going4roses said:

---

Define woke/ wokester ?

---

Minneapolis mayor crying at George Floyd's funeralpic.twitter.com/P05eHtKEfK

— Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) September 20, 2025

Left out of Disney/Kimmel story -- billions of dollars and the CEO Decision on the line.

https://t.co/2ud6sVwaXN

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) September 20, 2025

I'm guessing some churches in Phoenix said, "Sunday Service will be at the Cardinals stadium. See you back here in 2 weeks."

President of Hillsdale College said:

"Charlie lives on.
The assassin will die."

And then he paused for response.
The congregation breaks into widespread applause.







It sure is curious for me to observe what's happening here. This is a conservative coordinated lynch mob aiming to kill one of their own.

I mean, one reaction could be to look at their homo/transphobia as a contributing factor. Kirk offends many, and one of them lashed back (wrongly). But, instead of that, they commit their own sin through killing him as vengeance.

sycasey said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

sycasey said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

sycasey said:

---

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

Something important that’s being missed with the Jimmy Kimmel saga…

By spreading the vile lie that Charlie was assassinated by MAGA, the implicit message from Kimmel was clear: If you kill a conservative, we will cover for you. We will whitewash the murder because we don’t…

— Andrew Kolvet (@AndrewKolvet) September 20, 2025

---

Conservatives sound so much like lefty wokesters used to! Words actually are violence, apparently.

---

Don't allow yourself to be confused. A lefty wokester chose violence and pulled the trigger.

---

Not as violent as Jimmy Kimmel's joking about it, though!

---

Jimmy Kimmel provides the cover for violence by telling you MAGA pulled the trigger.

---

Right, Jimmy Kimmel's words are violence.

---

Words are violence! He said it!

Bash: "Do you believe in free speech?"

Sen. Markwayne Mullin: "Absolutely I believe in free speech...There's a thin line between free speech and when it crosses a line and causes violence. When you start calling someone 'fascist'...there is a problem." pic.twitter.com/MMA6F1U9ea

— The Bulwark (@BulwarkOnline) September 21, 2025

BWAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

You attending the Funeral today of your good friend?

Did you fly into Arizona or drive?
Was it difficult to get a hotel room?

---

You speak about him and protecting him more than I do

---

I'm not the one who has posted 267 times about him since he died ten days ago.

BearGoggles said:

---

And for what its worth, Kirk's widow said she forgives the killer. So she seems to be applying the Christian values you suggest should apply.

---

What are the chances that Trump will follow the same "Christian forgiveness values" and commute the killer's forthcoming death sentence? That's right: Zero.

BearGoggles said:

---

concordtom said:

---

President of Hillsdale College said:

"Charlie lives on.
The assassin will die."

And then he paused for response.
The congregation breaks into widespread applause.







It sure is curious for me to observe what's happening here. This is a conservative coordinated lynch mob aiming to kill one of their own.

I mean, one reaction could be to look at their homo/transphobia as a contributing factor. Kirk offends many, and one of them lashed back (wrongly). But, instead of that, they commit their own sin through killing him as vengeance.

---

The actual commandment is "thou shall not murder" - not thou shall not "kill". There's a difference. And we know that because: (i) the original Hebrew word was "murder"; and (ii) the same bible that contains the commandments recites many crimes punishable by death . . . so clearly not all killing would be proscribed.

And for what its worth, Kirk's widow said she forgives the killer. So she seems to be applying the Christian values you suggest should apply.

---

Glad to hear that last part.
But are you suggesting that Christianity is a religion of vengeance?

You know the difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Jesus said something like, "you have heard an eye for an eye, but I say turn thy other cheek. …Give your neighbor the shirt off your back."

The Old Testament has the ten commandments - thou shalt not kill/murder (splitting hairs in the forgiving Christian sense) - and the crimes punishable by death bit. And those are Jewish texts.

The New Testament is what defines Christian values most, to me.

Clearly, there are different guidance's provided in these different parts of the Bible.

So, I'm asking if these Christians at Kirk's event are Christians or Jews?
Eye for an eye?
Or Forgiveness for a wayward soul?

Again, that's huge for the widow to say that. Amen.

BearGoggles said:

---

concordtom said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

concordtom said:

---

President of Hillsdale College said:

"Charlie lives on.
The assassin will die."

And then he paused for response.
The congregation breaks into widespread applause.







It sure is curious for me to observe what's happening here. This is a conservative coordinated lynch mob aiming to kill one of their own.

I mean, one reaction could be to look at their homo/transphobia as a contributing factor. Kirk offends many, and one of them lashed back (wrongly). But, instead of that, they commit their own sin through killing him as vengeance.

---

The actual commandment is "thou shall not murder" - not thou shall not "kill". There's a difference. And we know that because: (i) the original Hebrew word was "murder"; and (ii) the same bible that contains the commandments recites many crimes punishable by death . . . so clearly not all killing would be proscribed.

And for what its worth, Kirk's widow said she forgives the killer. So she seems to be applying the Christian values you suggest should apply.

---

Glad to hear that last part.
But are you suggesting that Christianity is a religion of vengeance?

You know the difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Jesus said something like, "you have heard an eye for an eye, but I say turn thy other cheek. …Give your neighbor the shirt off your back."

The Old Testament has the ten commandments - thou shalt not kill/murder (splitting hairs in the forgiving Christian sense) - and the crimes punishable by death bit. And those are Jewish texts.

The New Testament is what defines Christian values most, to me.

Clearly, there are different guidance's provided in these different parts of the Bible.

So, I'm asking if these Christians at Kirk's event are Christians or Jews?
Eye for an eye?
Or Forgiveness for a wayward soul?

Again, that's huge for the widow to say that. Amen.

---

I'm suggesting that if you or someone else is going to quote text from the old testament in a weak attempt to make a political point, it should be quoted accurately and understood in context (murder vs. kill).

We have a justice system in our society which is based upon Judeo-Christian values, as modified and informed by modern norms. By no means am I suggesting that the Christian bible (or any religious text) should supplant those. Turn the other cheek and eye for an eye may be religious teachings, but they are not part of the USA criminal system.

---

Fair.
Except those gathered in AZ for Kirk seek to use their religious interpretations of said texts as the guidelines for US policy. So I don't think we should just take the 'separation of church and state' stance.

BearGoggles said:

---

quoted accurately and understood in context (murder vs. kill).

---

Let's remember that these texts have been copied and translated repeatedly. And that language is mutable.

Butch used to be guys name, now it's a dyke.
Dick used to be a guys name, now it's a male member.
I could go on to humorous appeal, but I'm no comedian.

In other words, literal interpretation is a losers game. But taking away the broad strokes is key.

Revenge?
Or forgiveness?

concordtom said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

quoted accurately and understood in context (murder vs. kill).

---

Let's remember that these texts have been copied and translated repeatedly. And that language is mutable.

Butch used to be guys name, now it's a dyke.
Dick used to be a guys name, now it's a male member.
I could go on to humorous appeal, but I'm no comedian.

In other words, literal interpretation is a losers game. But taking away the broad strokes is key.

Revenge?
Or forgiveness?

---

The old testament (Torah) has been passed down over thousands of years. We know what word was used in the original. That word was murder. We know it was an incorrect English translation that changed this to "kill."

https://www.gotquestions.org/you-shall-not-kill-vs-murder.html#:~:text=The%20King%20James%20Version%20(KJV,Numbers%2035:17%E2%80%9331

You're setting up a false choice. Forgiveness does not imply or require letting the criminal avoid consequences. In this case, the shooter will face consequences based on the law (not biblical treatises). Punishment/retribution is one of the many principles at issue, as are deterrence and incarceration (i.e., preventing the person from committing further crimes). In some cases, the system advances rehabilitation, though not likely in a case like Kirks.

BearGoggles said:

---

concordtom said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

quoted accurately and understood in context (murder vs. kill).

---

Let's remember that these texts have been copied and translated repeatedly. And that language is mutable.

Butch used to be guys name, now it's a dyke.
Dick used to be a guys name, now it's a male member.
I could go on to humorous appeal, but I'm no comedian.

In other words, literal interpretation is a losers game. But taking away the broad strokes is key.

Revenge?
Or forgiveness?

---

The old testament (Torah) has been passed down over thousands of years. We know what word was used in the original. That word was murder. We know it was an incorrect English translation that changed this to "kill."

https://www.gotquestions.org/you-shall-not-kill-vs-murder.html#:~:text=The%20King%20James%20Version%20(KJV,Numbers%2035:17%E2%80%9331

You're setting up a false choice. Forgiveness does not imply or require letting the criminal avoid consequences. In this case, the shooter will face consequences based on the law (not biblical treatises). Punishment/retribution is one of the many principles at issue, as are deterrence and incarceration (i.e., preventing the person from committing further crimes). In some cases, the system advances rehabilitation, though not likely in a case like Kirks.

---

So, murder Is unjustified killing and killing is justified ?
Who gets to decide the justification?

Re " letting the criminal avoid consequences"….. there can be many "consequences":
Stoning
Torture
Life in prison
Having to read all 30,000 of my BI posts.

I did not suggest the killer Tyler Robinson face no consequences. I was merely commenting on the fact that these people (various folks on TV claiming to be Christians also call for his death - when I feel like those two things don't go together. In other words, if you claim to be Christian, I don't think you should be talking about killing another person.

Was Jesus' death justified?
What crimes against humanity did he commit?
No, he was politically assassinated just the same. And on the cross he said "Forgive them father, they know not what they do."

I think I'd like to see some real brave Christian leadership and witness some of the same. Hard to do, for sure.


If it hasn't rung through - I'm mocking the hypocrisy. How can one carry the Christian banner and then be seen calling for retribution, vengeance with an angry heart?

I imagine if someone killed a member of my family, I'd want their blood, too! But in time, I'd know that I'd need to lose that hatred in my heart.

If you watch one thing today, let it be this — the truly remarkable display of grace and compassion from Mrs. Erika Kirk as she forgives her husband's assassin because that's what Christ would do.

We love you, Erika. pic.twitter.com/EsSUgeJx1F

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) September 21, 2025

Borrowed from another thread.
I'm shocked she got there so fast.

In her first speech some days ago she warned with vengeance "you have no idea what you have…". Sounded full of anger and retribution.

I said at the time she could say whatever the hell she wanted at the time. But that it was wrong.

I'll have to listen to her entire speech….

But this is how you build a movement. Trump should take notes, the dick-head!

concordtom said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

concordtom said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

quoted accurately and understood in context (murder vs. kill).

---

Let's remember that these texts have been copied and translated repeatedly. And that language is mutable.

Butch used to be guys name, now it's a dyke.
Dick used to be a guys name, now it's a male member.
I could go on to humorous appeal, but I'm no comedian.

In other words, literal interpretation is a losers game. But taking away the broad strokes is key.

Revenge?
Or forgiveness?

---

The old testament (Torah) has been passed down over thousands of years. We know what word was used in the original. That word was murder. We know it was an incorrect English translation that changed this to "kill."

https://www.gotquestions.org/you-shall-not-kill-vs-murder.html#:~:text=The%20King%20James%20Version%20(KJV,Numbers%2035:17%E2%80%9331

You're setting up a false choice. Forgiveness does not imply or require letting the criminal avoid consequences. In this case, the shooter will face consequences based on the law (not biblical treatises). Punishment/retribution is one of the many principles at issue, as are deterrence and incarceration (i.e., preventing the person from committing further crimes). In some cases, the system advances rehabilitation, though not likely in a case like Kirks.

---

So, murder Is unjustified killing and killing is justified ?
Who gets to decide the justification?

Re " letting the criminal avoid consequences"….. there can be many "consequences":
Stoning
Torture
Life in prison
Having to read all 30,000 of my BI posts.

I did not suggest the killer Tyler Robinson face no consequences. I was merely commenting on the fact that these people (various folks on TV claiming to be Christians also call for his death - when I feel like those two things don't go together. In other words, if you claim to be Christian, I don't think you should be talking about killing another person.

Was Jesus' death justified?
What crimes against humanity did he commit?
No, he was politically assassinated just the same. And on the cross he said "Forgive them father, they know not what they do."

I think I'd like to see some real brave Christian leadership and witness some of the same. Hard to do, for sure.


If it hasn't rung through - I'm mocking the hypocrisy. How can one carry the Christian banner and then be seen calling for retribution, vengeance with an angry heart?

I imagine if someone killed a member of my family, I'd want their blood, too! But in time, I'd know that I'd need to lose that hatred in my heart.

---

We have a lot of laws that decided when killings are permitted as a legal matter including those authorizing capital punishment as well as excusing killings (valid claims of self defense). Society has also chosen to make distinctions of culpability/punishment based on factors like intent, negligence, etc. In our country, those views are informed by Christian tenants, but don't rely upon them for implementation.

Most people don't carry the Christian banner (at least not exclusively) and simply rely on personal views as to how society should be ordered. You're seeking to impose religion on what is largely a secular exercise. There is nothing inconsistent with preaching forgiveness and expecting that a criminal be punished to the full extent of the law (including death). Beyond that, it is not merely the victim that gets a vote as to the disposition of a case. It may well be that Kirk's widow would oppose the death penalty (??), but society might seek to impose it anyway.

BearGoggles said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

OsoDorado said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

And for what its worth, Kirk's widow said she forgives the killer. So she seems to be applying the Christian values you suggest should apply.

---

What are the chances that Trump will follow the same "Christian forgiveness values" and commute the killer's forthcoming death sentence? That's right: Zero.

---

---

This is the rare example of the broken clock being wrong twice a day. Trump will not pardon the shooter because (among other things), the shooter will face state charges and Trump has no power to issue a pardon. So you're actually correct on this front, though as usual your reasoning is flawed.

And if Trump or any other republican politician issued a pardon based on Christian notions of forgiveness, you would be the first person screaming "fascist" or "theocrat". TDS

---

You're just playing word games. All you've shown is that I'm not a lawyer. You did not disprove my fundamental claim that Donald Trump doesn't have the same "Christian forgiveness values" as Kirk's widow.

Even though Trump won't have the power to commute the killer's forthcoming death sentence if it is for a Utah state charge, it is obviously true (and you never directly challenged it) that Trump would never lift a finger "behind the scenes" to have the killer's sentence commuted, let alone openly advocate for it.

And the reason is simple: Trump and the vast majority of his MAGA supporters -- even Evangelical Christians -- will demand that the killer pay the ultimate price for the murder.

I have a feeling that even Erika Kirk -- who "forgave" Tyler Robinson for murdering her husband -- will never lift a finger to oppose giving Robinson the death penalty. That's what real "forgiveness" would require, and what I would applaud.

The Turning Point apparatus has just orchestrated its largest ever event (which would usually take 9 months of preparation) in seven days.

This is political organizing on steroids. Nothing like this has ever been seen before. pic.twitter.com/HWOx2svh3s

— Gabe Guidarini (@GabeGuidarini) September 21, 2025

Goosebumps. pic.twitter.com/fTiAHPjyyc

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) September 21, 2025

It was a memorial service, political event, and a Christian revival service like no other. Only in America.

OsoDorado said:

---

And the reason is simple: Trump and the vast majority of his MAGA supporters -- even Evangelical Christians -- will demand that the killer pay the ultimate price for the murder.

---

The killer also committed a crime against the people of the state of Utah and must face the consequences as required by law.

Erika Kirk is a better person than me.

Mess with someone I love, and you’ll feel my full wrath.

When she said “I forgive him” it shook me to my core.

I’m rethinking everything now.

— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) September 21, 2025

PAC-10-BEAR said:

---

OsoDorado said:

---

And the reason is simple: Trump and the vast majority of his MAGA supporters -- even Evangelical Christians -- will demand that the killer pay the ultimate price for the murder.

---

The killer also committed a crime against the people of the state of Utah and must face the consequences as required by law.

---

Yes, and Erika Kirk won't ask the Utah Governor or pardoning board to do anything to forgive Tyler Robinson, and neither will Trump.