LGBTQ+ rights, women’s roles, and the
homogeneity of a Christian society. Of course, none of these things is
inherently Christian. They are choices made by some who claim to be Christian,
made and shoehorned into dogma as a means to justify these restrictive and bigoted
views. While the killer’s motives remain unknown, I find it hard to believe he
was killed for simply being a Christian. He has said far more inflammatory
things to have drawn the ire of an assassin.
We don’t know who did it, but they’ll find him (or her—wouldn’t
that be ironic) eventually. Donald Trump now has a reason to bring the hammer
down on political opposition. I’ll bet right now that the perpetrator will
somehow end up being killed before s/he can answer for their crime. Someone
will make themselves a hero for killing the killer. I’m sure Kyle Rittenhouse
has some time on his hands. He and Charlie were pals, you know.
There really isn’t much more to say. If you followed him
while he was alive, you know exactly what he stood for. You’ll certainly be mourning
his passing. Maybe he said something that truly spoke to you. I mean it
sincerely when I say I’m sorry for your loss—grief is a powerful and painful
emotion we all feel. But the keyword here is your. You see, to me,
Charlie Kirk espoused and represented all that I believe is wrong in the US,
and indeed, everywhere. He did not believe in equality. He clung to chauvinistic,
misogynistic views; believed that "non-traditional Americans” do not have the
same rights as those who fit his ideal; and sought to take rights away from
those who wanted nothing more than to be treated with dignity. I am relieved
that I no longer have to listen to him utter this brand of hate ever again. And
I do not, and will never apologize for it. He believed that people I love are
inferior to him. Why would I ever respect him for that?
But make no mistake, I am not celebrating anything. The loss
of human life, particularly by violent means, is always a tragedy. Ideally, I
would have rather seen Charlie Kirk just retire from public life, go home, tuck
his children into bed and say prayers with them, away from any microphone,
camera, or campus stage. But some moron chose to end his life, and here we are.
I didn’t want it to end this way, but since we’re here and nothing can change
it, I can at least be grateful he’s no longer spreading his signature brand of
bigotry. His words hurt a lot of people.
Worse, the reaction to this will be similar to the attempt on
Donald Trump’s life last year. Again, I didn’t want to see him shot to death,
and for the same reasons. What it did, however, was create a cause for the far-right
to rally around, and it has drawn in moderates based on sympathy toward his
near-death experience and all they perceived it to mean. They tried to
silence Trump; therefore, we all have to shout a little louder. It ended
up helping him win re-election— the exact thing the gunman likely wanted to
avoid.
Now, Charlie Kirk is more recognizable in death than he was
only hours ago while he was alive. The message he carried is the reason anyone
knows who he is. I would ask you: If you posted on social media that you felt
bad for him, why? Why him, specifically? Did you feel the same way when Minnesota state
representative Melissa
Hortman and her husband were shot in their home for political reasons?
Or for Breonna Taylor, or Trayvon Martin, or any of the hundreds of children
who have been shot for the crime of going to school? Ask yourself what made
this particular killing special? Because if it’s only about an innocent man
with a wife and kids being unjustly murdered, I’d like to think your heart
would hurt as much for anyone else.
But no, you chose Charlie Kirk. You know who he was. You know
what he said—he never apologized. He offered no empathy to the marginalized. In fact, he
once said that empathy is a dangerous emotion to have. A bit ironic, don’t you
think?
Charlie Kirk is on video stating that a certain number of gun
deaths are acceptable in society if that’s what it takes to protect the Second
Amendment, the American right to bear arms. Looks like he took one for the
team.
