News   Dec 05, 2025
Renowned Toronto-Born Architect Frank Gehry, Dead at 96
 1K     5 
News   Dec 05, 2025
Finch West Line 6 Opens Sunday: It Could Use Some Improvements
 3.3K     7 
News   Dec 05, 2025
First Phase Advances at Multi-Tower Proposal on Steeles in Brampton
 626     0 

President Donald Trump's United States of America

Mrgeosim said:
Considering that pretty much every Christian denomination believes that the Old Testament civil laws aren't binding today, I have an idea of what Charlie would believe, but we'll never know now because we live in the era where people get gunned down for beliefs they don't bother to actually investigate.
Click to expand...
What we do know is you're twisting in the wind to lie to us about his explicitly stated beliefs to suit your agenda.
 
Northern Light said:
Yes....



I have not defended a lie. I looked right at the video you provided, twice, and I am accurately representing the words he offered. I have not mis-stated or mis-attributed anything, not one word.



He explicitly endorsed text that did just that. It is what it is.



I'm not sure anyone was charging him with anything, but if the court were simply asked to rule, did Mr. Kirk endorse this text; and does this text call for the execution of gays, the answer would 'yes' in both cases.



I'm not sure I accept that. I have corrected you, with evidence provided by you, which unequivocally supports my take. A good faith dialogue requires to admit the obvious and concede the point. Obstinance in the face of being proven wrong is not truth or good faith or dialogue. Its disingenuous, bad faith arguing.

But lets move on, shall we?



My alma mater.

A fine school; but that's not a blanket endorsement of every professor or student.



I agree. But you would do more to prevent is repetition by simply admitting Mr.Kirk was despised and fairly so. Then we can have an honest discussion around the fact that people being despicable is insufficient reason to assassinate them (on which we agree); then move on to what one can realistically do then to make that less likely in the future. Hint, defending Mr. Kirk will not lower the temperature any.........



Quite possible. There is much that has gone wrong in democracies of the west the last several decades. Its not terrible story of endless woe, and indeed there have been many bright spots.

But there certainly has been an increase in militancy/extremism and a coarsening of public debate.

There are a host of reasons for that, and this thread simply isn't the right spot. But certainly, I will concur that this assassination is unlikely to prove helpful in anyway (which wouldn't excuse it any event) and may well contribute to a worsening of the situation, particularly in the country to our south.
Click to expand...
I am not being obstinate and I hardly feel that my counter points constitute bad faith arguing. I don't believe you've shown that the accusation against Charlie Kirk is accurate though I am relieved that you at least believe he didn't deserve to be murdered, which is clearly not a view shared by everyone here. The accusation against Charlie Kirk that I was addressing is that he advocated for the stoning of gay people. I referenced the video that people had used as evidence, and in it he was having an intramural Christian disagreement about a point of Christian doctrine relating to the meaning of the "love thy neighbour" passage in the Old Testament. Charlie Kirk disagreed with the extent of the application of that passage and offered a passage as counter-evidence that in the same passage where "love they neighbour" occurs, you find the passage about stoning gay people. He used that as a reference for his religious argument about the bounds and limits of what love would mean in that text. He endorsed the text because he is a Christian but his application was religious in nature and he never extrapolated it to the political realm or advocated for its application today, and it would put him at odds with virtually every Christian denomination if he did. There isn't a single Christian denomination that supports the application of Old Testament civil laws today (check Chat GPT) but that is beside the point. Charlie Kirk wasn't advocating for the execution of gay people and it is clear to anyone applying any degree of forensic analysis to the words he used in that video. You did not give evidence that clearly demonstrates that Charlie Kirk was calling for the execution of gay people. You said that his endorsement of the text would be proof of his guilt regarding the accusation that he is calling for the execution of gay people, but this is the association fallacy. The endorsement of a text broadly does not logically necessitate the endorsement of every aspect or application of it.

I am fine to leave this matter because I don't believe continuing this conversation is a profitable use of anyone's time and I agree that this thread isn't the best place for it. I will only say that I hope our American friends can move past this and end the tide of political violence that has taken hold.
 
Mrgeosim said:
That is his belief as a Christian, coming from his holy text, believed by billions of people, being referenced in a religious conversation. He did not use it as a basis for public policy, and it is his right to believe that both in America and in Canada. This is not a matter of agreement or disagreement about his religious beliefs regarding sexuality. He was not calling for the execution of gay people but news outlets picked it up, disseminated it, and now people are all over social media saying that he deserved to die because of a lie that was spun by unscrupulous news outlets.
Click to expand...
So, it is god's perfect law, but he doesn't think it should be applied?
 
afransen said:
So, it is god's perfect law, but he doesn't think it should be applied?
Click to expand...
the problem with the Old and New Testaments and Christianity, is that Jesus refuted many of the teachings of the Old Testament. So what do we get to cherry pick and what do Christians fall back on as teachings and guidance? The Old Testament is fire and brimstone and an eye for an eye; the New Testament is kindness and caring and turn the other cheek. Two very different approaches that the same people cite whenever whichever of them suits their purposes.

And Kirk talked about his God-given right to bear arms. Where did Jesus say that? I always want to ask today's Christians what Jesus would say about many of the current policies and leanings.
 
Mrgeosim said:
You absolutely have every right to believe whatever you want about Charlie, but I am going to call a spade a spade. Lies were said about the man and you defending the lie is not a good look. He didn't call for the execution of gay people and any court would exonerate him of the charge.

Just for context, I am not a follower of Charlie Kirk. I never watched his content, but I knew who he was. I am a passionate defender of good faith dialogue. I was the president of a debate club during my time at the University of Toronto, and I hate to see people being murdered for arguing their case. This is how democracy dies and we are well on the way there. The aftermath of this assassination will make America (and possibly Canada) worse off. Of that, I am sure.
Click to expand...
We should hate people being murdered, period. And yet, Trump and the rest of the right have been more effusive in their condemnation of this murder than any of the many thousands of Palestinian civilians. Or even of their fellow Americans of a different political persuasion.
 
afransen said:
We should hate people being murdered, period. And yet, Trump and the rest of the right have been more effusive in their condemnation of this murder than any of the many thousands of Palestinian civilians. Or even of their fellow Americans of a different political persuasion.
Click to expand...

I agree and but also the far left groups have also ignored that Palestine is extremely anti LGBT+. Hamas will kill you for being gay or trans. Where is outrage from the far left there? “In the case of homosexuality…they shall be killed.” - Hamas leader. People like Charlie Kirk on the far right and far left are just opposite sides of the same coin Not much difference between the two groups. Both far left and far right are idoits.
 
gabe said:
I agree and but also the far left groups have also ignored that Palestine is extremely anti LGBT+. Hamas will kill you for being gay or trans. Where is outrage from the far left there? “In the case of homosexuality…they shall be killed.” - Hamas leader. People like Charlie Kirk on the far right and far left are just opposite sides of the same coin Not much difference between the two groups. Both far left and far right are idoits.
Click to expand...
I am no fan of religious hatred, regardless of the creed.

I didn't like Kirk, or think he was a good person. It is wrong that he was killed, just as all murder is wrong. But I find it rather distasteful how his death is being mourned as a great national tragedy when school children are murdered any given Tuesday in the US and people like Kirk are glib about it.
 
gabe said:
I agree and but also the far left groups have also ignored that Palestine is extremely anti LGBT+. Hamas will kill you for being gay or trans. Where is outrage from the far left there? “In the case of homosexuality…they shall be killed.” - Hamas leader. People like Charlie Kirk on the far right and far left are just opposite sides of the same coin Not much difference between the two groups. Both far left and far right are idoits.
Click to expand...
Please point out to me anyone on the left excusing Hama's homophobia. A link to an article would suffice. Otherwise this is a nonsense talking point.
 
zang said:
Does it matter if I've seen it or not?

The fact that the shooter didn't hit the head or go for a second shot, kind of negates the idea that this was some kind of professional hit.



Are you a doctor? People have survived injuries like this. Kirk was still alive when transported to the hospital and AP reported he was there being treated in critical condition.



I will revisit this post later when you're proven wrong here. Conspiracy theories don't help the situation.



200 yards away is where the shooter was, and that isn't a "very long distance" in terms of rifle hunting. In fact, scopes recommended for that range are in the area of 40mm (in other words, not very big). You don't even need to be prone to make shots at that range, which is generally only recommended for shots greater than ~350 yards. Why would any professional sniper risk being that close to the target if they don't absolutely need to be, and again why wouldn't they take a security shot?

I grew up on a farm, and regularly used the family .22. My uncle (then RCMP Sergeant) would take my brother and I skeet shooting when we visited. As an Air Cadet (back before they switched to air rifles) we trained on small caliber bolt rifles nearly identical to those used in the olympics. I'm telling you right now, I could probably have made a shot the size of a human at that range.

Am I of the skill level of a professional assassin? Because I can tell you right now, I certainly don't believe I am.

As I said, every U.S. infantryman in required to hit a(n I believe 6") target at 300 yards using iron sights alone. 200 yards for a human sized target would not be difficult for just about anyone with a small amount of training; like just about anyone who grew up in a state in which hunting is pretty common. Y'know, like Utah is.



Is it your opinion or "ZERO doubt"?; because they are not one and the same.

Or, it's been less than 24 hours and it would be silly to make such assumptions. It took almost two full days to find and arrest Vance Boelter and five days to find and arrest Luigi Mangione. Give it time, ffs.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree. 200 yards is not an outrageous distance with a scope (and a bit of elevation it seems) for a decent hunter. Most decently-accurate rifles are bolt action (even specialized sniper rifles) so unless you are in a very secured location, you take your one shot and leave. Aiming for the neck would be ludicrous; a degree off and it's a miss. I suspect that the aim was either head or centre mass and the tiny factors of wind, humidity, powder load, etc. got in the way.

I had a colleague who could consistently hit 9-10 ('bullseye') with an FNC1 with iron sights at 400 yds.

I don't know what the guidelines are in Utah but I'm not surprised that the paramedics transported him 'in critical condition'. They, and other emergency services, can't pronounce death anyway. Most operate under some form of 'obvious death' guidelines, but the victim just suffered the injury; they aren't going to stand up, pull their gloves off and say 'call the coroner'. Who's going to be willing to own that call? According to a video, he was hustled in a SUV by police/security. There's a decent chance they had a tactical bandage ('Israeli bandage'). You intervene according to your training. I saw the 'graphic' video (no longer available it seems). There's no doubt in my mind his fate was sealed but you gotta do what you gotta do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PL1



A bomb threat in Detroit's Corktown neighborhood targeted the residence of Michigan Litentuant Governor Garlin Gilchrist II, he said.

Authorities investigated the threat and gave an all-clear after finding no danger.
Gilchrist linked the incident to a broader pattern of political violence, referencing the recent slaying of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Michigan Litentuant Governor Garlin Gilchrist II said that a bomb threat that authorities investigated Thursday, Sept. 11 in Detroit's Corktown neighborhood targeted the place where he and his family live.

"The threat has been cleared, and I am grateful to law enforcement for their quick response and for keeping my family and our neighborhood safe," Gilchrist said in a statement.
 
zang said:
Given they've released photos of the gun but not the rounds, I'm doubtful it's not just the right wing "exaggeration" that happens with every prominent violent act.
Click to expand...
It’s been suggested that the supposed “transgender ideology” (whatever the eff that’s supposed to mean) and antifa based markings found on shell casing or whatever they found allegedly from the fled gunman may have actually be from the manufacturer of the same. But the feds on a fishing expedition here likely have overlooked this more prosaic consideration… >.<
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top