this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2025
647 points (97.4% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

34650 readers
2178 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Tiger666@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Charlie Kirk would have called Jesus a communist.

Then crucified him and blame the Muslims...

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

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?

[–] Mediocre_Bard@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago

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

[–] Nikls94@lemmy.world 162 points 3 days ago (6 children)

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.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 49 points 3 days ago (1 children)

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

Yeah, but no republican wants to hear that their favorite activity is a sin.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 87 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Well hell, they don't like that rule at all

Right? No wonder they all make it about The Gays.

[–] D_C@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 days ago

molesting children is a sin

Nowadays that's a prerequisite if you want to be a republican politician.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 22 points 3 days ago

Similarly a lot of the stuff about sodomy was about rape. Regardless I don't think we should use religious texts as the basis for morals.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 23 points 2 days ago

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.

[–] antsu@discuss.tchncs.de 230 points 3 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] dan69@lemmy.world 38 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Sorry is this how he died… I just got out of my rock..

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 42 points 3 days ago (1 children)

basically. Someone was showing him that trans people are basically underrepresented in mass shootings, while Kirk et al claim the opposite; and his last words were "counting or not counting gang violence" which is a racist dogwhistle.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

And then, (and this is unverified but it appears to be true) a member of a rival white mayonnaise gang capped his ass in broad daylight.

Edit IM LEAVING IT IT'S FUNNIER THAN THE TRUTH AND ALSO A LITTLE TRUE

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Garbagio@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 days ago

Cremated, even

[–] vivalapivo@lemmy.today 150 points 3 days ago (3 children)

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

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 44 points 3 days ago

The extensive attention to curation, editing, and deleting was the whole point of the manufactured reality being pushed.

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 38 points 3 days ago (3 children)

editing videos like that is the equivalent to winning arguments in the shower

[–] shawn1122@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 days ago (2 children)

If only. In the year 2025, it apparently captures hearts and minds. I know because Boomers send this heavily edited shit constantly.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)

Charlie Kirk never liked free speech

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] Sweetpeaches69@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

Had no education...*

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 43 points 3 days ago (3 children)

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

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world 65 points 3 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] Grilipper54@sh.itjust.works 18 points 3 days ago (2 children)

As the other person said he ends up saying he still doesn't like it but there is still a challenge. The reason Charlie says it's reaffirmed in Mathew about the gays is because everything the student brings up is the old testament and Jesus already died to erase those sins. Bringing up Leviticus trying to make a point doesn't work if you believe in the new testament.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 27 points 3 days ago (8 children)

Good thing Charles set the trap himself by saying morality is objective and unchanging. That must either mean God commanded things that were not moral (which is against their worldview), or that burning women, killing disobedient children, taking people as slaves for life, and stoning people for working on the Sabbath are morally permissible.

It's usually impossible for them to concede God did anything wrong, so they have to justify numerous atrocities.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BreadOven@lemmy.world 77 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Glad that fascist is dead haha.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] wabasso@lemmy.ca 34 points 3 days ago (4 children)
[–] db2@lemmy.world 85 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm going to stick my neck out and say it was something stupid and ignorant.

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 72 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Careful, kirk warned us about sticking our necks out

[–] db2@lemmy.world 59 points 3 days ago (1 children)

He really gushed on about it

[–] don@lemmy.ca 52 points 3 days ago

Poured his heart out, he did.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Habahnow@sh.itjust.works 28 points 3 days ago (10 children)

watched the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZPWbpOnZ-8

Kirk actually has a good point in that those lines are from the old testament, which Christians believe doesn't apply, and only believe in the new testament. Assuming Kirk is right that it isn't in the new testament ( the Cambridge speaker doesn't contest it either, for whatever that is worth). From the the student then pivots to talking about a new testament description along the lines of: Man shall not sleep with man, which he says can be interpreted differently than man and man and could be man and prostitute. Kirk contends that the traditions and interpretations were created during the time that the writings were created, and so there is no loss of translation then, and those understandings have been passed down until down consistently. I will say, i've summised this, but it is a lot more of a meandering argument afterwards that is not very interesting to watch.

I feel like the cambridge student shouldn't have even brought up the lines in videos above because it doesn't completely apply to Kirk's religious beliefs. The student studied the bible decently enough to make his point, but it seemed he needed additional context of Kirk's beliefs to make a strong point against Kirk.

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 36 points 3 days ago

those understandings have been passed down until down consistently.

[x] Doubt

[–] Naich 12 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If they don't believe in the old testament, why do they want the 10 commandments put up in schools?

[–] Habahnow@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

yeah idk who "they" are specifically (i know in some state/city, they want the 10 commandments in schools), but I doubt they are a religious group that believes in all of the old testament, which means you make a very good point.

[–] WraithGear@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago

he actually didn’t dodge anything, nor did he make a good point.

he stated that morals and right and wrong are immutable/unchanging.

so Charlie is now trapped to make a choice,

A. he’s wrong and morality is dependent on the situation, and so his whole platform regarding how he treats minorities has no justification.

B. he’s wrong and his god purposely demanded atrocities, and was wrong in the past, and is fallible, in which case his whole platform can’t be considered moral based on the teachings of his god.

so his answer is he still didn’t like it, which is him admitting defeat but refusing to decide in which way he believes his god is wrong

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 18 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Sacred tradition? Was Kirk Catholic? And if not why not? Just a grab bag of pick and choose your tradition? Both Protestants and Catholics say that will send you straight to hell. Might as well call yourself a gnostic if you're going that route (though many of them didn't have sex hangups).

[–] xxd@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's not really a good point, it's just classic cherrypicking. Jesus himself said in Matthew 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." so clearly the old testament law should still apply. Christians are just faced with the reality that they could not live their life in accordance with old testament law in todays age, and have therefore chosen to ignore laws from the old testament.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lovely_reader@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago (2 children)

There are no mainstream Christian denominations that don't believe that the Old Testament is the word of their God, so I'm not sure how the student could have prepared for that particular nonsense juke

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago

Fucking hate shit like this.

BURN!

Well, uh, could I see the reply.

NO!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 26 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

This whole thing was already played out on the TV series "The West Wing", and I'm fairly sure that Aaron Sorkin got it from somewhere else.

https://www.tv-quotes.com/shows/the-west-wing/quote_13962.html

Edit: It appears that the original author is Kent Ashcraft:

Source: https://www-users.york.ac.uk/~ss44/joke/laura.htm#author

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago

“I love uneducated people”

[–] Lootboblin@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
load more comments
view more: next ›