Charlie Kirk and performative Christianity. Read this on Reddit, thoughts?
Irrespective of political beliefs, we can all agree that Charlie was able to influence, manipulate and monetize a young Christian based on misguided principles centered around hatred, fear and division - not one rooted in love or compassion for your fellow mankind.
He further leveraged Christianity as a vehicle to justify his disingenuous and sinful messages of pro-gun violence, bigotry, anti-female rights, anti-immigration, and general lack of empathy for the less fortunate.
Charlie once said: “I can’t stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that does a lot of damage.” (source: The Charlie Kirk Show, October 2022)
He specifically targeted a demographic (college students) most vulnerable to his manipulative tactics (mainly Socratic traps and ego baiting), and layered on performative Christianity to hook them. Yes, his wife even launched a Christian clothing line to further monetize this angle.
Am I wrong here?
. . .
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits.”
Matthew 7:15-16
I truly hope Charlie finally understood Psalm 23 in his final moments - that he is no matyr and was never any shepherd - that there is only One sheperd. I hope he repented, asked for forgiveness, and received mercy as he walked through the valley of the shadow of death.
And although the Lord provides the ultimate judgement, moral discernment is in fact encouraged by the Gospel.
John 7:24: “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.”
Although absolution may redeem Charlie, the moral compass by which he lived remains open to critique.
R.I.P. Charlie
Replies to: Charlie Kirk and performative Christianity. Read this on Reddit, thoughts?
This is a really interesting study of psychology.
Many of the people infected with your ideology felt a surge of glee when they heard about the assassination. They watched the hit on social media multiple times and felt like justice had been served. Many even began to celebrate it in "safe spaces" like Blue sky and Reddit.
Then, the inevitable backlash occurred when others saw this abhorrent behavior and began to call it out. The first line of defense was to say, "It's a big country, you always get outliers like that!"
The next line of defense was to say, "Whaddabout Paul Pelosi? You guys made jokes about that vicious attack that could have put him in a hospital."
But this didn't address the nagging doubts about whether it was YOU who was the psychotic weirdo.
So, many sifted through the Charlie Kirk quotes they could find. Often incorrect, like when the NYT said he made anti-Semitic statements IN HIS FUCKING OBITUARY. The ensuing retraction and "apology" was almost comical. "Although Charlie didn't say that, it's the type of philosophy that led right wingers to shoot Jews."
Charlie was a bad, bad person so our little celebration wasn't so bad. After all, did anyone mourn Hitler?
The other tactic was to try to cast doubt that the shooter was really a member of the tribe. His parents are republicans! The ATF is walking back the story on the bullets being inscribed! He's a member of something I just read about at the Daily Beast, the Groyper Army!
The final stage will be throwing the whole thing into the memory hole. Did that really even happen? You can do this because you live in a pernicious bubble where RightThink is rigorously enforced with the threat of humiliation and banishment.
I feel sorry for you.
It's actually not that complicated
Kirk was a cretinous, self-promoting dweeb who had every right to be that way. He did not deserve to be killed. It is horrible.
Our leaders ought to unite - and LEAD. They ought to be clear that political violence is never OK. Ever.
But, from the White House, we get demonization and the clear message that it is perfectly fine when violence is committed by one side. But not the other.
The governor of Utah is better on this. And Obama. But that should go without saying.
Your rhetoric is not conciliatory.
"Kirk was a cretinous, self-promoting dweeb"
" from the White House, we get demonization"
Which side is laughing about Kirk's slaughter?
Normals are not laughing. Democratic leaders are not laughing.
We are a nation of 340 million, the overwhelming majority of whom are horrified and saddened.
Sorry if that does not compute with your prejudices.
Both sides have barely turned down the rhetoric. Both sides are still demonizing.
Booker and Schiff snark Patel, who returns the snark. It's not going to stop. Sorry if that doesn't fit your narrative.
You MAGA types need to try out for the summer Olympics cuz your leaps are outstanding
(no message)
You are becoming Jim Basil Junior.
I'm not MAGA, liar.
My thought is that your Reddit friend is in the Charlie-Bad stage of liberal remorse.
(no message)
Thought for a moment you might not practice disingenuity, but joke is on me.
Again take out the politics and the heinous murder of Mr. Kirk, it is my believe this Reddit post is spot on and comes from a place of a true Christian. We all know politics and religion have been getting married together mightily in the last 10 years. Any pastor that stands up before his parishners and utters politics is a charlatan. Church and religion is a business and unfortunately there are people who forget their mission when that money starts rolling in hand over fist.
#facts
Meant for Qwesty below.
I pulled a Frances. Time to hang up the cleats.
Religious fervor, even if it is a-religious is still religious rather than rational in nature
(no message)
What a great post!
Q has obviously been radicalized. The same way Kirk’s shooter was.
Well said, they can't stop looking like idiots.
(no message)
Is this a copy and paste? If not, have any direct comments about the post?
(no message)
Some of us are able to coherently express our own thoughts.
Without AI, links to paywalls, or copy and paste.
You're free to call an audible but start your own thread. You outright ignored the sentiment of the
post. What are your organic thoughts on Charlie Kirk's version of Christianity?