Ironically enough, this shows how Kirk was actually at least somewhat better than most of the right wing pundits.

He would actually allow others to have the mic. He actually lets the dude speak. If not for that, you couldn't have a video of him being made to look the fool.

Most of them will refuse to interact, shouting down questions, trying to cut off counterpoints, only interacting via one-way streams and speeches. Generally cowardly refusing to vaguely risk a difficult talking point arise.

He said vile things, but he at least let others speak. And now the right wing is on a crusade to try to suppress any voice that would have stood against, rather than letting them speak.

Charlie Kirk would have called Jesus a communist.

Though this is hilariously funny, this is the list basic argument against just about any religion, the cherry picking, and I'm still waiting for a fucking answer. Why doesn't Charlie burn himself to death? I mean, I can imagine that that hole in his neck makes that hard to do for him right now, but why doesn't he? Why doesn't every Christian out there burn and stone themselves to death for their continuous sinning?

Or if not, you know, admit that they're plain wrong about their entire view on life?

Cremated, even

I didn't know I could watch the same piece of shit get murdered twice, but here we are.

Hahaha.

Still missing the point that he is free to read and believe anything he likes, but a book of ancient mythology shouldn't have any influence at all in developing 21st century social/political policy.

Ultimately, that is going to be the final outcome of his argument - either follow ALL the Bible's demands, or follow none of them - but that's too many steps for MAGAs. The answer is simple: It's in the 1st Amendment. If they want to know more, they can go get a real education. It's time to stop coddling these ignorant traitors.

That "if a man sleeps with another man and they shall be stoned" (not a native English) verse is wrongly translated iirc. In old Hebrew there is a word that specifically means "man who is not yet an adult" - and back then you were an adult with 14 I think.

It was never about being gay is sinful, it was about molesting children being a sin.

Pretty obvious Kirk has no education since high school. He flunked out of Harper after one semester.

Stop stop, he's already de- oh wait.

You're doing it wrong. You are supposed to cut and publish only parts where Kirk owns the libs

It clearly says it's fine to sleep with a dude if you are both high.

“I love uneducated people”

Charlie Kirk never liked free speech

So what is the response? I feel like these clips are great. But if he makes a great point after, isn't it setting a trap where you share this and the response is his rebuttal which could be good or bad

Glad that fascist is dead haha.

What was the rebuttal?