Your prose comes across as deliberately nice and tolerant, but that only highlights how shaky your stance is. You frame “tolerance” as though it excuses supporting Charlie Kirk. It doesn’t. Using tolerance to shield a bigot and a racist is not a virtue, it’s complicity.
Opposing Kirk’s rhetoric isn’t hatred. It’s simply refusing to let prejudice masquerade as principle.
Also, to be clear I never ment that charlie Kirk ever admitted or had someone committed to a facility. But he is on record saying that homeless people and transgenders should all be committed to mental health facilities.
@mechoman444 If he is “on record” with statements about committing people to institutions, please share some links and I will be happy to read them. I might agree or disagree depending on the information provided.
My “prose” is just the way I speak. I don’t care if you find me tolerant or not. Tolerance is not something I strive for, nor is hatred or bigotry.
I would submit that Kirk’s commentary and opinions are no more hatred and vitriol than your own. You are just on opposite sides. #truth
I’m not here to hand you evidence or play research assistant. I’m responding because your own tone was condescending and I’m not going to let it stand unchallenged.
Charlie Kirk was a bigot and a racist. That is not an opinion but a matter of record. His rhetoric makes it obvious and your defense of him makes your position clear.
If you think I was calling you tolerant or care if you are tolerant or not you completely miss the point of what I was trying to say.
@mechoman444 I’m not looking for a research assistant. It just seems fair that you provide evidence for claims against someone’s character. Shows that you have none. Go figure.
You call anyone whatever names you like. It doesn’t make them true, even if many voices agree with you. I am glad my position is clear. In case it isn’t, I am stating that you are in fact, the very things you claim Charlie to have been.
And again, I couldn’t care less what you think of me. It’s been lovely talking to u
Your prose comes across as deliberately nice and tolerant, but that only highlights how shaky your stance is. You frame “tolerance” as though it excuses supporting Charlie Kirk. It doesn’t. Using tolerance to shield a bigot and a racist is not a virtue, it’s complicity.
Opposing Kirk’s rhetoric isn’t hatred. It’s simply refusing to let prejudice masquerade as principle.
Also, to be clear I never ment that charlie Kirk ever admitted or had someone committed to a facility. But he is on record saying that homeless people and transgenders should all be committed to mental health facilities.
@mechoman444 If he is “on record” with statements about committing people to institutions, please share some links and I will be happy to read them. I might agree or disagree depending on the information provided.
My “prose” is just the way I speak. I don’t care if you find me tolerant or not. Tolerance is not something I strive for, nor is hatred or bigotry.
I would submit that Kirk’s commentary and opinions are no more hatred and vitriol than your own. You are just on opposite sides. #truth
I’m not here to hand you evidence or play research assistant. I’m responding because your own tone was condescending and I’m not going to let it stand unchallenged.
Charlie Kirk was a bigot and a racist. That is not an opinion but a matter of record. His rhetoric makes it obvious and your defense of him makes your position clear.
If you think I was calling you tolerant or care if you are tolerant or not you completely miss the point of what I was trying to say.
@mechoman444 I’m not looking for a research assistant. It just seems fair that you provide evidence for claims against someone’s character. Shows that you have none. Go figure.
You call anyone whatever names you like. It doesn’t make them true, even if many voices agree with you. I am glad my position is clear. In case it isn’t, I am stating that you are in fact, the very things you claim Charlie to have been.
And again, I couldn’t care less what you think of me. It’s been lovely talking to u
You’ve got to be a bot. Seriously.