People can have misunderstandings. What you were describing is a misunderstanding. Charlie Kirk is not an expert professional in anything. Nobody has any responsibility to know exactly what he says or how he says it. Nobody has any responsibility to give anything he says any weight.
He was a snake oil salesman. He engaged in debate with untrained an unprepared youth making shocking claims and spreading lies and hate toward specific races, genders, and religions in order to enrich himself.
Rather than posting the full debates on his website he would clip them when a student was getting the better of him so that he could show his little gotcha moments. It had nothing to do with quality debate and everything to do with his own personal financial gain.
Nothing regarding Charlie Kirk rises to the level of respect anybody should have when a scientist reports findings and data regarding their specific discipline.
Charlie Kirk is not an equivalent side of an argument. Nobody like Charlie Kirk is an equivalent side of an argument.
Charlie Kirk's skills were based in gaslighting and using red herrings in order to dissuade trained debaters from engaging him (Because he's not very skilled, and unwilling to engage in honest debate) while he targeted unsuspecting and untrained college students in an effort to hurt the standing of higher education.
This became very clear when he actually came up against students who had even a bit of training in debate (For example, Tilly, Dean Withers, etc). They ran circles around him even though he kept trying to gaslight them and kept throwing out red herrings in efforts to avoid having to defend his bigoted positions.
Once again, this is not honest debate. Charlie Kirk was an act. He did not engage in honest debate.
But you want to make it seem like what he says should be respected and studied as though he were some kind of well-educated and seasoned professional.
He wasn't. He was a quick-witted circus act and the idea that he was somehow legitimate has been harmful to this country.
The asshole claimed (or at least implied) that African Americans don't have the same mental capacity as white people. End of story.
Both sides aren't equal in this.
No, that is you misreading/misunderstanding/twisting my post. I never once said respect him. I never once said he was a good man or bad man. Im only commenting on the flood of emotional expressions of common folk who are basing their judgment off of truncated quotes. Don't read anymore into it than that.
Both sides love to quote portions of statements, publications, etc, to support their beliefs/ideologies.
This is a both side issue whether you are willing to acknowledge it or not.
The same goes for the murder of the Melissa Hartman.
Both sides are using this violence as agendas and finger pointing. If one is engaged in this finger pointing, they are part of the continual problem and not part of the solution.
You are mostly part of the solution because you continually push for improved healthcare, etc.
But when we stop pushing for improvements(mental health care, etc) on all sides and start pointing fingers at once side, while engaging in the same behavior, we will not improve anything.
Whether right or wrong, good or evil, no one gives a three year old temper tantrum the time of day. So whether the left is right or not, without ending the agro rage, nothing will improve.
Whether the right is right or wrong, without dividing religion from politics, nothing will improve. Religious beliefs should not supersede honest science.
That is a generalization, but it's also reality.
Both sides have communication breakdowns and both sides need improvement in that arena to make any change for the better. Without acknowledging this the left can yell all they want about how evil the right is. No one is listening.
Not saying that is right. It’s just the way it is. Its reality.
Sometimes it’s on the messenger to give the message in a way it is understood. No one understands fingerpointing and being called evil nazis because they voted on their conservative beliefs.
